Anda di halaman 1dari 24

Pendekatan dalam Pengambilan Keputusan Etis

Source: Leonard J. Brooks (2004). Business & Professional Ethics for Accountants. South-Western College Publishing

Ethical Decision-Making Framework (EDM)


Decision or action is considered ethical or right if it conform to certain standards. Four standards:
Consequences or well-offness created in terms of net benefit or cost Rights and duties affected Fairness involved Motivation or virtues expected

EDM Considerations Philosophical Theories


Consequences or welloffness created in terms of net benefit or cost Rights and duties affected Fairness involved Consequentialism, Utilitarianism, Teleology Deontology Kants Categorical Imperative, Justice as Impartiality Virtue

Motivation or virtues expected

Consequentialism
Teori moral yang menyatakan bahwa konsekuensi suatu tindakan membentuk dasar keputusan moral atas tindakan tersebut. Bobot normatif yang diberikan dalam mengevaluasi kebenaran dan kesalahan suatu tindakan. Sudut pandang pihak penerima konsekuensi:
Konsekuensi untuk diri sendiri egoisme Konsekuensi untuk semua pihak utilitarianisme

Consequentialism
Egoisme
Alasan: It benefits me Jika ada konflik antara yang baik untuk diri sendiri vs fairness untuk masyarakat:
self-serving action

Inti dari teori egoisme: Seseorang harus bertindak untuk kepentingan seseorang itu sendiri Egoism ethical or unethical?

Consequentialism
Egoisme
Prinsip egoisme tidak dapat diterima dalam profesi akuntan. Egoism selfishness unethical why?
Tidak sesuai dengan aktivitas manusia yang berterima umum. Egoisme tidak dapat mendamaikan perselisihan. Tidak dapat mengajarkan/menyampaikan suatu informasi/ilmu yang bermanfaat bagi manusia. Egoisme didasarkan pada pandangan egosentris yang terdistorsi.

Consequentialism
Utilitarianisme
John S. Mill:
The objective is not to secure maximum happiness just for personal or group interest but for whole sentient creation.

Prinsip utilitarianisme:
Suatu tindakan dikatakan benar jika tindakan tersebut dapat membawa pada kebahagiaan, bukan kebahagiaan individu tetapi kebahagiaan bagi semua.

Consequentialism
Utilitarianisme
Utilitarianism Principles Interests and Acts People Organization
Values Norms Regulations Laws Interest and acts must create value added for happiness and welfare of all sentient creation. Existed values have to well-applied as a basic in realization of greatest happiness for all parties (J.S. Mill)

Deontological Ethics
Deontologi:
Suatu perbuatan itu disebut baik karena merupakan kewajibannya. Suatu perbuatan itu disebut tidak baik karena dilarang. Deontologi tidak terkait dengan konsekuensi dari perbuatan tersebut. Contoh:
Kita tidak boleh mencuri, meskipun itu kita lakukan demi kebahagiaan orang lain.

Deontological Ethics
Immanuel Kant:
Teori etika yang menyatakan bahwa suatu keputusan harus dibuat terutama dengan mempertimbangkan tugas dari seseorang dan hak dari orang lain. Secara moral salah, jika melanggar aturan; benar jika patuh pada aturan. Suatu tindakan yang membawa kebaikan dapat dikategorikan salah jika melanggar prinsip deontology, seperti hak, kewajiban, atau the categorical imperative.

Deontological Ethics
The categorical imperative:
Bertindaklah sehingga alasan kamu berbuat dapat dijadikan hukum universal. Semua orang secara moral sama, sehingga harus diperlakukan dengan hormat dan bermartabat.

Virtue Ethics
Virtue = kebaikan, kebajikan. Virtues sifat, karakter yang mengatur seseorang untuk berbuat secara etis dan menjadikan seseorang tersebut pribadi yang bermoral baik. Aristotle kesopanan, keberanian, kesederhanaan, keadilan. Theological virtues kejujuran, integritas, belas kasih, keadilan, tidak memihak, dermawan, kerendahan hati, dan kesederhanaan.

Stakeholder Impact Analysis


Consequences, Utility Profitable? Benefit > Cost Risk Adjusted

Duty, Rights, Justice

Fiduciary duty Individual rights Fairness, Legality

Virtue Expectations

Character Integrity Courage

Stakeholder Impact Analysis


Shareholders

Activists

Employees

Governments

Corporation

Customers

Creditors

Suppliers Others, including the media, who can be affected by or who can affect the achievement of the corporations objectives

Lenders

Stakeholder Impact Analysis


Fundamental interests:
Their interest(s) should be better off The decision should result in a fair distribution of benefits and burdens The decision should not offend any of the rights of any stakeholder

Stakeholder Impact Analysis


Measurement of Quantifiable Impacts:
Profit Items not included in profit: measureable directly Items not included in profit: not measureable directly Bringing the future to the present Dealing with uncertain outcomes Identifying stakeholders and ranking their interests

Stakeholder Impact AnalysisDecision Making Approach


5 Questions Approach:
Profitable? Legal? Fair? Right? Going to further sustainable development?

Stakeholder Impact AnalysisDecision Making Approach


Moral Standards Approach:
Utilitarian: maximize net benefit to society as a whole does the action maximize social benefits and minimize social injuries? Individual rights: respect and protect is the action consistent with each persons rights? Justice: fair distribution of benefits and burdens will the action lead to a just distribution of benefits and burdens?

Stakeholder Impact AnalysisDecision Making Approach


Pastins Approach:
Ground rule ethics to illuminate an organizations and/or an individuals rules and values End-point ethics to determine the greatest net good for all concerned Rule ethics to determine what boundaries a person or organization should take into account according to ethical principles Social contract ethics to determine how to move the boundaries to remove concerns or conflicts

Ethical Decision Making Approaches


Philosophical 5-Question Velasquez Pastin

Consequences, Utility

Max. Profit Max. Utility (Benefits > Costs) Max. Utility (Risk-adjusted) Fiduciary duty Individual rights Fairness Character Integrity Courage Process

Duty, Rights, Justice

Virtue Expectations

See AACSB EETF Report, June 2004

TABLE 5.9
MOTIVATION, VIRTUE, CHARACTER TRAIT, & PROCESS EXPECTATIONS Motivations expected:
Self-control rather than greed Fairness or justice considerations Kindness, caring, compassion, and benevolence

Virtues expected:
Dutiful loyalty Integrity and transparency Sincerity rather than duplicity

Character Traits expected:


Courage to do the right thing per personal and/or professional standards Trustworthiness Objectivity, impartiality Honesty, truthfulness Selflessness rather than selfishness Balanced choices between extremes

Processes that reflect the motivations, virtues, and character traits expected

TABLE 5.10
A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO EDM
Consideration Description

Well-offness or Consequentialism
Rights, duty or Deontology

The proposed decision should result in more benefits than costs.


The proposed decision should not offend the rights of the stakeholders, including the decision maker. The distribution of benefits and burdens should be fair. The motivation for the decision should reflect stakeholders expectations of virtue.

Fairness or Justice Virtue expectations or Virtue Ethics

All four considerations must be satisfied for a decision to be considered ethical

FIGURE 5.5

STEPS TOWARD AN ETHICAL DECISION


Proposed Decision Or Action Final Decision

Yes

Better Alternative?

No

Identify the facts

Identify Stakeholders, Their Interests, & The Ethical issues

Ethical Analysis Rank interests in importance Apply Comprehensive EDM Framework Using a Philosophical Approach: Consequentialism, Deontology & Virtue Ethics And/or Stakeholder Impact Assessment Plus Gap Analysis of Motivation, Virtues & Character Traits

CONCLUSION
ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK

Consequences, Utility

Duty, Rights, Justice

Best Ethical Decision

Virtue Expectations
AACSB EETF Report, June 2004