Background
Ethical dilemmas constantly occur in organizations and workplaces regardless of the industry and the size of an organization. They may differ significantly in terms of values, which are in conflict, or parties, which are at stake. Therefore, it may be essential to introduce a comprehensive approach to the decision-making process related to ethical problems. Each of the three theories focuses its attention on a particular factor or element involved in ethics. Kantian ethics or deontology views good rules as the primary source of morality (Allhoff et al., 2016). Utilitarianism or consequentialism suggests that persuading the best possible outcome is the main goal of good morals. Virtue ethics link morality with the person who makes the decision and hence focuses on personal values and character. Each of these theories provides a unique approach to ethics with a number of strengths and weaknesses and may considerably improve my performance in the workplace in terms of decision-making. However, most importantly, I have learned that it may be critical to be flexible and approach each problem individually.
Kantian Ethics
Kantian approach to ethics implies that there are universal moral standards that can be applied to any person and situation regardless of the context. In Kantian ethics, moral standards, life values, and principles should contribute to the common goal of serving for the benefit of society (Allhoff et al., 2016). Kantian ethics may be broadly applied in business and frequently correlates with an organization’s mission. In most cases, businesses formulate their mission as a desire to serve humanity and particularly its customers.
Virtue Ethics
Virtue ethics rely primarily on virtues or moral character, which should drive the process of ethical decision-making. The ultimate idea of such an approach to ethics is that pursuing virtuous habits is the key to solving ethical dilemmas (Moore, 2017). Therefore, virtue ethics rely significantly on personal values and interpretations of morality as moral standards may be subjective. The above-mentioned ethical theory plays a considerable role in modern businesses as it may not be possible to dehumanize the solution of ethical problems, and hence personal life principles of the decision-maker are essential.
Utilitarianism
Unlike Kantian or Virtue ethics, utilitarianism views consequences as an inseparable part of ethics rather than duties or moral character. To some extent, utilitarianism is a rational and impersonal approach to ethics, which assesses potential consequences and chooses the best outcome. It is broadly utilized in practice as minimizing risks is vital for businesses (Irwin, 2020). For instance, the value of justice may conflict with the value of limited resources. Financial losses generated by the need to find a replacement for an unscrupulous worker may exceed profits lost due to the low performance of that employee.
Workplace Benefits
As already mentioned, each theory has its unique advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, utilizing the most relevant and suitable theory depending on the circumstances may contribute to improving decisions. For instance, there may be extreme circumstances, such as the need to hurt other people or violate the law to solve the problem. In such cases, Kantian ethics may provide strict and mandatory moral rules that prevent crossing the line. Utilitarianism may be utilized for operational business problems that require timely rational solutions with minimal risks. Nonetheless, I believe that virtue ethics overlap with the other two schools and unite them, as it is vitally important not to make decisions, which you are personally not able to live with or be proud of. The understanding of the ethical theories helped me acknowledge the importance of my personal moral principles and their interrelation with commonly accepted morality and rational justification of actions.
Reference
Allhoff, F., Sager, A., & Vaidya, A. J. (Eds.). (2016). Business in ethical focus: An anthology. Broadview Press.
Irwin, T. (2020). Utilitarianism. Ethics Through History, 232–255.
Moore, G. (2017). Virtue ethics and organizational ethics. Oxford Scholarship Online.