Essay Example on Business Ethics: Kantian Theory & Beyond

Introduction

Business ethics refers to the appropriate operational policies and practices implemented in a business setting with concern to particular controversial subjects. Some issues incorporated in ethics include bribery, corporate governance, discrimination, corporate social responsibility, and insider trading, among others. There are several theories developed by different philosophers to explain ethics. One of the prominent philosophers is Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, who developed Kantian ethics. Kantian ethics are moral principles applicable to all humans, regardless of context or incident. The paper uses Kantian deontology to analyze various case studies in an ethical setting.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Hacking Harvard Case Study

In a morality perspective, Kant states that the motives of an action by an individual determine its moral value. In this case, Kant argues that the consequences of an action do not reflect its value morally. The theoretical argument argues that ethical living says that one should not treat others as a means of obtaining a more remarkable outcome (CFI, n.d.). Kant assumes that human beings have a unique ability of thinking in a virtue setting, and they differ from other forms of physical existence.

In the context of Hacking Harvard, in September 2011, there were high school seniors who were thinking about their plans concerning college life. At that time, a Syrian Electronic Army was consisting of a group of hackers who were notorious in defacing well-known websites, and they had altered the Website of Harvard University (Patel & Weinstock, n.d.). Hackers are known for interfering with the university's website due to its nature of being secure due to the nature of the servers being powerful, where hackers find it valuable to violate it and store illegal data on the website for their benefit. According to Kantian theory, the hackers use the university website as a means of obtaining their more incredible outcome of storing illegal information in the university system. Relating to his argument concerning ethical behavior, the hackers did not observe ethics since they violated the privacy rights of the university to gain beneficial outcomes. Their acts lead to significant financial losses to the university. At the same time, they benefit, meaning they use the loss made by the university to gain from committing illegal actions for their advantage. Kant's ethical argument requires them to think according to human ability by understanding that they offend the other party to have benefit. According to the theory, the hackers' actions are unethical as they use the university's stability to obtain their more significant perceived outcome.

In recent years, Harvard University has indicated two cases of cybersecurity breaches that resulted in leaks of critical confidential information (Patel & Weinstock, n.d.). In the year 2008, a hacker accessed graduate school of arts and sciences site accessing personal data of the applicants, involving test scores and Social Security numbers. Concerning Kant's ethics, the hacker used the opportunity to gain quick access to confidential information for manipulation to set the data according to his preferences. The access aimed to benefit the hacker while violating the quality of information by the university, as well as violating the university's privacy. The hacking relates to stealing, which deprives the university of their accuracy of data and privacy too. In the same case, the hacker acted unethically by using the university's website to manipulate data according to his preferences. It means that the hacker used the university's website to achieve his great outcome, which is unethical according to Kantian moral perspective.

Mylan Hit with Racketeering Suit over Big Price Hikes of Epipen.

In the lawsuit involving Mylan concerning their drastic increase in prices of their EpiPen device used for by allergic people as an anti-allergy over the last decade, there apply several Kantian theories of ethics. First, the idea of morality in an ethical setting applies, which emphasizes that the motive of an individual, but not the consequence, is usually the determining factor of the moral value of the outcome. Besides, the case study fits nicely into the theory concerning categorical imperatives. The concept states that an action is typically justified as moral when everyone else doing the same gets justified (CFI, n.d.).

Mylan increased its price list of EpiPen for an extended period with a motive of increasing profits, a collaboration made between the company and the Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBM). The reason for the company to hike its prices was typically unethical since Mylan had self-interest goals made to benefit the company without considering other external severe effects to the consumers. As a result, the action led to consumer exploitation, which justified the lawsuit due to the violation of both the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the all US states' law of consumer protection. The action taken by Mylan fits with the moral of ethics, as stated by cant.

Moreover, relating the moral ethics to the scenario, the company increased the prices with the motive of increasing its benefits without considering the health status of the consumers. As a result, there were numerous death reports due to the inability of consumers to afford the EpiPen, which the company denied the responsibility. The outcome of the company's action of hiking the prices by a very high percentage was increased mortality rates, which becomes an unethical act by the company since it was intentional, leading to adverse outcomes. In the same case, the motive of Mylan was towards gaining self-interest without even a basis of the price increase because the costs of production remained low. Therefore, the rationale resulted in a negative outcome. According to Kant, the act falls in the category of unethical behavior. The company acted unethically to its customers leading to life-threatening as a result of the hiked prices of a critical device.

Additionally, the company's action of increasing price lists at a higher percentage gets in line with the concept of the categorical imperative. The company acted immorally hence unethically by raising its prices out of an unclear basis. The industry rivals did not contribute to the increase. Instead, some companies ventured into the market of providing EpiPen with a moral motive of saving the suffering masses. However, they did not succeed because they could not turn back the PBMs due to the strong collaboration with Mylan. According to Kantian ethics, the company's action was unethical because the other players in the industry did not increase their prices, making the company have a selfish character of gaining high profits while exploiting the consumers. If the company would act in that manner as a response to the outside forces that are competition, its acts could be moral, and at the same time, they could be ethical since they could have acted as a fight against severe competition.

Nevertheless, the move made by the lawsuit meant to protect the consumers against exploitation by Mylan. The suit acted with a motive of wanting to hold the company responsible for the high mass deaths reported due to the unaffordability of the EpiPen by some consumers as a result of the company's action of hiking list prices. According to Kantian ethics, the lawsuit acted ethically since its motive aims to protect the masses from exploitation, which is a positive move seeking to gain a positive outcome. In the same case, the action of the companies which ventured to provide the EpiPen at low prices to the consumers was primarily ethical because they aimed to prevent mass life-threatening occurring as a result of the high priced devices.

Nestle and Advertising an Ethical Analysis

Nestle operates globally selling products of infant milk, and it has a global market share of almost a quarter of the total (Nelsen, 2018). The company has violated the ethical marketing codes by providing misleading claims about nutrition concerning baby milk formulas, leading to customer manipulation. The ethical violation can get well explained by the Kantian ethics theory of morality. The approach applies in this case because it involves the company's motive towards providing misleading information in its advertisements to maximize sales. The theory states that for one to live ethically, they should not treat others as a means of obtaining a more excellent end.

According to a report presented by the Changing Markets Foundation, Nestle extensively acted unethically in its advertising during the marketing of its infant milk formulas (Nelsen, 2018). The Swiss-based company argued in its marketing that the infant milk formulas of its products were "closet to," "inspired by," and follows the example of human milk in many jurisdictions. The company took the initiative to advertise despite having prohibited by the World Health Organization. Nestle acted unethically by ignoring the provision of nutritional advice when promoting its products in many countries (Nelsen, 2018). The company got driven by the motive of obtaining a larger market share while increasing its sales and profits to provide misleading information to the consumers. The information violated the codes of marketing, which requires a company to provide full information concerning its products. Therefore, it applies Kantian morality ethics by focusing on increased sales while at the same time endangering the lives of infants in many countries by providing false information about its baby milk products.

Consequently, the Nestle Company acted unethically by manipulating the emotional responses of the consumers to increase consumer base and market share by selling a variety of products (Nelsen, 2018). The behavior violates ethical standards by treating children as a means of achieving profitability while risking the health of most vulnerable infants. Besides, the company manipulated its adverts while retaining the same sucrose content in both South Africa and Hong Kong. Still, it provided different information in South Africa from the one provided in Hong Kong. In South Africa, the company included sucrose in infant milk formulas, and at the same time, it marketed the same formulas as free of sucrose. According to Kantian ethics, the action becomes unethical because the company got driven by the motive of increasing sales while risking the health of babies.

Challenger Disaster

The challenger disaster primarily bases on the Kantian ethics approach concerning categorical imperatives. The idea argues that a hypothetical imperative is an obligation in a moral setting that applies in the pursuit of a predetermined goal. The rules are usually categorical because they apply in a universal context to every individual in all situations, regardless of the goals and inhibitions at the individual level. They typically are categorical since a human being may choose not to adhere to the moral codes of conduct because it is the choice of each individual to seek pleasure while reducing pain (CFI, n.d.). The challenger disaster involves personal decisions and advice to justify the launching of the rocket, making it well explained by this Kantian ethical approach.

First and foremost, there were discussions concerning the launch hours before the activity took place, involving Morton Thiokol engineers, managers, and the other side of NASA management. The engineers acted ethically by providing the exact information concerning the malfunction of O rings, a reliable history concerning their erosion on STS in the incidences of cold-weather launch (Hastings, 2003). The engineers followed hypothetical binding moral obligations standards by acting towards achieving a positive goal for the...