Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre,Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer
Moral issues greet us each morning in the newspaper, confront us in the memos on our desks, nag us from our children's soccer fields, and bid us good night on the evening news. We are bombarded daily with questions about the justice of our foreign policy, the morality of medical technologies that can prolong our lives, the rights of the homeless, the fairness of our children's teachers to the diverse students in their classrooms. Dealing with these moral issues is often perplexing. How, exactly, should we think through an ethical issue? What questions should we ask? What factors should we consider? The first step in analyzing moral issues is obvious but not always easy: Get the facts. Some moral issues create controversies simply because we do not bother to check the facts. This first step, although obvious, is also among the most important and the most frequently overlooked. But having the facts is not enough. Facts by themselves only tell us what is; they do not tell us what ought to be. In addition to getting the facts, resolving an ethical issue also requires an appeal to values. Philosophers have developed five different approaches to values to deal with moral issues. The Utilitarian Approach To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify the various courses of action available to us. Second, we ask who will be affected by each action and what benefits or harms will be derived from each. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest benefits and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the greatest number. The Rights Approach Of course, many different, but related, rights exist besides this basic one. These other rights (an incomplete list below) can be thought of as different aspects of the basic right to be treated as we choose.
In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach, then, we must ask, Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone? Actions are wrong to the extent that they violate the rights of individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the action. The Fairness or Justice Approach Favoritism gives benefits to some people without a justifiable reason for singling them out; discrimination imposes burdens on people who are no different from those on whom burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism and discrimination are unjust and wrong. The Common-Good Approach The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. More recently, contemporary ethicist John Rawls defined the common good as "certain general conditions that are...equally to everyone's advantage." In this approach, we focus on ensuring that the social policies, social systems, institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Examples of goods common to all include affordable health care, effective public safety, peace among nations, a just legal system, and an unpolluted environment. Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society. While respecting and valuing the freedom of individuals to pursue their own goals, the common-good approach challenges us also to recognize and further those goals we share in common. The Virtue Approach Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our highest potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtues are like habits; that is, once acquired, they become characteristic of a person. Moreover, a person who has developed virtues will be naturally disposed to act in ways consistent with moral principles. The virtuous person is the ethical person. In dealing with an ethical problem using the virtue approach, we might ask, What kind of person should I be? What will promote the development of character within myself and my community? Ethical Problem Solving
This method, of course, does not provide an automatic solution to moral problems. It is not meant to. The method is merely meant to help identify most of the important ethical considerations. In the end, we must deliberate on moral issues for ourselves, keeping a careful eye on both the facts and on the ethical considerations involved. This article updates several previous pieces from Issues in Ethics by Manuel Velasquez - Dirksen Professor of Business Ethics at Santa Clara University and former Center director - and Claire Andre, associate Center director. "Thinking Ethically" is based on a framework developed by the authors in collaboration with Center Director Thomas Shanks, S.J., Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good Michael J. Meyer, and others. The framework is used as the basis for many programs and presentations at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. Most business leaders I know clearly understand the difference between legal and illegal activities, but often are not so clear on the line between ethical and unethical. Unfortunately, there is no universal code of business ethics, written down and enforced by some external governing body. We all have to rely on our own interpretation of what will maintain a working level of trust between all constituents. For example, most would agree that a lending manager must look for the same qualifications from a friend that he or she applies to other applicants. But what do you do when making the right ethical choice will almost certainly upset that friend? The problem is that so many choices fall into a gray area, and you may not even see the ethical creep that is happening in your actions. Many professionals I know in business have the sense that an adherence to ethics is spiraling downward in business, and most don't believe they know how to make a difference. They don't realize that if they don't make the effort to be part of the solution, out of indifference or fear of jeopardizing their own careers, then they really become part of the problem. In my view, most people agree on the fundamental principles of ethics-- integrity, objectivity, competence, confidentiality, and professional behavior. They just need to follow a set of practical steps, including the following, to get beyond the emotion and the theoretical, to arrive at pragmatic yet ethical solutions to tough problems that we all encounter in business: Ethical issues are usually driven by an attempt to accomplish a desired objective, without overtly violating some existing legal or moral code. You can't be a change agent to improve business ethics without understanding the constraints, and the gray areas that surround them. For example, most would agree that bribery to win a contract is unethical, but how far can you go in nurturing a relationship with a key vendor? Defining legal and moral constraints is only the first step. Then you face cultural and historical norms, and your own integrity. Often it helps to analyze a list of likely results and then reason backward to find who benefits and who loses. The best solution for a tough ethical challenge is one that could be surfaced on the front page of the newspaper the next day without being misinterpreted by an unbiased customer. In the previous example, if a given vendor has a family connection to you, legal and moral constraints are not enough. If the information surfaces that you may have the intent of favoring family or friends, your analysis of qualifications must be beyond reproach. If everyone agrees that the key facts are clearly true, or non-debatable, then the first two steps will likely lead you to an ethical solution. Otherwise you need to examine how your decision might change if key facts are proved irrelevant or wrong. New alternatives may need to be evaluated. When you think ethically, you are in sympathy and empathy with others. It helps to meet face-to-face with the ones that differ from you most. Your ethical eye gets sharper when you bring all relevant objects or people closer. In that context, you must treat others as you would have them treat you. Consider, from a personnel standpoint, how much harder it is to fire someone face-to-face. That's because your empathy is engaged by their presence, and it makes you examine more closely all the ethics, facts, and emotions that are part of your decision. In this final step, you first assess how each party is impacted, then what counts, as a benefit or harm in considering the possible actions. Good ethics are ultimately about maximizing the positives of the entire situation. This attracts loyalty and trust from customers and employees alike. If you follow these steps, and iterate at required, I assure you that your own ethical eye will be sharpened, communicating these steps to others around you will improve their view, and will ultimately change the perception of your business in a positive way. The number of perceived ethical dilemmas will also be reduced. You definitely can make a difference if you start now. |