Nearly every business professor and philosopher have weighed in with models and tests that can be used for resolving ethical issues. The following sections offer summaries of the thoughts and models of others in the field of ethics.

Management Guru: Dr. Peter Drucker An internationally known management expert, Dr. Peter Drucker offers the following as an overview for all ethical dilemmas: primum non nocere, which in translation means “Above all do no harm” Adapted from the motto of the medical profession, Dr. Drucker’s simple ethical test in a short phrase encourages us to make decisions that do not harm others. This test would keep us from releasing a product that had a defect that could cause injury. This test would have us be fair and decent in the working conditions we provide for workers in other countries. This test would also prevent us from not disclosing relevant information during contract negotiations. Johnson & Johnson has used Dr. Drucker’s simple approach as the core of its business credo.

The late Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, an internationally known minister, and management expert Kenneth Blanchard, author of The One Minute Manager, offer three questions that managers should ponder in resolving ethical dilemmas: Is it legal? Is it balanced? How does it make me feel?
If the answer to the first question, “Is it legal?” is no, you might want to stop there.
Although conscientious objectors are certainly needed in the world, trying out those philosophical battles with the SEC and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) might not be as effective as the results achieved by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. or Mahatma Gandhi. There is a place for these mora! battles, but your role as an agent of a business might not be an optimum place to exercise the Divine Command Theory. In early 2010, four individuals from the company Wise Guys, Inc., were indicted for wire fraud as well as gaining unauthorized access to computers for their cornering of the ticket markets for the 2006 Rose Bowl, the 2007 MLB playoffs, the play Wicked, and concerts for Bruce Springsteen and Hannah Montana.” The four had hired Bulgarian programmers to circumvent the controls placed on ticket sites to require entry of data prior to being able to purchase tickets. The result was that the four cornered the primary and, consequently, secondary ticket markets for the events noted. Regardless of how strongly we may feel about having access to tickets, the four are accused of violating the laws by circumventing computer access controls.
Answering the second Blanchard and Peale question, “Is it balanced?” requires a manager to step back and view a problem from other perspectives—those of other parties, owners, shareholders, or the community. For example, an M&M/Mars cacao buyer was able to secure a very low price on cacao for his company because of pending government takeovers and political disruption. M&M/Mars officers decided to pay more for the cacao than the negotiated figure. Their reason was that some day their company would not have the upper hand, and then they would want to be treated fairly when the price became the seller’s choice.
Answering “How does it make me feel?” requires a manager to do a self-examination of his or her comfort level with a decision. Some decisions, though they may be legal and may appear balanced, can still make a manager uncomfortable. For example, many managers feel uncomfortable about the “management” of earnings when inventory and shipments are controlled to maximize bonuses or to produce a particularly good result for a quarter.
Although they've done nothing illegal, managers who engage in such practices often suffer such physical effects as insomnia and appetite problems.......................

Discussion Questions 1. Take the various models and offer a chart or dia- dilemmas. Remember, you are working to develop a gram to show the common elements in each. 360-degree perspective on issues. Stopping at legal-
2. After viewing the chart, make a list of the kinds ity is not enough if you are going to think through all of things all those who have developed the mod- the consequences of decisions. Just because someels want us to think about as we resolve ethical thing is legal does not mean it is ethical.