Sunday, January 27, 2008

In the End . . .

What has struck me the most as I look over the content of business ethics is how businesses go about rationalizing ethical misconduct. There seems to be four distinct rationalizations used by businesses. They are as follows:
  • A belief that the activity is within reasonable ethical and legal limits – that is, that it is not really illegal or immoral. The notion that anything that isn’t specifically labeled as wrong must be okay is an open invitation for the ethically challenged employer and employee – especially if there are explicit rewards for such creativity within those newly expanded ethical limits.
  • A belief that the activity is in the individual’s or company’s best interests – that the individual would somehow be expected to undertake the activity. In a highly competitive environment, working on short-term targets, it can be easy to find justification for any act as being in the company’s best interests.
  • A belief that the activity is safe because it will never be found our or publicized - the classic crime-and-punishment issue of discovery. Every act that goes undiscovered reinforces this belief.
  • A belief that because the activity helps the company, the company will condone it and even protect the person who engages in it. This belief suggests some confusion over the loyalty being demonstrated here. Companies engaged in unethical behavior – willingly or otherwise – may protect the identity of the personnel involved but only for as long as it is in the company’s best interests to do so.

The challenge for any company in building and operating an ethical business requires a great deal more than simply doing the right thing. The company must devote time to the development of a detailed code of ethics that offers guidance and traction as opposed to traditional general platitudes that are designed to cover a multitude of scenarios with a healthy mix of inspiration and motivation.

Of greater concern is the support offered to employees when they are faced with an ethical dilemma. This involves not only the appointment of a designated person or group to handle such issues, but also the creation and ongoing maintenance of a corporate culture of trust.

The bottom line: it always boils down to a matter of trust.