Business Ethics Three Common Characteristics of Poor

Business Ethics Three common characteristics of poor decision making are the following errors in logic: appeals to pity, ad hominem arguments, and arguments from authority. Appeals to pity do not focus on the victim and try to create pity for a victim in order to elicit a certain result. However, these appeals to pity frequently fail to adequately link the lobbied-for action with the victim's predicament. That someone is in a bad situation is not a reason to act unless that action would remedy the victim.

Moreover, it is not a reason to act if that action would harm a person who was not responsible for the victim's predicament. Therefore, while an ethical decision-maker should be compassionate, he should not have his decisions dictated by pity. Another characteristic of poor decision making is listening to the ad hominem attack. Ad hominem attacks attack the character of a person rather the substance of their argument.

In an election year, ad hominem attacks are very common; whether Obama had a Hawaiian birth certificate (though no one contested that his mother was an American, and, therefore, even had he been born abroad he would have been a natural-born American citizen) and how many wives a candidate like Gingrich has had become greater issues than their positions on foreign and domestic policy. Allowing personal feelings about the person making the argument to impact someone's assessment of the argument is an element in poor decision making.

Finally, listening to argument from authority is another characteristic of poor decision making. Many times people decide that a person in authority is an expert on a topic, and they except that person's conclusions without evaluating their arguments. The problem with that is that even authorities make mistakes. Moreover, frequently authorities have agendas. Taking an argument or facts as the truth based on who states them, without independently evaluating those facts or arguments is a hallmark of poor decision-making. 2.

Three ways of resisting requests to act unethically: recognize unethical requests and bosses; buying time; and finding a mentor and a peer support group. The first step to resisting requests to act unethically is that one has to be able to recognize those requests. A person needs to pay attention to his bosses and coworkers and critically evaluate their behavior.

Do they generally act in an ethical manner, or do they engage in behavior that the person views as unethical? If they do, then a person needs to be certain to evaluate the ethical appropriateness of any request from that person. The next step is to buy time.

It may be difficult to outright refuse an unethical request, particularly if they person making the request is in a position of power or authority, but a person can put off doing the task, and buy themselves time to evaluate the situation and seek help from others. Finally, in order to resist requests to act unethically, a person should develop an ethical support network, ideally in the person's organization.

Identify ethics leaders in one's place of business, or at least in one's industry, and seek out their advice in ethically questionable scenarios. 3. Ethical leadership is not about making a single big ethical decision, but about making a series of smaller ethical decisions that establish a pattern of ethical behavior. Perhaps the greatest way to ensure one's own personal ethical behavior is to exercise the golden rule.

It appears in various formats in different cultures and religions, but the essence of the golden rule is to avoid doing anything to someone else that you would not want them to.