Essays on Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics Coursework

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics" is a good example of business coursework. Businesses are expected to be responsible to society while undertaking their activities. They are required to undertake their activities ethically by having a concern to their employees and to the public. According to Moir (2001, p. 17), a business can only contribute to society fully if its operations are efficient profitable and socially responsible. Corporate social responsibility requires the management of a business to lay down policies formulate decisions and follow processes that are beyond the legal requirements while undertaking its operations.

This means that the business should be concerned about issues beyond its economic, legal and technical requirements. This is because of the fact that businesses rely on society in order for them to excel. This essay will discuss the utilitarian ethical theory and also the effectiveness of codes of ethics in instilling ethical behavior in an organization. Furthermore, the paper will discuss the notion that companies are formed to make profits and not to be socially responsible.   2.0 Utilitarianism theory is the most useful ethical theory to guide company decisions 2.1 Ethical theories of decision making According to Fernando (2010, p. 10.1), there are several theories that guide companies in making decisions.

The theories provide the companies with professional standards benchmarks through which they can develop their decisions. Companies can utilize these theories in order to provide them with a model framework of ethical decision making. 2.11The utilitarian theory The utilitarian theory is concerned with ensuring that consequences and courses of actions benefit the greatest number of individuals without considering who those people are (Bibb 2010, p. 76).

The concept behind this theory is that actions are viewed to be moral based on their outcome. The theory requires the decision-maker not to favor family or friends when making decisions but to consider the interest of everybody Dion (2012, p. 9) emphasizes that the utilitarian theory emphasizes on the consequences of the actions. 2.12 Rights theory This theory stresses on individual rights. According to this theory, ethical decisions should protect the moral and legal rights that are entitled to an individual (Fernando 2010, p. 10.2). Individual rights include privacy, free consent and freedom of speech.

These rights are morally justifiable because they are originated from the nature of individuals belonging in a community. This theory requires companies to make decisions by appropriately respecting the rights of others. 2.13 Justice theories The theory asserts that companies should be guided by equity, fairness and justice while arriving at their decisions. The theory requires all human beings to be treated equally. According to Coombs and Holladay (2011, p. 184), the theory examines the perception of fairness about decisions being made by a company. 2.14 The virtue approach This theory holds that decisions should be consistent with certain acceptable moral virtues (Fernando 2010, p.

10.3). The theory holds the assumption that what is considered moral in a given social setting is not only what is considered normally approved as moral. According to this theory, the company is required to evaluate various options before making a decision. 2.15 The common Good Approach Ethical decision making requires companies to have compassion and respect for others and particularly to the vulnerable members of the society. Weiss (2009, p. 115) argues that the common good theory requires the management of a company to take into consideration the intended as well as the actual effects of their decisions.

The company is expected to make decisions that share a common vision with the society and thus they benefit all members and they respect the differences that exist between individuals.


Bacher, C 2007, Corporate Social Responsibility, Grin Verge, Norderstedt

Bibb, S 2010, The Right Thing, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex.

Carroll, A & Buchholtz, A 2008, Business and Society, South-Western Cengage Learning,


Coombs, W & Holladay, S 2011, Managing Corporate Social Responsibility, John Wiley &

Sons, West Sussex.

Condrey, S 2010, Handbook of Human Resource Management, John Wiley & Sons, West


David, B 2005, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’, Stanford School of Business, vol. 9, no. 6,

pp. 1-32.

Dion, M 2012, ‘Are ethical theories relevant for ethical leadership?’, Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 4-24.

Embse, T, Desai, M & Desai, S,’ How well are corporate ethics codes and policies applied

in the trenches?: Key factors and conditions’, Information Management and Computer

Security, vol.12, no. 2, pp.146-153.

Fernando, A 2010, Business Ethics and Corporate Governance, Darling Kindersley, New-Delhi.

McDaniel, C 2004, Organizational Ethics, Ashgape Publishing, Burlington.

Moir, L 2001, ‘What do we mean by corporate social responsibility?’ Corporate Governance,

Vol.1, no. 2, pp 16-22.

Murray , R, Lindsay, L & Irvine, V 1996,I‘nstilling Ethical Behavior in Organizations: A

Survey of Canadian Companies’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 393-407.

Natale, S & Fenton, M 1997, Business Education and Training, University Press of America,


Pratt, J 2010, Long Term Care: Managing Across Continuum, Jones and Bartlett Publishers,


Pimentel, R, Kuntz, J & Elenkov, D 2010, ‘Ethical decision-making: an integrative model for

business practice’, European Business Review, Vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 359 – 376.

Spicer, C 1997, Organizational Public Relations, Lawrence Eribaum Associates Publishers,


Weiss, J 2009, Business Ethics, South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us