This lecture draws heavily from In Pursuit of Ethics: Tough Choices in the World of Work, by O.C. Ferrell and Gareth Gardiner (Springfield, IL: Smith Collins, 1991).

So far in this class we have looked at a variety of ethical theories that both describe how people act, and also tell us how we should act in general. As you have no doubt figured out by now, most of these theories work better in some circumstances than others. "Utilitarianism," for example, can work well for policy issues, but needs to be tempered with "Rights Theory" to make sure that some groups don’t simply get run over. Religion-based and virtue-based ethics can be both compelling and broadly applicable, but do not always tell us what to do in specific situations.

This is especially true in the case of work. Many of the "test cases" that we have looked at have been extreme or one-time events–hostage situations, for example. Work is funny because it is can be so different. When we think about the "big questions," we often tend to think about ourselves in relation to, say, God, or Ultimate Values, or family. Work is (at least in our heads) secondary. Yet many of us spend 50% (or more) of our waking hours at work, dealing with the people and problems there.

And, generally speaking, we tend to influence (and be influenced by) the people and situations where we spend the most time. And unless we work for, say, a church, temple, synagogue, or mosque, the odds are that we be spending a lot of time working around people who have values–at least some values–that are significantly different from our own. In fact, many people have found that (either consciously nor unconsciously) they have two sets of ethical and moral standards: one for home, and one for work.

Other issues may come into play, too–such as "tact." (Example: the tactless honest mechanic and the tactful one.) Or simply being able to get a job done with dubious employees, because they are the only ones available. (Richmond movie theatre)

So: what are the pressures that can cause people to be tempted to do things that are illegal and/or immoral?

1. Sometimes individuals and organizations are either immature or simply deranged. This can lead to a complete loss of ethical judgement and unrealistic expectations from employees, as well as to hardship for the company.

2. Economic self-interest overwhelms other interests (greed, organized crime and drug cartels).

3. Special circumstances outweigh other ethical concerns (Robin Hood, desperate people)

4. Not thinking things through, or simply being ethically or morally uneducated.

5. Probable rewards outweigh probable risks or punishments. ("Borrowing" company property, such as laptops)

6. Overuse of the "game" or "war" metaphor ("All’s fair in love, war... and business")

7. There is powerful organizational pressure (from bosses, workers, and other authorities) to act in a questionable fashion.

The last one is especially important, and powerful, because there you have two conflicting "rights": the right of the boss to tell the employee what to do, vs. the employees own sense of right and wrong.

Example: The Stanley Milgram experment (p. 14-15).

Example: "Dr. Doublemint" (p. 22-23).

People generally learn moral standards of right and wrong from parents and family, teachers, and churches. However, as I mentioned earlier, what people learn and even apply in their personal life does not always carry through to work. (Of course, it may not carry through in the personal life either, as in the case of romantic affairs.)

One survey showed that 2/3s of marketing managers surveyed use a different set of "home" morals than "work" morals. Why is this? This leads us to the work of Lawrence Kohlberg, who brought us "Heinz’s dilemma (p. 28).

Kohlberg thus suggested that there are three levels of moral development:

Pre-conventional (based on fear of punishment or obeying authority)

Conventional (based on social approval)

Post-conventional (based on rationality and personal responsibility and conviction)

Note that in differing circumstances (or locations) people may function at different levels of moral development!

Lets look at work a little more closely.

For some, work can serve as a second family. Since we tend to take moral cues from family members, a boss who lies, cheats, or steals to further either their own or their company’s ends is sending a signal that either can, or should do the same. This "message" can be either spoken or unspoken. In fact, these actions–regardless of "official" company policy or ethics statements–are probably going to be interpreted as the "real" ethics policy by workers.

The actions of co-workers can also be very influential, too. If an employee sees that everybody pads their expense account, "borrows" company goods, or uses or takes bribes, this sends a message that they can or should do so, too.

The term for this is corporate culture. Whether spoken or not, corporate culture consists of the values, traditions, legends, customs, and system of rewards and punishments that a particular company uses. (Examples: Microsoft, Men’s Wearhouse, U.S. military branches, Jerry McGuire) Sometimes lines can also blur, as in the case of "spiffs," promotional incentives, advertizing, or sexual or racial discrimination.

There is also the "when in Rome" problem. Behavior (especially bribes and "gifts") are customary in some parts of the world. However, they can lead to jail time in the U.S.

General policies:

1. Honesty and fairness are usually the best policies to live by. When businesses knowingly do things that may harm customers, clients, or employees, or engage in deceptive business practices, they are often breaking both "duty based" and "utilitarian" rules. In the latter case, they are probably alienating their customers and their employees. If such practices are common in a company, it is probably best to start looking for a new job as quickly as possible! Some advocate using internal grievance procedures and even threats of lawsuits; however, this is probably not the best approach, especially for people just starting out at new jobs. (Possible example: Morton Thiokol.)

2. While it can be both over- and under-rated, personal self-esteem is important. If you are repeatedly asked to do things that are questionable or degrading, there is probably something wrong! A job offers more than income; it should also offer at least one means of self-respect.

3. Keep an eye on the "red face" rule: if you feel you need to do something, but you would not want your spouse/friends/family to know about it, then there is probably something wrong.

4. Communication is extremely important. Sometimes "problems" are actually just mis-communications that can be cleared up by talking. (Note "parable of the floral display" on p. 42-3.)

5. Pride is also something that is overlooked. I just mentioned the "red face" rule, which is sort of related to pride: one should do things that they would be proud to have known publically, rather than ashamed. There is another side to this, too: one should not be too proud to admit personal error. Failure to do so can lead to the "C.Y.A. School of Management," where people acknowledge their victories but shun mistakes. This can open one up to being vulnerable to the Giant Evil Clinton-esque Snowball of Coverup. (This may work for Enron and Arthur Anderson, too.) Basically, one covers up one fairly minor error or ethical misjudgement, but then becomes entangled in a giant, self-perpetuating, web of coverup that can get out of control. (This is also what your mom probably called the "slippery slope."

One reason that this can happen is through excessive pride or inflated self-image, in which one cannot admit at the outset that they made a mistake. Aristotle and the virtue school would say, too much pride is as great a problem as too little! Also, one finds that when one is either an employee or a manager, many of the most successful managers are the ones who are the most supportive managers. Learning when to accept, or not accept, or just to forget about, blame can be key...both in professional and in personal relationships!

(Good Examples: Lee Iacocca and the speedometer scandal–p. 109, Tylenol recall–p. 110-111)

(Bad Examples: Ford Pinto fiasco, Exxon Valdez)

One core problem that we find in business ethics (and social ethics in general) is that we may be forced to act differently when acting as part of a group that we would act if we are alone. In the early part of the class, for example, any of the ethical theories are focused on the notion of an individual confronted with an ethical problem. The situation can become less clear when we have to work together with others, including some who may not agree with our own personal moral perspective.

These ethical dilemmas may be one reason that people like to start their own businesses–that way they are in the ethical driver’s seat! While this can actually help, it can also open up a whole new world of temptations.

Also, while honesty is by far usually the best policy (in both the personal and the business world), it is NOT an automatic guarantee of business or financial success. Sometimes even honest businesses go under, and perfect employees are let go or fired. Note, however, that honesty (coupled with tact) may help one to bounce back!