FINAL PROJECT
BY
COURAGE OSAZUWA
(170201024)
DEPARTMENT: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
COURSE TITLE: BUSINESS ETHICS
COURSE CODE: MGMT 303
COURSE LECTURER: HUSEYIN KARSILI
SEMESTER: SPRING 2020
Question 1: why aren’t some companies held accountable for
environmental pollution?
All over the world, local and international companies and businesses pollute
the environment in one way or another. Pollution (as is generally known) is the
process of making land, water, air or other parts of the environment dirty and
not safe or suitable to use. This act can be made possible by way of
contaminating the natural environment, but the contaminant doesn't need to
be tangible.
Substances and processes such as light, temperature and sound can be
considered as pollutants when introduced artificially into an environment.
Some of these companies do not take responsibility for their actions and they
are not held accountable by the appropriate authorities. Most of these
companies do not think about the consequences when they pollute the
environment because they can afford to pay the fine or they can get away with
it.
Some researchers argue that economic globalization has created significant
governance gap, hence, they are not held accountable because there are no
enforceable environmental global rules governing global economic plyers. Even
in their local places of business operation, some do have not have
environmental law biding them, it is therefore not easy for them to be held
accountable. Also, some states and their governments are more concerned with
the taxes and fines these companies pay rather than the impact of the
pollution they cause on the general environment. Some scholars have also
argued that in some cases, the people affected by these forms of pollution do
not speak up; they do not publicly relate the impact of the pollution on the
environment to the appropriate authorities, hence, fair accountability cannot
be guaranteed. On this note, it is important to say that accountability on
environmental pollution and its challenges MUST be centered on individuals
and persons with direct impact and not the government and policy makers
because they do not feel this hazard like the affected people. This also makes it
easy to hold the defaulting companies accountable.
Question 2: what role do morale leaders play in the business sector?
The issue of leadership is closely related to morals; this is because it involves
attaching values to human behavior for the achievement of a mission, vision,
aims and objectives of the business or organization. Leadership has one of the
strongest influences on the moral makeup of any organization. Organizations
are impacted by mostly by their leaders. Thus, it is an inherent responsibility
for leaders in a company to set a good example for all employees on how to act
morally and responsibly.
Good leadership refers not only to competence, but to morals that transform
organizations and people’s lives. Business leaders have long recognized that
they play a key role in promoting moral behaviors in their businesses. If
leaders are morally responsible, they can ensure that moral practices are
carried out throughout the business. Moral leaders must focus on how leaders
leverage their power in the decisions they make, actions they engage in and
ways they influence others. Leaders are known for influencing their followers in
performing actions, complete tasks, and behave in certain manners.
Effective moral and ethical leaders also influence the processes of activities in
the workplace, bring about change in attitudes and values, and amplify
empowerment and self-efficacy of their followers, as they foster the
internalization of corporate vision. Some of the roles they play as moral leaders
include:
i. They set the ethical tone that pervades the entire organization. If
the leader lacks moral conduct or teaches immoral practices in the
workplace, the employees and followers may have to continue in
that step and order.
ii. They lead by example. Moral is passed through words and acts. It
follows that words are enough to control only when they are
backed up by action. The actions that are considered most are
those actions that come from the people at the top management
level.
iii. They motivate others. The focus of moral leaders is primarily
concerned with preventing workers and employees from engaging
in any form of misconduct.
Question 3: can organizations whose employees experience a heavy
workload be made to pay them higher salaries?
Yes. The organizations whose employees experience a heavy workload can be
made to pay more; however, this must arise as a result of interference from an
external source or a negotiation, meeting, discussion and dialogue between the
affected employees and the organization. The organization or business might
also consider paying more for the heavy workload in other to retain them and
keep such employees from looking elsewhere.
In the case of holding meeting or discussion, the employees who experience
heavy workload will openly express their concerns and demands to the
management of the organization; in return, the management will state their
plan and reward mechanism towards the affected employees. Although, these
payments may not be out rightly about cash or cash payments, it is important
to that the organization may have other forms of payment plan, reward and
compensation plans that will also be satisfactory to the affected employees. It
may come in the form of vacation, holiday, tax cut, official property (car,
house), insurance and any forms of support.
The organization may also undertake some responsibility to ensure the
employee welfare provided it is satisfactory to both the affected employees and
the organization represented by the management. The overall benefit of this
payment increase is that the employee is encouraged to do more of his work
without any grudges because he already knows that there will be reward or
appreciation for it. It will also encourage other employees to do an extra
workload. The employees will not also have any need to look elsewhere for
better employment negotiation because the payments and benefits he/she is
getting are satisfactory already. It is however important to note that what may
seem as heavy workload to may be the job description of an employee in
another organization, hence, extensive discussion should be engaged to decide
the best way forward.
Question 4: Do any promise count if no contract has been signed?
Promises made without appropriately signing any contract do not really count
in so many cases. Although when an offer has been made by one party and the
other party relies on that promise in such a way that it causes harm or damage
then it is enforceable and therefore can count. It is important to note that in
most cases, promises should be taken seriously depending on how moral and
ethical the party making the promise is.
An ethical employer can make promise to an employee without signing any
contract; yet, such employer can keep to his words even if it may not be
enforceable by law. It is not the same with an unethical employer, the reverse
becomes the case. In today’s business world, every employer should be careful
when promises are made especially when there are no contracts signed
between the business and the person the promise is made to. There may be
some form of misunderstanding because there is no contract to explain the role
each party will play in the promise being made. This misunderstanding can
also arise because some of these promises made can have some conditions
attached to it; these conditions may not be made noticeable to the employee in
the first instance until the promise is due to take place.
Promises are usually from a business owner, organization manager or employer
to an employee mostly to motivate the employee towards a better work
environment attitude. Conclusively, promises do not count if there is no duly
signed contract, mainly because it usually comes as goodwill from an employer
as a result of good performance when an employee has done an impressing
performance and therefore may not be enforceable. However, business
managers and employers should try their best to keep to promises made to
employees with or without any signed contract.
Question 5: Do companies employing solely family members, relatives or
representatives of a certain race hire fairly?
No. companies that employ solely family members, relatives or representatives
of a certain race do not hire fairly. In general terms, it is called NEPOTISM. It
is the act of giving more employment preferences to family and friends over
other people even when the family and friends do no not have the required
skills and know-how to do the said job.
There is no fairness in this type of job employment; this is because they give
much opportunity to underserving employees (family, friends and a certain
race) while there are employees from other background, race and skills that do
not have these opportunities even though they would have been better as
employees. Some of these businesses, organizations and companies that hire
their own people may have their reasons for such practice. Although on a
general note, it does not do much good to the general public and the economy
at large, this is because the business resources and benefits are shared
between a particular set of people.
An advantage of this kind of practice is that For instance, if the employee
(family, friend, relative or certain race) has been groomed in the family
business, then the person may bring valuable social and intellectual capital to
the position he/she has been employed to. From a general point of view, there
is no legally known prohibition against nepotism, yet it is not a good practice
as it creates inequality and employment bias in its own way. In most cases,
this practice occurs mainly in private businesses and companies rather than in
public establishments. The freedom of the top management team in a private
company is not as controlled as that of the public establishments; hence
nepotism thrives very well in such private companies. Because it is not a fair
act and practice, we must all condemn it in it’s totally and employ people based
on merit and ability to do what is required of them.
