A manager refuses to reveal company secrets despite an offer of handsome kickbacks. Which of the following reasons justifies her action if she were to subscribe to Kohlberg’s preconventional level of moral reasoning?
A-An idea of the unpleasant emotions she would feel if her actions appeared on the front page of the New York Times.
B-The law states that it is morally wrong to share company documents with anyone outside the firm.
C-The company policy states that anyone found guilty of such an act will be suspended.
D-The disclosure of company secrets would jeopardize all the employees of the company through no fault of their own
My choice is D
What is "Kohlberg’s preconventional level of moral reasoning"? Is that defined in your text?
I looked over one more time and changed my answer to A. Am I right?
I don't know. I have no idea what "Kohlberg's..." is.
What about C?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_moral_development
If you were to subscribe to Kohlberg's preconventional level of moral reasoning, the justification for the manager's action would be option D - "The disclosure of company secrets would jeopardize all the employees of the company through no fault of their own."
Kohlberg's preconventional level of moral reasoning is characterized by a focus on self-interest and avoiding punishment. In this case, the manager's refusal to reveal company secrets despite the offer of kickbacks can be seen as an action driven by the potential harm it could cause to all the employees of the company, rather than any personal gain or fear of punishment. This aligns with the self-interest aspect of the preconventional level of moral reasoning. By not disclosing the secrets, the manager is prioritizing the well-being of the employees and acting in a way that avoids potential negative consequences for them.