ETHICS and HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
ETHICS and HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
By
VIKRAM KARVE
Can Ethics and Business co-exist? Or are the two mutually
exclusive?
Is Ethics relevant in Business Management in today’s world? Or is
"Business Ethics" an oxymoron, not relevant in today's business and
corporate environment?
Is there such a thing as Ethical Fitness?
When recruiting new people, or promoting/appointing persons to
senior / sensitive positions, a number of attributes ( Hard Skills and Soft
Skills) like Professional Competence, Managerial Proficiency, Domain-specific
or Technical skills, and pertinent soft skills comprising leadership,
communication, behavioural and emotional aspects, and even physical and medical
fitness are assessed, evaluated and given due consideration.
But does anyone evaluate a candidate’s Ethical Fitness
before recruitment or appointment?
No, I am not talking about the routine verification of antecedents
or background integrity checks. I am talking of assessing Ethical Fitness.
Ethical fitness refers to ensuring that people are in proper moral
shape to recognize and address ethical dilemmas. Ensuring Ethical fitness in a
proactive manner will result in preventive, rather than corrective, Ethical
Management.
Before launching any inquiry pertaining to the concept of Ethical
Fitness, it is necessary to explore the moral dimension. Moral development is a
prerequisite to ethical behaviour; in fact, a sine qua non for ethical fitness.
Kohlberg offers a handy framework for delineating the stage each of us has
reached with respect to personal moral development.
Stage 1. Physical
consequences determine moral behaviour.
At this stage of personal moral development, the individual’s
ethical behaviour is driven by the decision to avoid punishment or by deference
to power. Punishment is an automatic response of physical retaliation. The
immediate physical consequences of an action determine its goodness or badness.
Such moral behaviour is seen in boarding schools, military training academies
etc. where physical punishment techniques are prevalent with a view to
inculcate the attributes of obedience and deference to power. The individual behaves
in a manner akin to the Pavlovian dog.
Stage 2. Individual
needs dictate moral behaviour.
At this stage, a person’s needs are the person’s primary ethical
concern. The right action consists of what instrumentally satisfies your own
needs. People are valued in terms of their utility. Example: “I will help him
because he may help me in return – you scratch my back, I will scratch yours.”
Stage 3. Approval
of others determines moral behaviour.
This stage is characterized by decision where the approval of
others determines the person’s behaviour. Good behaviour is that which pleases
or helps others within the group. The good person satisfies family, friends and
associates. “Everybody is doing it, so it must be okay.” One earns approval by being
conventionally “respectable” and “nice.” Sin is a breach of the expectations of
the social order – “log kya kahenge?” is the leitmotif, and conformance with
prevailing ‘stereotypes’ the order of the day.
Stage 4. Compliance
with authority and upholding social order are a person’s primary ethical
concerns.
“Doing one’s duty” is the primary ethical concern. Consistency and
precedence must be maintained. Example: “I comply with my superior’s
instructions because it is wrong to disobey my senior”. Authority is seldom
questioned. “Even if I feel that something may be unethical, I will
unquestioningly obey all orders and comply with everything my boss says because
I believe that the boss is always right.”
Stage 5. Tolerance
for rational dissent and acceptance of rule by the majority becomes the primary
ethical concern.
Example: “ Although I
disagree with her views. I will uphold her right to have them.” The right
action tends to be defined in terms of general individual rights, and in terms
of standards that have been critically examined and agreed upon by the whole
society. (eg) The Constitution. The freedom of the individual should be limited
by society only when it infringes upon someone else’s freedom.
Stage 6. What is
right is viewed as a matter of individual conscience, free choice and personal
responsibility for the consequences.
Example: “There is no external threat that can force me to make a
decision that I consider morally wrong.” An individual who reaches this stage
acts out of universal ethical principles.
Moral development is in no way correlated with intellectual
development or your position in the hierarchy or factors like rank, seniority,
status, success or earnings, salary, material wealth. In the words of Alexander
Orlov, an ex-KGB Chief, “Honesty and Loyalty may be often more deeply ingrained
in the make-up of simple and humble people than in men of high position. A man
who was taking bribes when he was a constable does not turn honest when he
becomes the Chief of Police. The only thing that changes in the size of the
bribe. Weakness of character and inability to withstand temptation remains with
the man no matter how high he climbs.” Ethical traits accompany a man to the
highest rungs of his career.
In a nutshell the governing
factors pertaining to six stages of Moral Development which
determine Ethical Fitness may be summarized as:
FEAR – Stage 1
NEEDS – Stage 2
CONFORMANCE – Stage 3
COMPLIANCE – Stage4
CONSENSUS – Stage 5
CONSCIENCE & FREE
WILL – Stage 6
Before we try to delve into exploring how to evaluate Ethical Fitness, let us
briefly ponder on the concepts of Ethical Susceptibility and Ethical Vulnerability.
Ethical Susceptibility is your inability to avoid ethical dilemmas.
Ethical Susceptibility is
environment dependent (on external factors) like, for example, your job, your
boss, colleagues and subordinates, or the persons around you, or even the
‘prevalent organizational culture’.
Ethical Vulnerability
is your inability to withstand succumbing in the given ethical dilemmas
/situations. It is dependent
on your internal stage of moral development in the given
ethical situation.
Whereas being in an
ethical dilemma is not in your control, to act in an ethical manner in the
prevailing situation is certainly in your control.
Ethical vulnerability
is a measure of the ease with which a man be ethically compromised, especially in an ethically
poor climate. In situations where the ethical susceptibility is high, morally
strong people (ethically non-vulnerable) should be appointed and conversely,
only in jobs/situations where ethical susceptibility is low should ethically
vulnerable persons be permitted.
If the environment is not ethically conducive, a person can
intellectually inwardly reach stage 6 but deliberately outwardly masquerade and
remain morally at stage 4 as he may find that he has to sacrifice too much to
reach stage 6. This can be particularly seen in most hierarchical organizations
where most “smart” employees make an outward preference of being at stage 3 or
4 (Conformance and Compliance) in order to avoid jeopardizing their careers,
even if internally they have achieved higher ethical states. This Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde schizophrenic
moral approach is at the heart of many ethical dilemmas people encounter in
their professional lives and may result in internal stress due to ethical
confusion.
Whenever two
individuals at different stages of moral development interact with each other,
both of them try to force or manoeuvre the other into their own appreciation of
the ethical situation, thus leading to conflict.
In a formal hierarchical setup, the players in the chain may not
be at similar stages of moral development thereby leading to ethical dissonance
in the system. Where the ethical susceptibility is high, morally strong people
(less vulnerable) should be appointed and conversely, in only such jobs where
ethical susceptibility is low should ethically weak persons be permitted.
What is your stage of
personal moral development?
Be honest with yourself and recall the decisions you made in
recent ethical situations.
The six stages of moral development are valuable landmarks as they
tell you approximately where you are and what changes you will have to make in
yourself to move to a higher level of moral development. The ultimate goal is
to engage in ethical decision making at stage 6. However, the level that you do
reach will depend on your ethical commitment, your ethical consciousness and
your ethical competence.
Food for Thought
What do you do if your boss is at a lower stage of moral
development than you?
Do you masquerade and make pretence of being at the “appropriate”
stage of what moral development and practice situational ethics to reap maximum
benefits.
This Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde schizophrenic ‘situational ethics’
approach may cause your outer masquerade to turn into inner reality.
Do you want that to happen? Think about it!
Is there a need to assess Ethical Fitness in business and managerial
situations?
Or is "Business Ethics" an oxymoron, not relevant in
today's business environment?
Most importantly, can Ethics and Business co-exist? Or are the two
mutually exclusive?
Dear Reader, what do you think? Please
comment.
VIKRAM
KARVE
Copyright ©
Vikram Karve 2009
Vikram Karve
has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be
identified as the author of
this work
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve
|
|
