Ethics in Business

>From a business perspective, working under government contracts can be

a

very lucrative proposition. In general, a stream of orders keep coming

in,

revenue increases and the company grows in the aggregate. The obvious

downfalls to working in this manner is both higher quality expected as

well as the extensive research and documentation required for government

contracts. If a part fails to perform correctly it can cause minor

glitches as well as problems that can carry serious repercussions, such

as

in the National Semiconductor case. When both the culpable component and

company are found, the question arises of how extensive these

repercussions should be. Is the company as an entity liable or do you

look

into individual employees within that company? From an ethical

perspective

one would have to look at the mitigating factors of both the employees

and

their superiors along with the role of others in the failure of these

components. Next you would have to analyze the final ruling from a

corporate perspective and then we must examine the macro issue of

corporate responsibility in order to attempt to find a resolution for

cases like these.

The first mitigating factor involved in the National Semiconductor

case is the uncertainty, on the part of the employees, on the duties

that

they were assigned. It is plausible that during the testing procedure,

an

employee couldnt distinguish which parts they were to test under

government standards and commercial standards. In some cases they might

have even been misinformed on the final consumers of the products that

they tested. In fact, ignorance on the part of the employees would fully

excuse them from any moral responsibility for any damage that may result

from their work. Whether it is decided that an employees is fully

excused,

or is given some moral responsibility, would have to be looked at on an

individual basis.