What we do
About St James Ethics Centre
This article was published in Living Ethics: issue 79 autumn 2010
Have you ever wondered what an independent, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to providing a non-judgemental forum for the promotion and exploration of ethics actually does? Simon Longstaff sheds light on some of the activities of St James Ethics Centre.
I am told that it usually takes a person coming to work at the Centre about a year to figure out what we do. This is not a reflection on the ability of my colleagues, nor on our induction processes (rudimentary as they are). Rather, it is recognition of the fact that the organisation is like a 1000-piece puzzle – you may be entirely familiar with one part without realising how it fits into the larger picture formed by the other 999 pieces. I often wish that the picture could be simplified and then be brought into focus. As things stand, the demands of confidentiality necessarily obscure parts of the whole – as do the scope and scale of the work undertaken.
In the course of the past twenty years, there have been at least a thousand tales that have not been told. The result of this is that even our most ardent supporters are likely to be surprised by the depth and variety of the Centre’s work in Australia and abroad. So, perhaps now that sufficient time has passed, it may be appropriate to outline, in general terms, some of what we have done – not to ‘blow our trumpet’ or pretend a significance greater than is due – but to inform many of our supporters about how their generosity has been put to use.
The best place to start is with the personal. I still see the face of one of the first people ever to use the Centre’s ethics counselling service – a unique, free, national service staffed by volunteers. He was a young man who, having recently completed his studies at university, secured his dream job working as an accountant in industry. He was set for a promising future ... and then his employer asked him to engage in what he thought to be unethical (if not illegal) conduct. A person of high principle, he was not prepared to violate the dictates of his conscience. Yet, as options were explored and rejected, it soon became clear that his only real course of action was to resign his position without ever being able to disclose his reasons for doing so. This meant that a future employer might think that the problem lay with this young man – that he risked being perceived as unreliable; a short-term employee without references. He sat in my office, his eyes brimming with tears as all other avenues closed to him. He was due to attend his graduation ceremony the next day.
From time to time, we are asked to help in circumstances where families or extended communities face similar challenges. How will the decisions of a family affect a loved one suffering chronic illness and unable to speak for himself? Will the family be prolonging the life of a loved one or will they be causing him to die more slowly? Imagine a community racked by the tragedy of a suicide. How might they speak the truth of a dead man’s life when part of that truth will damage his good name and hurt hundreds?
These are not stories of how ethics can ‘save the day’. They do not relate the most profound challenges encountered over the past twenty years. But they highlight something important about our work – the reality and depth of suffering and distress endured by people caught in the jaws of an ethical dilemma. Here it is the spirit that is torn – a terrible thing to see.
From time to time, the Centre finds itself making an important contribution to events of international significance. For example, we played an important role in the establishment of the International Olympic Committee’s Ethics Commission. The Centre developed the ethical framework that informs the operation of the Genographic Project – a global project mounted by National Geographic and IBM, with the support of the Waitt Family Foundation, to map the migratory history of humanity.
We have served as the catalyst for the establishment of the Military Leadership Forum – an annual conference that brings together senior military commanders from seventeen nations ranging from Pakistan in the west to China in the east.
One of our important business-focused projects is the Corporate Responsibility Index (CRI). This strategic management tool helps improve corporate responsibility by providing a systematic process that assists companies to identify their non-financial risk, as well as develop and improve corporate responsibility in line with their business strategy. It provides a benchmark for companies committed to managing, measuring and reporting their impact on society and the environment. St James Ethics Centre is licensed to deliver the CRI in Australia and New Zealand.
Lastly, following a commission from the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, we are in the final stages of leading the development of a new set of international principles that will define best practice in the field of responsible social investment under the umbrella of the UN Global Compact. In each case, the Centre’s involvement is significant (if not essential) and in each case, our involvement is barely visible. That it should be so goes against all sensible rules for marketing. Yet, we have long believed (perhaps naively) that knowledge of the Centre will spread ‘organically’ if we maintain the quality of our work.
The introduction of the Intelligence Squared Australia (IQ2) series of debates has been one of our most important contributions to wider society. The debates are now running in Sydney and Melbourne with requests from Brisbane and Canberra to initiate series there. With the debates being broadcast in Australia and abroad, this is one of our most visible undertakings – but I doubt that many people realise that the debates are brought to them by St James Ethics Centre.
Another wonderful development has been the Centre’s co-creation of the Festival of Dangerous Ideas (FODI). A partnership with Sydney Opera House, FODI has the capacity to grow in international importance, bringing together local and international speakers willing and able to ‘discuss the undiscussable’.
Both IQ2 Australia and FODI are examples of the Centre at its best – creating safe but challenging spaces where the toughest of conversations can take place without rancour or compromise.
Given the original intentions of the Centre’s founders, it is perhaps not surprising that some of the Centre’s most significant work has been done within the world of business and the professions. Little-known achievements include establishing the intellectual foundations for the ethical framework currently used by the vast majority of Australia’s engineers. A similar role was played by the Centre in the development of the ethical guidelines for corporate counsel – work done in association with the Australian Corporate Lawyers Association. There is a broad range of professions, partnerships and corporations where work of this kind has been done – and where one can actually see its tangible effects ... but only if you know where to look.
At other times, the Centre works on retainer to provide ongoing support as issues arise. I would like to be able to provide details of this work – because it can be immensely complex (and therefore intellectually satisfying for those who engage with this material) and the effects of doing so are immediate. Unfortunately, the demands of confidentiality make it impossible to discuss this activity – except in the most general terms. What I can say is that I have known lawyers to look on with envy at the scope of our remit – not being limited by legal considerations, we can traverse a wide field of issues and possibilities. I sometimes wonder that more companies do not make use of this service – especially given its evident value to the Boards and CEOs who do.
I have tried to highlight some of the less obvious pieces of the puzzle that, in its assembled form, makes up the Centre. The more obvious parts are no less important for their visibility. Outstanding examples are the Responsible Business Project which has resolutely stuck to the ideal of maintaining an open space – a Hub – for the development and exploration of best practice. And, of course, there is the incomparable Vincent Fairfax Fellowship, the effects of which it really is impossible to measure across Australian society. It is only now, seventeen years since the program was conceived by the Centre and then funded by the family of Sir Vincent Fairfax, that one can see Fellows moving into positions of leadership across Australia, as the article by two exceptional Fellows Jane Sloane and Denis Moriarty on page 10 attests.
I find it an immense privilege to be part of the work of the Centre; to share its achievements and disappointments with a dedicated and talented group of colleagues – both paid and volunteer. I do not know if we will ever be able to tell the full story of St James Ethics Centre. I doubt that we will ever be able to measure fully the impact of its programs (seen and unseen) – and perhaps that is as it should be. I thank our supporters – some of whom have stood with us for all twenty years – for their generosity. But above all, I thank them for their trust in an endeavour whose integrity is more often felt than seen.
The Ethics Centre's websites
latest articles
