Business Roles: Classification

As a prerequisite considering the consequences of an action, it is desirable to identify and classify the various parties involved in a general sense, as a means to derive conclusions that have a broad impact. The core problem with many ethical systems is in the failure to consider the full scope of consequences, which often stems from considering only the effects pertaining to one category. Hence, it would seem that a more precise classification would lead to more reliable conclusions.

However, I've considered this at some length and have arrived at no conclusion. For any distinction, there are always gray areas, which would lead to uncertainty over whether a given individual or role falls into a given class of parties.

For example, the simplest distinction would be to determine whether an individual is "inside" or an "outside" a business. But this is not as simple as it might seem, as the criteria for being "inside" are unclear. It is not a matter of physical location (such that everyone on the premises is an insider), not is it a matter of authority and influence. So in the end, I have not been able to identify a single criterion that could be consistently applied.

From a perspective of ethics, the key considerations derive from actions undertaken: parties who have the authority to make decisions, parties who have influence without formal authority, parties whose are involved in the action precipitating from a decision, and parties affected by the consequences of the action. But even this is unclear, as a person who is in the role of "employee" may fall into all of those groups.

So in the end, I am presently unable to derive or accept a classification of parties that is sufficiently accurate, and will for the present proceed without classification until such time as I can arrive at a more acceptable definition, as an unsuitable classification will result in specious reasoning.