| Course | CSR 610 Business Ethics and Culture |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | graduate assignment applying ethical theories to a business decision |
| Length | About 1,030 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | MS Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for CSR 610 Module 2
Ethical Analysis of the Vitamin D Gummy Batch Decision
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
CSR 610: Business Ethics and Culture
Module Two Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
Ethical Analysis of the Vitamin D Gummy Batch Decision
Introduction
On Tuesday, the quality manager at the company told the plant manager that batch 25-1147, 400,000 vitamin D gummies for a national drugstore chain's store brand, had a problem. The label states 1,000 international units of vitamin D per gummy. The release test showed 103 percent of that amount, which meets the release minimum. But the company's own stability data show that its gummies lose about 8 percent of their vitamin D over a 24-month shelf life, so this batch will likely contain about 95 percent of the labeled amount before its expiration date. Most batches are made with a larger overage to allow for this loss; this one came out low because of a dosing error. The retailer expects the shipment Friday. This paper analyzes the decision using four ethical perspectives and recommends a course of action.
Stakeholders and Options
Consumers who buy the gummies, including people who take vitamin D on a doctor's advice, are the stakeholders most directly affected. The retailer, which sells the product under its own name, bears legal and reputational risk if the product is found below label. The company's employees, owners and quality staff are affected by the cost and by what the decision signals. Regulators and other customers are affected indirectly.
There are three realistic options. The company could ship the batch as labeled, since it passed its release test. It could tell the retailer and ask to shorten the expiration date from 24 to 12 months, so the product would still contain at least the labeled amount when it expired. Or it could scrap the batch, at a cost of about $180,000, and remake it, delaying the shipment about three weeks. Jones (1991) notes that the ethical weight of a situation depends partly on the size and likelihood of harm; here the harm to any one consumer is small, but it is likely and it affects many people.
Utilitarian Analysis
A utilitarian tallies the gains and losses of each choice for everyone touched by it and picks the best total. Shipping as labeled avoids the $180,000 loss and a delay, and the harm to each consumer, about 5 percent less vitamin D near the end of shelf life, is small. A narrow utilitarian calculation might favor shipping. But a fuller accounting includes the probability that the retailer's own testing or a regulator later finds the shortfall, the cost of a recall and lost business, and the effect on employees of seeing a known problem shipped. With those consequences included, shortening the dating produces nearly all the benefit of shipping at little cost, and it ranks first. Scrapping produces the least risk but the largest certain cost.
Duty-Based Analysis
Kant's line of thought, applied to a gummy batch, comes down to two tests: would the company accept every supplier shipping short whenever the gap looked small, and does shipping treat the buyer as someone owed the truth or only as a source of revenue? A label is a promise to the consumer. Shipping a product the company expects to fall below its label before expiry breaks that promise knowingly, and a rule allowing manufacturers to do so whenever the shortfall is small could not be applied universally without making labels meaningless. Velasquez (2012) emphasizes that honesty toward those who rely on information is a central duty in business. Shipping as labeled fails this test. Shortening the dating, with disclosure, keeps the promise, as does scrapping.
Rights and Justice
A rights perspective asks whether any option violates the rights of those affected. Consumers have a right to accurate information about what they are buying, particularly for products they take for health reasons. Shipping as labeled would violate that right without their knowledge or consent. Justice asks whether costs and benefits are distributed fairly; shipping would shift the cost of the company's dosing error onto consumers who cannot detect it. Both shortening the dating with the retailer's informed agreement and scrapping respect consumers' rights.
Virtue Ethics
A character-based view puts a different question: how would an honest, responsible professional act here, and what kind of company does each choice make this one? A quality manager of integrity would not sign off on shipping a product she expects to fall short of its label. The decision also shapes character in the organization: shipping would teach staff that passing a test matters more than the truth the test is meant to protect, the same lesson that produced the inspection findings described in Module One. Treviño and Nelson argue that everyday decisions like this one teach employees what the organization really values (Treviño & Nelson, 2021).
Where the Lenses Agree and Differ
Options assessed by ethical perspective
| Option | Utilitarian | Duty-based | Rights and justice | Virtue |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ship as labeled | Favored only if hidden risks ignored | Fails, breaks label promise | Fails, misleads consumers | Fails |
| Shorten dating with disclosure | Favored | Passes | Passes if retailer informed | Passes |
| Scrap and remake | Costly but safe | Passes | Passes | Passes |
Only a narrow utilitarian view supports shipping as labeled, and it depends on ignoring the risks of discovery and the effect on culture. The other perspectives reject it. Between the two acceptable options, shortening the dating achieves the same respect for consumers at far lower cost, provided the retailer agrees knowingly.
Recommendation
The company should tell the retailer today what happened and propose shortening the expiration to twelve months, with the stability data attached. If the retailer agrees, the company should relabel before shipping. If it declines, the company should scrap and remake the batch. Separately, it should investigate the dosing error and review whether any other batches were affected. The quality manager who raised the problem should be thanked publicly, since how the company treats the person who brings bad news will shape whether the next problem is raised at all.
Conclusion
Four ethical perspectives agree that shipping a product the company expects to fall below its label is wrong, and three of them say so regardless of how small the shortfall is. Shortening the dating with full disclosure honors the company's duty to consumers at modest cost and teaches staff the right lesson about what the company values.
References
Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. The Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-395. https://doi.org/10.2307/258867
Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2021). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right (8th ed.). Wiley.
Velasquez, M. G. (2012). Business ethics: Concepts and cases (7th ed.). Pearson.
What the CSR 610 Module 2 instructions ask for
The Module Two assignment in CSR 610 asks you to apply ethical theories to a business situation and reach a justified decision. You typically describe the facts, identify the stakeholders and the options, analyze the options through several theories, such as utilitarianism, duty-based ethics, rights and justice, and virtue ethics, compare the results and recommend a course of action. Strong submissions apply each theory to the specific options rather than defining it in general, show where theories conflict and explain how the conflict was resolved. They also consider the practical feasibility of the recommendation. Some versions also ask you to identify which theory you find most persuasive for this decision and why.
How this CSR 610 Module 2 ethical theories assignment example is built
The paper describes a batch of 400,000 vitamin D gummies labeled at 1,000 international units per gummy that tested at 103 percent of label at release. The company's stability data show gummies lose about 8 percent of their vitamin D over the 24-month shelf life, so the batch will likely fall to about 95 percent before expiry. The options are to ship as labeled, shorten the expiration to twelve months with the retailer's agreement, or scrap the batch at a cost of about $180,000. Utilitarian analysis, duty-based ethics, rights and justice and virtue ethics are each applied. All but a narrow utilitarian view reject shipping as labeled, and the paper recommends shortening the dating with full disclosure to the retailer, scrapping if the retailer declines.
Where the CSR 610 Module 2 rubric puts the points
The rubric for the theories paper usually weighs the accuracy of each theory's explanation, the depth of its application to the options, identification of stakeholders, comparison of results, the justification of the recommendation and writing. High-scoring papers analyze each option under each theory, identify who bears the costs and benefits, explain where theories disagree and why the chosen option best answers that disagreement. They avoid stopping at the conclusion that the right thing is obvious. Papers lose credit for definitions without application, for analyzing only one option, for ignoring consumers' rights and for impractical recommendations. Graders also notice whether the recommendation includes a fallback if the preferred option is not available. A table comparing options across theories often earns credit for clarity.
CSR 610 Module 2 help: the mistakes that cost points
The most common weakness in ethical theory papers is a paragraph defining each theory and a final sentence stating the answer. Apply each theory to each realistic option, even briefly, and say what it recommends and why. Identify the stakeholders who would bear each consequence. Notice where theories disagree, since that is where judgment is needed, and explain how you weighed them. Check that your recommendation is something the company could actually do by the deadline. Keep each theory's section focused on the options, and use one source per theory where you can. If a theory supports an option you reject, say why that consideration is outweighed.
Get CSR 610 Module 2 written to your instructions
Send the CSR 610 Module 2 assignment and your dilemma. The paper will set out facts and options, apply each ethical theory to them in turn, show where they agree or conflict and reach a reasoned decision. About two days; a first paper is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More CSR 610 papers and related MS Management samples
- CSR 610 Module 1 Discussion: Why Ethics Became a Business Problem in Ogden
- CSR 610 Module 3 Milestone One: Assessing the Company's Ethical Culture
- CSR 610 Module 4 Discussion: When Making the Ship Date Becomes the Value
- ACC 645 Module 4 Discussion: Do Nonaudit Fees Threaten Independence?
- MBA 687 Module 1 Correspondence on a Failed Change
- BMB 515 Module 6 Milestone Two: Spreading Revenue Across the Roster
- ACC 550 Module 9 Transfer Pricing Assignment: What Should Candy Pay for Halves?
CSR 610 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free CSR 610 Module 2 Ethical Theories sample?
This page includes a complete CSR 610 Module 2 analysis of a borderline supplement batch through four ethical theories.
What is utilitarian ethics in business?
An approach that judges actions by their consequences, choosing the option that produces the greatest overall benefit and least harm for everyone affected.
What is duty-based ethics?
An approach, associated with Kant, that judges actions by whether they follow moral duties, such as honesty, regardless of consequences, and by whether they treat people as ends rather than means.
How does virtue ethics apply to business decisions?
It asks what a person of good character, honest, fair and responsible, would do in the situation, and what the decision says about the kind of organization the company wants to be.
What should you do when ethical theories disagree?
Identify why they disagree, weigh the strength of each consideration in the specific facts and look for an option that satisfies the most important duties while limiting harm.