By: S. Lynne Willett, SPHR
Communication strategy is complex and fraught with possible misunderstandings. Ethical communication requires work and forethought; one must be self-aware, self-monitoring, humble, honest, and often, courageous. For example, a communicator must be aware of any personal biases or lack of knowledge in particular areas. The following five ground rules for ethical communication are not exhaustive, but rather are a base for opening dialogue among parties in the pursuit of greater understanding of an issue.
Openness.
Johnson (2012) asserted that openness includes an awareness of one’s weaknesses, being receptive, and possessing sensitivity to differences among people (p. 88). Openness to others is an essential first step to ethical communication because it allows input and ideas from others to flow. A communication that is closed to others’ ideas or makes broad assumptions will not foster an environment that encourages others to contribute to a body of knowledge, a strategy, or an idea. Johnson further encourages openness through various psychological processes that include “openness to new categories, not only based on age, race, gender, or role,” and “make finer distinctions within these classifications” (p. 371). A communicator must understand his or her own unconscious bias or preconceived notions regarding others. Ethical communication invites others into the conversation or dialogue and welcomes differences of opinion or broader perspectives. Openness seeks to understand and gain greater knowledge and does not assume to be the final word or authority.
Recognize Others as Having Value. Through listening with care, inviting others into the conversation, the communicator acknowledges others have value. Perhaps listening with care is one of the greatest catalysts for change and growth among not only groups with similar goals, but also groups that might appear to have very different goals and ideals. Johannessen, Valde, and Whedbee (2008), when speaking of “invitational rhetoric,” express the concept of valuing others’ ideas and contributions during the communication process. Ethical communication welcomes the audience to the communicator’s world, yet “does not judge or denigrate others’ perspectives … is open to and tries to appreciate and validate those perspectives, even if they differ dramatically from” one’s own (p. 213). To seek understanding and receptiveness, one must understand it is a give-and-take process, and seek an intentional mutuality of goals.
Humility. A characteristic seldom observed in communications is the element of humility. When communicating from a place of humility, we can send the message that we acknowledge we are not perfect and that, as humans, we are flawed and capable of misunderstanding and making mistakes. Johnson describes three qualities, or components, of humility; self-awareness, openness (covered previously), and transcendence (p. 88).
Johnson further asserted that humble leaders are more likely to resist the temptations to abuse power, take advantage of privileges, commit fraudulent acts, abuse others, or put their own interests before the interests of followers (p. 88). Thus, ethical communicators who possess or practice humility will likely build teams and organizations that foster trust and collaboration because they are willing to admit they do not have all the answers and will listen to input from

others. Followers will not be afraid to approach the leader who displays humility; this often paves the way for new ideas and innovative processes within groups, teams, and organizations.
Courage - Speak Even the Difficult Truths. Jablin (2006) offered a definition of courage as
“the confidence to act in accordance with one’s beliefs” (p. 104). The typical vision of courage in the media is often portrayed as bold and forceful, and the courageous hero is awarded for his or her efforts with praise and accolades. In reality, many courageous leaders and communicators quietly make inroads through means other than headlines in the media. Jablin provided examples of those quiet heroes as “ordinary examples of Germans who rescued Jews during the Holocaust”
… or people “who for one reason or another, shift the course of their lives and commit themselves to the common good of the communities in which they live” (p. 101).
Speaking the truth can sometimes create discomfort among listeners and possibly create consequences for the communicator. For example, when a direct report communicates upward to management and the communication contains bad news, it can create complex issues. The messenger can be viewed in a positive light for having the courage to tell the truth, or he or she can be viewed in a negative light simply for having conveyed bad news. This could be why some organizations have environments where leaders are surrounded by “yes” men; few are willing to convey difficult truths. Bennis (2009) encouraged embracing dissenters and contrarian views among a leader’s group of followers to help leaders see the truth when they are veering off course or to discourage groupthink. This practice takes courageous communication from both the leader and his followers (p. 190). Another form of courageous communication is whistle blowing, which can have an enormous impact on both the communicator and his or her organization.
A key component of courageous communication is the importance of the communicator seeking truth within the self. One must be honest and transparent with one’s intent, possessing the courage to take personal inventory as to whether there is an agenda, motive, or unresolved conflict within the message itself. Purging the communication of ill intent, manipulation, and prejudice often takes hard work and courage. Facing difficult truths about one’s own shortcomings, weaknesses, or limitations can be the first step toward ethical and courageous communication.
Inclusiveness.
Similar to the section “Recognizing Others Have Value,” inclusiveness takes the ethical communication process a step further. Many cultures value or take pride in their smaller groups, families, and businesses. However, when stepping out into a broader arena, communicators must take into consideration the differences among those in other cultures and among society, in general. Ethical communication should not exclude, diminish, or devalue a segment of a group or population based on differences of age, gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or orientation. Honoring differences and recognizing that everyone has value are key ingredients to inclusive ethical communications.
References
Bennis, W. G. (2009). On becoming a leader.
New York, NY: Basic Books.

Jablin, F. M. (2006). Courage and courageous communication among leaders and followers in groups, organizations, and communities.
Management Communication Quarterly, 20 (1), 94-110.
Johannesen, R. L., Valde, K. S., & Whedbee, K. E. (2008). Ethics in human communication .
Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Johnson, C. E. (2012). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: Casting light or shadow.
(4 th
ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.