Web Porn At Work

When faced with moral issues in every facet of life, individuals often rely on normative theories for guidance in their decision-making process and its subsequent justification. In the case of Rayburn Unlimited, Al Smetana, the founding president, discovers that Craig Lindley, the associate vice-president and an old-time friend, has been using the company’s computer network extensively for web pornography. At the current juncture, Al is faced with the decision of how to resolve the situation with Craig, debating between the spectrum of upholding the firm’s commitment to integrity, the importance of the intrinsic worth of each individual, and the personal friendship with Craig. This decision by Al falls into the categorization of a moral issue due to two reasons: Firstly, it involves an analysis of harms and benefits. That is, this decision has the potential to leave individuals involved in a better or worse position after the decision is made. Secondly, throughout the decision-making process, Al utilizes moral standards, which takes priority over both the self interest of Al or Craig. With that in mind, let’s analyze the decision “What should Al do with Craig” using two popular normative theories, Utilitarianism and Kantianism.

Using the theory of Utilitarianism, Al should determine all possible alternatives, and then implement the alternative that creates the most happiness (or the least unhappiness) for all parties involved. In this analysis, we will consider 3 different alternatives: (1) Fire Craig to uphold firm values, (2) Move on as if nothing happened, and (3) Offer counseling services to Craig to overcome his addiction, and let him go if he continues to violate the computer usage policy. Let’s begin with option (1): Firm values are upheld: +5 units; Unhappiness due to Craig’s lost of employment and the potential lost of friendship: -10 units; Potential effects to Craig’s family due to his lost of employment: -25 units; Craig’s termination will serve as a warning to other employees not to violate the policy: +10 units; Low morale in company: -5 units; Protection of firm’s professionalism: +10 units; Total units of happiness: -15 units. Under option (2): Firm values are violated and ignored: -10 units; Craig will maintain his job and friendship: +10 units; Craig’s family will not be affected: +15 units; Employees will not know the severity of firm policy: -10 units; No lost of moral: +5 units; Firm’s professionalism may be impacted if clients discover the use of pornography: -10 units; Total units of happiness: 0 units. Finally, using option (3): Partially upholding firm’s values: +5 units; Craig’s job and friendship maintained: +10 units, Craig’s family will not be affected: +15 units; Employees will not know the severity of violating firm policy: -10 units; No lost of moral: +5 units; Craig potentially recovering from his addition: +5 units; Total units of happiness: +30 units. Since option (3) creates the maximum utility out of the 3 alternatives, Al should choose decision (3) based on the theory of utilitarianism.

Under the theory of Kantianism, when deciding whether to perform a certain action, a maxim is first constructed based upon the desired action. Then the individual will determine whether that maxim will pass the test of the categorical imperative. That