Human relations development & corporate ethics strategies
by Simon Longstaff
It could be argued that Human Relations Development professionals have an important role to play in the formation of a more ethical society. After all, as education becomes better recognised as a lifetime process (most of which is structured in the world of work) so it is that employment related training will grow in importance.
With an increase in awareness of the importance of fostering an appropriate corporate ethos, HRD professionals may find themselves being asked to develop programmes designed to promote 'company values'. Part of this process might include a process of socialisation designed to undermine those customs and practices that lead to inefficient or unethical behaviour. Whilst it is certainly possible to proceed in such a fashion, it may be open to serious reservation on the two grounds of ethics and efficacy.
As would be fairly obvious, such a programme would appear (at the very least) to take little account of the interests and concerns of those subjected to its measures. Individuals are being treated as means to securing an end – only the end in this case is that of promoting sound ethical behaviour. Even if such a process falls short of indoctrination, it does little to promote or even recognise the autonomy and dignity of the people concerned. In this first respect the programme would be self-defeating. Unless the ethical sense is founded on a set of authentic commitments it is unlikely to take root.
People are more likely to come to see the true value of one another if they are treated in a manner that is consistent with a recognition of their intrinsic worth. It then becomes possible to reconcile some of the tensions that have emerged in the preceding discussion. For example, a recognition of employees as ends in themselves (and not as mere means to the ends of other people) will foster a climate of opinion in which the importance of human relations is maintained in terms of the long-term advantage for all. This is to reinforce the type of strategy built on the principle that profits follow relationships.
If relationships are taken seriously, then training and education will be designed to take account of the practice and experiences of employees. Some organisations choose to have an individual or department draw up a code of ethics for each employee to sign. The alternative is to build 'from the ground up' so that each person affected has a sense of 'ownership' of the code. Not only will people 'own' the code, it will also reflect the realities of their practice. There is little point in having formal provisions that are irrelevant or impossible to apply.
HRD professionals will need to do more than look at the nature of codes, training etc. There is a need to examine the structure of work organisations and practices. What is the aim of this organisation? How can this best be achieved using the resources and people at hand? Does the organisation require forms of behaviour or the application of techniques that frustrate the achievement of all aims (explicit and implicit)? Do patterns of remuneration and evaluation reflect the organisation's stated objectives? For example, does the board spout pious sentiments about ethics but reward the unscrupulous but successful?
A critical perspective is not inimical to the efficient and effective functioning of an organisation. To the extent that authentic commitments form part of the motivation of employees so they will be more likely to strive to support the activities of the unit to which they belong. People will even develop attachments sufficient to encourage them to be proactive in support of an organisation that treats them with the dignity reserved for ultimate ends.
Whilst much of the above has been concerned with issues to do with the way employees might be treated, it is as well to note that the list of stakeholders includes: management, shareholders, customers, suppliers, professional advisers, the wider public and so on. In contributing to the development and maintenance of an organisation's ethos, the HRD professional will need to be aware of the interests of each; not least because they intersect with the interests of parties more immediately affected.
Some thoughts on the 'ethics environment'
Much of the analysis of 'what went wrong in the '80s' has, up until now, been fairly simplistic. The debate has been characterised by a culture of blaming and there has been a tendency to deny inherent complexity by reducing explanations to an exploration of single 'causes". In short, insufficient attention has been given to the broad context in which critical trends and events evolved.
Hugh Mackay has done much to mature the debate. For example, he has drawn attention to the fact that the progression from the excesses of the '80s to the uncertainties of the ‘nervous ‘90s’ has been part of a continuing process of change in Australian society that has been accelerating since 1945.
Mackay argues that periods of uncertainty are marked by a renewed interest in basic values. But he also warns that the search for stability and certainty may lead people to call for much greater government intervention and regulation that, paradoxically, may further erode the individual's sense of personal responsibility to the community.
In a complementary argument, Professor Cliff Hooker of the University of Newcastle has suggested that an increase of interest in ethics is the latest response to the problem of managing a complex society. Hooker illustrates his point by asking us to imagine the damage that can be done by a person wielding a pair of bolt cutters in 1993 as compared to 1793. In earlier centuries the individual vandal could cause only local damage. Today it is possible for one person to wreak havoc by breaking into and damaging a society's technological infrastructure. Vast numbers of people can be adversely affected. Mass communication makes whole societies susceptible to the enervating effects of reported misdeeds and avoidable tragedy.
Given the cost of applying external 'controls' to every element of a complex system, Hooker argues that a resurgence of public interest in ethics is a reflection of a desire to provide a renewed framework for the exercise of self-discipline. This crucially depends on the development of an environment in which support is given to the idea that people should accept responsibility for what they do as individuals and in community.
The observations and arguments of Hooker and Mackay are especially pertinent to the work of the management community. The Ethics Centre's experience has been that ethical issues and dilemmas rarely present themselves in specifically 'ethical' terms.
Given the practical orientation of ethical reflection this should not be at all surprising. Yet many people in business and the professions have difficulty in recognising that there is an underlying ethical dimension to most problems arising in daily practice.
An understanding of the dynamics of complexity and change provides a framework for understanding the significance of ethical reflection and the management of values.
discuss this articleDr Simon Longstaff is Executive Director of St James Ethics Centre.
This article was first published in City Ethics (now Living Ethics), issue 12, 1993
© St James Ethics Centre