The field of ethical decision-making research is advancing, requiring more scholarly attention. A comprehensive grasp of the ethical-decision making research should be evaluated critically. Tenbrunsel and Smith-Crowe (2008) write that ethical decision-making research lacks definitions that limit the field’s understanding. Two main approaches, normative and descriptive, that debate how to view ethics. The primary distinction between normative and descriptive ethics is that the former examines how individuals should behave while the latter examines what individuals believe to be morally appropriate. The scholarship of ethical decision-making can vary depending on what approach scholars use.
At the level of everyday practice, decision-making is based either on intuition, impulsive impulse, or judgments based on personal experience, knowledge, and competence. There are three generally accepted principles for resolving dilemmas: outcome-based consideration, care-based consideration, and rule-based consideration. Choices will be easier if one understands and accepts the decision-making principles of the people with whom one interacts. This is especially pronounced in team activities when the team discusses and defines a core set of values. Consequently, finding out other people’s values and combining them with one’s values will help one identify potential conflicts and prevent them.
Rational decision passes five obligatory stages of comprehension of a problem: diagnostics of a problem, formulation of restrictions and criteria for decision-making, revealing of alternatives, their estimation, and final choice. At the stage of problem diagnosis, the quality of the decision is influenced not so much by an increase in the volume of information as by a person’s ability to distinguish relevant information from other information, even if very interesting and attractive.
The choice of the alternative reflects the values on which the decision-maker is guided. Under the influence of utilitarian values, the leading motive of choice can be the desire to maximize benefits and profits. Perfectionistic values are more likely to influence the choice of a satisfying solution, that is, an acceptable but not necessarily the best possible option. The effectiveness and value of a decision become apparent only after its implementation. At this stage, it is important to evaluate the choice made, both in terms of its effectiveness and considering the criteria that lie beyond optimization and effectiveness (respect for individual rights, dignity, and positive moral and psychological climate). The level of effectiveness in implementing decisions will be higher the more people whose interests are affected by the decision recognize its value. This implies another important stage of decision-making – the establishment of feedback and the formation of appropriate motivation for the people affected by the decision. In this sense, decision-making is one of the mechanisms of self-management and managerial activity.
The result of made decisions acts as a criterion of professionalism and competence, which combines experience, intuition, judgment, rational knowledge, and moral responsibility. Professionalism is the ability to make decisions with knowledge and foresee their results, and readiness to bear personal responsibility guarantees success in any activity.
Whether decision-makers are ethically aware is a key factor in ethical decision-making. Choice-makers engage in a process known as “moral decision making” when they are morally aware; “amoral decision making” occurs when they are not (Tenbrunsel & Smith‐Crowe, 2008). In existing ethical decision-making models, moral awareness has been a crucial component. Measuring this construct is particularly difficult despite the value placed on moral awareness. These studies presuppose that for decision-makers to be ethically aware, they must believe their choice is moral. Moral awareness is most frequently assessed by asking participants if a situation creates an ethical dilemma, potentially revealing a moral dimension that might not have been noticed otherwise.
In contrast to bad decision-making, moral aspects are part of the decision-making process. Tenbrunsel and Smith-Crow (2008) believe that moral consciousness is the basis of moral decision-making. However, they believe that moral consciousness is not a requirement for ethical decision-making but serves only as a starting point so that the decision-making process can be characterized as moral or immoral and the outcomes of the decision-making process as ethical or unethical. This distinction is simple, but its implications are not so obvious. Although some dismiss cases of moral ignorance as exceptions, they play an important role
The ethical decision-making process involves understanding the importance of the problem, the influence of factors on decision-making, explaining the concept of opportunity, and understanding how to improve the outcomes of decisions. Understanding the ethics of virtue and justice is not insignificant(Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2021). Similarly, although some have argued that ethical decision-making is best understood as the wrong choices of good people, the study of moral decision-making is worthwhile. Sometimes people know that their choices have ethical implications, and sometimes they are not (Tenbrunsel & Smith-Crowe, 2008). A review of research examining how different circumstances influence moral consciousness shows an unclear and incomplete picture, with some elements being more constant in their influence on moral consciousness than others. While some studies show that ethnicity and gender are related to decision makers’ level of moral consciousness, other studies do not. However, research on moral engagement, ethical experiences, and values and orientations is more consistent and therefore has more potential for an explanation.
As values, orientations, ethical experience, and moral disengagement are theoretically more closely related to moral concepts than gender and nationality are, they provide more reliable findings. It is plausible to suppose that underlying processes, such as cognitive attention to others, that are more closely connected with ethical characteristics regulate this relationship, even if it is probable that gender and nationality are highly related to moral decision-making. Thus, inconsistent results on moral awareness may reflect a lack of theoretical research and specification rather than the actual strength of a link.
Moreover, integrating disciplines unrelated to the business may offer fresh viewpoints when addressing ethical decision-making. The study of ethical decision-making should be helpful in enlightening moral philosophy on the psychological processes and distortions that characterize moral thinking. For instance, connections to moral philosophy would not only help in identifying what is ethical, as previously discussed. The requirements for a just system can be determined by moral philosophy, and ethical decision-making can inform moral philosophy about the biases emanating from the unfair biases that can lead to a discriminatory system. Similar to how integration with social psychology can help better understand the decision-making processes involved in ethical challenges, integration with sociology may provide new perspectives on ethics at the organizational level.
Overall, the organizational scholarship dealing with ethical decision-making is active and thriving. It is a fascinating tale because it is not one of rebirth but of development and opportunity. In contrast to the past, researchers no longer need to explain why they are researching ethics; instead, their attention should be directed toward creating a more thorough theoretical foundation on which empirical work in behavioral ethics can be built. The field will not survive if it keeps going in that direction, even though a great deal of empirical study has been done to look at numerous individual and situational antecedents to ethical and immoral decision-making. There is a need to put in the challenging and tedious labor of disproving outdated theories, developing new ones, and implementing new technology. The next section will analyze the ethical issue of data privacy.
Law and ethics and trust, security, and confidentiality are interrelated. Trust is necessary to protect confidentiality and security measures. Breaching confidentiality creates risk, which compromises security. Ethics can give context to the law, but the law can only offer a solution when ethics cannot. Breaking confidentiality violates ethics, undermines trust, and increases the likelihood of reduced or disappearing security (Hand, 2018). Thus, the basis for implementing these improvements is ethics. The goal of ethical behavior is to do the right thing, described as fulfilling one’s obligations and doing the right thing (Prindle & Loos, 2017). An ethical data strategy seeks to provide value to customers without harming them. Such a strategy complies with privacy laws, constantly striving to make progress in a dangerous and insecure digital world.
A prime example of an ethical issue related to public safety might be cybersecurity. The accessibility of cyberspace and the integrity, reliability, and confidentiality of data in cyberspace have become vital issues of the 21st century. Thus, cyber security has become a central concern for government, business, and society both nationally and internationally. The cyber security strategy is designed to improve framework conditions in this area. In recent years, cybercrime has increased dramatically, making user information even more vulnerable than before. Organizations of all sizes and purposes must commit to the ethical use of data while strengthening the security of their information systems in response to these challenges (Hand, 2018). Understanding the many privacy issues that affect consumers when working with digital platforms is the first step in this process. Users worry that their information may not be used in their best interest, from fraud to data sales.
Artificial intelligence has a way of helping people in business, creativity, and life in general, and causing all sorts of problems. Questions of correctness, ethics, and using artificial intelligence to threaten various systems have led people to seriously explore ways to make artificial intelligence and machine learning safer. People need to comprehensively investigate all related problems, keep an eye on all levels of security threats, create a culture of security, and raise their standards. Humanity should focus on accuracy, speed, scalability, and security as top priorities.
As data technologies broadly influence many facets of modern life, persons who care about data and its usage must consider ethical considerations. The areas at the core of the data revolution, such as statistics and computer science, have traditionally placed a strong emphasis on technical issues. Thus this necessity implies something of a qualitative shift. However, the acceptance of the technologies that are now being produced and the methods in which they are being utilized is extremely sensitive to nuanced ethical considerations (Hand, 2018). As of this writing, data privacy and ethics scholars are witnessing a pushback against the independence of social media corporations, who had previously enjoyed a degree of latitude in what they do and how they do it.
In a perfect world, people could develop detailed recommendations for acting in various situations. They cannot, however, aspire to establish exact laws given the data science setting’s vastness, diversity, and rate of change. Unexpected and unplanned situations are guaranteed to occur since there cannot be a single, straightforward set of laws that applies to everyone. The best people can aspire for are a few moral guidelines that must be applied or understood in a given situation. In other words, the principles must be translated into low-level instructions, which will probably depend on the application.
Consent and informed consent have long been crucial in research, particularly in medicine. In that area, the goal is to get an agreement before intervening and to base the intervention on a thorough knowledge of its implications and potential negative effects (Prindle & Loos, 2017). The application of this to today’s data world is controversial, including two points: the promise of big modern data is that future applications are uncertain, and that data is already present in databases, so that research is largely non-interventional.
The code may help spread the rules and standards throughout the company and beyond if it is effectively and adequately designed and stated, fostering corporate-wide ethical and professional behavior. A code has little power to enforce the laws or norms, even though it could inhibit potentially undesirable behavior (Hand, 2018). The restriction arises because the code can only rely on the stakeholders’ sense of morality. After all, breaking the code is not punishable by law. Further steps must be taken, such as executive decisions that offer incentives and apply penalties, to achieve desired outcomes.
Information security professionals urgently want effective and practical direction when creating data privacy protection guidelines. Data privacy protection becomes a top concern for information security management as privacy infringement occurs frequently and receives extensive media coverage. The information security function in a technology-driven, information-intensive environment becomes more complex and difficult due to new risks. Considering privacy from an ethical standpoint may help businesses create and enhance their code of conduct. By taking an ethical approach to privacy and adopting a code of conduct, a business can hold everyone responsible for safeguarding sensitive data, not just security employees.
References
Ferrell, O. C., & Fraedrich, J. (2021). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases. Cengage learning.
Hand, D. J. (2018). Aspects of data ethics in a changing world: Where are we now? Big Data, 6(3), 176-190. Web.
Prindle, S., & Loos, A. (2017). Information ethics and academic libraries: Data privacy in the era of big data. Journal of Information Ethics, 26(2), 22-33.
Tenbrunsel, A., & Smith‐Crowe, K. (2008). Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 545–607. Web.
