MGMT90015 · Foundations Of Human Resource Management
HRM, Ethics and Societal Wellbeing
Ethics is the third high-probability integrating topic, and the chapter's framing move is to argue that HRM is inherently an ethical activity — every HR decision (who is hired, paid, surveilled, promoted, retrenched) distributes benefits and harms among people, so HR is never value-neutral. The examinable core is the three ethical theories, which you must name, define and apply: deontology (Kant — duties and rights; some acts are wrong regardless of outcome), consequentialism / utilitarianism (Bentham — judge by outcomes, the greatest good for the greatest number), and virtue ethics (Aristotle — what would a person of good character do?). The chapter then gives two instruments: quick ethical tests (publicity, reversibility, the smell test) and the four-stage moral-decision process (awareness → judgement → intention → action) as a diagnostic for where an ethical decision breaks down. It closes on HR as ethical steward — the CIPD professional standard — and the power constraint that limits HR's ability to act on it, applied to live HR decisions: surveillance, transfers, restructuring/plant closure and whistleblowing.
What this chapter covers
- 01Why HRM is inherently an ethical activity
- 02Deontology (Kant) — duties, rights and the categorical imperative
- 03Consequentialism / utilitarianism (Bentham) — judge by outcomes
- 04Virtue ethics (Aristotle) — character and the good person
- 05The quick ethical tests (publicity, reversibility, smell test)
- 06The four-stage moral-decision process as a diagnostic
- 07HR as ethical steward (the CIPD standard) and its power constraint
- 08Live HR decisions — surveillance, transfers, restructuring, whistleblowing
Resolving an HR ethical dilemma with all three lenses
- +1Frame it as an ethical decision: open by stating that the restructure distributes harm (job loss, deception) and benefit (continuity), so it is inherently an ethical, not just operational, choice — this banks the engagement mark.
- +1Apply deontology: Kant's duty-and-rights lens — misleading staff treats them as means, not ends, and breaches a duty of honesty, so the deception is wrong regardless of the business benefit.
- +1Apply consequentialism: Bentham's outcome lens — weigh continuity and protected jobs against the harm to those cut and the loss of trust among survivors; the 'greatest good' calculation may not favour secrecy once survivor morale is counted.
- +1Apply virtue ethics: Aristotle's character lens — what would an honest, courageous HR professional do? Likely give fair notice and support, acting as an ethical steward.
- +1Conclude with a position: all three lenses converge against the quiet, minimal-notice approach; recommend transparent process and support — while noting HR's power constraint may limit how far it can push back.
Key terms
- HRM as an ethical activity
- The premise that every HR decision distributes benefits and harms among people, so HR is never value-neutral. Opening an ethics answer with this framing banks the 'engagement with the question' mark and sets up the three-lens analysis.
- Deontology
- Kant's duty-based ethics: some acts are right or wrong in themselves, regardless of consequences, because they respect (or violate) duties and rights and treat people as ends, not merely means. It judges the act, not the outcome.
- Consequentialism / utilitarianism
- Bentham's outcome-based ethics: an act is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number. It judges decisions by their net consequences, which means it can, controversially, justify harming a few for the benefit of many.
- Virtue ethics
- Aristotle's character-based ethics: the right action is what a person of good character (honest, courageous, just) would do. It shifts the question from rules or outcomes to the kind of person and profession HR should be.
- The moral-decision process
- A four-stage model of ethical action — awareness, judgement, intention, action — used as a diagnostic to locate where an ethical failure occurs (e.g. the person never recognised the issue, or knew but lacked the intention to act). It pairs with quick ethical tests like publicity and reversibility.
HRM, Ethics and Societal Wellbeing FAQ
Why is HRM described as inherently ethical?
Because every HR decision — hiring, pay, surveillance, promotion, retrenchment — distributes benefits and harms among real people, so it always embeds value choices. Stating this up front frames the question well and earns the engagement mark before you apply any theory.
What are the three ethical theories I need?
Deontology (Kant — duties and rights; the act matters), consequentialism/utilitarianism (Bentham — outcomes; the greatest good), and virtue ethics (Aristotle — character; what a good person would do). You must name, define and apply each to the scenario, not just list them.
What is the most common ethics mistake in the exam?
Naming the three theories but never applying them to the case. Each lens must do real analytical work — reach a different angle on the actual dilemma, then show where the lenses converge or conflict. Listing without applying is the single biggest mark-loser.
How do I use the moral-decision process?
Use it as a diagnostic to pinpoint where an ethical failure happened — awareness, judgement, intention or action. For example, a manager who recognised the issue and judged it wrong but lacked the intention to act failed at a specific stage, which sharpens your analysis and recommendation.
Exam move
Treat ethics as a guaranteed-value integrating topic and over-prepare the three lenses: name, define and apply deontology, consequentialism and virtue ethics to any scenario, then show where they agree or clash. Open every ethics answer by framing the decision as inherently ethical (the engagement mark), use the moral-decision process to diagnose where a failure occurs, and connect to the Harvard model's societal-wellbeing pole. Never list the theories without applying them — that is the chapter's biggest mark-loser.
