Introduction
The rise of business has witnessed increased diversity in the workplace with people from different backgrounds and faiths converging to offer professional services. The engagements are bound to raise ethical issues due to professional requirements and religious beliefs. Being presented with moral dilemmas that include propagation of violent messages raises the question of whether organizations should profit from such undertakings. The case study will evaluate whether it is ethical to publish pictures that desecrate Christ and at the same time promote antisocial behavior in the community. Broadly, conferring social benefits by an organization should be the primary motivation that influences their actions.
Issue
In the case under review, the graphic designer is confused on whether to uphold professional requirements and edit pictures of a heavy metal band that desecrate Christ. Even further, the ethical concern becomes complicated since the music band promotes antisocial behavior that ranges from drug abuse to violence in the community. The scenario raises moral misgivings on whether to undertake the work which is vital for the company’s future or maintain her religious beliefs which are against blasphemy and any antisocial behavior (Elango, Paul, Kundu, & Paudel, 2010). Again, the employee is torn between her theological viewpoints or her work which is significant considering it is likely to further her professional career. Overall, the worker is torn between upholding social values which are against drug abuse and violence or ignore the same and seek profits for the company.
Naturally, people are expected to work to earn a living, and some opportunities are bound to have a positive effect on one’s career in an increasingly competitive world (Gregg, 2011). Diversity in the world means people have different beliefs that might offend others in the community, which present ethical dilemmas if the jobs provided clash with the theological ideas of a professional (Firth, 2012). Fundamentally, one is forced to choose between promoting and defending their religious persuasions or demonstrate professionalism by eliminating any religious views espoused by the worker in question while at their workstation. Viewing the issue from another lens is essential since one should respect the opinions of other people in the community, even though, they might offend personal beliefs.
Stakeholders
The case presented above affects people directly that includes primary and secondary stakeholders. In this regard, the significant stakeholders include the publishing company that has been assigned the contract to develop and publish the images by the heavy metal band. Equally, the music band is a significant stakeholder since their professional pursuits are at stake. The worker in question is a significant stakeholder in the case since she is the one tasked with producing the product. Minor stakeholders in the case involve the community that is likely to be affected by the negative messages being propagated by the rock band. The family of the professional and the kin of the rock band might also be considered as minor stakeholders since anything that happens in the lives of the mentioned individuals is bound to affect them either directly or indirectly. Acknowledging all stakeholders is vital since the decisions made will have an impact on the interested parties either positively or negatively that demonstrates the critical of the ethical dilemma. Primarily, the issue raises questions on which interests should be prioritized over the other that is individual or group interests.
Rule
The employment of theory to underpin the arguments presented is critical to rationalize the issue objectively. Notably, theory enables individuals to understand the underlying dynamics that influence people to behave in a particular way. In this case, the analysis will utilize the dual investor theory to evaluate the issues raised in the scenario to determine if the actions of the major stakeholders were ethical or unethical. The dual investor doctrine revolves around the argument that organizations are facilitated to engage in business with the community, and as such, any benefits accruing must benefit the broader society (Schlossberger, 2008). Therefore, the arguments advanced in dual investor theory imply that firms must engage in actions that benefit the community rather than promote activities that harm the community since the society has enabled the resources in use. In other words, the interests of the majority override the rights of the minority in the community for the good of the most.
Analysis
Applying the dual investor theory, an objective individual will evaluate different situations to determine the best course of action. Towards this end, accepting to edit and publish the images will most likely offend the broader society that holds their religious beliefs in high esteem (Sekerka, 2009). Again, printing the photos will encourage the use of drugs and violence in line with the views of the music band. Moreover, the publishing company has been enabled by the community to operate and must, therefore, employ its resources for the benefit of the community (Geeta, Pooja, & Mishra, 2016). Against this backdrop, the graphics company must decline the job to protect the broader society since the dual investor theory extols entities to benefit the community.
On the other hand, the objective ethicist would also consider the case of the heavy metal band that will be affected if the images are not produced in due time. To some extent, the group has a following which the message is targeted towards that will be offended by the actions of the publishing firm. Notably, the assignment bestowed on the publishing company has been designed to promote their activities and beliefs among their target audience. Granted, they have their rights and freedoms which should be respected, but the consequences of their actions should be considered before any major decision is made regarding the project.
However, pertinent questions are raised when the dual investor theory is employed to determine the ethical efficacy of the action. In this regard, one is bound to ask themselves if the publishing will negatively impact the community (Jamnik, 2017). The answer will be in the affirmative since the society will be affected due to the propagation of messages that encourage social ills, for example, drug abuse. Therefore, declining to work on the heavy metal band project is ethical since it will confer benefits to the wider society (Jamnik, 2017). Besides the affected group is small and the losses incurred by the group cannot be compared with the dangers likely to plague the community if their works are published and viewed by the people in the society. In other words, the universal maxim that is the greatest good for the most people should be upheld by the worker under review.
Conclusion
Analysis of the issues presented, raise fundamental ethical questions on which right should override the other regarding individual or group interests. The employment of dual investor theory to rationalize the actions of the worker under review indicates that the worker and the publishing firm made ethical judgments. In line with the dual investor doctrine, declining to publish the project was ethical since it conferred benefits to the society at the expense of the heavy metal band. Notably, the overall message by the band is to promote violence in the community which is against any established social order. In summation, the actions were undertaken by the company, and the graphic designer is ethical in line with the dual investor argument that requires firms to grant the community benefits
References
Elango, B., Paul, K., Kundu, S., and Paudel, S. (2010). Organizational ethics, individual ethics,
and ethical intentions in international decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics.
Firth, L. (2012). Ethics in business. Independence.
Geeta, M., Pooja, J., and Mishra,N. (2016). Ethical Behavior in Organizations: A Literature
Review. Journal of Research in Business and Management.
Gregg, S. (2011). Profit, prudence and virtue. Andrews UK Ltd.
Heres, L., and Lasthuizen, K. (2009). Ethical leadership: A variform universal phenomenon. VU
University Amsterdam.
Jamnik, A. (2017). The challenges of business ethics: The basic principles of business ethics –
ethical codex in business. University of Ljubljana.
Schlossberger, E, (2008). For you alone? Dual-Investor theory and fiduciary relationships.
McGeorge Law Review.
Sekerka, L. (2009). Organizational ethics education and training: a review of best practices and
their application. International Journal of Training and Development.
