• Breadcrumb navigation uses Javascript

---

Why all the fuss about ethics?

by Simon Longstaff

For some years now, the topic of ‘ethics’ has been gaining increased exposure across the ranks of the management community, its advisors and regulators. Many believe that the rise of interest in this topic can be traced back to the latter years of the last decade - a time when society began to look for an appropriate response to what has been labelled 'the excesses of the '80s'.

While the activities of the 'corporate cowboys' certainly gave impetus to the current wave of interest in business and professional ethics, it is important to recognise the force of other factors driving the process.

Of these, the most important factor is the rate and process of change. As the rate of change accelerates, so novel problems arise with increasing frequency. Some of the most obvious challenges come about because of developments in technology.

For example, people working in the field of medicine regularly encounter circumstances where technology could be applied to sustain life but where to do so would merely be to extend the natural process of dying. At the same time there are issues to do with equity and the allocation of the community's resources. Should every person have access to the latest diagnostic tool or medical treatment? Or should there be some kind of 'rationing' in the interests of containing costs? Whether attention focuses on developments in medical research or the practice of health care professionals, the questions go on.

Although 'bio-ethical' questions capture the popular imagination, technological developments in other areas give rise to equally pressing issues. The use and potential abuse of information and communications technology has the power radically to affect the nature of society. New forms of surveillance may limit our effective zone of privacy. Genetic engineering gives rise to new life-forms which, as commodities, may serve commercial interests while defying nature's laws of evolution.

Looking towards the horizon of the future, it should be obvious that complex ethical questions are going to be a constant feature of our environment - touching the public and private sectors alike.

Another reason for a boost in the volume of talk about ethics can be found in a sincere determination to find an alternative to escalating regulation and surveillance. There can be no doubt that there is popular pressure on governments to ensure that the community is protected from some of the worst excesses perpetrated by those who would put profit or personal success before all else. And governments, of all persuasions, need little encouragement to expand their sphere of influence.

The trouble is that too much regulation and surveillance can destroy the very qualities of personal and institutional responsibility that should be encouraged. External controls can only do so much. Their limitation is that no matter how comprehensive, people will be tempted to wriggle through loopholes - especially if there is no understanding of the underlying principles that are being reflected in the rules.

Let me be clear, I am not suggesting that government abdicate its responsibility to set the framework within which commercial and professional behaviour is conducted. And I am not wanting to advocate the abolition of regulation.

Rather, I am concerned to argue that a balanced approach be adopted. In particular, an essential element of self-regulation ought to be allowed otherwise we will find that individuals and corporations surrender their judgement about the rights and wrongs of a situation in favour of a limited and strict interpretation of the law. As we have seen, once the language of ethics has been lost, it is hard to recover.

One implication flowing from the view I have advanced is that organisations will need to become far more sophisticated in the way they manage the ethical dimension of their environment. A concern about ethics needs to become a vital component in the process of strategy development. Policies and procedures need to reflect a genuine commitment to building a culture in which deep values are explicitly acknowledged. This means going beyond a commitment to the 'shallow' commercial values of profit maximisation and instead allowing a full appreciation of what underlies such commitments.

In other words, the organisation needs to know why profits are important. Only then will other legitimate concerns be weighed in the balance.

A failure to address these issues at a deep level will reinforce community cynicism that talk about ethics is just another piece of window dressing, just another public relations stunt. If this cynical view is reinforced then the cost will not just be borne by the management community. All of us will be affected - and so much for the worse.

A final reason for attention to ethics is the evidence of an increasing focus on the need to develop the skills of leadership as well as those of management. Or perhaps, it might be better observed that the inherent role of leadership in management is again being made explicit. For some time now, the idea of an 'art' of management has been replaced by the idea that management is a kind of 'science". Invariably, the creative aspect of science has been ignored in favour of its technical aspect. Management has been reduced to a kind of technology overseen by a crop of narrowly trained MBA graduates.

A renewed concern about leadership and its role in the art of management now means that there is a need to address issues to do with the character of those who lead organisations. In turn, this leads to a consideration of whether or not managers should possess a range of virtues suitable to their task. For example, do managers need courage, fortitude or even wisdom?

Each person will have their own answer to such questions. The important thing to note is that whatever the ultimate answer may be, the conversation is once again about ethics.

discuss this article

---