Little Enough Or Too Much Essay Essay

The case midget Enough or Too Much describes a company which produces a new industrial lubricant by the name of Chemical X. With approval from the government, the company dumps all excess chemical elope into a nearby river, commonly used by other producers, and in the production process chooses eliminate an sum step which would assimilate led to decrease dumping of chemical waste. This is done in collection to ensure cost efficiencies and competitiveness, however, a worker by the name of Bryan believes action should be taken in read to protect the environment and live up to the companys promise of environmental consciousness, with the potential pollution and misemploy posed by this actual process. Having already expressed his concerns to plant supervisor Bill Gates, it is clear that altering the current plan is non of any concern to the company (Heist, 1992). This case brings open to a very important moral issue Does Bryan have any obligation or responsibility for taking a ction and informing others in entrap to ensure that this issue is resolved? Seeing as the company currently perceives no reason to occupy adjustments to the production process, with their investment currently thriving, this puts Bryan in a very difficult position.However, on that point are possible solutions. Bryan could try and gather enough data from the engineers and chemists involved in the production process which would provide differentiate to Bryans concerns and reproach Bill Gates with his findings. Alternatively, he could approach individuals outside of the organization, such as the government, to see that action is taken to solve the problem ( lowly Enough or, 1992). Based on the ethical theory of virtue ethics, which emphasizes finiss to be make based upon ones take in moral character, Bryan does thence have an obligation to inform others of the necessity of this issue to be resolved and therefor, should take action. Virtue ethics teaches us that individuals should make decisions based on their own character and personal judgments, rather than relying on external laws and customs of a persons culture (Gowdy, 2013). It is made clear that Bryan is extremely uncomfort equal to(p) with the decisions being made by the company and does not believe they are right.With the governments authorisation for additional waste discarding and the evident approval among supervisors and co-workers, benefiting from the increase in lolly through the firms profit-sharing program, Bryans current business culture seems to contradict his inner beliefs. However, according to virtue ethics, thesefactors should not influence his final decision and therefor it would be logical for him to pursue this issue. Similarly, this theory places great emphasis on directing an individuals attention away from popular belief and focusing on ones own opinion and thoughts (Gowdy, 2013). Bryan should then not let his own judgement be clouded, however because others do not view the sit uation from his perspective, and listen to his instincts which appear to be telling him that the company is making a huge mistake. Referring back to Greek thinkers Plato and Aristotle, it is said that individuals should ultimately make decisions which reinforce key virtues such as courage, justice and honesty, and that through consistent application, individuals are able to acquire good habits of character.Ultimately, this forgeting cause them to be able to better regulate their emotions and make morally correct decisions when faced with difficulties (Cline, n.d.). Based on this, in put to ensure that Bryan continues to make moral decisions throughout the expect of his life and is able to truly live virtuously, he should make an attempt to have the additional step implemented into the production process, thus reducing the count of pollution. This is because such a decision would display the characteristic of courage on Bryans behalf, given that he is being faced with peers only interested in the current benefits being presented to them money and short-term organizational success. These motives of greed would then fall under the category of bad habits, or vices, which Bryan should avoid in order to make moral decisions (Cline, n.d.). While Bryan is able to see the benefits of this product, as perceived by his peers, he cannot ignore the fact that excess pollution will well-nigh likely cause more problems for the company in the future. With the river being located so closely to the factory, if evidence does prove that excess chemical waste will have extremely harmful health cause, this not only puts the local environment and wildlife in danger, but also the lives of the factorys workers if the landfill continues to grow.Therefore, attempting to minimize these effects would satisfy the virtue of justice. Other ethical theories such as Utilitarianism may argue that since the current production process is causing an increase in profits, quite substantial wh en compared to the past few mediocre quarters, choosing to leave the current process as it is will benefit the greatest number of people (Utilitarianism, 2007). However, as Bryan identifies, this is merely a short term projection ofbenefits. The company has not taken into consideration the costs of implementing this additional step, as well as the potential harm from pollution in their analysis. Not to mention the fact that the company is technically lying to the public. While the company publicly states that all actions are taken in order to minimize harmful environmental effects, Chemical X proves this statement to be false. If some consumers purchased this product because they believed they were doing good for the environment, as apparently advertised, they would be deceived entirely.Essentially, it is as if the consumers are being greenwashed by being fed false information in for hopes of organizational benefits, although no extensive marketing campaign has been penalize (Furlo w, 2010).While the company believes that slowing down production in order to implement this additional step will only draw attention to themselves and cause apprehension from environmental groups, would it not be worse if they were to discover this dishonesty down the road, only after the lie had snowballed over many years? At least if they were to correct this mistake now, they would be able to sustain this image of ecological concern by actively solving problems and admitting to their own errors in judgement. In order to satisfy the issues presented in this case, the ethical solution would be for Bryan to reproach Bill Gates and convince him that the additional phase in production must be implemented.This would be achieved by contacting the engineers and chemists involved in the production of Chemical X in order to derive concrete evidence that the current plan will be harmful and support Bryans claim (Little Enough or, 1992). Considering the amount of safety precautions taken an d training requirement on behalf of employees at heart chemical factories, there surely must be some sort of evidence to prove the damaging effects of their current process in order to draw attention to change. If it was then agreed upon to proceed with this plan, it would help to minimize the harmful effects on the environment and factory in general. In addition to Bryan being able to make a moral decision which will help him maintain a virtuous character in future difficulties, this would potentially have a positive effect on the character of other employees.Previously, the company was being dishonest to the public regarding their ecological motives which over time could have reinforced the concept that dishonesty in the workplace is acceptable and feed into greed, both vices for which no employer shouldencourage. By living up to the companys sign claim, this would potentially help reverse these effects. In conclusion, Bryan should follow his own beliefs and personal character a nd take action towards having the company implement an additional step in the production process of Chemical X. Thus, enabling him to make proper moral decisions in the future, sustain key virtues and minimize potential harmful effects on the environment and health of factory workers. Despite being a new employee and the idea that Bryan should avoid being a troublemaker, it cannot be simply denied that there is some form of injustice in this case and simply ignoring such injustice would stain ones own moral character.ReferencesCline, A. (n.d.). Virtue ethical motive Morality and Character. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http//atheism.about.com/od/ethicalsystems/a/virtueethics.htm Furlow, N. (2010). Greenwashing in the New Millennium. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 10(6), 22-25. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from ABI/INFORM Global. Gowdy, L. (2013, October 15). Virtue Ethics. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http//www.ethicsmorals.com/ethicsvirtue.html Heist, E. (1 992, January 1). Little Enough or Too Much. Retrieved November 25, 2014, from https//learn.humber.ca/bbcswebdav/pid-1288113-dt-content-rid-6008416_1/courses/5773.201470/227_case1.pdf Little Enough or Too Much Teaching Notes. (1992). Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http//wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu/ethics/AA/mgmt04-notes.pdf Utilitarianism. (2007). In Political philosophy A-Z. Retrieved from http//search.credoreference.com.rap.ocls.ca/content/entry/edinburghppaz/utilitarianism/0