Case Study Analysis: Ethical Theories, Online Gambling, and Fair Trade

This case study explores ethical considerations through three distinct scenarios. The first examines the ethics of commissioning student essays, delving into utilitarian, deontological, and virtue ethics perspectives, particularly concerning plagiarism and the roles of students, universities, and essay providers. The second case investigates online gambling and corporate social responsibility (CSR), analyzing the industry's profit-driven nature against ethical considerations, including the application of Carroll's CSR model and the moral development of organizations as suggested by Reidenbach and Robin. The final case delves into fair trade, focusing on stakeholder issues within the coffee industry, identifying both internal and external stakeholders and the impact of fair trade practices on producer nations, while considering the tension between profit and social responsibility. The analysis incorporates ethical theories to evaluate the complexities of each case and provides insights into the importance of ethical decision-making in business.

Case Study 1 Ethical theories and Commissioning of Student Essay
Introduction
In a world filled with different shades of dynamics, it has been identified that wherever people
interact in any form, it is largely consistent with Kaleidoscope of ethical issues arising from such
(Schlegelmilch and Oberseder, 2007). However, the question of ethics has been argued over
decades on its merits and application in the business world. Therefore, Elegido (1996) submit
that ethics in its original state, seeks to understand and to show the way that people should
behave and most essentially, the need to clarify such ways of behaving. In the context of the case
study on Commissioning of Student Essay, argument abound on the merits and demerits,
speaking from the perspective of plagiarism. The application of theories will show the difficulty
experienced in the use of the term ethics in business.
Argument
To address the case study, argument for and against using ethical theories, at best have been
found to be logical. The determination of what is good to students, providers of custom
essays/dissertation, Universities and organizations may differ in the quest to provide
understanding of ethics from the utilitarian perspective, which advocates the principle of utility
and the overall good to all parties involved (Gamlund, 2012). The utility of custom essays has
been argued to provide leading light to many university students who may need simpler
clarification such, as against the normal lectures obtained from lecturers. Plagiarism as it were,
has been placed to check undue usage of scholarly works. The interrelationship between what is
plagiarism and what is wrong with it has become the basis of argument (Helgesson and Eriksson,
2014). However, the quest for additional knowledge can be argued as one of the reasons for the
purchase of custom essays by students, for the furtherance of their reading, to enable better
grades and better understanding. Gren (2004) argues that in applying utilitarianism ethics, there
is need to ascertain the rightness of action. Since providers of custom essays say that it aids
students in further research and not for immediate consumption or replication for submission,
which supports plagiarism, it is therefore seen as utility for the parties involved – for example
(student, universities, organizations and the service providers themselves).
1

Further argument from deontological ethical perspectives will advance discussion on the need for
duty delivery by all the parties involved (students, universities, custom essay providers and
organizations). It is expected that all the parties mentioned above owe a kind of duty to
themselves in this regards regardless of consequences that may result from various platforms of
actions. Deontology therefore seeks to achieve the activation of duty on circumstance (Gaus,
2001). It is the duty of students to pass their modules with good grades; it is the duty of
university authorities to churn out quality graduates; it is the duty of custom essay providers to
deliver simpler knowledge from which students can achieve further reading; and it is the duty of
organizations also to employ qualified employees into their workforce. According to Norman
(2013), there is no uncontroversial way of addressing problems that result from the intended
application of ethical theories (consequentialist and deontological).
The interjection of virtue ethics which seeks to appeal to good character of the agents involved in
the given case study, has been found to negate the positions of utilitarianism and consequentialist
divides of ethics (Norman, 2013). Virtue ethics has been observed to bring to mind the reality of
actions of virtue. Hursthouse (1999) claims that actions are right and only right if an action is
what a virtuous agent will do in a given circumstance. In the context of the case study in view, it
is expected that all the parties involved must lay claim to some form of virtue in their individual
dispositions. The argument as to what forms a virtue in the parties involved may throw up
another angle of argument. However, virtue ethics seeks to draw a measure of reason from the
parties as to their response to the question of plagiarism, as one of the bane of quality education
deliveries in universities around the world. The undue usage of scholarly works has been
identified as inhibiting the potentials of students. Virtue ethics in this regards will hold that
students must understand the value of education and more value as to how they put in effort in
gaining knowledge which is key. In the same vein, Kirsten (2017) argued that acting in a
virtuous way results in the happiness and emotional satisfaction of the agent. It goes to say that
universities must continue to develop checks on what students submit, to ensure that a good
percentage of their submissions are their personal academic contributions; that students must see
value in the need for improved studies; that organizations should do more in sourcing talents that
qualify for the available jobs; and that providers of custom essays must intimate students of the
need to use their products with utmost good-faith.
2

As much as deontological and consequentialist ethical doctrines speak in different directions, one
of the need for duty to do the right and of the other to consider the consequence of actions, virtue
ethics provides the question of reason based on virtue, which should positive.
Case Study 2 Online Gambling/CSR Theories
The case of gambling and its recurrent nature of impacts on its players has taken a position of
interest in some literatures on social issues. Organizations that are into services have been known
to rake in huge profits at the expense of societal balance. According to Price Water Copper
(2015) gaming revenue from global casino got to $182.8 billion in the year 2015. This indicates
9.2% from year 2010 standing at $117.6 billion. This revenue position clearly supports Friedman
(1970) position that organizations generally are expected to show responsibility in generating
profits as returns to investment to investors.
Corporate social responsibility debates on gaming organizations remains an unstable discuss as
many view the activities of such firms as unethical in the first place. CSR for many reasons have
been seen as a seeming substitute for unethical practices in the business environment. However,
Carroll (1996) model of corporate social responsibility suggest the different levels of operations
of corporate social responsibility by organizations, no matter their type of operations.
Source: Carroll (1996).
3

From bottom up economic responsibility is expected from gaming organizations in countries
where they are allowed to thrive. And as such they are expected to make profits which is of
importance in addressing the issues of welfare to workers and returns to investors (Carroll,
2016). Good revenue and profit margins brings about capacity for the delivery of many other
aspect of corporate social responsibilities. This aspect of Carroll’s submission finds connection
with Friedman (1970) position on the need for firms to show responsibility in profit making, and
without which their capacity to sustain organizational operations may fail.
On the other hand, the legal expectations from gaming companies in their countries of operations
is critical to their survival as well. Countries place laws and regulations to guide the operation of
companies. And since organizations are taken to be a person, it is relevant gaming firms align
their social compliance as corporate citizens that they are (Carroll, 2016), in order to effectively
articulate their operations. Since corporate social responsibility show friendly partnership with
society, it is reasonable also to expect that such companies abide by the law.
The ethical aspect of the pyramid may be addressed in different ways in different cultures. In
some countries they may be taxed in exchange for their operational license and are hugely
involved in philanthropy. This is a way of given back to the communities where they do
business. However, Reidenbach and Robin (1991) the moral development of an organization as
being the yard stick for judging them as responding to morality in the business environment.
Though similar in some ways to Carroll (1996) model of corporate social responsibility,
Reidenbach and Robin tried to moral growth development of firms including gaming to be
consistent with the profit assertion of Friedman (1970) thoughts on the importance of profit as
the first corporate social responsibility of firms to themselves and to their shareholders. The
present provision of counselling for gambling addicts in some climes indicates gradual
compliance to the moral development model of Reidenbach and Robin. This is consistent with
organizations realizing that some of their activities compromise sustenance of good society in the
long run. And as a good corporate citizen, it behooves on such companies to do the needful by
helping out people found to be in addiction to the practice. Also in the same vein, gambling
companies running commercials on the possible caveats in the game would be a step in the
direction in cautioning prospective players in the dangers that are inherent in such practice.
Developing into an ethical organization from the amoral stage of Reidenbach and Robin
4

corporate social responsibility model ay take time in view of the increasing nature and impacts of
globalization on competition in the global gaming industry. In respect of gambling as it were,
many a company may prefer to stabilize at the responsive organization stage of the model, where
the function of profit as a corporate responsibility of the firm is still allowed. Only this time they
attempt to achieve seeming balance and doing the right thing (Reidenabch and Robin, 1991). At
this point, Freidman (1970) submission still holds sway as profit making remains one of the core
values that drives the operations of gaming companies. The implementation of best practices
may be tough in such business type, however, in view of laws and regulations of the business, it
is better follow best practices than to have operational license seized.
It is reasonable to say that since corporate social responsibility is an alternate practice in the
event of unethical practices in organizations, the position of organizations in the gaming industry
may wish to find balance between high profit margins and incremental corporate social
responsibility intervention in the communities where they do business. The idea that profit is the
responsibility of organizations will sound objective in the case of gambling companies as against
attaining the ultimate ethical organization stage of Reidenbach and Robin model of social
responsibility.
Case Study 3 Fair Trade (Stakeholder Issues)
Identifying internal and external stakeholders in fair trade using stakeholder map and
explain the purpose of stakeholder map.
Increase in the internationalization of business due to differences in natural endowment, has also
increased the question that fair trade phenomenon brings to the table. Krasnozhon and Simppson
(2015) identified fair trade as such attempts to mitigate the exploitation of producer nations
(Third World Countries) by industrialized countries. The concept attempts at reducing poverty
and bringing about the creation of balance in the quality of life of third world producer nations.
However, the obvious battle in respect to Friedman (1970) submission that the social
responsibility of business is to make profit, continually engages poor producer nations
negatively. In the light of the foregoing stakeholders that make up the dynamics of fair trade,
with example from the coffee global industry may be identified as follows:
5

Source: Google Images 2017.
From the above figure, internal stakeholders may comprise of employees, owners, management
and investors. On the external stakeholder side, it comprises of suppliers, government, creditors,
customers, shareholders, society, competitors, pressure groups/unions, communities, media.
Internal and external stakeholders has been described as the groups that are impacted by the
activities of organizations the business environment (Mathur et al, 2007). The synergy of all
these factors contributes to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of organizations in their business
environment. The presence of employees and management ensures that organizational operations
are carried effectively to bring about the achievement of goals and objectives, which according
to Friedman (1970), is the delivery of profits to investment. On the other hand, external
stakeholders are present to stabilize the operations of organizations in the Coffee industry in
India though policy formation (Government), provision of capital (Financial Institutions),
suppliers and customers alike. An effective synergy of these produce harmony in terms of
production and delivery of products and services. The stakeholders map represents the inter-
connectivity that firms share with internal and external publics. Some of these connections may
be seen from the angle of supply chain activities and public relations activities. The
6

consideration of the above factors (Supply Chain and Public Relations) position the organization
for greater effectiveness in the business environment.
Source: Google Images 2018.
Goff (2016) argued that the effect of global pressure on fair trade may result in higher pricing for
fair trade brands. However, to effectively capture this from poor producer nations, the external
stakeholders must play a critical role in ensuring that policy formulation and implementation are
to the benefit of companies and their employees that actually embark on the production of the
coffee beans used. Thaker (2009) argued that the stakeholder map has become even more
relevant in the operations of organizations, as good attention paid stakeholders will ensure that
organizations understand the risk tolerance, support and opposition. Furthermore, it will enable
producer companies to understand where it is necessary to make required adjustment in the
structure of the organization and its relationship.
Evaluate expectations of three key stakeholders in relations to CSR
According to Keekan (2016) among the key stakeholders in the coffee producing environment
are the employees, owners and the shareholders. These three factors crate some internal balance
in the operations of coffee production from the primary source, and they also play a critical role
7

in the formulation of corporate social responsibility action and implementation and with
consideration given to other areas of importance in organizational operations.
The expectation of owners (management) and shareholders in the context of coffee bean
production and other products that are associated with coffee, it is very important to make
reference to the submission of Friedman on the corporate social responsibility of any
organization is to make profit, which is the basis for the actualization of every other expectations
in terms of employment relations (Mertens, 2013). It is expected that capital investment of any
kind should be able to produce returns in the form of profits to investors. However, the strength
of the above position may come into conflict with the agency theory which seeks to validate the
position of managers as against the position of ownership (Panda and Leepsa, 2017). To this
extent, the impacts of corporate social responsibility which identifies the extension of activities
by organizations beyond the expectation of the law for the good of society (McWilliams et al,
2006), maybe connected to the drive by managers to enjoy aspects of corporate social
responsibility.
Looking at this from employees perspective, it is important for owners of coffee plantations and
companies that produce different products from this beans to ensure that workers at the lower
ebb enjoy some effects on improvement in the areas of their further education, healthcare and
infrastructures for their wellbeing. Good as these expectations may be from employees, the
frame of reference in employment relations may reduce the extent of application of corporate
social responsibility for the overall benefits of coffee growers and factory workers in India and
around the world. The different assumptions inherent in the frame of reference, has often been
used as excuse for the continuation of only Friedman (1970) assertion of corporate social
responsibility of firms.
Shareholders as it stands enjoy the delivery of dividends, being the result of profits made and
sustained by the economic activities of companies involved in the coffee production and trade.
Reduction to dividends except for the purpose of reinjection into investment, may not be viewed
positively by shareholders in every organizational setting.
Case study 4 Future Trends in Corporate Social Responsibility and Personal Career
Impact
8

The evolution of organizational and management theories has identified possible changes to the
ways that organizations operate in their business environment. This position maybe intensified
by the effects of globalization and the effect on firm’s competitiveness (Snowdon and
Stonehouse, 2006). The case of corporate social responsibility has grown to become palliative of
some sort in areas where unethical activities play out in organizations. However, organizations
try to set the records straight by looking at ways to better their moral engagement with society.
Hjelt (2009) argues that corporate social responsibility in the new millennium will have to align
with organizational strategies in order to meet its full potentials in redistributing wellbeing
among various stakeholders and the sustainability imperative of organizations.
One of the future trends in corporate social responsibility that will increase in the future will
according to Global Reporting Initiative (2015), increase attention given to sustainability of
corporate social responsibility activities of organizations and the necessary reporting of same in
timely manner that supports the economic and social intervention of organizations to their host
communities in the business environment. Reporting of corporate social responsibility actions
has become very important as a way of informing the world that organizations do not necessarily
answer only to the assertion of Friedman (1970) position of profit making as the core resolve of
business entities in the face of other important dynamics. The global business environment is
increasingly showing more interest in making sure that organizations show more of corporate
citizenship, which is the result of societal change and demand on organizations (Harribey, n.a).
Just as the Carbon Footprint of multinational companies are being investigated, increasing call
for carbon accountability has also increased. This is to help in the fight for the mitigation of
greenhouse gas from the atmosphere. Reporting corporate social responsibility aims to balance
the perception of stakeholders on the actual position of things concerning organizations and their
operations in the business place.
According to Windsor (2001), aspect of corporate social responsibility that is expected to take
stronger hold on the way that organizations behave in the business environment, is the aspect that
has a lot to do with the economic conception of responsibility. Improving the economic lot of
stakeholders, especially those with semblance with primary producers of vital produce used for
the production of other things like coffee beans. This will give them the sense of belonging with
such organizations. This may further be addressed from the corporate social responsibility model
9

of Caroll (1996), which has at the top of the ladder the philanthropic responsibilities to its host
community. Such aids could come from employment and ripple to ability of these people to
afford some level of education, through which they can further different aspects of their lives.
However, and in irony, this will also be in tandem with the bottom of the ladder factor which is
economic responsibility, which is supported by Friedman (1970) assertion that profit making is
the first corporate social responsibility a firm has to itself.
Corporate social responsibility as it were is the beneficial operations of organizations that
impacts positively and in ethical ways and in society friendly ways that results in community
development (Ismail, 2009). Irrespective of the positive nature of corporate social responsibility,
the issue if sustainability remains a challenge to organizations. Therefore, going forward in the
business environment, it is necessary for firms to understand more the dynamics inherent in the
phenomenon, and to strategize the best way forward. Sustainability as a concept require that
organizations act in such a way that the future is considered in today’s action. Sustaining
corporate social responsibility is another aspect of going forward. In objectivity, the assertion of
Friedman (1970) plays out to be critical in the sustained effort of firms to be societally friendly.
The impact of profiting firms can be far reaching. It must be based on this achievement that
companies can reach out to their communities in an effort to develop them and their people.
Argument may be given that by being ethical firms may have to increase the cost of their
products to final consumers. This may be resolved by effective marketing and segmentation. The
sustenance of corporate social responsibility may again rest on the observation of Carroll (1996)
that insists on the economic responsibility of the firm to make profit.
McPherson (2018) argues that one of the future trends of corporate social responsibility to look
out for from organizations, is the intentional effort to bring to end workplace harassment and
inequality. Carroll (1996) may have caught these in the strata of legal and ethical responsibilities
of an organization in its bid to deliver corporate social responsibility. It is expected that in the
new millennium going forward organizations should be able to bridge the gap in the case of
inequality in every guise of the term. The question of best practices must be upheld to mitigate
the occurrence of workplace harassment.
Irrespective of career choice and organization to be involved with, it is very important to
understand the organizational culture of firms and to evaluate their propensity for effective
10

corporate and social responsibility performance in the business environment. This assertion is
strong, because firms must understand that one of their key stakeholders are their employees.
Corporate social responsibility must first of all be effective in the internal operations of a firm
before it can be effective in its external disposition. This finds connection with the position of
Gabcanova (2011) that employees has been identified as the most important asset of
organizations. To this end, career choice must be guided by effective knowledge of what
organizations do in terms of best practices and their resolve to be competitive.
11

References
Abbott K. (2006). “A Review of Employment Relations Theories and their Application”. Journal
on Problems and Perspectives in Management, 4(1)
Ainley K. (2017). Virtue Ethics. Available at http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/69534/1/Ainley_Virtue
%20ethics_author_2017%20LSERO.pdf. Accessed 27th June 2018
Carroll A. B (2016). Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: taking another look. Carroll International Journal
of Corporate Social Responsibility (2016) 1:3 DOI 10.1186/s40991-016-0004-6
Gamlund E. (2012). Ethics.
https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/ifi/MNSES9100/v14/lectures/mnses-ethical-
theory-gamlund.pdf. Accessed 27th June 2018
Gaus G. F (2001). What is Deontology?, Part One: Orthodox Views. a Journal of Value Inquiry,
vol. 35 (2001): 27-42
Gren J. (2004). Applying Utilitarianism; The problem of practical action guidance.
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/4565/1/gupea_2077_4565_1.pdf. Accessed 26th
June 2018
Global Reporting Initiative (2015). Sustainability and Reporting Trends in 2025 – Preparing for
the future – GRI’s Reporting 2025 Project: First Analysis Paper, May 2015
Friedman M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. NEW York
Times Magazine September 13th 1970
Goff S. C (2016). Fair trade: global problems and individual responsibilities. Critical Review of
International Social and Political Philosophy . pp. 1-23. ISSN 1369-8230
Harribey L. E (n.a). Strategic Value of Corporate Citizenship. Available at
file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/9783642164606-c1.pdf. Accessed 24th June 2018
12

Helgesson G. and Erikson S. (2015). Plagiarism in research. Med Health Care and Philos (2015)
18:91–101
Hjelt B. (2010). Perspectives of future trend of strategic corporate social responsibility:
Illustrated with four case studies of Swedish multinational companies. Available at
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:379829/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Accessed 25th
June 2018
Hursthouse R. (1999). Virtue Ethics and Human Nature. Hume Studies Volume XXV, Number 1
and 2 (April/November, 1999) 67-82.
Keekan V. (2016). Stakeholder Analysis – Café Coffee Day. Available at
https://prezi.com/hhn0amoaqszr/stakeholder-analysis-cafe-coffee-day/?webgl=0.
Accessed 26th June 2018
Krasnozhon L. A., Simpson D., and Block W. E (2015). Fair Trade: Its real impact on the
working poor. The Review of Social and Economic Issues, v. 1, n. 2, Spring 2015
Ismail M. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and its role community development: An
international perspective. The Journal of International Social Research Volume 2 / 9 Fall
2009
McPherson S. (2018). 8 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Trends To Look For In 2018.
Available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanmcpherson/2018/01/12/8-corporate-
social-responsibility-csr-trends-to-look-for-in-2018/#22dcbd0e40ce.Accessed 27th June
2018
Mathur V. N., Price A. D. F., Austin S., and Moobela C. (2007). Defining, identifying and
mapping stakeholders in the assessment of urban sustainability. International Conference
on Whole Life Urban Sustainability and its Assessment M. Horner, C. Hardcastle, A.
Price, J. Bebbington (Eds) Glasgow, 2007
Mertens K. M. E (2013). Milton Friedman and Social Responsibility An Ethical Defense of the
Stockholder Theory. Available at
https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/38408/Mertens_Filsosofi_Master.pdf?
sequence=. Accessed 25th June 2018
13

Norman W. (2013). Business Ethics. The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Edited by Hugh
LaFollette, print pages 652–668
PWC (2015). Global gaming outlook. Available at
https://www.pwc.com/gr/en/publications/assets/global-gaming-outlook-2011-2015.pdf.
Accessed 24th June 2018
Panda B. and Leepsa N. M (2017). Agency theory: Review of Theory and Evidence on Problems
and Perspectives. Indian Journal of Corporate Governance 10(1) 74–95
Schlegelmilch B B and Öberseder M. (2007). Ethical Issues in Global Supply Chains. Emerging
Issues in Management, n. 2, 2007
Snowdon B. and Stonehouse G. (2010). Competitiveness in a Globalised World: Michael Porter
on the Microeconomic Foundations of the Competitiveness of Nations, Regions, and
Firms Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Mar., 2006), pp. 163-175
Thaker S. (2009). The Strategic Importance of Stakeholder Management. “Birds of a Feather” –
Discussion Notes. PMI – SAC Professional Development Conference November 24,
2009
Williams A., Siegel D. S and Wright P. M (2006). Guest Editors’ Introduction Corporate Social
Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies 43:1 January 2006
0022-2380
Windsor D. (2001). The future of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, Vol. 9 Issue: 3, pp.225-256, https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028934
14