Ethical decision making: are you really exploring the alternatives?

Like the baking of a cake, ensuring the right level and quality of inputs (ingredients), is key to effective decision making. However, one of the most important ingredients, ethics, appears to have become lost when you consider the continued flow of corporate misconduct scandals e.g. Wells Fargo, Monsanto, Oxfam etc.

Whilst many books could be written as to the root causes behind these scandals, it is clear that there has been a failure by corporations to appropriately integrate ethics into decision making practices, leading to ethical fading and blindness, often motivated by short term incentives and self interest.

Reflecting on these developments, this article highlights some of the key steps and considerations that should form part of any effective ethical decision making process. More specifically, it focuses on the stage at which stakeholders contemplate and assess the alternative options available to them prior to arriving at a final (and most ethical) decision.

General principles

When dealing with complex issues, particularly those with ethical considerations, there are likely to be many variables and inputs that can impact on a final decision. The following general factors should be considered when evaluating each of the alternatives:

• Clear identification of all stakeholders involved, internal and external. This should include those who are or may be impacted by the proposed alternative (Primary and secondary).
• Consider the practical implications, both positive and negative, of each alternative solution. How are the stakeholders affected by each alternative e.g. new and existing customer?
• Consider the positive and negative consequences of the alternatives and the probability of their occurrence (with facts – leave biases at the door). Include broader systemic consequence considerations e.g. what message would decision send or how would the decision be viewed in the public?
• Keep in mind that the more the evaluation is fact-based, the more confident you can be that the expected outcome will occur. Knowing the ratio of fact-based evaluation versus non-fact-based evaluation allows you to gauge how confident you can be in the proposed impact of each alternative.
• Identify and challenge any personal or collective cognitive barriers/biases.
• Identify any actual or potential conflict of interests.

Beyond these general principles, the following specific inputs should be obtained in the evaluation process:

1. Value Considerations: What are the applicable professional standards and company codes of conduct? Measure the proposed action / behaviour against the espoused corporate values and behavioural expectations. Will the action realise or conflict with values? 
2. Company Policy, Procedures & Guidelines: Identify and assess the relevant requirements related for each alternative. Are the proposed actions / behaviours consistent? If yes, is the relevant policy, procedure or guideline appropriate / effective?
3. Legal Considerations: Identify the relevant legal obligations. Is the law silent? What are the rights / duties of the impacted stakeholders under the relevant laws (General and specific) e.g. duty of care, fiduciary, confidentiality etc.? Are the proposed actions / behaviours consistent? When in doubt, revert to point 1.

Assessing the alternatives

When the analysis of the alternatives has been collated, there may be more than one option available, some which may present ethical dilemmas, such as having two negative or two positive options. Whilst each situation will vary in terms of complexity, the following questions are provided as a guide for a deeper analysis of the alternative options.

Questions to consider in prioritising alternative options

• Have any promises/ expectations been made? Should we honour them? 
• Will the alternative solve the identified problem or issue?
• Will the alternative violate the company’s policies, procedures or guidelines?
• Will the alternative conform with the company's values and/or code of ethics (professional codes of ethics)?
• Will the alternative meet (should exceed) legal requirements?
• Will the alternative negatively impact an individual's or the company’s rights?
• Would anyone be exploited by the alternative and, if so, exactly whom and why, and how can this be avoided?  
• What alternative is most likely to offer the best overall consequences, short and long term? 
• What alternative is most likely to prevent the most harm, short and long term, to stakeholders?  
• What do we honestly believe another reasonable group of individuals would choose given the same circumstances? 

Ethical filters – further assess the alternatives against the following questions:

• Which alternative will produce the most good and do the least harm?
• Which alternative best respects the rights of all who have a stake?
• Which alternative treats people equally or proportionately?
• Which alternative best serves the community as a whole i.e. not just some members?
• Which alternative is most consistent with the individual and collective virtues of the company?
• Which alternative is best aligned to the sort of people we want to be? 
• What alternative would serve as a good example for others in a similar situation to follow? 

Reflection – consider the following points for proposed alternatives:

• Looking back, will the alternative seem like a good idea a year from now? Think about how the decision will be remembered when you are gone.
• Could you make your decision public and feel good about it? 
• Consider what your relevant community members would consider to be the kind of decision that an individual of integrity would make in this situation.
• Disclosure rule - what would you do if the media reported your action and everyone was to read it.
• What is the perceived image of the company in the community?
• What choice would all stakeholders be most willing to live with? 
• Does the solution ensure meeting our duties as a good corporate citizen?

Final words

There a numerous ethical theories and frameworks on decision making, with no one necessarily being perfect for every situation. However, the onus is on companies to embrace an understanding and awareness that integrates ethics into key decision making practices. And in doing so, it is hoped that the continued trend in misconduct scandals will start to recede, as the interest of all stakeholders are given appropriate consideration, and the companies, along with their moral agents, elect to do the right thing.

Acknowledgement: I wanted to thank @Michael Kuckein for his valuable feedback which I have gratefully incorporated into this article. _________________________________________________

As an interdependent consultant, I work with organisations to review existing conduct / ethics and culture frameworks, proposing alternative methodologies and collaborating to tailor solutions to meet organisational objectives. If you would like to discuss this or any other of my services please message me or call on + 353 083 817 8715.