| Course | BUS 560 Business Ethics |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Ethical theory application |
| Length | About 1,057 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BUS 560 Module 2
Selling Where Our Runners Go: Four Ethical Theories Applied to a Fitness App's Data Offer
Student Name
MBA Program, Aspen University
BUS 560: Business Ethics
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Selling Where Our Runners Go: Four Ethical Theories Applied to a Fitness App's Data Offer
TrailMark Fitness, a composite company in Minneapolis, Minnesota, makes an app that runners and cyclists use to record workouts. About 900,000 active users share their routes, pace and times, which the app displays as maps and statistics. A retail marketing firm has offered TrailMark $2.4 million a year for access to users' location data, with names and email addresses removed, to help sporting goods retailers decide where to open stores and place advertising. The revenue would fund a new coaching feature and nearly double the company's profit. TrailMark's privacy policy says it may share de-identified data with partners. The chief executive has asked whether accepting the offer would be ethical. This paper applies four ethical theories to the question.
Utilitarianism
Mill (1863) judged actions by their consequences for human happiness, with every affected person's well-being counted equally. A utilitarian analysis weighs the benefits of the sale, revenue that improves the app, more useful retail locations and possibly better products, against its harms. The harms depend on risk. If de-identified routes could be linked to individuals, the sale could expose where people live, when they leave home and where they go each morning, information that could enable stalking or burglary. Even a small probability of such harm, multiplied across 900,000 people, is serious. A utilitarian would also count the loss of trust if users learned of the sale and left the app. The answer depends heavily on how likely re-identification is.
Respect for Persons
Kant (1997), in a work first published in 1785, insisted that every person carries a worth that forbids using them simply as an instrument for someone else's purposes. Using someone merely as a means includes using them in ways they could not agree to. TrailMark's users agreed to a privacy policy, but few read it, and fewer understood that their daily routes might be sold. Consent buried in a long policy is not genuine agreement to a specific, consequential use. From a Kantian view, selling the data on the strength of that policy would use users as a source of revenue in a way they have not truly accepted.
Justice as Fairness
Rawls (1971) imagined people setting the basic rules of a society while unaware of where they themselves would end up in it, so that no one could tilt the rules in their own favor; he named this setting the original position. Applied to data, the question is what rule users would choose if they did not know whether they would be among those harmed by re-identification. A runner who might be a domestic violence survivor hiding her address would not accept a rule allowing her routes to be sold without explicit choice. Rawls's approach supports rules that protect the most vulnerable users.
Virtue Ethics
Aristotle (2009) taught that ethics concerns character: virtues such as honesty, justice and practical wisdom are developed through practice, and good action flows from good character. The question becomes what a trustworthy company, one whose users rely on it with intimate information, would do. A company that sells data quietly practices a kind of character it may later regret; one that is transparent practices honesty.
The Utilitarian Case for Selling
A fair analysis must state the strongest argument for the sale. The revenue would pay for a coaching feature that could help thousands of users train more safely and avoid injury. Retailers placing stores and trail signage based on real usage could serve runners better. If the risk of re-identification were very small and the data were protected by contract, a utilitarian might conclude that the benefits outweigh the harms. The weakness in this argument lies in its factual premise: as the section below shows, location data are hard to protect by removing names alone, and the harm to a single identified user could be severe.
Comparing the Theories
| Theory | Key question | Conclusion on the offer as structured |
|---|---|---|
| Utilitarianism | Do total benefits exceed total harms? | Uncertain; depends on re-identification risk and loss of trust |
| Kantian ethics | Are users treated as ends, with genuine consent? | No; buried policy consent is not genuine agreement |
| Justice as fairness | Would users choose this rule not knowing their position? | No; vulnerable users would not accept it |
| Virtue ethics | What would a trustworthy company do? | Not as structured; transparency is required |
The Facts That Matter Most
The utilitarian analysis turns on whether removing names really protects users. Location traces are unusually revealing: a route that begins and ends at the same address most mornings identifies a home, and combining a few such points with public records can identify a person. Removing names does not remove that risk. Aggregating data, for example reporting only counts of runners on each trail segment by hour, would greatly reduce it.
What the Law Requires and What It Does Not
Law sets a floor, not a ceiling. Several states now regulate the sale of precise location data, and federal regulators have brought actions against companies that sold such data without adequate consent. TrailMark's lawyers believe its privacy policy may satisfy current rules in most states. But the ethical analysis asks a different question from the legal one: not whether the company could defend the sale, but whether it should make it.
Recommendation
TrailMark should decline the offer as structured. It should instead offer users a clear, separate opt-in to share aggregated route data with partners, explained in plain language, with a share of the revenue returned to participants as free premium features. It should share only aggregated counts by trail segment and time, never individual traces, and should exclude the first and last half mile of every route. This approach satisfies the Kantian and Rawlsian concerns through genuine consent and protection of vulnerable users, honors virtue ethics through transparency and likely produces a better utilitarian outcome than a quiet sale that could destroy users' trust. The marketing firm may pay less for aggregated, opt-in data; that is the cost of doing the sale ethically.
Conclusion
Four theories asked different questions about the same offer and mostly reached the same answer: selling users' routes on the basis of a buried policy would be wrong. The analysis also pointed to a better path, built on genuine consent and data designed to protect the people it describes.
References
Aristotle. (2009). The Nicomachean ethics (D. Ross, Trans.; L. Brown, Ed.). Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. (1997). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1785)
Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
What the BUS 560 Module 2 instructions ask for
Aspen's catalog for BUS 560 asks managers to take business ethics seriously and to see ethics as part of value creation, and the second module commonly asks students to apply the major ethical theories to a business decision. The specific Module 2 instructions are in your classroom; here four theories are applied to a single decision. State the decision and the relevant facts clearly. Describe every theory faithfully but briefly, naming the work it comes from. Apply each theory to the facts, showing the reasoning rather than only the conclusion. Compare where the theories agree and disagree. Identify the facts that would change the analysis. Reach a reasoned recommendation and explain how it answers the strongest objection.
Inside the BUS 560 Module 2 example
The paper opens with TrailMark Fitness, its app and the offer from a retail marketing firm. Mill's Utilitarianism supplies the principle of choosing actions that produce the greatest overall happiness, weighed here as revenue, better marketing and potential harm from re-identification. Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals supplies the formula of humanity, which forbids using people merely as means and turns on consent. Rawls's A Theory of Justice supplies the original position, in which people choose rules without knowing whether they would benefit or be harmed. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics supplies the idea of character developed through practice. A four-row table compares what each theory requires. A section explains why routes beginning and ending at homes can identify individuals even after names are removed. The recommendation offers users a clear opt-in with a share of the benefit.
Where the marks sit in the BUS 560 Module 2 rubric
Ethical theory papers are evaluated on accurate explanation of each theory, careful application to facts, honest comparison and a choice the reasoning actually earns. This example explains each theory with its original source, Mill's Utilitarianism, Kant's Groundwork, Rawls's A Theory of Justice and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, rather than relying on textbook summaries. Each application uses the case's facts, including the 900,000 users and the nature of location data, so the reasoning is specific. The comparison table makes agreements and disagreements visible. The section on re-identification shows attention to the facts on which ethical conclusions depend, and the recommendation addresses the utilitarian objection that consent requirements reduce revenue, which shows balanced judgment.
BUS 560 Module 2 help: mistakes that cost marks
Theory papers go wrong most often by summarizing the theories at length and applying them in a sentence each. Hold each definition to a sentence or two and give the application the space. Another weakness is using only one theory or treating all theories as giving the same answer; show where they differ and why. Make sure you state each theory accurately; Kant's ethics is not simply following rules, and utilitarianism counts everyone affected, not only the company. Identify the facts that matter, since ethical conclusions often depend on details such as consent or risk. Avoid concluding with a vague call for balance. Reach a decision, explain how it satisfies the strongest theories and deal openly with whatever objection is still standing.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More BUS 560 and MBA sample papers
- BUS 560 Module 1: Personal Values and the Manager
- BUS 560 Module 3: Why Good People Go Wrong
- BUS 560 Module 4: Stakeholders and Value Creation
- BUS 560 Module 5: Culture and Incentives
- BUS 560 Module 6: Governance and Accountability
- BUS 560 Module 7: Ethics and Compliance Programs
- BUS 560 Module 8: Ethical Leadership
- BUS 510 Module 7: Variance Analysis
- BUS 540 Module 7: Decisions Under Risk
- BUS 532 Module 8: Health Care Marketing Plan
- BUS 530 Module 5: Product and Brand Strategy
BUS 560 Module 2 questions, answered
What does BUS 560 Module 2 usually ask for?
Aspen's BUS 560 covers ethical theories for business decisions in this module, so applying theories such as utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, justice and virtue ethics to a decision is typical. Follow your classroom prompt.
What is utilitarianism?
The theory, associated with Mill, that the right action is the one producing the greatest overall happiness or well-being for everyone affected.
What does Kant's formula of humanity require?
Treating people always as ends in themselves and never merely as means, which in business often turns on honesty and genuine consent.
Where can I find a free BUS 560 Module 2 sample paper?
The complete paper appears above: a fitness app's offer to sell location data analyzed with four ethical theories in a comparison table, with a recommendation based on informed opt-in consent.
What is Rawls's original position?
A thought experiment in which people choose rules for society without knowing their own place in it, so they choose rules fair to everyone.