Why Do Good Managers Sometimes Make Bad Ethical Choices - Annotated Bibliography Example

Why do good managers sometimes make bad ethical choices? By: Incorporating ethics and values into business decisions making have become increasingly essential to business people, government, universities and the public in general. Given costs of unethical behavior in business are rising and high, possibly due to the new government regulation. The question hence becomes how can usually; intelligent, compassionate human beings and honest act in ways that are duplicitous, dishonest, and wrongheaded callously? Unethical behavior is found in all places, and ambitious top managers facing murky borderlands of right and wrong sometimes they cross over the line. Managers decisions ruin individual’s lives and give business as a whole a bad reputation. But managers can establish useful principles to ensure their corporations survival. Practical solutions exist to the rationalizations that provide a way to unethical behavior. Emphasis added. De Cremer, D., D. Mayer, and M. Schminke.2010. `On understanding ethical behavior and decision making: A behavioral business ethics approach, Business Ethics Quarterly, 20, pp. 1-6. In this article, the authors explore ethical decision evaluating whether practices exercised by managers, and organizations as a whole may be considered morally acceptable. From their evaluative perspective, it is clear that the contemporary business ethical failures are simply not acceptable particularly at the top management. Ever more so, business practices require changing and this change is never easy even for those good managers. According to the article for managers, to make these changes happen it requires increasing understanding of why people within organizations involve in unethical behavior and decision-making (De Cremer et al., 2010 p., 24). The article is negative in many aspects as it fails to give the exact bad ethical choices that the so called the ‘Good managers make’ make in their daily business operations. For instance, it sets out to demonize many precepts of top corporate managers and the ethical problems and challenges without offering demonstrable alternatives. The usefulness of this article may be in providing new theories and models of ethical behavior and the attempts “Good managers” do to make changes in their organization to avoid making wrong decisions. Through the article there is clear understanding of business ethics and it can be thought of in several different lights, and part of the reason that business ethics has become such a contemporary issue and since it cannot be defined precisely.It adds to understanding that most “Good managers” believe that in order to reach the minimum ethical business standards, a business must be honest and not directly infringe on the fundamental rights that the society holds as inalienable individual rights. This, however, does not exhaust the explanation of business ethics that many believe in. Kanter, R M 2011, ‘How Great Companies Think Differently’, Harvard Business Review, November, pp. 66-78. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss is an authoritative author with vast understanding of the business ethics. The author has written a lot of publications concerning good business management and what separates companies in profitability basing on individual managers performance (Kanter, 2011 p., 67). Specifically, this article looks at corporate leaders and how they have considered themselves performers and have long subscribed to the belief that the primary purpose of business is to make money. That narrow view, deeply entrenched in the American capitalist system, casts the actions of most corporations, constraining them to concentrate on maximizing short-term gains and returns to shareholders at the cost of worker safety and health, and society in general. In evaluation, the article by professor Kanter leads itself to criticism and may be considered inefficient in giving the real contemporary ethical issues that real managers struggle to accomplish. However, generalization and merging of these critical questions limit the literature in this context This article is relevant in many ways; professor Kanter argues that a very different logic notifies the practices of high- performing and sustainable organizations: An institutional logic and that is essential in this paper. It also helps understand the errors the so-called good managers make and that they make companies believe that they are money making machines; they are a never vehicle for advancing societal goals. Good managers can only be considered good when they give more than just financial gains; they also need to build enduring institutions. Kolk A, van Tulder R. 2010. International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review 19: 119–125. This article gives the renewed interest in new problems facing business environments and most successful managers. Through the article, mistake managers make in confusing operational effectiveness with business strategy (Kolk & Tulder 2010 p., 119-125). Operational efficiency in the organization is, in essence, extending best standards.it is evident that good operations can propel performance, but the trouble with that is its difficult to sustain. The article provides a real challenge of management as doing these things together at the same time. Management has to keep up with ideal practices while solidifying, clarifying and increase your unique positions. Supervisors regularly have a tendency to let incremental upgrades in operations swarm out the bigger method of building an individual business that will hold its preference. To sidestep this issue, managers must remember the focused methodology at all times. Consistently, every gathering, each choice, must be precise. Managers need to affirm whether this is an operational best practice or is this something that is enhancing my vital qualification. Despite the loopholes that the article provides and inadequacy in link why do good managers sometimes make bad ethical choices, it is important to the study as it adds to the literature. In this article is essential as it provides a review mind games that managers may play when they face difficult decisions making and absence of both a professional or ethical approach to management and a high value system. These managers tend to react to circumstances on a situational basis. The article articulate the understanding of various ethical issues that top quality managers face in their daily business operations and instances they fail to do as expected. Porter ME & Kramer MR. 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review 89(1–2): 62–77. The article examines shared value, and states, is not about personal values. Nor is it about "imparting" the worth officially made by the troughs a redistribution approach. Rather, it is about extending the aggregate pool of financial and social quality (Porter & Kramer, 2011 p., 62-77). The article claims that a decent case of this distinction in point of view is a reasonable exchange development in acquiring. Reasonable exchange expects to expand the extent of income that goes to poor ranchers by paying them higher costs for the same products. Despite the notion that this could be a respectable assessment, reasonable exchange is about redistribution instead of growing the general measure of quality made. This according to the article is where the so called good managers go wrong as they refocus their energy elsewhere and fail to consider other considerations. However, the article doesn’t contain adequate empirical research and as such heavily relies on literature and subjective approach. This forms basis of the claims of the article and this limits its reliability in giving clear details. Nevertheless the journal provides a clear comprehension manager priorities and neglect of business morals. Most managers want to be liked. Notwithstanding, when this yearning to be liked overwhelms business objectivity, moral failures can happen. Such an overriding yearning to be loved can at last antagonistically influence the morals of individuals in the association and along these lines can diminish the associations main concern. Such concerns pointed out in the article are important in developing the topic. Slavitt & Evan. 2013.Analysis of Organization Ethics: Do They Exist? How Can We Think about Them? Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, Vol. 5 The article moves away from mere aspects of business ethics and the errors top quality managers and proposes a new framework that differentiates the several aspects of business organization and clarifies how ethical questions should be framed for business and how to respond to those questions (Slavitt & Evan. 2013 p., 144). This Article surveys the different managerial models that have as of now been proposed and clarifies why those models are inadmissible, concentrating especially on the endeavors to expressive a hierarchical substitute for an individual plan. The article invests a long while characterizing its terms, and this gives a decent establishing to the models manufactured by Slavitt Evan. Twin-hub grids are the easiest of managerial models to comprehend and most favored by managers and Slavitt Evan does not frustrate - his presentation of administrators part and business favors allowed from either individual or authoritative assets indicates in an agreeable manner which activities are considered ethical and which are most certainly not. The article is important in many ways in contribution. The utility of this article lies in its inventiveness of looking at the reasons why great managers here and there settle on wrong ethical decisions the individual level of the organization. Regardless of this, the ethical hypothesis utilized as a part of this article is by all accounts restricted to social hypothesis and its varieties and subsidiaries; maybe a more extensive regulating point of view may have brought about more activities being distinguished and being esteemed ethical or not. This forms basis and rich literature in understanding the reasons why do good managers sometimes make bad ethical decisions. Ahmadi, A.,2011. Factors influencing ethical perceptions and attitudes of managers. African Journal of Business Management. The article adds to the rich knowledge that ethics as a regulator of individual relations always has a significant essential. The article adds to the fact that in order to achieve ethical behavior criteria, and overriding ethical principles in workers behaviors, effective factors on their ethical behaviors, specifically top managers in organizations, should be identified. In this article, effects of demographic variables (such as gender, age and education) and existence of code of ethics in business, on ethical attitudes and perceptions of Industrial Development and Renovation Organization of Iran (IDRO ) and its affiliated firms were examined. In the article, 16 hypotheses were constructed. However, the article lacks a link between the effective management and the rewards from the ethical managers. It also contains inadequate empirical research and as such heavily relies on literature and subjective approach. This forms basis of the claims of the article in giving reason and this limits the article reliability in giving clear details The relevance of the article is seen in the way it tries to give a brief discussion of various views regarding business ethics including the link to key factors of concern like instrumentalism, stakeholder theory, and stockholder theory. And as such the author Ahmadi, help focus on some probable reasons why good managers make unethical choices and how “good managers” can meet the challenge of making ethical business decisions in adverse conditions. References De Cremer, D., D. Mayer, and M. Schminke.2010. `On understanding ethical behavior and decision making: A behavioral business ethics approach, Business Ethics Quarterly, 20, pp. 1-6. Retrieved from: http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/dmmayer/Published%20Articles/De%20Cremer,%20Mayer,%20&%20Schminke.pdf Kanter, R M 2011, ‘How Great Companies Think Differently’, Harvard Business Review, November, pp. 66-78. Retrieved from: https://www.zotero.org/groups/whoweam2012development/items/itemKey/GUC78IKG Kolk A, van Tulder R. 2010. International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review 19: 119–125. Retrieved from: https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/iburev/v19y2010i2p119-125.html Porter ME & Kramer MR. 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review 89(1–2): 62–77. Retrieved from: http://pure.rhul.ac.uk/portal/files/18522570/CONTESTING_THE_VALUE_OF_THE_SHARED_VALUE_CONCEPT_CMR_submitted_version_for_circulation.pdf Ahmadi, A.,2011. Factors influencing ethical perceptions and attitudes of managers. African Journal of Business Management. Retrieved from: http://academicjournals.org/journal/AJBM/article-abstract/A7CCAF115448 Slavitt & Evan. 2013.Analysis of Organization Ethics: Do They Exist? How Can We Think about Them? Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, Vol. 5 Retrieved from: https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-3156198551/analysis-of-organization-ethics-do-they-exist-how Read More