12.1 Ethical decision-making frameworks

Ethical decision-making frameworks provide systematic approaches for navigating complex moral dilemmas in business and technology. These frameworks help professionals analyze situations, consider different perspectives, and apply relevant ethical principles to make more thoughtful and justifiable decisions.

The process involves identifying ethical issues, gathering information, analyzing stakeholder impact, and applying various ethical frameworks. Key approaches include consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, and rights-based theories. Each offers unique insights, but integrating multiple frameworks often yields the most comprehensive ethical analysis.

Ethical decision-making process

• Systematic approach to navigating complex moral dilemmas in business and technology
• Involves carefully analyzing the situation, considering different perspectives, and applying relevant ethical principles
• Enables more thoughtful, consistent, and justifiable decisions when facing difficult trade-offs

Identifying ethical dilemmas

Top images from around the web for Identifying ethical dilemmas

• 

  Business Ethics (OpenStax) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  3.3 The Individual Approach to Ethics – Foundations of Business View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Business Ethics (OpenStax) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  3.3 The Individual Approach to Ethics – Foundations of Business View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Identifying ethical dilemmas

• 

  Business Ethics (OpenStax) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  3.3 The Individual Approach to Ethics – Foundations of Business View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Business Ethics (OpenStax) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  3.3 The Individual Approach to Ethics – Foundations of Business View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Recognizing situations where there are conflicting moral obligations or values at stake (privacy vs public safety)
• Distinguishing genuine ethical issues from matters of personal preference, cultural norms, or legal compliance
• Considering the potential for serious harm, injustice, or rights violations if the wrong choice is made
• Acknowledging the difficulty of the decision and the need for careful moral reasoning

Gathering relevant information

• Investigating the facts of the situation, including the stakeholders involved, the available options, and the likely consequences of each choice
• Consulting with experts, affected parties, and ethical authorities to gain multiple perspectives
• Identifying any missing information that could significantly alter the ethical analysis
• Separating factual claims from opinions, assumptions, and value judgments

Analyzing stakeholder impact

• Mapping out the individuals and groups who would be affected by the decision, both directly and indirectly
• Assessing the nature and severity of potential harms and benefits to each stakeholder
• Considering the distribution of impact, including any disproportionate burdens on vulnerable or disadvantaged groups
• Identifying any stakeholders whose rights or legitimate interests may be overridden by the decision

Applying ethical frameworks

• Using established moral theories and principles to guide the decision-making process
• Considering the action from multiple ethical perspectives, such as consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, and rights-based approaches
• Identifying the relevant duties, virtues, and values at stake in the situation
• Critically evaluating the strengths and limitations of different frameworks for the specific context

Consequentialist frameworks

• Family of ethical theories that judge the morality of an action based on its outcomes or consequences
• Focus on maximizing overall welfare, happiness, or utility for all affected parties
• Require predicting and quantifying the likely results of each option, including long-term and indirect effects
• Can justify actions that violate moral rules if they produce sufficiently good consequences

Utilitarianism

• Ethical theory that holds that the most moral action is the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people
• Defines goodness in terms of happiness, pleasure, or preference satisfaction, and badness in terms of suffering, pain, or frustration
• Considers the interests of all sentient beings equally, without giving special priority to oneself or one's own group
• Requires impartially calculating the net utility of each option and choosing the one with the highest expected value

Egoism

• Consequentialist theory that judges actions solely in terms of their impact on the individual agent's own well-being or self-interest
• Holds that the rational choice is always the one that maximizes one's own long-term happiness or success
• Rejects the idea of impartial concern for others' welfare as a moral requirement
• Can justify selfish or exploitative actions if they serve the agent's interests better than alternatives

Altruism

• Ethical principle that holds that the moral action is the one that most benefits others, even at a cost to oneself
• Considers one's own interests to be of little or no intrinsic moral importance compared to the needs of others
• Can require significant personal sacrifices for the greater social good
• Taken to extremes, could lead to a complete disregard for self-care and autonomy

Calculating costs vs benefits

• Process of quantifying and comparing the positive and negative consequences of different options to determine which produces the best overall outcome
• Involves estimating the probability and magnitude of each potential cost and benefit, as well as converting qualitatively different impacts into a common metric ($, QALYs)
• Requires making value judgments about which outcomes are more or less important, and how to weigh them against each other
• Can be challenging when impacts are uncertain, intangible, or span long time horizons

Deontological frameworks

• Family of ethical theories that judge the morality of an action based on its intrinsic nature or adherence to moral rules, regardless of consequences
• Focus on the inviolable duties and obligations that we owe to ourselves and others
• Hold that certain actions (lying, stealing) are inherently wrong and others (keeping promises, respecting autonomy) are inherently right
• Provide clear guidelines for behavior and constrain the pursuit of desirable outcomes

Kant's categorical imperative

• Ethical principle proposed by Immanuel Kant that holds that the moral status of an action depends on whether it could consistently be willed as a universal law
• Formulated as: "Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law"
• Requires that moral rules be applicable to all rational beings without exception or contradiction
• Forbids treating people merely as means to an end, and demands respect for their autonomy and dignity as ends in themselves

Moral absolutism

• View that there are certain moral rules or principles that are objectively true and valid in all contexts, regardless of individual or cultural beliefs
• Holds that these absolute moral facts (murder is wrong) can be known through reason, intuition, or divine revelation
• Rejects moral relativism and subjectivism, and denies that ethics is simply a matter of personal opinion or social convention
• Can provide a strong foundation for human rights and a bulwark against abuses rationalized by appeals to social utility

Moral relativism

• View that moral judgments and principles are not universal or objective, but are relative to the individual or culture that holds them
• Holds that what is considered right or wrong can vary across people and societies, and that there is no independent standard by which to adjudicate moral disagreements
• Emphasizes the role of upbringing, worldview, and social context in shaping moral beliefs and practices
• Taken to extremes, can lead to an "anything goes" attitude and undermine the possibility of moral critique or progress

Duty-based ethics

• Approach to ethics that focuses on the specific obligations and responsibilities attached to particular roles, relationships, and social positions
• Holds that certain duties arise from the nature of a professional role (doctors' duty of care), an interpersonal relationship (parents' duty to protect their children), or membership in a community (citizens' duty to obey just laws)
• Recognizes that duties can sometimes conflict with each other or with the demands of impartial morality, requiring difficult judgments about which to prioritize
• Provides action-guiding principles for common situations, but may struggle with novel cases where duties are unclear or inconsistent

Virtue ethics frameworks

• Family of ethical theories that focus on the moral character of the agent, rather than the rightness or wrongness of specific actions
• Judge the goodness of a choice in terms of whether it reflects and promotes virtuous qualities (honesty, courage, compassion)
• Emphasize the importance of moral education and habituation in shaping our dispositions and choices over time
• Recognize the complexity of real-world situations and the need for practical wisdom to discern the appropriate response

Aristotle's golden mean

• Principle proposed by Aristotle that virtue is a mean or intermediate state between two extremes of excess and deficiency
• Holds that courage is the mean between cowardice and recklessness, generosity is the mean between stinginess and profligacy, etc.
• Suggests that the virtuous action is context-dependent and requires judging the right way to feel and act in a particular situation
• Aims for a balanced, harmonious character that avoids both too much and too little of good qualities

Character-based decision-making

• Approach to moral reasoning that asks "What would a good person do in this situation?" rather than "What are the rules?" or "What are the consequences?"
• Considers how the available options reflect on the moral character of the chooser, and what kind of person one becomes by performing them
• Recognizes that our choices shape our habits, desires, and self-conception over time, not just their immediate effects
• Requires having proper role models and exemplars of virtue to guide our judgment and behavior

Cultivating moral virtues

• Process of deliberately practicing and reinforcing the character traits, attitudes, and behaviors that constitute moral excellence
• Involves self-reflection, feedback from others, and conscious effort to act rightly even when it is difficult or costly
• Aims to make virtuous conduct a matter of second nature, so that we reliably do the right thing without inner conflict
• Recognizes that even generally good people can have blind spots or struggle with certain temptations, requiring ongoing growth and improvement

Practical wisdom in context

• Intellectual virtue of being able to discern the morally salient features of a situation and choose the most fitting response
• Involves both knowledge of general ethical principles and the skill to apply them flexibly to particular cases
• Requires emotional attunement, situational awareness, and the ability to balance competing considerations
• Cannot be reduced to a decision procedure or algorithm, but is cultivated through experience, learning, and good judgment

Rights-based frameworks

• Family of ethical theories that ground moral obligations in the inherent rights or entitlements of individuals
• Hold that certain fundamental rights (life, liberty, property) are inviolable and cannot be overridden by appeals to social utility or other values
• Provide strong protections for individual freedom and autonomy against coercion by others or the state
• Can conflict with other moral considerations (welfare, equality) and may require complex trade-offs in practice

Locke's natural rights

• Philosophical view proposed by John Locke that individuals have certain inalienable rights by virtue of their humanity, independent of social conventions or government decrees
• Identified the rights to life, liberty, and property as fundamental and argued that the purpose of government is to protect these rights
• Held that violation of these rights could justify resistance or revolution against tyrannical rule
• Provided a foundation for classical liberalism and constitutional limits on state power

Rawls' theory of justice

• Philosophical framework developed by John Rawls for evaluating the fairness of social and political institutions
• Imagines a hypothetical "original position" in which individuals choose principles of justice behind a "veil of ignorance" about their own talents, social status, or conception of the good
• Argues that rational agents in this position would choose principles that maximize the welfare of the least well-off and guarantee equal basic liberties for all
• Provides a basis for distributive justice and a social safety net within a broadly liberal framework

Nozick's libertarianism

• Political philosophy proposed by Robert Nozick that prioritizes individual rights and the free market over redistributive policies or social engineering
• Holds that the only legitimate function of the state is to protect citizens against force, fraud, and theft, and that taxation and regulation beyond this minimal level are unjustified
• Argues that economic inequalities arising from voluntary transactions are fair and that attempts to reduce them infringe on individual liberty
• Represents a "right-libertarian" critique of Rawlsian liberalism and the modern welfare state

Balancing individual vs collective rights

• Challenge of adjudicating conflicts between the rights and freedoms of individuals and the broader interests or values of the community
• Arises in cases such as public health measures that restrict personal liberty, eminent domain seizures of private property, or hate speech laws that limit free expression
• Requires weighing the severity of the individual burden against the importance and effectiveness of the collective goal
• May involve limiting the scope or exercise of certain rights rather than completely overriding them

Applying frameworks to digital dilemmas

• Using ethical theories and principles to navigate the complex moral challenges posed by emerging technologies and digital practices
• Recognizing that the digital realm creates new opportunities, risks, and power dynamics that strain conventional approaches to ethics
• Adapting and extending existing frameworks to address novel issues such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and online misinformation
• Engaging in interdisciplinary collaboration to understand the technical, legal, and social dimensions of digital ethics

Privacy vs security

• Tension between protecting the privacy rights of individuals and promoting public safety or national security through surveillance and data collection
• Arises in cases such as government monitoring of communications metadata, encryption backdoors, or the use of facial recognition in public spaces
• Requires balancing the harms of privacy violations against the potential benefits of preventing crime, terrorism, or other threats
• May involve developing technical and legal safeguards to limit the scope and abuse of surveillance powers

Intellectual property vs open access

• Conflict between the exclusive rights of creators to control and profit from their innovations and the public interest in free access to knowledge and culture
• Arises in debates over patent and copyright law, scientific publishing, and the sharing of educational resources online
• Requires considering the incentives for creativity and investment as well as the social costs of restricting access to valuable information and tools
• May involve alternative models such as open licensing, public funding, or tiered pricing to balance competing interests

Automation vs human agency

• Ethical implications of replacing human judgment and control with algorithmic decision-making systems in domains such as hiring, lending, and criminal justice
• Raises questions about accountability, transparency, and the risk of perpetuating or amplifying biases baked into the data or model
• Requires ensuring meaningful human oversight and the ability to appeal or override automated decisions that have significant consequences for individuals
• May involve developing technical and regulatory frameworks to audit and govern the use of AI in sensitive contexts

Transparency vs proprietary information

• Tension between the public's right to know how digital platforms and algorithms shape their online experiences and the companies' desire to protect their intellectual property and competitive advantage
• Arises in calls for greater transparency around content moderation policies, recommendation engines, and targeted advertising practices
• Requires balancing the benefits of accountability and informed consent against the costs of disclosing trade secrets or enabling gaming of the system
• May involve limited or conditional forms of transparency, such as audits by trusted third parties or explanations of specific high-stakes decisions

Limitations of ethical frameworks

• Recognizing that no single ethical theory or principle can provide complete or unambiguous guidance for every possible moral dilemma
• Acknowledging that even well-developed frameworks have blind spots, paradoxes, or areas of underdetermination that require judgment to navigate
• Identifying common challenges or pitfalls in applying ethical reasoning to real-world problems, especially in the complex and rapidly evolving domain of digital technology
• Emphasizing the need for humility, flexibility, and ongoing refinement in our approach to ethics, rather than expecting a perfect decision procedure

Conflicting principles

• Situations in which different ethical frameworks or principles point in opposite directions or cannot be simultaneously satisfied
• Arises in cases such as the trolley problem, where utilitarian and deontological intuitions clash, or conflicts between individual rights and collective welfare
• Requires finding a way to balance or prioritize the competing considerations, often involving difficult value trade-offs and context-dependent judgments
• Highlights the importance of moral pluralism and the need for practical wisdom to navigate ethical complexity

Situational complexity

• Difficulty of capturing all of the morally relevant features and potential consequences of a real-world decision in an abstract philosophical framework
• Arises from the presence of multiple stakeholders, long causal chains, incomplete information, and unintended side effects in many practical contexts
• Requires going beyond simple thought experiments or analogies to engage with the full messiness and particularity of actual situations
• Emphasizes the importance of empirical knowledge, situational awareness, and a holistic perspective in ethical reasoning

Cultural relativism

• Challenge of applying universal ethical principles across diverse societies and worldviews with different values, norms, and practices
• Arises in debates over the foundations of human rights, the limits of tolerance for illiberal cultures, or the imposition of Western values on developing nations
• Requires grappling with the tension between moral objectivism and respect for self-determination and cultural differences
• May involve seeking an overlapping consensus on basic principles while allowing for some local variation in their interpretation and implementation

Need for practical judgment

• Recognition that ethical decision-making ultimately relies on the situated judgment of moral agents, not just the mechanical application of rules or calculation of consequences
• Arises from the inherent limitations of general principles in capturing the nuances and contextual factors relevant to particular cases
• Requires cultivating moral virtues such as empathy, courage, humility, and practical wisdom that enable responsible and discerning choices
• Emphasizes the importance of moral education, role models, and communities of practice in developing capacities for ethical reasoning and action

Integrating multiple frameworks

• Approach to ethical decision-making that draws on the insights and strategies of different moral frameworks in a complementary and context-sensitive way
• Recognizes the value of theoretical diversity and the potential for different principles to shed light on different aspects of a complex issue
• Seeks to find common ground and overlapping consensus where possible, while acknowledging the persistence of some fundamental tensions or dilemmas
• Requires flexibility, creativity, and good judgment to adapt and combine frameworks in a coherent and actionable way

Pluralistic approach

• View that there are multiple irreducible and sometimes conflicting moral values that must be balanced and negotiated in ethical reasoning
• Holds that no single principle or theory can capture the full range of ethically relevant considerations or provide determinate answers in every case
• Draws on a variety of frameworks (consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics) to illuminate different dimensions of a moral problem
• Aims to find a coherent and justified resolution that respects the force of competing principles even if it cannot perfectly satisfy them all

Resolving framework conflicts

• Strategies for adjudicating between different ethical theories or principles when they yield opposing verdicts in a particular case
• May involve arguing for the priority of one principle over another based on the specific context or stakes involved (preventing catastrophe vs keeping a minor promise)
• May involve seeking a creative compromise or reinterpretation that fulfills the spirit of competing principles even if violating the letter of one or both
• Requires making difficult judgments about the relative weights and trade-offs between different moral considerations in a given