Ethical “reference” tests Bedroom to Boardroom (different
advertisement
Ethical “reference” tests David A. Whetten & Kim S. Cameron, “Developing Management Skills,” 5th Ed., 2002, Prentice Hall Front Page test: o o Would I be embarrassed if my decision became a headline in the local newspaper? Would I feel comfortable describing my actions or decision to a customer or stockholder? Golden rule test: o Would I be willing to be treated in the same manner? Dignity and liberty test o o o Bedroom to Boardroom (different standards?) Are the dignity and liberty of others preserved by this decision? Is the basic humanity of the affected parties enhanced? Are their opportunities expanded or curtailed? Equal treatment test: o o Are the rights, welfare, and betterment of minorities and lower-status people given full consideration? Does this decision benefit those with privilege but without merit? Personal gain test: o o Is an opportunity for personal gain clouding my judgment? Would I make the same decision if the outcome did not benefit me in any way? Congruence test: o o Is this decision or action consistent with my espoused personal principles? Does it violate the spirit of any organizational policies or laws? Procedural justice test: o http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=43 31212711247820259&ei=nDDuSL07ior9AYj RwMEG&q=Bedroom+and+the+boardroom &hl=en In Headlines http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIOov3Q VRzQ Can the procedures used to make this decision stand up to scrutiny by those affected? Cost-benefit test: o o o Does a benefit for some cause unacceptable harm to others? How critical is the benefit? Can the harmful effects be mitigated? Good night’s sleep test o Whether or not anyone else knows about my action, will it produce a good night's sleep? Ethical Choice Tool Ethical Maturity (Most Frequently Used?) Cognitive Moral Development Levels First Stage Second Stage Driven by self-interest Focus on Self Uncritically accept conventional standards Third Stage (maturity) Evaluate previous standards in an effort to develop more appropriate ones Magnitude of Consequence? Likelihood of discovery? Nine Basic Steps to Personal Ethical Decision Making 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Practice ethical behavior actively Beware of "new ethics" programs Define the ethical problem when it arises Formulate alternatives Evaluate the alternatives Seek additional assistance, as appropriate Choose best ethical alternative Implement the best alternative Monitor and assess the outcome Determinants of Moral Behavior Characteristics (Moral Intensity) of the Issue Social Characteristics Relationships with “others” Type of Relationships Steps towards moral behavior Recognize the moral Issue Structure of Relationships Make a Moral Judgment (establish Intent) Engage in Moral Behavior Individual Characteristics Cognitive Dissonance Situational Characteristics Level of Cognitive Moral Development 1 Ethical Decision-Making Process absolute X Analysis Relative Evaluation Philosophical framework Teleology Core Values Deontology Decision, or Behavior Time Frame Virtue to be Taken Ethics Screening Articulate all dimensions of proposed Action, decision, or behavior Conventional Approach Standards Norms • Personal • Organizational • Societal • International Principal Stakeholders " Cognitive Dissonance Principles Approach Care Approach Ethical Tests Approach Ethical Principles • Justice • Rights • Utilitarianism • Golden Rule • Relational ontology & ideal • Attentiveness • Contextual • Common Sense Principles Rights Utilitarian Care Passes Ethics Screens Ethics Tests A dynamic balance …. Consider the various ethical tests as a check Ethics / Decision-Making Consequences Partiality Subjective Emotional Ethical Analysis Toolkit Understands that framing of problem is based on stakeholder’s perspective (perception) Rewards integrity / consistency Action Impartiality Objective Logical Requires recognizing entire circumstance Requires recognizing principle stakeholders Identify new course of Action Identify most feasible alternatives (and consequences) Deontological Dimension (Absolutist approach) Are there any “rules,” or conventions that must be followed (or should be created) Considers the Action (regardless of consequences) Are there personal (virtue) conventions? Care Dimension (Relativist) Is there a relationship that requires special consideration Principles (Can be either relativist or absolutist) Analyze the Utilitarian, Justice, Rights frameworks 2. Do Not Proceed Ethics Identify the nature of the situation One’s Best Self Public Disclosure Ventilation Purified Idea Gag Test Fails Ethics Screens Proceed / Engage Virtue Ethical Decision Process 1. • • • • • BEHAVIOR Rationalization (Justification) Conventional Justice Identify Action, Information Critical Thinking Implies process / procedural integrity Requires the combining of Economic Legal Ethical 2 Selection of Tools Tool “pouch” Situational Analysis (Information) Organizing the information Rules, policies, procedures (organizational) Critical thinking process (dynamic) Determinants of Moral Behavior Bremer’s Big Picture Identification of stakeholder(s) Understanding of ethical climate Information gathering Analysis Evaluation Codes of Ethics Laws Roll the Dice (action / consequence gamble) Values (personal) e.g., worksheet(s) Decision making mode / models? • Cognitive Dissonance? (conflicting values) Cognitive Moral Development level? Aspirations? Philosophical (Category of tool) Teleological (Action / Consequences) Deontology (Action / Consistency) Aristotelian (Values / Principles of Being) Ethical Decision-Making Process Selection of Tools (cont) Identify Action, Decision, or Behavior to be Taken Ethics Screening Conventional Approach Standards Norms • Personal • Organizational • Societal • International Screening method Based on viable alternatives Articulate all dimensions of proposed Action, decision, or behavior • Principles Approach Care Approach Ethical Tests Approach Ethical Principles • Justice • Rights • Utilitarianism • Golden Rule • Relational ontology & ideal • Attentiveness • Contextual • Common Sense • • • • • • Tied to Deontology Principles approach One’s Best Self Public Disclosure Ventilation Purified Idea Gag Test • Utilitarian, Justice, and Rights (incl. Golden Rule) Relational / Situational approach • Care and custody Ethics test(s) Do Not Proceed Passes Ethics Screens Fully thought out and developed Conventional approach Fails Ethics Screens • Tied to consequences Identify new course of Action Proceed / Engage Ethical Cross-Check Bremer’s “big picture” perspective Question Level Method Values 1 What is? 2 3 What ought to be? Getting from 1 - 2? 4 Motivation? Personal Organizational Utilitarian Rights Self-Discipline Achievement Tolerance Industry or Professional Societal Justice Care Rule-Based Honesty Integrity Responsibility Fidelity Charity Honesty Integrity More of a “goal” oriented process 3 Methods of Reasoning Critical Determing Factor Comparing benefits and costs Method Utilitarian Simplified Ethics Justification Test An Action is Ethical when…. Net benefits exceed costs Limitations Justice Care Publicity Test Apply publicity test to alternatives Apply reversibility test to alternatives Societal Concern Policies Legal Universal Self Economic efficiency Consistent with Org. Policies and Guidelines? Fit within legal and regulatory requirements? Does it fit with principles & values maintained by the organization? Does it align with personal values and moral codes: Fit as right, good, and fair? Alternative 1 2 3 4 5 Components of Ethical Climates P.L.U.S. Focus of Individual Person Ethical Company Egoism (SelfCentered approach) Self Interest Company Interest Benevolence (Concern for others approach) Friendship Team interest Social responsibility Personal morality Company rules and procedures Laws and professional codes Ethical Criteria Harm Test Apply harm test to alternatives Check time, money, technical, and social factors Difficult to measure some human and social costs; majority may disregard the rights of the minority Respecting Basic human rights Difficult to balance entitlements are respected conflicting rights Distributing fair shares Benefits and costs Difficult to measure are fairly distributed benefits and costs; lack of agreement on fair shares (fair may not be equal) Honoring relationships The involved party is Requires situational given due ethics; Difficult to consideration justify under any of the other frameworks Rights Feasibility Test Reversibility Test Alternative 1 2 3 Principle (Integrity Approach) 4 5 The information ethics matrix values and rights in electronic environments Using Philosophical Framing Philosophy Alternative(s) Utilitatian Deontological Character Action - Consequences Action - consistency Values / Principles rights right to read right to write right to learn right to right to comcommumunicate nicate right to filter development, self-determination participation, open access development, information competence deliberative democracy privacy, data protection self-determination values autonomy inclusiveness justice sustainability information for all participation education for all collaboration knowledge sharing free access knowledge sharing education for all intergenerational access no censorship open access responsibility life-long learning information ecology information control This PP file is made publicly available under the following Creative-Commons-License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/de/ Rainer Kuhlen – Computer and Information Science – University of Konstanz, Germany Transborder Library Forum – Chihuahua, Mexico – March 2005 4
