Is business ethics an oxymoron?
Robert Jackall (1997) suggests that the modern bureaucracy has created a “society within a society” in which there is a set of ethical standards that may not be consistent with those of the larger society. This might help explain how certain corporate leaders could do what they did and still look at themselves in the mirror. Our current capitalistic society goes along with these sub-societies, as long as they are successful. Enron was touted as one of the most innovative organizations five years in a row by Fortune magazine. Only when there is a collapse is there a cry of “foul.”
In America, the Protestant work ethic at one time formed the basis of good business relationships. A person’s word was his bond and business could be counted on with a handshake. Personal integrity and reputation mattered. But in business, there is also a “dog eat dog” mentality. Somehow, when it comes to business, there is such an emphasis on success that morals and ethics sometimes take a back seat.
The larger an organization, the more complex the strategy and operations. Thus, the easier it becomes to stretch standards and change numbers to reflect what is desired, rather than what is. Meeting the numbers seems more desirable than sticking to reality. Besides, one might reason that “reality” or “truth” is really just a question of which version, which perspective, is applied.
Here’s the way one cynical executive put it: “Let’s be honest. We lie and our colleagues lie to us. People prefer to tell each other what they want to hear... I don’t need perfect people, I need successful people who can think for themselves and get the job done. If they need to tell a little white lie, I can live with that.”
Many corporations value stock prices and dividend and financial reports over customers, product or service quality. There is such an emphasis on the bottom line that even customer satisfaction becomes secondary. Jim Collins, in his research for his book Good to Great, emphasizes that sustainably successful companies are the ones that always focus on understanding and meeting customer needs. When this is done successfully, it delivers stakeholder return.
|
Facing ethical dilemmas: living in the gray
In business, not only are we faced with questions between right and wrong, but between right and right. According to Joseph Badaracco (1998), “We have all experienced situations in which our professional responsibilities unexpectedly come into conflict with our deepest values – we are caught in a conflict between right and right. And no matter which option we choose, we feel like we’ve come up short.”
“Between right and wrong is a troublesome gray area.” – Boeing ethics poster
Research on moral standards and business ethics is sparse. Weber in 1998 found that 85.9 percent of managers claim that they draw their moral standards at work from the expectations perceived in the work environment. Trevino (1990) adds that organizational norms that are embodied by the corporation’s culture are strong determinants of individual thought and behavior in the workplace. Gillespie (1997) notes that corporate culture is recognized as a key contextual influence in establishing and maintaining norms.
The morality and ethics of the modern workplace are influenced by the leaders of the organization. There is an increasing sense of distrust of leaders’ motives since they are seen to serve shareholders and themselves, rather than the employees, the community, the environment, or even the customers! They are seen as not telling the truth, and doing whatever it takes to increase stock value.
Such erosion of trust may be pandemic. What happened at Enron and WorldCom colors all employees’ views of how leaders operate. When corporate culture is undermined by distrust, the original excitement and enthusiasm about a job turns to cynicism, alienation and disengagement. When this happens, work suffers.
|
|
