Sometimes it seems that, years ago, there were clearer boundaries between “right” and “wrong”. Today, there are a lot of gray areas; that foggy space filled by the phrase “it all depends.” This gray area has been defined as “situational ethics”, the belief that every act committed is directly linked to the context surrounding it. Technology- the advents of email, computerized merchandising, and online banking, among others have made living ethically a little more trying for many people.
There are many different internal compasses that people utilize to point them towards the path of morality. The most common probably still remains the golden rule. The solidly constructed, “do unto others as you would do unto yourself.” Still, sometimes this approach seems to fall short. Sometimes it is hard to envision exactly who your decision could impact, or if your decision will affect anyone at all.
Herbert Taylor attempted to devise a system of questioning that, he believed, if answered truthfully would lead every questioner to the moral answer. This system, the Rotary Four-Way Test, is composed of the following questions:
Even this system of forming a basis for ethical behavior has its limitations. Many of these questions are subjective. For instance, some people feel that telling the truth is not the best option in every single scenario. Other people believe that the most fair or truthful solution will often not build goodwill and better friendships. These questions are very useful, though, and should be used as tools to “jumpstart” introspection, rather than laws written in stone.
Thomas Jefferson advocated the theory of transparency – acting as though everyone in the community can see what you’re doing. He believed that everyone should be aware of what ideas were being discussed by government leaders. This is good advice if you are the sort of person who cares what others think, and most of us do care, on some level, how we appear to those around us.
Immanuel Kant, on the other hand, was a proponent of the categorical imperative, which states that some acts are wrong and others are right, regardless of the consequences. For instance, we should always be honest not because others will approve or because it is likely to lead to a reward eventually, but because it is our duty to be honest. Kant stressed that we must be granted free will, in order to be held morally accountable. Free will was, in fact, so important to him that he categorized it as one of the three laws of the universe – beside God and Immortality.
Many companies have used the Scout Law to help guide them when forming a mission or values statement. The Scout Law is based on 12 principles:
Once you have chosen a system of belief to help you solve ethical problems that arise in the modern workplace, you must devise a system to help your employees form a similar philosophy. The first step is to find a way to specify appropriate behaviors, not just by word, but also by your actions as a leader. From day one, each employee must be trained to think ethically, and this would ideally begin in orientation. Today’s workforce needs to be prepared to deal with stressful situations; when a person is taken aback by an ethical dilemma that they had not previously considered likely – this is when personal belief systems falter. Employees must be taught that rationalization of poor decisions, blaming the victim (“he was stupid enough to fall for it”), and finger pointing (“she does the same thing, and you never call her on it”) will not be tolerated. Make the repercussions of unethical behavior in the workplace known, and make sure that it is put in writing.
Perhaps the question that we should ask above all others when faced with an ethical problem is neither lengthy nor complicated, “What sort of person would do such a thing?” Memorize this phrase, and hold your employees accountable for memorizing it, as well. This is how your business can find it’s way through the gray areas, and to the light on the other end of the tunnel.