I found this article insightful, even though it was quite long. I appreciated that it began by emphasizing the first step in the decision-making process: recognizing that you’re facing a moral dilemma. Once that’s identified, the next step is understanding the nature of the dilemma and deciding how to resolve it. I found it particularly interesting that the article discusses how people often struggle to identify moral dilemmas due to “moral intensity.” According to the article’s Proposition 1, issues with high moral intensity are more likely to be recognized as moral issues than those with low moral intensity. I completely agree with this point! I would also add that issues with low moral intensity not only tend to go unrecognized as moral dilemmas but also make people less likely to see themselves as moral agents. This tendency contributes to what’s known as the bystander effect, where individuals are less likely to intervene in a situation that doesn’t directly impact them. When moral intensity is low, people might feel less accountable or assume someone else will step in, resulting in inaction. This article effectively highlights the link between moral awareness and action, showing how moral intensity can influence whether individuals see a situation as requiring ethical consideration and intervention.

Source:

Thomas M. Jones. Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model. The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Apr., 1991), pp. 366-3. Published by: Academy of Management. http://www.jstor.org/stable/258867