Question: It can be argued that only if an individual is in a position of power or influence can the consequences of their actions be identified. You can only be moral or immoral if you have power. Perhaps most of us (in ordinary social and organizational life) prefer to avoid power, influence and moral responsibility. A further issue is whether an organisation (or part of it; or a professional role) can be said to exhibit ethical behaviour in a consequentialist sense. The augmented power of an organisation might make the identification of consequences easier in many contexts. We may also argue that a consequentialist view of moral behaviour is only bearable (for the person who really wishes to be virtuous) if the full, possible consequences of our actions are unknown. Fortunately in a social context it is often difficult to identify the consequences of our actions from within the endless web of interaction. Maybe we can only talk of possible influences. Does all this lead to a deontological viewpoint of personal ethics in an organizational context, that is the best we can do is follow the rules?