MGMT20134 Business Ethcis And Sustainability

Introduction

According to Ceva (2018), the offering or giving of a bribe is termed as bribery. It is a word synonymous to corruption. Bribery has been defined by Black’s law dictionary as an action of providing or receiving in return of some form of action or influence which would not have been altered by the recipient otherwise.  This leads to corruption when it s done in relation to a public official or any other person who is in charge of a legal or public duty. Corruption is a fraudulent or dishonest conduct by those who are in power involving bribery. Corruption is prevalent in developing countries as the rules in relation to such activities are very strictly implemented in developed countries like Australia. In this paper the situation of the Indian Premier League which is also the richest domestic league in world cricket have been discussed with respect to bribery and corruption in the league.  The paper in the light of ethical theories also discusses whether bribery and corruption should be considered as unethical. The paper has also made a comparison in relation to the legal framework regarding bribery and corruption in Australia with the framework of the same in India. The ethical theories which the paper has discussed with respect to bribery and corruption include Deontology, Utilitarianism, Relativism, ontology and epistemology.

Personal Career-relevance

Any person who wishes to indulge in a either a professional or a business activity or being in employment would at some point have to tackle bribery and corruption. Thus it is of much significance to know that whether the actions of bribery and corruption can be considered as ethical or not. Ethical decision making ensures long term performance as well as compliance with the existing legal framework. It is important to understand the reason which makes a person indulge in bribery and corruption. Whether these reasons are only financial hardship or the culture of the country or a custom in the business or all of them is important to understand. It is also important to understand that why does bribery and corruption fall within a category of actions which are considered as unethical under the renowned theories of ethics such as  Deontology, Utilitarianism, Relativism, ontology and epistemology.

Description of Key Ethics Scenario (THE INDIAN PREMIER LEAGUE)

According to Sekhi (2016) the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has been subjected to various conflicts with other cricket boards because of the IPL. The primary point of contention was that the player should always stay available for the country for international matches even if they are at the time when the IPL is scheduled. The BCCI had made a request to the ICC to allow them and window for IPL, however the request had been denied by the ICC.  As the players are paid much more for playing in IPL as compared to international matches, they usually have the temptation of choosing IPL over their national duty. This is the situation where the issue of Bribery and Corruption comes into the context. These players are provided with more money to ignore their national duties and play for IPL which they should not be doing (Mann, 2014).

The IPL has also been subjected to various cases involving spot fixing which, is a part of Bribery and Corruption. The Indian news channel India TV conducted a sting operation in which 5 players including foreign players had been accused of spot fixing. The payers were caught on the camera stating that the franchisee had provided them with black money.  The police also caught three famous cricketers of the team Rajasthan Royal in the event of spot fixing who had been suspended by the BCCI (Philpott, 2018).

In what is considered as the biggest corruption scandal in BCCI one of the best teams in IPL, the Chennai Super Kings had been suspended for a period of two years along with Rajasthan Royals. They had been suspended as the team officials which included foreigners had been involved in illegal betting on matches. The conduct of the officials has affected the image of the game and the others associated with the high profile tournament (Naha, 2015).

Applied Theories

Deontology 

With respect to moral philosophy deontology is considered to be a normative ethical position which is put in place to judge the morality of a specific action in relation to certain rules. It is also sometimes considered as a rule obligation or duty based ethics. This is because under the ethics, rule binds a person to their duties (Kaliyabanu & Aida, 2016). This theory is generally in contrast with other theories of consequences, pragmatic ethics and virtue ethics. Under this theory actions are considered to be of more importance as compared to the consequences of the action. It has been provided through this ethical system that a moral obligation can be created from an internal or external source. This may include a set of rules with respect to religion, universe or set bicultural or personal values (Koven, 2018). There are various reasons because of which the theory provided by Immanuel Kant is considered to be deontological. The primary argument provided with this theory is that for the purpose of acting in a morally correct way people have to abide by their duties. In addition it is provided by the theory that it is not the consequences of the act which makes the act right or wrong it is actually the motive of the person who has committed the act which decides morality. The argument provided by this theory that morally correct action can only be achieved by complying with a duty imposed on a person is based on the principle that the best morally correct action has to be morally correct in itself and morally correct without any qualification. It further provides that something would be considered as morally correct in itself, when the thing is intrinsically good. In addition and action would be considered as correct without qualification in situation where any addition does not make the situation ethically worse. It is further argued by the theory that the things which are usually taken as morally correct such as pleasure perseverance intelligence either fail to be intrinsically good or good without qualification (Ceva, 2018). For instance, pleasure does not appear to be correct without any qualification as when there is Pleasure created by people watching someone else suffer, make the situation ethically worse. This theory argues that only one thing can be considered as morally correct. The only thing which is considered as morally correct under the theory is a good intention. It is further stated by the theory that consequences of an action should not be utilised to find out that a person has good intention or not. This is because good result can be obtained accidentally from an action which has the intention of harming other people. Therefore when a person is making an ethical decision he should ask himself a question that whether that decision would be considered as morally correct, if it is taken by everyone around the world. While making a morally correct decision the primary focus of a person should be to abide by the duties imposed on them by law or any other authority (Paquette, Sommerfeldt & Kent, 2015).

Utilitarianism 

On the other hand the theory of utilitarianism states that a morally correct action would be the action which results in maximum utility. The definition of utility can include various aspects such as wellbeing of sentiment entities (Lazari-Radek & Singer, 2017). Utility had been defined as the sum of all pleasures which is the result of an action and subtracting any suffering which is caused to a person involved in the action (Fraser, 2018). This theory of morality has taken the consequentialism approach according to which consequences of actions are the only factor to be taken into consideration towards determining morality of the action. In this theory the interest of all beings is considered in an equal manner (Mill, 2015). The primary emphasis of this theory is that if an action provides maximum utility it is considered to be an ethical action. Maximum utility signifies taking into account the happiness of the majority (Patrick & Werkhoven, 2017). Therefore under the theory if an action results in maximum happiness for 60 people out of hundred it would be considered as an ethical action not taking into consideration the effect the action would have on the other 40 people. This approach has been subjected to various criticisms as it fails to take into consideration the sufferings caused to the minority because of an action (Mill, 2016).

Relativism

According to the doctrine of relativism there is nothing which can be considered as absolute truth. All views are dependent on difference in consideration and perception. Every point of view provided has its own truth. Therefore under this theory whether action is to be considered as ethical or not depends upon the perception of the person who judges the action. This theory would essentially signify that if bribery and corruption is considered to be a part of a culture it is morally correct from the perspective of the culture (Pearson, 2016).

Reality seen through

Ontology

Ontology is the branch of metaphysics which deals with nature or existence of a being. This theory also focuses on the fact that the primary existence of bribery and corruption is because of the culture of the society in which it takes place. When an action is prevalent in the society it would become a part of the society and would be considered as an ethical and general activity. For instance capital punishment may not be considered as ethical in certain regions but it is still applicable in certain jurisdictions (Klakegg, 2016).

Epistemology

Epistemology is primarily concerned about the theory of knowledge. It studies the nature of justification, rationality and knowledge. Thus, in case, bribery and corruption can be taken into consideration as an ethical action if it can be justified (Mayan, 2016).

Key body of Arguments

In relation to the ethical scenario provided and the ethical theories discussed above it can be stated that not under every theory would bribery and corruption be considered as unethical. When the perception of deontology is applied it can be stated that bribery and corruption in ethical. This is because under the theory when a person is making an ethical decision he should ask himself a question that whether that decision would be considered as morally correct, if it is taken by everyone around the world. While making a morally correct decision the primary focus of a person should be to abide by the duties imposed on them by law or any other authority. Every person in the society if indulges into the actions of bribery and corruption it would not be seen as ethical and the primary duty imposed on a person is not to indulge in such actions as they may also be considered as illegal.  Under the theory of utilitarianism also the actions of bribery and corruption would be considered as unethical. This is because in this theory the interest of all beings is considered in an equal manner. The primary emphasis of this theory is that if an action provides maximum utility it is considered to be an ethical action. In the present situation it can be stated that when a person indulges in Bribery and corruption it is only beneficial for the person who indulges in such action and not the general public associated with it. Thus bribery and corruption is also considered to be unethical under the theory of utilitarianism. Under relativism however, the morality of bribery and corruption can vary. This is because there is nothing which can be considered as absolute truth. All views are dependent on difference in consideration and perception. Every point of view provided has its own truth. Therefore under this theory whether action is to be considered as ethical or not depends upon the perception of the person who judges the action. This theory would essentially signify that if bribery and corruption is considered to be a part of a culture it is morally correct from the perspective of the culture.

The law in India and Australia in relation to bribery and corruption is almost the same. In Australia giving bribe to a public official is punishable under 70.2 of the Criminal Code Act 1995. In India also bribing a public official is a penal offence

Examples 

The first example can be provided with respect to Deontology. In IPL emotions of various fans are involved and it is also illegal to provide bribe in form of black money. Thus bribery and corruption would be considered as unethical.

The second example can be provided in relation to utilitarianism. In the given situation it is evident that In IPL emotions of various fans are involved and the number of fans is much more than the players. Thus an act which is not favourable for the fans would not being maximum utility.

Conclusion

Thus from the above discussion it can be concluded that The law in India and Australia in relation to bribery and corruption is almost the same. In Australia giving bribe to a public official is punishable under 70.2 of the Criminal Code Act 1995. In India also bribing a public official is a penal offence. However the problem is in relation to the implementation of law and the perception of bribery and corruption in relation to the culture of both the countries. Under the theory of utilitarianism also the actions of bribery and corruption would be considered as unethical. The result would also be the same under the theory of deontology as under the theory when a person is making an ethical decision he should ask himself a question that whether that decision would be considered as morally correct, if it is taken by everyone around the world.

References 

Ceva, E. (2018). The political wrongness of corruption. RAGION PRATICA, 50(1), 235-252.

de Lazari-Radek, K., & Singer, P. (2017). Utilitarianism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.

Fraser, N. (2018). Recognition without ethics?. In The culture of toleration in diverse societies. Manchester University Press.

Kaliyabanu, K., & Aida, M. (2016, October). Deontological Training of Specialists as the Basis for the State Anti-corruption Strategy. In International Symposium on Chaos, Complexity and Leadership (pp. 83-88). Springer, Cham.

Klakegg, O. J. (2016). Ontology and epistemology. In Designs, Methods and Practices for Research of Project Management (pp. 87-96). Routledge.

Koven, S. G. (2018). Toward a Strategy for Combating Corruption. International Journal of Public Administration, 1-8.

Mann, S. (2014). A Qualitative Examination of Player Perspectives on Corruption in Indian Cricket.

Mayan, M. J. (2016). Essentials of qualitative inquiry. Routledge.

Mill, J. S. (2015). On Liberty, Utilitarianism, and other essays. Oxford University Press, USA.

Mill, J. S. (2016). Utilitarianism. In Seven Masterpieces of Philosophy (pp. 337-383). Routledge.

Naha, S. (2015). The great tamasha: cricket, corruption and the turbulent rise of modern India.

Paquette, M., Sommerfeldt, E. J., & Kent, M. L. (2015). Do the ends justify the means? Dialogue, development communication, and deontological ethics. Public Relations Review, 41(1), 30-39.

Patrick, T., & Werkhoven, S. (2017). Utilitarianism. Macat Library.

Pearson, R. (2016). Beyond ethical relativism in public relations: Coorientation, rules, and the idea of communication symmetry. In Public relations research annual (pp. 77-96). Routledge.

Philpott, S. (2018). The politics of purity: discourses of deception and integrity in contemporary international cricket. Third World Quarterly, 39(4), 677-691.

Sekhi, D. G. (2016). Not Out!: The Incredible Story of The Indian Premier League. Penguin UK