Thomas Corbin

A significant theory of corporate social responsibility is the Stakeholder Model. Within this model, entities make decisions that impact all stakeholders. Occasionally, the decision that is made ultimately impacts one stakeholder differently than another. Negative data by its very definition is seen as problematic for any organization as it pertains to its stakeholders. When confronted with the data or the potential of the data being negative to desired outcomes or directions of programs, an organization’s leadership may be faced with an ethical conundrum. Should the data be included and shown to all stakeholders? Or should the data be buried and avoided even to the point of engaging in questionable conduct in the management of paperwork and record keeping?

This review seeks to present a comprehensive picture of recent discussions in the social sciences of the anticipated impact of AI on the world of work. Issues covered include: technological unemployment, algorithmic management, platform work and the politics of AI work. The review identifies the major disciplinary and methodological perspectives on AI’s impact on work, and the obstacles they face in making predictions. Two parameters influencing the development and deployment of AI in the economy are highlighted: the capitalist imperative and nationalistic pressures.

Ethics practice is both relative and situational. Perhaps there is an area of no greater demonstration of these realities than where an organization, be it a public governmental entity and/or a quasi-governmental entity with government contracts has the duty of care owed to a vulnerable constituency as well as to other community stakeholders. These agencies have the public trust as well as the ethical caretaking concerns to master. In the following fact scenario and discussion, one would consider a situation where the care of the vulnerable constituency is the paramount concern and the facilitation of that care is also in question. Human Resource and leadership teams need to be cognizant of not only impropriety of members within their organization but also the appearance of impropriety as well. The following case study attempts to put into perspective the need for managers and HR representatives to monitor practice and perception of ethical behavior.

Often conflicts arises between stakeholders of a firm. Instances where one stakeholder’s needs conflict with the rights of other stakeholders can put managers in a precarious situation. Strict adherence to contract rules, for example, may be the absolute right of the firm but at the same time enforcement of that contractual right or rule may be unduly damaging to another stakeholder. Managers in these situations may seek to find a balancing act between the two conflicting sides in order to maintain the balance that prioritizes the competing and conflicting responsibilities. The following case study, based on an actual managerial decision in an industrial setting, seeks to bring the lessons of balancing competing interests into harmony, as best as possible, in order to pursue the survival and success of the enterprise while realizing that all stakeholders are vital to the said success and survival.

This case study attempts to frame the ethical considerations between hiring a known smoker over a non-smoker in today’s cultural climate. Referenced data from a parallel project gauging the likelihood of Human Resources representatives to hire smokers and accommodate them in the workforce could help manage the response and critical thinking components of the case scenario. Questions also arise as to whether it is advisable for employers to take particular attitudes toward smoking in the workplace. This is not only in the interest of the health of employees, customers and clients, but is also on the basis of a concern that employers may otherwise expose themselves to lawsuits where employees may, on the basis of illness contracted due to a smoking environment supported by an employer, sue for the costs of care and income.