Week 4: Organizational Values and Character

R. Nozick (1989) in Examined Life, outlined four "levels" of ethical practice, charting a perspective of ethics from its minimalist form to its most challenging form of practice.

• Ethics of Respect: Corresponds to an extended ethics mandating cooperation to mutual benefit. Rules and principles mandating respecting another person's life and autonomy.
• Ethics of Responsiveness: Underlying notion of inherent value of all individuals. Mandates acting in a way that is responsive to people's value, enhancing and supporting it, and enabling it to flourish.
• Ethics of Caring: Ranges from concern and tenderness to deeper compassion and love. Fullest development mandates no harm--ahimsa and love of all living creatures.
• Ethics of Light: Being a vessel of truth, beauty, goodness, holiness, etc.

People, families, organizations, teams, societies and nations have a choice of which one (or ones in the case of organizations, societies, etc. where more than one form may be practiced) they wish to practice.

Increasingly organizational culture and values are being understood as central shapers of leadership styles and managerial practices, and as critical elements in worker productivity and job satisfaction.

Business enterprises are recrafting their images and rethinking their values to be more socially responsible as corporations. They are trying to reshape their work policies and practices to put people first, making flexible work environments and giving workers more control over their jobs and work schedules. While they are doing this for mixed reasons--sustained profitability and productivity as well as concern for their workforce--there is a conscious effort to "re-humanize" the organization and see workers not as "cogs in a machine," but as "flesh and blood" people who have lives, interests and responsibilities beyond their work duties. This re-humanizing is also bringing to light again the sense of organzational integrity or character, and the organization's resposnibility to the community in which it operates, the community whose citizens it serves. It is bringing into prominence again that organizations are called to be good corporate citizens.

While the deontological approach to ethics supports such changes in organizations because of its focus on rights and dignity (that people have an inherent value), a virtue ethics perspective is even more applicable in a business situation for it focuses on organizational character and values.

Virtue ethics shifts the focus of ethics from the actions to be done to the way of being in the world. Emotions are vital avenues that enable us to process our experiences and understand the world (Nussbaum, 2001). As a person psychologically grows, (s)he develops perceptions of the world and values (Erikson & Erikson, 1998). In a community context, one discerns and incorporates into one’s personality and work ethic core values (Sherman, 1997) that guide one’s decision making (McIntyre, 1984). The focus is on building character (Hauerwas, 1975, Hillman, 1999, Flanagan & Rorty, 1997) and a work ethic that stems from the personal acquisition of the values contained in community stories and histories.

The ethic of care furthers this perspective. In contrast to Kolberg’s moral development concepts rooted in fairness and justice (Gibbs, 2003), and ethics of care poses compassion and caring relationships as the starting point for being and actions (Gilligan,1993, Nodding,1986), thus freeing people from their present diminished position in society (Tronto,1994). The challenge is to envision care and equity as essential and valued components of society (Walzer, 1983) and its business, enterprises, nonprofit organizations, and government agencies.

For many, core Aristotelian values of courage, prudence, temperance, and justice are being promoted as key leadership characteristics for contemporary professionals.

Altruistic values and enlightened self-interest are important in making organizational decisions and addressing organizational issues, as are rights and civil law. It is important to incorporate more fully into organizational and business ethics the perspectives and challenges presented by virtue ethics and the ethics of care. A major reason being that the dignity of the human person is often not emphasized, or not considered as a primary starting point for ethical decision-making in business. In 1948 the United Nations took a stance that there were universal human rights with the first being the right to human dignity. (United Nations, 1948) This position makes the nature and dignity of the human person central to ethical decision-making. This is important for understanding and reclaiming worker dignity is a significant concern in today's 24/7 work environment.

What are the organizational values that you believe should be the foundation of organizational cultures, management styles, and and workplace practices? Why?

What is the role of responsibility, caring and justice in the business arena, and how organizations operate?

Week 3: Utility, Duties and Organizational Stakeholders

Societies have norms. Organizations have values, policies and practices. Profession’s have standards.

Ethics and law, what is considered legal by a society and what is not, are two separate things. The hope is that laws will be grounded in what is moral. Ideally, ethics is to guide law and civic regulations in their formation and practice.

For Robert Nozick (2001), former Harvard philosopher and professor, ethics referred to "the most weighty principles or values concerning interpersonal relations (or relations of self and other, including self and animals, or self and environment) that mandate behavior that may be opposed to one's desires of the moment, where these principles or values are not backed solely (or predominately) by the consideration that other people will punish you if you deviate."

For him, "ethical beliefs facilitate closer coordination and voluntary exchange among people."

While there are many ways to categorize Western ethical traditions (Pojman, 2002) four frameworks are pivotal in examining information ethical issues in either a social or business setting: utilitarian, duty (deontological), virtue, and care. These frameworks are augmented by two perspectives that can be used as sub lenses that focus decisions: stakeholder theory and social contract theory.

The utilitarian framework espouses the greatest good for the greatest number of people with the outcome or end being the primary focus (Mills, 1987). On the other hand, the duty (deontological) framework emphasizes that there are moral imperatives that need to be followed while never compromising the dignity of people when taking action. One must seek to discover and act in a manner rooted in these principles with the means never justifying the end. (Kant, 1988) Related to this ethical perspective, is the understanding that all men and women have rights that should not be violated. (Locke, 1952)

The utlitarian ethical perspective is the most prominent approach in today's business arena, and the deontological second.

The utilitarian approach enables the business as a whole--its survival and success--to be seen as the primary objective when decisions are made. It also allows the shareholders to be conceived as the organization's key stakeholders whose "happiness" or interests must always be sought.

Employees, natural resources, vendors, business partners, customers and local communities are just a "means" to the organization's articulated end, i.e., its business goals and mission. Thus, their needs and welfare do not have to be considered, only the organization's desired end. In the modern business arena that is the financial bottom line--the highest profit margin, the greatest return on one's investment. In a utlitarian perspective people can ethically be used as a means to the end.

Such perspectives can be seen in how lay-offs are used, downsizings are conducted, workloads are constructed, and pay scales and compensation packages developed. Business practices often ask much of employees--long hours and work weeks, reduced pay, work travel, always being on call, etc.--for the benefit of the business enterprise. Markets are often seen as a source of "profitable gain," not people. Natural resources are often utilized for the sake of the highest bottom line, not looking at the effect upon the environment or the sustainability of resources. Products, and their quality, are developed and sold to customers for the profit, not always considering their effect upon the consummers health and safety.

The deontological or duty perspective, has a different approach. People have rights and can never be treated as a means to an end. If the desired result cannot be optained without violating the dignity and rights of people, then another end must be sought. What ever "legitimate" or "reasonable" harm that may come to a person must be minimal. With today's wider consciousness and its understanding of the "rights" of animals, this view can be extended to the environment.

Such a perspective can be seen in human resource laws and regulations that protect employees and demand safe, nonviolent and non toxic work environments. Product quality/safety and the emerging ecological and sustainable standards also are influenced by this viewpoint. Organizations, their productes and services are to safeguard the rights of citizens and future generations by providing safe products and a helping ensure a healthy environment.

What do you see as the pros and cons business practices being rooted in utilitarian and duty oriented ethical perspectives? How can business practices be improved? Why?

Week 2: Ethics in a Diverse, Networked 21st Century Organization

As you know from your own professional experience, and the discussions so far in this course, ethics in the 21st century is not a "cut-and-dry" topic. Like today's social and work envirovments, it is complex and has many angles.

Without a question, being a professional today is both exciting and challenging, adventurous and daunting. Due to the global nature of both society and the organizational arena, whether for-profit or nonprofit, life and work means interacting in a multi-cultural and inter-cultural/ethnic manner. Diversity of languages, traditions, worldviews, beliefs, genders, and abilities are not only a "given," they are accepted and valued. In fact, difference--diversity in it many forms--is seen as a means of enabling creative problem solving and innovation and thus intentionally sought. Such diversity coupled with a strong sense of individualism brings with it a diversity of understanding of rights, values and moral standards. Thus, uniformity and homogeneity are social and workplace characteristics of the past.

If this is the case, how are ethics and moral standards to be understood and formulated in a world that recognizes and strives to embrace diversity?

Today's world gives rise to many difficult questions reqarding the nature of ethics, as well as leading or working with integrity, and conducting buisness in an ethical manner.

Some wonder if there can even be a sense of ethics, let alone a "common ethical code." Are ethics and professional codes and standards something of the past, an aspect of an earlier era that either is no longer needed, or cannot be achieved? Because of our acceptance of diversity and individualism, and our understanding of how knowledge and values are shaped by personal and social expereince, is all relative? Do absolutes or universal principles even exist?

It is a challenge to discern how to act humanely, responsibly, and justly in a postmodern world (Bauman, 1993), a world that is characterized by diversity, flux, insecurity, speed, deconstruction, and a tendency to depersonalize people.

All of the ethical frameworks discussed in this course, have strengths and limitations, were developed in various countries in different eras, and are not specific to the postmodern technological Information Age that has created a global networked society. This leads to such questions as:

• What is the feasibility of an international ethical standard or code?
• What challenges do complex contemporary organizational and social situations pose to existing ethical philosophies?
• Do these philosophies need to be adapted or expanded in order to effectively be utilized in modern decision-making? What are their limitations regarding addressing high-tech information age concerns?
• What insights and wisdom can traditional ethical frameworks offer managers in resolving dispersed organizational and information issues? In making complex decisions?
• What are their limitations regarding addressing today's social and business concerns?
• What are the central ethical issues surrounding the quality of life and work in a highly competitive, dispersed work environment comprised of physical and virtual components?

While the contemporary world is more morally complex than in past times, this course takes the position that a sense of ethics is still quite relevant and possible. Further, integrity is critical for sustained organizational and professional effectiveness and success. A sense of moral consciousness and responsibility upon which complex decisions and actions can be founded are fundamental characteristics of leadership and organizational conduct, and has too often been missing in today's workplace. More and more this is becoming readily apparent due to the current economic downturn and financial scandals.

While ethics and moral standards are essential, they are multi-faceted. There is no one way to construct an ethical system, and there are many dimensions to such systems. Rarely is there one way to resolve a issue. Often several choices might be "viable" and "ethical"--be "good" choices that benefit people, the organization and the community. How does one discern and select the "appropriate" or "responsible" choice?

Further, ethical systems are shaped by personal experience, culture and social norms, family traditions, religious beliefs, and workplace policies, and influenced by one's personality, fears, and anxieties. But that does not mean that all is relative, nor that every belief, choice, decision or action is ethical or moral.

In light of this one can ask: are there moral perspectives or attributes that are intrinsic to people no matter what era they live or have lived in, or what culture they come from? If so, what are they? If so, how are they discerned, i.e., discovered or made known? If there are "common moral principles or human attributes, "do all understand these "human characteristics" in the same way?

As you have read, ethics is concerned with the foundational principles individuals and organizations use to make decisions. Ethics deals with understanding human actions and developing a system of how to discern what is praiseworthy, and what is not. It is the system that a person or group uses to make choices they consider appropriate (Johnson, 1994). When new technologies emerge, such as new business practices and informtion and communication technology(ICT), a void in standards and ways of operating is created (Moor, 1985), thus calling for new disciplines in applied ethics (e.g., medical ethics, business ethics, computer ethics, information ethics, etc.). We are in such a period when "voids" are being created in the business, economic and social arenas. Business globalization is calling for the examination of ethics from an international perspective (Nardin & Mapel, 1992), as well as the consideration of developing a new world ethic (Kung, 1991, Singer, 2002) that is more socially responsible and focused on working for the common good of all. What will be the core characteristics of such a perspective?

How do you address or resolve this issue regarding "ethics in a global workplace and business environment"? In a globally networked world, is ethics an obsolete concept or unobstanable practice? Why or why not?

How can managers and staffs work together and make decisions in a work environment where people do not hold the same world view and ethical perspectives?

Week 1: The Contemporary Business Landscape and Organizational Ethics

While it has not always been the case in the last few decades, "ethical practice" and "professional integrity" are terms written in many newspapers and blogs, as well as concepts on many people's minds. It is not hard to imagine why...the dot.com bust, Enron, Worldcom, Wall Street and the economic crisis of 2008, the house and mortgage instructries, bank bailouts, corporate automotive CEOs and their corporate jets, rising oil prices, and home foreclosures. The list could continue, but this blog has limited space.

In a postmodern world where the plurality of society and diversity of human nature is accepted, and the subjectivity of human knowledge is embraced, "ethics" and "norms" was seen as being out of reach, unobtainable. Form some, even outdated. But, the current situation has shown that ethics and values are needed for "unbounded individualism" and an extreme focus on "personal profit and benefit" can easily result in the llack of caring for how one's wants, decisions, and actions impact others, as well as excessive greed and the loss of seeking the common good of others.

Business issues and organizational practices that lack integrity often lead to new laws and/or governement regulations. The creation of the sarbanes oxley act and it regulations after the dot-com bust is a good example.

So, what is ethics in today's diverse and complex world? More specifically, how can businesses and organizations operate with integrity and not harm their employees, customers, vendors, local communities, and the environment? How can organizations function and be profitable while ensuring that all organizational stakeholders are respected and treated justly? What are the professional standards that business women and men need to hold, and be accountable to? What is sustainability and corporate social responsibility, and how can they be authentically practiced? How can entreprenuers be ambitious and seek their dreams while working for the benefit of the common good?

None of these questions have single answers. There are various ways to approach each. Some answers will be complementary, while others opposite ends of the spectrum. A key point, though, is to actively begin to clarify or form one's own ethical viewpoint and sence of professional integrity.

Ethics is an emotional topic, and often feels like a very personal issue. Discussions about the nature of ethics or the ethics of a business practice, social issue, government ruling, or professional decision are often heated, with participants differing on how they understand what is ethical and what is ethical in this particular situation.

A starting point in defining one's own understanding of ethics is that to be ethical it will cost one something. Second, ethics is not about "everything being OK " if one believes it to be right or good. Third, ethical decision making is not about personal opinions.

So, what does it mean to be an "ethical person"? What makes a decision or action "right or wrong," "good or bad"? Why do you believe this?

What is the difference between "what is good" or "the good" and "what is right"?

What cost will you pay to be ethical? How do you make ethical decisions? What standards do you both aspire to and hold yourself to? How do you know when you are acting responsible as a professional?