Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Full Download Business Ethics Now 5th Edition Ghillyer Solutions Manual
Full Download Business Ethics Now 5th Edition Ghillyer Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/download/business-ethics-now-5th-edition-ghillyer-solutions-
manual/
CHAPTER 2
Table of Contents
2-1
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill
Education.
Visit TestBankFan.com to get complete for all chapters
Chapter 02 - Defining Business Ethics
Chapter Summary
This chapter begins by defining how ethics are applied to business behavior. It describes and
explains who the stakeholders are in an organization, their interests in the organization, and the
impact on them from unethical behavior. Many people, because of the track record over the past
two decades, believe that business ethics is an oxymoron, the combination of two contradictory
terms. This chapter also discusses the history of business ethics and the dramatic changes that
have taken place in the business environment over the last five decades. It continues going into
deeper detail about the definition and resolution of ethical dilemmas. It discusses four commonly
held rationalizations that can lead to misconduct. In conclusion, this chapter begins looking at the
aspects in building and operating an ethical business.
Learning Outcomes
Frontline Focus
“The Customer is Always Right” Questions
1. Look at Figures 2.1 and 2.2, and identify which stakeholders would be directly impacted by
Dave’s plan to sabotage the new healthy menu.
The stakeholders that would be directly impacted by Dave’s plan would include customers,
employees, and stockholders or shareholders.
Carol is faced with the ethical dilemma of whether to abide or not to abide by Dave’s new
plan.
2-2
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill
Education.
Chapter 02 - Defining Business Ethics
Carol must decide if her values are strong enough to stand up to this dilemma. She could go
along with Dave’s plan and limit the number of new items and push side items and desserts;
or, if her values do not agree with Dave’s, Carol could leave the company or could express
her opinion to Dave’s boss.
• Figure 2.1 maps out the relevant stakeholders for any organization and their respective
interests in the ethical operation of that organization—stockholders or shareholders,
employees, customers, suppliers/vendor partners, retailers/wholesalers, federal
government, creditors, and community.
• A stakeholder is someone with a share or interest in a business enterprise.
• Not every stakeholder will be relevant in every business situation.
o Not all companies use wholesalers to deliver their products or services to their
customers.
o Customers would not be involved in payroll decisions between the organization and
its employees.
2-3
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill
Education.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
proportion—and, if we would but be true to our trust, in strength and
durability—finds no parallel in the world’s history.
“Patriotic sentiments, sir, such as marked the era of ’89, continued
to guide the statesmen and people of the country for more than thirty
years, full of prosperity; till in a dead political calm, consequent upon
temporary extinguishment of the ancient party lines and issues, the
Missouri Question resounded through the land with the hollow
moan of the earthquake, shook the pillars of the republic even to
their deep foundations.
“Within these thirty years, gentlemen, slavery as a system, had
been abolished by law or disuse, quietly and without agitation, in
every state north of Mason and Dixon’s line—in many of them,
lingering, indeed, in individual cases, so late as the census of 1840.
But except in half a score of instances, the question had not been
obtruded upon Congress. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 had been
passed without opposition and without a division, in the Senate; and
by a vote of forty-eight to seven, in the House. The slave trade had
been declared piracy punishable with death. Respectful petitions
from the Quakers of Pennsylvania, and others, upon the slavery
question, were referred to a committee, and a report made thereon,
which laid the matter at rest. Other petitions afterwards were quietly
rejected, and, in one instance, returned to the petitioner. Louisiana
and Florida, both slaveholding countries, had without agitation been
added to our territory. Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi,
and Alabama, slave states each one of them, had been admitted into
the Union without a murmur. No Missouri Restriction, no Wilmot
Proviso had as yet reared its discordant front to terrify and confound.
Non-intervention was then both the practice and the doctrine of
the statesmen and people of that period: though, as yet, no hollow
platform enunciated it as an article of faith, from which,
nevertheless, obedience might be withheld, and the platform ‘spit
upon,’ provided the tender conscience of the recusant did not forbid
him to support the candidate and help to secure the ‘spoils.’
“I know, sir, that it is easy, very easy, to denounce all this as a
defence of slavery itself. Be it so: be it so. But I have not discussed
the institution in any respect; moral, religious, or political. Hear me.
I express no opinion in regard to it: and as a citizen of the north, I
have ever refused, and will steadily refuse, to discuss the system in
any of these particulars. It is precisely this continued and persistent
discussion and denunciation in the North, which has brought upon
us this present most perilous crisis: since to teach men to hate, is to
prepare them to destroy, at every hazard, the object of their hatred.
Sir, I am resolved only to look upon slavery outside of Ohio, just as
the founders of the constitution and Union regarded it. It is no
concern of mine; none, none: nor of yours, Abolitionist. Neither of us
will attain heaven, by denunciations of slavery: nor shall we, I trow,
be cast into hell for the sin of others who may hold slaves. I have not
so learned the moral government of the universe: nor do I
presumptuously and impiously aspire to the attributes of Godhead;
and seek to bear upon my poor body the iniquities of the world.
“I know well indeed, Mr. President, that in the evil day which has
befallen us, all this and he who utters it, shall be denounced as ‘pro-
slavery;’ and already from ribald throats, there comes up the
slavering, drivelling, idiot epithet of ‘dough-face.’ Again, be it so.
These, Abolitionist, are your only weapons of warfare: and I hurl
them back defiantly into your teeth. I speak thus boldly, because I
speak in and to and for the North. It is time that the truth should be
known, and heard, in this the age of trimming and subterfuge. I
speak this day not as a northern man, nor a southern man; but, God,
be thanked, still as a United States man, with United States
principles;—and though the worst happen which can happen—
though all be lost, if that shall be our fate; and I walk through the
valley of the shadow of political death, I will live by them and die by
them. If to love my country; to cherish the Union; to revere the
Constitution: if to abhor the madness and hate the treason which
would lift up a sacrilegious hand against either; if to read that in the
past, to behold it in the present, to foresee it in the future of this
land, which is of more value to us and the world for ages to come,
than all the multiplied millions who have inhabited Africa from the
creation to this day:—if this it is to be pro-slavery, then, in every
nerve, fibre, vein, bone, tendon, joint and ligament, from the
topmost hair of the head to the last extremity of the foot, I am all
over and altogether a PRO-SLAVERY MAN.”
Speech of Horace Greeley on the Grounds of
[84]
Protection.