688
P. R. Cueto and E. R. Filho
motivation is the third element that refers to the mental reinforcement of deciding
for the “best for all” while the fourth element (moral behavior) is the action itself
(Rest 1986).
These elements form the ethical behavior of the individual in the organization and
are influenced, according to Treviño et al. (2006), by other components such as moral
disengagement (misconduct, lying, avoiding accountability for own acts, exposing
inopportune comments (positive and negative emotionality, fear, guilt, shame, etc.),
identity (traits that the individual brings with him/her before entering the organization), language, leadership and generates followers), as well as infrastructure, climate
and organizational culture (pressure, goals, corruption, rewards, incentives, punishments, etc.).
Two other normative approaches to ethical decision-making are the utilitarian,
which evaluates ethical decisions from the perspective of outcomes, giving less relevance to the middle processes (Bazerman and Gino 2012), while the deontological
(or formalist) has the judgment based on the motive by which the person acts and not
the consequences. For Reynolds (2006), formalists can observe the whole process in
the way that utilitarians do, but utilitarians can not see in the same way as formalists,
whereas the formalist approach is concerned with the details of ethical/moral aspects,
the utilitarian approach is concerned with the outcome.
In order to assist in the determination of ethical behavior, organizations develop
their own codes of ethics. Studies show that codes of ethics are formal and legal
documents that describe organizations expectations regarding employee behavior,
but unilaterally conceived as a way of managing organizational risk, generating a
conflict of interest (Adelstein and Clegg 2016). Lere and Gaumnitz (2003) argue that
the code of ethics often have no impact on the decision-making process.
Ethical decision-making processes are complex because they involve particular
issues of each individual (who have their own ethics). Organizations can provide an
environment that engenders ethical corporate behavior that values individuals ethical attitudes. In the meantime, it is up to decision-makers to seek moral choices
from the community, trying not to hurt the individual ethics of the parties involved
(Pinto 2004). For this, it is necessary to promote the qualification of these managers (considering the lack of qualified professionals in the market), since leadership
is the differential in organizations that associate ethics, market growth and social
responsibility (Dorneles et al. 2017).
Thus, when ethical decisions are made within the organization with the commitment to meet collective interests, without depreciating particular interests, higher
levels of commitment from employees at all hierarchical levels are achieved, which
provides better results for the organization.
Based on the understanding of ethical behavior in the decision-making process,
where the question of sustainability is inserted, it is possible to discuss sustainable
development.
P. R. Cueto and E. R. Filho
motivation is the third element that refers to the mental reinforcement of deciding
for the “best for all” while the fourth element (moral behavior) is the action itself
(Rest 1986).
These elements form the ethical behavior of the individual in the organization and
are influenced, according to Treviño et al. (2006), by other components such as moral
disengagement (misconduct, lying, avoiding accountability for own acts, exposing
inopportune comments (positive and negative emotionality, fear, guilt, shame, etc.),
identity (traits that the individual brings with him/her before entering the organization), language, leadership and generates followers), as well as infrastructure, climate
and organizational culture (pressure, goals, corruption, rewards, incentives, punishments, etc.).
Two other normative approaches to ethical decision-making are the utilitarian,
which evaluates ethical decisions from the perspective of outcomes, giving less relevance to the middle processes (Bazerman and Gino 2012), while the deontological
(or formalist) has the judgment based on the motive by which the person acts and not
the consequences. For Reynolds (2006), formalists can observe the whole process in
the way that utilitarians do, but utilitarians can not see in the same way as formalists,
whereas the formalist approach is concerned with the details of ethical/moral aspects,
the utilitarian approach is concerned with the outcome.
In order to assist in the determination of ethical behavior, organizations develop
their own codes of ethics. Studies show that codes of ethics are formal and legal
documents that describe organizations expectations regarding employee behavior,
but unilaterally conceived as a way of managing organizational risk, generating a
conflict of interest (Adelstein and Clegg 2016). Lere and Gaumnitz (2003) argue that
the code of ethics often have no impact on the decision-making process.
Ethical decision-making processes are complex because they involve particular
issues of each individual (who have their own ethics). Organizations can provide an
environment that engenders ethical corporate behavior that values individuals ethical attitudes. In the meantime, it is up to decision-makers to seek moral choices
from the community, trying not to hurt the individual ethics of the parties involved
(Pinto 2004). For this, it is necessary to promote the qualification of these managers (considering the lack of qualified professionals in the market), since leadership
is the differential in organizations that associate ethics, market growth and social
responsibility (Dorneles et al. 2017).
Thus, when ethical decisions are made within the organization with the commitment to meet collective interests, without depreciating particular interests, higher
levels of commitment from employees at all hierarchical levels are achieved, which
provides better results for the organization.
Based on the understanding of ethical behavior in the decision-making process,
where the question of sustainability is inserted, it is possible to discuss sustainable
development.