Salt Lake Olympic Bribery Scandal Essay Sample
The Olympic Games took topographic point in the United States at Salt Lake City. Utah. The tourney opened on February 8. 2002 and closed on February 24. 2002. There were 77 NOCs. 2. 399 jocks. 78 events. 22. 000 voluntaries and 8. 730 of the media. “The Games saw the enlargement of the Olympic plan to 78 events. including the return of skeleton and the debut of women’s bobsleds. Athletes from a record 18 National Olympic Committees earned gilded decorations. including first-ever gold for China and Australia” ( Olympic. org ) . The Olympic International Committee is the supreme authorization of the full Olympic Games. responsible for forming and keeping a successful event. “Acting as a accelerator for coaction between all parties of the Olympic household. from the National Olympic Committees ( NOCs ) . the International Sports Federations ( IFs ) . the jocks. the Forming Committees for the Olympic Games ( OCOGs ) . to the TOP spouses. broadcast spouses and United Nations bureaus. the International Olympic Committee ( IOC ) shepherds success through a broad scope of plans and undertakings.
On this footing. it ensures the regular jubilation of the Olympic Games. supports all attached member organisations of the Olympic Movement and strongly encourages. by appropriate agencies. the publicity of the Olympic values” ( Olympic. org ) . In December of 1998. the U. S Department of Justice discovered that the Salt Lake Organizing Committee ( SLOC ) of the Games might hold been involved in graft Acts of the Apostless with the International Olympic Committee. SLOC admitted paying IOC members relatives tuition and disbursals. They besides offered the members free health care services by paying for their plastic and medical surgeries. The U. S Department of Justice believed that all these bribery allegations were done to guarantee that the 2002 Olympics would come to Utah. The aim of this paper is to measure utilizing the three values of jurisprudence. moralss and societal duty whether the Salt Lake Organizing Committee which is responsible of forming athleticss events in the metropolis was legal. ethical and socially responsible in forming the Winter Olympics of Salt Lake 2002.
II. LEGAL Section
It is of import to discourse somewhat the background information about the issue in this instance. The SLOC is responsible for Utah’s athleticss events and holding a clean repute is of import for the city’s hereafter as an Olympic host. The SLOC was accused by the U. S Justice Department of being involved in graft Acts of the Apostless with the IOC to purchase ballots for the approaching Olympic event. which finally took topographic point in 2002. The research workers at justness were seeking to happen out if SLOC violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. FCPA. The research workers were besides seeking to find whether the SLOC have committed revenue enhancement fraud by misapplying exempt money to buy gifts for IOC members’ relations. It is reported that more than 400 corporations admitted doing questionable or illegal payments. The companies. most of them voluntarily. have reported paying out good in surplus of $ 300 million in corporate financess to foreign authorities functionaries. politicians. and political parties. These corporations have included some of the largest and most widely held public companies in the United States ; over 117 of them rank in the top Fortune 500 industries. B. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT LEGAL PRINCIPLES AND RULE OF Law
When the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. FCPA. was enforced. many were caught in the act of graft and for that they were fined and some were sent to gaol. This act made a batch of companies in the United States and outside the state to get down look intoing in order to happen these felons that threaten concerns in our society. The maltreatments ran the gamut from graft of high foreign functionaries to procure some type of favourable action by a foreign authorities to alleged facilitating payments that allegedly were made to guarantee that authorities officials discharged certain ministerial or clerical responsibilities. These types of actions forced the Congress to come out with an act that prohibits graft that might impact the economic system negatively. Congress enacted the FCPA to convey a arrest to the graft of foreign functionaries and to reconstruct public assurance in the unity of the American concern system.
The FCPA was intended to hold ( and has had ) an tremendous impact on the manner American houses do concern. Several houses that paid payoffs to foreign functionaries have been the topic of condemnable and civil enforcement actions. ensuing in big mulcts and suspension and debarment from federal procurance catching. and their employees and officers have gone to imprison. To avoid such effects. many houses have implemented elaborate conformity plans intended to forestall and to observe any improper payments by employees and agents. The FCPA prohibits any American citizen to be involved in perpetrating any graft for concern issues. Paying or having money or anything of value makes it against the jurisprudence and penalty should be enforced by the authorities in order for justness to take topographic point. As mentioned in the Lay-Parson’s Guide to FCPA. “The anti-bribery commissariats of the FCPA make it improper for a U. S. individual. and certain foreign issuers of securities. to do a corrupt payment to a foreign functionary for the intent of obtaining or retaining concern for or with. or directing concern to. any individual. Since 1998. they besides apply to foreign houses and individuals who take any act in promotion of such a corrupt payment while in the United States. ”
The purpose of this illegal behaviour was to act upon foreign governmental functionaries in hope that they would have discriminatory concern intervention. Many of the concerns argued that this was a necessary concern disbursal and that without bribes American concerns would endure in their ability to make concern in a clime that would give foreign concerns an unjust advantage. Research. nevertheless proved that despite the fact that the payments which this measure would forbid are made to foreign functionaries. in many instances the ensuing inauspicious competitory affects are wholly domestic. Former Secretary of Commerce. Richardson. pointed out that in a figure of cases. “payments have been made non to “outcompete” foreign rivals. but instead to derive an border over other U. S. makers. ” ( House of Rep. ) So the alibi that this Act would in somehow put American concerns at a competitory disadvantage with their foreign opposite numbers was fake. Just the antonym was true. In fact. this type of illegal activity ensured in most state of affairss that a deficient merchandise received a premium monetary value with domestic companies and their largely American shareholders. alternatively of foreign concerns. paying the monetary value for the prostituting of the markets. C. APPLICATION OF LAW TO TOPIC AND LEGAL ANALYSIS
After analysing the instance we can see that the SLOC clearly violated the Anti-Bribery and Anti-Corruption jurisprudence under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act jurisprudence due to their illegal graft Acts of the Apostless. If a company or a commission promises or pays a foreign functionary in favour of advantages for their ain concern. it is considered illegal and punishable by jurisprudence. Taking a expression back at the instance grafts. the SLOC admitted giving IOC household members free health care services including medical and fictile surgeries. The grafts were confirmed by Intermountain Health Care that $ 28. 000 worth of wellness services was provided for IOC members which evidently is considered a payoff. Cash payments of around $ 5. 000 to $ 70. 000 were given to IOC members from Africa and Latin America.
The Utah land trade generated about $ 60. 000 for an IOC member in the Republic of Congo. Expensive gifts including a $ 2. 000 scattergun were given to the IOC president Juan Antonio Samaranch. Committee recognition cards were used to pay for female bodyguards for IOC members. After looking at all the undermentioned payoff committed it clearly proves that the SLOC were the offenders by acknowledging that they did all these Acts of the Apostless. They clearly violated the FCPA and the United States has the legal power over the Acts of the Apostless done because the concern took topographic point in the United States. The IOC besides violated their ain regulations by utilizing commission recognition cards for illegal Acts of the Apostless and accepting gifts with sums that exceeded $ 150. Therefore. in kernel. that exclusive act of graft is illegal. D. LEGAL CONCLUSION
After looking at the facts. we can reason that the SLOC appeared to hold clearly violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. They confirmed giving payoff and the SLOC president Frank Joklik did apologise and took full duty for the actions done by his commission. turn outing that the commission was guilty of corrupting foreign functionaries. A Swiss IOC member believed that several members were involved in grafts for the past 10 old ages and that about 5 to 7 per centum of the members were unfastened to bribery. In reasoning this legal subdivision we believe that the judge’s determination to hold found the commission inexperienced person of graft was incorrect because there was clearly grounds that they committed graft. We besides disagree with the judge’s statement that “the grounds ne’er met the legal criterion for graft. ” The grounds did be and SLOC admitted the payment of payoffs to the IOC members. Law and moralss go manus in manus. When you discuss jurisprudence. moralss is touched. Therefore. in the following subdivision. we are traveling to discourse what moralss has for us in the SLOC graft dirt. We are traveling to discourse three signifiers of ethical theories – utilitarianism. Kantian moralss. and a 3rd signifier. which is Machiavellian ethical theory. We will compare and contrast the places of these three signifiers of ethical theories and see how each of them would see the SLOC dirt. III. ETHICS Section
A. UTILITARIAN ETHICAL ANALYSIS
Ethical motives as a subdivision of doctrine
Doctrine is the beginning of all ethical surveies and it addresses complex issues from all aspects of life. Ethical motives. besides called moral doctrine. is a subdivision of moral doctrine. and it involves the survey of theories of behavior and goodness. and of the significances of moral footings. Ethical motives refers to sustained and reasoned effort to find what is morally right or incorrect. The field of doctrine traditionally is divided into three parts: metaphysical. political and ethical. and doctrine of cognition. Metaphysical is the effort to understand and to explicate the ultimate nature of the universe which human existences live. Political and ethical is the survey of human existences. their nature. topographic point in the universe. and their dealingss with others. The doctrine of cognition is the surveies of what it is finally based on. and what correct mental procedures ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2010 ) . Philosophic moralss is concerned with analyzing. proposing. systematizing. and measuring moral regulations. whether really enforced in some societal group or whether desirable. In all attempts. moralss has a double duty. First. it determines the nature of morality. and 2nd. it provides the tool to assist human understanding what it means to love and move morally right. The intent of moralss is to develop. articulate. and justify rules and techniques that can be used in specific state of affairss where a moral finding must be made about a peculiar action or pattern ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2010 ) . Utilitarianism Theory
Utilitarianism is a systematic theory of moral doctrine developed by the British philosopher Jeremy Bentham. He was one of the earliest and the most influential utilitarians. Utilitarians regarded utilitarianism as an aim. scientific system of moralss. non simply as abstract ethical theory. Harmonizing to Bentham’s theory. the moral class of human behavior. therefore. is the 1 that promotes the greatest sum of felicity for the greatest figure of people. Furthermore. under this theory. “…all people are every bit important” ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2010 ) . Utilitarianism is a moral rule which holds that the morally right class of action in any state of affairs is the 1 that produces the greatest balance of benefits over injuries for everyone affected. So long as a class of action produces maximal benefits for everyone. utilitarianism does non care whether the benefits are produced by prevarications. use. or coercion. In add-on. the theory takes a long term position when finding the numeral value of each effect.
Utilitarianism attempts to supply a sense of predictability and future results. In this ethical analysis. we will utilize the useful theory to find if the action of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee ( SLOC ) paying tuition. disbursals. and fees for several relations of International Olympic Committee ( IOC ) members in order to successfully convey the 2002 winter games to Utah is moral or immoral. We will see of import points when making this useful analysis and they include groundss from scholarship plans. free medical services. hard currency payments. existent estate trade. and expensive gifts that the SLOC spent for IOC members. every bit good as the people and parties that involved and related to this dirt. In order to do this finding. we will analyse and delegate a numeral value to each stakeholder group. With the consequence. we will find the morality of the SLOC’s action. Stakeholders Analysis
1/ The Action–Is it moral for the Salt Lake Organizing Committee to win the rights to host the 2002 Winter Olympic Games through offering payoffs to the International Olympic Committee during the command procedure in order to gain benefits in footings fiscal. political and societal to Salt Lake City. Utah? 2/ Stakeholder Groups
a. Salt Lake Organizing Committee ( SLOC )
Prior to its successful command in 1995. Salt Lake metropolis had attempted four times to procure the winter games. neglecting each clip in 1932. 1972. 1976 and 1992. No fewer than 10 states submitted applications to host the 2002 Winter Olympics four of which. Salt Lake City ( Utah ) . Quebec City ( Quebec ) . Sion ( Switzerland ) . and Ostersund ( Sweden ) were named finalists. Wining the rights to host Winter Olympic is a great success of the SLOC although their act of graft to win it is someway unethical. The Winter Games cost $ 2. 1 billion for undertakings and activities related to planning and hosting the event. and $ 1. 3 billion of the entire cost comes from the SLOC. The Games is financially successful raising more money with fewer patrons than any anterior Olympic Games. which leave SLOC with a excess of $ 40 million at the decision of the games ; even though the dirt of graft still leaves a negative impact on SLOC’s prestigiousness if they want to host other featuring events in the hereafter. Based on this success. we award an overall mark of ( +4 ) to the SLOC. B. International Olympic Committee ( IOC )
IOC members received gifts from the SLOC in many different ways so they would vote for Salt Lake City. Six relations of IOC members received the payments somewhat less than $ 400. 000. Utah’s largest health care supplier gave free surgical services to two IOC members. IOC members from Africa and Latin America besides received hard currency payments runing from $ 5. 000 to $ 70. 000. The gifts besides included Utah land trade that turned a speedy $ 60. 000 net income for an IOC member of Republic of Congo. $ 2000 gift for IOC president. Committee recognition card for female bodyguards for IOC members. The instance stated that Salt Lake City decided to concentrate its wooing delegates from Africa and Latin America. but because the vote was secret. the SLOC could non even be certain it had gotten the ballots it was accused of paying for. This grounds means that an IOC member may have a gift without return because the SLOC will non cognize whether they get the ballot from this IOC member or non. Overall. IOC members and relations got a large ( +5 ) for everything they received. c. Salt Lake metropolis and The State of Utah
Salt Lake City garnered a great trade of benefits from hosting the Olympics. The benefits include changes in the design of the metropolis which raised the metropolis to certain conformed criterions. alterations to the physical and current environment. the representation of a metropolis and its civilization. and betterments in air. route and rail conveyance. From Feb 8 through Feb 24. 2002. Salt Lake City was the centre of the athleticss universe as 3. 500 jocks from 80 states participated in 70 featuring events dispersed across 10 locales. The Winter Olympic Games brought selling sweetenings. such as planetary media attending. community infrastructural investings. attractive sponsorship disbursement. the promise of long-run imagination sweetening for touristry and concern intents. and community pride. The Olympic boosted Utah’s degree of consciousness in international markets. There has been an increasing figure and magnitude of single and concern determinations to see. relocate to. or invest in Utah that are attributable to Utah’s Olympic acknowledgment. The consequence is an overall measuring of ( +4 ) . d. Utah’s Community
The 2002 Winter Olympic Games clearly provided a important. though mostly ephemeral. stimulation to Utah’s economic system. Olympic employment includes those with decade-long occupations every bit good as those employed for merely a few months. The amount of employment for Olympic related or induced occupations is tantamount to 35. 000 occupations enduring one twelvemonth. Olympic related employment is comparatively little compared to the size of Utah economic system. In general. most economic activity. whether for edifice main roads and locales or for supplying media and security services. would weave up shortly after the games themselves came to a stopping point. Utah’s ‘Olympic’ population increased 17. 000 in 2001 as a consequence of in-migration of many impermanent Olympic related occupants including broadcasters. building workers. jocks. service suppliers. sellers. etc. These migrators relocated to the province prior to the Olympics and so left once more following the terminal of the Games. The Games generated a net gross of $ 76 million to the province and local authoritiess and it ne’er increased the revenue enhancement load on Utah occupants. Because this economic growing was short-run and finally fell back to where it was later after the Games. the overall mark given to them is ( +3 ) . e. United States Society
The 2002 Winter Olympics is the most recent universe games to be held in the United States. Salt Lake City is one of the most successful Winter Olympics in history. In a position of the place state. United States earned the pride of hosting a successful universe athletics festival in one of its metropoliss. There were over 2 billion viewing audiences around the universe. who watched more than 13 billion spectator hours. The entire economic end product of the Games was about $ 4. 5 billion. which included all gross revenues from both in-state and out-of-state. on concern and single footing. Goods and/ or services were purchased in the province but some of these values were besides produced out-of-state. which benefited many other provinces besides Utah. There were besides premises that important sums of visitant disbursement supplanting would happen as a consequence of lessenings in out-of-state skier visits during the Olympic season. Additional costs which included security and substructure betterments were non included in the Olympic budgets but provided by authorities. Many people besides contended that to pay for the Olympics. money would be taken from the wellness. public assistance and environmental budgets. where it is most needful. instead than hosting a luxury featuring festival. Overall. the society earns a mark of ( +2 ) . f. Government
The authorities stated that the SLOC violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. and it tried to avoid revenue enhancements from the concealed money paid to IOC members. The U. S. District Court dismissed all the charges as the federal authorities wanted to set the instance before the jury. The justice stated that the grounds of the instance ne’er met the legal criterion for graft. Even if the instance had reached a jury. though. the prosecution would hold had a hard clip make up one’s minding on it since cogent evidence of evil purpose or bad motivation is an indispensable component to a instance of graft and fraud. It is imaginable that current perceptual experiences suggest that the costs incurred in hosting the games. to include the direct and indirect costs of graft. are dwarfed by the benefits. Anyway. the authorities still benefits on nonexempt gross revenues on visitants disbursement of the Olympics related goods and services such as hotels. eating houses. transit. retails. etc. Because of these legal mumbo jumbo that happened. the authorities earns the mark of ( -2 ) from our analysis. g. Cities losing the run
It has been alleged that Salt Lake City merely “outbid the competition” for the Winter Olympics in misdemeanor of both stated and unexpressed Olympic rules every bit good as U. S. Federal Torahs. The three metropoliss: Quebec City ( Quebec ) . Sion ( Switzerland ) . and Ostersund ( Sweden ) could hold won the rights to host the Olympics and the benefits that Salt Lake metropolis earned when hosting the Games if they were purchasing adequate ballots to win as Salt Lake metropolis did. In response to the dirt. the construction regulating the Olympic command procedure has been revamped for better hereafter run. The command procedure is now unfastened and trusty. Cities can now be confident that the best command will win and that they should non be put off command to host because they fear they will lose merely for non being corrupt plenty. The letdown gives them a entire point of ( -5 ) .
Unit of measurements Assigned
Salt Lake Organizing Committee
International Olympic Committee
Salt Lake metropolis and The State of Utah
United States Society
Cities losing the run
Resulting from the above Utilitarian analysis. it is deemed moral for the Salt Lake Organizing Committee to utilize graft in order to win the rights to host the 2002 Winter Olympics. The acquisition of such goods outweighs the bad effects. Although there are dissensions with the action. some of them still earn profit such as revenue enhancements for the authorities. or income for out-of-state concern. The SLOC morally serve the greatest sum of felicity for the greatest figure of people. B. KANTIAN ETHICAL ANALYSIS
Harmonizing to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. ground is the ultimate base and beginning for morality. Morality merely and entirely is found in pure. innate ground and will non rest in public-service corporation. jurisprudence. scruples. or intuition. Kant besides mentioned that “moral” jurisprudence is adhering on human existences as they are rational. and morality is derived from ethical rules that all rational worlds accept. For one to be moral one must be rational and frailty versa as morality consists of moving rationally ( Cavico et al. 2009 ) . Brief account of Kantian Ethical motives
Kant puts great accent on the importance of responsibility. He states one must ignore effects. even “happy” effects. and entirely concentrate on executing one’s responsibilities ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . Kant’s belief was that a rational. ordinary individual does non necessitate counsel to get at a moral judgement. as the right determination should be clear ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . Harmonizing to Kant. “one ought to execute an action. regardless of opportunisms. personal desires. or effects. because it is one’s responsibility to make so” ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . The Categorical Imperative
The supreme ethical rule harmonizing to Kant was the Categorical Imperative rule. as it is a needed component of human ground and the foundation upon which rest all moral judgements. Kant mentioned that ground indicated that a moral action must hold a certain signifier. The three trials
There are three trials to assist find whether an act is ethical. This moralss “test” is a formal trial. The signifier. the Categorical Imperative. is the first. supreme. cardinal rule in moralss ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . The Categorical Imperative has three facets ; catholicity. intrinsic worth and liberty. Kant claimed the three facets would amount to the same thing supplying signifier. affair. and complete word picture of morality ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . All three trials must be met in order for an act to be considered ethical and moral. The three trials are the “Universal Law. ” “Kingdom of Ends. ” and “Agent-Receiver” trials. a. Universal Law Trial
This first trial is the trial of Universality. Actions must be capable of being systematically cosmopolitan ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba 2005 ) . Organizers of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee ( SLOC ) engaged in corrupting members of the International Olympic Committee ( IOC ) by paying the tuition. life disbursals and fees for relations of the IOC members as portion of a successful attempt to convey the 2002 Olympic Games to Utah. The word here is “bribery” and graft is illegal and morally incorrect. A moral individual knows that graft is incorrect and can non go a cosmopolitan “law” because graft erases the possibility of an even playing field. The SLOC members can non see themselves as particular from a moral point of position. which they were making by corrupting IOC functionaries. The SLOC decidedly failed Kant’s first trial of “Universal Law” as graft is a corrupt concern act which. any rational individual knows as morally incorrect and unjust to others. Bribery is a negative act which is self-defeating. and can non be systematically cosmopolitan. B. The Kingdom of Ends Test
The “Kingdom of Ends” trial. which is the 2nd trial in Kant’s Categorical Imperative rule. illustrates the intrinsic worth of Human Beings. It states that each individual must be treated by the other individual as an “end” and people must be treated with self-respect and regard and as valuable and worthwhile entity in and of itself ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . The US Justice Department reviewed allegations that the SLOC had bribed IOC functionaries and violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. which prohibits the graft of foreign functionaries. In add-on. revenue enhancement fraud could hold occurred as research workers were finding whether revenue enhancement exempt money had been misused by purchasing gifts or funding scholarships for relations of the IOC ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) .
Dignity resides in freedom and reason. It was irrational to corrupt the IOC functionaries with about $ 400. 000 in scholarships and $ 28. 000 in surgical services by Utah’s largest wellness attention supplier for the relations of the IOC functionaries. The SLOC must hold believed they were accomplishing a higher intent by conveying the Olympic Games to Utah ; nevertheless. they failed the “Kingdom of Ends” trial. The SLOC did non care about other states that were besides offering for the 2002 Olympics. and thereby. treated them without self-respect and regard as valuable and worthwhile entities. The SLOC manipulated the IOC functionaries by offering them a land trade in Utah to do a speedy $ 60. 000 in net income in exchange for their intent of conveying the 2002 Olympic Games to Salt Lake City. Regardless of how baronial or good the intent was for Utah and the American economic system. corrupting the IOC functionaries failed the 2nd “Kingdom of Ends” trial. c. The Agent-Receiver Test
The “Agent-Receiver” trial is the 3rd trial of Kant’s Categorical Imperative rule. where Kant states that rational existences are independent ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . The “agent-receiver” asks whether a rational individual would accept the action or regulation irrespective of whether he or she was the agent. or giver. of the action or the receiving system of the action or regulation ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . While any payoff over $ 150 from bidders are forbidden by the IOC regulations. the SLOC paid for “female escorts” for some IOC members and bought expensive gifts. like a brace of scatterguns. for the IOC members ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2010 ) . Any rational individual would see this pattern to be corrupt and create inequalities if they were non the agent or receiving system in the dealing. Likewise. any state would happen this pattern to be corrupt in attempts to win the Olympic Games if they were non apart of the agent-receiver relationship. Rational existences have the ability to acknowledge. give. and govern themselves harmonizing to moral “law” ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . Therefore. the SLOC graft dirt besides failed Kant’s “agent-receiver” trial. and therefore. no rational individual or concern would prosecute in graft because graft is morally incorrect. Problems with Kantian Ethical motives
The Categorical Imperative is an abstract rule and lacks definite content. Ignoring any and all effects is non easy in pattern. Further. when there are conflicting terminals. there is no method given to assist accomplish declarations ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . In the SLOC graft dirt. it may hold been impossible for any state to win the chance to host the Olympic Games without corrupting the functionaries. For illustration. an IOC member said he believed “vote-buying” has been traveling on for the past 10 old ages and that about 115 IOC functionaries were corrupt. Another IOC member boasted the fact “no metropolis has of all time won the Olympics without his help” ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2010 ) . In this state of affairs. Kantian Ethical motives do non supply a moral declaration when certain effects are excessively cursing. Possibly the SLOC merely engaged in graft because every other Olympic Committee was prosecuting in graft and they felt it was the lone manner to efficaciously vie. Decision
The Kantian moral decision is that the Salt Lake Organization Committee engaged in corrupt concern patterns by corrupting the IOC functionaries to derive commands for 2002 Olympics and were immoral. The SLOC failed all three trials of the Categorical Imperative. Bribery is non a cosmopolitan jurisprudence as there are Torahs set by the Olympic Committee functionaries to forestall these types of unfair and corrupt patterns. Furthermore. the SLOC might hold been functioning a higher intent by acquiring the Olympic Games to Salt Lake City ; nevertheless. the local economic system. concerns and repute of Salt Lake City was traveling to endure one time the graft dirt was revealed to the populace. The US Department of Justice besides investigated the graft dirt. exemplifying that it was non acceptable and sensible patterns when you are non the agent or the receiving system. In drumhead. what we learned from this probe and from Kantian Ethical motives is that people are free. rational. moral existences. and have single rights and self-imposed responsibilities to esteem others and move rationally ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . C. MACHIAVELLIAN ETHICS
A struggle job emerges in Ethical Egoism ; struggle is generated when people pursue their ain involvements. It does non decide one’s struggles. The solution is to make one’s best to predominate. One’s actions are non good or bad but diminish one’s power as virtuousness and power become one ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . That is a Machiavellian construct. Niccolo Machiavelli ( 1469 – 1527 ) was an Italian political philosopher. set out to detect. from history. modern-day events. and his ain experience. how rules are founded. won. held. and lost. His doctrine is regarded as “scientific” in the sense that it is empirical. matter-of-fact. and rational. His attending focuses on “what is” in footings of people’s behaviour and how society should run ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) . Machiavelli’s celebrated book “The Prince” states that there are two inquiries to how people act towards moralss and morality: 1. What do people endeavor for? This purpose. whatever it is. is their “good. ” 2. What acts will bring forth this good? These Acts of the Apostless. whatever they are. are “virtues” ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) .
Machiavelli’s reply to his first inquiry was power ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . Machiavelli had a pessimistic position of human nature. and believed people were preponderantly egocentric and selfish. unscrupulous and unreliable. covetous and greedy. fearful and cowardly. passionate and irrational. and above all. short–sighted. fleeceable and stupid ( Cavico. et al 2009 ) . He besides believed that traditional virtuousnesss may be contrary to self-interest. Therefore. he believed that in order to be successful. or “virtuous. ” and accomplish the desired. one must utilize whatever means it required irrespective of how many traditional ethical rules were violated. His doctrine was that the “ends justified the agencies. ” Therefore. he even suggested that one should interrupt promises if it was against one’s involvement to maintain them ( Cavico & A ; Mujtaba. 2005 ) .
Application of Machiavellian ethical theory and rules to the SLOC graft dirt The nature of Machiavellian moralss of “what’s good is bad and what’s bad is good” comes into drama for the Salt Lake Organization Committee moving ethically when corrupting International Olympic Committee functionaries to win the 2002 games. The SLOC’s chief aim was to win the command for the 2002 Olympic Games. and by making so. they achieved their chief concern end of maximising net incomes by acquiring the 2002 Olympic Games to Salt Lake City and gave Utah more economic power. The SLOC gained this power by corrupting corrupt IOC functionaries. even though graft is looked down upon and SLOC had to defy being investigated by the US Department of Justice for go againsting U. S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Whether corrupting the IOC members was right or non became contextual. The “bad” agencies of graft won the good “end” of winning the command for the 2002 Olympic Games for Salt Lake City. Therefore. harmonizing to Machiavellian moralss. the SLOC was extremely ethical in its behaviour because it achieved its coveted consequence and won the command for the Olympic Games. Decision
Merely as analyzed above. Machiavellian rule was so much depicted in what the SLOC used to hold the 2002 Winter Olympic Games hosted in Utah. Machiavelli is normally considered as the quintessential advocate of a wholly amoral attack to making ends set. ( particularly in political relations ) . giving legitimacy to both force and fraudulence. to the point that he has attained the doubtful award of holding an adjectival – Machiavellian – created after his name and was. although randomly. awarded the paternity of the ill-famed stating “the terminal justifies the agencies. ” In the instance we have here. the terminal merely justified the agencies ; the act in its entireness is moral. D. ETHICS CONCLUSION
The ethical analysis that our group concluded has assorted ethical consequences and positions about graft in the concern universe. Harmonizing to useful moralss. we concluded that what SLOC did to acquire the Games hosted in Utah may hold been lawfully incorrect. but non morally incorrect. sing the entire good it provided to the people and the economic system. The SLOC morally serve the greatest sum of felicity for the greatest figure of people. The Kantian Ethical Analysis illustrates that the Salt Lake Organization Committee’s concern patterns of corrupting International Olympic Committee functionaries failed in all three trials of the Categorical Imperative rule. ensuing in SLOC moving amorally. However when weighed against Machiavellian moralss. the SLOC won the 2002 Olympic Games over all of the other states that command for the 2002 Olympics. which was the end for SLOC in order to maximise net incomes for the metropolis of Salt Lake. This created good virtuousnesss for the Salt Lake Organization Committee. which is moral. It is really unfortunate that the Salt Lake Organization Committee resorted to the unethical patterns of graft to win the 2002 Olympic Games because how the SLOC additions regard and a good repute within the Olympic and world-wide athleticss community is a affair of societal duty. Below. hence. we will discourse if the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics Games was socially responsible or non. IV. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY SECTION
For every concern venture that is transacted within the concern universe comes along these sometimes unasked but really of import inquiries ; is it a socially responsible concern venture? Does the concern have a socially responsible motivation? Is the company or organisation being socially responsible to the community? What is the extent of the organization’s societal duty? Is the community experiencing the organisation being socially responsible to them? In the instance of Salt Lake City Olympics which was so extensively discussed herein. did it give any socially responsible fruits to the people of Salt Lake City? Or is there a deficiency of socially responsible properties towards it? And so on. For such inquiries to be thought about or asked at all. agencies that societal duty is a really critical feature for a company or an organisation to possess. Up till now. there is some sort of a argument traveling on about whether it is mandatory for an organisation. or a company to be socially responsible to the community where it operates or non. It can non be quickly said that it is compulsory for an organisation to be socially responsible.
As such. that organisation can non be held apt. lawfully. if it is non “socially responsible” . However still. an organisation is besides judged by how “socially responsible” it is. A company or an organisation really receives good classs. which transforms to credibleness and warm welcome from the community it is situated when they are recognized as socially responsible towards the community. On the other manus. if an organisation is perceived as non being socially responsible. particularly depending on the type of organisation it is. its magnitude. the type of merchandises it produces. and how it straight or indirectly affects the community where it is located. the community tends to kick against it. In fact. there have been instances where houses have been taken to tribunal as a consequence of being viewed as socially irresponsible. We can non. nevertheless. maintain speaking about a company or an organisation being socially responsible without cognizing what being socially responsible is. This. therefore. leads us to inquiring what being socially responsible to the community means. Defined and explained below is what being socially responsible agencies. Then. ways by which it can be applied to the subject being written about will be discussed. every bit good as societal duty recommendations. B. DEFINITION OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
A whole scope of definitions of what societal duty is. abound. Harmonizing to the online concern lexicon. “social duty is the
duty of an organization’s direction towards the public assistance and involvements of the society in which it operates. ”Social duty is an ethical political orientation or theory that an entity. be it an organisation or person. has an duty to move to profit the society at big. It is a responsibility every person or organisation has to execute so as to keep a balance between the economic system and the ecosystem. There is ever a tradeoff between economic development. in the stuff sense. and the public assistance of the society and environment. Social duty means prolonging the equilibrium between the two. It pertains non merely to concern organisations but besides to everyone whose any action impacts the environment. This duty can be inactive – by avoiding prosecuting in socially harmful Acts of the Apostless. or active – by executing activities that straight advance societal ends. “A important component of current believing about privateness. nevertheless. stresses “self-regulation” instead than market or authorities mechanisms for protecting personal information” ( Swire. 1997 ) .
Most regulations and ordinances are formed due to public call ; if there is no call at that place frequently will be limited ordinance. Critics argue that Corporate societal duty ( CSR ) distracts from the cardinal economic function of concerns ; others argue that it is nil more than superficial window-dressing ; others yet argue that it is an effort to pre-empt the function of authoritiess as a watchdog over powerful transnational corporations ; though there is no systematic grounds to back up these unfavorable judgments. A important figure of surveies have shown no negative influence on stockholder consequences from CSR but instead. a somewhat positive correlativity with improved stockholder returns. Harmonizing to what alexericaandkarina. wikispaces. com has to state on CSR: There are three chief countries of CSR Social. Economic. and Environmental. There are three chief constituencies that corporations need be cognizant of when seting together their program for CSR: clients. stockholders. and employees.
Customers are the most of import since they care about the company’s good standing. society support and employee labour patterns ; stockholders care about CSR in footings of it assisting make a new gross watercourse and to retain and turn the company’s client base. ensuing in increased net incomes ; employees…are motivated by and seeking work with companies who uphold a strong repute for being socially responsible. Peoples tend to inquire many inquiries sing the company or organisation that operates within their communities. For case. does the concern usage recycled paper merchandises or donate to a homeless shelter? What do we derive from holding these boring companies pollute our air and sour our dirt? A turning figure of consumers consider such factors when make up one’s minding whether to sponsor concerns or non. A company’s “social responsibility” quotient can do a difference to its bottom line. Different organisations have designed different definitions. The fact remains that there is considerable common land between them. One enterpriser defines it as the manner companies manage their concern procedures to bring forth an overall positive impact on the society.
He contends that companies need to reply to two facets of their operations – 1. the quality of their direction. both in footings of people and procedures. and 2. the nature of. and measure of their impact on society in the assorted countries. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development in its publication. Making Good Business Sense ( Holme & A ; Watts. 2000 ) . used the undermentioned definition: Corporate Social Responsibility is the go oning committedness by concerns to act ethically and lend to economic development while bettering the quality of life of the work force and their households every bit good as of the local community and society at big. Evidence from the same study gave different perceptual experiences of what this should intend from a figure of different societies across the universe. Some see corporate societal duty. CSR. as about capacity edifice for sustainable supports.
It respects cultural differences and finds the concern chances in constructing the accomplishments of employees. In the United States. CSR has been defined much more in footings of a philanthropic theoretical account. Companies make net incomes. uninterrupted and unhampered. except by carry throughing their responsibility to pay revenue enhancements. Then. they donate a certain portion of the net incomes to charitable causes. even though it is entirely dependent on whether they want to make so or non. In Europe. the theoretical account is much more focussed on runing the nucleus concern in a socially responsible manner. complemented by investing in communities for solid concern instance grounds. The belief that this theoretical account is more sustainable roots in portion from societal duty going an built-in portion of the wealth creative activity procedure. which if managed decently should heighten the fight of concern and maximise the value of wealth creative activity to society. And when times get tough. there is the inducement to pattern CSR more and better. particularly if it is a philanthropic exercising which revolves around the chief concern.
But as with any procedure based on the corporate activities of communities of human existences ( as companies are ) . there is no ‘one size tantrums all’ . In different states. there will be different precedences. and values that will determine how concerns act. From the foregoing. hence. the general term “social responsibility” is defined as the duty corporations. organisations. and persons have to society. These yearss. the definition of societal duty seems to include everything from personal wellness picks so you don’t add to the country’s wellness attention load to supplying wellness attention benefits to employees. In other words. the term “social responsibility” is bandied about in all kinds of state of affairss. It is applied to personal behaviour and to the behaviour of the organisation. from where you purchase your nutrient to where you purchase your natural stuffs. C. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY WITH REGARDS TO SALT LAKE CITY
Athletic events like the Olympics are events merely like every other event. ( for case. political. technological. medical ) and are non needfully expected to be downright socially responsible. This is because they are really impermanent. hosted between one twenty-four hours to a figure of few months. Because the Olympic Games is a six-week event that is so impermanent. is hosted every four old ages. and is merely awarded to metropoliss across the Earth via vote of commission members. there is truly non a solid impression to comprehend the event as socially responsible or non. from the point of view of specifically holding that property to the metropolis it is hosted. It can merely be generalized in such a manner that Olympics itself as a planetary event is determined as a socially responsible event or otherwise. as the instance may be. No contributions specifically to communities hosting the event. or charities. or foundations that take attention of several facets of medical research of any kind have been recorded. This likely is because. as pointed out earlier. the Olympics being a six-week event. is hosted merely every four old ages. and in topographic points chosen at random by voting. It is rather unlike companies. or houses. or organisations that reside in a peculiar community for old ages. holding an array of employees working for them over the old ages. and running concern at that place.
However. in this discourse. we will alternatively utilize the benefits that the Salt Lake City community. the province of Utah. and the United States as a whole. got. from holding hosted the 2002 winter Olympics as the standards of judging whether hosting of the event was socially responsible. or non. Granted that the Salt Lake Olympics was mired with rumours of allegations of international graft of Olympic commission members. it was yet doubtless that it was socially responsible to the people of Salt Lake City. Utah. and. in fact. the United States in general. based on the benefits received on holding the event hosted in Salt Lake City. First of all. and as pointed out above. the event put Salt Lake City in the international limelight as 3. 500 jocks from 80 states gathered to vie among themselves in 70 featuring events spread out in 10 avenues. It boosted Utah’s degree of consciousness in international markets. There was overall increased work force as people from different occupation backgrounds were given occupations several months before the chief event to assist in fixing the land for the event. In readying. major building undertakings were initiated.
Changes in the design of the metropolis which raised the metropolis to certain conformed criterions were done. Local expresswaies were expanded and repaired. there were betterments in air. route and rail conveyance. and a light rail system was constructed. Olympic locales are now used for local. national. and international sporting events and Olympic athlete preparation. Tourism has increased since the Olympic Games. even though concern did non pick up instantly following them. There has been an increasing figure and magnitude of single and concern determinations to see. relocate to. or invest in Utah that are attributable to Utah’s Olympic acknowledgment. The Winter Olympic Games brought selling sweetenings. such as planetary media attending. community infrastructural investings. attractive sponsorship disbursement. the promise of long-run imagination sweetening for touristry and concern intents. and community pride. That clearly provided a important. though mostly ephemeral. stimulation to Utah’s economic system.
Peoples were employed for decade-long occupations every bit good as those for merely a few months ensuing to about 35. 000 occupations enduring one twelvemonth being given out. We besides pointed out that Utah’s ‘Olympic’ population increased 17. 000 in 2001 as a consequence of in-migration of many impermanent Olympic related occupants including broadcasters. building workers. jocks. service suppliers. sellers. etc. These migrators relocated to the province prior to the Olympics and so left once more following the terminal of the Games. The Games generated a net gross of $ 76 million to the province and local authoritiess and it ne’er increased the revenue enhancement load on Utah occupants.
There is non more of a societal duty that you can acquire from such a impermanent event as the Salt Lake City Olympics Games than have been discussed. As a consequence of hosting the Olympic Games by and large. people’s lives are ever touched in different ways. be it financially. socially. psychologically or otherwise. There is every ground to hold the perceptual experience that people were satisfied after the Olympics was hosted in Salt Lake City. Harmonizing to Olympic intelligence mercantile establishment Around the Rings. Salt Lake City could be be aftering another Olympic command. Fraser Bullock. the main fiscal officer of the 2002 Salt Lake Olympics. has said that he was asked about command. proposing there may be encouragement for a command. If there was no satisfaction for the one hosted before in the first topographic point. there wouldn’t be another program for another command. at least non this fast. D. CONCLUSION OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Social duty has been used as a kind of yardstick for a good concern organisation or house. However. some advocates see it as more than altering our life styles ; whether it is driving less. puting the air conditioner at a moderate temperature of 75 grades and the warmer a small lower. recycling. and a list of other things that can be done to assist nature. President Barack Obama has called upon Americans to take more personal duty for the wellness and wellbeing of society. whether by incurring less recognition card debt or by being better parents. These single actions have an impact on the economic system and on communities ; hence duty for one’s personal personal businesss becomes a signifier of societal duty. merely as prudent money-management and just workplace regulations are signifiers of corporate societal duty. The complete definition of societal duty for both concerns and persons seems to include: •How we treat the people we meet every twenty-four hours
•How we handle our fundss
•How we conduct ourselves at place and at work
•Whether we minimize our negative environmental impacts
•Whether we make an attempt to actively better our communities. and so on. One enterpriser advised on societal duty therefore. “if you think acquiring involved in societal causes would work for your concern. here are some things to see. First and first. clients can smell “phony” societal duty from stat mis off. So. unless you’re truly committed to a cause. don’t attempt to work customers’ concerns to do a net income. ” V. CONCLUSION
The Utah 2002 Winter Olympic Games was one that continues to be debated in schools and elsewhere. Sides will ever be taken sing topographic points SLOC got it right and topographic points they failed deplorably. be it lawfully. ethically. or whether they were socially responsible to the society or non. As have been analyzed above. we have been able to angle and marshal out several points sing the subjects aforementioned. On the legal forepart. we decided it was illegal for SLOC to hold bribed the IOC functionaries holding clearly violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. even as SLOC president Frank Joklik apologized and took full duty for the actions done by his commission. turn outing that the commission was guilty of corrupting foreign functionaries. On the moralss forepart. diverse decisions emerged. depending on the ethical rule used. For utilitarianism. we concluded that it was morally right for SLOC to hold brought the event to Utah. sing the concluding mark derived from the consequence of the stakeholder analysis.
The concluding mark showed that the terminal was for the good of the society at big. which made it morally right But Kant’s ethical rules denied that morality. There was ne’er any manner graft could be right in the first topographic point. whether it was for the good of the people or non. If they had been awarded hosting the event usually without any graft. so the terminal would hold been morally right. but non otherwise. Machiavellian moralss praised what the SLOC did wholly. In the whole instance. the terminal justified the agencies. Therefore. it was a perfect trade and morally right. The event besides proved to be socially responsible given all the grounds aforementioned.
Hosting the event in Utah projected the metropolis to spotlight and the subsequent hubbub that came out of it even projected it the more. Simply put. it is merely because the event was hosted in Utah that we are holding this treatment now. Finally. we believe that SLOC must hold learnt their lessons on how to beguile for hosting another Olympic Games in Utah. and elsewhere excessively. The graft instance exposed a batch of the traffics of the IOC that the general public ne’er knew were go oning. It was a lesson every other commission that may be involved in hustling for and forming an Olympic event must hold learned. As a consequence of the media coverage of the dirt. it may non be every bit perfect as it should be seeking to acquire favored by the IOC members to host the event in a peculiar metropolis. However. it has elevated the caution and openness of the procedure of presenting host metropoliss to greater highs.