Running Head: BUSINESS ETHICS 1

BUSINESS ETHICS

Student Name

Institution Affiliation
BUSINESS ETHICS 2

The microchip is meant to moderate human behaviours. Halo Chip is an inconspicuous

microchip that uses intellectual genome reprogramming to moderate human behaviours after

implanting in the human. The major reason for the microchip is to develop habits in the user over

some time; it aims at lowering the pressure human beings have on nature and environmental

surroundings. Halo Chip microchips help by enhancing daily exercise, thus reducing the burden

of private transport. It is also supposed to help people develop decent eating habits, which are

meant to help with a person's health wellness and reduce the pressure on the food systems.

The Halo Chip is an inconspicuous smart microchip injection that uses genome

reconfiguration to regulate social actions. The Halo Chip's main selling point is that it improves

the recipient's behaviour patterns, which reduce their negative impact on the environment over

the period—increasing the propensity to work out regularly, thereby lowering the utilization of

private transportation; designing healthy eating patterns, which, aside from unique nutritional

benefits, may de-pressurize food production; boosting acceptance of minimal light and reduced

temperature rates, which may minimize power needs; realigning volatility in our inclination

states – which often contribute in inefficient. The biological urge for contentment is frequently

cited as fueling extreme resource usage thresholds (Scheyvens et al., 2020).

The Halo Chip can be configured (in reasonable limits) to generate and even extend human

enjoyment at reduced ranks of carbon footprint, thus interrupting the relationship between usage

and contentment. Furthermore, the Halo Chip can be configured by the consumer to motivate

specific character patterns like intensified and lengthy compassion with others (e.g., human

beings, livestock, and biodiversity), again within a specified tolerance, so that we are smarter

allowed to function in respects that do not damage them. It's essential to remember that the
BUSINESS ETHICS 3

processor only improves and stabilizes propensities that Natural World has already built-in. In

this context, it emulates the individuals' DNA sequence in manners that encourage pro-

sustainability result toward the accomplishment of the SDGs rather than reconfiguring it.

Furthermore, like a cell phone, the Halo Chip is a willingly bought item that can be turned on

and off at the user's jurisdiction. There is no pressure to utilize the item, and it is extremely

customizable, so each user maintains complete control. Another feature of the processor that we

haven't decided on is retrieving user-generated material over its lifespan. We don't see the item as

a reactive tracking device but rather as a user-driven channel that allows people to perceive their

information.

Participants could, for instance, retrieve the data from the chip to a Tablet gadget and track

patterns in their conduct over time. They could, for instance, contrast actions during positive and

negative periods of the chip. However, we are still unsure concerning this as a brand image

because of the inescapable considerations regarding purchaser confidentiality. While the chip's

primary intention is to reduce the international threat of weather transformation to human

framework servicing, the existence of the item and its fundamental innovations in genome

recreation are probably contentious and thus a public threat for certain categories. For Example,

there may be concerns that it could be exploited and utilized in other uses to accomplish

behavioural benefits (warfare, sports, and education).

When it relates to biomaterials, there is an archaeological justification for increased

community consideration. Even though genetic modification (GM) food plants improve national

food security, they were originally met with strong opposition from main players in the

worldwide community domain, who effectively used the channels to mobilize pessimistic
BUSINESS ETHICS 4

community perceptions of 'Frankenstein Food.' Would the community and media regard the Halo

Chip as generating new mutants if they assumed GM plants as "Franken-Food"?

The intensely detrimental impacts of atmospheric turmoil are at the centre of rising

population, mass starvation, and inequality. Several authorities have financed a wide range of

personal industry projects with the primary goal of developing radical alternatives to handle the

danger of climate transformation in response to the rise. A large portion of funds has been

channelled into biotechnologies about the additional well-known studies into biofuel power

innovations (solar, wind, Genetic modification).

The first stream of biotechnology financing resulted in the biological adjustment of crop

production (such as wheat), allowing new seedling extracts to endure and even thrive in difficult

climatic situations reducing the threat of crop collapse and international food insecurity. A

second, lesser-known source of financing was directed toward human biotechnology studies.

Halo Corp, a crucial beneficiary of this financing, has effectively established a client base of bio-

technologies that reconfigure human behaviour in ecologically pleasant contexts with no adverse

effects (which will be outlined further below).

As a result, our digital technology main selling point is its ability to combat weather

transformation by reducing adverse human effects on the ecosystem. We see the Halo Chip as a

one-of-a-kind item that can help to achieve numerous Sustainable Development Goals. Presently,

we estimate that our core product, the Halo Chip, will be commercialized in 5-7 years, pending

the completion of compulsory testing protocols and regulations authorization. In preparation for

this, we'd like to enlist your help in assessing any dangers or vulnerabilities that may arise during

the commodification of the Halo microchip.

BUSINESS ETHICS 5

The pressure on the food systems results from the overconsumption of utilities, and often

characterized by competition in terms of status, binge eating, impulsive buying; this is because

the most human desire for contentment raises the urge to material consumption. The microchip

can be effectively programmed with the necessary restrictions to balance their happiness and fuel

effect on their material consumption. The Halo Chip has the feature that allows it to be coded to

inspire certain characteristics of empathy toward others and the ecosystem at large, which is to

encourage a livelihood that these aspects of their lives are not harmed.

Although the microchip influences users' decisions, it should be acknowledged that the Halo

Chip only improves and alleviates tendencies that have already been encrypted in the person

DNA by genetics. The microchips, therefore, do not re-write the genetic configurations but

concentrate the way that these DNA codes encourage the sustainability of and promotion of the

SDGs. The other consideration that should be the chips is not forced on people, but they

purchased voluntarily and can be powered on and off whenever they seem worthy. These chips

can be used to compare behaviours when they are active or inactive using the downloaded

information into these microchips. Due to the unavoidable distress with customers' privacy, it is

hard for this feature of the chips to be fully determined.

Whilst the purpose of the product is potentially beneficial from an environmental viewpoint,

elements of the product's usage – an 'intelligent chip' planted under the skin to manipulate

behavioural tendencies – are likely to be regarded as ethically controversial by some key public

stakeholder groups. For Example, whilst Halo Chip aims to enhance sustainability behaviours,

the product's core technology (genome reprogramming) could have various behavioural
BUSINESS ETHICS 6

applications such as lowering or suppressing emotions; for example, guilt, remorse, sadness, fear

and insecurity.

The tiny chips implanted in the flesh between the thumb and forefinger are similar to those for

pets. They enable people to open their front door, access their office, start their car with a wave

of their hand, and store medical data. While technology is changing the way we work, this makes

for distinctly uncomfortable reading. Firms should be concentrating on rather more immediate

priorities and focusing on engaging their employees. Microchipping would give bosses even

more power and control over their workers. There are obvious risks involved, and employers

must not brush them aside or pressure staff into being chipped (The Guardian (2018).

When an ethical issue surfaces in developing a project, investors who had shown interests in

the project or funded the organization are affected; either negatively or positively. All of the

involved in the project/stakeholders have unique characteristics regarding the issues at hand.

Stakeholder's that have are more invested in a project and are powerful in the aspect of their

contributions are considered important, and the issues that they raise are considered and

addressed urgently.

The ethical issues that are probably to be generated by this project include testing the

effectiveness or faultiness of the microchips. The issue that arises in this section is the

infringement of the subjects used to test the Halo Chips. Another ethical issue that might prove to

be hindrances to the development of this project is the health and human rights of the people

using microchips (Mohamed & Chaudhry, 2021, February). Whether the user of the chips would

be at their free will while under the influence of the microchips question on the respect for

human rights this project has. The user's health is also a concern considering that a foreign object
BUSINESS ETHICS 7

is inserted into a person's body. The fear for one health might be due to the side effects the

microchips might have or fears of radiations and other microwaves related to signal transfer.

Most of the major stakeholders of a project fall under four categories, including the

customers, sponsors of the projects, organizations that take part in the production of the products,

and the team player who own the idea (Mitchell et al., 1997). Customers are majorly concerned

with the quality of the products, the safety measures that have been put in place and the

effectiveness. They would ask the questions: is it safe? Can I trust it? Does it work? On the other

hand, the people or organizations are worried about the profitability and the reputation such

products display on their already established firms and organizations.

While this is so, the organization aims to please both the customers and the sponsors, and with

the help of their staff members and team players in the making of these projects, they try to

ensure that the quality of products they offer is up to standards. This is not only on the

effectiveness of the microchips but also the health standards and the presentation of the product,

which is important to them since their reputation and income is at risk if the products disappoint

in the market.

The responsibility of managing relevant stakeholders can, paradoxically, turn into a project in

and of itself – a large, multi-fanged, multi-headed beauty that can be difficult to regulate. I

pursued the guidance of three knowledgeable project executives to determine the best way to

maintain the beast at the harbour.

BUSINESS ETHICS 8

1. At the start of the venture, recognize all of the relevant parties. It would be best if you did

so, or you will encounter the issue of additional stakeholders with troublesome agendas

connecting the campaign after it begins.

2. Ensure that all stakeholders are on the same page regarding the project's deadlines and

positions. Glen Alleman, vice president, Integrated Advising and Quality Assurance at Lewis &

Fowler, a process improvement and collaborating firm in Niwot, CO, replied, "You demand to

have a comprehensive arrangement on the narrative of the task, the timeframes, and what

people's positions are." "Establishing regulations of interaction that describe people's operations

and whether they are rulers or supporters is critical before the project starts. Midway through a

task, you don't need your adherents clamouring to be rulers. "At the commencement of the

process, everyone needs to comply with all of the regulations," Endres agrees. "Inability to do so

could contribute to disruptions funding issues, and lost opportunities."

3. Agree on how to manage project adjustments. According to Alleman, the more complicated

the task is, the more adjustments there will be. "It is critical for a project's achievement that all

decision-makers concur on how to deal with adjustments.

4. Make an effort to communicate effectively. This is something that demands to be

characterized from the beginning of the project. According to Enders, the operation group should

decide on the level of interaction and what will be included. "Interaction should generally be

brief and focused on advancement and significance," he explained. "All stakeholders must be

able to benefit from the interaction."

BUSINESS ETHICS 9

5. Maintain visibility of the project's ambition. According to Enders, maintaining the project

perception visible enables everyone to remain organized on what's essential. "By doing so, the

risk of magnification creep is reduced."

6. Involve stakeholders in the procedure. From start to finish, Specialists stress the importance

of involving stakeholders in major issue, analyzing new prerequisites and compiling lessons-

learned categories.

7. Define what it means to be "done." Endres points out that stakeholder must agree on what

constitutes "done." "If they don't, the design could quickly derail.

8. Last but not least, remember to empathize with other decision-makers. A compassionate

evaluation, according to Nankeen, can assist a PM in revealing concealed factors that can assist

them in determining how to handle problems. "For instance, if an elevated stakeholder is

extremely motivated to sustain your task, users may discover it more beneficial to devote time

housing trust with a reduced stakeholder as compared with an elevated stakeholder."

BUSINESS ETHICS 10

References

Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification

and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management

Review, 22(4): 853-886.

Wright, N. S., & Bennett, H. (2011). Business ethics, CSR, sustainability and the MBA. Journal

of Management and Organization, 17(5), 641. Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/openview/52262c894b27a62f47847d403e4d25d8/1?pq-

origsite=gscholar&cbl=38879

The Guardian (2018). “Alarm over talks to implant UK employees with microchips”:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/11/alarm-over-talks-to-implant-uk-

employees-with-microchips?fbclid=IwAR3ZvgSuuBc0ECccf-

mbeL_oF0UjuvvVJCh5fZbr1TIipJsLdbggZE1T1lY

Scheyvens, R., Banks, G., & Hughes, E. (2016). The private sector and the SDGs: The need to

move beyond ‘business as usual’. Sustainable Development, 24(6), 371-382. Retrieved from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sd.1623

Mohamed, M. A., & Chaudhry, B. (2021, February). Preliminary Investigations on Subcutaneous

Implantable Microchip Health and Security Risks. In International Conference on Intelligent

Human Systems Integration (pp. 612-618). Springer, Cham. Retrieved from

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-68017-6_90
BUSINESS ETHICS 11

Lee, M. T., & Raschke, R. L. (2020). Innovative sustainability and stakeholders’ shared

understanding: The secret sauce to “performance with a purpose”. Journal of Business

Research, 108, 20-28. Retrieved from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296319306083

Crane, A., Matten, D., Glozer, S. and Spence, L., 2019. Business ethics: Managing corporate

citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press, USA.

de Bakker, F.G., Rasche, A. and Ponte, S., 2019. Multi-stakeholder initiatives on sustainability: A

cross-disciplinary review and research agenda for business ethics. Business Ethics

Quarterly, 29(3), pp.343-383.

Marina, A. and Wahjono, S.I., 2017. Business ethics for business sustainability in

Muhammadiyah hospital: Evidence from Ponorogo, Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian

Economy and Business: JIEB., 32(3), pp.178-189.

Zsolnai, L. (2015). Spirituality, ethics and sustainability. In The spiritual dimension of business

ethics and sustainability management (pp. 3-11). Springer, Cham.

Ferrell, O.C. and Fraedrich, J., 2016. Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Cengage

learning.

Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2018). Business cases and corporate engagement with

sustainability: Differentiating ethical motivations. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(2), 241-

259.
BUSINESS ETHICS 12

Freudenreich, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F. and Schaltegger, S., 2020. A stakeholder theory perspective

on business models: Value creation for sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(1),

pp.3-18.

Galea, C. ed., 2017. Teaching business sustainability: From theory to practice. Routledge.