"Organizations as a source of Immoral Behaviour"

.
             This example is, to some degree, similar to the utilitarianism theory developed by Bentham and Mill which states that "acts are right which produce the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of beings affected" (Pence, 2000). In the above scenario, harm in the form of inconvenience is deliberately inflicted on customers in order for the cinema complex to make a higher profit. Most customers (those who arrived at the cinema early) got the seat they paid for, the cinema complex made their profit and only the minority of customers were forced to watch a less popular movie so it is evident that the greatest number were afforded the greatest happiness.
             Whilst pondering the definition of "evil" we must also consider the theory of ethical relativism which proposes that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture and there is no universal truth for all societies. Consequently, what is considered "evil" to us may be acceptable to another culture. An example of this would be the "sweat shops" operating in South East Asia who employ young children to work long hours in sub standard conditions for minimal pay in order to manufacture goods that will generate profit for a business organisation. In our western society many people would find this appalling and organisations would not get away with such exploitation but in South East Asia it is acceptable as children are expected to help support their families from an early age. Therefore, if children were made to work under the same circumstances in New Zealand it would be entirely unacceptable and the organisation responsible would be accused of "evil doing" acts but when made to work in South East Asia under the same circumstances it would not be viewed by the people of that society as "evil doing".
             When determining why individuals feel obligated to perform evil acts within a business organisation we must first consider the basic needs of all human beings.