Words: 1088
Ethics can be defined as a philosophical study of moral values based on the concept of right and wrong. Therefore, ethical perspective could be considered as a person’s individual perception of moral values, beliefs and rules based on his or her personal view of right and wrong.
The Ethics Awareness Inventory is a test devised to help individuals learn or analyze personal characteristics that reflect individual perspectives on ethics—one’s ethical perspective (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008). Through the Ethics Awareness Inventory ethical perspective can be gauged under four separate categories: 1) character, 2) obligation, 3) results and 4) equality—also known as (CORE) to determine an individual’s personal ethical perspective.
The CORE categories are based on a broad characterization of one’s individual ethical perspective. Therefore, the Ethics Awareness Inventory test is not an exact science but rather a general description of an individual’s ethical perspective which is intended to provide insight into the individual’s personal views toward ethical issues. As a student of University of Phoenix, I was given the opportunity to take the Ethics Awareness Inventory in order to gain new insight into my own personal ethical perspective.
The purpose of this paper is to relay the findings of my Ethics Awareness Inventory test and convey the results in each of the four CORE categories: 1) character/virtue, 2) obligation/deontology, 3) results/utilitarianism and 4) equality/relativism based on my personal results. According to the Ethics Awareness Inventory obligation is the ethical profile I am most closely aligned with, and equality was the ethical profile I was least closely aligned with (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008).
Character Character is considered to be a person’s identity based on a person’s individual behavior or personal outlook on life i. e. personality, disposition, nature, qualities, attributes, morals, virtue and so on. “We form our character when we commit to irreversible courses of action that shape our personal and professional identities” (Weiss, J. , 2006). My character, based on ethical perspective, is of a person whom bases decisions on what is good to be rather than what is good to do.
This means that my main focus is on helping others attain moral distinction in their lives. When put in a position to judge an individual’s performance or conduct over a particular issue as ethical or unethical, I prefer to look at his or her overall character rather than the particular action before passing judgment—either positive or negative. Hence, a person’s character is more important to me that his or her over all actions or performance.
My philosophy is that anyone can follow the rules and perform good deeds but that doesn’t make them an ethical person of good character. Therefore, as far as character is concerned, I fall under Aristotle and Alasdair’s philosophies—the philosophy of virtue (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008). Obligation Obligation can be considered as an individual’s responsibility, duty, and commitment, a sort of contract either verbal or written that binds that individual to a specific course of action i. e. ocial obligation, political obligation, work ethic obligation and so forth. Obligation is based on an individual’s perception of ethical behavior. Therefore, each person chooses, either consciously or unconsciously, which rules he or she believes are ethical and which are not. Under obligation, my ethical perspective is of a person whom places emphasis on duty or obligation to do what is morally right. I believe that “ethical conduct appeals to conscience” (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008).
Basically, all human beings have a natural sense of right and wrong. When put in a position to judge an individual’s performance or conduct over a particular issue as ethical or unethical, I prefer to look at his or her intentions rather than the particular outcome of his or her action before passing judgment—either positive or negative. I believe that people are people, and to err is human. Therefore, everyone disserves a chance on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration underlying circumstances in order to preserve human dignity.
My ultimate goal is promoting individual freedom and independence for all human beings. Therefore, as far as obligation is concerned, I fall under Immanuel Kant and John Rawls philosophies—the philosophy of deontological theory (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008). Results Results can be defined as the direct consequence, good or bad, of an individual’s actions or decisions. Therefore, a person’s actions and decisions reflect his or her level of ethical responsibility.
Consequences of an act can be defined as morally wrong if physical or emotional harm is done to another as a result of the act (Weiss, J. , 2006). Therefore, actions resulting in favorable physical or emotional wellbeing would be considered morally right. Under respect, my ethical perspective is of a person whom places emphasis on seeking to maximize the good. I make decisions based on the probable outcome being of good quality results both personal and in the work environment. Therefore, I examine potential outcomes of different strategies before choosing to make a decision.
I look for the individual benefit of others as well as for the organization to determine which decision will have the most favorable benefit physically and emotionally for all involved. However, my ultimate goal is for the greater good of the organization. Equality Equality can be defined as being in balance or mutually fair. Moral authority that decides what is right and wrong concerns the fair distribution of opportunities to all (Weiss, J. , 2006). In this particular category I appear to be quite judgmental as my ethical perspective is that of uncertainty toward trusting human judgment.
I believe that human knowledge is unstable. Therefore, I judge the validity of presumed expert’s decisions toward what is right and wrong. I believe that education does not provide all the answers (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008). Therefore, I think that common sense and hands on knowledge provide people with a greater understanding and hold more validity toward having a firmer grasp on ethical perspective than education itself. I have a deep distrust for any individual who attempt to define universal principles because I believe that principals change with circumstances.
Therefore, as far as equality is concerned, I fall under Michel Foucault and David’s philosophies—the philosophy of postmodern theory (The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management, 2008). References Weiss, J. (2006). Business Ethics; A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach (4th ed. ) Thompson, Mason, OH The Williams Institute for Ethics and Management. (2008). Ethics Awareness Inventory. Retrieved October 10, 2008, from University of Phoenix, Week Three, rEsource. MGT/344-Organizational Behavior and Ethical Responsibility.