Table 1.

1: Analysis of Cases Using Major Classifications of Responsibility

What is responsibility? Indias Superrich
Starbucks Coffee
Company
Bajaj Autos Chakan
Plant
Responsibility for the action is
primarily moral, and involves
the concepts of duty, obligation,
blame, and answerability
Responsibility for the
consequences is primarily legal
and is associated with the
concepts of liability,
immutability, accountability,
and punishment/
compensation for the harm
accruing from the action.
They are responsible
for all the actions
which they enact
through their
companies and the
consequences of all
such actions. They
liable for all the harm
that their companies
and practices bring to
the public.

Causal and Agent
Responsibility
If the executives themselves act
or omit an act that causes harm
to some stakeholder, then the
executives are directly
responsible for it - this is called
consequent causal
responsibility.
If the executives command or
delegate an action (commission
or omission) that causes harm,
then they are indirectly
responsible for the harm - this is
called consequent agent
responsibility.
The concept of
consequent causal
responsibility would be
lesser for the superrich
as most of their actions
are taken on their
behalf by others.
The case of consequent
agent responsibility is
very relevant for the
case of Indias
superrich as any of
their business may
create an error the
responsibility of which
will be attributed to
them.


Table 1.2: Analysis of Cases Using Aristotles Notion of Responsibility
Context of Action Indias Superrich
Starbucks Coffee
Company
Bajaj Autos Chakan
Plant
Involuntary Actions under
force:
The executive does not initiate
the decision or action; others
initiate it.
Once initiated by others, the
executive contributes nothing to
the action.
This may happen
when one of the
promoters of an
organization is left
answerable for an act
which has been
committed by one of
his or her companies
or employees.

Involuntary Actions under
Duress
This may happen
when one of the
promoters of a

The executive does not choose
the action for itself, even though
it may be choice-worthy.
The executive is forced into
action because of extreme (i.e.,
non-endurable) fear of greater
evil or of avoiding some serious
good.
Though pressured into action
morally or psychologically, the
executive can still act or not act.
company is under
duress such as the
company almost
winding up due to
financial failure. The
executive then may
resort to unethical
means to save the
company like
Ramalinga Raju did
for Satyam.
Involuntary Actions under
Ignorance
Aristotle specifies six particulars
regarding ignorance Who is
doing it, what is being done,
What the action is all about, With
what instrument the action is
done, what consequences flow
from the action, how the action is
done
This may happen for
Indias super rich
when they are unaware
of an environmental
consequence which
one of their activities
or companies are
perpetrating. It might
also happen then there
is a social problem is
created due to their
activities and they are
unaware of it.

Voluntary Actions
The executive:
Deliberates over the ends (or
various outcomes) of the action
or strategy;
Deliberates over the means (or
various alternatives) conducive
to the ends under (1);
Initiates the action, individually
or in partnership, based on the
best alternatives under (2);
Is cognizant of the action-
circumstances under (3);
Wills the action strategy and its
consequences (means or end)
under (2) or (1)
This is when an Indian
superrich deliberates
on alternative courses
of action for attaining
a goal and then choses
one of the alternatives.
The alternatives
chosen are often to
change the strategy of
the company and
creates wealth for
them. They are also
aware of the
possibility of failure
associated with each
alternative.


Table 1.3: Analysis of Cases Using various Philosophers Perception of Responsibility
Perception of Responsibility Indias Superrich
Starbucks Coffee
Company
Bajaj Autos Chakan
Plant
Immanuel Kant: Responsibility
as Moral Worth
The principle of will
being the driving force
behind voluntary
actions can be seen in

the case of Shri Ratan
Tata launching the
TATA Nano car at the
promised price point of
Rs. 1 lakh. It was the
sheer will and
conviction of Ratan
Tata which drove
TATA Motors to
completion of this
amazing feat.
Karl Marx: Responsibility as
Historical Determinism
This principle can be
seen in the case most of
the corporations in
India having to resort to
bribery and unethical
means to get their
permissions and
permits. This happens
because the social
consciousness and
structure in India has
been set up in a way
where bribery in some
form is accepted in
everyday life.

Bradley: Attributional
Responsibility
This would be the case
when a promoter of a
company is acting
based on his religious
beliefs and constructing
a temple of a specific
god. This decision is
stemming from the
religious orientation of
the person which is
from the without.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer:
Responsibility as Commitment
and Deputyship
This is the case when
an executive needs to
choose between the
lesser of the two evils.
The situation might be
such that company
needs to sell of a part of
itself and lay off
thousands of people or
it will cease to exist.
The executive then
chooses to shut down
and layoff a part of the
company in order to

survive.
Richard Niebuhr: Responsibility
as Response
This is a situation
where the superrich of
India have to listen to
the citizens of India
who are their real
customers and
incorporate changes to
their organizations
based on what the
public sentiment is
saying. An example of
this would be where
Reliance retracted its
plans to open a chicken
fast food restaurant
when the shareholders,
who were primarily
vegetarian, objected.

Bernard Lonergan:
Responsibility as Effective
Freedom
Indian executives and
super rich face the
problem of lack of
effective freedom all
the time. In a country
where law and order is
lacking in almost all
domains it is
impossible for an
ethical company to
explore all the
opportunities because it
has to compete and
survive with a company
which is breaking the
law.