Business Ethics vs. Game Model
Business ethics also referred to as corporate ethics, relates to a class of applied as well as professional ethics. Ideally, the rationale behind the establishment of business ethics is the necessity for examining ethical morals, principles and problems that arise from time to time in the business world. In light of the above, business ethics applies to every aspect of the business as long as it is related to the conduct of the entire organization or the individuals in the organization. With the extremely globalized business environment, the necessity to understand the various aspects of business ethics most important for consideration has resulted in the application of scientific processes. The Game Model is a simulation applied by business executives focusing on various business aspects, including business ethics and business social responsibility which characterize the modern business environment. Essentially, it provides a means to foster better understanding of various business ethics approaches.
Solomon has contributed quite a great deal with matters relating to the running of businesses organizations across various industrial sectors. In the process, he has authored a relatively significant number of articles and literal materials regarding business ethics as implemented and developed in business organizations. Apparently, his wide research and involvement with business ethics matters have resulted in him developing a theoretical approach towards business ethics. Suitable for application to business corporations and other general organizations, he calls it the Aristotelian Approach. Solomon acknowledges the fact that Aristotle may have exhibited characteristics that portrayed him as an enemy of business, something he is famous for, but as the first true economist, he stands out as the first proponent of business ethics (Solomon 1021).
Borrowing from the mentality of Aristotle, the Aristotelian Approach by Solomon disregards the moral ideology that perceives “business is business”. Solomon’s approach disregards the above perception because its development in the society features as an excuse for personal insensitivity and social irresponsibility by the business people. According to Solomon, the development of business ethics has to find a basis for the consideration and embracement of the fact that the business people are members of the community as well. In light of the above, Solomon’s approach emphasizes that optimal business ethics ought to bring out not only what is good for the business people, but also what is good for other community members – simultaneously. In the absence of the above, Solomon argues that there is a high risk of the development of the antagonism between what is good for the community and the individual self-interests.
The Game Model proves Solomon’s approach to be true in the following ways. First, it helps to illustrate that individual integrity counts in the success of a business. Secondly, it clarifies the fact that good social practices nourish the relationship between the business and the community.
Approach by Albert Z. Carr
Much like Solomon, Carr has also made significant contributions on matters relating to business ethics. However, with respect to his different perspective, he has his relatively different approach with respect to addressing business ethics. His major contribution is in the bid to answer or provide insight about the morals stand of bluffing in business. According to many individuals, bluffing stands out as a form of lying which means that advocating it as a form of business strategy is advising business people to lie. However, that is not according to Carr. From his point of view, the above only holds true only with respect to private morality matters. However, with respect to business morals, Carr believes that bluffing is ethical regarding the fact that when it is open neither the business people of the community expects the truth from each other (Carr 1).
Ideally, the approach by Carr advocates for the application of bluffing as an ethical business strategy that helps in the expansion and continuity of businesses. However, he puts the fact that the business people applying the bluffing strategy should only do so if it does not necessarily result in them becoming emotionally disturbed. More so, applying the above strategy is not advisable if the business people end up losing personal respect.
With respect to features observed from simulations under the Game Model, succeeding in business in a free, fair and perfectly competitive market, special strategies are a necessity. In light of the above, bluffing features as an ethical business practice since ideally, none of the parties involved knows perfectly what the other parties have in plan.
Approach by Norman C. Gillespie
Additionally, Gillespie also features as a respectable contributor in matters of ethics in business organizations. Finding his arguments upon the image of the business, he comes strongly especially against the approach by Carr illustrated above. As a result, the approach by Gillespie argues that the ordinary standards and morals for individuals feature as important business ethics aspect that business people ought to uphold. According to Gillespie, the kind of completion in business is no way like poker. In the kind of competition between business organizations, the rules and standards are materially the same as the ones governing the general social system. The approach by Gillespie also highlights that there is not a disadvantage in abiding and applying ordinary moral principles in a business dominated by practitioners applying differing business rules (Gillespie 133).
The approach by Gillespie looks forward to helping in differentiating between illegality and ethical acceptability with respect to business operations. More so, his approach helps to lay out the norms are not set forth by numbers, and that and the most featured activity or action is not always the right one. In light of the above, Gillespie’s approach underlines the fact that ordinary morals and reasoning are far much richer in comparison to the business conventionalism that proposes special business ethics. Gillespie argues that ethics is known to be subtle and realistic while conventionalism comes out as unrealistic. Thus, the above approach is ideally an opposite of Carr’s approach which Gillespie depicts as one that obscures ordinary morals and standards from applying the way they should in business organizations.
In light of the above, approaching the Game Model with the approach by Gillespie is bound to prove that with perfect truth about each party, the business environment can benefit a lot and nourish with the application of ordinary moral standards and principles.
Conclusion
With respect to the fact that each of the above approaches is from a respectable contributor, of matters relating to business ethics, each of them has significant relevance altogether. However, the one that stands out as most convincing with respect to evaluation through the Game Model is Carr’s approach. The approaches by Solomon and Gillespie may seem relatively appealing, especially with respect to the fact that they propose for the application of ordinary social standards in the business environment. However, Carr’s approach is the most convincing with respect to the fact that it highlights the impossibility of overlooking special business ethics. The rationale behind Carr’s relevance finds its basis in the fact that perfect competition in the contemporary business environment can hardly survive without special business ethics or entirely on ordinary social principles and morals.
Works Cited
Carr, Albert Z. 'Is Business Bluffing Ethical?’ Harvard Business Review. N.p., 1968. Web. 4 July 2015.
Gillespie, Norman Chase. 'The Business of Ethics'. Profits and Professions: Essays in Business and Professional Ethics (1983): 133- 140. Web. 4 July 2015.
Solomon, Robert C. 'Aristotle, Ethics and Business Organizations'. Organization Studies 25.6 (2004): 1021-1043. Web. 5 July 2015.
