Nine Basic Steps to Personal Ethical
Decision Making
Differing Approaches
Philosophical
Pragmatic
Teleology
Deontology
Virtue (Character)
Considerations
Utility
Balance
Rights
Absolute
Justice & Fairness
Consequentialism
General (Rule based)
Act (Individual acts)
1.
2.
Deontology (Duty)
3.
Contrarian
4.
• Issues of rights & justice
• Natural Rights (Locke)
• Reasonable Person (Rawls)
5.
6.
Human Nature
7.
Individual potentialities
8.
• Social construction
Comparative
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
Care
Unique Relationship
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
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=43
31212711247820259&ei=nDDuSL07ior9AYj
RwMEG&q=Bedroom+and+the+boardroom
&hl=en
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
Bedroom to Boardroom (different
standards?)
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 Maturity
Cognitive Moral Development Levels
(To be covered first week of March)
Ethical Choice Tool
(Most Frequently Used?)
Driven by self-interest
First Stage
Focus on Self
Second Stage
Uncritically accept conventional standards
Third Stage (maturity)
Evaluate previous standards in an effort to
develop more appropriate ones
Magnitude of Consequence?
Likelihood of discovery?
Determinants of Moral Behavior
Characteristics
(Moral Intensity) of the Issue
Social
Characteristics
absolute
Information
Relative
Evaluation
Critical
Thinking
X
Steps towards moral behavior
Relationships
with “others”
Make a
Moral
Judgment
(establish
Intent)
Recognize
the moral
Issue
Type of
Relationships
Philosophical framework
Engage in
Moral
Behavior
Teleology
Cognitive
Dissonance
Core
Values
Structure of
Relationships
Individual
Characteristics
Justice
Ethical Decision-Making Process
1.
to be Taken
Articulate all dimensions of proposed
Action, decision, or behavior
Standards Norms
• Personal
• Organizational
• Societal
• International
Principles
Approach
Care
Approach
Ethical Principles
• Justice
• Rights
• Utilitarianism
• Golden Rule
• Relational
ontology & ideal
• Attentiveness
• Contextual
Passes
Ethics Screens
Rights
Utilitarian
Care
Ethics Tests
Virtue
• Common Sense
One’s Best Self
Public Disclosure
Ventilation
Purified Idea
Gag Test
Do Not Proceed
Fails Ethics
Screens
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
Ethical Tests
Approach
•
•
•
•
•
Principles
Identify the nature of the situation
Conventional
Approach
BEHAVIOR
Rationalization (Justification)
Ethical Decision Process
Identify Action,
Decision, or Behavior
Ethics Screening
Virtue
Cognitive Dissonance
Conventional
Level of Cognitive Moral
Development
Deontology
Principal Stakeholders
Situational
Characteristics
Time Frame
Analysis
2.
Consider the various ethical tests as a check
Identify new
course of Action
Proceed / Engage
Ethics / Decision-Making
Ethics
A dynamic balance ….
Requires recognizing entire circumstance
Requires recognizing principle
stakeholders
Understands that framing of problem is based
on stakeholder’s perspective (perception)
Rewards integrity / consistency
Requires the combining of
Implies process / procedural integrity
Action
Impartiality
Objective
Logical
Consequences
Partiality
Subjective
Emotional
Economic
Legal
Ethical
Ethical Analysis Toolkit
Tool “pouch”
Situational Analysis (Information)
Determinants of Moral Behavior
Bremer’s Big Picture
Identification of stakeholder(s)
Understanding of ethical climate
Critical thinking process (dynamic)
Information gathering
Analysis
Evaluation
Selection of Tools
Ethical Decision-Making Process
Identify Action,
Decision, or Behavior
Organizing the information
Rules, policies, procedures (organizational)
to be Taken
e.g., worksheet(s)
Codes of Ethics
Laws
Roll the Dice (action / consequence gamble)
Values (personal)
Decision making mode / models?
Cognitive Moral Development level? Aspirations?
•
Articulate all dimensions of proposed
Action, decision, or behavior
Conventional
Approach
Standards Norms
• Personal
• Organizational
• Societal
• International
Teleological (Action / Consequences)
Deontology (Action / Consistency)
Aristotelian (Values / Principles of Being)
Care
Approach
Ethical Principles
• Justice
• Rights
• Utilitarianism
• Golden Rule
• Relational
ontology & ideal
• Attentiveness
• Contextual
Ethical Cross-Check
•
Tied to Deontology
Principles approach
•
Care and custody
Ethics test(s)
•
Values
Utilitarian
Rights
Self-Discipline
Achievement
Tolerance
Utilitarian, Justice, and Rights (incl. Golden Rule)
Relational / Situational approach
•
Method
Fully thought out and developed
Conventional approach
One’s Best Self
Public Disclosure
Ventilation
Purified Idea
Gag Test
Identify new
course of Action
Screening method
•
• Common Sense
•
•
•
•
•
Fails Ethics
Screens
Proceed / Engage
Based on viable alternatives
Ethical Tests
Approach
Do Not Proceed
Passes
Ethics Screens
Selection of Tools (cont)
Principles
Approach
Cognitive Dissonance? (conflicting values)
Philosophical (Category of tool)
Ethics Screening
Justice
Care
Tied to consequences
Rule-Based
Honesty
Integrity
Responsibility
Fidelity
Charity
Honesty
Integrity
Bremer’s “big picture” perspective
Question
Level
1
What is?
2
3
What ought to be? Getting from 1 - 2?
Methods of Reasoning
4
Method
Motivation?
Utilitarian
Critical Determing
Factor
Comparing benefits
and costs
Organizational
Rights
Justice
Societal
Care
More of a “goal” oriented process
Components of Ethical Climates
Simplified Ethics Justification Test
Feasibility Test Reversibility Test
Check time, money,
technical, and social
factors
Alternative
Apply reversibility test
to alternatives
Limitations
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
Personal
Industry or
Professional
An Action is Ethical
when….
Net benefits exceed
costs
Harm Test
Publicity Test
Apply harm test to
alternatives
Apply publicity test to
alternatives
1
2
3
Focus of Individual
Person
Ethical Company
Societal Concern
Egoism (SelfCentered approach)
Self Interest
Company Interest
Economic efficiency
Benevolence
(Concern for others
approach)
Friendship
Team interest
Social responsibility
Personal morality
Company rules and
procedures
Laws and
professional codes
Ethical Criteria
Principle (Integrity
Approach)
4
5
P.L.U.S.
Alternative
1
2
3
4
5
Policies
Legal
Universal
Self
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?
Using Philosophical Framing
Philosophy
Alternative(s)
Utilitatian
Deontological
Character
Action - Consequences
Action - consistency
Values / Principles
The information ethics matrix
values and rights in electronic environments
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
education for
all
collaboration
knowledge
sharing
self-determination
no censorship
information
control
values
autonomy
inclusiveness
justice
sustainability
information
for all
participation
free access
knowledge
sharing
education for
all
intergenerational
access
open access
responsibility
life-long
learning
information
ecology
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