企業倫理

1. 企業倫理 余德成 國立高雄海洋科技大學運籌管理系 2007.3.7

2. 倫理觀點 倫理哲學 倫理的性質 倫理價值

3. 倫理哲學 • 描述性模式(Hunt & Vitell, 1986) • 道義論 • 過程的正當性 • 程序的優先性 • 西方的邏輯 • 目的論 • 結果的善 • 目的的優先性 • 東方的邏輯

4. 商業哲學基礎(Stevens, 1979) • 社會達爾文主義(史賓賽) • 達爾文的進化論: 適者生存 • 史密斯的國富論: 自由競爭 • 馬基維利主義 • 一個人的成功首重權術 • 權術凌駕於美德之上 • 客觀主義(Ayn Rand) • 理性的自利 • 現實世界的客觀基礎是倫理的基礎 • 倫理相對主義 • 所有的道德規範皆是相對於特定文化 • 社會傳統是倫理的判準 • 普遍化主義 • 世界上存在絕對的倫理原則, 所有的行為皆以相同的原則評判 • 在類似的環境下,若要別人以同樣的方式對待我們,唯有以相同的方式對待別人(Picher & DeGeorge, 1979) • 己所不欲,勿施於人; 推己及人(孔子)

5. 康德的道德行為 • 倫理行為:倫理哲學; 義務本質; 純粹以內心的意志來考量,而不論及外部行為與後果;強調內在的自由 • 法律行為:法權哲學; 權利本質; 純粹以外部行為來考量,而與內心意志無關;強調外在的自由

6. 康德的人性論 • 二元論 • 人就其本身是目的而言,是理性/睿智體,人性本善 • 就現象中實存的個體而言,人有私慾,是可能為惡的 • 使人為善屬於倫理學的領域: 就人是存在於睿智界的理性者而言,人是理論理性的主體,經由思維,人可以認識到普遍有效的自然律,更可以運用自然率來役使萬物 • 自然律:包括自然界的理化法則,社會發展的某些必然的法則 • 人在社會中的行為是可以預估的;人的社會行為可以依據某些因果法則做預測 • 人並非完全自由的,而是可以操縱的; 但是人的思維能力,帶有濃厚的反省性格,他可以針對自然現象或社會現象來進行反省,從而擺脫社會律則的控制 • 因此,社會律則只具有相對的有效性

7. 何謂自由? • 自由是一種能力 • 人可以獨立於一切經驗因素的制約,而讓純粹理性的要求成為實踐的能力 • 自由使人能夠脫離像是好逸惡勞/趨福避禍,貪生怕死等等的惰性 • 真正的自由, 積極的自由 • 絕對的道德主體 • 消極的自由:人有擺脫某些必然法則的可能性

8. 何謂正義? • 亞里斯多德主要用以討論人的行為 • 近代西方思想家則用以評價社會制度的 一種道德標準,甚至成為社會制度的首要價值(cf.真理是思想體系的首要價值) • 正義的研究對象:社會的基本結構(分析單位),包括基本權利與義務,利益與負擔 • 正義原則(Rawls,1971) • 平等自由原則:每個人對於所有人所擁有的最廣泛平等的基本自由體系,以及相容的類似自由體系,都應有一種平等的權利 • 差別原則與機會的公正平等原則: 社會的與經濟的不平等應該如此安排,使它們:(1)在與正義的儲存原則一致的情況下,適合於最少受惠者的最大利益; (2)在機會公正平等的條件下,職務和地位對所有人開放

9. 個人自由 • 決策自由的極大化 • 個人自由的極大化,包括行為/言論/適當程序/個人隱私

10. 自然法則 • John Loche • 人人生而平等,只受自然法則的支配 • 兩種自然權利: 自由與私有財產 • 自由經濟:市場經濟及民營企業制度 • 功利主義:最大多數人的最大效益 • Charles Darwin • 物競天擇,適者生存 • 弱肉強食 • 社會達爾文主義:追求自利而成功的企業,代表最適生存的企業

11. 公平法則 • 基本人權的考慮:生命權/人格權/工作權/基本生活權 • 倫理判斷應該是提倡公平/公正/大公無私的分配利益與執行法律 • 社會互助的重要性

12. 分配正義 • 根據需要: 各盡所能,各取所需 • 根據貢獻: 各盡所能,各取所值 • 根據自由選擇: 基於個人自由意志所做的選擇 • 根據公平法則 • 平等自由原則 • 機會平等原則 • 差異原則

13. Ethical Principles and Decision-Making Guidelines • Business Ethics Education on Stakeholder Belief Systems • Ethical Criteria in Ethical Reasoning • Moral Responsibility • Ethical Principles

14. Business Ethics Education on Stakeholder Belief Systems • Take it! But use your best judgement on how to handle the details. • Inputs(ethical training,courses, seminars) • Transformation (effects on Stakeholder Belief Systems) • Outputs(decisional changes)

15. Inputs(ethical training,courses, seminars) • ethical principles • decision rules • cases using ethical principles with stakeholder approval

16. Transformation (effects on Stakeholder Belief Systems) • perceptions • assumptions • motivations • norms • values • organizational cultures

17. Outputs(decisional changes) • behavior • decisions • actions • policies • procedures

18. Ethical Criteria in Ethical Reasoning • MBA只是槍手而已,因為他們雖具備分析工具與技巧,但卻缺乏發掘問題之能力 • How to clarify ethical problems?(Laura Nash, 1981) • Ethical Criteria in Ethical Reasoning(Manuel Velasquez, 1988)

19. How to clarify ethical problems?(Laura Nash, 1981) • Have you defined the problem accurately? • How would you define the problem if you stood on the other side of the fence? • To whom and to what do you give loyalty as a person and as a member of the corporation? • What is your intention in making this decision? • How does this intention compare with the probable results? • Can you discuss the problem with the affected parties before you make your decision? • Could you disclose without qualm your decision or action to your boss, and other stakeholders as a whole? • What is the symbolic potential of your action if understood? If misunderstood? • Under what conditions would you allow exceptions to your stand?

20. Ethical Criteria in Ethical Reasoning(Manuel Velasquez, 1988) • Moral Reasoning must be logical. • Factual evidence cited to support a person’s judgment should be accurate, relevant, and complete. • Ethical standards used in person’s reasoning should be consistent.

21. Moral Responsibility • To be morally responsible for one’s actions and the harmful effects of the actions (Velasquez, 1988).When • A person knowingly and freely so acted, or the person caused the act to happen when that act was morally wrong • Knowingly and freely failed to act or prevent a harmful act that was morally wrong

22. Ethical Principles • Ethical Relativism • Utilitarianism • Universalism • Rights • Justice

23. Ethical Relativism and Decision-Making Guidelines • No single, universal rules • Personal interests and values (native relativism) • When in Rome, do as the Romans do (cultural relativism) • Problems • Logic of relativism as an excuse for not developing another moral standards • This view contradicts everyday experience • Decision-Making Guidelines/stakeholder analysis • What are the major moral beliefs and principles at issues for each stakeholder affected by this decision? • What are my moral beliefs and principles in this decision? • To what extent will my ethical principles clash if a particular course of action is taken? Why? • How can conflicting moral beliefs and principles be avoided or negotiated in seeking a desirable outcome?

24. Utilitarianism and Decision-Making Guidelines • Ethical judgement depending on consequences (Jeremy Bentham, 1748-1932; John S. Mill, 1806-1873) • Problems • Decision-Making Guidelines/stakeholder analysis

25. Ethical judgement depending on consequences(Jeremy Bentham, 1748-1932; John S. Mill, 1806-1873) • An action is morally right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people affected by it • An action is morally right if the net benefits over costs are greatest for all affected, as compared to the net benefits of all other possible choices considered • An action is morally right if its immediate and future direct and indirect benefits are greatest for each individual, and if this benefits outweigh the costs of those considered for other alternatives.

26. Problems • There is no agreement about what is the “good” to be maximized for all concerned in different situations is. Who decides what is good for whom? Whose interests are primary in the decisions? • Actions vs. consequences • Measurement and timeframe • No consideration on individual • The principles of justice and rights are ignored.

27. Decision-Making Guidelines/stakeholder analysis • define how costs and benefits will be measured in selecting one course of action over another.Include social as well as economic and monetary costs and benefits; include long-term and short-term costs and benefits. • Define what information you will need and use to determine costs and benefits in making comparisons • identify procedures an policies you will use to explain and justify your cost/benefit analysis • state your assumptions in defining and justifying your analysis and conclusions • ask what moral obligations you have toward each of your stakeholders, after costs and benefits have been estimated for particular strategies

28. Universalism and Decision-Making Guidelines • referred to as “deontological ethics” or “nonconsequentialist ethic” (Immanuel Kant (1742-1804) • nonconsequentialist ethic: the means justify the ends of an action, not the consequences • Kant’s principle of the categorical imperative(無上命令;良心的而且絕無條件的道德律:我要這麼做,以便我的行為能與普遍有效的行為法則不相矛盾) • A person should choose to act if and only if she or he would be willing to have every person on earth, in that same situation, act exactly that way. • A person should act in a way that respects and treats all others involved as well as means to the end.

29. Problems from Universalism and Decision-Making Guidelines • Practical utility? • Conflicts of interest • decision-maker’s duties conflict in an ethical dilemma?

30. Decision-Making Guidelines/stakeholder analysis • Identify individuals as well as aggregates and their welfare and risks in considering policy decisions and outcomes. • Identify the needs of individuals involved in a decision, the choices they have, and the information they need to protect their own welfare. • Identify any manipulation, force, coercion, or deceit that might be harmfully used against individuals involved in a decision • Identify duties of respecting and responding to individuals affected by particular decisions before adopting policies and actions that affect individual lives • Ask if the desired action or policy would be acceptable to those individuals involved if they are informed of the policy intentions. Under what conditions would they accept the decision? • Ask if the designated action or policy would acceptably be repeated as a principle by different individuals in a similar situation. If not, why? And would the designated action continue to be employed?

31. Rights and Decision-Making Guidelines • Moral authority: Entitlements and unquestioned claims • Fundamental rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness • The principle of rights is one of the most powerful concepts enabling and protecting individual freedom, dignity, and choice. • Problems • The entitlement justification of individual rights can be used by certain individuals as groups to disguise and manipulate selfish, unjust political claims and interests. • Protection of rights can be exaggerate certain entitlements in society at the expense of others. • The limitation of rights • Decision-Making Guidelines/stakeholder analysis • Identify the individuals and their rights that may be violated by a particular policy or course of action. • Determine the legal and moral basis of these individual’ rights Does the decision violate these rights? • Determine to what extent the action to be taken has moral justification from utilitarian principles if individual rights may be violated.

32. Justice and Decision-Making Guidelines • fairness and equality • The principle of justice forces us to question how fairy benefits and costs are distributed to everyone, opportunity and hardship to all, regardless of power, position, wealth, and station in life. • Principle of justice (J. Rawls, 1971) • Each person has an equal right to the most extensive basic liberties compatible with a similar liberty for others. • Social and economic inequalities are arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all.

33. Types of justice (R. DeGeorge, 1976, 1986) • Compensatory justice • Retributive justice • Distributive justice • Procedural justice

34. Problems of justice • Outside the jurisdiction of the state and its legal judicial systems where ethical dilemmas are solved by procedure and law, who decides who is right and who is wrong? • Who has the moral authority to punish whom? • Can opportunity and burden be fairly distributed to all when it is not in the interest of those in power to do so?

35. Decision-Making Guidelines/stakeholder analysis • How equitable will the distribution of benefits and costs, pleasure and plain, reward and punishment be among stakeholders if we pursue a particular course of action? • How clearly have procedures been defined and communicated for distributing the costs and benefits of a course of action or policy? How fair are these procedures to all affected? • What provisions can we make to compensate those who will be unfairly affected by the costs of the decision? What provisions can made to redistribute benefits from those who have been unfairly or overly compensated by the decision?

36. Summary of Five Ethical Decision-Marking Principles

37. The End 運籌帷幄 決勝全球 把握現在 實現夢想!