Ethics in Business

Essay Assignment #2

Objectives: (1) to develop critical thinking and writing skills (2) to accurately and in detail interpret philosophers we have read (3) to develop your own well argued, unique philosophy and compare/contrast it with philosophers we have read.

Instructions: Read the case study "Integrity in Business" by Robert F. Ladenson (below).  Then compare/contrast what you think a philosopher  would say about this case with your own view.  Begin devising a thesis, which will be your individual point of view on this case.  Be sure to state your thesis clearly in your first paragraph (In this essay, I argue that...).  Then pose an analysis of this case by (choose 1 only) Locke, Smith, Friedman, Henderson, Marx, Lasn.  Imagine what the philosopher would say about this case and apply details from his view to this case.  Compare/contrast  your thesis with the philosopher's point of view.   

Please see the tip sheet to help you get started. You have the option to give me drafts of your essay, which I will read. Final essays are due 6/16/05/05, the last day of class. There is a severe penalty for handing an essay in late. Remember: plagiarism is the use of another's words or ideas without citation and is punishable by automatic failure of this course. Use simple parenthetical citations to cite books we have read. For example, (Bowie online pg. 3). No outside research is necessary.

"Integrity in Business" by Robert F. Ladenson from http://ethics.sandiego.edu/

You are a recruiter for an executive recruitment firm that has recently been retained by one of the largest corporations in the United States to find appropriate candidates for the position of President of the corporation. If the corporation hires one of the candidates you find then your firm will receive one third of the President’s cash compensation —— salary and bonus, an amount in excess of $750,000. Several weeks into the recruitment process it becomes clear to you that the company has gone about the search in a severely flawed way, making it highly unlikely that it will find the kind of candidates it needs. The Board of Directors, in your judgment, has allowed the CEO to control the search. It is clear to you that he wants someone who will be deferential towards him, which, in your judgment, will make it extremely difficult to attract the most highly qualified candidates. You discuss the issue with your superior. She says that given the intensely competitive environment for executive search firms, it would seriously disadvantage your firm to offend the Board of Directors of one of America’s largest corporations. She reminds you that the Board of Directors is responsible for hiring the President of the Corporation. A recruitment firm, she says, bears no legal liability if a candidate it presents to a company is hired and proves unsuccessful in his position.

What should you do in this situation, and why?
 

PLAGIARISM is the use of another's words or ideas without properly citing them and is punishable by automatic failure of this course. It is plagiarism if you cut and paste the direct words of another person without citing the source, if you paraphrase another's words without citing the source and even if you write about ideas that are not originally your own (except if they are common knowledge) without citing the source. In this course, we will use simple parenthetical notations. After a direct quote or an indirect discussion of another's ideas cite the author's last name and page number. For example: (Henderson, online pg. 3). For any citations beyond our basic reading list, include all bibliographic or web information.

AN INTRODUCTION is essential for philosophy papers. In the introduction, you should outline the thesis of the entire paper. Do this with the sentence: "In this paper, I will argue that..." Then the introduction should give the reader a preview of what's to come.

HAVE A THESIS in you paper. The thesis is the position that you will advance through argument. While you briefly state your thesis in the introduction, be sure to follow through on it by making each subsequent paragraph of your paper relates to your thesis. Good papers are ones that offer arguments for the thesis. An argument is a set of reasons. We might give arguments by giving examples or analogies, by discussing causes, by citing authorities, or by deducing conclusions from premises. In your final and concluding paragraph, the reader should be at least be convinced that your thesis has been clearly stated and argued for throughout.

SPELLING AND EDITING are incredibly important. Although I don't count it against you in terms of points, it is important to hand in a paper appropriate to a college student. (P.S. The spell checker doesn't get all your mistakes. Go back and reread word for word after spell checking.) Also, please use standard pagination and paragraphs, which means indenting each new paragraph and not spacing in-between them. Don't try and play tricks with the pages to lengthen the paper if it's short, just write more.

DON'T ASK, ANSWER! Many students new to philosophy make the mistake of asking questions in the paper without answering them. For example: instead of rhetorically asking, say, "Doesn't everyone know stealing is wrong?" rephrase the sentence to read "Everyone knows stealing is wrong.". By using declaratives (.) and not questions (?), your writing will become not only more sophisticated, but also more lucid. Double check your paper for any errant question marks that may have slipped in.

Philosophers don't use the awkward convention of describing their positions in the third person. Feel free to say 'I' whenever you want!

No: "One might argue that..."

Yes: "I argue that..."

This (and almost every other writing assignment you will do in college) is formal writing. That means no contractions, no funny abbreviations, no internet shorthand. Try to make your language formal and precise. Avoid over-the-top hyperbole!

No: "U gotta B kidding me. Marx is whack! I didn't get it and LOLed when I read it."

Yes: "Marx is a radical thinker. I did not understand his point of view initially."

Often introductory students include personal anecdotes which barely related to the issues on hand. Personal accounts can be valuable BUT ONLY if they are made explicitly relevant to the philosophical matters. Don't randomly insert anecdotes; show how they pertain to what is under discussion. And please: keep the anecdotes and your language throughout all your work "Rated G".

No: "I get paid a lousy wage and it sucks."

Yes: "I relate Marx's economic theory to my own experiences of being treated badly..."

Don't be superficial. People often write trite/silly/superficial fillers to make transitions between paragraphs or to introduce topics. Rather than that approach, be direct with the reader by simply stating what you plan on talking about and why.

No: "Marx was a guy who liked communal ownership."

Yes: "In this section, I will consider Marx's theory of ownership."

Skip quoting from the dictionary. If you want to give a philosophical treatment of a word, give your own. However, feel free to briefly quote from our readings to back up your interpretations of the text, or else to support your original ideas.

No: "Webster's dictionary defines ownership as 'to hold as property'."

Yes: "I think ownership means being able to use something however you want to."

Remember to include your own analysis. Besides failing to fulfill the requirements of the assignment, you also lose your chance to speak out about the issues. Be bold! Take a stand!

No: "Marx has an interesting theory of economics."

Yes: "Marx's theory underestimates the individual's desires for wealth."

Give real analysis by taking stands on the philosophical issues. Don't just toss up your hands and say that 'there is no answer' or 'but who really knows', etc. And if you don't have a certain opinion or argument, admit and explore that. (That is when papers really get deep and interesting.)

No: "But everyone will always disagree about what's moral, so it's useless to give an opinion."

Yes: "I do not have a single solution to what is moral, but here are some observations that I think are relevant..."