International Manufacturing Corporation’s “side payments” to government officials in exchange for favorable business contracts in foreign countries over more deserving competitors are likely to be considered in the United States as
Illegal and unethical
None of the above.
Members of a profession generally have mandatory:
Legal obligations to the profession and society.
Moral obligations based on the Code of Ethics of the profession.
Social responsibility obligations required by the profession.
All of the above.
Which of the following is an accurate statement?
If business fails to be sufficiently social responsible it is thereby acting immorally too.
A corporation is recognized legal “person” but it is not a moral “person” for the purposes of ethical evaluation of corporate activities.
According to the Friedman view of the corporation, it has no moral or social responsibility, and its only obligation is to make money legally.
The corporation only is obligated morally to its shareholders, and thus owes no moral responsibilities to any other stakeholder groups.
Kitchen Appliances, Inc., markets a product that is capable of seriously injuring consumers who misuse the product in a foreseeable way. What statement best describes the company’s resulting duty to consumers?
The company will owe a legal duty to consumers since it is an insurer against all harms caused by its products.
The company will not have any ethical duty to consumers if it contributes to charities in communities where some injured consumers live.
The impact of any decision on the firm’s profits supersedes any and every ethical duty to consumers.
None of the above.
A company that pressures and coerces its own employees to contribute their own money and their own time to help out local charities in order for the company to gain a good reputation for being socially responsible in the community could be acting:
Morally pursuant to Utilitarianism
Immorally pursuant to Kantian ethics
Legally if the employees are employees at-will and no crimes or torts are committed
All of the above.
Regarding the values of legality, morality, and social responsibility, which of the following is/are TRUE:
a. One can be sued for acting illegally.
b. One cannot be sued for “merely” acting immorally unless some law is also violated.
c. One cannot be sued for “merely” being socially irresponsible or non-responsive unless some law is also violated.
d. All of the above are true.
What did Kant mean by the “Categorical” part to his Categorical Imperative?
You must act legally, period, because the “law is the law.”
You and your company must act in a socially responsible manner if you and your company want to be placed in the “good corporate citizen” category.
You must act morally if the consequences are definitely good for you and your firm.
You must act morally based on what your reason informs you is the supreme ethical principle and the correct moral course of action regardless of consequences.
Danielle, the CEO of a large corporation treats the employees very well, as they have very good wages and benefits, open lines of communications, self-managed, and an organizational culture of inclusion and diversity. They are treated with dignity and respect. Danielle’s primary motivation for such good treatment is to have a happy and contented workforce, a more loyal and productive workforce, less turnover problems, and no union, since as the company does well, so will Danielle, as she will gain an enhanced reputation as a corporate executive and a greatly increased salary, compensation, and bonus “package.” Danielle can best be described as acting ethically how?
a. Morally pursuant to Ethical Egoism.
b. Morally pursuant to Corporate Social Responsibility.
c. Immorally since she has a selfish attitude.
d. Immorally since she probably has an anti-union animus in violation of the National Labor Relations Act.
Which of the following is NOT a correct statement?
Ignorance will always excuse a person from any responsibility for acting immorally.
The principle of Last Resort indicates when a person has a legal obligation to act.
Acting immorally can be argued as acting imprudently against one’s self-interest.
One’s role as a member of a profession may require a degree of socially responsible behavior.
Susan Sharpe, an amateur but very smart stock trader, by means of properly analyzing public sources of information and using her native intelligence and keen deductive powers correctly reasons that Big Oil Company has discovered oil in its holdings off Vietnam. In fact, the company has discovered oil, a lot of oil, but that information is kept highly confidential in the company. Susan buys shares of stock in Big Oil based on her deductions alone. She is correct in her deductions and as a result makes a great deal of money when the oil discovery is announced by Big Oil and its stock prices soar. Susan can best be described as acting:
a. Illegally since she is a misappropriator of insider information who wrongfully purchased stock based on the inside information.
b. Illegally since the level-playing-field theory is the prevailing legal theory of insider trading and obviously Susan had more and better information than the people she purchased the stock from.
c. Legally since she is a very smart, and perhaps a bit lucky, trader.
d. Immorally pursuant to Machiavellian ethics since she took advantage of someone who was ignorant and thus she committed a traditional bad act.