UNIVERSITY OF GHANA BUSINESS SCHOOL

SEMESTER 1, 2022/2023 ACADEMIC YEAR

ASSIGNMENT 1

COURSE TITLE : ETHICS IN ADMINISTRATION

COURSE CODE : PAHS 605

QUESTION
Article. Moral Motivation Across Ethical Theories: What
Can We Learn for Designing Corporate Ethics Programs.
 The article argues on the various perspectives of ethical philosophers Aristotle’s ethics,
Kant’s deontological ethics and Mill’s utilitarianism.
Aristotle argues that developing the right virtue is what guarantees the happiness of humans. He
argues that, when people of good character consciously make morally wrong decisions, it can be
explained by “incontinence” meaning using wrong emotions for right reasons.
Kant is of the view that the motivation of a person determines the morality of their action. The
wrong or right of an individual’s behavior cannot be judged with the consequences but rather on
what prompted the person to act in that manner. He identifies three types of motivation namely,
action by immediate inclination, actions from duty and actions impelled by some other
inclinations.
Mill’s also argues with utilitarianism that “in every situation, one should act in such a way that
will result in the greatest overall happiness” hence the “Greatest Happiness Principle” (GHP)
which views actions as right provided it promotes happiness and wrong if it does otherwise. He
says all moral policies are grounded on Internal and External sanctions.
Although Kant, Aristotle and Mill’s act based on morality, their ideas differ with regards to
human rationality. One important issue with this view has to do with the conflicting views
between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for ethics of virtue.
Aristotle believes moral motivation is a false problem due to the presence of an intrinsic between
living a good life and developing a good character. He believes that a rational individual will act
morally with their self-interest at heart.
Kant thinks Aristotle’s view generates a paradox because “if a good life is an intrinsic end, how
can one claim that it is an object of autonomous deliberation of free well?” Kent believes reason
enables the individual to identify their morals and provides incentives to act in accordance.
Mill’s according to his greatest happiness principle is of the view that, reason is used by people
as the best option to achieve their greatest goal.
The implications of the different perspectives of moral motivations can be seen in;
Aristotle’s ethical behavior which is all about virtue and not compliance with principles, hence
an ethics program with emphasis on compliance will not get the needed motivation to support its
implementation.
Kant believes in “developing the company’s values and principles” in his view, the organization
should be seen as the “moral community” regulated by rules and regulations “that supports
human freedom, encourage workers participation and treat all stakeholders in a fair manner”.
Mill’s on the other hand believes in “balancing internal and external sanctions”, by “the capacity
to acquire appropriate moral feelings to appreciate the value of cooperation and society’s
welfare” and “the capacity of being aware of the possible external benefits of ethical behavior”
The strengthening approach to support the enforcement of ethics is basically “the concept
of moral imagination. This is defined as “a necessary ingredient in responsible moral judgement”
that can identify, and access possibilities determined by the circumstance.
There are three stages to moral imagination namely “Delving into possibilities”, “Focus on
consequences” and “Disengagement from the context”.
The above is a summary of the article.

References
Simone de Colle, Patricia H. Werhane. Moral Motivation Across Ethical Theories: What Can We
Learn for Designing Corporate Ethics Programs?. Journal of Business Ethics (2008) 81:751-764
DOI 10.1007/s10551-007-9545-7