A634.5.4.RB - Is Marketing Evil?

The title of this blog “is Marketing Evil?” this is a broad topic and makes you ask the question, is marketing really evil? Overall, I don’t believe marketing is evil, but there some instances where marketing has been use for evil, like the holocaust campaigns, or communist propaganda. In 2011, Marlboro a tobacco company ran a campaign with the slogan: A maybe never reached the top, don’t be a maybe. This was controversial because it presumes that Marlboro was trying to persuade the young to smoke, which goes against the tobacco company ethics (Boseley, 2014). So why do companies think its ok to market these types of advertisements? Consider this, the Centers for Disease Control found that Americans bought over eight billion packs of cigarettes in 2014 and spent nearly 50 billion dollars on liquor, beer and wine in 2014. Furthermore, the Daily Mail reports that Americans spend on average 1,200 dollars per year on fast food (Revesencio, 2015). The demands of such commodities and the competition might be why companies are trying different marketing approaches. El Sayed and El Ghazaly (n.d.) suggest that “marketers try their best to attract and keep satisfied, the customer” (n. p.).  However, this doesn’t excuse unethical approaches. The Washington Post reports that nine out of 10 pharmaceutical companies now spend more on marketing than on research and development (Revesencio, 2015). If companies are investing in their marketing strategy, they must consider how their image is perceived. The American Marketing Association has 6 ethical values that marketers are expected to uphold: (Anastasia, 2015).

1. Honesty – Be forthright in dealings and offer value and integrity.

2. Responsibility – Accept consequences of marketing practices and serve the needs of customers of all types, while being good stewards of the environment.

3. Fairness – Balance buyer needs and seller interest fairly, and avoid manipulation in all forms while protecting the information of the consumers.

4. Respect – Acknowledge basic human dignity of all the people involved through efforts to communicate, understand and meet needs and appreciate contributions of others.

5. Transparency – Create a spirit of openness in the practice of marketing through communication, constructive criticism, action, and disclosure.

6. Citizenship – Fulfill all legal, economic, philanthropic and societal responsibilities to all stakeholders as well as giveback to the community and protect the ecological environment.

These ethical values are guidelines that companies can follow, but it’s up to the company to follow their own ethical values. Companies need to balance the need to win with being ethical. This means that each organization has to try innovative ways to reach the consumer while being ethical. Take for example, Victoria Secret perfect body campaign. Many people thought this was unethical, because it didn’t include all women from all types. Victoria Secret reevaluated the strategy to fit in the need of the consumer and made bad marketing campaign into a positive one by being ethical. No longer can companies silent the consumers. With the advances of technology and social media, the people have a stronger voice against unethical behavior. This is a driving force in the need for companies to be ethical in their marketing strategy. Technology has made marketing easier for organizations. By tracking your shopping habits and web searches, companies are marketing to individuals. Is this unethical if being done without your consent?  In my opinion this is unethical if they don’t make it apparent of the tracking. Most companies will tell you or have it in their sites that they are collecting data to enhance your shopping experience, like amazon suggest items base on you search history.

As a leader, we must properly use our resources to enhance the company to consumer experience. One way to do this is by being truthful, ethical and fair when implementing marketing strategies. It takes days or even months to develop a positive customer relationship, but it takes a bad marketing strategy to lose their trust. The change start from the top to the bottom and leaders need to lead the way toward more ethical and morally decision and marketing strategies.

Anastasia. (2015). Social Responsibility & Ethics in Marketing. Retrieved April 23, 2016, from https://www.cleverism.com/social-responsibility-ethics-marketing/

 

Boseley, S. (2014). Marlboro marketing campaign aimed at young people, anti-tobacco report says. Retrieved April 23, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/12/marlboro-marketing-campaign-aimed-young-people-cigarettes-report

 

El Sayed, H., & El Ghazaly, I. (n.d.). Ethics-Based Marketing: Ethical Articles. Retrieved from http://www.ethicsbasedmarketing.net/2.html

Revesencio, J. (2015). 4 Examples of Dubious Marketing Ethics. Retrieved April 23, 2016, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonha-revesencio/4-examples-of-dubious-marketing-ethics_b_7292370.html

 

 

 

 

 

A634.4.4.RB - Is Affirmative Action Ethical?

In the 1960’s, the Civil Rights Movement intended to provide equal opportunities for members of minority groups and women in education and employment as a result affirmative action was born (Affirmative Action | Overview, 2014). Affirmative action is a policy, which allows organization and state institutions to allow then recruiting and diversifying their organization. Affirmative action itself has been defined as "any measure, beyond simple termination of a discriminatory practice, adopted to correct or compensate for past or present discrimination or to prevent discrimination from recurring in the future."(Affirmative Action, 2016). According to LaFollette (2007), affirmative action is the practice of giving special consideration to minorities and women in hiring and school placement. It has the means of taking positive steps to end discrimination, to prevent its recurrence, and to create new opportunities that were previously denied minorities and women (Affirmative Action, 2016). The intention is to undercut racist habits, and corral racist institutions (LaFollette, 2007). LaFollete describe it as a reasonable and effective way to do both” A great example is the 2008 case of Fisher v. University of Texas, where a white student felt discriminated against because she didn’t get in to the school where her minority friends with not so good grades got in (Raphel, 2015). This case brought some light on how universities utilize the affirmative action program; universities may use race as part of a holistic admissions program where it cannot otherwise achieve diversity (Raphel, 2015). In the end the court ruled on the side of the University.

In my personal opinion, I don’t believe affirmative action is fair. The reason is because of the ability to retain the integrity of the policy. Schools and even organizations are being selective of applicants in order to ensure there is a balance of diversity within the organization. I don’t believe affirmative action is in keep with today’s demands. Every single person should have the same opportunity no matter the race or color. This rule is not being used in many states already. For example in the case of Hopwood v. Texas in 1996, the Fifth Circuit dismissed Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, ruling that a university's interest in a diverse student body was never compelling, and that race could no longer be used as one among several factors in admissions decisions in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi (Affirmative Action, 2016). I think as a culture we need to change, it’s not about the race or color of a person, but how qualify the person is.

Reference

Affirmative Action. (2016). Retrieved April 17, 2016, from http://www.civilrights.org/resources/civilrights101/affirmaction.html

 

Affirmative Action | Overview. (2014). Retrieved April 13, 2016, from http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/affirmative-action-overview.aspx

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Pub.

Raphel, A. (2015). Affirmative action in university admissions: Research roundup - Journalist's Resource. Retrieved April 17, 2016, from http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/race-society/affirmative-action-in-university-admissions-research-roundup

 

 

A634.3.4.RB - The Harder They Fall

           Ethical dilemma is defined as “a situation in which a person must choose between two courses of action of (apparent) equal moral importance, so that the choice necessarily entails the transgression of an important moral principle” (Ethical dilemma, para. 1, 2016). To elaborate, ethical dilemma deals with making a decision when faced with multiple outcomes. In situations where certain decisions make you feel uncomfortable but don’t require a choice does not constitute an ethical dilemmas (Allen, n.d.). Additionally, there are no clear solutions to an ethical dilemma and some ethical principles may be compromise (Allen, n.d.). Take for example the TED ed video below. How would a self-driving car decide whom to save if it encounters an unavoidable accident and must hit either a SUV on the left or motorcycle on the right? I would think that hitting the SUV would be better than hitting the motorcycle since the survivability is greater for the SUV. If it would be driving by a person, the decision would be made in a split second; however, if a computer were making the decision, the decision would pre-program into the vehicle. This would add ethical issues; who will determine if someone lives or dies? And what are the ethical complications if humans program this logic into a computer system? This scenario is a complex ethical dilemma, but with the current technological advancements is not long before we will have to answer the question of whether machines can make ethical decisions.

              The world we live in is in constant movement and time doesn’t wait for no one. The decisions you make now will at some point affect the outcome of your future. Take for example, the consequences of stealing a DVD from a store. When thinking about it, this is not a big deal right? It’s just a movie and if the person gets caught then they would to pay for it. However, when viewing this in the big picture this can greatly affect your career and your life. You see, this crime is considered as a petty theft and it’s a misdemeanor. The long-term consequence of this action is that you will end up with a criminal record.  When you apply for a job, college and professional license, your decision will be known when a criminal background check is done (Shoplifting or "Petty" Theft: What's the Big Deal? n.d.).  When we make ethical decisions we encourages others to do the same and this establishes a culture where unethical decision, like stealing is not tolerate. 

              But it amazing to see how often leaders at organizations make unethical choices. According to research done by Amitai Etzioni, roughly two-thirds of America’s 500 largest corporations have been involved, in varying degrees, in some form of illegal behavior (Gellerman, 1986). So why are top executives behaving in such an unethical way? According to Kramer (2003) society has learned to consider risk taking and rule breaking as markers of good leadership. We are creating a culture that considers breaking the rules as a way to make it to the top. Kramer (2003) described this behavior as a genius-to-folly-syndrome, which is a “swift and steady rise by a brilliant, hard-driving, politically adept individual followed by surprising stints of miscalculations or recklessness” (p. 60). Leaders need to overcome the temptation of making unethical decisions. Leaders that are grounded and ethical exhibit five common psychological and behavioral habits (Kramer, 2003). 1) Keep their life’s simple, thy are humble and are ordinary; 2) They shine a light on their weaknesses instead of trying to cover them up; 3) They float trial balloons to uncover the truth and prepare for the unexpected; 4) They sweat through the small stuff; and 5) They reflect more, not less (Kramer, 2003). These habits are a great reminder of how successful executives stay humble and lead an ethical organization. Being in the military, we are taught from basic training to follow the rules and make ethical decisions. However, through out my career I have seen many leaders make bad decision based on unethical behaviors. It is up to everyone in the organization to follow the rules and enforce ethical behaviors.  It just take one person to lead change and encourage others to the same. Do your part and make ethical decision and lead change!

Reference:

Allen, K. (n.d.). What Is an Ethical Dilemma? Retrieved April 09, 2016, from http://www.socialworker.com/feature-articles/ethics-articles/What_Is_an_Ethical_Dilemma?/

Ethical dilemma. (2016). Retrieved April 09, 2016, from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/ethical-dilemma

Gellerman, S. (1986). Why “Good” Managers Make Bad Ethical Choices. Retrieved April 10, 2016, from https://hbr.org/1986/07/why-good-managers-make-bad-ethical-choices

Kramer, R. M. (2003). THE HARDER THEY FALL. (cover story). Harvard Business Review, 81(10), 58-66.

Shoplifting or "Petty" Theft: What's the Big Deal? (n.d.). Retrieved April 10, 2016, from http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/shoplifting-or-petty-theft-whats-the-big-deal.html

A634.2.4.RB - Theories of Ethics

Deontology

Consequentialism    

                                                        Introduction          
The way we think about an issue or dilemma in systematic, logical, sensible way is what we call reasoning. Webster dictionary defines reasoning as the “process of thinking about something in a logical way in order to form a conclusion or judgment” (Reasoning, n.d.). Wesleyan University defines Ethical reasoning as “the ability to identify, assess, and develop ethical arguments from a variety of ethical positions” (para. 1). Reasoning is the process by which we take to make an ethical or unethical decision. Let’s take a look at two style of reasoning; Consequentialism and deontology. According LaFollette, (2007), Consequentialism suggest that we ought to choose the available action with the best overall consequences, while deontology propose that we “should act in ways circumscribed by moral rules or rights, and that these rules or rights are at least partly independent of consequences” (p. 354). These two ethical theories help as understand and apply moral decisions.

Consequentialism

The term Consequentialism was first used by Elisabeth Anscombe in 1958 to cover an array of theories according to which the moral value of an act or other moral entity is derived solely from its consequences (Consequentialism, 2007). This theory is a type of normative ethical theory, which means it provide criteria’s and methods for making moral decisions. Consequentialists guides us to act in ways that produce the best consequences (LaFollette, 2007). For example, if you are considering two schools to attend, you are consideration the pros and cons of both options and make your decision based on the best option that will bring success and happiness. At the same way this theory takes parts of hedonistic act of Utilitarianism which is the right action that maximizes pleasure (Driver, 2015). In other words, is to judge the actions by their consequences and select the one with the highest likely to succeed. However, there are negatives to consequentialism; it ignores the rights of others and it cannot properly predict every situation. To illustrate, imaging if there is a millionaire who is in need of a heart transplant. He offers to to build and fund a hospital that will be saved thousands of life each year. However, if he gets the kidney the person at the top of the waiting list will died. Consequentialism might argue that this person life and happiness is not proportional to the potential of saving of thousands of lives. This can be argued that it goes against ethics and human rights. There is much to consider when making a decision based on consequentialism belief. Consequentialism tells us to look at each situations and their consequences and select the one with the best results; this can be damaging when faced with complex decisions.

Deontology

Deontology by definition is “the theory or study of moral obligation” (Deontology, n.d.). It is the “right” and “wrong” of moral belief. According to LaFollette (2007) deontologist believes that it is important not only that we do the right thing, but that we do it for the right reasons. Deontology comes from the Greek word deon which means duty (Shakil, n.d.). This theory opposed to any form of utilitarianism or pragmatism (Deontology, 2015). Deontologist make their decisions on moral belief regardless of the consequences that may result from it. LaFollete (2007) differentiate between the theories by stating that “Deontologists contend there are strict moral limits on what we can do to others. Consequentialists do not” (p. 390). It’s importance to consider that Deontology reflects our moral belief and the “do’s” and “don’t” we have learned from childhood.  These sets of rules are impeded in our societies and are easy to follow, hence why deontology is popular. The negative about the approach, is that it only follows what is morally without truly considering the consequences of the actions even if the consequences greater greater. Take for example a car that is approaching a light that is about to turn red, would you run the red light and break a rule? Consequentialism would tell us that if there is someone behind you and the odds of them hitting you is greater, then run the red light. In contrast Deontology, would suggest to stop and hopefully not get hit.

Are you more Deontology or Consequentialism or mixture of both?

Do you follow the rules and stick to morals no matter the consequences? Or do you consider the consequences and make your decision based on the best chances of success. Take for example the Train Scenario; imagine if there is a train speeding and in one side of the rail road tracks there is 5 people and on other side there is one person. Would you push the level and have the train run over one person instead of five? Now imagine there is man on top of a bridge and there are 5 people on the rail road track, by pushing the man you can save the five but you murder the one person. This a complex ethical dilemma, Consequentialism would suggest that we save the five and sacrifice one. However, Deontology would look at the moral viewpoint and it would be immoral to have control over someone’s life and sacrifice them to save others. I believe a mixture of the two theories is necessary, we must consider the ethical information’s and the consequences to come up with the most logical decision.

Reference

Consequentialism. (2007). In J. Pike, Political philosophy A-Z. Edinburg, United Kingdom: Edinburgh University Press. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/edinburghppaz/consequentialism/0

Deontology. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deontology

Deontology. (2015). In The Hutchinson unabridged encyclopedia with atlas and weather guide. Abington, United Kingdom: Helicon. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/heliconhe/deontology/0

Driver, J. (2015). PHILOSOPHY - Ethics: Consequentialism [HD]. Retrieved April 03, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hACdhD_kes8

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Pub.

Ethical Reasoning:  A Key Capability. (2016). Retrieved April 03, 2016, from http://www.wesleyan.edu/ethics/reason.html

Reasoning. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reasoning

Shakil, A. (n.d.). Deontology - Kantian Duty-Based Ethics - Seven Pillars Institute. Retrieved April 03, 2016, from http://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/morality-101/kantian-duty-based-deontological-ethics