Final answer:
The damage control approach to ethical conduct tends to be favored by companies worried about scandal and PR fallout, not by inherently ethical companies. This reactive approach contrasts with proactive ethical practices embedded in company culture and guided by various ethical theories and principles.
Step-by-step explanation:
The damage control approach to dealing with or managing ethical conduct is typically not associated with companies whose executives are inherently moral or desire to cultivate a public image of high ethical standards. Instead, it tends to be favored at companies concerned about scandals and negative public relations fallout that could cost them their jobs or damage their careers. This approach is reactive rather than proactive, suggesting it aligns with entities that prioritize the maintenance of their reputation after an incident, rather than those committed to establishing robust ethical practices from the outset.
In the context of business ethics, various theories and principles are involved in framing what constitutes ethical behavior in organizations. Approaches like care ethics, consequentialism, or the teachings found in Confucianism, all play a role in understanding and implementing ethical practices within businesses. Additionally, many businesses, as well as professional organizations, have codes of ethics like those adopted by entities such as the IEEE Computer Society, which emphasizes the professional and ethical obligations of software engineers concerning societal impacts.
Effective Impression management can contribute to building an ethical company culture. However, it is important to differentiate between managing impressions to genuinely foster a culture of integrity versus doing so to superficially mitigate or deflect from ethical lapses.