Essay Instructions: Prepare a 300-600-word analysis of your completed Ethics Inventory below. Interpret your results, and apply them to your personal and professional development. Include a statement explaining how educational experiences can have an impact on ethical thinking. This analysis should address your use of ethics in thinking and decision-making and your potential for conflict in situations with people who have different interpretations of ethical behavior.
Introduction:
GAIN NEW INSIGHT INTO YOUR ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE
Over the past twenty-five years, public opinion polls have reported a dramatic increase in the number of individuals who perceive that attention to ethics has been steadily declining. Several have expressed the belief that our leaders are, at best, self-interested or, at worst, corrupt, thereby contributing to the problem. In addressing the public?s concern, some officials have attempted to explain this ?unfortunate situation? by attributing it to a general decline in personal ethics, the inevitable result of increased power and luxury. Others have chosen to respond with stricter laws, detailed rules and regulations, and specific prohibitions or penalties to ?solve the problem? by systematically institutionalizing ethics within the organizations over which they exercise some control. Despite these attempts, the polls continue to report no increase in public trust.
A certain number of ethics guidelines are always necessary, but as an emphasis on the details of codified rules and regulations increases, attention to the importance of individual judgment in ethical decision making diminishes. Individual attention is focused on the need to conform or to comply with organizational mandates. Personal ethics is replaced by a dependence on organizational ethics, and the primary focus is the misuse of powers and discretion by individuals performing organizational roles. In this setting, a person begins to lose sight of the ethical principles that form the basis for reaching equitable decisions. A commitment to the importance of personal ethics requires me to:
Understand and care about what is right or good;
Compare and decide among alternatives;
Form opinions regarding what actions are morally appropriate for me (personally) to take; and
Acquire the skills necessary to justify my decisions on ethical grounds.
A commitment to personal ethics is about developing a moral self capable of dealing with ethical issues as they arise. It is about each of us acquiring an acute AWARENESS of the conditions that define our ethical perspectives and those of others. It is about understanding the general principles or concepts that define ethical styles. As you attempt to work with others in making ethical decisions, the ability to express the basis for your position and to justify the decision-making process you used to reach that position is critical to the effectiveness of your communication. AWARENESS is the key to developing a personal perspective on ethics. The ability to express that perspective equips you with the capability to offer meaningful input that will have a definite impact on decision making.
YOUR ETHICS AWARENESS PROFILE
SCORING SUMMARY
C O R E
MOST 10 8 5 1
LEAST 5 4 5 10
COMBINED SCORE 5 4 0 -9
The ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY refers to a series of broad characterizations representing four prominent categories of ethical philosophy. These descriptions are used to analyze some of the characteristics of your own perspective on ethics, as identified by the questions you just answered.
Your largest COMBINED SCORE should closely reflect your perspective on ethics.
Of course, individual perspectives vary, and this general description may not fit you exactly. However, it can provide insight into your general views and approaches with regard to ethical debates. The letter category in which your lowest COMBINED SCORE appears should reflect values least in agreement with your views on ethics.
The key word for each category (Character, Obligation, Results, and Equity) represents a primary core value that forms a basis for ethical decision making within this ethical perspective. If your second highest score is within one or two points of your highest score, consider reading both letter categories in analyzing your approach to ethical decision making.
Your ethical perspective is most likely to be based on CHARACTER, and your ethical perspective is least likely to be based on EQUITY.
YOUR ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE
You tend to base your ethical perspective on an individual?s duty or obligation to do what is morally right - principles that represent what rational persons ought morally to do. You believe that ethical conduct appeals to ?conscience.? In judging whether a person?s actions are ethical, you look to the intent behind his/her actions, rather than focusing on results. In other words, to be considered ethical, we must choose how we act and what rules we are willing to follow. From your perspective, ethical principles must be: (a) appropriate under any circumstances (universalizable); (b) respectful of human dignity; and (c) committed to promoting individual freedom and autonomy. Human beings must never be treated simply as ?means? to the accomplishment of some defined ?end.? The end does not justify the means. This category is most closely aligned in philosophy with a deontological theory (Immanuel Kant and John Rawls).
YOUR ETHICAL STYLE
You believe that human beings have intrinsic value - we have a right to individual respect. Therefore, you cannot support social traditions and policies aimed at ?the best interests of society as a whole? if any individual is denied the opportunities to which she/he is entitled as a human being. Your approach to ethics requires that, within legal and humane limits, people should be allowed to make their own choices. Acting in response to impulse, instinct, or rules worked out by others for us to obey does not constitute ethical conduct on our part. You believe that fostering personal growth takes precedence over achieving efficiency through dehumanizing organizational and social structures. For this reason, you advocate policies intended to ensure equal respect and opportunities for all. Moral decisions must reflect the free choice of individuals if we ever expect to hold them personally responsible. You are guided by a desire to be in accord with established standards of right and wrong.
FRUSTRATIONS YOU FACE IN ADDRESSING ETHICAL DILEMMAS
What you determine to be the right choice may not appear to be the most beneficial choice, in the short-run, for the organization you have agreed to support. The right choice does not necessarily maximize the good for the decision maker.
You believe that cost-benefit analysis, the preferred decision-making tool of many organizations, is inappropriate for addressing issues with ethical considerations. For example, some of the things that you hold most dear are not easily measured, e.g., right and wrong; good and evil; and the value of a human life.
Your belief that we have a moral duty or obligation to do what is right leaves little room for compromise when ethical principles are being violated.
You are frustrated to discover how various individuals define right and wrong, how conflicts are resolved in an organizational setting, and who resolves them.
The people you work with may argue that certain factions of society are not capable of acting in their own best interests. You consider this a faulty argument that was once used to deny equitable treatment to women and minorities.
Defending your ethical perspective may result in economic hardship, e.g., a lost promotion or termination.
Remember to refer to the BLENDED CATEGORIES section if your second highest score is within one or two points of your highest score. The final step in the exploration of ETHICS AWARENESS using the inventory is a review of some of the pertinent questions associated with ethical decision making. No matter which ethical perspectives you were referred to by the results of the ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY and no matter what your ethical style, the important thing to understand is that we all face situations in which we must choose what we believe is ?right.? Contrary to recent attempts to present ?value-neutral? research and education, when faced with an ethical decision, we all believe that there are ?right? and ?wrong? answers. This does not mean, however, that we will all arrive at the same answer. Therefore, it is critical to develop a process to guide our struggle in making ethical decisions?one that will allow us to consider a variety of aspects that affect not only our immediate decisions but its effect on other people.
YOUR ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE
You tend to base your ethical perspective on the results or consequences of your actions. You believe that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest good for the greatest number of persons. In judging whether an individual?s actions are ethical, you look for concrete evidence. It is not enough for an individual to ?talk the talk.? Results are needed to indicate that she/he is ?walking the walk.? In your opinion, what really counts in ethical debates is the ?bottom line.? Discussions about process and principles are not as important as what is ultimately achieved for the overall good of society. The goal of ethics is to achieve the greatest possible good for society as a whole. This category is most closely aligned in philosophy with a utilitarian theory of ethics (Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill).
YOUR ETHICAL STYLE
You believe that we each have a moral right to experience the ?good life.? This ?goodness? can be measured, in part, by the level of satisfaction expressed by the majority of the persons who make up our society. If most people are unhappy, something is morally wrong and needs to be fixed. Therefore, your approach to ethics is likely to focus on what could be done to improve the well-being of the greatest number of persons. One approach might be to develop rules of ethical conduct for people to follow, along with corresponding sanctions, in order to achieve what is best for society as a whole. Another quite different approach might be to improve overall satisfaction by creating a more pleasant environment in which people enjoy learning and working together for the betterment of society. With either approach, your ethical style demands that you achieve measurable results.
FRUSTRATIONS YOU FACE IN ADDRESSING ETHICAL DILEMMAS
The inability to adequately measure the far-reaching impacts of an ethical decision may compel you to focus your decision making on the immediate scope of the problem, thereby creating conflicts with those who are not results-oriented.
You are frustrated by the wide variety of competing views regarding what is good for society as a whole and by the process used to determine whose view ultimately prevails.
In attempting to maximize the general good, you will, at some point, need to decide whether your goal is to improve the total benefit to society as a whole (the aggregate) or the total benefit per person within society (the average). This definition will have a direct impact on your approach to ethical decision making.
People who cling to the idealistic notion of protecting the interests of some minority of the population may stand in the way of achieving the good life for the majority.
People you work with may not share your ethical approach, thereby interfering with your ability to achieve the desired results.
What is best for the greater good of society may not be best for you.
Remember to refer to the BLENDED CATEGORIES section if your second highest score is within one or two points of your highest score. The final step in the exploration of ETHICS AWARENESS using the inventory is a review of some of the pertinent questions associated with ethical decision making. No matter which ethical perspectives you were referred to by the results of the ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY and no matter what your ethical style, the important thing to understand is that we all face situations in which we must choose what we believe is ?right.? Contrary to recent attempts to present ?value-neutral? research and education, when faced with an ethical decision, we all believe that there are ?right? and ?wrong? answers. This does not mean, however, that we will all arrive at the same answer. Therefore, it is critical to develop a process to guide our struggle in making ethical decisions?one that will allow us to consider a variety of aspects that affect not only our immediate decisions but its effect on other people.
YOUR ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE
You tend to base your perspective on ethics on a concern for the instability of knowledge, the uncertainty of human judgment, and the lack of individuals who can truly qualify as experts in the discernment of what is right and what is wrong. In your view, pragmatism, practical day-to-day experience, is the only reasonable guide to action. In judging whether an individual?s actions are ethical, you stress the practical consequences of his/her actions as the essential criterion of evaluation in each case. Your distrust of any attempt to define universal principles and moral values is based, in part, on a distrust of the motives of the individuals involved. You believe that no principled solution is adequate for all time. As long as decision makers continue to disregard the cultures and lives of minorities, any discussion that suggests a unity of belief is absurd. This category is most closely aligned in philosophy with a postmodern theory of ethics (Michel Foucault and David Harvey).
YOUR ETHICAL STYLE
You believe that there are no absolute standards of right and wrong. With new knowledge and different circumstances, it may be necessary to change one?s beliefs periodically. Therefore, your approach to ethics generally tends to challenge all attempts to plan ideal social orders rationally. You tend to distrust institutionalized codes of ethics. The correct choice for a particular situation and a particular time is likely to evolve from a consideration of alternative viewpoints. You reject the use of power or control to suppress opposition to the ?accepted? perspective, embracing broad representation in ethical decision making. Your ethical style requires a critical analysis of the far-reaching impact of each alternative, not a predetermined response to what appears to be ?good? in the short-run.
FRUSTRATIONS YOU FACE IN ADDRESSING ETHICAL DILEMMAS
Your commitment to frequent reconsideration of a wide variety of differing alternative viewpoints is unsettling to others who seek a sense of security in believing that they have made the ?right? decision.
It is difficult, expensive and time-consuming to adequately analyze the far-reaching impact of an ethical decision. Extensive public input and debate is essential to the development of policy that supports tolerance and respect for diversity.
In periods of crisis or chaos within your organization, short-term benefits and image frequently triumph over ethics as the primary concern.
People you work with may not acknowledge the complexity of the world as you see it and will tend instead toward recommending highly simplified ?solutions? that appear to be little more than window dressing.
Without the structure provided by established standards of right and wrong, it is difficult to justify your ethical decisions to others. Consensus becomes an arduous task.
In today?s society, you are frustrated that those with the most power are attempting to define what is important to individuals under their control.
Remember to refer to the BLENDED CATEGORIES section if your second highest score is within one or two points of your highest score. The final step in the exploration of ETHICS AWARENESS using the inventory is a review of some of the pertinent questions associated with ethical decision making. No matter which ethical perspectives you were referred to by the results of the ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY and no matter what your ethical style, the important thing to understand is that we all face situations in which we must choose what we believe is ?right.? Contrary to recent attempts to present ?value-neutral? research and education, when faced with an ethical decision, we all believe that there are ?right? and ?wrong? answers. This does not mean, however, that we will all arrive at the same answer. Therefore, it is critical to develop a process to guide our struggle in making ethical decisions?one that will allow us to consider a variety of aspects that affect not only our immediate decisions but its effect on other people.
YOUR ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE
If your second highest score is within one or two points of your highest, you may want to consider whether (a) you are experiencing an internal conflict in attempting to function in two distinguishable moral realms, or (b) your ethical style is a blend of two categories. In the first case, you may have found it necessary to adopt a different ethical perspective on the job or in some other role, causing conflict at times with your personal ethical perspective. Although in completing this ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY you were instructed to answer the questions in accordance with your personal ethical philosophy, it is possible that your personal perspective has been distorted by a perception that you need to circumvent your beliefs on a daily basis. Until you are able to articulate your sincere beliefs and consistently function in accordance with those beliefs, you will continue to experience internal moral conflict. This will create discomfort for you, and it will be difficult to make and justify ethical decisions.
In the second case, the primary characteristics of your ethical perspective simply may overlap two categories. Most individuals exhibit at least some aspects of all four categories, and the relationship between these categories form your unique ethical style. In this respect, these categories should be viewed as broad characterizations of representative patterns intended to stimulate a deeper understanding of your belief system. The consideration of blended categories takes your AWARENESS a step further. For example, an individual whose high categories are C and O (within one or two points of each other) is likely to support the notion that ethical principles without virtue are powerless and virtue without some standards or principles is ineffective. The two categories can be supportive of one another. However, an individual whose high categories are O and R may be experiencing some internal struggles between his/her moral obligations to individuals, on the one hand, while attempting to achieve specific results on the other. A careful analysis of these blended categories to determine what this means in terms of your ethical decision making is recommended.
Keep in mind that these descriptive categories are representative of only four prominent categories of ethical philosophy. Other schools of thought may be more closely related to your ethical perspective. However, these categories provide insight into a number of the significant differences that may arise in ethical debates, allowing you to better understand conflicts that may arise between yourself and others. Hopefully, the ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY will encourage you to explore other sources of ethical thought and to consider the ethical styles of others. AWARENESS of your ethical perspective is the first step toward making ethics an integral part of your daily life and developing a better working relationship with others.
ETHICAL DECISION MAKING
No matter which ethical perspective you were referred to by the results of the ETHICS AWARENESS INVENTORY and no matter what your ethical style, the important thing to understand is that we all face situations in which we must choose what we believe is ?right.? Contrary to recent attempts to present ?value-neutral? research and education, when faced with an ethical decision, we all believe that there are ?right? and ?wrong? answers. This does not mean, however, that we will all arrive at the same answer. Therefore, it is critical to develop a process to guide our struggle in making ethical decisions?one that will allow us to consider a variety of aspects that affect not only our immediate decision but its effect on other people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STEP ONE: WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY MY DECISION?
Who are the people most immediately impacted by my decision?
Who else will be touched in some way by this decision?those not quite so obvious?
Who is strongly supporting a position in this decision? Why?
Who might have a strong opinion about this decision but lacks the power, money or status to be heard?
Who is affected in the short-run, and who may be affected a year or more from now?
What opportunities have all these stakeholders had to be heard? What did they have to say?
Does my ethical decision making reflect on my family and friends? What do they think?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STEP TWO: WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT OF MY DECISION?
Have I compared a variety of alternative decisions?
What have the various stakeholders had to say about how they would be affected by each decision?
Have I gotten input from all stakeholders? What do I need to do to get input from those I have not heard?
What evidence exists to support my conclusions regarding the impact of various decisions?
Have I tailored my factfinding to fit some preconceived result or desired outcome?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STEP THREE: WHAT ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE IS REFLECTED BY MY DECISION?
What is my decision?
What CORE belief is reflected in each of the various alternative decisions? In my decision?
Character?
Obligation?
Results?
Equity?
Are there other factors that have influenced my decision making?
Pressure from above?
Interest groups?
Profits or costs?
Personal gain?
Limited resources?
Convenience?
Threats?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STEP FOUR: CAN I JUSTIFY MY DECISION ON ETHICAL GROUNDS?
Is my decision fair to everyone involved? What is the ethical basis I used to determine its fairness?
Do I feel uncomfortable or frustrated with my decision? If so, why? If not, why not?
If I were on the receiving end of this decision, would I feel that I had been treated fairly?
Does my decision fit my ethical perspective and style?
Would I feel comfortable having this story appear on the front page of my local newspaper? Would I be able to justify my decision if I were interviewed?
What ethical justification would I use to explain my decision?
Would I use this case as an example to teach young people about ethical decision making?
Have I rationalized my position in answering any of these questions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ETHICAL AWARENESS is the key to sound ethical judgment. The answers to the questions posed here will assist you in making the ?right? decision, but it is important to remember that there is no easy shortcut to ethical decision making. It requires you to make an important personal judgment about a matter that will have a significant impact on the lives of real people?not some faceless mass. Therefore, none of these steps can be neglected without jeopardizing the ethical quality of your decisions. An examination of our ethical perspectives and styles reveals a moral responsibility for each of us to uphold our CORE beliefs.
A CUSTOMER-BASED EXAMPLE - DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
Another approach would be to apply each of these CORE perspectives to a somewhat generic customer-based decision by which readers will be able to visualize applicability to several types of organizations. This example for study is once again intended to be illustrative; the varieties of organizations and situations and the complexities of individuals and policy decisions will require fine tuning.
This discussion will focus on the question: Is it ethical, is it right or wrong, for upper-level managers to base their decisions regarding the acceptability of products and services for consumption by customers on financial considerations? Assume that the managers of an organization have called a meeting to decide about issuing refunds or replacing/substituting products and services for defective ones.
CHARACTER is concerned with what it is good to be, rather than what it is good to do. If character is the framework for a manager?s ethical decision whether to support issuing a refund or replacing/substituting products and services for defective ones sold to customers, the focus of the manager?s input will be concerned with protecting the character and integrity of those associated with the decision. The response to the significant possibility of a threat to a customer?s safety or damage to a customer?s well being is a reflection on the character of both the managers and the organization. The cost of the correction to the organization is not as important as a consistent commitment to sound moral judgments. Using character as her/his ethical perspective, the manager will assess the evidence relating to the reality of the threat and the alternatives for making the customer ?whole??focusing on honor, justice, integrity and benevolence.
OBLIGATION is about duty, what a rational person ought morally to do. A manager focusing on obligation or moral duty as the perspective from which decisions are made is likely to rely on a particular moral rule or principle he/she believes to be universalizable, appropriate under any circumstances. A rule applicable to the decision to issue a refund or replace/substitute products and services for defective ones might be: ?Treat all persons with respect and never simply as means to an end.? The universalizability of this principle is reflected in the manager?s willingness to support this principle if she/he was the customer rather than the manager. In the meeting, the manager using this ethical perspective will support a decision that reflects the intent of the decision to treat customers with respect.
RESULTS are synonymous with the consequences of our actions, and, using this ethical perspective, an individual will support conduct that promotes the greatest good for the greatest number of persons. A manager?s decision based on results would focus on the ?bottom line.? The input of this manager will be evident in the meeting as he/she examines the potential outcomes on the basis of cost-benefit analysis. Although a finite number of customers may not experience the ?good,? the manager will be able to justify a decision to vote against a refund or replacement/substitution of products and services if the decision serves the greater good of the organization?and the society as a whole.
EQUITY supports practical day-to-day experience as the only reasonable guide to action. A manager guided by a focus on equity will seek alternative viewpoints. He/she will evaluate these alternatives based on broad representation of all the stakeholders in the decision making process, including customers. The manager will question the motives of other upper-level managers and the ability of technical and financial ?experts? to fairly analyze both the threats to customers and the costs to the organization. Managers and customers are viewed as a partnership tasked with the responsibility to examine the threats and potential damage to all involved, alternatives for correction, and the far-reaching impact of the various decisions. For this manager, the decision whether or not to offer corrective solutions can be justified only if everyone directly involved is given a voice.
A MANAGEMENT-BASED EXAMPLE - DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
It may be of some benefit to consider each of these CORE perspectives as they might apply to a relatively simplistic managerial decision with which most readers can identify. It is important to realize that providing such an example for study is merely intended to be illustrative; the complexities of individuals and policy decisions typically exceed the definitions that these sketches will portray.
The discussion will focus on this question: Is it ethical, is it right or wrong, for managers to require employees to participate in a company-sponsored management class that simultaneously may identify within individuals a lack of the specific skills endorsed by the organization?s leaders, thereby potentially jeopardizing employees? future employment? Assume that the upper-level managers of an organization have called a meeting to decide about offering the class and requiring participation.
CHARACTER is concerned with what it is good to be, rather than what it is good to do. If character is the framework for a manager?s decision whether to endorse the class, an emphasis on developing positive character will be evident in the meeting as her/his primary concern. This manager will focus on: (a) the personal character qualities reflected in all managers involved in making the decision, particularly focusing on herself/himself, and (b) the impact on the character of the individuals affected by the decision. The decision itself is not as important as a manager?s consistent voluntary striving to be a good person and the contribution the class would make to the development of practical wisdom and integrity within individuals. Using character as her/his ethical perspective, the manager will assess alternative decisions for professional development from the perspective of justice, honor, integrity, and benevolence.
OBLIGATION is about duty, what a rational person ought morally to do. If obligation or moral duty is the perspective from which a manager operates, she/he is likely to be following a moral rule or principle believed to be universalizable, appropriate under any circumstances. In this case, such a rule might be: ?Provide opportunities for all individuals to learn and grow.? The manager could support this rule even if the roles were reversed and she/he was one of the employees. In the meeting, the manager using this ethical perspective will be able to justify endorsing the class only if the intent of the decision is to provide employees with an opportunity for individual growth, respect their personal dignity, and allow them to make their own voluntary decisions regarding participation in the class.
RESULTS are synonymous with the consequences of our actions, and, using this ethical perspective, an individual seeks to maximize the good. If results are of prime importance, this manager?s decision would be based on the benefits to be derived from endorsing the requirement for employees to participate in such a class. The input of this manager will be evident in the meeting as he/she seeks to examine the potential outcomes of the class and to decide whether the benefits outweigh the costs. Although some employees may not derive individual benefit (or ?good?) from the class, using this perspective, the manager will be able to justify a decision to require participation if it serves the greater good of the organization?and the society as a whole.
EQUITY supports practical day-to-day experience as the only reasonable guide to action. If equity plays a major role in a manager?s decision, in the meeting she/he will question the ability of the course to adequately and fairly assess the skills of the participants and the motives for requiring participation. This manager will recommend giving employees the opportunity to participate in making the decision. Working in partnership, the managers and employees could then examine the stated purpose of the class and its respect for diversity, consider the far-reaching impact of participating in such a class, and identify alternative training opportunities that may be more appropriate to offer employees. For this manager, the decision to require participation in the class can only be justified if everyone directly involved is given a voice.
