ET H I C A L A P P R O A C H E S

T O D E C I S I O N - M A K I N G
E NTAT ION B Y: OM SHAH
PRES
 INTRODUCTION
• DEFINITION OF ETHICS:
ETHICS REFERS TO THE MORAL PRINCIPLES THAT
GOVERN A PERSON'S BEHAVIOR OR THE CONDUCTING OF
AN ACTIVITY.
IN BUSINESS, ETHICS OFTEN REFERS TO THE PRINCIPLES
AND VALUES THAT GUIDE THE BEHAVIOR OF
INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS IN THE BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT.
IMPORTANCE OF ETHICAL DECISION-
MAKING IN BUSINESS:
• BUILDS TRUST: ETHICAL BEHAVIOR FOSTERS TRUST AMONG STAKEHOLDERS,
INCLUDING CUSTOMERS, EMPLOYEES, AND INVESTORS.

• ENHANCES REPUTATION: COMPANIES KNOWN FOR ETHICAL BEHAVIOR OFTEN ENJOY

A BETTER REPUTATION, WHICH CAN LEAD TO INCREASED BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES.

• ATTRACTS TALENT: A COMMITMENT TO ETHICS CAN ATTRACT TOP TALENT WHO

WANT TO WORK FOR A COMPANY WITH STRONG VALUES.

• CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS: ETHICAL BEHAVIOR FOSTERS POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS

WITH CUSTOMERS, AS THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT COMPANIES THEY
PERCEIVE AS ETHICAL.
ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS OVERVIEW
The
The Rights The Virtue
Utilitarian
Approach Approach
Approach

The Fairness The Common

(or Justice) Good
Approach Approach
 UTILITARIANISM APPROACH
UTILITARIANISM IS AN ETHICAL APPROACH THAT FOCUSES ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIONS.

• FOCUS ON HAPPINESS: THE MAIN GOAL IS TO MAXIMIZE HAPPINESS OR PLEASURE AND MINIMIZE PAIN OR
SUFFERING FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

• CONSEQUENCES MATTER: DECISIONS SHOULD BE BASED ON THE OUTCOMES THEY PRODUCE. THE
CONSEQUENCES OF AN ACTION DETERMINE WHETHER IT IS RIGHT OR WRONG.

• QUANTIFIABLE IMPACT: UTILITARIANISM SUGGESTS THAT THE IMPACT OF AN ACTION CAN BE MEASURED AND
COMPARED IN TERMS OF THE HAPPINESS OR SUFFERING IT CREATES.

• IMPARTIALITY: IT REQUIRES TREATING EVERYONE'S HAPPINESS AND SUFFERING EQUALLY, WITHOUT

FAVORITISM OR BIAS.

• COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: BEFORE MAKING A DECISION, ONE SHOULD WEIGH THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS AND
HARMS TO DETERMINE THE COURSE OF ACTION THAT PRODUCES THE GREATEST OVERALL GOOD.

• LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE: UTILITARIANISM CONSIDERS THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF DECISIONS, AIMING FOR
THE GREATEST OVERALL BENEFIT OVER TIME.
 THE RIGHTS APPROACH
• RESPECT FOR RIGHTS: THIS APPROACH EMPHASIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF RESPECTING AND PROTECTING
THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS.

• INHERENT RIGHTS: RIGHTS ARE CONSIDERED INHERENT TO INDIVIDUALS BY VIRTUE OF THEIR HUMANITY,
NOT GRANTED BY SOCIETY OR GOVERNMENTS.

• UNIVERSAL RIGHTS: IT SUGGESTS THAT CERTAIN RIGHTS APPLY UNIVERSALLY TO ALL INDIVIDUALS,
REGARDLESS OF FACTORS LIKE CULTURE OR SOCIETY.

• PROTECTION AGAINST HARM: RIGHTS-BASED ETHICS PRIORITIZES PROTECTING INDIVIDUALS FROM

HARM, ESPECIALLY FROM ACTIONS THAT VIOLATE THEIR RIGHTS.

• CONFLICT RESOLUTION: WHEN RIGHTS CONFLICT, THIS APPROACH SEEKS TO FIND A BALANCE OR
RESOLUTION THAT RESPECTS THE RIGHTS OF ALL INVOLVED PARTIES.

• LEGAL FRAMEWORK: IT OFTEN ALIGNS WITH LEGAL FRAMEWORKS THAT PROTECT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS,
SUCH AS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OR INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAWS.

• INDIVIDUAL AUTONOMY: THIS APPROACH VALUES INDIVIDUAL AUTONOMY AND THE FREEDOM TO MAKE
CHOICES THAT DO NOT HARM OTHERS OR INFRINGE UPON THEIR RIGHTS.
 THE VIRTUE APPROACH
VIRTUE ETHICS FOCUSES ON THE CHARACTER OF THE PERSON MAKING DECISIONS RATHER THAN ON THE
DECISIONS THEMSELVES.

• FOCUS ON CHARACTER: VIRTUE ETHICS EMPHASIZES DEVELOPING GOOD CHARACTER TRAITS, SUCH AS HONESTY,
INTEGRITY, AND FAIRNESS.

• PERSONAL INTEGRITY: IT VALUES ACTING IN WAYS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH ONE'S VALUES AND BELIEFS, EVEN
WHEN IT IS DIFFICULT OR UNPOPULAR.

• ROLE MODELS: VIRTUE ETHICS LOOKS TO ROLE MODELS AND VIRTUOUS INDIVIDUALS AS EXAMPLES OF HOW TO
LIVE A GOOD LIFE.

• BALANCED VIRTUES: IT PROMOTES FINDING A BALANCE BETWEEN DIFFERENT VIRTUES, AVOIDING EXTREMES LIKE
EXCESSIVE AMBITION OR RECKLESSNESS.

• COMMUNITY VALUES: VIRTUE ETHICS CONSIDERS THE VALUES AND NORMS OF THE COMMUNITY OR SOCIETY IN
WHICH A PERSON LIVES, BUT IT IS NOT PURELY RELATIVISTIC.

• LONG-TERM ORIENTATION: THIS APPROACH FOCUSES ON LONG-TERM CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT RATHER THAN
SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES.
THE FAIRNESS (OR JUSTICE) APPROACH
JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS IN ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING FOCUS ON ENSURING THAT DECISIONS ARE MADE
IMPARTIALLY AND THAT INDIVIDUALS ARE TREATED EQUITABLY.

• EQUALITY: JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS REQUIRE TREATING ALL INDIVIDUALS EQUALLY, WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION OR FAVORITISM.

• IMPARTIALITY: DECISIONS SHOULD BE MADE IMPARTIALLY, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND

CIRCUMSTANCES WITHOUT BIAS.

• PROCEDURAL JUSTICE: THIS ASPECT EMPHASIZES FAIR PROCESSES FOR MAKING DECISIONS,
ENSURING THAT PROCEDURES ARE TRANSPARENT, CONSISTENT, AND BASED ON ESTABLISHED RULES.

• DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE: DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE FOCUSES ON THE FAIR DISTRIBUTION OF BENEFITS

AND BURDENS IN SOCIETY, ENSURING THAT RESOURCES ARE ALLOCATED EQUITABLY.

• COMPENSATION: WHEN HARM OCCURS, JUSTICE MAY REQUIRE COMPENSATION OR RESTITUTION TO

RESTORE FAIRNESS.
THE COMMON GOOD APPROACH
THE COMMON GOOD APPROACH TO ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING EMPHASIZES THE WELL-BEING OF THE COMMUNITY OR
SOCIETY AS A WHOLE.

• COMMUNITY WELL-BEING: THE PRIMARY GOAL IS TO PROMOTE THE OVERALL WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY, NOT JUST
INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS.

• SHARED VALUES: IT RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF SHARED VALUES, SUCH AS JUSTICE, EQUALITY, AND SOLIDARITY, IN
DECISION-MAKING.

• PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: DECISION-MAKING SHOULD INVOLVE THE INPUT AND PARTICIPATION OF MEMBERS OF THE
COMMUNITY TO ENSURE THAT IT BENEFITS EVERYONE.

• BALANCING INDIVIDUAL AND COMMON GOOD: IT SEEKS TO BALANCE THE INTERESTS OF INDIVIDUALS WITH THE
COLLECTIVE WELL-BEING OF THE COMMUNITY.

• RESPONSIBILITY TO OTHERS: THE COMMON GOOD APPROACH EMPHASIZES OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO OTHERS IN THE
COMMUNITY AND THE NEED TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT OF OUR ACTIONS ON THEM.

• LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY: IT CONSIDERS THE LONG-TERM IMPACT OF DECISIONS ON THE COMMUNITY, AIMING FOR
SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE OUTCOMES.
 ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
• IDENTIFY THE ETHICAL DILEMMA:
• RECOGNIZE THAT A SITUATION INVOLVES A CHOICE BETWEEN TWO OR MORE MORALLY CONFLICTING OPTIONS.

• GATHER RELEVANT INFORMATION:

• COLLECT ALL RELEVANT FACTS AND INFORMATION RELATED TO THE ETHICAL DILEMMA.

• IDENTIFY STAKEHOLDERS:
• DETERMINE WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE DECISION AND HOW.

• CONSIDER DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES:

• EVALUATE THE SITUATION FROM VARIOUS VIEWPOINTS, INCLUDING THOSE OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS.

• APPLY ETHICAL THEORIES AND PRINCIPLES:

• UTILITARIANISM: SEEK THE GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE.
• RIGHTS-BASED ETHICS: RESPECT AND PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS.
• VIRTUE ETHICS: ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MORAL VIRTUES SUCH AS HONESTY, INTEGRITY, AND FAIRNESS.
• JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS: ENSURE FAIRNESS AND EQUITY IN DECISION-MAKING.

• MAKE A DECISION:
• BASED ON THE INFORMATION GATHERED AND ETHICAL PRINCIPLES APPLIED, MAKE A DECISION ON HOW TO ADDRESS THE ETHICAL
DILEMMA.

• IMPLEMENT THE DECISION:

• PUT THE DECISION INTO ACTION, CONSIDERING HOW IT WILL AFFECT ALL STAKEHOLDERS.

• EVALUATE THE DECISION:

• REFLECT ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE DECISION AND ITS IMPACT ON STAKEHOLDERS.
• ASSESS WHETHER THE DECISION WAS EFFECTIVE IN RESOLVING THE ETHICAL DILEMMA.
 EXAMPLE OF ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
• SCENARIO: A PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY IS CONSIDERING WHETHER TO INCREASE THE PRICE
OF A LIFE-SAVING DRUG TO MAXIMIZE PROFITS.

• ETHICAL DILEMMA: BALANCING THE COMPANY'S FINANCIAL INTERESTS WITH THE NEED TO
PROVIDE AFFORDABLE ACCESS TO THE DRUG FOR PATIENTS.

• STEPS TAKEN:
• IDENTIFIED THE ETHICAL DILEMMA: BALANCING PROFIT MOTIVES WITH PATIENT WELFARE.
• GATHERED RELEVANT INFORMATION: CONSIDERED PRODUCTION COSTS, MARKET DEMAND, AND
PATIENT NEEDS.
• IDENTIFIED STAKEHOLDERS: PATIENTS, SHAREHOLDERS, HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS, AND
REGULATORY BODIES.
• CONSIDERED DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES: WEIGHED THE FINANCIAL IMPACT ON THE COMPANY
AGAINST THE POTENTIAL HARM TO PATIENTS.
• APPLIED ETHICAL THEORIES: UTILITARIANISM (MAXIMIZING OVERALL BENEFIT), RIGHTS-BASED
ETHICS (ENSURING ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE), VIRTUE ETHICS (ACTING WITH COMPASSION AND
INTEGRITY), AND JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS (CONSIDERING EQUITABLE ACCESS).
• MADE A DECISION: DECIDED NOT TO INCREASE THE DRUG PRICE TO ENSURE AFFORDABILITY AND
ACCESS FOR PATIENTS.
• IMPLEMENTED THE DECISION: MAINTAINED THE CURRENT PRICE OF THE DRUG.
• EVALUATED THE DECISION: MONITORED PATIENT ACCESS AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE TO ENSURE
THE DECISION WAS EFFECTIVE AND ETHICAL.