Case Analysis: Case Studies: Lehman Brothers, British Petroleum, Monsanto, Merck, Goodyear, Perdue

In the Week Three Discussion, you selected a current business problem from the following case categories:

  • Banking
  • Fuel and the Environment
  • GMOs
  • Factory Farming
  • Pharmaceuticals
  • Gender Discrimination

In this written assignment, you will present your work on the case analysis using selected components of an argumentative essay as described in Sections 9.1 and 9.2 of With Good Reason: A Guide to Critical Thinking (Hardy, Foster, & Zúñiga y Postigo, 2015). This written assignment will include a revised and polished version of your discussion work, the presentation and support of two premises, and an analysis of how your chosen ethical theory offers the best moral solution to the business problem in your case analysis.

Using the components of the argumentative essay located in Sections 9.1 and 9.2 of With Good Reason: A Guide to Critical Thinking (Hardy, Foster, & Zúñiga y Postigo (2015), your assignment should include the following:

An introduction. This is the “Problem” portion of the essay that is covered in Section 9.1: The Argumentative Essay (Hardy, Foster, & Zúñiga y Postigo, 2015). This should be an improved version of the introduction in your initial post, revised on the basis of your professor’s feedback and additional research. In this introduction you will need to (a) identify the specific issue or problem that you want to address and give an impartial presentation of the controversy, (b) articulate briefly the characteristics of the economic system that serves as the setting for the business, and (c) examine the laws that affect the operations of the business. The introduction should be one paragraph of around 200 words in length.


A thesis. Start a new paragraph with a precise and clear sentence in which you state your moral position with regard to the case that you presented in your first paragraph. This is known as stating your thesis. (See the “Thesis” passage in “The Argumentative Essay” in Hardy, Foster, & Zúñiga y Postigo, 2015). The thesis you state here should be an improved version of the thesis in your initial post in the discussion, revised on the basis of your professor’s feedback and your reading of “The Argumentative Essay” indicated above.

A thesis is only one sentence, so do not write a series of sentences, or a complex sentence with explanatory clauses (e.g., “because…” or “since…” or “according to Dr. Mary Expert, an economist with the Bureau of Labor statistics…”, or “a law that was ratified with 80% votes in favor…”). An example of a precise and clear thesis is this: “Factory farms are not morally justifiable” or, of course, the opposite point of view: “Factory farms are morally justifiable.” Keep in mind that your thesis in this assignment will be the basis for the argumentative essay of the Week Five written assignment, so take your time when formulating this thesis.


Ethical theory. In the same second paragraph as the thesis statement, identify the ethical theory that supports your moral position. You may choose from utilitarianism, duty ethics, or virtue ethics. Present the characteristics of the ethical theory in a broad sketch, and include citations and references in APA form. Then, apply your chosen ethical theory by explaining how it lends itself to the moral position that you are defending.


Two premises. Present at least two reasons in support of your thesis and these should be presented in the form of a claim. These are called premises. Articulate each premise in one clear and grammatically correct sentence. Review Section 9.1 of
With Good Reason: A Guide to Critical Thinking (Foster, Hardy, and Zúñiga y Postigo, 2015). Start a new paragraph for each.

In the rest of the paragraph, support your premise by presenting an analysis of how the ethical theory lends itself to the best solution. This analysis includes articulating the characteristics(s) of the economic system at work that support the claims in your premises. It also includes examining the effects of the law(s) at work that also support the claims in your premises.


Comparative analysis. In the final paragraph, analyze how this application lends itself to a solution that is superior to that offered by one of the ethical theories that you did not select. To do this, provide a clear statement describing the moral solution offered by this other theory. For example, if you chose utilitarianism to apply to your case, then you can choose from either virtue ethics or deontology for your comparative analysis. Explain in no more than three sentences what moral solution would result from the application of this other ethical theory. See the “Sample Case Analysis” in the required reading for an illustration of how this would look like. Finally, analyze the strengths of the moral solution presented by your chosen ethical theory in ways that demonstrate how it is superior to the moral solution offered by the other ethical theory.

Once you receive your assignment back from your professor, start working on revisions based on your professor’s feedback. This is the first step in preparing your Final Project and the details are presented on the Final Project’s prompt. You will benefit from starting your Final Project as soon as you receive your assignment back from your professor.

Requirements for Your Assignment:

  • Your assignment should be 1000 words in length, excluding the title page and reference page(s).
  • Your examination should be both thorough and succinct. This is a combination that demands time and thought, so give yourself sufficient time to draft and revise.
  • Your assignment should include citations, as well as a list of references. Both must be in APA form.
  • You should draw from the sources provided in your chosen case category in the discussion this week.
  • Also refer to Section 9.1: The Argumentative Essay and the introduction to Section 9.2: Strengthening the Argumentative Essay (intro only for the latter) from Hardy, J., Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015).
  • Your references should include at least two scholarly sources from your own research in the Ashford University Library, Google Scholar (this is not the same as Google), or the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. No Wikipedia articles and the like should be included in the references, nor employed to inform your paper. Also keep in mind that dictionary definitions are not references in the academic sense.Your assignment should be submitted no later than the end of Monday (11:59 pm, U.S. Mountain time).

Below is reading material/videos for any additional help needed for the paper:

Required Resources: Gender Discrimination (Goodyear)

Text

Articles

Professor’s response to the Discussion question, what was written for the discussion, is below:
The Below is the questions asked for the discussion paper.

This discussion assignment requires you to submit at least four posts: an initial post, two reply posts to fellow students in threads other than your own, and a revised post.

Prepare Icon

Prepare: In your first post in this discussion, you will identify and apply one ethical theory of your choosing to a current problem in business, also of your choosing. Start by reviewing your notes on the Week One course material and your completed work for Week One. Then, choose one of the three ethical theories—i.e., utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics—on the basis of your thoughtfully considered preference in general and independent of the business problem that you will select here. Keep in mind that you will employ this ethical theory for supporting your position not only for this discussion, but also for this week’s assignment and the Final Project.

To prepare for your selection of the current problem in business, look at the list of required articles and multimedia which are divided in the six case-categories as follows:

  • Banking (Lehman Brothers)
  • Environment (BP)
  • GMOs (Monsanto)
  • Pharmaceuticals (Merck)
  • Gender Discrimination (Goodyear)
  • Factory Farms (Perdue)

Choose the case-category that you find the most interesting and note that each category also corresponds to one particular case. Please choose carefully because your choice for this discussion will establish the case that will be central to your argumentative essay this week as well as your Final Project in Week Five. It is recommended that you leaf through all the required resources indicated for the possible case-categories that you identify as possible contenders before making your final choice.

Reflect Icon

Reflect: Once you have selected your ethical theory and your case category, articulate the characteristics of the economic system (or combination of both systems) that serves as the setting for the case presented in the case category sources. Given this context, examine how the nation’s laws affect the operations of the business.

Next, identify the characteristics of your chosen ethical theory and its notion of the moral good. For the latter, you will need to review again the PowerPoint that was introduced in Week One, which is also listed in this week’s Required Resources and it is titled The Moral Good in Three Traditional Ethical Theories. Then, think how you would apply the ethical theory to the specific problem presented in the case category sources.

Write Icon

Write: Start your post by (a) identifying the issue or problem that you want to address in the case that you have selected and providing an impartial presentation of the controversy, (b) articulating briefly the characteristics of the economic system that serves as the setting, and (c) examining the laws that affect the operations of the business.

The following illustration should help. Consider, for example, the case of Uber that we examined in Week Two. If the California decision establishes a precedent for similar claims, then Uber would have to do business as an employer and not merely as a service that pairs consumers with ride sharing services by means of a unique phone app. Accordingly, the law would require Uber to reimburse its drivers for certain costs and perhaps offer benefits. Take in consideration, then, the legal setting for the case that you have chosen. Does the case take place in the United States or another country? What are the laws that are relevant to the problem under examination? Keep in mind that all laws are constraints on our actions, whether those by individuals or corporations. The relevant laws, then, will be (a) any laws that present not only a constraint on the company’s operations, (b) any laws that are being violated by the corporation, or (c) any laws that unfairly limit the goods and services that can be offered to and are demanded by consumers.

In a second paragraph, formulate a sentence that presents the moral position that you want to defend in regard to the issue or problem introduced in the previous paragraph.

In the same paragraph, present the ethical theory that you choose to employ. Your choices are utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics, and the necessary material is included in the required readings and media. Make sure to identify the characteristics of the ethical theory, and include in-text citations and full references in APA form at the end of the post. Once you have done this, apply the ethical theory to your selected case by explaining how it lends itself to the moral position that you are defending.

Revise: Read the feedback provided by your professor to your initial post, either directly to you or to your fellow students. Use this as an opportunity to learn from your professor, especially with regard to the best ways to apply the course material and your research to your analysis. On the basis of what you have learned in this process, post a revision of your initial post that applies the additional knowledge that you have gained.

Remember that your grade depends on the quality of your initial and revised responses, not just on the submission of an attempt at improvement. It is thus to your advantage to post the best initial post you can and then to also improve that best effort as much as you can through revision. Taking this process seriously will help you develop the skills you need to do well on the final project.

Requirements for Your Initial Post:

  • Your initial post should be at least 400 words in length and have citations and references in APA notation. It should address the prompt in its entirety. This means that you should not split your response to the prompt in multiple posts. Your examination should be both thorough and succinct. This is a combination that demands time and thought, so give yourself sufficient time to draft and revise.
  • Please be advised that until you post, you will not see what your fellow students are posting. Once you submit your post, you will be able to view the posts from your other classmates. You can then proceed to reply to at least two different threads based on the required material for this discussion.
  • Your list of references for your initial post should include the videos and the other required reading material pertaining to your chosen subject heading, as well as the ethics, economic, and law components of Weeks One and Two, the Instructor Guidance, and any other announcements presented to you by your professor. In addition, your references should include any other sources that you consult to inform yourself about your chosen case category (but not Wikipedia or similar sources).
  • Your initial post for this discussion should be submitted no later than the end of Thursday (11:59 pm, U.S. Mountain time).

Requirements for Replies to Other Threads:

  • At least two of the four posts required should be in the form of replies to fellow classmates in threads other than your own.
  • Each of your replies should be at least 200 words and informed by the required course material. As such, the replies must have citations and references in APA notation. Your list of references for each reply should include all of the course material that has informed your reply, in addition to any research that you have obtained on your own.
  • Your replies should focus on the specific examination presented by your fellow student and these should include an examination of whether or not the characteristics of the ethical theory and/or economic system were identified well, and whether or not their application and analysis were also carried out successfully. Providing such an examination is not an attack on your fellow student but an attempt to work together with your fellow student toward the better understanding of the ethical theories employed, as well as their application.

Requirements for Revising your Initial Post:

  • Submit a revision of your initial post by either replying to your own post, or to the feedback provided to you by your professor.
  • There is no minimum word requirement for your revised initial post. But you should always explain the reasons for revising your post so that it is clear what you are doing. If you are revising only a few words, or an ethical theory, you should avoidsubmitting a post with vague language such as: “another ethical theory works better here” or “I now understand how to do the analysis.” It is important to recognize that no one can read your mind so you need to provide the setting for your revision (Why? What prompted it? What course material informed you?).
  • Your revised initial post is your chance to correct any oversights or errors in your initial post, or show your improved understanding of the material and its applications to the case at hand. You may, for example, come to the realization that another ethical theory is better than the one that you initially chose. Accordingly, your revision should indicate that you chose another ethical theory and an explanation why you find the replacement more suitable. You may also find the need to revise any relevant portions of your analysis. Or, you might have realized that your conclusion did not take into account important factors necessary for your evaluation of the situation.
  • You should maximize the improvement of your initial post by employing your professor’s feedback as a guide. Keep in mind that you may not always receive direct feedback from your professor. But your professor will have submitted feedback in the discussion to other posts. So read your professor’s feedback whether it is addressed to you directly or to other fellow students. This will give you much to think about and apply to your own post.
  • If your professor or a fellow classmate responds to your revised initial post, and on this basis, you find good reason to submit yet another revision, then by all means do so. The more you improve your initial post, the more you will benefit both in terms of your learning and most likely your grade.

The Below is the paper written and the professors response off of the above discussion question:



Goodyear Co. and Deontological Theory





Dustin Hudson

PHI445: Personal & Organizational Ethics

Ricci Rizzo

Ashford University

March 2nd, 2017


Goodyear Co. and Deontological Theory

Since the United States advocates for similar ethics, Goodyear should have conducted its business not only as mere employers but embracers of gender equity in employee recruitment, pay, and (if unavoidable) firing. The federal laws outlaws any discrimination grounded on gender in various settings when it comes to organizations’ handling of human resource, which holds in each business operating in any state. The 1964 Civil Right Acts forbids employment discrimination or favoritism on the basis of religion, sex, national origin, and color. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act discourages applicant’s discrimination on whatever basis: sex, color, origin, marital status, or religion (Hovenkamp, 2001). Similarly, the 1963 Equal Pay Act gives a provision that employers should always pay their workers equally/fairly for equal tasks, irrespective of their gender. All these laws should hold for any enterprise that operates within the United States of America, besides the state’s specific laws. Fair handling of employees by their employers and organizations, thus, remains the optimal priority of the federal system. Goodyear, well-known as Goodyear Tire and Rubber Corporation (James, 2008) operating in New York should have embraced these laws or made them its priority if ‘the moral right’ was its governing operational trait. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. compromised these laws as it proved to embrace sex discrimination in its human resource handling.

Goodyear Company failed in ethically, as it failed to embrace the federal laws that advocates for gender equity and fairness in considering applicants, hiring staff, and paying workers because it hounded female staffs out of offices. Deontology theory gives emphasis to the wrongness or the rightness the actions as opposed to the consequences or importance of the action (Cropanzano, Goldman, & Folger, 2013). Considering this, it’s crystal clear, that Goodyear Company did not conform to the business moral norm within its operational setting as it routinely harassed Luci Richards and Christie Hood – two ladies who were delivering their services as maintenance technicians for Goodyear Company in Northport Mall location (James, 2008). The reports have it that, Daryll Grayson, the company’s manager made the working environment coercive for the duo ladies among other females so that they quit, and replace them with males. Truly, this violates the First Kantian Imperative, as it stipulates that Grayson should have acted in a manner that his action could qualify to be universal. His action can never be a universal law given that it is against the business laws, which preach gender fairness. If any other company did the same, then the gender laws will be fully broken in the employment sector. Additionally, while Deontology recommends that people should always act with humanity while treating others, as means as well as ends to such means (Zúñiga & Postigo, 2015), Goodyear Co. didn’t act per this maxim since it fired woman unfairly at the same time violating their human rights as drafted in the federal law. Therefore, considering purely the Goodyear’s actions, it is clear they were totally wrong and far from being right.




References

Cropanzano, R., Goldman, B., & Folger, R. (2013). Deontic justice: The role of moral principles in workplace fairness. Journal of organizational behavior, 24(8), 1019-1024.

Hovenkamp, H. (2001). Enterprise and American law, 1836-1937. Cambridge (Mass.)/London

James, B (2008). Goodyear Faces Sex Discrimination Suit

Zúñiga, Y, & Postigo, G. (2015). The moral good in three traditional ethical theories [PowerPoint Slides]

Professors response:

You had a thorough explanation of the laws that address gender discrimination, and their applicability to the Goodyear case. You needed to present the facts of the case in the first section, along with information on the economic system the company operated in. You should then describe how the economic system affected the development of the unethical behavior.

Your moral position was clear, and you showed how the Deontology Theory supports your position. You clearly explained the specific characteristics of the theory.

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 15% Discount! Use Code "FIRST15"