Case Study Analysis: Business Ethics, Moral Duties, and Decisions

This case study analysis delves into the realm of business ethics, exploring the interplay between moral duties, ethical theories, and decision-making processes. The analysis begins by differentiating between normative and descriptive ethical theories, highlighting the importance of moral values and duties in business contexts. The assignment further examines the role of ethical theories in providing a framework for right and wrong decisions, emphasizing the impact of these decisions on stakeholders. The case study then focuses on Edward Snowden's actions, evaluating them through the lenses of consequentialism and non-consequentialism. The author reflects on Snowden's moral obligations, the concept of utilitarianism, and the implications of his choices. The analysis concludes by emphasizing the importance of fulfilling moral duties, even when they conflict with societal norms, and the potential positive impact of such actions. The author also explores the impact of Snowden's actions on the American public and his role as a hero in the eyes of some people.

INTRODUCTION
I was given a group activity in which I had to read case study and then analyse it. So, by
analysing it, in my point of view there are several business ethics which has to be followed by
business. The normative theory is based on moral value and goodness rather than on duties. It
focuses on action rather than on moral duties as action is appeal to human nature. So, I think it is
easy to determine what good is. Similarly, in business a person has to fulfil his moral ethics and
duties which allows in taking right decision. But the descriptive ethical theory is related to
human attitude and behaviour of people. The decisions are made on basis of moral and with goal
of describing situation. I learned that business ethics is integrated with managerial implications
as well.
In my opinion ethical theories play vital role in business. This is because it provide a
framework on how a moral decision has to be taken in context of right and wrong. So, I realise
that theory gives an insight on finding out what is right and wrong and then making decision.
The decision is usually in good context that benefit customers, employees, stakeholders, etc.
Similarly, I analysed that Edward Snowden was also right in his decision as he was having duty
to inform to public about what government is doing wrong against public. However, he violated
the privacy of people by spreading their confidential data and info.
I also got to know about difference between consequentialism and non consequentialism
approach. In consequentialism decision taken with moral duty results in right outcome and then
impact is evaluated via Utilitarianism theory. But in non consequentialism approach ethics focus
on what is right and wrong of action and its impact. I realized that moral obligation is direct
command from God. So, as per case study consequentialism approach was used which allows
Snowden to be obliged with his moral duty towards society. He was only doing his duty. But he
must have consulted with CIA before taking further step. This would enabled him in finding info
about why this is been done. I should have done similar thing if I was in same situation.
In my opinion Snowden has sensed that it was his moral duty to inform public about
injustice been done. So, he has done nothing wrong. I learned that when a person has is having a
choice between his moral ethic and society he must fulfil his moral duty. This is because it will
help in taking right decision and also impact of that decision will be right. Likewise, I think that
Snowden has helped Americans to keep safe and protect them. He is hero for society and in the
1

eyes of other people. So, for me as well he was hero for people of US as he informed them about
what wrong is been done against them.
2

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
3