2 Overview of the Factors that Affect Ethical-Decision Making

Learning Objectives

In this chapter, you will learn to:

  • Define what is business ethics.
  • Differentiate ethical problems from ethical dilemmas.
  • Identify and explain the common views for defining what is “ethical.”
  • Identify the meaning of each of the four letters in the PICS framework and give a brief explanation of the relevance to ethical decision-making and management.
  • Recognize a general process for how managers can make and facilitate ethical decisions in their organizations.

 

1. Ethics and Business Ethics Defined

Ethics essentially involves how we act, live, lead our lives, and treat others. Our choices and decision-making processes and our moral principles and values that govern our behaviors regarding what is right and wrong are also part of ethics.2

Normative ethics refers to the field of ethics concerned with our asking how should and ought we live and act? Business ethics is applied ethics that focuses on real-world situations and the context and environment in which transactions occur—How should we apply our values to the way we conduct business?

Ethics and business ethics continue to gain influence in corporations, universities, and colleges nationally and internationally. No longer considered a luxury but a necessity, business ethics has awakened a need in the public consciousness due to crises in many areas. For example, the 2008 subprime lending crisis—economic effects of which still persist—revealed widespread corruption of large investment banks and lending institutions internationally. Unsupported mortgages were fraudulently offered with no legitimate financial backing. Some large financial institutions, such as Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., went bankrupt; millions of mortgage holders lost their homes. An estimated cost of that crisis to the global economy is over $22 trillion U.S. dollars.3

In the early 2000s, CEOs and top-level leaders from notable corporations such as Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, and others were caught committing outrageously greedy and fraudulent crimes of white-collar theft from their organizations and shareholders. The now classic film The Smartest Guys in the Room depict how Enron’s leaders during that time, Kenneth Lay (now deceased), Jeff Skilling (still serving prison time), and Andrew Fastow (released from prison in 2011), deceived employees, Wall Street, and shareholders. Enron’s crisis took an estimated $67 billion of shareholder wealth out of the U.S. economy.4

These criminal activities ushered in national laws such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which we discuss below.

While these recent historical crises illustrate the continuing relevance and importance of business ethics, ethical issues are not only concerned with financial and economically motivated crimes and misbehaviors. Fast forward to the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), which also is calling attention to the relevance and need for ethics in scientific institutions, businesses, and governments. The public needs to be informed of potential and actual harmful consequences—as well as all the recognizable benefits—of these technologies that are in large part driven by algorithms (“a sequence of instructions telling a computer what to do”).5

Intentional and unintentional misuses of such designs embedded in artificially intelligent technologies can negatively and harmfully affect individual lives as well as entire societies. For example, studies show that a number of minority members of society are often discriminated against by institutions using faulty algorithms to qualify customers for mortgages and to predict who is at risk of being incarcerated. Often times, racial and low-income minorities are discriminated against by such technology designs.6

At a societal level, another now classic film, The Minority Report, illustrates how misuses of technology can threaten individual rights, privacy, free will, and choice. While this may sound like science fiction, scientific and business luminaries such as Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, and others have openly declared that we as a society must be cautious and ethically aware and active to fend off the ill effects of the control and dominant influences of certain AI algorithms in our lives. Scientific and ethical practices in corporate social responsibility (CSR) are one way that ethicists, business leaders, and consumers can support moral self-regulation of technologies. Some scientific and technological firms have adopted ethics boards to help safeguard against harmful social uses of AI technologies.7

The European Union (EU) has produced policy studies that are forerunners of laws to safeguard against potentially harmful uses of robotics.8

Another timely ethical issue is climate change and the environment. Lack of sustainable environmental practices that curb air pollution and destructive uses of land, water, and natural resources have, according to a large community of reputable scientists, threatened Earth’s—and our neighborhoods’—atmosphere.9

Scientific studies and United Nations reports affirm that changes to the earth’s atmosphere, melting glaciers, and rising seas are occurring at accelerated rates. For example, “California’s coastline could rise up to 10 feet by 2100, about 30 to 40 times faster than sea-level rise experienced over the last century.”10

While university, business, and local community groups are rallying for legal actions to curtail and reverse environmental polluters, current political executive orders push against such regulations designed to protect against further erosion of the physical environment.11

The point here is that as these issues described above are not only technological, economic, and political in nature, but also moral and ethical, as the public’s health, welfare, and safety are at risk.

Relevant ethical questions can be asked to prevent a crisis: Who is responsible for preventing and addressing what happens to individuals, the public, our institutions, and government and who is responsible for preventing such crises and harmful effects from occurring and reoccurring? At whose and what costs? Whose responsibility is it to protect and preserve the common good of societies? What ethical and moral principles should and can motivate individuals, groups, and society members to act to change course?

Universities and colleges are taking notice. Business ethics and corporate social responsibility courses and offerings are becoming increasingly important. The accrediting national body of business schools, AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business), reported that “[i]n their curricula, research, and outreach, business schools must be advocates for the human dimension of business, with attention to ethics, diversity, and personal well-being.”12

In addition, NGOs (nongovernmental organizations), emergent groups internationally representing the public’s interests and common good, and political action movements are beginning again to give voice to injustices and potentially dangerous ethical as well as fiscal (income inequality), health (the environment), and discriminatory (racism and stereotyping large segments of the society) problems that require stakeholder as well as stockholder actions.

In this chapter, we begin by presenting an overview of the dimensions of business ethics at the individual, professional, and leadership levels, followed by the organizational, societal, and global levels.

  1. What individual and organizational ethical issues can we expect to occur?
  2. What are some signs of unethical activities you might notice individually and organizationally?
  3. What are ethics and business ethics?

A goal of the chapter is to present ethical principles, guidelines, and questions that inform our individual decision-making and influence actions we can take with regard to questionable ethical situations and dilemmas. We also present and illustrate how business leaders, corporations, and organizations internationally have responded and are responding to questionable ethical problems with the environment in their communities through responsible corporate governance and alliance with concerned stakeholders. Ethics is both local and global; it begins with the individual, moves to the organizational, and reaches to international and global levels of societies.

Quick Comprehension Check

ethics
The code of moral principles and values that governs the behaviors of a person or group with respect to what is right or wrong.
normative ethics
The field of ethics concerned with our asking how should and ought we live and act.
business ethics
The area of applied ethics that focuses on real-world situations and the context and environment in which transactions occur.
stakeholder
Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of an organization’s objectives. The use of the term stakeholder has become commonplace in organizations.

Section 1 References

  1. Brian Goldner, “Who Are You Really?—Brian Goldner, President & CEO for Hasbro, Inc.,” http://insights.ethisphere.com, accessed June 29, 2017; “CSR Fact Sheet,” https://csr.hasbro.com, accessed June 23, 2017; “The World’s Biggest Public Companies: Hasbro,” Forbes, https://www.forbes.com, accessed June 23, 2017; “2016 Global Philanthropy & Social Impact,” https://csr.hasbro.com, accessed June 23, 2017; Elizabeth Gurdus, “Hasbro CEO Reveals the Magic Behind the Toymaker’s Earnings Beat,” CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com, April 24, 2017; Jade Burke, “Hasbro Reaches Top spot in CSR Listing,” Toy News, http://www.toynews-online.biz, April 21, 2017; Kathrin Belliveau, “CSR at Hasbro: What It Means to Play with Purpose,” LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com, April 20, 2017.
  2. Hartman, L., J. DesJardins and MacDonald, C. (2018). Business Ethics: Decision Making for Personal Integrity and Social Responsibility, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, New York; and Weiss, J.W. (2014). Business Ethics, A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach, 6th ed. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
  3. Eleazar Melendez. (2013). Financial Crisis Cost Tops $22 Trillion. https://www.huffingtonpost.co/2013/02/14/financial-crisis-cost-gao_n_2687553.html
  4. James Flanigan. (2002). Enron Is Proving Costly to Economy, http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jan/20/news/mn-23790
  5. David Auerbach. (2015). The Programs That Become the Programmers, http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/09/pedro_domingos_master_algorithm_how_machine_learning_is_reshaping_how_we.html
  6. Julia Angwin, Jeff Larson, Surya Mattu and Lauren Kirchner. (2016). Machine Bias. ProPublica analysis of data from Broward County, Fla., https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing
  7. Hern, A. “Growth of AI Could Boost Cybercrime and Security Threats, Report Warns”, The Guardian, February 21, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/21/ai-security-threats-cybercrime-political-disruption-physical-attacks-report
  8. Nevejans, N. (2016). European Civil Law Rules in Robotics, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/571379/IPOL_STU(2016)571379_EN.pdf
  9. Ripple, W., World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Warning”, XXXX / Vol. XX No. X • BioScience, 2017, http://scientists.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/sw/files/Ripple_et_al_warning_2017.pdf.
  10. Samuel Chiu. (2017). Climate experts release latest science on sea level rise projections, https://phys.org/news/2017-04-climate-experts-latest-science-sea.html
  11. Friedman, Z. (2018). Trump Administration Requests $0 In Funding For Consumer Protection Agency, https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2018/01/19/cfpb-funding-trump/#61dd837c1826
  12. AACSB, A Collective Vision for Business Education, AACSB International, 2016, https://www.aacsb.edu/-/media/aacsb/publications/research-reports/collective-vision/collective-vision-for-business-education.ashx

2. Ethical Problems vs Ethical Dilemmas

When we start to examine ethical situations in business or otherwise, we realize that something are easy for everyone to agree on what is “ethical.” These are ethical problems. In other words, these are situations when the situation presents a choice between “right” and “wrong.” For example, it is easy to get consensus when someone is doing something only for personal gain and at the cost to others.

The reason we study ethics and ethical decision-making is because the hard choices are rarely ethical problems. Managers, instead, face the most challenges when dealing with ethical dilemmas. These are situations when we are choosing between two right options (aka “right vs right”). Another way to look at it is when you are faced between choosing between two ethical outcomes. The figure below highlights the differences between ethical problems and ethical issues.

Now, in the figure the examples are outside of an organizational setting, but you can imagine that managers face ethical dilemmas all of the time. Something as simple as time off requested by two employees who both need leave for personal reasons can put a manager in either:

  • a “right vs wrong” situation because one person clearly has no time off remaining or
  • a “right vs right” situation because both people have time off and both have equally valid reasons for needing to take the time off.

When facing an ethical situation, the first step is to identify if this is an ethical problem or an ethical dilemma. If it’s an ethical dilemma, then it will require more analysis to get to the most ethical behaviour.

3. The Cyenfin Framework – “A Leader’s Framework for Decision-Making” (Snowden & Boone, 2007)

Ethical decisions and how you make the depend a lot on the type of situation you are facing. To help us, we are going to draw on the Cynefin framework for decision-making (Snowden & Boone, 2007). While this framework is not specifically geared towards ethical decision-making, it gives a good indication of how we should approach decision-making in general. Figure 1 below describes the different types of decisions we face.

The Cynefin Framework (Snowden and Boone, 2007)

First, we need to look at the two ends of the spectrum, ordered vs unordered. Situations that are ordered usually have structure, known methods, or accessible information. Unordered situation tend to lack those things or have obstacles obscuring those things from the view of the decision-maker. Now, in reality, situations change and can move from ordered to unordered, but more on that later.

Ordered Side of the Spectrum

On this side of the spectrum, we find simple and complicated situations.

Ordered – Simple Space – “The Domain of Best Practice” (Snowden & Boone, 2007)

In the simple down, information is ordered, clear, available, and known methods are established or available. You could bring to mind a situation that works like a flowchart. In it’s simplest form, it could be>

  • Is the answer A?
    • If yes, go to B.
    • If no, go to C.

Simple problems usually have more layers than that. Please refer to the example below.

  • Situation: Customer complaining about the wait time to get seated in the restaurant, pointing out the empty seats.
  • Simple space approach steps: Sense, Categorize, and Respond
    • SENSE: Are the empty seats empty because we have not seated people properly or because we are not seating people based on a limitation in what the kitchen can do (e.g., lots of online orders actually keeping the kitchen busy).
    • CATEGORIZE: Let’s say in this situation, the reason the seats are empty is because the host at the front got unexpectedly sick and was not able to do the host duties.
    • RESPOND: Assign someone to cover the host duties to clear the backlog.

When a situation is in the simple space, a best practice is available or can be developed. Then, that best practice can be used every time the situation arises in the same way.

Ordered – Complicated Space – “The Domain of Experts” (Snowden & Boone, 2007)

Complicated problems are also considered on the ordered side of the spectrum, but they require more analysis to figure out because it has “known unknown” (aka we cannot see everything but we have a sense of what we cannot see). The situations in this domain usually require you to Sense the situation, Analyze through experimenting or testing, and then Respond. Here’s an example.

  • Situation: Customer comes in complaining of a squeaky sound in the engine of their car. Despite the customer’s best efforts to recreate the sound, you do not know what sound the engine is making.
  • Complicated space approach steps: Sense, Analyze, and Respond
    • Sense: Drive the car around the block so that you can hear that sound to identify the potential underlying causes.
    • Analyze: Then, you start analyze systematically the possible causes to rule out what is causing the problem until you identify the cause.
    • Respond: You find and implement the solution to fix the problem.

Now, that situation could have been even more complicated. Even the situation below would be complicated (not complex).

  • Situation: Customer comes in complaining of a squeaky sound in the engine of their car. Despite the customer’s best efforts to recreate the sound, you do not know what sound the engine is making.
  • Complicated space approach steps: Sense, Analyze, and Respond
    • Sense: Drive the car around the block so that you can hear that sound to identify the potential underlying causes, but you don’t hear the sound.
    • Analyze: Then, you start analyze systematically run diagnostics on the car to see how the car is functioning to see if any issues arise.
    • Respond: You find no issues based on your in-depth diagnostics. So, you tell the owner to record the sounds (if possible) the next time it happens, but in the meantime to keep up their regular car maintenance.

This space, as you can see from the example, lends itself to multiple right answers. Meaning in the first situation, after the analysis, the response was the right answer. In the second situation, the analysis lead to different information and the response of no action and to record the sound for next time was also the “right” answer. What that means is that in this space, we are looking for the solutions that lead to our objectives being met. In the car situation, the objective was for the customer to leave with resolution about the sound. Both responses led to that, but in different ways.

The Unordered Side of the Spectrum

The unordered spaces are marred by ambiguity and lack of clarity. In these two spaces, complex and chaos, the normal ways of doing things does not work or we do not see the results to know if it is working. So, in these spaces, we need to take different approaches to bring clarity and find solutions.

Unordered – Complex Space – “The Domain of Emergence” (Snowden & Boone, 2007)

Snowden and Boone (2007), like many management researchers and practitioners, acknowledge the society is only growing more complex with time. The methods and problem-solving of the past are not longer applicable to many of today’s managerial needs. In the complex space in particular, requires managers to be attentive to “see” to all components of the situation for what is visible and not, adaptable to find new ways of investigating and gathering information, and often creative in finding appropriate responses.

Let’s make the example with customer complaints into a complex problem. Company A has effectively sold it video recording software for 5 years. This software allows people to record videos easily and put them directly to a unique public URL. Yesterday, Company A’s service team had a service outage for the servers that hosts their service and that hosts the videos made by its employees. At first, it seems like a simple situation and that they should use their normal protocol, but when they started to implement the protocol during the rebooting stage, bugs started showing up everywhere. Their tech team was on it right away, but the problem seemed to be everywhere. When they fixed it in one area, another area would be unresponsive or would change too. Slowly though, they were able to use a few code patches here and there that brought stability. They were then able to see a theme in the patches that were working. They all had to do with the same error code. That helped them realized the root of the problem, so they were able to provide a solution and within 24 hours get everything up and running again.

  • Situation: Unexplained server outages that seemed to worsen with normal protocol and was affecting the whole situation.
  • Complex space approach steps: Probe, Sense, and Respond
    • Probe: The techs went right to identify all of the errors and trying patches with which they were familiar until something started to work. All of these were small probes (e.g., trial and error probes) to see what might work.
    • Sense: Once things started to improve in several areas, they sensed a pattern and for the first time were able to understand what they were facing.
    • Respond: Now that they understood what they were facing, they could solve the problem with that approach.

When responding in the complex space, you may now be faced with a simple problem. In this example, depending on what pattern they sensed, a protocol might be appropriate. That would actually move the situation into the simple space for the next steps of sensing, categorizing, or responding. Alternatively, if the pattern required further testing and analysis within the known unknowns, then they would then approach it as a complicated problem and would sense, analyze, and respond. On the other hand, the sense stage could have made the realize that it is still a complex problem, although it is now narrower in scope, so probing, sensing, and responding are the best next steps.

It is important remember that these spaces have permeable walls and that situations can move between them. The Cynefin framework is about problem-solving.

Unordered – Chaotic Space – “The Domain of Rapid Response” (Snowden & Boone, 2007)

Now, the chaos space is probably the hardest to understand because it is the one that we actually encounter least in the world. There are not that many times when we actually have to face that “searching for right answers would be pointless” (Snowden & Boone). That futility is the hallmark of the chaos space. In this turbulent space, patterns that appear one minute, disappear the next. This is truly the area of the unknown.

For our example, let’s go to Company B, who like Company A in the Complex space was facing an outage, but Company B’s software and servers supported the electric grid for all of lower British Columbia. When Company B’s techs worked on patches, they would work once maybe twice but not again. There was not a pattern that could be sensed. All that they could do was try to patch things, and if something worked, try it again and hope it stayed. The goal was to find anything that would fix anything to minimize the negative impact of the situation.

  • Situation: Unexplained server outages that seemed to worsen with normal protocol and was affecting the whole situation.
  • Chaotic space approach steps: Act, Sense, and Respond
    • Act: The techs worked to create patches and fix errors as they identified them.
    • Sense: They sensed if the fix/patch worked.
    • Respond: If it did, they would try it again, which is actually going back to the Act step. If it didn’t, they tried something new, which is going back to the Act step.

This situation is all about quick responses and adaptability. It requires managers to act quickly.

How to Use the Cynefin Framework for Ethical Decision-Making

Because the Cynefin Framework is about decision-making, applying it to ethical decision-making is quite intuitive. Table 1 below shows how you can commonly use the Cynefin steps in each space for many ethical situations.

Table 1. Suggestions for How to Apply the Cynefin Model when Faced with Ethical Decisions

SIMPLE
Sense Sense “Does that have a clear right and a clear wrong?” If it does, then go to the next step. If it doesn’t, does it fit better in another space?
Categorize Categorize what the right behavior is to do. It might require referencing codes of conduct or manuals or a few other known steps, but the step(s) will be established.
Respond Implement the appropriate protocol/action/decision to either uphold the “right” in the situation or remove/punish the “wrong” option.
COMPLICATED
Sense Sense “Does that have a clear right and a clear wrong that everyone would agree upon?” If it does, then go to the simple. If it right vs right or there is not agreement on there being a right and wrong, then identify what would make the outcome successful? In other words, what results would make you satisfied with solution? As an example, these could be outcomes like upholds company values, ensures employee safety, promotes positive company culture. Choose outcomes relevant to the situation.
Analyze Analyze, compare, and/or test various options (e.g., decisions, actions, approaches, solutions) that could satisfy your desired outcomes.
Respond Use the option that most effectively achieves the desired outcomes. Bear in mind, there could be multiple options that have the same effectiveness in achieving outcomes.
COMPLEX
Probe To get started, probe to see if there are any patterns emerging for any of the following: (a) what the issue is, (b) possible values involved in the issue, (c) possible values opposing one another, (d) the stakeholders directly and indirectly impacted by the decision, (e) organizational values, and (f) human components that make this harder to clarify. More probes may be needed as the situation is more clearly identified, such as the PICS Framework discussed later.
Sense Sense if a pattern starts to emerge on what is happening in this situation.
Respond If a clear pattern emerges that leads to the situation being simple or complicated, follow the steps from those spaces appropriately. If the pattern is still complex or still unclear, go back to probing.
CHAOS
Act Try to do what is most ethical in the moment.
Sense See if it had a desirable effect.
Respond If it did, do it again. If it didn’t, try something new.

The Cynefin framework, as described in Table 1, is a tool that managers can use to aid them in knowing how to approach different ethical situations depending on whether those situations are simple, complicated, complex, or chaotic.

4. Factors Affecting an Individual’s Ethical Decision(s) in an Organization (the PICS Influences)

If we want to understand which influences affect a decision-maker when making an ethical decision, the PICS model can be helpful. The PICS model below incorporates several models often used in discussing ethical decision-making. This model is quite useful when you find yourself in an ethical dilemma and want to see what factors are shaping your decision (and which you may not want to). It can be a valuable tool even after an ethical decision has been made as it allows you to analyze and deconstruct possible influences on the decision.

As we look at the PISC model, we need to see that these factors can either enhance or hinder the likelihood that someone will make an ethical decision. In other words, if we have more of these factors, it increases our empowerment, another way to look at it is likelihood, of making an ethical decision or action. If those factors are missing or working against the person, it may hinder them from choosing what is ethical. Even ethical people act unethical depending on these factors’ influences on them in a given situation.

The PICS Framework summarizes the Personal, Issue, Organizational Culture, and Organizational Structure factors that affect ethical decision-making.

 

Personal Factors

Later in the book, we will devote a whole chapter to understanding the personal factors and how they influence ethical decision-making and management. For now, it is simply important for us to recognize them in a broad since, namely:

  • Moral development – affects whether a person is more concerned with self, others, or principles when choosing to do something that is ethical; people who based decisions on principles are more likely to act ethically.
  • Values development – if people know what their specific values are (i.e., they can name them and define them), then they are more likely to chose something in line with those values.
  • Values strength – if people actually strongly believe in their values, then they are more likely to use them in their decisions. People often have values (values development), but don’t always have value strength.
  • Locus of control – people who believe that what they do can lead to changes in the environment around them (high locus of control) are more likely to take action to do what they believe is ethical because they believe they can impact the world around them.
  • Access to information – people who have access to information that allows them to understand the issue and its relevance to them are more likely to feel empowered to make an ethical decision.
  • Power – people who feel empowered in the situation, culture, and society at large are going to feel more empowered to make ethical decisions.

Managers do not have much control over the Personal Factors’ of their individual employees. However, they can help facilitate their employees in developing a self-awareness around their own values through leading professional development opportunities for ethics. For example, if training was offered that support employees in identifying and defining their values and then determining how they would apply them in the workplace, that:

  • Could catalyze the employees’ moral development,
  • Would allow them to have grown in the values development,
  • Might enhance their values strength, and
  • Would allow them to have access to greater information on values and ethics that they may not have had access to previously.

So, while it is neither the goal or the role of manager to force values upon the employees, facilitating the employees’ development and application of their own values can be quite useful in promoting ethical decision-making.

Issue Factors

In another chapter, we will explore issue factors in more detail, specifically how they influence ethical decision-making and management. To get started, it is good to understand that:

  • Agreement on “right” – if there is a generally agreed upon “right” answer, then the person making the decision will be more likely to choose what is “right”
  • Relationship to those potentially negatively impacted – the closer the decision-maker is to the people who might be impacted by an unethical decision, the more likely they are to act ethically.
  • Intensity of the negative impact – the more devastating the negative impact would be on those affected, the more likely someone is to choose the “ethical” action.
  • Timing of the negative impact – if the negative impact from a decision will be seen sooner (rather than delayed greatly), then the decision-maker is more likely to take ethical action.
  • Likelihood of the negative impact – the higher likelihood that there will actually be a negative impact, the more likely the person will take action to be ethical.
  • Number of those negatively impacted – the higher number of people will actually be negative impacted, the more likely the person will take action to be ethical.

Like Personal Factors, Issue Factors are areas over which managers have little to no control. However, like with Personal Factors, managers can equip their employees’ to be more capable by doing ethical training in areas, such as personal values development and application (see example in Personal Factors), training on the organizational values (including case studies and simulations so that employees can practice), and as applicable, training in any professional ethics standards in their industry.

These types of trainings would create the groundwork for employees to:

  • Feel more confident in know whether there was a company agreement on what is right – in other words, the company’s expectations would be clear;
  • Understand the possible intensity, likelihood, and timing of negative impact – case studies and simulation trainings help employees see these before facing them in the real-world
  • Identify the number of those negatively impacted – cases and simulations again can help them have “experience” with identifying this prior to need to identify it in their actual role.

If managers make ethics training a part of the organizational practices, it may not dictate that employees will be ethical but it can equip them with skills that aid in their ethical decision-making.

Organizational Culture Factors

Now, with organizational culture, we start to explore how an organization can influence whether someone makes an ethical decision. Organizational Culture (C in the PICS framework) and Organizational Structure (S in the PICS framework) factors are the ones that managers can more directly influence. To preview what Organizational Culture factors affect individuals’ ethical decisions, it is important to note the following.

  • Ethical nature of the organizational culture – If the organizational culture has the following characteristics, it is more likely to a culture that promotes ethical behaviour.
    • Balanced focus between the process of achieving the outcomes and the outcomes itself
    • Ability to innovate and adapt to new information and situations
    • Promotion of the collective good more than the promotion of competition among employees
  • Strength of culture – If a culture is strong, it tends to have a greater influence on its employees (think: peer pressure). As it relates to ethical decision-making:
    • Strong organizational cultures that do not support ethical processes are hard to oppose and will discourage employees from being ethical.
    • Strong organizational cultures that promotes ethical decision-making will influence its employees, even the less individually ethical, to make ethical decisions.
  • Connection to individual empowerment – If the organizational culture empowers people from diverse backgrounds to contribute by building an inclusive environment, then all of its employees are more likely to choose ethically. However, if it is not inclusive, it may be hinder individual’s ability or perception of the ability to make ethical choices.
  • Socialization of ethical expectations – If the organization uses socialization and “walks the talk” about the ethical values and company values, then it encourages ethical behaviour in its employees.

The good news is that managers can directly impact the organizational culture as well as influencing it to develop in a manner that support ethical decision-making by:

  • Support an ethical culture by emphasizing a/an:
    • Balanced focus between the process of achieving the outcomes and the outcomes itself
    • ability to innovate and adapt to new information and situations
    • Promotion of the collective good more than the promotion of competition among employees
  • Building a strong organizational culture by:
    • Have clear organizational culture values that are representative of the people in the organization,
    • Using organizational culture as a consideration when hiring someone,
    • Considering organizational culture as a factor in performance management,
    • Integrating organizational culture in the organizations goals and plans,
    • Facilitating the socialization of the values through activities such as building rhythms that support the culture, using common language, and promoting relational mentorship in the organizational culture.
  • Actively working to decolonize and build inclusive work environment that promote the empowerment and participation from employees from diverse backgrounds.
  • Ensuring that managers and employees are not expected to just know the values, but are expected to embody them; in particular, it is very important for managers to model the ethical cultural values.

So, while for Personal Factors and Issue Factors, managers have a more indirect influence; in organizational culture, they have the opportunity to cultivate a culture that supports ethics and social responsibility.

Organizational Structure Factors

In this final area of the PICS framework, we will briefly discuss the organizational structure (S) factors that influence ethical decision-making and management. To get started, it is good to understand that:

  • Performance management system – organizations can promote ethical behaviour if their performance management systems:
    • Reward ethical behaviour in performance reviews (even when it might mean less profit)
    • Recognize people for outstanding ethical behaviour
  • Reporting systems – organizations can promote ethical behaviour if their reporting systems:
    • Allow for subordinates to be safe when reporting their peers or superiors
  • Availability of information – if individuals in the organization have access to information relevant to the situation, then they often feel more empowered to make the decision.
  • Codes of ethics – codes of ethics can support ethical behaviour because they allow employees to clearly understand what is expected of them. It is important to note that a code of ethics is more effective when accompanied by training on the code of ethics.

Organizational Structure, like Organizational Culture, is an area in which managers can directly impact ethical decision-making by establishing and maintaining structures, policies, and process that support ethical decision-making.

5. Implications for Facilitating Individuals’ Ethical Decisions in Organizations

If we look at the last two frameworks, Cynefin and PICS, together, we can start to get a sense of what managers can do to facilitate ethical decision-making within their organization. In terms of what that looks like for what managers can do, they can:

  • Proactively build and support organizational cultures and structures that facilitate ethical decisions and organizational social responsibility;
  • Reactively (when an ethical situation arises):
    • Use the Cynefin framework to determine the space in which the situation resides, and
    • Then, use the suggestions in Table 1 for guidance;
  • Reflect after their decision is made or the situation is resolved to see how they could improve the organizational culture and structure and how they could more effectively navigate similar situations in the future.

While these aforementioned steps for using these frameworks do not give a nuanced view of what that means for individual managers, it provides a pattern that managers can follow to help them get started in building and supporting organizations that uphold ethical standards and use those standards to manage their social responsibility.

Key Takeaways

From this chapter, the key takeaways are:

  • What is “ethical” can be defined in several distinct ways depending on the ethical norms used by decision-makers.
  • Ethical problems are when decision-makers face “right vs wrong” situations, meaning there is a consensus about what is right and wrong. On the other hand, “right vs right” situations or situations in which there is not a consensus on “right and wrong” are called ethical dilemmas.
  • The Cynefin Framework, as described in Table 1, is a tool that managers can use to aid them in knowing how to approach different ethical situations depending on whether those situations are simple, complicated, complex, or chaotic.
  • The PICS Framework can help managers identify, analyze, and understand the influences on ethical decision-making; in turn, managers can proactively build organizations that promote ethically decision-making.
  • By using the Cynefin and PICS Frameworks in tandem, managers have tangible ways in which to proactively, reactively, and reflectively improve the ethical decision-making in their organizations.

 

References for Sections 2 and onward

1. Snowden, D. J. & Boone, M.E. (2015, December 7). A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2007/11/a-leaders-framework-for-decision-making.

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

Ethical Management and Decision-Making Copyright © 2023 by Rachael Newton is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book