Likewise, if we consider that an organization has done wrong, we need some real basis from which to argue our situation. This is when normative moral theories come into play. Normative moral theories suggest a proper way of acting ethically. Richard De George proposes 2 extreme points for locating a place for moral theory. One is ethical absolutism. This asserts that there are everlasting, universally acknowledged ethical principles (Crane and Matten, 2007, p. 86). According to this view, right and wrong are objective characters that can be realistically determined. The other one is ethical relativism, which claims that ethics is context-reliant and subjective. The concept of relativism arises in global business issues, where it is debated that a moral decision about behaviour is another culture that cannot be formed from outside. It is because ethics is culturally determined (Crane and Matten, 2007, p. 87).Most conventional ethical theories tend to be absolutist in nature. They seek to embark on universal rules that can be useful in any circumstances to provide the answer as to what is correct or incorrect. Contemporary moral theories often are inclined towards a more relativistic place. Thus, in making effectual decisions in business, both these points are not mainly useful. Pluralism is a kind of a situation, which appears in between absolutism and relativism. It accepts ethical convictions and backdrops while simultaneously proposing that an agreement on basic values in a certain social background can be arrived at. In making good business decisions, we need to appreciate this range of viewpoints so as to establish an agreement on the solution to moral problems (Crane and Matten, 2007, p. 87).There are other certain theories like consequentialist and non-consequentialist theories. The former is based on the proposed outcomes, which governs the actions. The latter is based on the moral decision on fundamental principles of the decision maker’s inspiration.