are unethical decisions more a function of the individual decision maker or the work environment?

Answer 1

The individual. No matter what, you can always choose integrity. Many have done it in the face of death. So those that choose unethical because they're afraid they might lose their job are just making excuses.

Answer 2

If it is run by an individual then the unethical decisions are more a function of the individual decision maker. If it is body/board etc., it all depends on work environment. Permit me to quote an example. Editor of a News Paper. Working in a financial Institution.

Answer 3

Unethical decisions can be both. For example, while building the budget you discover that the list of people being cut from the payroll are all of the people with serious health problems like heart trouble or kidney problems, or some other dilemma. They can still work, but the company doesn't want them on their benefit rolls. The choice of an unethical decision while it promises some short term conservation of money, actually undercuts the business severely. I watched them cut a man with a heart problem who had so much knowledge and intelligence he was single-handedly helping them to avoid pitfalls in their supply chain by doing tremendous research. Another woman they made to feel as though she was failing and she became depressed, and they tried to fire her because she was depressed. That person I was able to help. If I was an unethical person trying to increase my pocketbook it would not be difficult because there is too much cheating going on. But this is precisely why businesses have been unable to grow their own capital base, they keep undercutting their goodwill and preservation of talent and resource. Moral conscience and good ethical standards go hand in hand, but aren't walking together much right now. I have also seen the culture collaborate to cheat the management in a vicious spiral that caused some of their best plans to fail. And I point and say: what comes around goes around and it stops when we put our foot down as Americans and concern ourselves about our heritage.

Answer 4

I would have to say the individual decision maker primarily because ethical or unethical decisions are a matter of personal choice. One can choose to do or say the right thing regardless of the standards of their environment. In some cases it will might seem harder to make ethical decisions when unethical practices are more prevalent or even applauded, but in the end it comes down to the character of the worker and their moral choices.

Answer 5

Ethics, by nature, are a function of individual decisions. No matter how oppressive the work environment, the primary responsibility in any moral decision lies with the decision-maker. To claim otherwise is to undermine the entire concept of morality, and is probably no more than a misguided effort to transmit guilt and shame to the collective and away from the individual.

This is not to say that companies have *no* moral responsibility, but it is fundamentally necessary that we as a society recognize that ethics begin with the single person, not with ambiguous collectives.

Answer 6

Mostly due to the influential Individual Decision maker

Answer 7

Individual decision maker. God has given the freedom of choice to everyone but they need to face the consequences of their decisions. Universal Law.

Answer 8

It is a result of an already unethical person put into a situation without oversight or monitoring that allows them to make the decision.

Answer 9

Decisions are a function of the decision maker. Placing blame elsewhere is irresponsible. If one chooses to be unethical, which probably means selfish, there is nobody else to blame. Spare us all the excuses and take responsibility for your choices, is what I say to those who place blame elsewhere.

Answer 10

Show a definite line between the two, and then i might be able to answer one way or another. As it stands, there is no discrete 'individual' and "environement", there is only the universal appearing as particular.