1005 Group Presentation Our group chose the deontological framework in order to examine the ethical issues that may arise if the manufacturing firm internationalises into the US or Turkey. This framework is centred around making moral actions, regardless of the consequences they could potentially espouse. We chose this framework because it conveys an intrinsic desire to be morally just in all actions, both individually and as a corporation. Political/legal ethics: With regards to Turkey - politically - there is a significant ethical issue the firm will encounter: corruption. Governmental corruption has increased by 22% over the past 6 years, and it is currently 10% higher than the global corruption average. Corruption, most notably, bribery, is known to be heavily involved within the government, and this ‘culture’ has bled into other branches of the economy, particularly the private sector. For a firm establishing itself in Turkey, this is a major problem, because newly-established corporations (such as this) engaging in bribery is extremely prevalent, because they think that is the only way to hit the ground running for business to prosper. Turkey has an anti-corruption action plan implemented by the government in 2010, however limited enforcement and weak policies has proven it to be ineffective. When looking at it from a deontological perspective, administering and willingly being involved in corrupt practises is extremely unethical and should be inhibited, despite the benefits the corporation may enjoy, thus conducting business legally and legitimately should be the only way. From a political and legal standpoint, the USA has a much more secure and strict enforcement against corruption, compared to Turkey. The US however, according to Transparency International’s corruption index, has seen corruption slightly increase since 2015, although, from a holistic perspective, it is still 37% lower than the global average, which is very significant compared to Turkey. In the US, bribery is not part of the fabric of life/culture, in contrast to many other nations; in fact, the Foreign Corrupt Practises Act was implemented by the government in 1977 in order to prohibit any businesses from engaging in these illegal activities – severe fines and even jail time for company officers could be a result of this practise. It is evident that the US has adopted and follows the deontological philosophy and framework of ethics, as can be seen from comparatively low corruption levels, and the recognition that the means of conducting business justifies the end, whether the business will benefit or be put at a disadvantage. Now that we’ve delved into both the US and Turkey, I’m sure it’s clear that the US is the favoured nation, when analysing it from a deontological framework. The enforcement working towards the absence of corruption is much more dominant and effective, compared to Turkey. This comparison comes as no surprise now, because we have learnt that corruption is embraced as a common custom in some nations, and is suppressed as an illegal practise in others. Chêne, M. (2012). Overview of corruption and anti-corruption in Turkey. [online] Transparency International, Marie Chêne, pp.2–9. Available at: www.transparency.org [Accessed 13 Oct. 2020]. GAN Integrity. (2018). Turkey Corruption Report. [online] Available at: https://www.ganintegrity.com/portal/country-
-preview.jpeg)
