Overview

The article “Retail website Kapruka which sold essential goods for exorbitant prices raided’’ is

about a popular Sri Lankan e-platform website selling essential food items at the prices far

above the maximum retail prices (MRP) fixed by the government during the COVID 19 curfew

period. The raid carried out using public complaints and Kapruka CEO, Mr. Dulith Herath

denies these allegations thoroughly. Many people are calling is this over pricing strategy is quite

not ethical during a difficult phase to the entire nation. This business proceeding reflects many

unethical claims. that has to be discussed over a number of ethical conception to determine

whether Kapruka’s over pricing strategy is socially responsible and ethical.[ CITATION Dai20 \l

1033 ]

Theories
Moral decision making
Moral decision making is a
procedure to resolve the dilemma
of conflicting individual interests
and how it affect the welfare of the
society. An action or decision to be
morally right it has to
enhance the social well-being, and
morally wrong if it distract from it.
[ CITATION Wei10 \l 1033 ]
Professionals have a responsibility
not to harm their stakeholders in
business decision making.
Stakeholders are anyone who can
affect or affected by any action or
decision of the business.
Using Moral decision making
in management decision has
to be a key perspective. But
management ignore this fact as
they think been moral is a
distraction to company profit
motive.
Therefore they used to make
their decisions based on their
self-interest ignoring social
responsibility. Principally
capitalistic economic systems
run their businesses on their
self-
interest, means profit motive
debating the morality of
decision making which
benefits the
society. It is simply a wrong
mind set of management
perspective that seeing problems
of
business ethics as a problem of
managers. By adopting moral
positioning it could be claimed,
business ethics can be a tool of
management while taking every
other morally legitimate interest
into proper account. In the above
scenario Kapruka management
intentionally higher their retail
prices and mislead their customers
to buy high priced tag products
even in a tragic period. This
practice is not morally acceptable.
therefore they has to follow the
concept of moral reasoning
and establish moral standards and
work according to them to
recognize as social responsible
entity.[ CITATION Sha16 \l 1033
Theories

Moral decision making

Moral decision making is a procedure to resolve the dilemma of conflicting individual interests

and how it affect the welfare of the society. An action or decision to be morally right it has to

enhance the social well-being, and morally wrong if it distract from it. [ CITATION Wei10 \l 1033 ]

Professionals have a responsibility not to harm their stakeholders in business decision making.

Stakeholders are anyone who can affect or affected by any action or decision of the business.

Using Moral decision making in management decision has to be a key perspective. But

management ignore this fact as they think been moral is a distraction to company profit motive.

Therefore they used to make their decisions based on their self-interest ignoring social

responsibility. Principally capitalistic economic systems run their businesses on their self-

interest, means profit motive debating the morality of decision making which benefits the

society. It is simply a wrong mind set of management perspective that seeing problems of

business ethics as a problem of managers. By adopting moral positioning it could be claimed,

business ethics can be a tool of management while taking every other morally legitimate interest

into proper account. In the above scenario Kapruka management intentionally higher their retail

prices and mislead their customers to buy high priced tag products even in a tragic period. This

practice is not morally acceptable. therefore they has to follow the concept of moral reasoning

and establish moral standards and work according to them to recognize as social responsible

entity.[ CITATION Sha16 \l 1033

EGOISM
In Egoism, individual interest act
as the guiding principle and
represent that an act is morally
right if it only promotes agent’s
long term interest. An agent can be
an individual, entity, or
group. This principle equates
morality with self-interest.
Egoism permits us to do
whatever
benefits our long term interest and
doing so sometimes may benefits
third party. The egoism
can be demonstrates in two
pathways, that is physiological
egoism and Ethical Egoism.
Physiological Egoism asserts that
all actions are selfishly motivated,
there can’t be any unselfish
motive in the actions. Furthermore
it made to satisfy the individual’s
own self-interested desires.
To some extent our own self-
interest is the motive but we all
know of incident where someone
patented to be acting morally but
the hidden fact is his motive is
driven by self-interest. as an
Example business don’t wont to
lower their profits at any instance
but they sometimes they act
as the value moral values.
Relating to the instance in the
above Kapruka pretend to act like
that they motivated to help
their customers during the curfew
period by delivering their essential
retail items to their door
steps but their high pricing strategy
prove their self-driven motive is
not social safety but their
motive to increase their profits. In
ethical egoism consider that third
part or the external parties
beliefs, attitudes and responses
may impact upon one’s interest.
By following long term interest
of third party may be
conflicting to his immediate
desire but it beneficial in the
long-run.
Therefore if Kapruka run their
business operation as an ethical
egoist by following states orders
they may keep their business
goodwill and increase their
customer base in the future.
[ CITATION Aud09 \l 1033 ]
EGOISM

In Egoism, individual interest act as the guiding principle and represent that an act is morally

right if it only promotes agent’s long term interest. An agent can be an individual, entity, or

group. This principle equates morality with self-interest. Egoism permits us to do whatever
benefits our long term interest and doing so sometimes may benefits third party. The egoism

can be demonstrates in two pathways, that is physiological egoism and Ethical Egoism.

Physiological Egoism asserts that all actions are selfishly motivated, there can’t be any unselfish

motive in the actions. Furthermore it made to satisfy the individual’s own self-interested desires.

To some extent our own self-interest is the motive but we all know of incident where someone

patented to be acting morally but the hidden fact is his motive is driven by self-interest. as an

Example business don’t wont to lower their profits at any instance but they sometimes they act

as the value moral values.

Relating to the instance in the above Kapruka pretend to act like that they motivated to help

their customers during the curfew period by delivering their essential retail items to their door

steps but their high pricing strategy prove their self-driven motive is not social safety but their

motive to increase their profits. In ethical egoism consider that third part or the external parties

beliefs, attitudes and responses may impact upon one’s interest. By following long term interest

of third party may be conflicting to his immediate desire but it beneficial in the long-
run.

Therefore if Kapruka run their business operation as an ethical egoist by following states orders

they may keep their business goodwill and increase their customer base in the future.

[ CITATION Aud09 \l 1033 ]

morally motivated.[ CITATION Bir62 \l 1033 ] Kapruka do not give their attention to their

stakeholders that means they unconcerned their duty of obligation towards their customer by

not viewing the correct market prices on essential items them misrepresent them with double

high price in the curfew in order to seek high profit and make the pandemic most bifacial to

them. If they care about their own goodwill of the business they may not face to consumer affair

authority legal actions and raided.

Corporate Social Responsibility.

A Corporation is a legal entity that distinct from owners or shareholders while in the purpose of

earning profits. They operate with limited liability represent as an economic power within an

economy. Corporations are recognize as lives beyond the natural life. Corporate Social

Responsibility is a concept that company be socially responsible or CSR is the human face of
an entity towards the society. [ CITATION Sha16 \l 1033 ] Being Socially responsible is not

compulsory but it reflect the moral value of the business and generate many benefits. CSR is

broader concept and runs through different pathways. A company can build their CSR policies

for environment, for their operations for stakeholders etc. The majority opinion is that an entity

operates for the interest of its shareholders. But business operations have an economic and

social impact on society that willing far beyond its shareholders. The stakeholder approach

attempts to consider the interests of all upon whom the business has an impact in carrying

business operations. CSR activates does not have to be activities that always spend money.

There are ways of non-monetary acts of CSR. AS an example being responsible on business

decisions and make them according to majority benefits is a socially responsible activity. Hence

Kapruka may socially responsible if they can perform their retailing business without mislead

their customers without selling essential items more than the market price. by doing that they

can earn customer loyalty and their good will without loosing them. [ CITATION Kim17 \l 1033 ]

Conclusion

Businesses has to perform their business operations ethically, Business Ethics gives a

scope to that dimension. Here the document critically analyses ‘’Kapruka’’ a web

retailer’s misconduct in their selling operations and illustrates moral theories that they

can be used to make moral policies and standards. ‘’Being Good is Good Business

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Weitzner, D. & Darroch, J., 2010. The Limits of Strategic Rationality: Ethics, Enterprise Risk Management,
and

Governance. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(3), pp. 361-372.

Werkhoven, S. & Patrick , T., 2017. An Analysis of John Stuart Mills's Utilitarianism. 3 ed. London: Macat
International

Limited

WRIGHT , C. & RWABIZAMBUGA, . A., 2006. Institutional Pressures, Corporate Reputation, and Voluntary
Codes of

Conduct: An Examination of the Equator Principles. Business and Society Review, 111(1), pp. 89-117.

Anon., 2020. Dailymirror. [Online]

Available at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/top_story/Retail-website-Kapruka--which-sold-goods-for-
exorbitant-prices-

raided/155-185607

[Accessed 20 07 2020].

Audi, R., 2009. Objectivity Without Egoism: Toward Balance in Business Ethics.. Academy of
Management learning

and education, 8(2), pp. 263-274.

Bird, G., 1962. Kant's Theory of Knowledge : An Outline of One Central Argument in the 'Critique of Pure
Reason'. 4

ed. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Kim, S., 2017. The Process Model of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Communication: CSR
Communication

and its Relationship with Consumers’ CSR Knowledge, Trust, and Corporate Reputation Perception.
Journal of

Business ethics, 154(2), pp. 1143-11599.

Shaw, W. et al., 2016. Seeing Moral Dimension in the Business. In: C. Australia, ed. Moral Issues in
Business.

Australia: Cengage Australia, pp. 2-101.