Personal Ethics and Business Ethics: Bridging the Gap

Introduction: The Link Between Personal and Professional Ethics

In his book Corporation, Be Good! The Story of Corporate Social Responsibility, William C. Frederick (2006) notes that the dichotomy companies face impacts their capacity for ethical decision-making. In the 1950s and 1960s, executives relied on consciences shaped by religious and family values. However, ethical business problems in the 1960s and 1970s revealed that an individual's conscience alone was not adequate. A different skill set was required. "Even if you have a good conscience, it isn't easy to resolve the different problems that land on your desk. It's a different ball game, an enormous jigsaw puzzle to satisfy a range of stakeholders with conflicting interests and demands," Frederick states.

Frederick, along with a number of other researchers, finds that business schools specifically — and higher education in general — are not adequately covering the topic of business ethics. Continuing scandals demonstrate that ethical failures are not attributable to a few "rotten apples" but are systemic issues that need to be addressed before people even begin their careers.

In addition, the connection between personal ethics and business ethics is blurry. Many ethicists and psychologists are challenging the belief that humans can separate their private and professional selves. "We'd like to think there's a crisp line that divides the behaviors we do outside of work and those we engage in at work," says David Gebler, president of Working Values, a business ethics and training company. Yet Gebler and others say that line is growing increasingly blurry (Andrews, 2005). How a person acts in their personal life is indicative of how he or she will act in business.

An Unethical Supervisor: A Case Study in Workplace Anomie

In two instances — one negative and one positive — I found that managers do not separate their values outside of work from their beliefs and actions within it. The first instance occurred when I was working part-time for a woman manager who was very self-centered yet also deeply insecure. Every decision she made was based on "what's in it for me?" Although she held a master's degree, she had jumped from one type of career to another, one position to another. She was also driven by a need for control rooted in her insecurities, requiring everyone around her to follow her directives regardless of whether they were right or wrong.

I was already employed at the company when she was hired as my manager. She immediately took a dislike to me, sensing that I was secure in myself and would not hesitate to question her poor judgments. She deliberately created problems for me in my role, hoping I would quit. Eventually, she placed three letters in my personnel file regarding my work performance that were inaccurate at best and dishonest at worst. These letters gave her grounds to lay me off, which she did. I was informed by the state department of labor that my part-time status created too many complications for them to offer legal support. However, I had the option of escalating the matter to the manager's supervisor, the board — since this was a city-funded organization — and even the city itself.

What concerned me more about this situation was that her behavior was not merely unethical; in some instances it crossed into illegality. She altered employee timesheets and, most often, padded her own. She and her supervisor would take long lunches and go shopping — sometimes for three or four hours — and record this time as "meetings." She also had the option of working from home when the office was closed on Fridays. She rarely came in, but consistently recorded herself as present for the full day.

When I asked other employees to support me by speaking to someone about this conduct, they complained privately but were too afraid of losing their jobs to act. I could not persuade them that presenting a united front would be the most effective approach and that their own positions would not be jeopardized. They continued to voice frustrations among themselves — particularly when they were required to cover for an absent manager. After I lost my job, I spoke with a board member and discovered that this behavior was known not only to the board but to higher-level city officials. It was being ignored and condoned. As the saying goes, "You can't fight city hall."

For the purposes of this paper, this situation illustrated clearly that this manager could not divorce her unethical behavior outside the workplace from her conduct within it. An illuminating article, "Anomie and Ethics at Work" (Tsahuridu, 2006), describes the type of behavior this manager demonstrated. Anomie, as defined by the sociologist Émile Durkheim, refers to a condition of breakdown in social values and a state of demoralization. More recently, Benn (1988) characterized moral anomie in philosophy as moral lawlessness — a state not of freedom, but of a lack of moral orientation.

Tsahuridu (2006) explored three organizations to examine the impact of anomie at work and to determine whether a distinction existed in levels of anomie between individuals' perceptions of their work and non-work lives — in other words, whether people are more likely to feel hopeless and helpless in their professional or personal spheres. She found that efforts to address moral degeneration at work may not be effective until the influence of the work context on employees is well understood. Anomie appears to be an essential element in explaining why certain individuals make amoral decisions in professional settings. In fact, the work situation itself may exacerbate anomie — perhaps making my manager's behavior worse than it would otherwise have been. Ironically, she did treat me noticeably differently in social settings outside work. Meanwhile, she remained in her position, and I moved on to another part-time role.

An Ethical Supervisor: Consistency Between Personal and Professional Values

My second part-time position was with a corporation where my supervisor was the complete opposite of the first. He was confident in himself and his abilities, yet also acknowledged his shortcomings and readily turned to others' expertise when necessary. He believed in team meetings, collaborative decision-making, and an overall spirit of teamwork. His door was always open.

His personal life reflected the same qualities. He was deeply community-minded, committed to volunteering and helping others, and served on several boards while maintaining an active schedule of activities both inside and outside the company. While I cannot say with certainty that he never acted unethically, I never witnessed him do so. In fact, he would frequently comment on news articles about companies exposed by whistleblowers for actions that harmed others. That said, I cannot know the extent to which he would have acted if he witnessed someone else behaving unethically or illegally — particularly if doing so would have jeopardized his own position. Like many employees, he had a family and a mortgage; he needed his job.

Conclusion: A Multifaceted Approach to Business Ethics

The authors of the Desplaces et al. (2007) study found that business courses on ethics, alone, are not enough. Organizations themselves must model ethical behavior — as my second supervisor did — and ensure they have processes in place that encourage and motivate ethical conduct. As both the research and my personal experience suggest, meaningful change requires top-down involvement; without it, reform efforts are unlikely to succeed.

Such efforts by universities and organizations to instill ethical behavior will probably not transform individuals like my first supervisor into a model of virtue. However, the hope is that within a genuinely ethical culture, such a person will either feel uncomfortable enough to leave, or will at least reconsider their actions at work to avoid being dismissed. Ultimately, the path forward lies in combining ethics education with organizational accountability — a multifaceted approach that addresses both the individual and the systems in which they operate.

References

Andrews, L. W. (2005). The nexus of ethics. HR Magazine [electronic form].

Beggs, J. M., & Dean, K. L. (2007). Legislated ethics or ethics education?: Faculty views in the post-Enron era. Journal of Business Ethics, 71, 15–37.

Benn, S. I. (1988). A theory of freedom. Cambridge University Press.

Desplaces, D. E., Melchar, D. E., Beauvais, L. L., & Bosco, S. M. (2007). The impact of business education on moral judgment competence: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(1), 73–87.

Frederick, W. C. (2006). Corporation, be good!: The story of corporate social responsibility. Dog Ear Publishing.

Tsahuridu, E. E. (2006). Anomie and ethics at work. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 163–174.