Utilitarianism

The concept of utilitarianism has been derived from the Latin word
"utilitās" meaning usefulness. The utility is the root word in utilitarianism.
It refers to the positive uses (benefits or utilities that will accrue as a result
of choosing one option over another. Utilitarians consider all types of harms
and benefits in their ethical deliberations. 
 Utilitarianism is defined as the doctrine of ethics that advocates that actions
are right if they are useful for the benefit of a majority and that an action is
right in so far as it promotes happiness. The doctrine adopts the
consequentialist approach of focusing on the effects of actions to determine
if they are good or bad. 
In ethics, morals are separated into good and bad. In utilitarianism, good is
defined as the existence of pleasure and the absence of pain. The utilitarian
ethic is governed by the greatest happiness principle, which states that a
moral action is one that increases the total utility in the people and any
means is justified in order to achieve the desired end result. 
Components 
 It has two broad variants - Classical and Ideal Utilitarianism 
Jeremy Bentham and J.S. Mill are the most famous proponents of Classical
Utilitarianism which defines "good" essentially in terms of maximizing
pleasure and minimizing pain (hedonism). 
 Jeremy Bentham defines pleasure strictly in sensual terms and believed that
there were no qualitative differences in pleasures, for which he was
criticized by other theorists. 
J.S. Mill propounded that pleasures are of different types, they can be
intellectual and sensual. The former is of a superior type. He believed that a
good act was one that would increase the general prevalence of pleasure
over pain in the whole of society (altruism). 
Ideal Utilitarianism disagrees with the hedonistic values adopted by the
Classical Utilitarians. That is, good includes more than what can be reduced
to pleasure. G. E. Moore is the most important scholar of this school of
utilitarianism. 

The principle of utility governs not only the acts of private individuals but
those of governments as well. Thus it is the duty of governments and
individuals to promote happiness. 
 
The principle of utilitarianism can be employed to formulate better policies
and make informed decisions, as the priority of governance is to maximize
the benefits from programs and policies and at the same time minimize the
losses and damages. Here lies a direct connection between theory and
practice. An officer can employ the utilitarian ethic to maximize the utility
of the resources at his disposal and impact maximum lives. 
However, governance is not a zero-sum game and one must be cautious to
not overlook those who are outside the purview of such policies. Utilitarian
policies benefit the majority, thus the repeated emphasis on utility may lead
to alienation of the deprived section. "The greatest amount of good for the
greatest number” is a good approach to governance but inclusivity is
equally important.

Policies like higher taxation for tobacco and alcohol to 

discourage people from consuming such substances.  Free basic education
in order to impact as many young minds as possible. 

Real-life example - Imagine you are the driver of a train. As you are
heading towards your destination, you realize the brakes are not working.
Ahead you see five workers on the track. 
They are busy jackhammering and do not see the train approach. You as the
driver have the ability to determine where the train goes by switching the
tracks. However, the other track has one worker, who is also unaware of the
train. By physically switching the tracks, you will save five, but your
actions will kill the lone worker. What will one do in this situation? From
the utilitarian point of view, one must switch tracks and save the five works
at the cost of one.

The doctrine has been criticized by proponents of other ideas. Karl Marx for
instance criticizes utilitarianism for its failure to acknowledge that people
can have different notions of good/pleasure in different socioeconomic
contexts. 
As we cannot predict the future, it is difficult to know with certainty
whether the consequences of our actions will be good or bad. Primacy to
the outcomes and not the means can promote unethical practices amongst
administrators and people in general.