Scenario 3: Substantial action or medium term action
This scenario refers to the medium term actions taken by an organisation to minimise the occurrence of risks to the reputation of the organisation. This includes taking actions on a small scale. Here are the deontological and consequential perspectives for Rio Tinto in this scenario.
- Deontological Perspective:
If Rio Tinto uses a medium term allocation of resources, such as reporting the act on the organisational website, and taking further actions against it, will be a positive step viewed from the lens of deontology. This is because reporting against modern slavery in organisational supply chain practices and addressing it using a medium term action will help the company comply with the UN SDG 8.7, which recommends organisations to take immediate actions against any act of modem slavery (United Nations, n.d.). In this way, this scenario will be ethically acceptable in terms of deontology as it fulfills its duty and obligation as a responsible organisation.
- Consequentialist Perspective:
Considering the consequences of a medium term action from a consequentialist perspective, it could be assessed that the medium term action taken by Rio Tinto against modern slavery problem in supply chain can give rise to two possible consequences, which is positive and negative. if the organisation works with the suppliers to improve the practice and address the issue, this will lead minimise the ethical obligations of involvement in modern slavery. Consumers will view it as a positive action, as the organisation will be addressing to sustaibility and ethics, which is preferred by consumers (Baskentli et al., 2019). However, the negative consequence will be a risk of damage to the stakeholder and investors relationship who strictly opposes modern slavery, as they will think that the organisation is not taking strict actions to address the issue deeply (Hess, 2021; Ahmed et al., 2022).
