On the Ethics of "The Whole Enchilada"


For the last several months we have been working on Market 70 - an intentional, integrated approach to moving from being merely a "Christian organization" to being transformational in one's sphere of influence. Of course, ethics is one of the topics on the agenda and we are building it into a module called "Excellence in Process." As in teaching anything, we, ourselves continue to learn. 


What are we learning? Ethics is clearly NOT a separate process to be dealt with in an organization. Rather, it is part of the whole. It touches and is touched by every other thing we do. This isn't really news to anyone who's familiar with ethics, but it does affect how we approach building or evolving our organizations. Unless we lead with ethics in mind, every other process will eventually fall short of its full potential contribution to the whole. Ethics is the basis for quality, relationships, viability, transparency, strategy, etc.


Our linear way of thinking places "ethics" in a list of things to deal with, but in actuality, ethics drives our entire organization. Being consciously "ethical" is the key to excellence throughout "the whole enchilada."

On the Ethics of Being Transparent - post WikiLeaks

My last two Tweets (DailyConscience) raised some questions about the ethics around WikiLeaks and all the players involved in and spotlighted by them. I just ran across this article, though, in Unashamedly Ethical that brings out yet a more important and lasting principle.

By the way, go to UnashamedlyEthical.com and consider signing the pledge. It's more than a fad or a concept, it is a challenge to fundamentally change the way business is conducted.

On the Ethics of Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

I recently wrote on the ethics of eliminating systemic poverty and the business case for doing so.  This week I faced the challenge of living out my own words. My wife and I had an opportunity to offer a spare bedroom to a guy who's out of job and out of a place to live. While we readily agreed to do so, we became aware of our own values clashes. Yes, we want to give, but do we really want someone in our house everyday? Yes, we want to help him out, but do we really want to risk letting someone use our car while we're away? Yes, we want to help him get a job, but do we really want someone using our computer when we're not here?

This points out the difference between ethics and values. Values are what we hold as important. Ethics relate to the decisions we make based on our values. Values clashes happen within us all the time. Our behavioral response to those clashes reveal which values we hold to be most important. While we're not proud of the some of the selfish values we hold, we are relieved that the decisions we made are based on a set of values we can be proud of. 

On the Ethics (and Self Interest) of Eliminating Poverty

Eliminating poverty is not just for politicians and social workers anymore. Read why and how business can get involved - both for the common good, as well as our own self interest.

Read HTML version: http://is.gd/g8jLT- [open in new window]
Listen to MP3 version: http://is.gd/g8jPW- [open in new window]

On the Aftermath of a Ponzi Scheme

Tom Petters was convicted this year of engineering a large Ponzi scheme involving $3.5 billion. Now, a court appointed trustee is trying to recapture as much money as possible to return to the investors. One move made by the trustee creates an ethical dilemma. He has asked employees of Petters Group Worldwide to return bonuses they were paid several years ago. These bonuses range from $5000 to over $2 million and reportedly total some $58 million.

So, here's the ethical question. If you were one of those 70-100 people who received letters from the court appointed trustee asking you to voluntarily return the bonuses, would you?

When I ask myself that question I came up with several other questions that would shape my decision, and I think they make up a good framework for examining the ethics of any actions in any situation.

Was I knowingly involved in something illegal/unethical? (Here's a couple of hints:)

Was my action something I would be embarrassed to make public?

Did I ignore or dismiss any warnings, either internally or from others?

Was my action harmful in any way to others?

If so, was the harm I caused necessary to avoid a greater harm?

Does remediation alleviate the harm caused?

Does remediation cause a greater harm?

These questions address some of the objections I heard when asking colleagues about this news story http://is.gd/fbU4X. Issues like the role an employee may or may not have played; the current economic situation of the employee; whether an employee “should” have been able to sense that something was wrong; whether an employee was an executive or a “soldier.”

So, what would you answer?

Now, more importantly, will you apply questions like those above to your current actions? The last two questions are clearly those that can only be asked after the fact, but the others can be used to gauge present situations. The value of an ethical dilemma is not the intellectual exercise I just posed, but rather the opportunity to clarify our own values and to shape our own behavior based on those values.

On Integrity in Business

When asked what value one holds highest in business, must business people will answer, "Integrity." Time for a reality check - what does "integrity" really mean in your business? How does it play out in behavioral terms?

There's the obvious - we don't steal or cheat. Nice platitudes, but what does that look like in real time business relationships?

Are you habitually late for meetings? Do you take home company office supplies? Do you take a quick side trip with the company truck? Do you run an errand on company time? In all these examples, you are stealing. 

Do you employ people as independent contractors who cannot pass the criteria set by the Wage and Hour people? Do you, as a business owner take unstructured benefits from the company without paying taxes? Do you reverse-engineer patent protected equipment or parts and then make and use them for yourself? Do you install more than one copy of licensed software on your computer? In all these examples, you are stealing.

"No, no," you say, " I mean we treat people with integrity." Really? Do you dodge phone calls from people? Do you extend out the payment time rather than seek funding from the bank? Do you negotiate terms with vendors that you would not be willing to take if you were them? Do you wink at star performers' occasional bending of the rules while holding other employees to the letter of the law? Do you have an unwritten, unspoken expectation that the company comes before family? Are you sloppy in your record keeping, your communications, your own or your building and equipment appearance? In all these examples, you are demonstrating a lack of integrity. 

Next time someone asks you about your values, stop and think about whether you have truly defined what they are IN PRACTICE. Ethics is about behaving according to principles and beliefs. What do your actions say about your values?

On the Ethics of Bosses' Pay in Hard Times

It is very common practice during hard times for business owners to pay themselves last - if at all. An article in CNNMoney .com claims this is a mistake:

1. Pay yourself first
Joe is making a mistake common among small-business owners, says Collins, by paying himself last. Instead, he should pay himself the same salary he would pay someone else to do his job. If that creates red ink, he may have to lay someone off. "If you can't pay your own personal bills, that's a road to ruin," says Collins. "As hard as it is to let good people go, you've got to do it." (Read the article)

What are the ethical dimensions of this approach? (There are clear business dimensions, as well. Watch for these in my free, twice-monthly newsletter. Click on the link to sign up.)

There are several ethical issues to be decided when thinking this through. Ultimately, the business owner has to decide what values drive her/his actions. What are some of the values that could be involved, and what actions would they suggest?

1. The owner's mental, emotional and physical well-being must be in top form so that business development will remain strong or the owner will be able to drive recovery. Under this belief, Collins' advice would suggest the owner pay himself/herself well enough to insure against any undue suffering.
2. The owner has a fiduciary and moral obligation to employees. Under this belief, the owner's behavior must include some way to provide for employees and their families. However, even this is not clear-cut. Does one support employees at the expense of the owner? If so, is there any resulting threat to the long-term viability of the company?
3. All employees contribute to the success of the company and therefore should be treated equally.  In this case, it would seem everyone would take a hit and share the burden. By the way, how does this value and resulting behavior stand up in light of current compensation practices? ARE all treated (payed) equally?
4. There's a greater good involved in providing for employees who are in the most immediate income-producing positions. This would entail the owner taking a serious look at what she/he contributes to the bottom line of the company and perhaps taking a short-term hit, or, if she/he is a producer, letting others go as in Collins' suggestion, above.

There are probably other values to be examined, too, but we see how many values are competing and making the decision for action more difficult. Make no mistake about it, the owner's behavior IS an ethical issue, even if he/she is not aware of it. The owner's actions exhibit underlying values that affect everyone - perhaps for years to come.

Before accepting "common business wisdom," think through the values you hold and the message you send. Ask yourself if those actions are consistent with your beliefs and the way you want to run the company.