Deontology and Teleology: A Comparative Analysis for Business Ethics

This essay explores the debate between deontology and teleology as ethical frameworks for business decision-making. Deontology, which focuses on adherence to rules and duties, is presented as a potentially superior approach due to its emphasis on moral principles and consistency. The essay discusses the strengths of deontology, such as its simplicity and universality, while also acknowledging its weaknesses, including its inflexibility and potential disregard for consequences. By examining the core tenets of both ethical systems and considering their practical implications in a business context, the essay aims to determine which approach offers a more robust and reliable foundation for ethical conduct. The essay also briefly touches upon the rules of business ethics like utilitarian rule, moral right rule, justice rule, and practical rule. Desklib provides access to similar essays and resources for students seeking academic support.

BUSINESS ETHICS
University:
University URL;
Student ID: password:
Course Name/Code:
Assessment Number:
Word Count:

What ethical approach would be better for ethical decision making deontology and
teleology?
Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
Rules for business ethics..................................................................................................................2
Influence of ethical believes and decision making..........................................................................3
Why deontology is better/strength in business decision making?...................................................3
Weaknesses of deontology ethics in business decision making......................................................5
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................7
References........................................................................................................................................8
1

Introduction
Deontology ethics refers to an ethical position that judges morality of an action based on the
existing rules. Sometimes it is described in terms of duty, obligation or rules-based ethics. A
moral judgment is placed on a person (actor) as to whether they complied with the set rules and
obligations. Deontology is not concerned with whether the action to be taken is reliable or
inappropriate but only focuses on the set rules and steps to be followed (action). For instance, an
employee has to obey the orders given by their employer to perform certain tasks, without having
to weigh whether or not the action will give the desired result or not as far as that is what the rule
dictate (Carlson, Kacmar and Wadsworth 2009). On the other hand, teleology which is also
known as finality refers to ethics based on an explanation for something or in function of its end
or purpose or goal. It involves goal or purpose and also gives the reason or explanation of the
results. When passing judgment on the action of a human, deontology ethics focuses on that
which is an obligation or duty. While teleology ethics mainly focuses on that which is good or
desirable to achieve the better end result. Before focusing on what ethical approach is considered
appropriate in business, we must be aware that ethical consideration also has rules that are
employed to give maximum benefit to the society and the business itself (Anunciação Santos and
Rocha 2009). The rules guiding business ethics may include; utilitarian rule, moral right rule,
justice rule, and practical rule.
Rules for business ethics
The four rules of business ethics are to be followed in order to do what is morally right even as
businesses focus to make more profits. Utilitarian rules state that, the action or decision taken has
to have the largest positive impact to all parties concerned including business itself, stakeholders,
customers and all people interested in that business (Kujala, Lämsä and Penttilä K2011). The
next business ethical rule is moral right and it states that decisions made must guard or uphold
the basic right of the population. It mostly tries to weigh whether or not the decision arrived at
matches with the general moral code of ethics. The next most important business rule of ethics is
justice rule which states that any decision or action should distribute harm and benefit on an
equal basis to all the population involved (Szerletics 2010). No member should have more
benefit or harm than the other. The other important consideration in this context is the practical
2

rule (Massotte 2017). This rule state that any decision or action in business should be that which
managers will not be afraid of telling members of society because they would think it is
acceptable.
Influence of ethical believes and decision making
Ford and Richard 2013, states that ethical beliefs and decision making are influenced by
variablesthat are unique to the individual decision maker and viewed situational in nature. The
variables they state are related to individual decision maker includes; personality, employment,
education, age, sex, religion, and nationality. Situation variables can be business
competitiveness, industry, organizational effects, type of ethical conflict, codes of conducts,
referent groups, and rewards and sanctions (Trevino and Nelson 2016).
Why deontology is better/strength in business decision making?
Deontology ethical approach would be better in business decision making as human beings are to
have rules to guide them not to focus their decision on personal interests. Businesses’ decision
dictates its success and the best rules guiding the decision or actions of workers will enable
businesses to avoid wrong consequences (Yoon 2011). Deontological ethics has many strengths
and also weaknesses just like other ethical approaches. Some of these strengths will help
business to thrive as they continue to impact as many peoples’ lives positively as possible. The
fact that this ethical approach is far less flexible and has rules and morals to follow can be
effective in business decision making. This approach has simple rules guiding businesses to
make their decision easily in business situations which helps in time-saving when providing
solutions to business clients (Anunciação Santos and Rocha 2009). This approach is simple to
apply as the decision is guided by stated rules and morality. For instance, when deciding whether
or not to show faces of victims of rape on a television to speed justice, the right for individual
privacy protection will help to draw a conclusion (Crossan, Mazutis and Seijts, 2013). Unlike
teleology ethical approach which is more individualistic, deontology approach is more general
and applies to everyone. CavaliereMulvaney and Swerdlow 2010, state that deontology can save
time in business situations as it is simple to follow the stipulated rules rather than having to every
3

aspect of the situation. This is more important to business as it helps to avoid single person(s)
consideration at the expense of the majority who are pillars of the business (Weiss 2014).
Deontology approach also helps in forming an ordered society. Vago 2015 state that “the
development of trade and industry requires a system of formal and universal legal rules dealing
with business organizations and commercial transactions” Therefore, there is a need to construct
rules for humans to follow. The decision of revealing faces of victims of rape on a television in
order for them to get justice would be considered immoral as it may cause even more harm to the
victims and their families although it would bring them justice. In business ethics, it would be
wrong to sell expired food items to a person even when they are willing to have it at fewer prices
(Cavaliere, Mulvaney and Swerdlow 2010). This is because it is human right to get access to
healthy food and spend their money on what can improve their lives. If the decision of a business
person upholds this principle it is morally right.
Business decision making should be keenly looked at and more importantly whether the action
arrived at is wrong or not, this is one principle of deontological ethics. Kant who is a
deontological thinker would say it is wrong always to lie even if lies would bring positive results.
Kant’s thinking is important in business reputation as it can cost business huge loses in future if
it may be realized.Ciulla, Martin and Solomon 2011, agrees to Kant thinking by stating that,
“Ethics stands at the very core of our working lives and of society as a whole, defining the public
image of the business community and the ways in which individual companies and people
behave”However, in theological ethics, according to Jeremy Bentham it would be acceptable to
lie to save a life if the consequence of lie would produce the most favourable outcome for the
whole society. Here Jeremy focuses only on the consequences which could not be very good in
business’ public image. The teleological approach in business would only focus on the
consequences taken in accordance to decision made, but the deontologist will be concerned as to
whether the action was moral or not (Ulrich and Sarasin 2012).
Deontology ethics has complete rules such as natural law theory which has five primary precepts
such as “maintaining an orderly society’” or “protecting the lives of innocents” that must be
followed, unlike teleological ethics which is far less the same. These are absolute rules which are
not to be broken under whatever circumstances. Here, for instance, it would not be justifiable in
any case, to sell expired food items as it would break morals of “maintaining an orderly society”.
4

Whether the product would bring loses to the business or not, once expired should not be sold to
a customer if the business has a goal to keep their customers health. But Singer, who is a
preference utilitarianism state in regard to selling, expired item that if the person was ready to die
they should be allowed to do so(Iyabora2013). Rules could not be applicable here to stop them,
so eating expired food would be allowed. Teleological and deontological decision-making
methods are in opposition to individual ethical believes, where the individual themselves where
they contributed to the outcome(Crossan, Mazutis and Seijts 2013).
Weaknesses of deontology ethics in business decision making
Even though this ethical approach would to some extent be beneficial to the business decision-
making process, weaknesses associated with it is common. For instance, it lacks the strength of
teleological approach in that it is not flexible which makes business vulnerable to consequences
that are morally wrong, such as denying a dying person food to eat and save their life, as this
approach would not allow giving expired item since it allows even though it was to help the
majority (Kujala, Lämsä and Penttilä).
The other weakness of deontology is that it is not impersonal or individualistic. This system may
not be very good to apply in21st century where almost every situation in the business
environment requires individualism. This approach does not look at the customers’ families, their
situation, or their religion and culture and this may make some customers who wanted particular
services to refuse them depending on their religious beliefs and cultural practices (Charles 2012).
Business people, therefore, may not be able to convince customers of particular services since
they are not individualistic and may not be sure of whether the service would work or not. In as
far as doing the right thing and justice to the majority is concerned with this approach, it does not
consider the consequences of an action at all. It bases its decision on whether the action was
morally right. Although the action would have been morally right, the consequences produced
would be seen unloving, for instance, not giving a customer an expired food item is morally right
as one may see it prevent the customer being sick or dying, giving it, on the other hand, would
save lives and benefit the majority of people depending on them. This approach, therefore, would
not allow reasoning that way but restrict the morality of the action and results would be worse
(Ulrich and Sarasin 2012).
5

There are major differences between deontological approaches and teleological that makes the
deontological approach more preferable than the teleological approach in business decision
making and these differences are covered below. One, the deontological approach looks at the
morality of the action without considering the outcome and conclude whether it was right
whereas teleological looks at the consequences of the action to figure out whether it was the best
than another available alternative (s) (Ferrell and Fraedrich 2015).
The deontological approach will consider the motives and intents of the individual involved in
the act, whilst teleological are more virtual, weighing outcomes and the objectives. As said
earlier, Kant a deontological thinker will not accept a lie even if it was justified to produce better
results favorable to the majority. On the other hand, a utilitarian will consider lying if the results
were to benefit a majority of people or save a life (Nylander 2016).
Through the discussion, you might be asking yourself, what would justify that an action is right
or wrong since it has been mentioned severally. Here is the deal; one of the latest scholars in the
field of deontological ethics Dr. Joel Marks publicly a top ethical scholar in bioethics, declared
that there is nothing that distinguishes between wrong and right. Dr. Joel is an ‘ethicist’ scholar
at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Bioethics at Yale University, ah he honestly believes that “The
religious fundamentalists are correct: without God, there is no morality. But they are incorrect, I
still believe, about there being a God. Hence, I believe, there is no morality." Other ethicists have
done it before and publicly declared that no differences exist between wrong and right. He has
now concluded that it is deontological ethics unreasonable as to believe in the Devine power.Dr.
Mark in through many of articles in philosophy has developed wholly own “Amoral manifesto”
by rejecting deontology existence after realizing that morality was just a fuzzy subjective feeling
with nothing more. He states, the following statement "I retain my strong preference for honest
dialectical dealings in a context of mutual respect. It's just that I am no longer giving premises in
moral arguments; rather, I am offering considerations to help us figure out what to do. I am not
attempting to justify anything; I am trying to motivate informed and reflective choices... But this
won't be because a god, a supernatural law or even my conscience told me I must, I ought, I have
an obligation. Instead, I will be moved by my head and my heart. Morality has nothing to do
with it" (Taylor 2014).
6

Conclusion
Decision making is an important and crucial part of any business ethical consideration and a
major role in which success is determined. Small businesses’ success depends on the decisions
made by the managers, owners or directors as opposed to big companies where every single
decision no matter how small it is CEOs and directors has to put it into consideration. From this
point, we note that, since the decision is important in business daily life, better ethical
consideration must be put in place. This means the ethical consideration should consider rules of
ethics which are fidelity, utilitarianism, practical rule, justice rule, and ethical rule. In our
discussion, we note that rules are important to guide human behavior and it would be risky
letting people operate without following procedures in a business environment. Deontological
approach to business will be important to put into consideration due to the reasons already
discussed in the context but poses a challenge where there is a need for flexibility. However
more importantly business applying deontological rule would reap more and maintain their
reputation for a long time if their goal is to benefit the majority through the decision they make.
7

References
Anunciação, P.F., Santos, J.C. and Rocha, F., 2009. How Important are the Regulation and
Supervision Authorities in Economic Society. The New Ethics Value Chain, Investment
Management and Financial Innovations International Research Journal, 6(3), pp.273-283.
Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M. and Wadsworth, L.L., 2009. The impact of moral intensity
dimensions on ethical decision-making: Assessing the relevance of orientation. Journal of
Managerial Issues, pp.534-551.
Cavaliere, F.J., Mulvaney, T.P. and Swerdlow, M.R., 2010. Teaching business ethics after the
financial meltdown: is it time for ethics with a sermon?.Education, 131(1), pp.3-8.
Charles, D., 2012. Teleological causation.InThe Oxford Handbook of Aristotle.
Ciulla, J.B., Martin, C.W. and Solomon, R.C., 2011. Honest work: A business ethics reader.
Crossan, M., Mazutis, D. and Seijts, G., 2013. In search of virtue: The role of virtues, values and
character strengths in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4), pp.567-581.
Ferrell, O.C. and Fraedrich, J., 2015. Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Nelson
Education.
Ford, R.C. and Richardson, W.D., 2013. Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical
literature. In Citation classics from the Journal of Business Ethics (pp. 19-44).Springer,
Dordrecht.
Iyabora, F.O., 2013. UNETHICAL PRACTICES IN THE BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT.Asia-
Pacific Journal of Education, Business, and Society, 1(1).
Kujala, J., Lämsä, A.M. and Riivari, E., 2017. Company stakeholder responsibility: An empirical
investigation of top managers’ attitudinal change. Baltic Journal of Management, 12(2), pp.114-
138.
8

Kujala, J., Lämsä, A.M. and Penttilä, K., 2011. Managers’ moral decision-making patterns over
time: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(2), pp.191-207.
Massotte, P., 2017. Business Ethics: Some Principles and Mechanisms. Ethics in Social
Networking and Business 1: Theory, Practice and Current Recommendations, pp.123-144.
Nylander, R., 2016. Corporate social responsibility: business benefits from saving the world.
Supervision Authorities in Economic Society?The New Ethics Value Chain, Investment
Management and Financial Innovations International Research Journal, 6(3), pp.273-283.
Szerletics, A., 2010. THE MORAL FOUNDATIONS OF LEGAL PATERNALISM (Doctoral
dissertation, Ghent University).
Taylor, D.F., 2014. Defining ubuntu for business ethics-a deontological approach.South African
Journal of Philosophy= Suid-AfrikaanseTydskrifvirWysbegeerte, 33(3), pp.331-345.
African Journal of Philosophy= Suid-AfrikaanseTydskrifvirWysbegeerte, 33(3), pp.331-345.
Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A., 2016. Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do
it right. John Wiley & Sons.
Ulrich, P. and Sarasin, C. eds., 2012.Facing public interest: The ethical challenge to business
policy and corporate communications (Vol. 8).Springer Science & Business Media.
Vago, S., 2015.Law and society.Routledge.
Weiss, J.W., 2014. Business ethics: A stakeholder and issues management approach. Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
Yoon, C., 2011. Ethical decision-making in the Internet context: Development and test of an
initial model based on moral philosophy. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), pp.2401-2409.
9