VALUE & ETHICS IN BUSINESS

MBA 1st Year 1st Semester

 WBUT/MBA/ I st Sem
(3 Credit : 30 hrs)

[MB 110] : VALUES & ETHICS IN BUSINESS

Course Contents

1. Values – Importance, Sources of Value Systems, Types, Values, Loyalty and Ethical
Behaviour, Values across Cultures. [2 L]

2. Business Ethics – Nature, Characteristics and Needs, Ethical Practices in Management.

[2 L]
3. Indian Values and Ethics – Respect for Elders, Hierarchy and Status, Need for
Security, Non – Violence, Cooperation, Simple Living high Thinking, Rights and
Duties, Ethics in Work life, Holistic relationship between Man and Nature, Attitudes
and Beliefs.

[6 L]
4. The Ethical Value System – Universalism, Utilitarianism, Distributive Justice, Social
Contracts, Individual Freedom of Choice, Professional Codes. [4 L]

5. Culture and Ethics – Ethical Values in different Cultures, Culture and Individual
Ethics.

[2 L]
6. Law and Ethics – Relationship between Law and Ethics, Other Bodies in enforcing
Ethical Business Behavior, Impact of Laws on Business Ethics. [ 2L]

7. Social Responsibilities of Business – Environmental Protection, Fair Trade Practices,

Fulfilling all National obligations under various Laws, Safeguarding Health and well
being of Customers.
[4 L]

8. Ethics and Corporate Excellence – Code of Ethics in Business Houses, Strategies of

Organizational Culture Building, Total Quality, Customer Care, Care of the Employees
as per Statutes, Objective and Optimistic Approach. [4 L]

Readings
1. S. K. Chakraborty : Values and Ethics in Organisation, OUP
2. R. Raj : A study in Business Ethics, Himalaya Publishing.
3. A. N. Tripathi : Human Values, New Age International
4. L. T. Hosmer : The Ethics of Management, Universal Book.
5. D. Murray : Ethics in Organizational, Kogan Page.
 LECTURE PLAN
MBA I
VALUES & ETHICS IN BUSINESS
[MB 110]
Ch topic Areas No. of Dates
no lecture
. s
1 Values Importance, Sources of Value Systems, 2L
Types, Values, Loyalty and Ethical
Behaviour, Values across Cultures.
2 Business Nature, Characteristics and Needs, Ethical 2L
Ethics Practices in Management.
3 Indian Respect for Elders, Hierarchy and Status, 3L
Values Need for Security, Non – Violence
and
Ethics Cooperation, Simple Living high Thinking, 2L
Rights and Duties, Ethics in Work life

Holistic relationship between Man and 2L

Nature, Attitudes and Beliefs.
4 The Universalism, Utilitarianism, Distributive 3L
Ethical Justice, Social Contracts
Value
System Individual Freedom of Choice, Professional 2L
Codes.
5 Culture Ethical Values in different Cultures, Culture 2L
and and Individual Ethics.
Ethics
6 Law and Relationship between Law and Ethics, 3L
Ethics Other Bodies in enforcing Ethical Business
Behavior, Impact of Laws on Business
Ethics
7 Social Environmental Protection, Fair Trade 3L
Responsi Practices
bilities 2L
of Fulfilling all National obligations under
Business various Laws, Safeguarding Health and well
being of Customers
8 Ethics Code of Ethics in Business Houses, 3L
and Strategies of Organizational Culture
Corporat Building
e 3L
Excellen Total Quality, Customer Care, Care of the
ce Employees as per Statutes, Objective and
Optimistic Approach.
 Chapter 1
VALUES

Introduction:-

During the last few decades the world has noticed phenomenal industrial growth and
development. Due to this growth and development the living standard of general people has
changed a lot. Last two decades has been called as the E-Decade where E stands for economy,
environment and ethics.
The fast pace of economic development has also given rise to a dark phase consisting of
erosion of values and ethics. This degradation in values and ethics has resulted in corruption in
all walks of life.
Any good company should have their quality goods and services but these are not the all. Good
companies need to have proper ethics and values in running their business. Most of the
companies have developed their code of ethics for better and smooth running of the business.
Management d of today will become managers of tomorrow. They need to be well versed in
how to sustain in the competition and how to progress. These future managers will introduce
and strengthen the code of ethics of any business.

The study of values and ethics provides the following benefits for the management students-
• Create awareness of social and professional values
• Inculcate integrity
• Helps to realize social responsibility
• Helps to solve ethical dilemmas
• Helps to make the organization a better place for work and development

VALUES

The sense of value is an essential attribute of the human consciousness. It is this sense which
prompts and guides the unceasing quest of the common thread of goodness in the good human
being, the good society and the good life. The word value expresses the qualitative significance
or importance we assign to ideas, feelings, activities, and experiences. According to Milton
Rokeach, a leading researcher of values, value is “an enduring belief that a specific mode of
the conduct or end-state of existence in personality or socially preferable to an opposite or
converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence.”
An individual’s value system is defined as an enduring organization of belief concerning
preferable modes of conduct or end-state of existence along a continuum of relative
importance.
The value system we acquire and develop affects our attitudes, preferences, goals and
aspirations. It sets the standards and guidelines which govern our behaviour, the quality of
relationship we build, and the responses we make to life situations. Those who value money,
status, power etc direct all their efforts for achieving them ignoring the social, human and
ethical implications. On the other hand those who value morality, justice, kindness etc may
decline even lucrative career options if it requires compromising these values.
At the society level it is the commonly shared values of a social group which determine the
quality of life in it. In a society like ours, which value collectivism, it is the group needs of the
family which get preference over the individual needs.

A. Importance of Values:-

It influences the behaviour at individual and group levels.

A manager’s values affect the decision making process of the organization
A manager’s value system plays an important role in time of employee appraisal
It will help managers to resolve ethical dilemmas at work place
It is very important in making an organization socially responsible and acceptable to society.

B. Types of Values-

B.1. Instrumental values

B.1.a Assertiveness - It is linked to self-esteem and considered an important

communication skill.

B.1.b Dependability - Dependability is the reliability of a person to others

because of his integrity, truthfulness and trustfulness, traits that can encourage
someone to depend on him.

B.1.c Hard work – work with sincerity and devotion.

B.1.d Obedience - Obedience is behavior intended to comply with explicit

demands of authority. It differs from conformity, which is behavior intended to
match that of others.

B.1.e Open mindedness - Ready acceptance of often new suggestions, ideas,

influences, or opinions.

B.1.f Truthfulness - The quality of being authentic.

B.2. Terminal values

B.2.a Satisfaction - The fulfillment or gratification of a desire, need, or

appetite. Pleasure or contentment derived from such gratification. A source or
means of gratification.

B.2.b Peace and harmony - Peace is commonly understood to mean the

absence of hostilities. Other definitions include freedom from disputes,
 harmonious relations and the absence of mental stress or anxiety, as the
meaning of the word changes with context. On the other hand harmony means
agreement in feeling or opinion; accord.

B.2.c Prosperity - A state of health, happiness, and prospering

B.2.d Recognition - The confirmation or acknowledgment of the existence of

an act performed, of an event that transpired, or of a person who is authorized
by another to act in a particular manner.

B.2.e Security & safety – security means the quality or state of being safe and
safety means protection from harm.

Again we can classify values as follows-

1. Personal values- a person is known by the values he believes & practices.

2. Business values- a company becomes well known by its quality goods, services,
growth, revenue, social responsibilities etc.

3. Managerial values-the organizations use to provide training on the values and

ethics followed by that organization to make new entrants accustomed with the
environment.
 Chapter 2
BUSINESS ETHICS

Business ethics is a form of applied ethics that examines ethical rules and principles within a
commercial context; the various moral or ethical problems that can arise in a business setting;
and any special duties or obligations that apply to persons who are engaged in commerce.”
Generally speaking, business ethics is a normative discipline, whereby particular ethical
standards are assumed and then applied. It makes specific judgements about what is right or
wrong, which is to say, it makes claims about what ought to be done or what ought not to be
done. While there are some exceptions, business ethicists are usually less concerned with the
foundations of ethics (metaethics), or with justifying the most basic ethical principles, and are
more concerned with practical problems and applications, and any specific duties that might
apply to business relationships.

1. Overview of issues in business ethics

A. General business ethics

• This part of business ethics overlaps with the philosophy of business, one of the aims of
which is to determine the fundamental purposes of a company. If a company's main
purpose is to maximize the returns to its shareholders, then it could be seen as unethical
for a company to consider the interests and rights of anyone else.
• Corporate social responsibility or CSR: an umbrella term under which the ethical rights
and duties existing between companies and society is debated.
• Issues regarding the moral rights and duties between a company and its shareholders:
fiduciary responsibility, stakeholder concept v. shareholder concept.
• Ethical issues concerning relations between different companies: e.g. hostile take-overs,
industrial espionage.
• Leadership issues: corporate governance.
• Political contributions made by corporations.
• Law reform, such as the ethical debate over introducing a crime of corporate
manslaughter.
• The misuse of corporate ethics policies as marketing instruments.

B. Professional ethics

Professional ethics covers the myriad of practical ethical problems and phenomena which arise
out of specific functional areas of companies or in relation to recognized business professions.
C. Ethics of finance and accounting

• Creative accounting, earnings management, misleading financial analysis.

• Insider trading, securities fraud, bucket shop, forex scams: concerns (criminal)
manipulation of the financial markets.
• Executive compensation: concerns excessive payments made to corporate CEO's.
• Bribery, kickbacks, facilitation payments: while these may be in the (short-term)
interests of the company and its shareholders, these practices may be anti-competitive
or offend against the values of society.

D. Ethics of human resource management

The ethics of human resource management (HRM) covers those ethical issues arising around
the employer-employee relationship, such as the rights and duties owed between employer and
employee.

• Discrimination issues include discrimination on the bases of age (ageism), gender, race,
religion, disabilities, weight and attractiveness. See also: affirmative action, sexual
harassment.
• Issues surrounding the representation of employees and the democratisation of the
workplace: union busting, strike breaking.
• Issues affecting the privacy of the employee: workplace surveillance, drug testing. See
also: privacy.
• Issues affecting the privacy of the employer: whistle-blowing.
• Issues relating to the fairness of the employment contract and the balance of power
between employer and employee: slavery[3], indentured servitude, employment law.
• Occupational safety and health.

E. Ethics of sales and marketing

Marketing which goes beyond the mere provision of information about (and access to) a
product may seek to manipulate our values and behaviour. To some extent society regards this
as acceptable, but where is the ethical line to be drawn?

• Pricing: price fixing, price discrimination, price skimming.

• Anti-competitive practices: these include but go beyond pricing tactics to cover issues
such as manipulation of loyalty and supply chains. See: anti-competitive practices,
antitrust law.
• Specific marketing strategies: greenwash, bait and switch, shill, viral marketing, spam
(electronic), pyramid scheme, planned obsolescence.
• Content of advertisements: attack ads, subliminal messages, sex in advertising.
• Children and marketing: marketing in schools.
• Black markets, grey markets.

F. Ethics of production

This area of business ethics deals with the duties of a company to ensure that products and
production processes do not cause harm. Some of the more acute dilemmas in this area arise
out of the fact that there is usually a degree of danger in any product or production process and
it is difficult to define a degree of permissibility, or the degree of permissibility may depend on
the changing state of preventative technologies or changing social perceptions of acceptable
risk.

• Defective, addictive and inherently dangerous products and services.

• Ethical relations between the company and the environment: pollution, environmental
ethics, carbon emissions trading
• Ethical problems arising out of new technologies: genetically modified food, mobile
phone radiation and health.
• Product testing ethics: animal rights and animal testing, use of economically
disadvantaged groups (such as students) as test objects.

G. Ethics of intellectual property, knowledge and skills

Knowledge and skills are valuable but not easily "ownable" objects. Nor is it obvious who has
the greater rights to an idea: the company who trained the employee or the employee
themselves? The country in which the plant grew, or the company which discovered and
developed the plant's medicinal potential? As a result, attempts to assert ownership and ethical
disputes over ownership arise.

• Patent infringement, copyright infringement, trademark infringement.

• Misuse of the intellectual property systems to stifle competition: patent misuse,
copyright misuse, patent troll, submarine patent.
• Even the notion of intellectual property itself has been criticised on ethical grounds: see
intellectual property.
• Employee raiding: the practice of attracting key employees away from a competitor to
take unfair advantage of the knowledge or skills they may possess.
• The practice of employing all the most talented people in a specific field, regardless of
need, in order to prevent any competitors employing them.
• Bioprospecting (ethical) and biopiracy (unethical).
• Business intelligence and industrial espionage.

H. International business ethics

While business ethics emerged as a field in the 1970's, international business ethics did not
emerge until the late 1990's, reflecting the international developments of that decade. Many
new practical issues arose out the international context of business. Theoretical issues such as
cultural relativity of ethical values receive more emphasis in this field. Other, older issues can
be grouped here as well. Issues and subfields include:

• The search for universal values as a basis for international commercial behaviour.
• Comparison of business ethical traditions in different countries.
• Comparison of business ethical traditions from various religious perspectives.
• Ethical issues arising out of international business transactions; e.g. bioprospecting and
biopiracy in the pharmaceutical industry; the fair trade movement; transfer pricing.
• Issues such as globalisation and cultural imperialism.
• Varying global standards - e.g. the use of child labour.
 • The way in which multinationals take advantage of international differences, such as
outsourcing production (e.g. clothes) and services (e.g. call centres) to low-wage
countries.
• The permissibility of international commerce with pariah states.

2. Conflicting interests

Business ethics can be examined from various perspectives, including the perspective of the
employee, the commercial enterprise, and society as a whole. Very often, situations arise in
which there is conflict between one or more of the parties, such that serving the interest of one
party is a detriment to the other(s). For example, a particular outcome might be good for the
employee, whereas, it would be bad for the company, society, or vice versa. Some ethicists
(e.g., Henry Sidgwick) see the principal role of ethics as the harmonization and reconciliation
of conflicting interests.

3. Ethical issues and approaches

Philosophers and others disagree about the purpose of a business in society. For example, some
suggest that the principal purpose of a business is to maximize returns to its owners, or in the
case of a publicly-traded concern, its shareholders. Thus, under this view, only those activities
that increase profitability and shareholder value should be encouraged. Some believe that the
only companies that are likely to survive in a competitive marketplace are those that place
profit maximization above everything else. However, some point out that self interest would
still require a business to obey the law and adhere to basic moral rules, because the
consequences of failing to do so could be very costly in fines, loss of licensure, or company
reputation. The economist Milton Friedman is a leading proponent of this view.

Other theorists contend that a business has moral duties that extend well beyond serving the
interests of its owners or stockholders, and that these duties consist of more than simply
obeying the law. They believe a business has moral responsibilities to so-called stakeholders,
people who have an interest in the conduct of the business, which might include employees,
customers, vendors, the local community, or even society as a whole. They would say that
stakeholders have certain rights with regard to how the business operates, and some would
even suggest that this even includes rights of governance.

Some theorists have adapted social contract theory to business, whereby companies become
quasi-democratic associations, and employees and other stakeholders are given voice over a
company's operations. This approach has become especially popular subsequent to the revival
of contract theory in political philosophy, which is largely due to John Rawls' A Theory of
Justice, and the advent of the consensus-oriented approach to solving business problems, an
aspect of the "quality movement" that emerged in the 1980s. Professors Thomas Donaldson
and Thomas Dunfee proposed a version of contract theory for business, which they call
Integrative Social Contracts Theory. They posit that conflicting interests are best resolved by
formulating a "fair agreement" between the parties, using a combination of i) macro-principles
that all rational people would agree upon as universal principles, and, ii) micro-principles
formulated by actual agreements among the interested parties. Critics say the proponents of
contract theories miss a central point, namely, that a business is someone's property and not a
mini-state or a means of distributing social justice.
Ethical issues can arise when companies must comply with multiple and sometimes conflicting
legal or cultural standards, as in the case of multinational companies that operate in countries
with varying practices. The question arises, for example, ought a company to obey the laws of
its home country, or should it follow the less stringent laws of the developing country in which
it does business? To illustrate, United States law forbids companies from paying bribes either
domestically or overseas; however, in other parts of the world, bribery is a customary, accepted
way of doing business. Similar problems can occur with regard to child labor, employee safety,
work hours, wages, discrimination, and environmental protection laws.

It is sometimes claimed that a Gresham's law of ethics applies in which bad ethical practices
drive out good ethical practices. It is claimed that in a competitive business environment, those
companies that survive are the ones that recognize that their only role is to maximize profits.
On this view, the competitive system fosters a downward ethical spiral.

Rushworth Kidder developed a fascinating way to address ethical conflicts. He calls it a

"trilemma". Instead of feeling stuck in a choice between violating your ethics and doing
something painful but ethical, he suggests exploring if there is a third, unexplored option.

4. Corporate ethics policies

Many companies have formulated internal policies pertaining to the ethical conduct of
employees. These policies can be simple exhortations in broad, highly-generalized language
(typically called a corporate ethics statement), or they can be more detailed policies, containing
specific behavioral requirements (typically called corporate ethics codes). They are generally
meant to identify the company's expectations of workers and to offer guidance on handling
some of the more common ethical problems that might arise in the course of doing business. It
is hoped that having such a policy will lead to greater ethical awareness, consistency in
application, and the avoidance of ethical disasters.

An increasing number of companies also requires employees to attend seminars regarding

business conduct, which often include discussion of the company's policies, specific case
studies, and legal requirements. Some companies even require their employees to sign
agreements stating that they will abide by the company's rules of conduct.

Not everyone supports corporate policies that govern ethical conduct. Some claim that ethical
problems are better dealt with by depending upon employees to use their own judgment.

Others believe that corporate ethics policies are primarily rooted in utilitarian concerns, and
that they are mainly to limit the company's legal liability, or to curry public favor by giving the
appearance of being a good corporate citizen. Ideally, the company will avoid a lawsuit
because its employees will follow the rules. Should a lawsuit occur, the company can claim
that the problem would not have arisen if the employee had only followed the code properly.

Sometimes there is disconnection between the company's code of ethics and the company's
actual practices. Thus, whether or not such conduct is explicitly sanctioned by management, at
worst, this makes the policy duplicitous, and, at best, it is merely a marketing tool.

To be successful, most ethicists would suggest that an ethics policy should be:
• Given the unequivocal support of top management, by both word and by example.
• Explained in writing and orally, with periodic reinforcement.
• Doable....something employees can both understand and perform.
• Monitored by top management, with routine inspections for compliance and
improvement.
• Backed up by clearly stated consequences in the case of disobedience.
• Remain neutral and nonsexist.
 Chapter 3
INDIAN VALUES & ETHICS

1. Respect for Elders

2. Respect for Hierarchy
3. Respect for status

1. Indian culture has survived because in every generation the best among us have lived by
certain fundamental values. Before exploring those values let us first clarify our understanding
on two basic questions :- what is society? & what is a good society?

Society is an organisation for cooperative working to seek human development, through

production and distribution of shareable social goods.

2. Indian culture originates from religion, education and environment of living. One of the
fundamental values of Indian culture is the faith in the supremacy,from where respect is
derived. Indian cultural tradition shows respect to elders in the family, older people in the
society and superiors in the working place. The Ramayana shows us the obedience of Ram to
his father and obedience of Laxmana to his elder brother Ram. Similarly in the Mahabharata
we can see the respect of Pandavas towards Yudhisthir without whose permission they would
not take any major decision. The very survival of family system depended on the observance of
values and ethics by all memebers of the family. The love and affection of the elders for the
younger members and respect shown by the younger members to the elders were responsible
for keeping the family together. Such togetherness gave the strenght and society as a whole
was benefited.

3. In organisation as well as in family one should respect the Head of the place respectively.
Here comes the respect for hierarchy and status. The respect for superior in the organisation or
in the family is a general value in India. The respect of people towards the king has been
exhibited in many epics.

4. need for security

5. need for non violence
6. need for cooperation

4.Need for security

indian culture and value system have made majority people law abiding citizens. During the
ages , the kings and monarchs have shown their nobleness by the efficient administration
which guaranteed security for their citizens. Efficient maintenance of law and order provides
secured living. Rule of law is a basic value of a good society. According to Maslow’s need
hierarchy after considerable fulfilment of the physiological needs the second stage need safety
arises. Safety from different natural and other incidents which may cause harm to human
being.

For better safety each country have a set of law. Laws are a set of public rules for regulating
the social order. They carry with them the authority of the state and its coercive power of penal
action to ensure that they obeyed. The restraint of law is necessary to maintain social order and
social cooperation. Law and law enforcing agencies ensure security of life and propery and
safeguard the dignity, rights and liberties of citizens.

Rule of law cannot be very effective if it has to rely only on the coercive power. Respect for
law, cooperation with the proper authirities by people in the society and legal institution can
provide securities to life and properties of the citizen.

5. Need For Non Violence

Most of the leaders of ferrdom movement derived inspiration from the classical Indian value
system. Mahatma Gandhi has introduced the Ahimsa or nonviolence, the powerful weapon
against the british ruler.

The first ethical canon is “do not harm”. It is a general injunction to abstain from causing harm
and injury. The Indian value system appreciate this. The present age restlessness in the society
and unfair social practices are the results of non-observance of this canon of ethics.

In the present context, the greatest need is the more proactive, more positive and more forceful
ethical canon i.e. “practice ahimsa or non violence” and “do good”.

6. Need for co-operation

Co-operation, or cooperation, refers to the practice of people or greater entities working in

common with commonly agreed-upon goals and possibly methods, instead of working
separately in competition.

Cooperation is the antithesis of competition, however, the need or desire to compete with
others is a very common impetus that motivates individuals to organize into a group and
cooperate with each other in order to form a stronger competitive force.

Many people support cooperation as the ideal form of management of human affairs. In terms
of individuals obtaining goods and services, rather than resorting to theft or confiscation, they
may cooperate by trading with each other or by altruistic sharing.

There are four main conditions that tend to be necessary for co-operative behaviour to develop
between two individuals:

• An overlap in desires
• A chance of future encounters with the same individual
• Memory of past encounters with that individual
• A value associated with future outcomes
A. Simple Living High Thinking

Hindu spirituality has been largely nurtured in a rural setting, and scripture recommends a
simple life, free from unnecessary complication. Varnashrama-dharma is closely associated
with an agrarian culture, which fosters a mood of dependence on God. According to
theologians, the village demonstrates the influence of goodness (sattva), the town is compelled
by passion (rajas) and sinful places, such as many modern cities, are bound by ignorance
(tamas). The whole system of varnashrama-dharma is designed to bring everyone, step by
step, to the level of goodness, more easily attained in a rural setting. Sustainability and a
peaceful, regulated lifestyle are principal characteristics of sattva-guna.

The early morning hours are also considered sattvic and in India people rise early, between 4
and 6 am. Practically everyone bathes upon rising, making use of a pond, river or hand-pump,
or – if relatively well-off – a bathroom. It is common in the morning to see Hindus outside
their simple dwellings, slowly cleaning their teeth with a twig from a tree, such as the
antiseptic neem. Life is relatively slow, with morning hours dedicated to some form of
worship. A light breakfast follows at around eight o'clock. Shops and stalls open quite late,
around ten. The main meal is lunch – for the digestion is considered strongest when the sun is
at its highest. People take a siesta in the sultry afternoons, and shops and stalls either close, or
the shopkeeper takes a snooze. They often open late into the evening, when it is pleasantly
cool, and people again throng to the streets and the temples.

Life is very much in contact with nature and the elements. Water is drawn straight from wells
or rivers. Cooking is over open fires. Village homes have an earth floor, coated with a mixture
of earth and cow-dung, which has antiseptic properties. Animals are very much a part of life.
Dogs are not domesticated, and live quite differently than in the West. Cows roam freely and
are given much leeway. Wild pigs, often part of the natural scenery are valued for their
function of waste disposal. Monkeys are notorious for their mischief and their stealing (eye-
glasses are now a favourite!). Camels, ponies, and buffalo are used for pulling carts. In the
south especially, elephants are used in temple rituals.There are many stories about snakes,
especially the cobra, which is considered to have mystical powers. Today, there are still many
physicians who can cure a snake bite by chanting mantras rather than administering a serum.
Mysticism and spirituality are woven into the colourful fabric of everyday life.

Simple living requires the philosophical basis and inspiration provided by spiritual life.
Without this higher taste, the lower self (mind and senses) erodes the desire and morality
needed to develop one's relationship with Krishna. In essence, it is this pleasure of the eternal
relationship with God that is being sought after even through consumerism. In the end, it is the
only true pleasure. So without this higher taste, the mind eventually returns to material
pleasures with the attractiveness and relevance of simple living being lost.
Recent history provides many instances where simple living is maintained solely by the level
of available technology. However, though fulfilling many of our ideals of simple living, its
lacks the higher spiritual connection. So simple living without higher thinking is also not
recommended. Connection to the Supreme is key.
 Chapter 4
THE ETHICAL VALUE SYSTEM

A. UNIVERSALISM THEORY

Universalism comprises concepts and issues which are said to be "universal" in appeal—i.e.
transcending any existing localizing boundaries. In particular,

• Truth may be said to be universal, as opposed to relativism conceptions;

• Rights may be said universals, for example natural rights or the 1789 Declaration of the
Rights of Man and of the Citizen, heavily influenced by the philosophy of the
Enlightenment and its conception of a universal human nature;
• In comparative religion, universalism is the belief that true and valuable insights are
available in many of the religious traditions which have grown up in various human
cultures. It posits that a spiritually aware person will respect religious traditions other
than his own and will be open to learning from them. It does not deny that immersion in
one tradition is a useful anchor for an individual's spiritual development. While it
celebrates the richness and value to be found among humankind's religious traditions, it
does not necessarily deny that some things done in the name of religion, and some
religious practices, are not constructive. But it distinguishes itself from the view that
there is only one true faith, one uniquely chosen people, or one final prophet
superseding all others. The name Universalist refers to certain religious denominations
of universalism, which as a core principle adhere to standards and rituals which are
convergent rather than divergent, often espousing themselves as alternatives to
denominations based on dogmatic or factionalized differences;
• A universal religion is one that holds itself true for all people and thus allows anyone
to join, regardless of their ethnicity. In contrast, ethnic religions, like ethnicity itself,
can be determined not just by genealogy, but by geography, language, and other social
boundaries. In that sense Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism are universal religions,
whereas Sikhism, Druze, and Judaism are ethnic religions. However, Judaism may also
be considered universal, since there is no requirement for non-Jews to convert, only for
them to follow the Noahide Laws. Contrast with Chosen people. Hinduism is also
typically an "ethnic" religion, but converts will be able to be re-socialized into this
system
• Within Christianity, Universalism, universal reconciliation, or universal salvation, is
the doctrine that all will be saved;
• Universalism is also used as a synonym for moral universalism, as a compromise
between moral relativism and moral absolutism.
• Universalism can also mean the wish for a closer union between all people of the
world (the emergence of world citizens) and/or the aim of creating common global
institutions (democratic globalization).
A.1 Universalism in Christianity

As noted above, in Christianity, Universalism, Universal reconciliation, or universal

salvation, is the doctrine that all will be saved. Among theologians the doctrine is often
referred to using the Greek word apocatastasis. The doctrine addresses the problem of Hell and
notions of God's mercy and justice. Universalists contend that a loving God would not submit
anyone, regardless of his or her sins or beliefs, to everlasting torment. Some also argue that
eternal condemnation in Hell, an infinite punishment, is not proportionately just with any
number of essentially finite sins. Scriptural support includes Biblical passages such as 1
Corinthians 15:22 and Revelation 5:13. Some universalists, sometimes called "strong
universalists," hold that all creatures, including demons and even Satan himself, will
eventually be saved. In North America, some adherents formed the Universalist Church, which
in 1961 merged with the American Unitarian Association to form the Unitarian Universalist
Association and creating a new form of Universalism called Unitarian Universalism.

Universalists as a matter of historical definition are those who believe God to be so loving that
all will be reconciled to God's own self. Anything short of "universal salvation," Universalists
in the 18th century thought, would fail to comport with the image of God as all-powerful and
all-knowing. The doctrine can be traced to the earliest centuries of Church history, and was
taught by both Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa. Universalists in 18th and 19th century North
America often believed that the punishment for sin was simply the fate of having to live the life
of a sinner, and that this was sufficient and "just retribution" for such conduct. Others believed
in something closer to purgatory, while others said it was beyond the understanding of mortals
to know what would ultimately transpire before all dwell in "final harmony" with God.

As for human conduct, Universalists typically have taught that the boundless love of God by
which all sin will (at least eventually) be forgiven animates a similar duty for humankind,
citing the same biblical texts on forgiveness that are used by 'partialists' (a Universalist term for
non-Universalist Christians) to illustrate the principles by which Universalists seek to live,
among which the most notable is the petition from the Lord's Prayer - "Forgive us our
[debts/sins/trespasses], as we forgive our [debtors/those who trespass against us/those who sin
against us]". (See Forgiveness.)

In its more pluralist expressions, and as a result of its ultimate consolidation of the Universalist
Church of America with the Unitarian denomination, many Universalists have moved away
from an explicitly or wholly biblical foundation for their inclusive faith. That said,
Universalists have bestowed upon Unitarian Universalism a global understanding of what
constitutes God's family, an undiminished belief in the goodness of the life, and a commitment
to seeking reconciliation and restorative justice in their personal relationships and in the public
realm.
It should be noted that there remain Christians outside the fold of the Unitarian Universalist
Association, who are otherwise theologically conservative and who hold to Universalism.
These include various Evangelical and Baptist Universalist ("no-heller") groups. [1] [2] Many
Universalists believe that Jesus was the first Universalist. They tend to insist on walking the
talk and being of service to their communities and see their religion as a means of commitment
to peace and justice and being true to a stand on human rights of all people regardless of any
category or false division. It should also be noted that there are "hopeful" universalists in many
of the larger denominations [3][4] [5], and many universalists who believe in hell as a place of
remedial punishment. This belief in hell is held by Bishop Carlton Pearson's "Higher
Dimensions Family Church," and stated on their web site (on the frequently asked questions
page) in the following words:

"A person who spends every day getting drunk, will ruin their health, marriage, family and
career; they will make their lives a living Hell. But that still falls far short of the chronic
alcoholic being condemned by a just God to literally burn in Hell forever and ever. For others
it may very well be that the punishment merited by their sins is greater than what they receive
in this life. For those people perhaps there will be some kind of punishment after death, but we
believe that it will be remedial and corrective rather than just punishment for punishment's
sake. Exactly what that will be and how long it will last we don't know. Will Hell for some
people last 10 minutes or 10 million years...we don't know. But this we do know; Hell will not
last for eternity; it will not be endless...Don't sin. Be reunited with God now, rather than after
you have put yourself (and those you love) through Hell." [6]

A.2. Universalism in Ananda Marga

In Ananda Marga, Universalism refers to the ideas that energy and matter are evolved from
cosmic consciousness. Thus, all created beings are of one universal family. This is an
expansion of humanism to include everything as family, based on fundamental truth that the
universe is a thought projection from the Supreme.

A.3.Universalism in the New Church

In the New Church Universalism is the belief that The Lord created every person to go to
heaven and be conjoined with Him there as an angel. And also that He does not make anyone
go there, but people freely choose their eternal destiny.

People of all faiths come into heaven if they have followed their beliefs sincerely and loved
God and their neighbors.

Those who go to Hell have chosen Hell because they enjoy Hellish delights, which in Hell are
only allowed to be enjoyed as fantasy. Therefore the Lord does not punish people by sending
them to Hell, but rather allows Hell as a permission of man's free will.

B. UTILITARIANISM THEORY
Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism (from the Latin utilis, useful) is a theory of ethics that prescribes the
quantitative maximization of good consequences for a population. It is a form of
consequentialism. This good to be maximized is usually happiness, pleasure, or preference
satisfaction. Though some utilitarian theories might seek to maximize other consequences,
these consequences generally have something to do with the welfare of people (or of people
and nonhuman animals). For this reason, utilitarianism is often associated with the term
welfarist consequentialism.

B.1. History of utilitarianism

Utilitarianism was first proposed by the Chinese philosopher Mozi, who lived some time
between the years of 479-381 B.C. during the Warring States Period. He was the founder of the
school of Mohism in ancient China and advocated a utilitarian ethical system some 1,800 years
before it was promoted as a viable principle in Europe.

European Utilitarianism was originally proposed by Jeremy Bentham. From the principle of
utility, Bentham found pain and pleasure to be the only absolutes in the world: "nature has put
man under the governance of two sovereign masters: pleasure and pain." From this he derived
the rule of utility: that the good is whatever brings the greatest happiness to the greatest
number of people. Later, after realizing that the formulation recognized two different and
potentially conflicting principles, he dropped the second part and talked simply about "the
greatest happiness principle."

In his famous (and short) book, Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill argued that cultural,
intellectual, and spiritual pleasures are of greater value than mere physical pleasure, because
the former would be valued more highly by competent judges than the latter. A competent
judge, according to Mill, is anyone who has experienced both the lower pleasures and the
higher. Like Bentham's formulation, Mill's utilitarianism is hedonistic, because it deals with
pleasure/happiness.

The classic utilitarianism of Bentham and Mill influenced many other philosophers and the
development of the broader concept of consequentialism. As a result, the correct definitions of
utilitarianism and consequentialism and the exact difference between these two principles are
not always entirely clear, even among philosophers.

Other past advocates of utilitarianism include William Godwin, James Mill, and Henry
Sidgwick; modern-day advocates include R.M. Hare and Peter Singer.

Utilitarianism has been used as an argument for many different political views. In his essay On
Liberty and other works, John Stuart Mill argued that utilitarianism requires that political
arrangements satisfy the "liberty principle", according to which each person must be
guaranteed the greatest possible liberty that would not interfere with the liberty of others, so
that each person may maximize his or her happiness. Ludwig von Mises advocated
libertarianism using utilitarian arguments. In contrast, some Marxist philosophers have also
used these principles, but instead advocated political socialism.
B.2. Types of utilitarianism

B.2.a Negative utilitarianism

Most utilitarian theories deal with producing the greatest amount of good for the greatest
number. Negative utilitarianism requires us to promote the least amount of evil or harm, or to
prevent the greatest amount of harm for the greatest number. Proponents argue that this is a
more effective ethical formula, since, they contend, there are many more ways to do harm than
to do good, and the greatest harms are more consequential than the greatest goods.

However, some advocates of the utilitarian principle were quick to suggest that the ultimate
aim of negative utilitarianism would be to engender the quickest and least painful method of
killing the entirety of humanity, as this ultimately would effectively minimize pain. Negative
utilitarianism would seem to call for the destruction of the world even if only to avoid the pain
of a pinprick.

B.2.b Act utilitarianism vs. rule utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism states that, when faced with a choice, we must first consider the likely
consequences of potential actions, and from that, chose to do what we believe will generate the
most happiness. A rule utilitarian, on the other hand, begins by looking at potential rules of
action. To determine whether a rule should be followed, he looks at what would happen if it
was constantly followed. If adherence to the rule produces more happiness than otherwise, it is
a rule that morally must be followed at all times. In this way, rule utilitarianism is a more of a
proportionalistic ethical theory.

To illustrate, consider the following scenario: A surgeon has five terminal patients: one needs a
liver, one needs a pancreas, one needs a heart, and two need kidneys. A sixth, non-terminal
patient just came in to have his appendix removed. Should the surgeon kill the sixth man and
pass his organs around to the others?

An act utilitarian would consider the probable consequences of sacrificing the sixth patient that
one time, while a rule utilitarian would look at the consequences of performing such a sacrifice
every time such a situation arises. One potential rule would be: "whenever a surgeon could kill
one relatively healthy person in order to transplant his organs to more than one other person
who needs them, he ought to do so." If instituted in society, this rule would obviously lead to
bad consequences. Relatively healthy people would stop going to the hospital, many risky
transplant operations would be performed, etc. Therefore, a rule utilitarian would say we
should implement the opposite rule: "don't harvest healthy people's organs to give them to sick
people." For a rule utilitarian, therefore, it would be immoral for the surgeon to kill the sixth
man. Of course, it is possible that the act utilitarian would decide not to sacrifice the sixth man,
but most would agree that rule utiltarianism would provide stronger reasons not to.

Rule utilitarianism has been criticized for advocating general rules that will in some specific
circumstances clearly decrease happiness if followed. To never kill a human might seem to be
a good rule, but this could make defense against aggressors very difficult. Rule utilitarians
would then add that there are general exception rules that allows the breaking of other rules if
this increases happiness, one example being self-defense. Critics would then argue that this
reduces rule utilitarianism to act utilitarianism, and the rules become meaningless. Rule
utilitarians respond that the rules in the legal system (i.e., laws) which regulate such situations
are not meaningless. For instance, self-defense is legally justified while murder is not.

Rule utilitarianism should not be confused with rules of thumb. Many act utilitarians agree that
it makes sense to formulate certain rules of thumb to follow if they find themselves in a
situation in which the consequences are difficult, costly, or time-consuming to calculate
exactly. If the consequences can be calculated relatively clearly and without much doubt, then
the rules of thumb can be ignored.

B.2.c Preference utilitarianism

Preference utilitarianism is a particular type of utilitarianism which defines the good to be

maximized as the fulfillment of persons' preferences. Like any utilitarian theory, preference
utilitarianism claims that the right thing to do is that which produces the best consequences;
when defined in terms of preference satisfaction, the best consequences can include things
other than pure hedonism, like reputation or rationality.

Preference utilitarianism is favored by the modern utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer, who
was influenced by R.M. Hare.

B.2.d Other species

Peter Singer, along with animal rights activists, has argued that the well-being of all sentient
beings (conscious beings who feel pain, including animals) deserve equal consideration with
that given to human beings. Bentham made a similar argument. Even those utilitarians arguing
otherwise note that suffering in animals often causes humans to suffer, thus making it often
immoral to harm an animal even if the animal itself is not given a moral status.

B.3. Combinations with other ethical schools

In order to overcome perceived shortcomings of both systems, several attempts have been
made to combine utilitarianism with Kant's categorical imperative. For instance, James
Cornman proposes that in any given situation we should treat as "means" as few people as
possible, and treat as "ends" as many people as are thus then consistent with those "means". He
refers to this as the "Utilitarian Kantian Principle".

Other consequentialists may consider happiness an important consequence, but in addition

argue that consequences such as justice or equality should also be valued, regardless if they
increase happiness or not.

B.4. Biological explanation for utilitarianism

It has been suggested that sociobiology, the study of the evolution of human society, provides
support for the utilitarian point of view. For example, in The Expanding Circle: Ethics and
Sociobiology, the utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer argues that fundamentally utilitarian
ethical reasoning has existed from the time primitive foraging bands had to cooperate,
compromise, and make group decisions to survive. He elaborates: "In a dispute between
members of a cohesive group of reasoning beings, the demand for a reason is a demand for a
justification that can be accepted by the group as a whole." Thus, consideration of others'
interests has long been a necessary part of the human experience. Singer believes that reason
now compels the equal consideration of all people's interests:

If I have seen that from an ethical point of view I am just one person among the many
in my society, and my interests are no more important, from the point of view of the
whole, than the similar interests of others within my society, I am ready to see that,
from a still larger point of view, my society is just one among other societies, and the
interests of members of my society are no more important, from that larger perspective,
than the similar interests of members of other societies… Taking the impartial element
in ethical reasoning to its logical conclusion means, first, accepting that we ought to
have equal concern for all human beings.

This conclusion -- that everybody's interests should be considered equally when making
decisions -- is a core tenet of utilitarianism.

Singer elaborates that viewing oneself as equal to others in one's society and at the same time
viewing one's society as fundamentally superior to other societies may cause an uncomfortable
cognitive dissonance. This is the sense in which he means that reason may push people to
accept a broader utilitarian stance. Critics (e.g. Binmore 2005) point out that this cognitive
dissonance is apparently not very strong, since people often knowingly ignore the interests of
faraway societies quite similar to their own. They also note that the "ought" of the quoted
paragraph applies only to someone who has already accepted the premise that all societies are
equally important. Singer has responded that his argument in Expanding the Circle wasn't
intended to provide a complete philosophical justification for a utilitarian categorical
imperative, but merely to provide a plausible explanation for how some people come to accept
utilitarianism.

B.5. Criticism of utilitarianism

B.5.a Utilitarianism and "common sense" morality

Utilitarianism has been criticized for leading to a number of conclusions contrary to "common
sense" morality. For example, it might be argued that it is "common sense" that one should
never sacrifice some humans for the happiness of other humans (an ethical position famously
explored in Le Guin's modern fable "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas"). Utilitarians,
however, argue that "common sense" has been used to justify many positions on both sides of
controversial issues and varies greatly from individual to individual, making it an unsuitable
basis for a "common" morality. Regarding the example, it is equally "common sense" that one
must sacrifice some soldiers and civilians in a defensive war.

B.5.b Comparing happiness

Another difficulty with utilitarianism is that of comparing happiness among different people.
Many of the early utilitarians hoped that happiness could somehow be measured quantitatively
and compared between people through felicific calculus, although no one has ever managed to
construct a detailed one in practice. It has been argued that the happiness of different people is
incommensurable, and thus felicific calculus is impossible, not only in practice, but even in
principle. Defenders of utilitarianism reply that this problem is faced by anyone who has to
choose between two alternative states of affairs where both impose burdens to the people
involved. If happiness were incommensurable, the death of a hundred people would be no
worse than the death of one. Triage is an example of a real world situation where utilitarianism
seems to be applied successfully.

That the pleasure of a sadist should have the same importance as the pleasure of an altruist has
also been criticized. Supporters note that in practice almost no decisions will be made to cater
to the sadist. While creating pleasure for an altruist simultaneously helps other people, creating
pleasure for a sadist simultaneously hurts other people. Furthermore, many utilitarians feel that
sadist pleasure is superficial and temporary, and thus it is detrimental to the sadist in the long
run. In practice, therefore, the pleasure of a sadist almost never has a weight of any
significance in a utilitarian calculation.

B.5.c Predicting consequences

Daniel Dennett uses the example of Three Mile Island as another example of the difficulty in
calculating happiness. Was the near-meltdown that occurred at this nuclear power plant a good
or a bad thing (according to utilitarianism)? He points out that its long-term effects on nuclear
policy would be considered beneficial by many and might outweigh the negative
consequences. His conclusion is that it is still too early (20 years after the event) for
utilitarianism to weigh all the evidence and reach a definite conclusion. Utilitarians note that
utilitarianism seems to be the unspoken principle used by both advocates and critics of nuclear
power. That something cannot be determined at the moment is common in science and is
frequently resolved with further advancements.

Utilitarians, however, are not required to have perfect knowledge; indeed, certain knowledge of
consequences is impossible because consequences are in the unexperienced future. Utilitarians
simply try their best to maximize happiness (or another form of utility), and to do this, makes
their best estimates of the consequences. If the consequences of a decision are particularly
unclear, it might make sense to follow an ethical rule which has promoted the most utility in
the past. Utilitarians will also note that people trying to further their own interests run into
situations in which the consequences of their decisions are very unclear. This does not mean
that they are unable to make a decision.

B.5.d The importance of intentions

Utilitarianism has been criticized for only looking at the results of actions, not at the desires or
intentions which motivate them, which many people also consider important. An action
intended to cause harm but that inadvertently causes good results would be judged equal to the
result from an action done with good intentions. However, many utilitarians would argue that
utilitarianism applies not only to results, but also to desires and dispositions, praise and blame,
rules, institutions, and punishment. For instance, bad intentions may cause harm (to the actor
and to others) even if they do not result in bad acts. Once this is recognized, supporters argue
that utilitarianism becomes a much more complex, and rich, moral theory, and may align much
more closely with our moral intuitions.
Furthermore, many utilitarians view morality as a personal guide rather as a means to judge the
actions of other people or actions which have already been performed. In other words, morality
is something to be looked at when deciding what to do. In this sense, intentions are the only
thing that matter, because the consequences cannot be known with certainty until the decision
has already been made.

B.5.e Human rights

Some critics reject utilitarianism, both rule and act, on the basis that it seems to be
incompatible with human rights. For example, if slavery or torture is beneficial for the
population as a whole, it could theoretically be justified by utilitarianism. Utilitarian theory
thus seems to overlook the rights of minority groups. It might also ignore the rights of the
majority. A man might achieve such pure ecstasy from killing 100 people so that his positive
utility outweighs the negative utility of the 100 people he murdered.

Utilitarians may argue that justification of either slavery, torture or mass murder would require
unrealistically large benefits to outweigh the direct and extreme suffering to the victims
(although some may support one of these practices as being justifiable by the consequences
achieved). Utilitarianism would also require the indirect impact of social acceptance of
inhumane policies to be taken into consideration; for example, general anxiety and fear might
increase for all if human rights are commonly ignored.

Act and rule utilitarianisms differ in how they treat human rights themselves. Under rule
utilitarianism, a human right can easily be considered a moral rule. Act utilitarians, on the other
hand, do not accept human rights as moral principles in and of themselves, but that does not
mean they are rejected altogether. First, most act utilitarians, as explained above, would agree
that acts such as enslavement and genocide always cause great unhappiness and little
happiness. Second, human rights could be considered rules of thumb; although torture might be
acceptable under some circumstances, as a rule it is immoral. Finally, act utilitarians often
support human rights in a legal sense, because utilitarians support laws that cause more good
than harm.

B.5.f Sacrifice of an important individual interest for a greater sum of lesser interests

Since utilitarians judge all actions by their ability to maximize good consequences, any harm to
one individual can always be justified by a greater gain to other individuals. This is true even if
the loss for the one individual is large and the gain for the others is marginal, as long as enough
individuals receive the small benefit. Thus, utilitarians deny that individuals have inviolable
moral rights. As explained above, utilitarians may support legal rights or rights as rules of
thumb, but they are not considered inherent to morality. This seems problematic to many
critics of utilitarianism, one of whom notes that according to utilitarianism there is "nothing
intrinsically wrong with sacrificing an important individual interest to a greater sum of lesser
interests. That assumption is retained in the foundations of the theory, and it remains a source
of moral concern."
Althought the above criticism is not, two other common criticisms of utilitarianism are based
on misconceptions. The principle of "the greatest good for the greatest number", introduced by
Bentham, is often mistaken as meaning that if something hurts one person and helps many, it is
always moral. This is not the case, however; as noted above, Bentham dropped the misleading
"greatest number" part of the principle, replacing the original formulation with the more direct
"greatest happiness principle." Thus, the morality of an action is not determined by the number
of people made happier, but rather the quantity of happiness produced. A great loss to one
individual might be outweighed by small gains for many, but it might not. Even if 1 person is
hurt and 100 people are helped, the harm to the one might be so great as to outweigh the small
gains for the rest of the people.

Second, many mistakenly believe utilitarianism means individuals interests are sacrificed for
the sake of the "society" or the nation. According to utilitarianism, however, one individual's
interests can only be sacrificed for the sake of the interests of other individuals. As Bentham
put it, "It is vain to talk of the interest of the community, without understanding what is the
interest of the individual." While it may benefit individuals to have a healthy society or a
functional state, neither of these are ends in themselves.

B.5.g Right and wrong dichotomy

A further criticism is in regard to Utilitarianism's judgement of right and wrong. Utilitarianism

holds that in any given situation the 'right' act is that which produced the greatest good, while
all other acts are wrong. Therefore even charitable actions could be considered wrong under
this theory. For example, if someone donated $1,000 to a charity that provided starving
children with food when that person could have donated the money to a charity that does the
same thing but is more efficient, and in doing so created even more good, that action would be
judged as wrong by Utilitarianism.

In response to criticism of this nature the contemporary philosopher and utilitarian William
Shaw claimed that, although Utilitarianism would clearly dictate the above conclusion, a good
utilitarian would still praise the wrongdoer for their charitable donation even though it is
wrong. This is because punishing such a person would likely push them to no longer make any
charitable contributions, so praising the wrongdoer would better serve the greater good than
punishing them.

Furthermore, the decision to donate to charity was still morally good, even if the decision to
ignore efficiency was immoral.

B.5.g Proof

Another criticism of utilitarianism is that it is not proved by science or logic to be the correct
ethical system. However, supporters claim that this is common to all ethical schools (and
indeed the system of logic itself) and will remain so until the problem of the regress argument
or at least the is-ought problem is satisfactorily solved. Indeed, utilitarians are some of the first
to recognise this problem. It might instead be argued that almost all political arguments about a
future society use an unspoken utilitarian principle, all sides claiming that their proposed
solution is the one that increases human happiness most. Some degree of utilitarianism might
very well be genetically hard-coded into humans.
B.6. Why be moral?

Critics have also asked why one should follow utilitarianism instead of egoism. A legal system
might punish behavior which hurts others, but this incentive is not active in a situation where
one can personally gain by breaking it and others cannot punish this. However, one egoist may
propose means to maximize self-interest that conflicts with the means proposed by another
egoist. As a result, they are behooved to compromise with one another to avoid conflict, out of
self-interest. The means proposed may incidentally coincide with those prescribed by
utilitarianism, though the foundational ethical imperative would not, of course, be utilitarian.

Another reason for an egoist to become a utilitarian was proposed by Peter Singer in Practical
Ethics. He presents the paradox of hedonism, which says that if your only goal in life is
personal happiness, you will never be happy; you need something to be happy about. One goal
which Singer feels is likely to bring personal happiness is the desire to improve the lives of
others. This argument is similar to the one for virtue ethics.

C.DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

Distributive justice concerns what is just or right with respect to the allocation of goods (or
utility) in a society. It is often contrasted with procedural justice. Distributive justice
concentrates on just outcomes, while procedural justice concentrates on just processes. The
most prominent contemporary theorist of distributive justice is John Rawls.

Distributive justice looks at the distribution of goods among members of society at a specific
time, and on that basis decides whether the distribution is just. For example, someone who
looks at standard of living, absolute wealth, differences in wealth, or any such utilitarian
standard to judge justice is thinking in terms of distributive justice. People who hold equality to
be important generally, if implicitly, rely on notions of distributive justice. However, not all
advocates of end-state theories are concerned with equality. What unites them is their concern
with achieving the best results, the best distribution of wealth.

D. SOCIAL CONTRACT

Social contract theory (or contractarianism) is a concept used in philosophy, political

science and sociology to denote an implicit agreement within a state regarding the rights and
responsibilities of the state and its citizens, or more generally a similar concord between a
group and its members, or between individuals. All members within a society are assumed to
agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society without
violating the contract; such violation would signify a problematic attempt to return to the state
of nature. It has been often noted, indeed, that social contract theories relied on a specific
anthropological conception of man as either "good" or "evil". Thomas Hobbes (1651), John
Locke (1689) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous philosophers of
contractarianism, which is the theoretical groundwork of democracy. It is also one of a few
competing theoretical groundworks of liberalism, but Rousseau's social contract is often seen
as conflicting with classical liberalism which stresses individualism and rejects subordination
of individual liberty to the "general will" of the community.

D.1 Overview
D.1.a State of nature & social contract

The social contract, as a political theory, explains the justification and purpose of the state and
of human rights. According to Hobbes' canonical theory, the essence is as follows: Without
society, we would live in a state of nature, where we each have unlimited natural freedoms.
The downside of this general autonomy is that it includes the "right to all things" and thus the
freedom to harm all who threaten one's own self-preservation; there are no positive rights, only
laws of nature and an endless "war of all against all" (Bellum omnium contra omnes, Hobbes
1651). To avoid this, we jointly agree to an implicit social contract by which we each gain civil
rights in return for accepting the obligation to honor the rights of others, giving up some
freedoms to do so. The figurehead of the society we create, representing our joint interests as
members and formed by the delegation of our power, is the sovereign state.

D.1.b A fictional state of nature?

The emergence of the social contract from the state of nature is often explained in terms of
just-so stories whose goal is to show the logical basis of rights rather than attempting historical
accuracy. Rousseau's 1754 Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men is
more a fictional account of what has passed than a realistic description of what happened.
However, it is also true that the ambiguity persists, and that Hobbes' polemic conception of the
state of nature (opposed to Rousseau's irenical conception of it) approach it from the realist
description of civil war. Although many read Leviathan, Hobbes' principle work on social
contract theory, in the context of the English Civil War, it was written in its entirety during the
antebellum period, when Hobbes had fled to the continent. Due to political pressures, Hobbes
was unable to publish the tome until war had already broken out, and he could be protected. It
should be noted that Hobbes and Rousseau view the social contract as an explicit, actual
agreement. Locke sees the contract in more of its traditional fictional sense.

D.1.c Violations of the contract

The social contract and the civil rights it gives us are neither "natural" nor permanently fixed.
Rather, the contract itself is the means towards an end — the benefit of all — and (according to
some philosophers such as Locke or Rousseau), is only legitimate to the extent that it meets the
general interest. Therefore, when failings are found in the contract, we renegotiate to change
the terms, using methods such as elections and legislature. Locke theorized the right of
rebellion in case of the contract leading to tyranny.

Since rights come from agreeing to the contract, those who simply choose not to fulfill their
contractual obligations, such as by committing crimes, risk losing some of their rights, and the
rest of society can be expected to protect itself against the actions of such outlaws. To be a
member of society is to accept responsibility for following its rules, along with the threat of
punishment for violating them. Most of us are comfortable with laws punishing behavior that
harms people because we are concerned about others harming us and don't plan on harming
others. In this way, society works by "mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon" (Hardin 1968).
[1] However, philosophers such as Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze have argued that this is
a repressive conception, declaring that we are all "potential criminals". Indeed, Foucault
criticized the concept of "criminal" ("délinquant", meaning professional outlaw), and pointed
out the relationship between crime, class struggle and insanity which, as in crimes of passion,
can burst out suddenly — thus explaining the motto "we are all virtual criminals".

Some rights are defined in term of the negative obligation they impose on others. For example,
your basic property rights entail that everyone else refrain from taking what is yours. Rights
can also involve positive obligations, such as the right to have stolen property returned to you,
which obligates others to give you back what's yours when they find it in the hands of others
(or, in modern society, to send the police in to do it). Theorists argue that a combination of
positive and negative rights is necessary to create an enforceable contract that protects our
interests. Recently, liberal thinkers such as John Rawls have stressed positive rights, while
libertarian thinkers such as Robert Nozick have emphasized negative rights.

D.2 History

D.2.a Classical thought

It might be argued that social contract ideas go back to the Greeks; Plato has Socrates make a
case for social contract ideas in Crito but criticizes them in The Republic [2]. Some have argued
that Epicurus explicitly endorsed "social contract" ideas; the last fourth of his Principal
Doctrines state that justice comes from agreement not to harm each other, and in laws being
made for mutual advantage (pleasure, happiness), and that laws which are no longer
advantageous are no longer just. Strictly speaking, however, contractualism refers to the theory
of sovereignty first elaborated by Hobbes in the 17th century, in the Leviathan, traditionally
considered as a landmark of absolutism. Before Hobbes, Francisco Suárez (1548-1617), from
the School of Salamanca, might be considered as an early theorist of the social contract,
theorizing natural law in an attempt to limit the divine right of absolute monarchy. In this
sense, the Greeks had little to do with contractualism as it is formulated by modern philosophy:
conventionalism is in fact quite the opposite of contractualism, since it considers justice to be
the product of social conventions (as in the sophists' acceptation of the term), while
contractualism considers nature to be the grounds of justice.

D.2.b Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan (1651)

The first modern philosopher to articulate a detailed contract theory was Thomas Hobbes
(1588-1679), who contended that people in a state of nature ceded their individual rights to
create sovereignty, retained by the state, in return for their protection and a more functional
society, so social contract evolves out of pragmatic self-interest. Hobbes named the state
Leviathan, thus pointing to the artifice involved in the social contract. Other philosophies
conceived by Hobbes is that man was innately born with no morals or understanding of god.
When observing the Bible, one can find that the name of Satan's serpent is Leviathan, thus the
naming of his book. His ideas were greatly criticized due to their morbidity and anti-Christian
ideals.

D.2.c John Locke's Two Treatises of Government (1689)

John Locke's Two Treatises of Government differs from Hobbes' conception of an absolute
monarchy by arguing in favor of a right of rebellion against tyranny, believing that people
contracted with one another for a particular kind of government, and that they could modify or
even abolish the government. For this reason, he is considered to be one of the main thinkers of
liberalism. Locke's social contract theory was intertwined with his understanding of an innate,
essential human rationality constituting 'natural law', explained in An Essay Concerning
Human Understanding. John Locke is often compared to his contemporary, Thomas Hobbes,
and their main differences stands as one of the most important of Locke's beliefs. Locke
believed, in contrast to Hobbes, that man is naturally good, and is not solely driven by greed
and evil.

D.2.d Jean-Jacques Rousseau Du Contrat social (1762)

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), in his influential 1762 treatise The Social Contract, Or
Principles of Political Right, outlined a different version of contract theory, based on the
conception of popular sovereignty, defined as indivisible and inalienable - this last trait
explaining Rousseau's aversion for representative democracy and his advocacy of direct
democracy. Rousseau's theory has many similarities with the individualist Lockean liberal
tradition, but also departs from it on many significant points. For example, his theory of
popular sovereignty includes a conception of a "general will", which is more than the simple
sum of individual wills: it is thus collectivist or holistic, rather than individualist. As an
individual, Rousseau argues, the subject can be egoist and decide that his personal interest
should override the collective interest. However, as part of a collective body, the individual
subject puts aside his egoism to create a "general will", which is popular sovereignty itself.
Popular sovereignty thus decides only what is good for society as a whole:

The heart of the idea of the social contract may be stated simply: Each of us places his
person and authority under the supreme direction of the general will, and the group
receives each individual as an indivisible part of the whole...

Hence, Rousseau's famous sentence: "We shall force them to be free" must be understood as
such: since individual subjects resign their free will, as in Hobbes's theory, to form popular
sovereignty; besides, since the indivisible and inalienable popular sovereignty decides what is
good for the whole, then if an individual lapses back into his ordinary egoism, he shall be
forced to listen to what they decided as a member of the collectivity.

Rousseau's version of the social contract is the one most often associated with the term "social
contract" itself. His theories had an influence on both the 1789 French Revolution and the
subsequent formation of the socialist movement. Furthermore, one can note that, as in Locke or
Hobbes' theories, Rousseau gave particular attention to subjective and individual questions, as
in his Confessions for example.

D.2.e Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's individualist social contract (1851)

While Rousseau's social contract is based on popular sovereignty and not on individual
sovereignty, there are other theories espoused by individualists, libertarians and anarchists,
which do not involve agreeing to anything more than negative rights and creates only a limited
state, if at all. This is related to the non-aggression principle.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon advocated a conception of social contract which didn't involve an

individual surrendering sovereignty to others. According to him, the social contract was not
between individuals and the state, but rather between individuals themselves refraining from
coercing or governing each other, each one maintaining complete sovereignty upon oneself:

"What really is the Social Contract? An agreement of the citizen with the government?
No, that would mean but the continuation of [Rousseau’s] idea. The social contract is
an agreement of man with man; an agreement from which must result what we call
society. In this, the notion of commutative justice, first brought forward by the
primitive fact of exchange, …is substituted for that of distributive justice … Translating
these words, contract, commutative justice, which are the language of the law, into the
language of business, and you have commerce, that is to say, in its highest significance,
the act by which man and man declare themselves essentially producers, and abdicate
all pretension to govern each other"
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century
(1851).

This idea of a social contract that excludes intervention by the state in individual liberty was
also followed by other individualist anarchists, such as Benjamin Tucker (an enthusiast of
Proudhon's writings) who said "Mankind is approaching the real social contract, which is not,
as Rousseau thought, the origin of society, but rather the outcome of a long social experience,
the fruit of its follies and disasters. It is obvious that this contract, this social law, developed to
its perfection, excludes all aggression, all violation of equality and liberty, all invasion of every
kind." (Liberty, VII, 1890)

D.2.f John Rawls's Theory of Justice (1971)

John Rawls (1921-2002) proposed a contractarian approach that has a decidedly Kantian
flavour, in A Theory of Justice (1971), whereby rational people in a hypothetical "original
position," setting aside their individual preferences and capacities under a "veil of ignorance,"
would agree to certain general principles of justice. This idea is also used as a game-theoretical
formalization of the notion of fairness.

D.2.g Philip Pettit's conception of republicanism (1997)

Philip Pettit has argued, in Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government (1997), that
the theory of social contract, classically based on the consent of the governed (as it is assumed
that the contract is valid as long as the people consent to being governed by its representatives,
who exercise sovereignty), should be modified, in order avoid dispute. Instead of arguing that
an explicit consent, which can always be manufactured, should justify the validity of social
contract, Philip Pettit argues that the absence of an effective rebellion against the contract is the
only legitimacy of it, in much the same way that Karl Popper argues that the criteria of
scientific work is its falsifiability.

D.3 Criticism

D.3.a Social contract is a violation of contract theory

Normally, a contract is not presumed valid unless all parties agree to it voluntarily, that is, no
one has been pressured under the threat of physical force to enter into it. Lysander Spooner, a
staunch supporter of a right of contract between individuals, argues that a supposed social
contract (of the Rousseauean sort) cannot be used to justify governmental actions such as
taxation, because government will initiate force against anyone who does not wish to enter into
such a contract. As a result, he maintains that such an agreement is not voluntary and therefore
cannot be considered a legitimate contract at all. It should be noted, however, that
philosophical concept of social contract does not address the same issues as the juridical
contract theory, making the name "social contract" potentially misleading.

D.3.b Implicit social contract theory presupposes its conclusion

The theory of an implicit social contract holds that by remaining in the territory controlled by
some government, people give consent to be governed. This consent is what gives legitimacy
to the government. Philosopher Roderick Long argues that this is a case of question begging,
because the argument has to presuppose its conclusion:

I think that the person who makes this argument is already assuming that the
government has some legitimate jurisdiction over this territory. And then they say, well,
now, anyone who is in the territory is therefore agreeing to the prevailing rules. But
they’re assuming the very thing they're trying to prove – namely that this jurisdiction
over the territory is legitimate. If it's not, then the government is just one more group of
people living in this broad general geographical territory. But I've got my property,
and exactly what their arrangements are I don't know, but here I am in my property
and they don't own it – at least they haven't given me any argument that they do – and
so, the fact that I am living in "this country" means I am living in a certain
geographical region that they have certain pretensions over – but the question is
whether those pretensions are legitimate. You can’t assume it as a means to proving it.

D.3.c Ronald Dworkin's Law's Empire (1986)

In his 1986 book Law's Empire, Ronald Dworkin touches briefly on social contract theory,
firstly distinguishing between the use of social contract theory in an ethical sense, to establish
the character or content of justice (such as John Rawls' A Theory of Justice) and its use in a
jurisprudential sense as a basis for legitimate government.

Dworkin argues that if every citizen were a party to an actual, historical agreement to accept
and obey political decisions in the way his community's political decisions are in fact taken,
then the historical fact of agreement would provide at least a good prima facie case for
coercion even in ordinary politics:

So some political philosophers have been tempted to say that we have in fact agreed to
the social contract of that kind tacitly, by just not emigrating when we reach the age of
consent. But no one can argue that very long with a straight face. Consent cannot be
binding on people, in the way this argument requires, unless it is given more freely,
and with more genuine alternate choice, than just by declining to build a life from
nothing under a foreign flag. And even if the consent were genuine, the argument
would fail as an argument for legitimacy, because a person leaves one sovereign only
to join another; he has no choice to be free from sovereigns altogether. [4]
A typical counterargument is that the choice is not limited to tacit consent to the status quo vs.
expatriation, but also includes accepting the contract, then working to alter the parts that are
disagreed with, as by participating in the political process.

D.3.d Criticisms of natural right

Contractualism is based on a philosophy of rights being agreed to in order to further our

interests, which is a form of individualism: each individual subject is accorded individual
rights, which may or may not be inalienable, and form the basis of civil rights, as in the 1789
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. It must be underlined, however, as Hannah
Arendt did on her book on imperialism, that the 1789 Declarations, in this agreeing with the
social contract theory, bases the natural rights of the human-being on the civil rights of the
citizen, instead of doing the reverse as the contractualist theory pretends to do [5]. However, this
individualist and liberal approach has been criticized since the 19th century by thinkers such as
Marx, Nietzsche or Freud, and afterward by structuralism and post-structuralism thinkers, such
as Lacan, Althusser, Foucault, Deleuze or Derrida. Several of those philosophers have
attempted, in a spinozist inspiration, of thinking some sort of transindividuality which would
precede the division between individual subject and collective subject (i.e. society).

E. INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM OF CHOICE

As an individual in society any person uses to develop some choice. Individual’s choice is
influenced by his/her family, education, experience, profession, and situational factors. An
individual who respect the quality of life enjoyed by others in the society is likely to have
strong ethics with respect to the proper treatment of others.

An individual expresses freedom of choice with respect to education, profession, leisure time
activities, dresses, food habits, and type of company s/he keeps.

But not only the choice of individual but also the sustainable development of society and
economic development are important issues for an individual are very important.

Value based behaviour is required for the survival and development of human being as well as
individual. Once an individual has clear cut idea and understanding about his/her mission and
values, s/he develops a basis for evaluating the work practices and bring them into alignment.

Ethical values help in doing right things by being honest, acting in a legally and socially
responsible manner, being fair in one’s treatment of others.

The freedom of choice should generate in an individual the positive values such as honesty,
integrity, kindness, self respect, creativity, and positive attitude.

F. THE ETHICAL VALUE SYSTEM-PROFESSIONAL CODES

The ethical values for professional codes as prescribed by the Upanishads and The Gita are
given as under:

1. Divine values are much more powerful than physical wealth.

2. Work should be regarded as worship and one should do duty without calculation of gain and
loss.

3. By cooperation and mutual help all professional shall achieve the highest human welfare.

4. Health and character are real power and wealth character is based on divine values and
divine values are based on wisdom.

5. A professional with positive values and skills can assure harmony and progress for the
society.

6. Practice of self evaluation helps to remove the weakness and enhance positive values.

7. One must develop wisdom, vision and insight for building a good personality.
 CHAPTER- 5
CULTURE AND ETHICS

The word culture, from the Latin colo, -ere, with its root meaning "to cultivate", generally
refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that give such activity
significance. Different definitions of "culture" reflect different theoretical bases for
understanding, or criteria for evaluating, human activity. Anthropologists most commonly use
the term "culture" to refer to the universal human capacity to classify, codify and communicate
their experiences symbolically. This capacity is long been taken as a defining feature of the
genus Homo. However, primatologists such as Jane Goodall have identified aspects of culture
among our closest relatives in the animal kingdom.

A. Defining "culture"

Culture has been called "the way of life for an entire society." As such, it includes codes of
manners, dress, language, religion, rituals, norms of behaviour and systems of belief.

Various definitions of culture reflect differing theories for understanding — or criteria for
evaluating — human activity.

Sir Edward B. Tylor writing from the prespective of social anthropology in the U.K. in the late
nineteenth century described culture in the following way:

"Culture or civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole
which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities
and habits acquired by man as a member of society."

More recently, the United Nations Economic, Social and Cultural Organization UNESCO
(2002) described culture as follows:

"... culture should be regarded as the set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and
emotional features of society or a social group, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and
literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs".[4]

While these two definitions cover a range of meaning, they do not exhaust the many uses of the
term "culture." In 1952 Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn compiled a list of more than 200
definitions of "culture" in Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions
These definitions, and many others, provide a catalog of the elements of culture. The items
catalogued (e.g., a law, a stone tool, a marriage) each have an existence and life-line of their
own. They come into space-time at one set of coordinates and go out of it another. While here,
they change, so that one may speak of the evolution of the law or the tool.

A culture, then, is by definition at least, a set of cultural objects. Anthropologist Leslie White
asked: What sort of objects are they? Are they physical objects? Mental objects? Both?
Metaphors? Symbols? Reifications? In Science of Culture, (1949), he concluded that they are
objects "sui generis," i.e., of their own kind. In trying to define that kind, he hit upon a
previously unrealized aspect of symbolization, which he called "the symbolate," i.e., an object
created by the act of symbolization. He thus defined culture as: "symbolates understood in an
extra-somatic context." The key to this definition is the discovery of the symbolate.

A.1 Key components of culture

A common way of understanding culture sees it as consisting of four elements:

1. values
2. norms
3. institutions
4. artifacts.

Values comprise ideas about what in life seems important. They guide the rest of the culture.
Norms consist of expectations of how people will behave in various situations. Each culture
has methods, called sanctions, of enforcing its norms. Sanctions vary with the importance of
the norm; norms that a society enforces formally have the status of laws. Instututions are the
structures of a society within which values and norms are transmitted. Artifacts—things, or
apects of material culture—derive from a culture's values and norms.

Julian Huxley gives a slightly different division, into inter-related "mentifacts", "socifacts" and
"artifacts", for ideological, sociological, and technological subsystems respectively.
Socialization, in Huxley's view, depends on the belief subsystem. The sociological subsystem
governs interaction between people. Material objects and their use make up the technological
subsystem.

As a rule, archeologists focus on material culture, whereas cultural anthropologists focus on

symbolic culture, although ultimately both groups maintain interests in the relationships
between these two dimensions. Moreover, anthropologists understand "culture" to refer not
only to consumption goods, but to the general processes which produce such goods and give
them meaning, and to the social relationships and practices in which such objects and processes
become embedded.

A.2 Ways of looking at culture

A.2.a Culture as civilization

Many people today have an idea of "culture" that developed in Europe during the 18th and
early 19th centuries. This notion of culture reflected inequalities within European societies, and
between European powers and their colonies around the world. It identifies "culture" with
"civilization" and contrasts it with "nature." According to this way of thinking, one can classify
some countries as more civilized than others, and some people as more cultured than others.
Some cultural theorists have thus tried to eliminate popular or mass culture from the definition
of culture. Theorists such as Matthew Arnold (1822-1888) or the Leavises regard culture as
simply the result of "the best that has been thought and said in the world”[9] Arnold contrasted
culture with social chaos or anarchy. On this account, culture links closely with social
cultivation: the progressive refinement of human behavior. Arnold consistently uses the word
this way: "... culture being a pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all
the matters which most concern us, the best which has been thought and said in the world".

In practice, culture referred to élite goods and activities such as haute cuisine, high fashion or
haute couture, museum-caliber art and classical music, and the word cultured described people
who knew about, and took part in, these activities. For example, someone who used 'culture' in
the sense of 'cultivation' might argue that classical music is more refined than music produced
by working-class people, such as punk rock or the indigenous music traditions of aboriginal
peoples of Australia.

People who use the term "culture" in this way tend not to use it in the plural as "cultures". They
do not believe that distinct cultures exist, each with their own internal logic and values; but
rather that only a single standard of refinement suffices, against which one can measure all
groups. Thus, according to this worldview, people with different customs from those who
regard themselves as cultured do not usually count as "having a different culture," but are
classed as "uncultured." People lacking "culture" often seemed more "natural," and observers
often defended (or criticized) elements of high culture for repressing "human nature".

From the 18th century onwards, some social critics have accepted this contrast between
cultured and uncultured, but have stressed the interpretation of refinement and of sophistication
as corrupting and unnatural developments that obscure and distort people's essential nature. On
this account, folk music (as produced by working-class people) honestly expresses a natural
way of life, and classical music seems superficial and decadent. Equally, this view often
portrays Indigenous peoples as 'noble savages' living authentic unblemished lives,
uncomplicated and uncorrupted by the highly-stratified capitalist systems of the West.

Today most social scientists reject the monadic conception of culture, and the opposition of
culture to nature. They recognize non-élites as just as cultured as élites (and non-Westerners as
just as civilized) -- simply regarding them as just cultured in a different way. Thus social
observers contrast the "high" culture of élites to "popular" or pop culture, meaning goods and
activities produced for, and consumed by the masses. (Note that some classifications relegate
both high and low cultures to the status of subcultures.)

A.2.b Culture as worldview

During the Romantic era, scholars in Germany, especially those concerned with nationalist
movements — such as the nationalist struggle to create a "Germany" out of diverse
principalities, and the nationalist struggles by ethnic minorities against the Austro-Hungarian
Empire — developed a more inclusive notion of culture as "worldview." In this mode of
thought, a distinct and incommensurable world view characterizes each ethnic group. Although
more inclusive than earlier views, this approach to culture still allowed for distinctions between
"civilized" and "primitive" or "tribal" cultures.

By the late 19th century, anthropologists had adopted and adapted the term culture to a broader
definition that they could apply to a wider variety of societies. Attentive to the theory of
evolution, they assumed that all human beings evolved equally, and that the fact that all
humans have cultures must in some way result from human evolution. They also showed some
reluctance to use biological evolution to explain differences between specific cultures — an
approach that either exemplified a form of, or segment of society vis a vis other segments and
the society as a whole, they often reveal processes of domination and resistance.

In the 1950s, subcultures — groups with distinctive characteristics within a larger culture —
began to be the subject of study by sociologists. The 20th century also saw the popularization
of the idea of corporate culture — distinct and malleable within the context of an employing
organization or a workplace.

A.2.c Culture as symbols

The symbolic view of culture, the legacy of Clifford Geertz (1973) and Victor Turner (1967),
holds symbols to be both the practices of social actors and the context that gives such practices
meaning. Anthony P. Cohen (1985) writes of the "symbolic gloss" which allows social actors
to use common symbols to communicate and understand each other while still imbuing these
symbols with personal significance and meanings.[10] Symbols provide the limits of cultured
thought. Members of a culture rely on these symbols to frame their thoughts and expressions in
intelligible terms. In short, symbols make culture possible, reproducible and readable. They are
the "webs of significance" in Weber's sense that, to quote Pierre Bourdieu (1977), "give
regularity, unity and systematicity to the practices of a group."[11] Thus, for example:

• "Stop, in the name of the law!" -- Stock phrase uttered to the antagonists by the sheriff
or marshal in 20th century American Old Western movies
• Law and order -- stock phrase in the United States
• Peace and order -- stock phrase in the Philippines

A.2.d Culture as a stabilizing mechanism

Modern cultural theory also considers the possibility that (a) culture itself is a product of
stabilization tendencies inherent in evolutionary pressures toward self-similarity and self-
cognition of societies as wholes, or tribalisms.

A.2.e Cultures within a society

Large societies often have subcultures, or groups of people with distinct sets of behavior and
beliefs that differentiate them from a larger culture of which they are a part. The subculture
may be distinctive because of the age of its members, or by their race, ethnicity, class or
gender. The qualities that determine a subculture as distinct may be aesthetic, religious,
occupational, political, sexual or a combination of these factors.

In dealing with immigrants groups and their cultures, there are essentially four approaches:
 • Monoculturalism: In most Old World nations, culture is very closely linked to
nationalism, thus government policy is to assimilate immigrants.
• Leading Culture: A model developed in Germany Bassam Tibi. The idea is that
communities within a country can have an identity of their own, but they should at least
support the core concepts of the culture on which the society is based.
• Melting Pot: In the United States, the traditional view has been one of a melting pot
where all the immigrant cultures are mixed and amalgamated without state intervention.
• Multiculturalism: A policy that immigrants and others should preserve their cultures
with the different cultures interacting peacefully within one nation.

The way nation states treat immigrant cultures rarely falls neatly into one or another of the
above approaches. The degree of difference with the host culture (i.e., "foreignness"), the
number of immigrants, attitudes of the resident population, the type of government policies that
are enacted and the effectiveness of those policies all make it difficult to generalize about the
effects. Similarly with other subcultures within a society, attitudes of the mainstream
population and communications between various cultural groups play a major role in
determining outcomes. The study of cultures within a society is complex and research must
take into account a myriad of variables.

A.2.f Cultures by region

Many regional cultures have been influenced by contact with others, such as by colonization,
trade, migration, mass media and religion.

A.2.f.i Africa

Though of many varied origins, African culture, especially Sub-Saharan African culture has
been shaped by European colonialism, and is differentiated from North Africa from its lesser
influence by Arab and Islamic culture.

The culture of the Americas is strongly influenced by:

• peoples that inhabitated the continents before Europeans arrived,

• Africa (The United States especially has a large African-American population, most of
whom are descended from former slaves.), and
• European immigration, especially Spanish, English, French, Portuguese, and Dutch.

A.2.f.ii Asia

Asia is not the cultural monolith that many in the west once regarded it as. However, within
Asia there are several transnational cultural influences. In East Asia, Chinese writing is
generally agreed to exert a unifying influence. Though Korea, Japan, and Vietnam are not
Chinese speaking countries, their languages have been heavily influenced by Chinese and
Chinese writing. Religion, especially Buddhism and Taoism have had an influence on the
culture of East Asian countries (see section on Eastern religion and philosophy, below). There
is also a shared social and moral philosophy derived from Confucianism.
Hinduism and Islam have for hundreds of years exerted cultural influence on various peoples
of South Asia. Similarly, Buddhism is pervasive in Southeast Asia.

A.2.f.iii Australia

Much of Australia's culture is derived from European and American roots, but distinctive
Australian features have evolved from the environment and Aboriginal culture.

A.2.f.iv Europe

European culture also has a broad influence beyond the continent of Europe due to the legacy
of colonialism. In this broader sense it is sometimes referred to as Western culture. This is
most easily seen in the spread of the English language and to a lesser extent, a few other
European languages. Dominant influences include ancient Greece, ancient Rome, and
Christianity, although religion has declined in Europe.

A.2.f.v Middle East and North Africa

Perhaps the defining characteristic of the Middle East and North Africa is Islam and variations
of the Arab language, though this region is also home to Israel and Judaism, and significant
Christian minorities. Further, several groups which are adherents to Islam do not consider
themselves Arab.

B. Belief systems

Islamic art has been mainly abstract and decorative, portraying geometric, floral, Arabesque,
and calligraphic designs. Islamic art does not include depictions of human beings, as Muslims
believe this tempts followers of the Prophet to idolatry.

Religion and other belief systems are often integral to a culture. Religion, from the Latin
religare, meaning "to bind fast", is a feature of cultures throughout human history. The
Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion defines religion in the following way:

... an instutution with a recognized body of communicants who gather together regularly for
worship, and accept a set of doctrines offering some means of relating the individual to what is
taken to be the ultimate nature of reality.

Religion often codifies behavior, such as with the 10 Commandments of Christianity or the
five precepts of Buddhism. Sometimes it is involved with government, as in a theocracy. It also
influences arts.

Eurocentric custom to some extent divides the humanity into Western and non-Western
cultures, ahtough this has some flaws.

Western culture spread from Europe most strongly to Australia, Canada, and the United States.
It is influenced by ancient Greece, ancient Rome and the Christian church.
Western culture tends to be more individualistic than non-Western cultures. It also sees man,
god, and nature or the universe more separately than non-Western cultures. It is marked by
economic wealth, literacy, and technological advancement, although these traits are not
exclusive to it.

C. Abrahamic religions

Judaism is one of, if not the first, recorded monotheistic faiths and one of the oldest religious
traditions still practiced today. The values and history of the Jewish people are a major part of
the foundation of other Abrahamic religions such as Christianity, Islam, as well as
Samaritanism and the Bahá'í Faith.

Christianity was the dominant feature in shaping European culture for at least the last 1700
years. Modern philosophical thought has very much been influenced by Christian philosophers
such as St. Thomas Aquinas and Erasmus. European colonization and missionaries have spread
it.

D. The Bible

Both Christians and Jews regard the Bible as the revealed word of God.

Because of Christian domination of Europe from the late Roman era to the Age of
Enlightenment, the Bible has influenced not only religion but language, law and the natural
philosophy of mainstream Western Civilization.

Both Hebrew Scripture and the Christian Bible have been translated more times and into more
languages — more than 2,100 languages in all — than any other book. The Gutenberg Bible
marked the beginning of the mass production of books in the West.

E. Eastern religion and philosophy

Philosophy and religion are often closely interwoven in Eastern thought. Many Asian religious
and philosophical traditions originated in India and China and spread across Asia through
cultural diffusion and the migration of peoples. Hinduism is the wellspring of Buddhism, the
Mahāyāna branch of which spread north and eastwards from India into Tibet, China, Mongolia,
Japan and Korea and south from China into Vietnam. Theravāda Buddhism spread throughout
Southeast Asia, including Sri Lanka, parts of southwest China, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and
Thailand.

Indian philosophy includes Hindu philosophy. They contain elements of nonmaterial pursuits,
whereas another school of thought from India, Carvaka, preached the enjoyment of material
world. Confucianism and Taoism, both of which originated in China have had pervasive
influence on both religious and philosophical traditions, as well as statecraft and the arts
throughout Asia.

During the 20th century, in the two most populous countries of Asia, two dramatically different
political philosophies took shape. Gandhi gave a new meaning to Ahimsa, a core belief of both
Hinduism and Jainism, and redefined the concepts of nonviolence and nonresistance. During
the same period, Mao Zedong’s communist philosophy became a powerful secular belief
system in China.

F. Folk religions

Folk religions practiced by tribal groups are common in Asia, Africa and the Americas. Their
influence can be considerable; may pervade the culture and even become the state religion, as
with Shintoism. Like the other major religions, folk religion answers human needs for
reassurance in times of trouble, healing, averting misfortune and providing rituals that address
the major passages and transitions in human life.

G. The ”American Dream”

The American Dream is a faith, held by many in the United States, that, through hard work,
courage, and self-determination, regardless of social class, a person can gain a better life.[15]
This notion is rooted in the belief that the country is a "city upon a hill, a light unto the
nations,"[16] which were values held by many early European settlers and maintained by
subsequent generations.

H. Marriage

Religion often influences marriage .

Most Christian churches give some form of blessing to a marriage; the wedding ceremony
typically includes some sort of pledge by the community to support the couple's relationship.
In marriage, Christians see a picture of the relationship between Jesus Christ and His Church.
The Roman Catholic Church believes it is morally wrong to divorce, and divorcées cannot
remarry in a church marriage.

I. Cultural change

Cultures, by predisposition, both embrace and resist change dependence of culture traits. For
example, men and women have complementary roles in many cultures. One sex might desire
changes that affect the other, as happened in the second half of the 20th century in western
cultures.

Cultural change can come about due to the environment, to inventions (and other internal
influences), and to contact with other cultures. For example, the end of the last ice age helped
lead to the invention of agriculture, which in its turn brought about many cultural innovations.

In diffusion, the form of something moves from one culture to another, but not its meaning. For
example, hamburgers, mundane in the United States, seemed exotic when introduced into
China. "Stimulus diffusion" refers to an element of one culture leading to an invention in
another. Diffusions of innovations theory presents a research-based model for why and when
individuals and cultures adopt new ideas, practices, and products.
"Acculturation" has different meanings, but in this context refers to replacement of the traits of
one culture with those of another, such as happened to certain Native American tribes and to
many indigenous peoples across the globe during the process of colonization.

Related processes on an individual level include assimilation (adoption of a different culture by

an individual) and transculturation.

Cultural invention has come to mean any innovation that is new and found to be useful to a
group of people and expressed in their behaviour but which does not exist as a physical object.

J. Cultural studies

Cultural studies developed in the late 20th century, in part through the re-introduction of
Marxist thought into sociology, and in part through the articulation of sociology and other
academic disciplines such as literary criticism. This movement aimed to focus on the analysis
of subcultures in capitalist societies. Following the non-anthropological tradition, cultural
studies generally focus on the study of consumption goods (such as fashion, art, and literature).
Because the 18th- and 19th-century distinction between "high" and "low" culture seems
inappropriate to apply to the mass-produced and mass-marketed consumption goods which
cultural studies analyses, these scholars refer instead to "popular culture".

Today, some anthropologists have joined the project of cultural studies. Most, however, reject
the identification of culture with consumption goods. Furthermore, many now reject the notion
of culture as bounded, and consequently reject the notion of subculture. Instead, they see
culture as a complex web of shifting patterns that link people in different locales and that link
social formations of different scales. According to this view, any group can construct its own
cultural identity.

K. Culture theory

Is the branch of anthropology and other related social science disciplines (e.g., sociology) that
seeks to define the heuristic concept of culture in operational and/or scientific terms. In the
19th century, "culture" was used by some to refer to a wide array of human activities, and by
others as a synonym for "civilization". In the 20th century, anthropologists began theorizing
about culture as an object of scientific analysis. Some used it to distinguish human adaptive
strategies from the largely instinctive adaptive strategies of animals, including the adaptive
strategies of other primates and non-human hominids, whereas others used it to refer to
symbolic representations and expressions of human experience, with no direct adaptive value.
Both groups understood culture as being definitive of human nature.

According to many theories that have gained wide acceptance among anthropologists, culture
exhibits the way that humans interpret their biology and their environment. According to this
point of view, culture becomes such an integral part of human existence that it is the human
environment, and most cultural change can be attributed to human adaptation to historical
events. Moreover, given that culture is seen as the primary adaptive mechanism of humans and
takes place much faster than human biological evolution, most cultural change can be viewed
as culture adapting to itself.
Although most anthropologists try to define culture in such a way that it separates human
beings from other animals, many human traits are similar to those of other animals, particularly
the traits of other primates. For example, chimpanzees have big brains, but human brains are
bigger. Similarly, bonobos exhibit complex sexual behavior, but human beings exhibit much
more complex sexual behaviors. As such, anthropologists often debate whether human
behavior is different from animal behavior in degree rather than in kind; they must also find
ways to distinguish cultural behavior from sociological behavior and psychological behavior.

L. Ethical values in different culture-

Ethics is concerned with the norms of human social behaviour. It is the study of human
behaviour which propounds the supreme good of human life. It is specifically concerned with
the principles of rules which make our conduct right.

The vedic philosophy of moral life ,as summed up by Dr. S Radhakrisnan are as follows-

Prayer are to be offered to the Gods,Rites are to be performed. The life of man has to be led
under the very eye of God.

Kindness to all is enjoined. Hospitality is regarded as a great virtue.

Theft,witchcraft,seduction and adultery are condemmed us vicious. Gamling is loooked down

upon.

Virtue is conformity to the law of God and vice is disobedience to the law.

The upanisad sums up a whole ethical philosophy in self control charity and compassion.

According to Manu, non injury to others, self possession, patience, self control, integrety,
purity, restraint, intelligence, truithfulness and absence of anger are the ten marks of dharma.
Respect for elders as one of the cardinal virtues as regarded by Manu.

The ethical values of Indian cultures during the middle ages were exhibited by Ramananda and
Kabir, nanak and Chaitanya.

The cultural values are expressed through aesthatic sensibilities and their external expressions.
They are reflected in the life cycles, in music and art and literature.

M. Cultural and Individual ethics

All values pursued by a person are comprehensive under the term culture. The contemporary
value crisis in the indian society is understood as a cultural crisis. This crisis is reflected in an
individual’s confusing and abnormal attitude in behaviour.

All individual generates variety of ideas, philosophies, religious beliefs and social customs
from culture.
In this modern age the current cultural crisis is the fast change in life styles, particularly
amongst the urban middle class, food habits, dress, common courtesies, modes of
entertainment etc are changing fast.

An individual should combine ethics and dharma for observance of customary morality in the
modes of interpersonal relation and family obligations. Such individual attitude must be
developed into a social and cultural force to meet the challenges of contemporary life.

N. Social Culture & Individual Ethics

The relationship between social culture and individual ethics can be considered from four
different perspectives.

1. Social Contract Theory

2. Collectivism or Socialism Theory
3. Organic Theory
4. Idealistic or Group – Mind Theory

N.1. Social Contract Theory

An agreement among the members of an organized society or between the governed and the
government defining and limiting the rights and duties of each.

Social contract theory (or contractarianism) is a concept used in philosophy, political

science and sociology to denote an implicit agreement within a state regarding the rights and
responsibilities of the state and its citizens, or more generally a similar concord between a
group and its members, or between individuals. All members within a society are assumed to
agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society without
violating the contract; such violation would signify a problematic attempt to return to the state
of nature. It has been often noted, indeed, that social contract theories relied on a specific
anthropological conception of man as either "good" or "evil". Thomas Hobbes (1651), John
Locke (1689) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous philosophers of
contractarianism, which is the theoretical groundwork of democracy. It is also one of a few
competing theoretical groundworks of liberalism, but Rousseau's social contract is often seen
as conflicting with classical liberalism which stresses individualism and rejects subordination
of individual liberty to the "general will" of the community.

N.1.a Overview

State of nature & social contract

The social contract, as a political theory, explains the justification and purpose of the state and
of human rights. According to Hobbes' canonical theory, the essence is as follows: Without
society, we would live in a state of nature, where we each have unlimited natural freedoms.
The downside of this general autonomy is that it includes the "right to all things" and thus the
freedom to harm all who threaten one's own self-preservation; there are no positive rights, only
laws of nature and an endless "war of all against all" (Bellum omnium contra omnes, Hobbes
1651). To avoid this, we jointly agree to an implicit social contract by which we each gain civil
rights in return for accepting the obligation to honor the rights of others, giving up some
freedoms to do so. The figurehead of the society we create, representing our joint interests as
members and formed by the delegation of our power, is the sovereign state.

N.2. Collectivism or Socialism Theory

Plato and Aristotle propounded this theory which is the exact opposite of the social contract
theory.

According to them, man had always lived in societies and it is impossible to imagine man
existing without a society. This theory states that it is impossibe for a man to develop either
intelectually or ethically without participating in social life. This theory also states that man
cannot exist without society, though society can exist without the man. Society makes it
obligatory for the man who follow its rules, regulations, norms and ethics, which he cannot
afford to ignore.

This view would seem to suggest that cultural norms of the society makes it imperative for
the individual to follow its norms and standards of behaviour.

The ethics is not a matter of individual or collective contract, rather ethics of a culture
develops slowly and overtime to make up the ethics of that society. Thus according to this
theory, society or social norms and values control a man, but the man has no control over
the norms and values.

The basic philosophy of socialism is that the control over the resources, means of
production and distribution must be exercised by the society. They should not be left in the
hands of private economic powers.

But value-wise even the ideology of socialism has little to offer. It advocates social
ownership which in practice means governement ownership of the means of production and
tight control overall aspects of socio-economic life. But it may lead to corruption, deley etc.

This theory also appears to take an extreme view. A society is a collection of individuals,
without the individuals the society too would cease to exist.

N.3. Organic theory

Leslie Stephen and Herbert Spencer states that the relation between individual and society
is organic and not mechanical. The individuals belonging to the society are interdependent
among themselves and in turn to the society. Hence, individuals can not exist without a
society and the society cannot exist without individuals. Social process and social rules and
regulations, norms and values are organic in nature, forever changing and forever evolving.
Just like living organisms, social cultures also pass through stages of birth, growth,
maturity and decay.

Though society resembles a living organism in many respects, an individual is not

controlled by the society in many areas. An individual has his independent existence and
his actions are guided by his free will. His menal faculties can never be controlled or
guided by society. Though social values and ethics may, compell a man to think and
evaluate them, his own free will guide him in choosing his moral standarda and ethical
behaviour. Though difficult a man can live without the society like a cell which cannot hire
apart from living organism. A man living without a society can still be ethical and practise
high moral conduct. Moreover, unlike an organism which decays a society may just change
and transform itself rather than decaying.

N.4. Idealistic or Group-Mind Theory

Propounded by many philosophers including Plato, this theory states the relation between
society and individual as spiritual. A man living outside society can not strive for and attain
excellence. Without society a man cannot develop his moral character or ethical value
system. Without society, he can not be termed as a complete man, and remains only as a
fragment of humanity.

This group mind theory can be accepted only as metaphore, since it is difficult to
practically apply this theory in relation to social culture and individual ethics. Perhaps it is
important to keep in mind the saying of Gilbert who stated that ‘social values are in the last
resort to personal values’.

It is understood and accepted that the value system and the moral standards of the society
affects the value system and moral standards of the individuals of the society and the value
system of the individuals make up the moral standards of the society.

The culture of a perticular society is intimately linked to the individual ethical value of the
people in society. Some cultures consider certain acts to be highly unethical while some
cultures may accept these acts to be highly ethical. However, these are certain immoral acts
which are universally condemned as unethical irrespective of the culture involved.
 Chapter 6
LAW AND ETHICS

Business ethics is essentially obeying the law. The business reports very often do not highlight
the alleged corrupt practices, those have already taken place in the organisation.

A. Relationship between law & ethics

The following statements are intended to clarify the relationship between law and ethics.

Ethical values and legal principles are usually closely related, but ethical obligations typically
exceed legal duties. In some cases, the law mandates unethical conduct. In general, when
physicians believe a law is unjust, they should work to change the law. In exceptional
circumstances of unjust laws, ethical responsibilities should supersede legal obligations.

The fact that a physician charged with allegedly illegal conduct is acquitted or exonerated in
civil or criminal proceedings does not necessarily mean that the physician acted ethically.

A law without ethical content is one that does not proscribe or mandate an act because of the
act's moral or ethical value, but for some other reason. These laws should be understood to
include not only statutory law, but also case law and common law.

In general, a law may be said to have no ethical content if it represents a choice between two or
more ethically equivalent options.

B. Significance

The existence of laws without ethical content may be used to support the central claim of legal
positivism, namely that law and ethics are separable. Legal positivism states that one may
disobey certain laws without doing wrong, or conversely that one may wrongfully obey certain
other laws.

C. Examples

C.1. Traffic law

In many countries, motor vehicles are required by law to drive in the left-hand lanes of roads
with more than one lane, whilst in others they are required to drive in the right-hand lanes.
It is generally understood that whilst having such a rule provides significant obvious benefits,
neither driving on the left nor driving on the right are inherently ethically superior. The law
exists to protect drivers from each other, rather than to prohibit drivers from driving on an
unethical side of the road.

It would not usually be considered unethical to drive on the wrong side of the road when one
knows there are no other vehicles on that road, although it may well be considered foolish, but
it is also usually considered good that there is a consensus as to which side of the road one
should travel on, and that such an arrangement is better than having no consensus, or allowing
each county, town or road to impose its own rule.

C.2. Systems of measurement

Many countries have laws mandating a particular system of measurement for use by
government bodies and commercial entities. Common systems are SI (also known as the metric
system), imperial units and U.S. customary units.

Neither system has any inherent ethical value, and in some countries they are used side-by-
side. In the United States, for example, the government recommends the metric system but
does not proscribe customary units, and so either may be used.

In the United Kingdom, law mandates the use of the metric system by most government bodies
and commercial entities. In fact the rules are more complex than this since you can't use units
which are likely to confuse -- listing weights as newtons per g is technically correct, but not
easily understood by most shoppers.

But, the law doesn't prohibit me from measuring weights with such units, measuring lengths in
cubits, or times in metres per c, and it would not usually be considered unethical for me to do
so.

C.3. Criticism

Not everyone accepts that there are laws without ethical content. Few would dispute that there
is no ethical reason to prefer one side of a road or one system of units over another, but that
does not necessarily mean that the law itself has no ethical value.

Although the subject matter of a law may not be an ethical issue, the law exists to form a
consensus for the benefit of society, and may be understood to gain ethical value from that
purpose. Legal positivism would counter that this ethical value is derived from context and not
from within the law itself. If it isn't unethical to drive on the wrong side when there are no
other cars on the road, then it cannot be the law itself which has ethical value.

Many, such as Robert Alexy, argue that since laws curtail individual freedoms, albeit for the
benefit of society as a whole, all laws are ethically relevant.

D. Other bodies in enforcing ethical business behaviour

The following agencies enforce etical behaviour in business.

 1. the laws- there are different law to protect human rights, environment etc
2. industrial safety regulation regarding observance of all necessary safety codes in
industries.
3. occupational health codes- regarding observance of safe health measure for the working
personnel.
4. indian factories act and indian boilers regulation regarding observance of safe measure
for installation and working plant and mechineries including steam boilers. The chief
inspector of factories of the concerned state is empowered to enforce ethical business
practice.
5. pollution control boards under govt. of india and state govt. regarding relevent ethical
behaviours in the concerned activities.
6. the chartered accountant’s act regarding maintaining proper books of account.
7. industrial dispute act regarding settlement of industrial disputes between management
& labour force.

E. Impact of law in business ethics

Business and business ethics concern for both civil law and criminal law. Indian penal code is
designed to incorporate ethical values of rights, democratic values and distributive justice.

Indian legal system is seen as legislation on fiscal measures of taxation and foreign exchange.
The relationship between law and business ethics is best illustrated in the working of the
bureau of Indian standards which have developed specification various goods and services.

The ethical business organisation never wish to break any law. They would rather wait for it to
be corrected or amended for its ethicality, they may suffer but not break it.

Due to existence of laws, the ethical business manager pays proper wages to workers, maintain
proper books of account, pays income tax, take pollution control measures,charge proper price
from the customers, makes reasonable profit etc.
 Chapter 7
SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF BUSINESS

Though it may be an expression of private enterprise, business is not an activity of isolated

individuals. Business owes its existence to society. Whether we are talking about the corner
store or a gigantic transnational corporation, business is a social practice with implications for
the public good. The social responsibility of business is therefore a fundamental element in
business ethics; at least this is what this discussion will attempt to demonstrate.

The view that business has no social responsibility beyond that of making profits for its
stockholders has been vigorously proposed by Chicago economist Milton Friedman. For him,
"there is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in
activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which
is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud". Friedman is even
opposed to businesses contributing to charity or other social causes (unless those actions
contribute to the business and its profitability). The basis of his view is that company directors
have a fiduriary responsibility to stockholders to maximise profits and to act otherwise is, in
effect, stealing which moves away from the free market approach toward socialism. He
endorses William Vanderbilt: " The public be dammed. I’m working for my stockholders". In
effect, he is also summoning a narrow role morality to buttress his position: the role of the
business person is to develop a profitable business, not to be a legislator or a social reformer, or
even a good corporate citizen.

The argument against this view is that, even within the parameters of a capitalist economy, a
much wider understanding of the nature of business is required. The proposal is that business
sometimes has social responsibilities that conflict with, and override, the responsibility to
maximise profits. Arguably, companies that withdrew from the South African economy as an
action against apartheid were exercising social responsibility in spite of its effect on profits. On
the other hand, an international satellite television service withdrew news on human rights
abuses because it offended a government on which the company depended for television rights
to about a billion people. In that case it would seem that consideration of profits overrode
social responsibility.

While Friedman’s view rests on several half-truths, it overstates the capacity of the free market
to correct itself and to work for the wider public good. It is a nonsense to suggest, as he
implies, that all steps which maximise profits are socially beneficial. In fact to focus narrowly
on profits as the aim of business is misleading. Though a business aims to be profitable, it does
so only by supplying quality goods and services, while providing employment and relating to
its community. Business lives off, and impacts upon, the society in which it operates (and for
some corporations that society is global). Because business interacts with society, questions of
job creation and fair pricing, for example, are matters of integrity for business. Of course, no
issue exemplifies the need for social responsibility by business better than the environment,
because, as we know, some business activities have an enormous capacity to damage the life
support systems of Earth. There is no acceptable justification for business, as moral agents, to
respond to the environmental crisis in a minimal way and only under the duress of legal
sanction. Business, like the rest of the community, is not exempt from the injunction to value
life. Proactively sustaining the environment, as an ethical imperative regardless of law, is a
new bottom line for commerce.

Solomon invokes the term "stakeholder" to dismiss Friedman’s argument that the ethical
responsibilities of business stop with stockholders:

"The stakeholders in a company are all of those who are affected and have legitimate
expectations and rights regarding the actions of the company, and these include the employees,
the consumers and the suppliers as well as the surrounding community and the society at large.
The virtue of the concept is that it greatly expands the focus of corporate concern, without
losing sight of the corporation itself. Social responsibility, so considered, is not an additional
burden on the corporation but part and parcel of its essential concerns

Fitting, ethical business decisions based on the comprehensive range of concerns indicated by
Solomon require an approach consistent with the ethic of response; that approach endorses the
need to respect life, act fairly and be true to obligations with the wider community. While an
ethic of response applied to business includes the so-called micro-concerns, it will also
introduce a critical perspective which incorporates a broad social responsibility. Social
responsibility is arguably a constituent of business best practice. Business ethics which fail to
serve the common good and the public interest is unethical, chiefly because it fails to
understand that business, like all human activity, is dependent on life’s interconnectedness.

A. Environmental protection

Eventually, in discussions on consumption and production patterns, environmental protection,

the sustainability of local communities, and even the integrity of government policy-making,
the subject of transnational corporations and their increasingly dominant influence comes up.
NGOs are understandably concerned as governments -- particularly from "developed
countries"-- claim they have "no new resources" to devote to sustainable development, and that
we instead need to look to the leadership of business and industry. While there may be many
businesses and even transnational Corporations (TNCs) sincerely attempting to be socially and
environmentally responsible, the bottom line of business is to make a profit -- everything else
is secondary.

Furthermore, the world is shamefully scarred by the conduct of corporations giving little
priority to social responsibility, abusing local communities and ecosystems in their quest for
market share and higher returns. A large number of NGOs have been acting from the premise
that corporate accountability is an essential element of sustainable development, that ultimately
corporations can only be responsible if they can be held accountable to the society which they
should serve.

The world has witnessed rapid, unprecedented technological advances that have had a
profound bearing on all aspects of the production of goods and services. The increased scale
and reach of human activity have led to mounting pressure on not just the global commons
(water, air, soil, etc), but also on local and global sinks (the ability of the biosphere to absorb
waste and regulate climate).

It is feared that greenhouse gas emissions cannot be reined in unless a concerted effort is made
to increase energy efficiency, reduce our current dependence on fossil fuels, and develop viable
‘clean-energy’ options. Added to this, we have seen that poverty has been a concomitant of
economic development..

A.1. India: Environmental Issues

Introduction
India's ongoing population explosion has placed great strain on the country's environment. This
rapidly growing population, along with a move toward urbanization and industrialization, has
placed significant pressure on India's infrastructure and its natural resources. Deforestation, soil
erosion, water pollution and land degradation continue to worsen and are hindering economic
development in rural India, while the rapid industrialization and urbanization in India's
booming metropolises are straining the limits of municipal services and causing serious air
pollution problems.

Following the 1984 Bhopal disaster - in which a toxic leak from the city's Union Carbide
chemical plant resulted in the deaths of more than 3,000 people - environmental awareness and
activism in India increased significantly. The Environment Protection Act was passed in 1986,
creating the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and strengthening India's
commitment to the environment, which was enshrined in the 42nd amendment to country's
constitution in 1976. Under the 1986 Environmental Protection Act, the MoEF is tasked with
the overall responsibility for administering and enforcing environmental laws and policies. The
MoEF established the importance of integrating
environmental strategies into any development plan
for the country.

Nevertheless, despite a greater commitment by the

Indian government to protect public health, forests,
and wildlife, policies geared to develop the country's
economy have taken precedence in the last 20 years.
While industrial development has contributed
significantly to economic growth in India, it has done
so at a price to the environment. Not only is industrial
pollution increasing public health risks, but abatement
efforts also are consuming a significant portion of
India's gross domestic product (GDP). As such, one
of MoEF's main responsibilities continues to be the
reduction of industrial
pollution.

Air Pollution
Industrialization and urbanization have resulted in a profound deterioration of India's air
quality. India has more than 20 cities with populations of at least 1 million, and some of them--
including New Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, and Kolkata--are among the world's most polluted.
Urban air quality ranks among the world's worst. Of the 3 million premature deaths in the
world that occur each year due to outdoor and indoor air pollution, the highest number are
assessed to occur in India. Sources of air pollution, India's most severe environmental problem,
come in several forms, including vehicular emissions and untreated industrial smoke.
Continued urbanization has exacerbated the problem of rapid industrialization, as more and
more people are adversely affected and cities are unable to implement adequate pollution
control mechanisms.

One of the most affected cities in New Delhi, where airborne particulate matter (PM) has been
registered at levels more than 10 times India's legal limit. Vehicles are the major source of this
pollution, with more than three million cars, trucks, buses, taxis, and rickshaws already on the
roads. With vehicle ownership rising along with population and income, India's efforts to
improve urban air quality have focused in this area. In New Delhi, emissions limits for
gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles came into effect in 1991 and 1992, respectively, and the
city has prohibited the use of vehicle more than 15 years old. Emissions standards for
passenger cars and commercial vehicles were tightened in 2000 at levels equivalent to the
Euro-1 standards of the European Union, while the even-more-stringent Euro-2 standards have
been in place for the metropolitan areas of Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, and Kolkata since 2001.
Furthermore, the sulfur content of motor fuels sold in the four cities has been restricted to 500
parts per million (PPM) since 2001 in order to be compatible with tighter vehicle emissions
standards. Motor fuel sulfur content in all other regions of India has been limited to 2,500 PPM
since January 2000.

India's high concentration of pollution is not due to the absence of a sound environmental legal
regime, however, but to a lack of environmental enforcement at the local level. Regulatory
reforms aimed at improving the air pollution problem in cities such as New Delhi have been
difficult to implement. In 1998, India’s Supreme Court issued a ruling requiring all the city’s
buses to be run on compressed natural gas (CNG) by March 31, 2001. Compliance was to be
achieved either by converting existing diesel engines or by replacing the buses themselves.
However, only 200 (out of a total fleet of 12,000) CNG-fueled buses were available by the
initial deadline and public protests, riots, and widespread "commuter chaos" ensued as some
appearance of some 15,000 taxis and 10,000 buses in the city were banned from use. To ease
the transition, the local government changed course and allowed for a gradual phaseout of the
existing diesel bus fleet.

In addition, India's reliance on coal-fired power plants for its electricity generation has
undermined some of the vehicular-oriented air quality improvement initiatives. Despite the fact
that India is a large coal consumer, its Central Pollution Control Board has been slow to set
sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions limits for coal-fired power plants, mainly because most of the
coal mined in India is low in sulfur content. Coal-fired power plants do not face any nitrogen
oxide (NOx) emissions limits either, although thermal plants fueled by other fossil fuels are
subject to particulate matter emission standards. Again, however, the government's support for
air quality standards has been undermined by the lack of enforcement of these standards.

Energy Consumption
India's energy consumption is increasing rapidly, from 4.16 quadrillion Btu (quads) in 1980 to
12.8 quads in 2001. This 208% increase is largely the result of India's increasing population
and the rapid urbanization of the country. Higher energy consumption in the industrial,
 transportation, and residential sectors continues to
drive India's energy usage upwards at a faster rate
even than China, which experienced a 130%
increase in energy consumption from 1980 to 2001.

Despite teh rapid growth between 1980 and 2001,

India's energy consumption is still below that of
Germany (14.35 quads), Japan (21.92 quads), China
(39.67 quads), and the United States (97.05 quads).
In addition, India's per capita energy consumption,
which stood at 12.6 million Btu in 2001, is well
below most of the rest of Asia and is one of the
lowest in the world (although this may be more the
result of India's large population rather than a low level of energy consumption). The 103%
rise in India's per capita consumption between 1980, when per capita energy usage was just 6.2
million Btu, and 2001, is more problematic in the long-term, however.

Coal accounts for just over 50% (6.5 quads) of India's energy consumption. The power
generation sector uses the majority of this coal, with heavy industry a distant second.
Petroleum (4.4 quads) makes up 34.4% of India's energy consumption, while natural gas
(6.5%) and hydroelectricity (6.3%) account for much of the remainder. Natural gas is growing
in importance, as its share of India's energy consumption has risen from just 1.4% in 1980,
while hydroelectricity - which made up 11.5% of the country's energy usage in 1980 - has
declined in relative importance. Nuclear (1.7%) and geothermal, wind, solar, and biomass
(0.2%) made up a very small share of the country's energy consumption in 2001.

Carbon Emissions
In 1992, India signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as a non-
Annex I country, meaning it is not obligated to reduce its emissions of carbon and greenhouse
gases (GHG). India ratified the agreement in 1993. While India recognizes the importance of
reducing these harmful emissions, the Indian government also places a high priority on
economic development. As such, India is not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol that mandates
specific commitments by countries to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases by an
average of 5.2% below 1990 levels by the agreed 2008-2012 time frame. Nevertheless, India
accepted (ratification was unnecessary) the Kyoto Protocol on August 26, 2002.

India's non-participation in the Kyoto Protocol has been cited as a major reason behind the
opposition to implementing the Protocol by several signatories, including the United States. In
2001, India, with 251 million metric tons of carbon equivalent emitted, ranked fifth in the
world in carbon emissions, behind the United States, China, Russia and Japan. Although
India's carbon emissions stood at only 80% of Japan's (316 million metric tons of carbon
equivalent) total and less than one-sixth of the United States' (1,565 million metric tons)
carbon emissions that same year, the rapid growth of India's carbon emissions - in combination
with its exclusion from the Protocol - is the main point of controversy.

Between 1990 and 2001, India's carbon emissions increased by an astonishing 61%, a rate
surpassed only by China's 111% increase during the same time period. India's carbon emissions
are expected to continue to increase throughout the decade, offsetting the planned reduction in
 GHGs from the European Union and other countries that
plan to implement the Protocol's emissions cut
requirements. The rise in India's carbon emissions has
been exacerbated by the low energy efficiency of coal-
fired power plants in the country. With the high capital
costs associated with replacing existing coal-fired plants,
a scarcity of capital, and the long lead time required to
introduce advanced coal technologies, it stands to reason
that many of India's highly-polluting coal-fired power
plants will have to remain in operation for the next
couple of decades.

As such, India's contribution to world carbon emissions is expected to increase in coming

years, with an estimated average annual growth rate between 2001 and 2025 of 3.0% in the
EIA International Energy Outlook 2003 reference case (compared to 3.4% in China and 1.5%
in the United States). The absolute increase in emissions will partially be a function of the
degree to which coal is relied upon as a major energy source. If coal consumption is substituted
by oil and natural gas consumption, India's overall carbon emissions would be reduced.

India's per capita carbon emissions are relatively low - at 0.25 metric tons of carbon per person
in 2001, India's per capita carbon emissions were less than one-quarter of the world average
and 22 times less than the United States. However, the country's per capita carbon emissions
are expected to increase in the coming years due to the rapid pace of urbanization, a conversion
away from noncommercial towards commercial fuels, increased vehicular usage and the
continued use of older and more inefficient coal-fired plants. In fact, due to fast-paced
industrialization, per capita emissions are expected to triple by 2020.

Energy and Carbon Intensity

In 2001, India's energy intensity (energy consumption per dollar of GDP) stood at 25,307 Btu
per $1995. Although this figure is one of the highest in Asia, surpassed only by Pakistan
(26,229 Btu per $1995) and China (35,619 Btu per $1995), India's carbon intensity has
remained relatively flat over the past 20 years, even falling from a high in 1995 (30,459 Btu
per $1995) back below 1980 level (25,861 Btu per $1995). By contrast, China's energy
intensity level in 2001 was just one-third of its 1980 level of 105,632 Btu per $1995. India's
still elevated energy intensity level is due in large part to the growth of energy-intensive
industries that has taken place in the country during the course of its economic expansion,
coupled with the virtual absence of energy efficiency and conservation measures in most
industrial sectors.

Carbon intensity (carbon emissions per dollar of GDP) in India also is relatively high
compared to its neighbors. In 2001, India's carbon intensity measured 0.5 metric tons of carbon
per thousand $1995. In Asia, only China's carbon intensity (0.75 metric tons of carbon per
thousand $1995) was higher than that of India, but whereas China has become less carbon
intensive over the past 20 years, India's carbon intensity has remained at virtually the same
level as in 1980.

India's heavy reliance on coal, much of it low-quality, goes a long way towards explaining the
country's relatively high carbon intensity level. Indian economic policies such as high import
tariffs on high-quality coal and subsidies on low-quality domestic coal also have contributed to
increased use of low-quality coal, although initiatives to encourage the use of higher-quality
coal, such as reducing the tariff on imported coal, may help in reducing the country's carbon
intensity. The introduction and adoption of technologies to reduce coal consumption and/or
improve the efficiency of the coal that is combusted is an important government priority, given
that the majority of India's power generation is coal-fired.

Renewable Energy
Despite a trend towards urbanization, more than 70% of India's population still lives in rural
areas. As the Indian economy develops, one of the greatest challenges that India's local and
regional governments face is providing people in rural areas with access to energy. Renewable
energy projects - in the form of solar-, wind-, and hydropower-generated electricity - are the
key to providing rural areas with energy where power is in short supply. In addition, replacing
coal- and other fossil fuel-generated electricity supplied to India's cities with energy from
renewable energy sources could aid in reducing air pollution and help to meet the growing
energy needs of the country's large metropolises as well.

India is the only country that has a separate government ministry exclusively for non-
conventional energy sources, and India has one of the largest national programs to promote the
use of solar energy. Whereas the majority of developed countries have turned to solar energy
mainly out of concern about the environment and energy security, the use of solar power in
India is being advocated as a way to provide energy to regions where there is a shortage of
electricity. Rather than build new, expensive generating capacity or connect rural areas to the
existing power transmission infrastructure, India is turning to the use of solar energy. In many
small villages and remote areas, solar photovoltaic systems are far more cost-effective than
conventional energy.

Wind-generated energy is also an important component of India's strategy to boost the use of
renewable energies. India is rich in wind energy potential, and the country has been adding
installed wind power capacity at an impressive rate. According to the Ministry of Non-
Conventional Energy Sources, India now expects to exceed its target of installing 1,500 MW of
wind power in the 2002-2007 period. The improvement in grid connections, which have
previously slowed the development of wind power in India, as well as an effort to provide
incentives to wind-power producers, has spurred the growth of the wind energy industry in
India.

Nevertheless, at the same time that small- and micro-level wind and solar energy projects are
taking shape, the Indian government is looking to large-scale hydroelectric plants to meet its
future energy needs. India has an estimated hydropower potential of 150,000 MW, but
hydropower's share of India's energy consumption and production has declined in the past 20
years. Indeed, according to Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the share of
hydropower in the country's total installed generating capacity, which was over 40% about 20
years back, has fallen to 25%. Power Minister Anant Geete has said that only about 23% of
India's hydropower potential has been exploited. India's state-owned National Hydroelectric
Power Corp. (NHPC) is planning to commission 1,090 MW of capacity by mid-2004, ending a
protracted period of lackluster growth, and the government hopes that subsidies to support
hydropower plant development will help it attain a goal of building 50,560 MW, almost
tripling the country;'s current installed hydropower capacity.
Environmental Outlook

India faces significant challenges in balancing its increased demand for energy with the need to
protect its environment from further damage. Sheer population growth and urbanization make
the task all the more difficult for the Indian government, as increased vehicular ownership will
contribute to existing air pollution problems and urbanization raises the health risks from that
pollution. A rapidly increasing population also will lead to an increase in electricity demand,
taxing the already straining power generation, transmission and distribution infrastructure and
putting pressure on the power sector to add new capacity to the system. Already, shortages of
electricity have hampered India's industrial growth.

As such, electricity is one of the keys to both India's economic development and its
environmental protection efforts. The Indian government has introduced initiatives aimed to
discourage firms from generating electricity using older, inefficient coal-fired plants, and it has
reduced subsidies on low-quality coal. The government has used fiscal incentives, in the form
of customs waivers and soft loans, to encourage the installation of pollution abatement
equipment, and market mechanisms such as user charges, deposit refund systems, marketable
permits and taxes for implementing pollution measures also are being contemplated. In August
2003, India's Supreme Court laid down the principle of ''polluter pays.''

India has made significant efforts in the field of environmental protection, developing
environmental standards for both products and processes, requiring environmental impact
statements in certain areas, and introducing environmental audits. India's strong support of air
quality and alternative fuel initiatives has brought progress as well as growing pains to the
country. However, in the absence of coordinated government efforts, including stricter
enforcement, air pollution is likely to continue to worsen in the coming years as urbanization
picks up pace and vehicle ownership increases. The Indian government's ability to safeguard
the country's environment will depend on its success in promoting policies that keep the
economy growing while providing adequate energy needs to satisfy the populace's growing
energy consumption requirements in a sustainable manner.

B. Fair trade practices

Modern business operates in a socio economic environment. It has to demonstrate not only its
economic efficiency but also consumer sensitivity and social awareness. Social responsibility
are not the talk of the town but the talk of the world. Profitability must be one of the objectives
of the business but for better running and society acceptance one must be socially responsible.
Busness must access the profitability of its action as well as the overall effect those actions
have on the society, and on the ecology or environment.

If business wants survival, social power enjoyed must be duly balanced with social duties,
responsibilities and accountability.

Self regulation along can avoid government interference. Fair trade practices, full disclosure in
customer credit contract, in warranties necessary. Informative lebelling is always welcome.
Environmental degradation, side effects of new drugs, harmful effects of smoking, drinking
should be minimised.

Business houses have responsibilities beyond social costs. The corporations must take social
welfare in area of their competence. They should be involved in providing subsidised meals,
nutrition, education, low-cost housing for poor and backward people, donations to relief funds,
adoption of villages and beautification of towns and cities.

B.1. FTF Principles and Practices

FTF members are committed to the following principles and practices in their trading
relationships:

B.1.a FAIR WAGES

Producers are paid fairly for their products, which means that workers are paid at least that
country's minimum wage. Since the minimum wage is often not enough for basic survival,
whenever feasible, workers are paid a living wage, which enables them to cover basic needs,
including food, shelter, education and health care for their families. Paying fair wages does not
necessarily mean that products cost the consumer more. Since Fair Trade Organizations bypass
exploitative middlemen and work directly with producers, they are able to cut costs and return
a greater percentage of the retail price to the producers.

B.1.b COOPERATIVE WORKPLACES

Cooperatives and producer associations provide a healthy alternative to large-scale

manufacturing and sweatshops conditions, where unprotected workers earn below minimum
wage and most of the profits flow to foreign investors and local elites who have little interest in
ensuring the long term health of the communities in which they work. Fair Trade Organizations
work primarily with small businesses, worker owned and democratically run cooperatives and
associations which bring significant benefits to workers and their communities. By banding
together, workers are able to access credit, reduce raw material costs and establish higher and
more just prices for their products. Workers earn a greater return on their labor, and profits are
distributed more equitably and often reinvested in community projects such as health clinics,
child care, education and literacy training. Workers learn important leadership and organizing
skills, enabling self-reliant grassroots-driven development. Safe and healthy working
conditions are maintained and producers gain greater control and decision making power over
the use of their local resources.

B.1.c CONSUMER EDUCATION

Fair Trade Organizations educate consumers about the importance of purchasing fairly traded
products which support living wages and healthy working conditions. By defining fair trade
and conducting business in a manner that respects workers' rights and the environment, the fair
trade movement strives to educate consumers about the often hidden human costs of their
"bargains." By providing information about producers' history, culture and living conditions,
Fair Trade Organizations enhance cross-cultural understanding and respect between consumers
and communities in the developing world. They also educate consumers and policy makers
about inequities in the global trading system.

B.1.d ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Fair Trade Organizations encourage producers to engage in environmentally friendly practices

which manage and use local resources sustainably. Many FTF members work directly with
producers in regions of high biodiversity to develop products based on sustainable use of their
natural resources, giving communities an incentive to preserve their natural environments for
future generations.

B.1.e FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT

Small-scale farmers and artisans in the developing world lack access to affordable financing,
impeding their profitability. FTF members that buy products directly from producers often
provide financial assistance either through direct loans, prepayment or by linking producers
with sources of financing. Unlike many commercial importers who often wait 60-90 days
before paying producers, Many FTOs ensure prepayment so that producers have sufficient
funds to cover raw materials and basic needs during production time. They also often provide
other critical technical assistance and support such as market information, product feedback
and training in financial management. Unlike commercial importers, FTOs establish long term
relationships with their producers and help them adapt production for changing trends.

B.1.f RESPECT FOR CULTURAL IDENTITY

Fair Trade Organizations encourage the production and development of products based on
producers' cultural traditions adapted for Western markets. They seek to promote producers'
artistic talents in a way that preserves cultural identity.

B.1.g PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY

FTF members' finances, management policies, and business practices are open to the public
and monitoring by the Fair Trade Federation.

Fair trade practices is bringing hope, joy, dignity and respect for the people.

C. Fulfilling all national obligations under various laws

Law means rules made by authority for proper regulation of a society. There are several
brances of law like international law, constitutional law, criminal law, civil law, business law
etc.

With increasing complexity of modern business world, the scope of laws has enormously
widened. It is generally understood to include the laws relating to contracts sale of goods
partnership companies, negotiable instruments insurance ,carriage of goods etc.

The violation of law is punishable. Whan a bill is passed by the parliament and signed by the
president it becomes an Act. In case of certail decision if thee is no any present law then there
will be dialemma. In this case one has to decide accordingly what is the right judgement.
Indian laws are designed to incorporate ethical values of distributive justice, democatic rights.

D. Safeguarding health and well being if customers

Now a days market is customer oriented.as customers have lots of choices so any company’s
prime job not only to satisfy but make a customer delight about the product and services of that
company. For making a company goodwill and better acceptance by the society company
should safe guard the health and well being of the customers.

The customer protection aims at following-

1. physical protection of the customers against products that are unsafe for health and
welfare.
2. protection of customer against adulteration.
3. protection from ecological and environmental effects of chamical, fertilizers which
cause bad effects on human body as well as to the environment.
4. protection against all types of pollution- a beautiful ,healthy and peaceful environment.
5. protection against monopoly or restrictive trade practices.
6. protection from missleading advertisements.
 Chapter 8
ETHICS AND CORPORATE EXCELELNCE

The issues relating to business ethics will be discussed under the following heads-

Issues relating to business objectives

Issues relating to consumers

Issues relating to employees

Issues relating to government.

Issues relating to national interests

Issues relating to competition

Issues relating to fair trade practices

Issues relating to environmental protection

Apart from this other corporate code of ethics such as:-

1. Be a dependable organization citizen

Demonstrate honesty and fairness in relationships with customers, suppliers and

employees.

2. Do not do anything against the law which will harm the organization

Offering or taking bribe is an unethical issue

Personal relationship is against the corporate rules

Protect the corporate goods-furniture, electric appliances etc.

3. Good customer relationship is encouraged

Render quality services to the customers in spite of taking care of the profitability of
the firm
A. Strategies for organizational culture building

Organizational culture is the tool for promoting ethical corporate behavior. In

any companies where organizational culture is strong in terms of good business practices,
transparency, shared values, beliefs and norms for the good of all, ethics takes center stage in
influencing organizational behavior. Some important strategies for organizational culture
building are as follows:-

(a) Development core values based on ethics.

(b) Focus on dominant beliefs.
(c) Corporate management’s initiatives.
(d) Favorable environment.
(e) Adopt the environmental changes taking place in any organization.

B. Total Quality

Organizational culture should aim to develop four fundamental elements of total quality.

(a) people
(b) process
(c) systems
(d) management

Total quality consists of above four parameters. Any organization should develop and maintain
this system in order to build an absolute advantage and competitive advantage from the market.

C. Customer Care

Customer is the king in this market. So customer care is the most important factor for
achieving success in this competitive market.

D. Care of Employees as per Statues

The corporate management’s role in developing business leaders is concerned with

1. Choice of future business leaders.

2. Career planning and development.
3. Succession planning.

It is the responsibility of top-management to decide about the development of the important

employees of their organization and place them in their proper position. There must be proper
organizational structure through which one can understand the status, authority, responsibility
and accountability of any employee.
E. Objective and Optimistic Approach

If we like to analyze the current value system that Indians hold, it is seen that most of our
culture values are gradually degenerating and our character has been devaluated faster. In the
same way this decline can be observed in business houses. After the process of liberalization,
privatization and globalization, there appears to be a cut-throat competition and rat race among
different business houses either indigenous or MNCs to win over each other.

The most important is that at the present time not only fulfilling short-term objectives but also
fulfillment of long term objectives incorporated with ethical and ,moral responsibilities by
corporate houses to survive and excel in this era of intense competition and ever slippery
market. Management should develop human values by setting examples so that they are
perceived as role models, so as to perform corporate excellence.

Management should take care of their employees. Any employee who is well remunerated,
given the chance of development will be satisfied and loyal to the organization. Satisfied
employees will provide better services to the customers. If any customers are getting better
services then the others they will be delighted and loyal towards the organization. Now if the
customers and employees have a win-win long term relationship then the company will
progress and the shareholders better to say stakeholders will be happy. Shareholders since they
also belong to the society will definitely influence the society, i.e., a happy shareholder will
make the society happy.

The corporate management should be optimistic in approach and try to assess spirituality
quotient, intelligence quotient and emotional quotient for proper balancing approach.
 CASE STUDIES

1. The Polluter’s Dilemma

R. Ghosh is the environmental compliance manager for a small plastics manufacturing
company. She is currently faced with the decision whether or not to spend money on new
technology that will reduce the level of a particular toxin in the wastewater that flows out the
back of the factory and into a lake. The factory’s emission levels are already within legal
limits. However, she knows that environmental regulations for this particular toxin are lagging
behind scientific evidence. In fact, a scientist from the university had been quoted in the
newspaper recently, saying that if emission levels stayed at this level, the fish in the lakes and
rivers in the area might soon have to be declared unsafe for human consumption. Further, if
companies in the region don’t engage in some self regulation on this issue, there is reason to
fear that the government — backed by public opinion — may force companies to begin using
the new technology, and may also begin requiring monthly emission level reports (which
would be both expensive and time consuming). But the company’s environmental compliance
budget is tight. Asking for this new technology to be installed would put her department over-
budget, and could jeopardize the company’s ability to show a profit this year.

Questions for Discussion

What motives would the company have to install the new technology?
What motives would the company have to delay installing the new technology?
Why might the companies in this region prefer for the government to impose new regulations?

2. Negligence And The Professional "Debate" Over Responsibility For Design

Introduction To The Case

On July 17, 1981, the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Kansas City, Missouri, held a videotaped tea-
dance party in their atrium lobby. With many party-goers standing and dancing on the
suspended walkways, connections supporting the ceiling rods that held up the second and
fourth-floor walkways across the atrium failed, and both walkways collapsed onto the crowded
first-floor atrium below. The fourth-floor walkway collapsed onto the second-floor walkway,
while the offset third-floor walkway remained intact. As the United States' most devastating
structural failure, in terms of loss of life and injuries, the Kansas City Hyatt Regency walkways
collapse left 114 dead and in excess of 200 injured. In addition, millions of dollars in costs
resulted from the collapse, and thousands of lives were adversely affected.

The hotel had only been in operation for approximately one year at the time of the walkways
collapse, and the ensuing investigation of the accident revealed some unsettling facts:

• During January and February, 1979, the design of the hanger rod connections was
changed in a series of events and disputed communications between the fabricator
 (Havens Steel Company) and the engineering design team (G.C.E. International, Inc., a
professional engineering firm). The fabricator changed the design from a one-rod to a
two-rod system to simplify the assembly task, doubling the load on the connector,
which ultimately resulted in the walkways collapse.
• The fabricator, in sworn testimony before the administrative judicial hearings after the
accident, claimed that his company (Havens) telephoned the engineering firm (G.C.E.)
for change approval. G.C.E. denied ever receiving such a call from Havens.
• On October 14, 1979 (more than one year before the walkways collapsed), while the
hotel was still under construction, more than 2700 square feet of the atrium roof
collapsed because one of the roof connections at the north end of the atrium failed. In
testimony, G.C.E. stated that on three separate occasions they requested on-site project
representation during the construction phase; however, these requests were not acted on
by the owner (Crown Center Redevelopment Corporation), due to additional costs of
providing on-site inspection.
• Even as originally designed, the walkways were barely capable of holding up the
expected load, and would have failed to meet the requirements of the Kansas City
Building Code.

Due to evidence supplied at the Hearings, a number of principals involved lost their
engineering licenses, a number of firms went bankrupt, and many expensive legal suits were
settled out of court. The case serves as an excellent example of the importance of meeting
professional responsibilities, and what the consequences are for professionals who fail to meet
those responsibilities. This case is particularly serviceable for use in structural design, statics
and materials classes, although it is also useful as a general overview of consequences for
professional actions. The Hyatt Regency Walkways Collapse provides a vivid example of the
importance of accuracy and detail in engineering design and shop drawings (particularly
regarding revisions), and the costly consequences of negligence in this realm.

• Who is ultimately responsible for the fatal design flaw? Why?

• Does the disputed telephone call matter to the outcome of the
case? Why or why not?
• What is the responsibility of a licensed professional engineer
who affixes his/her seal to fabrication drawings?
• In terms of meeting building codes, what are the responsibilities
of the engineer? The fabricator? The owner?
• What measures can professional societies take to ensure that
catastrophes such as the Hyatt Regency Walkways Collapse do not
occur?
• Do you agree with the findings that the principal engineers
involved should have been subject to discipline for gross negligence in
the practice of engineering? Should they have lost their licenses,
temporarily or permanently?
• Was it fair that G.C.E., as a company, was held liable for gross
negligence and engineering incompetence? Why or why not?