Bandura, Caprara & Zsolnai (2000) – Corporate Tran

All None Save

• Explaining how normal people can act unethically without feeling guilty Moral disengagement
• Making bad actions seem good or necessary Moral justification
• Using soft or neutral words to hide harm Euphemistic labeling
• Blaming the group or system instead of oneself Diffusion of responsibility
• Claiming others caused the harm Attribution of blame
• Seeing victims as less human Dehumanization
• Shifting focus away from consequences of actions Disregarding consequences
• Creating clear responsibility for decisions Accountability
• Making actions and effects visible to others Transparency
• Unethical behavior explained by psychological defense Descriptive ethics
• Acting based on what should be done, not what is Normative ethics
• Judging right and wrong by results and total happiness Utilitarianism
• The greatest good for the greatest number of people Principle of utility
• Focusing on moral duty and intention, not results Deontology
• Following universal moral rules that apply to everyone Categorical imperative
• Treating people as ends, never as means Kantian ethics
• Looking at outcomes rather than motives Consequentialism
• Moral theory that compares benefits and harms Cost-benefit reasoning
• Strict rule-based morality independent of context Duty ethics
• Questioning whether moral truths exist objectively Meta-ethics
• Belief that moral facts exist independent of opinion Moral realism
• Belief that morality depends on culture and emotion Moral anti-realism
• Seeing morality as universal and unchanging Realist ethics
• Seeing morality as social and context-based Anti-realist ethics
• Ethical decisions seen as universal duties Universal moral law
• Moral norms created through human agreement Social construction of morality
• Using theory to evaluate corporate behavior Applied business ethics

All None Save