Opal Leung's Blog

Social media has become a popular platform to get messages delivered across the globe. With only a few clicks of the mouse, information can travel down the street, as well as halfway across the world. Businesses are adopting the use of social media to allow the general public to receive notifications of the company’s newest updates. This is undeniably efficient, as time is money in the business world, but is this the correct method to improving customer satisfaction and increasing sales?

A genuine interaction is key. As a consumer, I understand that we want our voices to be heard and that businesses are working towards catering to our expectations. With the use of social media, messages are being heard, but action is not merely “talking the talk.” We want a personal interaction ensuring that our opinions are truly considered. This is not to say that we do not value the second-to-second updates. Rather, a personal interaction is of greater value.

Social media is a platform, but should it not be a shortcut. 

In the realm of business, we live by two main objectives  –   cutting down the opportunity costs and pumping up profits. Businessmen make decisions after weighing the two, often subtracting input from output or sacrifices made from benefits gained. However, we do not live in a society of only numbers, stocks, and markets. There are values, beliefs, and morals to be considered.

When we know that a decision that will benefit the society will also hurt the company, do we sway our professional practices or compromise our personal standards? This dilemma does not subside. We can never completely drive out our emotions. Although this contradiction creates complications, I am glad that we have these contradicting feelings. It is a good sign that we are not fully tuning out our own voices to yield to our materialistic desires. The fact that there is a struggle indicates that we are not merely money making machines, but humans with moral standards.

This is not to say that ethics will always win this internal tug of war. The truth is that there may not be an easy way out, or the ethical solution may not always be a good resolution to the problem.

 A dress code consisting of suits and blouses is no longer necessarily a norm, especially at venues where sex appeal is a marketing gimmick.

The cartoon reminds me of a news article detailing a complaint received by Shark Club regarding the bar’s requirement for employees to wear seductive clothing. According to the female bartender, the provocative attire has elicited harassment. She also claims that this is discrimination, as male employees do not have the same requirements.

From a justice viewpoint, I believe it makes a difference whether or not the employee is informed before applying. If she is aware of the danger, she is responsible for taking the risk. Conversely, if the employee is told after her application, the company’s moral standards are questioned, as there should be a transparent relationship between employee and employer. From an ethical standpoint, the morality of using sex appeal as a gimmick is questioned. Once again, it depends on the employee herself. If she is willing to use seduction as a tactic, she must bear the responsibility. However, this can be seen as demeaning women and exploiting their bodies as an attraction.

No practical laws have been established to prohibit the use of sex appeal as a tool, so we must decide for ourselves what should be done. 

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/15092010/74/bc-shark-club-bartender-alleges-sex-discrimination-dress-code.html

   This billboard has unethical and immoral written all over it. This picture belongs to a page in the Vogue Magazine. As observed, PlayStation draws attention to its new product by expressing a racist statement of white domination over black. While the lady in white is the dominating figure, the woman of darker skin appears to be inferior and weak. In today’s society, in which racism receives much of public’s attention, this ad has made no ethical considerations. Taking advantage of racist gimmicks to accentuate the new product is wrong, especially when the company responsible is one of reputation and popularity.

As a world-class seller of entertainment products, the long term effects of this ad are significant. Children who are deeply absorbed in gaming follow PlayStation ads and commercials religiously, and this ad may instill in them the idea that racism is correct.

We have had class discussions about ethics and there is a wide range of viewpoints regarding the issue. Some may argue that this is simply a gimmick or promotion tactic, but where should the line be drawn? Can we step on others’ shoulders and argue that it has no bad intentions?

Last class, a guest speaker spoke to us about business ethics. He showed us several quotes that led me into thinking about the ethical issues that are emerging in the business world today. The quote that caught my attention was,

 “In looking for someone to hire, you look for three qualities: integrity, intelligence, and energy. But the most important is integrity because if they don’t have that, the other two qualities, intelligence and energy, are going to kill you.”

It’s a shame because many of the individuals who carry out misconducts are the ones who have spent years in education and achieved significant accomplishments. Most importantly, they are the ones who still have a life of potential ahead of them.

Intelligence and energy are two vital qualities capable of leading an individual to success, but when these strengths are channelled into a negative direction, they have the power to bring a person down. Integrity is the quality that catalyzes intelligence and energy and ensures that this synergy is pointed towards an ethical direction.

The list ends with the quote, “What we learn from history is that people don’t learn from history.” Is this predicting that unethical misconducts will never be eliminated from the business world? I think not. The moment we realize how to maximize our potential and desirable qualities without crossing the ethical line, we will learn from history.

Thomas Coughlin, former vice chairman at Wal-Mart Stores Inc., was accused of committing a financial misconduct of misusing large sums of corporate funds for personal profits.  He defended that the money was used to control union activity in Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart has publicly opposed unionization, which is believed to reduce efficiency of the company by introducing unnecessary labour policies. Wal-Mart previously closed down a store that had enlisted in a labour union, but claiming the store’s lack of profits to be the main cause.

This case can be viewed as unethical from two aspects. Firstly, Coughlin prioritizes his self-interests before the interests of the company. These misconducts often lead to significant consequences because the individual responsible tends to cover up his mistakes by following up with more unethical decisions. Coughlin’s actions may also influence others to commit the same crime, so the issue of ethics should be taken seriously.

Secondly, Wal-Mart’s opposition to labour unions may be considered unethical because the workers’ perspectives are often neglected. Business ethics is a strong player in the controversial debate regarding labour rights. Although I recognize the company’s perspective, workers should be able to voice their thoughts and unions should not be oppressed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9086-2005Apr22.html

The controversy of labour unions and their rights can be further investigated on this site: http://reportermag.com/article/04-17-2009/union-controversy-brings-both-sides-to-table

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!