Introduction
The Burger Murder ethical dilemma forces individuals to confront the problematic ethical decision between prioritizing the safety of customers and employees, complying with terrorist demands, and preserving business ethics and values. The dilemma underscores the complexities of ethical decision-making in business environments, particularly in situations with no clear-cut solutions and where the consequences of one’s actions can have far-reaching effects. It forces the CEO to make a difficult ethical decision between protecting human life and upholding the principles of business ethics, thereby raising the more general question of the balance between business ethics and business success. This problem is an example of a situation proving the relevance and seriousness of business ethics and the need to evaluate the moral and ethical sides of business decisions (Crane et al., 2019). The dilemma ultimately leads to conclusions prioritizing social benefit, emphasizing the relevance and importance of adopting a corporate social responsibility business philosophy.
The Burger Murder Ethical Dilemma
The Burger Murder ethical dilemma is a hypothetical scenario involving a CEO of a large fast-food chain receiving a letter from an unknown person who claims to have poisoned one of the firm’s hamburgers in a restaurant located in a busy metropolitan area. The letter states that the person plans to do the same to another restaurant soon. The writer demands that the company recall all of its hamburgers and pay a large sum to prevent further attacks. The letter also includes a list of demands related to the company’s business practices.
The CEO now faces a difficult ethical dilemma. If they recall all of the hamburgers, they may save lives, but they will also be giving in to the demands of a terrorist. If the CEO does not comply with the demands, they risk the lives of the customers and the company’s reputation. Furthermore, suppose the CEO complies with the demands. In that case, they may encourage other terrorists to use similar tactics to achieve their goals and create a precedent for other people to demand changes in the company’s business practices.
Stakeholders in the Burger Murder ethical dilemma can be identified as Customers, Employees, Shareholders, and Managers. Customers are stakeholders in this dilemma as they are directly affected by the potential danger posed by the poisoned hamburgers (Stanberry & Byars, 2018; TED-Ed, 2020). They have a stake in the outcome of the ethical decision, as their health and safety are at risk. Employees are also stakeholders as they work for the fast-food chain and are responsible for producing and serving hamburgers, threatening their jobs and livelihoods (TED-Ed, 2020).
Shareholders are stakeholders in this dilemma as they have invested in the fast-food chain and stand to lose financially if the company’s reputation is damaged or the terrorists’ demands are met (Stanberry & Byars, 2018; TED-Ed, 2020). Management is also a stakeholder, making decisions affecting the company’s operations and reputation. They have a stake in the ethical decision as they must balance the interests of all stakeholders while upholding the company’s values and principles.
The role of managers in ethical decision-making is crucial. Managers are responsible for making decisions that affect the well-being of all stakeholders, and they must balance competing interests while upholding ethical standards. They must consider the potential consequences of their decisions and evaluate the impact on all stakeholders.
In the Burger Murder ethical dilemma, managers must weigh the risks of complying with the terrorists’ demands against the potential harm to customers and employees. They must also consider the long-term impact on the company’s reputation and financial well-being. Managers must uphold ethical principles and values while navigating complex and challenging situations that do not have clear-cut solutions. They must communicate the decision effectively to all stakeholders and take responsibility for the outcome of their decision.
The Utilitarian, Family, Newspaper, and Mentor tests are ethical frameworks that can be used to evaluate ethical dilemmas. The utilitarian test evaluates ethical decisions based on their ability to produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people (TED-Ed, 2020). Under this test, the decision that maximizes overall happiness and minimizes overall suffering is considered ethical (Häyry, 2021).
In the Burger Murder ethical dilemma, the utilitarian test would advise recalling all the hamburgers to stop the worsening of the poisoning issue. This decision would minimize the potential loss of life and suffering caused by the poisoned hamburgers. However, this decision may not maximize happiness for all stakeholders as it may negatively impact the company’s and its shareholders’ financial well-being.
The family test evaluates ethical decisions by comparing potential outcomes to the same outcomes regarding one’s family members. This test encourages people to make decisions based on empathy, care for others, and the capacity to accept and justify these decisions. In the current ethical dilemma, the family test would suggest recalling all the hamburgers to prevent further harm to customers and employees. This ethical decision under this test reflects respect and concern for other people.
The newspaper test evaluates ethical decisions based on how others would perceive them if made public. This test encourages considering how others would view one’s decisions and whether they would stand up to public scrutiny. In the current case, the optimal solution under the newspaper test would also be recalling all the hamburgers to prevent potential harm to the stakeholders and preserve the company’s public image. This decision would be perceived as responsible and ethical by the public, and it would be consistent with the company’s values and principles.
The mentor test evaluates ethical decisions based on whether one would be comfortable using their decision as a universal standard for ethical behavior. This test encourages people to consider whether their decision is consistent with their values and principles and whether it would be a decision they would be proud to stand behind. In the Burger Murder ethical dilemma, the mentor test recommends pulling all the hamburgers from circulation to protect customers and employees from further harm. This decision reflects the values of care and concern for others and upholding ethical principles. It would be consistent with the standards of ethical behavior that the company, in the best-case scenario, would want to promote and encourage in others.
Conclusion
In summary, the most morally responsible choice in each scenario is to recall all the hamburgers to avoid causing additional harm to customers and staff. Preserving and potentially improving the company’s public image and raising public awareness of the issue while complying with the socially expected corporate behavior would potentially sway public opinion in a favorable direction. This decision reflects my principles of care and concern for others, upholding ethical principles, and promoting the greater good for all stakeholders while mitigating the risk of a repeating crisis. Recalling the product would further promote corporate social responsibility as the optimal philosophy for the modern business environment.
References
Crane, A., Matten, D., Glozer, S., & Spence, L. J. (2019). Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press.
Häyry, M. (2021). Just better utilitarianism. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 30(2), 343–367. Web.
Stanberry, K., & Byars, S. M. (2018). Business ethics. OpenStax
TED-Ed. (2020). Ethical dilemma: The Burger murders – George Siedel and Christine Ladwig [Video]. YouTube. Web.