Analyzing the basics of ethical thinking for leaders and organizations in society

This chapter will introduce the basic constructs of moral thinking.  We will begin by defining the terms morality and ethics.   After we have created a working knowledge of the terminology, we will proceed to look at the roots of moral decision-making in our society by tracing the factors that have contributed to the western societal framework.  We will look at the many characteristics, including inherent tensions, that determine individual morality and societal ethics, while spending time focusing on the inherent legacy and discussion found in that interaction.  At the end of this section, different conceptions of the deeper components of moral theory and its interaction in society will be introduced, with constructive and practical outcomes that will help us to determine how best to approach ethical outcomes. This will include suggestions of how to become more aware of moral decision-making and how to avoid potential problems organizations or leaders might face, as the consider problems that we all have to address personally, professionally and also in a societal and/or global sense.

Key Definitions

Let’s begin with basic definitions that pertain to the study of moral philosophy and “good” decision making.  Morality is the term used to describe the constructs of human conduct and/or values.  At its base, morality is formulated on the understanding of what is preferred behavior, in both an individual and societal sense, depending on the context.  It is often in the interaction of personal and societal factors that thinkers have contemplated the depth and uniqueness of this study.  Though many theorists differ in their interpretation of where morality comes from or how personally or collectively it impacts us, experts are in general agreement that morality is a combination of reason and “sense”, that we as individuals, employ or fall back on to determine right from wrong or our expectations of ourselves and others.  Using the writings of Plato in commentary on Socrates, the definition focuses on morality as the determination of “how we ought to live”.  This understanding of morality directly coincides with our beliefs about the future and how we conceive of the way the world, the people, and the factors that determine that reality, should come to be, and the end result we desire.

Ethics is the formal study of the personal and collective definitions of morality.  Ethics focuses on how we, individually or collectively, conceive or determine morality.  It also represents the constant reevaluation and thinking behind the decisions that have led us to these conclusions.

The term “ethics” is derived from the Greek term “ethos”.  This term was most closely connected to the Greek concept of “proper character or manners.” The definition of ethics, whether used as a discipline or conceptually, is focused on the pursuit of objective Truth in order to determine better outcomes on a daily basis for everyone, whatever the factors or the results.  Inherent in the study of ethics is a crucial understanding of the concept of objectivity.

Moral reasoning is the series of factors, arguments, and thinking patterns that humans use or engage in to determine what the basic values or constructs of proper moral judgments should be.  The term moral reasoning focuses on why and/or how we as people achieve the end result of a proper way of living life.  Though this is obviously complicated, the fact remains that all of us engage in this reasoning on a daily basis and throughout our lives, whether we consciously know it or not.

Two questions are at the core of this evaluation:

What is the best course of thought and action required to improve our awareness of this reasoning?

And second, how do determine its best outcome personally and in as we interact and build community with others?

All three of these terms are crucial to consider as we work towards the conceptual goal of Truth.  It is inclusive of how to more carefully and diligently read individuals and how we know ourselves.  By paying more close attention to these constructs and studying them in greater depth, a good thinker can be more understanding of the factors that determine better decisions and of course, in turn, avoid the prospect of decisions that could be very costly.

Crucial Moral Concepts

Building on the first three definitions, we can now turn our attention to two concepts that are crucial to ethical study.  The term virtue is defined as the concept of moral excellence or right moral conduct.  This term is also applied to a field of ethical study referred to as “virtue ethics”.  Individuals who believe that there is a core of attributes that are central to the human condition that we can determine or “call upon” as preferred attributes of human behavior, have been labeled as “virtue” philosophical thinkers.  These theories are most prevalently studied in the framework of Ancient Greek philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, to name perhaps the most famous.  We will look at their views in the future.  Many of these thinkers believe that proper ethical thinking becomes self-evident as individuals learn more about themselves and the world around them.

From that wisdom development, concepts of preferred behavior emerge.  A good example is courage.  Using reason, it becomes clear that being a courageous person is always more desirable than being an uncourageous person.  Though people can choose to be “courageous” or uncourageous”, the mere fact that, personally and collectively, this is a common preferred behavior, leads many to the believe that such a concept may in fact be a virtue or an element of right moral conduct.  In our study, pay particular attention or think about what determines a better or wiser thinker and what it requires of us. ”  In Damon Horowitz’s 3 minute talk on teaching philosophy in prison, listen to his assessment of the importance and power of philosophical training and thought as it relates determining the practical nature of the definition of virtue.  What are the essential components of this conversation that we should consider as we contemplate what it means to pursue ethical thinking?  Often those components of wisdom or attributes observed in human experience coincide with the concepts that thinkers of the ages have determined are central to the “virtue” ethical excellence elements.

The other term that is essential to the discussion of morality and decision-making is the definition of values.  The baseline definition of the term “values” pertains to the characteristics of human thought and action that are intrinsically preferred or held in high esteem.  For our purposes, think of the term “values” or “value” as the individual characteristics, like courage given above, that makeup the concept of virtuous or right moral conduct.  These two terms remind us that there may be ideals or concepts that are present in our decision-making on a daily basis.  The key is to identify them, to be sure those ideals are central to objective truth and not just what we want, and then to consciously allow them to guide us in all aspects of our lives.

Basic Constructs of Ethical Study

Descriptive Ethics + Analytical Ethics = Normative Ethics

The determination of values and/or virtues can be seen in the struggle of leaders and organizations over time.  In the twentieth century, and continuing into the twenty-first century, the world has been dominated by unethical decisions that have resulted in unethical outcomes.  In the wake of such damaging outcomes, people are more astutely focusing on ethics and ethical practice.  In doing so, they are considering greater thoughtful procedures as they scope through risk management, organizational function and productivity, market positioning, and civic responsibility. What has emerged in greater clarity is the understanding that profits and ethical decision-making at all levels, can be integrated partners if consistent and committed long term success is kept at the forefront of individual consciousness.

In order to begin to study ethical options, we need to clearly define a frame to understand how to study ethics.  In doing this, it becomes clear that ethics is complicated and not merely a formulation of what is only “wrong” or “right” but a concentrated and in-depth study into the various segments of human thought and behavior.  I term this complexity the equation of ethical study.  There are three components.

1. Descriptive ethics is the branch of ethical study that considers ethical analysis in the context of a neutral representation of the perceptions or facts of any ethical situation.  It involves the lengthy and careful practice of attempting to identify the ethical issues and values inherent in the evaluation process.
2. Analytical ethics, centers on the argument and logic found in the ethical opinions and assessments used to determine the ethical issues, values, or outcomes.  This approach builds on descriptive ethics by considering in greater depth the construct of ethical determination.  Analytical ethics considers the ethical outcome based upon other decisions, especially those decisions that are disconnected with others and the impact such decisions or outcomes might have in that consideration.
3. Normative ethics approaches the study of ethics with the belief, according to Kitson and Campbell in Case Studies in Business Ethics (2001), of seeking “to develop and defend judgments of right and wrong, good and bad, and virtue and vice, to arrive at an understanding of what Truth is.”  This final evaluation tool process focuses on determining the best possible outcome after solid and productive consideration of descriptive and analytical components.  Normative is usually the stage of the ethical evaluation process that most people are most familiar with as it often leads to a decision or determination of what is “right” or “wrong” for an individual, group, organization or society.

These three layers, as May describes in Case Studies in Organizational Communication, make up the many different conceptualizations inherent in ethical analysis.  All are equally important, but it is imperative that we pay attention to which layer to ensure that we consider descriptive and analytical ethical standing as equally important if we hope to make the best possible ethical decision in any situation.

Prominent Ethical Tensions

Foundational vs Situational Tensions

Individual vs Community Tensions

Beyond these layers of ethical study, good critical thinkers must be aware of certain tensions that are present between individuals that are crucial to ethical study evaluation.  Such tensions exist in our world and are at the root of ethical dilemmas.

The first tension focuses on the interaction between foundational  and situational arguments.

• Foundational ethical arguments are based upon the idea that proper ethical formulation is based upon “universal” constructs of ethical thinking or objective conceptualization.  From this standpoint, ethical evaluation is determined by objective evaluation that the individual or organization using this approach deems to be true, regardless of context or situation.
• Situational ethical arguments are formulated on the belief that ethical thinking is a product of consistent change and subjective conceptualizations based upon unique circumstances or each instance in which an ethical evaluation must take place.  This presents a tension as each perspective can often be at the root of ethical difference and misunderstanding.

The other tension highlights the moral stances of ideologies linked to individualism and collectivism.

• Individualistic ideology argues that true ethical evaluation and determination is inherently formulated on the individual and his or her entity and responsibility.
• The collective ethical perspective argues the opposite.

Ethical decision-making is best constructed through one’s ability to decipher the best course of thought and evaluation through group affiliation and agreement.  Thinkers must consider the interplay of the rights and responsibilities of individuals with the rights and responsibilities of communities found in any society or organization (of people).  A better understanding of the framework of ethical interaction allows us to more deeply contemplate productive outcomes to some of our most difficult moral problems.  Awareness of these tensions is a start to become more productive in helping to arrive at more ethical outcomes and defray possible misunderstandings around thought and behavior of those involved.

Moral Reasoning and Determination is not only…  A matter of opinion or personal taste.

Central to the discussion of moral decision-making is this essential question:  isn’t morality simply a matter of opinion or personal taste?  This question represents a standard assumption on the part of many.  Other people view morality, ethical thinking, moral reasoning, virtue, and value or values, as simply relativistic or subjective.  The term “relativistic” refers to the belief that our understanding of Truth (or what we believe in) is based on our own evaluation or perspective. While it can be argued that truth comes from a subjective conception and that such a viewpoint carries great merit as we understand perception, thinking and uniqueness. It is also true that moral reasoning or morality must probe more deeply than simply a belief or opinion we possess.  Good thinking requires that we investigate, process and evaluate as many components of possible ethical dilemmas and not only the use of our background, quick assessments or sole emotional reactions to determine better practice or outcomes.

Relativistic statements of individuals must go further than a simple assertion that they might have on a subject; instead, as the philosopher Dr. James Rachels explains in The Elements of Moral Philosophy, we must employ moral reasoning and virtuous decision-making solidly and constructively, building on reasoning that is supported by soundness of thought and consistency of action.  This Starburst candy advertisement demonstrates how important it is to determine when opinion or personal taste should lead us in evaluating the Truth and how we might begin to use reason to help us transcend evaluations that might be problematic or untrue.

Basic Ethical Constructs of the Western World

Though there are many codes of moral conduct and varying traditions of ethical perspective we could study, I have limited the scope of this course to a series of very strong contributors to our western world today in order to show how ethical theory and conception has come to define our reality.  These factors have become prominent, in some ethical determinations in the Western World and in the world at large.  As we consider the climate of increasing globalized networks built upon some of these notions, it is increasingly important to constructively understand and evaluate the roots of such basic conceptions of morality.

In tracing the background of morality and ethical conduct, the long conversational history becomes clear.  We can find that important modern conceptions linked to the world of the ancient world of the Greeks and Romans.  Our presumptions of good business, proper conduct, and even the truth of reality, have been shaped by the writings and beliefs of individuals predating the fourth century BC.  Central to the Greco-Roman world was the philosophical viewpoint that the meaning of life was somehow connected to this idea of creating a “better life” or moving towards a greater sense of “progress”.

This idea is still present in almost every aspect of our world today and can be fundamentally seen in western culture.  This concept of “betterment” or “good” living has impacted our concept of decision-making, creating a society that focuses on growth and also the belief that there are better ways to approach various subjects and our lives.

One key component of this Greek belief of “betterment” can be traced to their strong ethical notion of citizenry and civic responsibility.  Citizens have rights given to them by circumstance or situation; but with rights come responsibilities required of those with privilege.  The Romans took this concept further adhering to the belief that the true notion of justice were steeped in ethical importance.  They attempted to setup courts and impartial authority figures connected with the Roman authorities who were given the task of helping those in conflict to resolve their issues through productive and just outcomes.  The idea was that a society only operates ethically when people are treated fairly and problems are solved so that conflict can be diminished.

The second component is the influence that Christian values and virtues on the development of accepted social norms of thought and behavior in the western world.  Regardless of one’s religious affiliation, the western world has been developed using the beliefs Christian principles passed down since the Middle Ages by the Roman Catholic Church.

During this time, many of the social norms espoused by the Christian establishment became the backbone of European society and laid the foundation for individual and organizational behavior either through law or through cultural expectations.  Many of those expectations often associated with Hebraic belief expectations, such as the Ten Commandments, were combined with the teachings of Jesus Christ found in the New Testament.  Those expectations became encapsulated in such Christian creeds and also lists of behavioral expectations such as The Seven Deadly Sins decided by Christian leaders through council decisions.  These decisions were often instituted as laws that kingdoms adopted.  Many concepts of societal values such as what is true justice, as well as characteristics of personal values were taught, reinforced, and past down generation to generation both societally and individually.  In addition, these values or moral expectations were also taught and reinforced in direct conjunction with the Church’s practices.

Beyond the first earlier western influences we have discussed, there have also been economic ideologies that have come to shape moral thinking and evaluation.  Milton Friedman, one of the most prominent economists of the twentieth century argued, in a famous 1970 essay, termed Friedman’s Thesis, as well as his early text Capitalism and Freedom, “the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits” arguing that the role of business should be to maximize profits and not to be concerned with elements of moral responsibility or participate in determining moral “rights” and “wrongs’ within society.  According to his evaluation, institutions, especially for-profit organizations, should only concern themselves with economic decisions that would increase the profitability of shareholders and in this way, morality and market interaction would dictate proper moral decision-making.

The freedom of organizations to pursue their best interest, namely profit, should determine organizational attitude and behavior as long as they obey the law.  This belief functioned under the assumption that moral assessments should be reserved for the citizens who would make those decisions through their purchase of the products or services presented and through the regulations created by legislators who represented those citizens.  This approach had a profound influence on how western society determined the best moral course of action, arguing that the market would be the best assessor of moral attitude and behavior.

Another layer of this debate centers itself on the tension between philanthropy and charity.  Philanthropy, the offering of financial or resource help to an individual, organization or society in need with some benefit for the giving organization or individual, has often been interpreted by many as a productive way to invest in a beneficial, moral manner in order to address important ethical problems.  It has been argued as the best option in addressing moral social needs.  In doing so, though, the belief is that what is beneficial for those who need the help should be linked to the benefit of the participating organization.  Charity, in contrast, is centered on the idea that benefit of any kind should be offered without the mutual requirement of exchange.  The debate over what is proper and productive “help” and the morality of how to best offer it as we consider economic end results, has been at the crux of moral evaluation in the western world and linked to the debate around Friedman’s Thesis.  Some of that debate has been influenced by moral presumptions connected with the value of work and individual responsibility.  This also includes the assumption that profitability is most important and should influence how we evaluate the most moral course of action.

The moral complexity of individual and society in western society…Pluralism, dualism, and monism

As alluded to in the last section, the complexity of the interaction of individual and societal beliefs is important to consider in understanding the context of western ethical thinking.  Western society has consistently attempted, through the institution of such documents as the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights 1688, and The Constitution of the United States, to name a few, to more clearly define the relationship between what is individually acceptable behavior and what collectively accepted as permissible.

Rousseau, the famous French-Swiss philosopher of the eighteenth century, referred to this as the concept of a social contract.  At the heart of this interaction is a moral societal value referred to as justice.  Perhaps one of the most controversial legal thinkers of the twentieth century, John Rawls, a prominent professor of law and philosophy at Harvard, asserts that we must be knowledgeable of the role of “institutions” or groups of people in the process of moral decision-making.  At the root of the interaction of personal, institutional (which is really best defined as any group of individuals), and society at large, is the philosophical conception of whether Truth, defined objectively, can be found in a dualistic thinking framework or a monistic thinking conceptualization.

Dualism is the belief that two concepts, ideals, or factors, by their interplay or lack therein, determine Truth; while monism refers to the belief that Truth is a reflection of one concept, ideal or factor.  For a thinker, it is imperative to be able to determine whether problem-solving takes into consideration a more dualistic, or perhaps even pluralistic, or multiple factor approach or a more monistic framework.  As we struggle with proper judgments, one will inevitably come to the conclusion that proper conduct and decision-making, as well as good critical thinking must incorporate a solid and reliable set of rules of conduct or expectations that is inclusive of as many approaches or perspectives as possible while considering the need to determine ethical goals or ideals to progress towards.

Dilemmas at the Heart of Ethical Thinking…

1. Justice vs. mercy
2. Truth vs. loyalty
3. Individual vs. community
4. Short term goals vs. long term goals

To further our understanding of ethical thinking, it is useful to dissect moral problems within the context of “value pairings.”  Rushworth Kidder breaks ethical issues into four major categories that should help us assess moral decision-making in order to highlight some of the more important western societal values.  He argues in How Good People Make Tough Choices:  Resolving the Dilemmas of Ethical Living, (1995) that all difficult ethical dilemmas have at their core, many of the following series of troubling pairings that make it challenging to determine the best moral outcome.

Justice versus mercy, forces us to consider how we should uphold proper expectations for attitudes and behaviors, emphasizing the belief that everyone should receive what they aptly deserve within society.  This includes the belief that taking responsibility for one’s self is important while balancing the belief that it is valuable to consider when to offer leniency to those who might not deserve it or someone who hasn’t taken responsibility or might not be deserving.

Truth (objective) versus loyalty, presents the dilemma of how we determine when we or society should adhere to the Truth regardless of loyalty and when loyalty to ourselves, others or institutions, might be the most moral course of action.

The construct of individual versus community tension, compels us to consider the varied interests of the individual versus the needs and/or desires of a greater community.  This moral dilemma can be present in many different facets of society.

Finally, Kidder iterates that the final dilemma we should consider is the clash between short-term and long-term goal-setting in situations.  There are often very compelling cases for when we should choose long term over short term goals or vice versa, but knowing when to make the right decision in the right situation is often difficult to determine.  The importance of considering these four dilemmas can not be understated when we evaluate the importance of better critical thinking with the end result of more ethical outcomes.  Listen to Patrick Awuah’s discussion (17 minutes), as he uses his experience to emphasize the importance of being a “thinking, moral” leader and how one should look for opportunities to encourage those traits in others.  Making ethical decisions is not easy but is needed.

The origin of Ethical Determination

Differing perspectives on moral determination have been considered in western society for centuries.  As a result, many differing viewpoints have emerged over time.  It is important to contemplate the thoughts of some of the greatest thinkers in order to analyze what is truly at the core of proper moral reasoning and understand what many people today might conclude.

David Hume, a Scottish philosopher of the eighteenth century, espoused the viewpoint that people determine what is “right” or “wrong” through experiences filtered by their senses.  Hume’s famous statement that humans are nothing more than “a bundle of perceptions” makes claim that the core of who individually are is directly tied to our perceptions or the ways in which we interpret the world.  Though perception, as a process, may be considered universal in the sense that we, as humans, all participate in it or employ the phenomena, he is quick to point out that each one of us is diverse in those experiences.

Karl Marx, the famous mid-nineteenth century philosopher is known primarily for his work The Communist Manifesto. Marx wrote that the root of ethical thinking is found in the economic constraints under which humans exist.  He argued that the cause and effect relationship of the struggle over the modes of production, personally and collectively, determines what is “right” or “wrong”.  The struggle over material goods, between those who have and those who have not, and how that relationship is worked in society, outlines and determines ethical thinking or morality.

The last and most controversial, is the work of psychologist and psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud.  Freud believed that ethical thinking is directly tied to our subconscious found.  In the interaction of the id, ego, and superego that we find the real motivations for ethical decision-making.  Therefore, morality is based upon our “hidden desires” or “what we really want” when played out against other influences such as societal expectations and/or the interests of others; this reflects the central feature of who we are as individuals but also the weighs that interest against the interest of others.

By beginning to contemplate the potential motivating factors that determine ethical thinking in people, we become much more careful in how we think through matters that pertain to decision-making.  In western society, any thinkers have come to radically different perspectives on what determines ethical thought and action.

Questions at the Root of the Ethical Decision-Making Process

At the root of ethical decision-making are four initial questions that must be contemplated with the goal of finding answers.