Amir is a young manager employed by a Canadian construction company, Senecom. Senecom recently promoted Amir to be the head of local operations in an African country X. Senecom hopes to have a gradual development within the nation X and also to expand to other African countries in the region. After working hard for a few weeks, Amir found an opportunity to execute a significant construction project where the local government was intending to build a multi-million-dollar bridge in a rural area. Everything looked beautiful, and Senecom was successful in the bidding process, winning over all other competitors in financial and technical requirements. However, there was so much delay from the government side to award the project to Senecom finally. Amir was so concerned, and he was wondering why.
Amir’s assistant, who is a local employee, advised Amir that some official authorities might be expecting to receive some facilitation or grease payments to award the project to Senecom. The assistant explained to Amir that these kinds of payments are normal in country X. He said: This might look like a bribe in your Western culture. But, if you live here for a while, then you’ll see that this is accepted and, perhaps, expected here. This is how everything works. It’s kind of like an open secret. If you want to succeed, you need to accept it as well.
Now, Amir is in a challenging situation. On the one hand, as a new manager, he sees his success linked to the successful completion of this project. He also knows that this project provides great employment opportunities to Canadian experts and more than 500 direct salaries to local workers, being a great source of income to Seneca and hugely positive to the local economy of country X. On the other hand, he is afraid if he might be doing something wrong. He knows these payments might not be illegal in country X, but they are probably illegal in Canada. To make a better decision, Amir calls four of his friends who are experts in business ethics and international business. These friends have different perspectives towards the problem. One of them is a (i) cultural relativist scholar. (ii) One is expert in consequentialism. (iii) Another one has a great knowledge about Kantian ethics. (iv) Finally, the fourth one is virtue ethicist.
Question
a.As the Cultural Relativist friend, explain if cultural relativism is a suitable approach to decision making?(300 words). As the Consequentialist friend, explain the pros and cons of decision-making based on the consequences (300 words)
As the Kantian expert, explain what is the right course of action and why?(300 words)