Component 02 Applied ethics (business ethics): corporate social responsibility, globalisation and whistleblowing, Friedman's shareholder view, and the application of Kantian ethics and utilitarianism to business.

A 40-mark Component 02 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Explaining the positions earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging the claim.

Explain (AO1). Friedman argues the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits within the rules of the game (law and ethical custom); managers are agents of shareholders and should not spend their money on social causes. The stakeholder view replies that a business owes duties to employees, customers, suppliers, communities and the environment, not only shareholders.

Evaluate (AO2). For Friedman: profit drives efficiency and wealth, and unelected managers should not impose social agendas. Against: pure profit-seeking can harm stakeholders and the environment, and Kant forbids treating workers merely as means; CSR can also serve long-term profit.

Judge. A top answer decides whether profit is the sole responsibility or one duty among several, and defends the verdict.

A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of whistleblowing and AO2 evaluation of it.

Explain. Whistleblowing is exposing wrongdoing within an organisation. It pits loyalty to the employer against duties to the public and to truth. Kant would test whether concealing wrongdoing could be universalised and whether silence treats the public merely as a means; utilitarianism weighs the harm prevented against the costs to the firm and the whistleblower.

Evaluate. For: it protects the public and upholds honesty. Against: it can breach confidentiality and loyalty, damage innocent colleagues, and may be motivated by malice or be mistaken; the harm caused can outweigh the harm exposed.

Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether whistleblowing is a duty, a permission or sometimes wrong, and reaches a justified conclusion.