"Everyone's doing it"

Summary of an article by Robert M Green published in Business Ethics Quarterly 

("Everyone's doing it" abbreviated as EDI hereon)  

EDI: A Moral Justification 

- EDI is often an excuse to seek a bail out from an repercussions of an action which is widespread but less than ideal (e.g mitigate a punishment of a crime by offering EDI as a justification)

- In business, one often justifies a moral compromise under the garb of "competition is doing it too" 

But, 

1) Moral Conducts are Situational

- There might be situations where if you do not participate in the widespread (though immoral) behavior, you may be penalised for non-conformance (a common example I can think of is ragging) or suffer a personal harm or loss (casting couch)

- In business, these might be situations like offering or accepting a bribe, which may be classified as EDI by the party who commits it 

2) Moral Conducts  are Perceived Differently by Different People

- Some communities may have differing view of what is moral and what is not. 

- When the belief or moral value of majority is offered as a rationale to establish superiority,  EDI !

So, when can you morally justify EDI? (This is quite complex now)

When atleast first 4 out of these 5 conditions stand valid  : 

1) If refraining from the behavior do not cause you or your loved ones harm

2) If indulging in this activity will not harm others 

3) If this act becomes public knowledge, others will not engage in a substantially harmful act 

4) If this becomes public knowledge, your refraining from this behavior will not lead others to refrain from

it

5) Your refraining from this behavior will not unavoidably lead others to engage in it in ways that are substantially more harmful than would have been the case had you chosen to engage in it yourself

(Note: Phew, so my things  we do then will be immoral!) 

So I simplify it for you: 

1) Assess the cost of refraining on yourself (your loved ones a part of your-self)

2) Are you by refraining or doing this act harming others? 

3) Are you setting an example for others? Is it positive? Or detrimental? 

4) Is the act publically permissible? 

An act therefore is morally permissible if it does not harm self or others and the "actor" does not merit punishment or blame for doing so. 

Conclusion : 

Essentially the author is saying that being an ape is not the way to survival in the human civilisation. One has to have a logic in conducting business and self. We must consider the context, repercussions and compassion to analyse the situation to act.