Ethical Decision MakingEthical Decision Making

A Framework for Ethical A Framework for Ethical Decision MakingDecision Making

• We all have an image of our better selves-of how we are when we act ethically or are "at our best." We probably also have an image of what an ethical community, an ethical business, an ethical government, or an ethical society should be. Ethics really has to do with all these levels-acting ethically as individuals, creating ethical organizations and governments, and making our society as a whole ethical in the way it treats everyone.

Putting the Approaches Putting the Approaches TogetherTogether• Each of the approaches helps us determine what

standards of behavior can be considered ethical. There are still problems to be solved, however.

• The first problem is that we may not agree on the content of some of these specific approaches. We may not all agree to the same set of human and civil rights.

• We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even agree on what is a good and what is a harm.

• The second problem is that the different approaches may not all answer the question "What is ethical?" in the same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives us important information with which to determine what is ethical in a particular circumstance. And much more often than not, the different approaches do lead to similar answers.

Making DecisionsMaking Decisions • Making good ethical decisions requires a trained

sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically without consulting the specific steps.

• The more novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the more we need to rely on discussion and dialogue with others about the dilemma. Only by careful exploration of the problem, aided by the insights and different perspectives of others, can we make good ethical choices in such situations.

• The following framework for ethical decision making is a useful method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action.

A Framework for Ethical A Framework for Ethical Decision MakingDecision Making

1.Making an Ethical Decision2.Get the Facts3.Evaluate Alternative Actions4.Make a Decision and Test It5.Act and Reflect on the

Outcome

Making an Ethical Decision1. Could this decision or situation be

damaging to someone or to some group? Does this decision involve a choice between a good and bad alternative, or perhaps between two “goods” or between two “bads”?

2. Is this issue about more than what is legal or what is most efficient? If so, how?

Get the Facts3. What are the relevant facts of the

case? What facts are not known? Can I learn more about the situation? Do I know enough to make a decision?

4. What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome? Are some concerns more important? Why?

5. What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been consulted? Have I identified creative options?

Evaluate Alternative Actions6. Evaluate the options by asking the

following questions:– Which option will produce the most good and

do the least harm? (The Utilitarian Approach)– Which option best respects the rights of all who

have a stake? (The Rights Approach)– Which option treats people equally or

proportionately? (The Justice Approach)– Which option best serves the community as a

whole, not just some members? (The Common Good Approach)

– Which option leads me to act as the sort of person I want to be? (The Virtue Approach)

Make a Decision and Test It

7. Considering all these approaches, which option best addresses the situation?

8. If I told someone I respect—or told a television audience—which option I have chosen, what would they say?

Act and Reflect on the Outcome

9. How can my decision be implemented with the greatest care and attention to the concerns of all stakeholders?

10. How did my decision turn out and what have I learned from this specific situation?

HOW TO IDENTIFY AN HOW TO IDENTIFY AN ETHICAL ISSUEETHICAL ISSUE • Ethical judgments are made about actions

or situations that are right or wrong, good or bad.  One clue that an action or situation needs an ethical rather than simply a business judgment is that the action or situation involves actual or potential harm to someone or some thing.  Another clue would be that there seems to be a possibility of a violation of what we generally consider right or good.

HOW TO USE THE SMELL HOW TO USE THE SMELL TESTTEST • Another good way to identify when an

ethical issue that needs to be addressed is to use the “Smell Test: “What would the action or situation we are considering smell like if we read about in a front-page news article or in a popular blog?  Would we be comfortable reading a Wall Street Journal story that our company was doing this or letting the current situation continue for long?   Would I be comfortable explaining it to my spouse, or my grandmother?”

•The Smell Test is familiar ground in most businesses and is a good place to begin.  It is a “quick and dirty” test for deciding if something is an ethical issue and useful because brand name and a person’s reputation are important in business.

The The strengthsstrengths of the smell of the smell test: test: • It focuses us on what other ethical

people in the society would think.  It prevents us from taking special advantages for ourselves.

• It recognizes that morality is about what others think as much as it is about what I think.

• It enlists the emotion of shame, a powerful motivator to be sure we are getting this right.

The The weaknessesweaknesses: :

• The smell test is only as good as the society we live in.  The society may be blind to the ethical dimensions of an action or situation, may accept unethical actions as ethical, or be divided on whether the action is right or wrong.

• As the olfactory image reminds us, living with bad smells or unethical conduct for a long time may dull a person’s ability to notice them.

• It tells us that an action is an ethical issue but not why it is right or wrong.  Knowing why an action is right or wrong can help explain it to others.  Knowing why it is wrong can help to modify the action to make it right.  To determine why, we will have to move beyond the smell test.

Calculating Consequences:Calculating Consequences:The Utilitarian Approach to EthicsThe Utilitarian Approach to Ethics

•Utilitarianism is a moral principle that holds that the morally right course of action in any situation is the one that produces the greatest balance of benefits over harms for everyone affected. So long as a course of action produces maximum benefits for everyone, utilitarianism does not care whether the benefits are produced by lies, manipulation, or coercion.

• Utilitarianism offers a relatively straightforward method for deciding the morally right course of action for any particular situation we may find ourselves in.

• To discover what we ought to do in any situation, – we first identify the various courses of action that

we could perform. – Second, we determine all of the foreseeable

benefits and harms that would result from each course of action for everyone affected by the action.

– And third, we choose the course of action that provides the greatest benefits after the costs have been taken into account.

• The principle of utilitarianism can be traced to the writings of Jeremy Bentham, who lived in England during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

• Bentham, a legal reformer, sought an objective basis that would provide a publicly acceptable norm for determining what kinds of laws England should enact.

• He believed that the most promising way of reaching such an agreement was to choose that policy that would bring about the greatest net benefits to society once the harms had been taken into account. His motto, a familiar one now, was "the greatest good for the greatest number."

• Utilitarians also differ in their views about the kind of question we ought to ask ourselves when making an ethical decision.

• Some utilitarians maintain that in making an ethical decision, we must ask ourselves: "What effect will my doing this act in this situation have on the general balance of good over evil?" If lying would produce the best consequences in a particular situation, we ought to lie.

• Others, known as rule utilitarians, claim that we must choose that act that conforms to the general rule that would have the best consequences. In other words, we must ask ourselves: "What effect would everyone's doing this kind of action have on the general balance of good over evil?" So, for example, the rule "to always tell the truth" in general promotes the good of everyone and therefore should always be followed, even if in a certain situation lying would produce the best consequences.

• Despite such differences among utilitarians, however, most hold to the general principle that morality must depend on balancing the beneficial and harmful consequences of our conduct.

Problems With Problems With UtilitarianismUtilitarianism • The utilitarian calculation requires that we assign

values to the benefits and harms resulting from our actions and compare them with the benefits and harms that might result from other actions. But it's often difficult, if not impossible, to measure and compare the values of certain benefits and costs. How do we go about assigning a value to life or to art? And how do we go about comparing the value of money with, for example, the value of life, the value of time, or the value of human dignity? Moreover, can we ever be really certain about all of the consequences of our actions? Our ability to measure and to predict the benefits and harms resulting from a course of action or a moral rule is dubious, to say the least.

• Perhaps the greatest difficulty with utilitarianism is that it fails to take into account considerations of justice.

• We can imagine instances where a certain course of action would produce great benefits for society, but they would be clearly unjust.

• During the apartheid regime in South Africa in the last century, South African whites, for example, sometimes claimed that all South Africans—including blacks—were better off under white rule. These whites claimed that in those African nations that have traded a whites-only government for a black or mixed one, social conditions have rapidly deteriorated. Civil wars, economic decline, famine, and unrest, they predicted, will be the result of allowing the black majority of South Africa to run the government. If such a prediction were true—and the end of apartheid has shown that the prediction was false—then the white government of South Africa would have been morally justified by utilitarianism, in spite of its injustice.

•Utilitarianism cannot be the sole principle guiding our decisions. It can, however, play a role in these decisions. The principle of utilitarianism invites us to consider the immediate and the less immediate consequences of our actions.

•Utilitarianism asks us to look beyond self-interest to consider impartially the interests of all persons affected by our actions.

As John Stuart Mill once wrote: “The happiness which forms the

utilitarian standard of what is right in conduct, is not...(one's) own

happiness, but that of all concerned. As between his own happiness and

that of others, utilitarianism requires him to be as strictly impartial as a

disinterested and benevolent spectator.”

HOW TO USE THE UTILITY HOW TO USE THE UTILITY TESTTEST • A.  INTRODUCE THE TEST

    Ask: “Are we maximizing good and minimizing harm for all those affected?”

For the utility test (or “Utilitarian Principle”), the consequences or outcomes determine what is right or wrong.  For this principle the ends justify the means: an action is right if it creates the best overall outcome.  Good outcomes can be measured by:•    happiness and unhappiness (pleasure and pain)•    the preferences of individuals•    money, as an indicator of preferences

• B.  WHY IS UTILITY A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?The utility test is a valid way to decide which actions are right or wrong because:    Everyone counts the same.    Everyone wants to be happy or avoid being unhappy.    Therefore, good is what makes the most happiness or least unhappiness regardless of who is affected.

In short, we can’t just look at consequences for ourselves or our group to decide what is ethical, because everyone affected by the action has equal standing as a person.

• C.  APPLY THE TESTSTEP 1:  Identify the alternative actions that are possible and the persons and groups (the stakeholders) who will be affected by these actions.

STEP 2:  For each of the most promising alternatives, determine the benefits and costs to each person or group affected.  These calculations:     •    require predicting probable outcomes based on facts and experience;•    should include both short-term and long-term consequences; and•    should consider the relative value or “marginal utility” of an outcome to different individuals and groups. STEP 3:  Select the action in the current situation that produces the greatest benefits over costs for all affected.  If costs outweigh benefits, select the action with the least costs relative to benefits.  This step shows the alternative that has the greatest net good for this one situation.  STEP 4:  Ask what would happen if the action were a policy for all similar situations.  Since what is done in one situation often becomes an example or even a policy for future actions, this step shows which alternative maximizes good for this and future situations.

•D.  DRAW A CONCLUSIONIf the same action is selected in Steps 3 & 4, then this is the ethical action.  If different actions are selected, then decide whether the individual action or the policy will produce the greatest good and the least harm, for all affected, over the long term.   

STRENGTHS OF THE UTILITY TEST:STRENGTHS OF THE UTILITY TEST: • Outcomes matter—I cannot be satisfied with simply

following my personal ethical standards if bad consequences result.

• Factual data and assessing the probability of potential outcomes are important to deciding what is right/wrong.

• The welfare of animals and other entities should be included in ethical decisions since they are affected by outcomes.

• The emphasis on rational calculation and on including all stakeholders reminds us that our immediate intuitions about right and wrong cannot always be trusted.

• Requires striving for the best outcome and not simply a good outcome.

WEAKNESSES OF THE UTILITY WEAKNESSES OF THE UTILITY

TESTTEST • Requires accurate probability assessments of

likely outcomes that may be difficult or impossible to make in complex situations.

• In organizations where outcomes are measured by making the quarterly numbers, it may be difficult to focus on long term goods and harms—in the long run everyone hopes to outrun their mistakes by promotion, transfer, or retirement.

• Is subject to several common errors when being applied:– Limited Stakeholder error--considering outcomes only

for myself or my group.– Short Term error--considering only direct or immediate

consequences instead of including indirect and long term consequences.

– Single Alternative error--deciding an action is good because its benefits outweigh its costs without considering alternatives that may have a better benefit/cost ratio.

•What is a right?

•A right is a justified claim on others.

•The "justification" of a claim is dependent on some standard acknowledged and accepted not just by the claimant, but also by society in general– Legal– Moral Standard

• Intrinsic value Vs Extrinsic value

•Liberty Vs Welfare Rights

•Negative Vs Positive Rights

HOW TO USE THE RIGHTS HOW TO USE THE RIGHTS TESTTEST

• the Rights Test,

• the Exceptions Test,

•and the Choices Test.

THE RIGHTS TESTTHE RIGHTS TEST A.  INTRODUCE THE TEST    Ask: “Are we respecting human rights.”

B. WHY IS THIS A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?People are familiar with the idea of rights and are quick to use the word to explain •    a claim they have against others, •    why they are entitled to something from society or others•    why they should be protected from actions that benefit society or others at  our expense.

•C.  APPLY THE TEST    STEP 1:  Identify the right being upheld or violated.•    Liberty rights.

•    Welfare rights–   Individuals and society may have

obligations to help me obtain these if they are available and I have done my part to obtain them.

STEP 2:  Explain why it deserves the status of a right, because it is:    (a)  essential a person’s dignity and self worth; and/or    (b)  essential to a person’s freedom or well-being.    (c) We can explain why a right is essential by asking what would happen if the individual were denied this right and whether we would want that right respected if we were in that person’s position.

    STEP 3:  Ask whether that right conflicts with other rights or with the rights of others. 

•D.  DRAW A CONCLUSION    Explain briefly how the Rights principle does or does not apply in this case.  Remember, save the rights hammer for the really big issues.

STRENGTHS OF THE RIGHTS STRENGTHS OF THE RIGHTS TESTTEST

•Others pay attention when you advance a claim that someone’s rights are being violated.

WEAKNESSES OF THE RIGHTS TESTWEAKNESSES OF THE RIGHTS TEST

• conflict with other rights and with the overall good. – Restaurant, Business Class, Cinema etc

• Non availability of universally recognized list of rights.

• This test is not  helpful in ordinary circumstances.– Firing an employee

HOW TO USE THE EXCEPTIONS HOW TO USE THE EXCEPTIONS

TESTTEST 1.  INTRODUCE THE TEST    Ask: “What if everyone did it?” An “exception” is claiming it is ethical for us to do an action but not ethical for others to do it in the same situation. 

2.  WHY IS THIS A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?We are all equal as ethical actors, so whatever is ethical for me must be ethical for others in the same circumstances. 

3.  APPLY THE TEST    STEP 1: Specify what action we are considering.    Describe the action in a way that captures the ethically relevant features.    Adjust the generality or specificity of the action to highlight what is questionable:•    Is the action part of a general category such as  “not telling the truth” or “breaking a promise”?

•    Or does the action have specific characteristics that are relevant, such as “not telling the truth to save a life” or “breaking a promise because something more important is at risk” which are more specific descriptions.

•    Avoid value-loaded descriptors that already contain the ethical judgment (“We are lying to the customer”) because this closes off further discussion.

        STEP 2: Ask, “What if everyone did it?”  If the action were adopted by others in similar situations, would it:       

a.  Become impossible for anyone to do the action because everyone tried to do it? a) If everyone liedb) If everyone filed false tax returns Since everyone is equal, it is not ethical for us to do something that not everyone can do.  We would be making an exception for ourselves.

  b.  Create a business climate unacceptable to

us because everyone was doing it?

STEP 3:  Draw a conclusion for Step 2: What if everyone did it?  Either condition a. or b. would make the action unethical: 

    STEP 4: Ask, “What if they did it to us?”  Golden Rule:  “Do unto others.”

    STEP 5:  Draw a conclusion for Step 4: “What if they did it to us?”  If it would not be ethical for others to do the action to us, then it is unethical for us to do the action because we would be claiming an exception for ourselves.

•SUMMARIZE THE CONCLUSIONS  for “What if everyone did it?” and for “What if they did it to us?” 

•   Failing any one of the three conditions shows the action to be unethical.

STRENGTHS OF THE STRENGTHS OF THE EXCEPTIONS TESTEXCEPTIONS TEST

•Reminds us not to give ourselves advantages in regard to what is ethical – that we are all equal in what is right or wrong.

WEAKNESSES OF THE WEAKNESSES OF THE EXCEPTIONS TESTEXCEPTIONS TEST

•People who are vicious or fanatics may agree to a world that others would find unacceptable.

HOW TO USE THE CHOICES HOW TO USE THE CHOICES

TESTTEST • 1.  INTRODUCE THE TEST    Ask “Are the people affected able to make their own choices.” 

2. WHY IS THIS A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?•    So let others make their own choices based on what they value. Don’t choose for them except in special circumstances.  Children, for example, may not be equal because they may not know what they really value.

•    Those who have made promises, signed contracts, or made other prior commitments may not be free to act because of their commitments.

3.  APPLY THE TEST    STEP 1:  Am I giving others freedom to choose what they value?   

        STEP 2:  Am I giving them the information necessary to know what they value in this situation?

STEP 3: Draw a conclusion:    Is the action unethical because it does not give the persons being affected the freedom and/or the information to choose what she/he values?

STRENGTHS OF THE STRENGTHS OF THE CHOICES TESTCHOICES TEST

•Respecting the ability humans to determine the course of their own lives by making choices based on what they think is valuable.

•Many ethical violations in business and professional settings involve denying people information or limiting their freedom to choose.

WEAKNESSES OF THE WEAKNESSES OF THE CHOICES TESTCHOICES TEST• It can reinforce a simplistic view of human

decision making that people are clear about what they value and make rational choices based on those values(Seat Belt, Mobile Phones, Changing password etc).

• The concept of freedom is the subject of much disagreement.  The line, for example, between persuasion and coercion can be difficult to draw.  When does making something look attractive take away from a person’s freedom to reject it (Advertising).

Justice and Fairness Justice and Fairness

• When Beatrice Norton was fourteen, she followed in her mother's footsteps and began working in the cotton mill. In 1968, after a career in the mill, she had to stop working because of her health. Years of exposure to cotton dust had resulted in a case of "brown lung," a chronic and sometimes fatal disease with symptoms similar to asthma and emphysema. In 1977, she testified at a congressional hearing, asking that the government require companies to provide disability compensation for victims of the disease similar to the compensation companies provided for other similar diseases.

•To Mrs. Norton , receiving compensation for the debilitating effects of brown lung similar to that given to other diseases was a simple matter of justice.

•From the Republic, written by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, to A Theory of Justice, written by the late Harvard philosopher John Rawls, every major work on ethics has held that justice is part of the central core of morality.

• Justice means giving each person what he or she deserves or, in more traditional terms, giving each person his or her due. Justice and fairness are closely related terms that are often today used interchangeably.

Principles of JusticePrinciples of Justice

•The most fundamental principle of justice—one that has been widely accepted since it was first defined by Aristotle more than two thousand years ago—is the principle that "equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally."

• In its contemporary form, this principle is sometimes expressed as follows: "Individuals should be treated the same, unless they differ in ways that are relevant to the situation in which they are involved."

• For example, if Jack and Jill both do the same work, and there are no relevant differences between them or the work they are doing, then in justice they should be paid the same wages. And if Jack is paid more than Jill simply because he is a man, or because he is white, then we have an injustice—a form of discrimination—because race and sex are not relevant to normal work situations.

• There are, however, many differences that we deem as justifiable criteria for treating people differently. For example, we think it is fair and just when a parent gives his own children more attention and care in his private affairs than he gives the children of others;

• we think it is fair when the person who is first in a line at a theater is given first choice of theater tickets;

• we think it is just when the government gives benefits to the needy that it does not provide to more affluent citizens;

• we think it is just when some who have done wrong are given punishments that are not meted out to others who have done nothing wrong;

• and we think it is fair when those who exert more efforts or who make a greater contribution to a project receive more benefits from the project than others.

• In the world of work, for example, we generally hold that it is unjust to give individuals special treatment on the basis of age, sex, race, or their religious preferences. If the judge's nephew receives a suspended sentence for armed robbery when another offender unrelated to the judge goes to jail for the same crime, or the brother of the Director of Public Works gets the million dollar contract to install sprinklers on the municipal golf course despite lower bids from other contractors, we say that it's unfair. We also believe it isn't fair when a person is punished for something over which he or she had no control, or isn't compensated for a harm he or she suffered. And the people involved in the "brown lung hearings" felt that it wasn't fair that some diseases were provided with disability compensation, while other similar diseases weren't.

HOW TO USE THE JUSTICE TESTHOW TO USE THE JUSTICE TEST • A.  INTRODUCE THE PRINCIPLE:

    Ask: “Is this a fair distribution of benefits and burdens.”

• B. WHY IS THE JUSTICE TEST A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?If everyone is equal – that is, has equal value as a human person– then everyone has an equal claim to a share.  The default distribution is to give everyone an equal share since all are worth the same.

But there are circumstances in which everyone does not have an equal claim because they worked harder or less hard, contributed more or less, have greater or less need, etc.  

So a fair distribution is in each situation depends on their equality or inequality: Treat equals equally and unequals unequally.

The reasons for inequality:•    Effort – some may have worked harder•    Accomplishment – some may have achieved more or performed better•    Contribution – some may have contributed more to the group or society•    Need – some may have a greater need to be served first or receive a larger share•    Seniority – some may have arrived in line first, be older or younger, or have more years of    service•    Contract – a prior agreement about how the distribution should be made.•    Relationship or In-Group Status -- some may have a claim because they are members of my family or a group to which I owe loyalty.

• C.  APPLY THE PRINCIPLE    STEP 1: What is the distribution?   Who is getting the benefits and burdens in the situation: Do those who get benefits also share burdens?  Do those with benefits share some of the burdens?  These are factual questions.  Once you know the distribution you can decide if it is fair or not.

    STEP 2:  Is the distribution fair? Which criterion for distribution would be     most fair in this situation and why would it be most fair in this situation?  You     have to defend the distribution and the criterion or reason for the distribution.

    STEP 3:  If disagreement persists over which outcome is fair or over which criterion for inequality is best in the situation, then select a fair process to decide what is fair: an election, dispassionate judge, chance decided by a coin or paper-rock-scissors.

    STEP 4: Draw a conclusion    Will this action produce a fair distribution, and why?

STRENGTHS OF THE JUSTICE STRENGTHS OF THE JUSTICE TESTTEST

•Research shows fairness to be one of the most fundamental ethical instincts in humans.  It is present in many animals, including primates and dogs.

•Subjects will give up rewards that would make them better off than they are, if others are getting greater rewards that are not justified.

WEAKNESSES OF THE JUSTICE TEST

There is no single criterion for a fair distribution so the test is always open to disagreement among ethical persons.

The Common GoodThe Common Good

• Newsweek columnist Robert J. Samuelson recently wrote: "We face a choice between a society where people accept modest sacrifices for a common good or a more contentious society where group selfishly protect their own benefits."

• Daniel Callahan, an expert on bioethics, argues that solving the current crisis in our health care system--rapidly rising costs and dwindling access--requires replacing the current "ethic of individual rights" with an "ethic of the common good".

•What exactly is "the common good", and why has it come to have such a critical place in current discussions of problems in our society? The common good is a notion that originated over two thousand years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero.

•Contemporary ethicist, John Rawls, defined the common good as "certain general conditions that are...equally to everyone's advantage"

•Catholic religious tradition, defines it as "the sum of those conditions of social life which allow social groups and their individual members relatively thorough and ready access to their own fulfillment.

•The common good, then, consists primarily of having the social systems, institutions, and environments on which we all depend work in a manner that benefits all people.

•Examples of particular common goods or parts of the common good include an accessible and affordable public health care system, and effective system of public safety and security, peace among the nations of the world, a just legal and political system, and unpolluted natural environment, and a flourishing economic system.

•The common good does not just happen. Establishing and maintaining the common good require the cooperative efforts of some, often of many, people. Just as keeping a park free of litter depends on each user picking up after himself, so also maintaining the social conditions from which we all benefit requires the cooperative efforts of citizens.

•The common good is a good to which all members of society have access, and from whose enjoyment no one can be easily excluded. All persons, for example, enjoy the benefits of clean air or an unpolluted environment, or any of our society's other common goods. In fact, something counts as a common good only to the extent that it is a good to which all have access.

OBSTACLES TO COMMON OBSTACLES TO COMMON GOODGOOD• First, according to some philosophers, the

very idea of a common good is inconsistent with a pluralistic society like ours. Different people have different ideas about what is worthwhile or what constitutes "the good life for human beings", differences that have increased during the last few decades as the voices of more and more previously silenced groups, such as women and minorities, have been heard. Given these differences, some people urge, it will be impossible for us to agree on what particular kind of social systems, institutions, and environments we will all pitch in to support.

•And even if we agreed upon what we all valued, we would certainly disagree about the relative values things have for us.

•While all may agree, for example, that an affordable health system, a healthy educational system, and a clean environment are all parts of the common good, some will say that more should be invested in health than in education, while others will favor directing resources to the environment over both health and education.

• Such disagreements are bound to undercut our ability to evoke a sustained and widespread commitment to the common good. In the face of such pluralism, efforts to bring about the common good can only lead to adopting or promoting the views of some, while excluding others, violating the principle of treating people equally.

• Moreover, such efforts would force everyone to support some specific notion of the common good, violating the freedom of those who do not share in that goal, and inevitably leading to paternalism (imposing one group's preference on others), tyranny, and oppression.

• A second problem encountered by proponents of the common good is what is sometimes called the "free-rider problem". The benefits that a common good provides are, available to everyone, including those who choose not to do their part to maintain the common good. Individuals can become "free riders" by taking the benefits the common good provides while refusing to do their part to support the common good.

• An adequate water supply, for example, is a common good from which all people benefit. But to maintain an adequate supply of water during a drought, people must conserve water, which entails sacrifices. Some individuals may be reluctant to do their share, however, since they know that so long as enough other people conserve, they can enjoy the benefits without reducing their own consumption. If enough people become free riders in this way, the common good which depends on their support will be destroyed.

• The third problem encountered by attempts to promote the common good is that of individualism. Our culture views society as comprised of separate independent individuals who are free to pursue their own individual goals and interests without interference from others. In this individualistic culture it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to convince people that they should sacrifice some of their freedom, some of their personal goals, and some of their self-interest, for the sake of the "common good". Our cultural traditions, in fact, reinforce the individual who thinks that she should not have to contribute to the community's common good, but should be left free to pursue her own personal ends.

• Finally, appeals to the common good are confronted by the problem of an unequal sharing of burdens. Maintaining a common good often requires that particular individuals or particular groups bear costs that are much greater than those borne by others. Maintaining an unpolluted environment, for example, may require that particular firms that pollute install costly pollution control devices, undercutting profits. Making employment opportunities more equal may require that some groups, such as white males, sacrifice their own employment chances.

•Forcing particular groups or individuals to carry such unequal burdens "for the sake of the common good", is, at least arguably, unjust. Moreover, the prospect of having to carry such heavy and unequal burdens leads such groups and individuals to resist any attempts to secure common goods.

HOW TO USE THE COMMON HOW TO USE THE COMMON GOOD TESTGOOD TEST • A. INTRODUCE THE TEST:

Ask: “Are we doing our part to look out for the common good in this situation?”

B.  WHY IS THE COMMON GOOD TEST A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?Being able to live together in a community requires that we pay attention not just to our individual goods but also to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of us all. This common good includes the social systems, institutions, natural and technological environments, and ways of understanding that we all depend on to pursue our individual goods.  For a community to be sustainable, these must work in a manner that benefits all people.  Since we all have access to the common good and benefit from it, we all have obligations to establish and maintain it.  

• C.  APPLY THE TEST:      STEP 1: Specify what parts of the common good are involved.    Which social systems, institutions, environments and ideologies that we depend on for a functioning and healthy society could be advanced or damaged by our actions in this situation?  What actions will strengthen them?  What actions will weaken them?•    Whereas the utility test focuses on the total benefits and harms produced, the common good test focuses on whether the action or situation contributes to or harms a particular aspect of the common good.

•    The common good includes among other things the family, social, educational, and health care systems required for human growth, development, and happiness; the police, courts, military and political system required for public safety, a functioning government, and peace; the businesses, financial, and legal systems necessary for the production of goods and services and economic development; and the ecosystem and technology which make all these activities possible.  The common good also includes the sets of ideas we use to understand the different aspects of the common good.

• STEP 2: Explain why we have obligation to promote or protect the common good.     •    What obligation does my company or I have to maintain these aspects of the common good because we benefit from them?

•    If my company benefits from having stable families and educated workers, for example, do we have an obligation to promote these aspects of the common good or at least not to harm them?

• STEP 3: Does the proposed action conflict with this obligation? •    Do our employment policies and actions in the community weaken family stability or education or put these aspects of the common good at risk?

•    This question might help an investment banker recognize that even though he is due a multimillion dollar bonus, the common good of restoring trust in the financial system may require that he give it up; that the common good of maximizing the good effects of distributing federal stimulus money in a severe recession means that lobbying for a particular interest group needs to be restrained more than in ordinary times; or that the common good of maintaining the courts as an efficient problem resolution mechanism requires that even though a company’s deep pockets enable them to stall a lawsuit indefinitely by filing an endless motions, they should not do so.

•D: DRAW A CONCLUSION:If the action conflicts with my or my organization’s obligation to contribute to the common good, it is the wrong action.

STRENGTHS OF THE TEST:STRENGTHS OF THE TEST:

•  It provides an important reality check for individuals and organizations.  No matter how much a person or group has contributed to their own success, the test reminds them that society and the natural and technological environments also contribute to that success and that existing institutions and ideologies enable them to carry on their activities.

• It is a good check on the free rider problem where the efforts of others may allow me not to contribute.

WEAKNESSES OF THE TEST

• There is a great deal of disagreement over what constitutes the common good and over what relative value the parts have should they conflict.

• The test runs contrary to a long-standing tradition of individualism and the pursuit of self-interest in some western societies, so it may stir up immediate resistance that could distract from the ethical issue to be resolved.

Ethics and VirtueEthics and Virtue• For many of us, the fundamental question of

ethics is, "What should I do?" or "How should I act?" Ethics is supposed to provide us with "moral principles" or universal rules that tell us what to do. Many people, for example, read passionate adherents of the moral principle of utilitarianism: "Everyone is obligated to do whatever will achieve the greatest good for the greatest number." Others are just as devoted to the basic principle of Immanuel Kant: "Everyone is obligated to act only in ways that respect the human dignity and moral rights of all persons."

• Moral principles focus primarily on people's actions and doings. We "apply" them by asking what these principles require of us in particular circumstances, e.g., when considering whether to lie or to commit suicide.

• We also apply them when we ask what they require of us as professionals, e.g., lawyers, doctors, or business people, or what they require of our social policies and institutions.

• In the last decade, dozens of ethics centers and programs devoted to "business ethics", "legal ethics", "medical ethics", and "ethics in public policy" have sprung up. These centers are designed to examine the implications moral principles have for our lives.

•According to "virtue ethics", there are certain ideals, such as excellence or dedication to the common good, toward which we should strive and which allow the full development of our humanity. These ideals are discovered through thoughtful reflection on what we as human beings have the potential to become.

•"Virtues" are attitudes, dispositions, or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop this potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues.

• How does a person develop virtues? Virtues are developed through learning and through practice. As the ancient philosopher Aristotle suggested, a person can improve his or her character by practicing self-discipline, while a good character can be corrupted by repeated self-indulgence. Just as the ability to run a marathon develops through much training and practice, so too does our capacity to be fair, to be courageous, or to be compassionate.

•Virtues are habits. That is, once they are acquired, they become characteristic of a person. For example, a person who has developed the virtue of generosity is often referred to as a generous person because he or she tends to be generous in all circumstances. Moreover, a person who has developed virtues will be naturally disposed to act in ways that are consistent with moral principles. The virtuous person is the ethical person.

• At the heart of the virtue approach to ethics is the idea of "community". A person's character traits are not developed in isolation, but within and by the communities to which he or she belongs, including family, church, school, and other private and public associations.

• As people grow and mature, their personalities are deeply affected by the values that their communities prize, by the personality traits that their communities encourage, and by the role models that their communities put forth for imitation through traditional stories, fiction, movies, television, and so on. The virtue approach urges us to pay attention to the contours of our communities and the habits of character they encourage and instill.

HOW TO USE THE HOW TO USE THE CHARACTER OR VIRTUE CHARACTER OR VIRTUE TESTTEST • A.  INTRODUCE THE TEST

 Ask: “Does this action represent the kind of person I am or want to be?”      Ask: “Does it represent my organization’s reputation or vision of the kind of enterprise it wants to be?”

• B. WHY IS THE CHARACTER OR VIRTUE TEST A VALID WAY TO DECIDE RIGHT AND WRONG?The kind of person I am, or the kind of organization this is, are as important to living a good life as what specific actions we do.  My character and the organization’s culture are represented and influenced both by how we act and by what we aspire to be. To focus only, as the other ethics test do, on how to judge individual actions to be right or wrong would be to miss an important aspect of ethics.  Part of our aspiration is to have virtues or habits of acting in certain ways that fit our character.  If we know who we are and aspire to be, we can decide how to act by considering whether an action is something that would be done by the kind of person or organization we want to be.

• C.  APPLY THE TEST    STEP 1: Ask if the action will help to make you the kind of person you want to be.• Consider whether the action fits your self-image or the story you would like to tell about your life.  The most excellent or virtuous people are usually thought of as those who consistently act with honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, prudence and so on.

• One way to see if the action fits with who you would like to be, is to ask whether the action is something that the person you most respect in your company would do. • Business people often call this question the Mirror Test, “If you do this action, will you be able to look at yourself in the mirror every morning?”

•STEP 2: Ask whether the action will fit the company’s reputation or vision of what it would like to be.  An individual’s actions represent and affect not only him/her but also the firm or organization he/she works in.  The image of what the company wants to be will be found in the mission and vision statements, the core values, and the ethics code, as well as in the stories that are told about the heroes and the villains in the firm’s history.

• STEP 3: Ask whether the action maintains the right balance between excellence and success for the firm?  • Excellence refers to how well the activities of the organization are being done.  Each activity, such as producing a product or service, marketing it to customers, financing the organization, accounting and maintaining controls, and so on can be done in the best possible way.  Striving for too much perfection in any one of these areas, however, can have an affect on the ability of the firm to do the other activities and generate profits necessary to keep it in operation over the long term.  If the product or service is too perfect for the customer to afford it, then the firm will fail.  • Overemphasizing success, measured as profitability, can affect the excellence of the firm’s activities, and thereby cause the firm to fail.   • Actions that maintain the right balance between excellence and success are therefore the right ones.

•STEP 4: Draw a conclusionActions that fit your idea of what kind of person you want to be, and with the firm’s idea of what it wants to be are good actions.

STRENGTHS OF THE VIRTUE OR CHARACTER TEST

• Focuses us not just on individual actions but on the larger questions of what kind of individuals and companies it is good to be and on the role that the community we are part of plays in setting those ideals.

• Emphasizes that being an ethical person or an ethical company is not just a matter of following ethical rules but involves developing habits of acting in the way that we, our company, and the society think that good people and companies should act.

WEAKNESSES OF THE VIRTUE OR WEAKNESSES OF THE VIRTUE OR CHARACTER TESTCHARACTER TEST• Psychological research suggests that most of us do

not act in a consistent way across different situations, motivated by our character traits such as honesty or generosity. We are motivated more by factors in the situation, even those with no ethical significance, as when we act generously because of the good smells of a bakery or less generously because of a higher ambient noise level. 

• Yet we continue to attribute our own and others’ actions to good or bad character traits rather than to factors in the situation.  This research doesn’t indicate that we don’t have dispositions to act a certain way but that steady virtue may be very hard to develop because situational factors do affect us so much.  Having an ideal account of a particular virtue like courage, however, or a hero in our company to emulate might help us strive to develop the habit of acting in a virtuous way.

HOW TO COMPARE CONCLUSIONS FROMHOW TO COMPARE CONCLUSIONS FROM

THE DIFFERENT TESTSTHE DIFFERENT TESTS

• In many business and professional situations, one ethics test will provide all the guidance needed in the time available for making a decision.

• It is helpful, however, to use more than one ethical principle to increase the level of confidence in the rightness of the decision when:– the situation is complicated– the decision will make a significant

difference to a person or organization– there are contrary points of view

supported by what seem to be good reasons.

In ethics as in politics, it is important to be confident but

never certain.

•Experience suggests that for most ethical situations multiple ethical tests will yield the same judgment of right or wrong.  The only difference will be their reasons why the action is right or wrong.

• Using several principles willUsing several principles will – increase the chances of generating

new insights into why an action is right or wrong.

– be very helpful in designing alternative actions

–  give an opportunity for the strengths and weaknesses of the principles to balance each other out

When the principles When the principles conflict, what is a person to conflict, what is a person to do?  do?   • If action being considered is ethical

according to some of the principles and not ethical according to others, a person can appeal to reflection and judgment to indicate which principle(s) capture the most important features of the situation. 

• Reflection can either be an internal conversation with yourself, or better a conversation with other people in the firm whose judgments you trust.

•Ethical people can and do sometimes disagree as to which principle(s) should govern in a particular situation and therefore disagree about what was the ethical thing to do.  At least these disagreements are among people who are using ethical tests to determine how they should act.

• The trading of insights among the various ethics tests is part of the practical wisdom that we should all cultivate.  Maximizing happiness in the utility test or maintaining the common good may require tempering or even forgoing the exceptions, choices, rights, justice and/or character principles. 

• Strong considerations raised by the exceptions, choices, rights, justice, and/or character principles may override the claims of the greater or the common good.  We should be conscious, however, that we do this at the apex of a steep and slippery slope.  When making those kinds of decisions, a person should remember

• We should be conscious, however, that we do this at the apex of a steep and slippery slope.  When making those kinds of decisions, a person should remember – that the strong emotional charge carried by

his/her intuitive individual judgment does not guarantee that the judgment is right;

– that when reflecting on the judgment with myself, I will often give myself special considerations that I would not give to others;

– and that to overcome the limitations of my intuitions and self-reflection he/she should engage wise and experienced people in a discussion about the best balance among the ethics tests for this situation.