Business Contextual ethics

CONTEXTUAL ETHICS
Mini-MBA Course
Ch.5
Prepared by:

Amr Abdel-Aziz
Computer science, Helwan University
Amr.abdulaziz@outlook.com

When it comes to ethics, there are ample theories from
philosophy, psychology, legal, and sociology. Within
globalization, these value-based theories have limited application since
cultural values are unique to a region. A practical framework for
understanding ethics starts with understanding the difference between
context and content. Within most organizations, content drives
policies, structures and behaviors. Knowing the difference between
context and content is like seeing the forest from the trees. A leader
who understands context can navigate and lead any
organization, including one‟s most intimate organization – the family.
The topic of diversity is one area of understanding that separates
content from context. For example, most people train on content – a
specific culture/ethnicity. If you‟re learning contextual skills, you‟d be
mastering the process of understanding any culture, not just being
spoon fed information. You‟re learning to fish, rather than given a
cultural fish. Within this chapter, the partnership of leadership and
ethics provide a natural blend of healthy tools that create powerful
relationships. We‟ll further extend the previous leadership discussion to
ethical dimensions of thought.

UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT


For many, understanding and seeing the context presents
significant challenges. Recently, I was observing a group of
caring adults teaching specific leadership skills to young inner
city children. While the intent was to teach public
speaking, etiquette, and conflict resolution, they used
traditional methods of teaching – by authority and rules. They
told the children to be quiet and even went as far as requiring
them to repeat phrases about being quiet when the teacher
was speaking. This might sound familiar in many
organizations as people need to talk “like” the boss to get
promotions and raises. Now, there is no doubt that children
need to respect other people and be quiet to listen and
learn, but the context of the way they went about their
message was simple – “you will conform to my rules”. Many
organizations still have this unhealthy environment.



Understanding a context is about seeing the forest from
the trees. When you‟re not caught up in the midst of fear
and authority, you get to see something much more
meaningful. Look at “how” the message is delivered to
the audience, not just the content of the message. The
content is always conditional and temporary. Content
changes often, based on events and people
involved. The context is the relationship between
people. Context is about respect or lack
thereof. Context can also be about trust. When leaders
require their employees to obtain training, the contextual
message speaks of a lack of trust while the content
rationale may be solid. If you trusted your people, you
would have confidence that they would behave in an
ethical manner and in the best interest of the
company. If there is limited trust, leaders require all
types of enforcement to influence behavior. Little do
they realize that behaviors are only surfacelevel. Behaviors remain composed while the intent and
values below the surface is context.



Another basic example of context and content is diversity. If
you think about diversity, you might consider other cultures
and races. Diversity, though, resides in almost every
individual. In most of the diversity training sessions I have
observed, companies attempt familiarize their employees with
a specific culture. Often, the immense amount of information
on the various differences between cultures makes minimal
impact, as the differences are forgotten. This is content
training. Diversity has tremendous impact when you look at
the context. In contextual training, the transformation of
thought transcends any specific culture. For example, one
could walk through a process of understanding diversity from
within (i.e. how many different cultures are within you, your
family, your community; how do they work together; what
conflicts do they have internally; do you really know the
specific norms and values of your various
cultures). Contextual training is about getting individuals to
understand themselves and appreciate humanity. Once that
basic fundamental belief is present, skills for exploring new
cultures develop over time. The content of a single culture is
only a tool for practicing the skill of learning about other
cultures. As you walk through life over the next week, see the
context of people‟s communication; go beyond the wordsunderstand the various levels of respect and trust.

CHALLENGES OF BEHAVIORISM


One of the major challenges in ethical practices amongst businesses is
behaviorism. The world of business thrives -on behaviorism. John Watson
(1878-1958) and B.F. Skinner (1904-1990) were the founding fathers of
behaviorism. Within this school of thought, inputs (stimulus) and responding
behaviors (response) are the primary focus of study. In thinking further, are
human beings so simplistic that they will consistently repeated a response to
a certain stimulus? This is a one of the major challenges of leadership theory
as well as ethics. In leadership, countless theories still discuss
behaviors/traits required for successful leadership. Yet, trait theory of
leadership has been debunked for many years. Looking around you,
countless books continue to preach “key” behaviors of leadership as well as
how to behave using those strategies. For all the people who read those
books, you‟d think the world would be a better place by now. An interesting
question to ask those around you – how many people do you know who have
completely changed their lives because of a book they read or a training class
they went to? These actions are only a starting point for transformation, not
the desired outcomes.





Ethical leadership is far more than providing content training to
employees. In order to develop people who can be ethical, the
theory of education provides a solid foundation of systemically
enhancing ethical behaviors. Let‟s look at the foundations of
adult learning.
According to research, your lifetime achievements and earning
comes from workplace learning (up to 85%); formal education
only accounts for 15 percent of that success. People spend
between 12 to 16 years in formal education, only learning 15%
of what they need to be successful. Something is not working
within the educational system. In the business world, taking a
training course represents an attempt to address a problem.
For example, the huge attention on ethical practices has
forced many companies to take on ethics training. Yet, these
training programs have failed to reduce legal violations.
Measures of success are often “smiley face” surveys or
attendance numbers. They fail to provide a feedback loop that
creates permanent changes in behaviors or thinking. The
concept of a honeymoon effect describes the lack of
permanent change, as newly acquired behaviors fade within
days or weeks.



To attempt to “fix” this issue, a conceptual understanding in the birth
of the current education system provides insight into the root cause.
The seed that gave birth to the college/university educational
system was the industrial revolution. Before that era, education was
mostly informal apprenticeships where the apprentice departed the
apprenticeship within a few years to start their own business. Such
a mentality of entrepreneurship did not align with the needs of the
industrial revolution. The industrial revolution required workers who
were controllable by management, not entrepreneurs who had
ideas of their own ideas. The need for skilled and controllable labor
in factories helped drive the formation of higher education systems
for learners. With a heavy influence by Taylor‟s scientific principles
of management, the integrated experiential learning in the
apprenticeship model perished. In order to match the needs of
industry, the division of technical knowledge aligned with the
division of labor. Based on the needs of the economy and the lack
of a formal education system, the vocational movement in the early
1900‟s created a system that produced controllable workers who
contained segregated knowledge that lacked interconnectedness of
knowledge and multiple intelligences.



While the vocational movement created an automobile
that launched the United States toward a world
power, this automobile will not run on the information
superhighway or reach space. The typical content
changes to the existing system such as standardization
fails to consider the various intelligences of the human
being and the interconnectedness of knowledge and
people. Furthermore, blaming teachers/trainers for the
issues in the system is a band aid approach to a
systemic problem. No amount of fixing or blame will ever
create a new educational vehicle that launches
humanity into a global knowledge-based economy.





Currently, an enormous amount of research has shown the validity
of new methods of education, such as constructivism which sees
learning as a partnership in constructing knowledge from new
information and existing experiences or tacit knowledge. Especially
for adult learners, the definition of learning as a permanent change
in both behavior and thought needs to be at the foundation of
educational systems, along with anagogical beliefs. Most of these
methods call for a contextual focus in the system. This would be a
complete redesign of adult education, including the structure of
educational institutions and training organizations. The new
educational vehicle would encompass fundamentals of knowledge
creation spirals, as well as variations of constructivism and
meaningful learning methodologies. At the foundations of this new
educational vehicle, the principles of andragogy offer a flexible
framework that transcends the content of a fast paced
environment, which is constantly changing. Leaders in the
classroom, including professors and trainers, need to believe that
learners are naturally creative and innovative who possess selfdirection, rather than the traditional pedagogical/industrial belief
that learners are child-like and require direction.





Unfortunately, many training programs fail to address the
fundamental beliefs required for contemporary theories and
methods. Regardless of the brilliance of theories and
methods, the lack of congruence between one‟s
beliefs/values and theories/methods creates the honeymoon
effect in both educators and adult learners.
Furthermore, little research exists for individual application of
values and beliefs within the organizational context. Too
many organizations focus on content driven needs such as
immediate performance, rather than focus on the process of
learning or challenging the basic assumptions in beliefs.
These factors are a major roadblock to learning.
Another key foundation of the new educational vehicle is a
self-correction mechanism based on the true impact of
learning, clearly not exhibited by the typical „smile faces‟ in
survey. One possibility in creating such a feedback loop may
entail four levels of learning outcomes (Kirkpatrick):
reaction, learning, behavior, and results or knowledge
creation spiral. This would create a sustainable system that
would take on the characteristics of a living system. A
system that is self-correcting, self-programming and selfhealing, similar to a human being.



As you‟re looking to explore ethical leadership, one question
to ask yourself – is it really ethical to
influence/manipulate/force people to behave in a certain
manner? Most organizations require/force their employees
to take ethical training. Yet, how much do people learn when
being forced to attend a class? This is where the context of
most organizational actions in ethical training has
challenges and lacks foundation. Yet, this is very profitable
for training organizations as well. This could be a
coincidence or a carefully designed program (i.e. if our
training program does not produce systemic changes in
thought and behavior, we can blame it on the employees
and get another training contract for the following year; after
all, many organizational leaders still think it‟s the employees‟
fault for many mistakes and refer them to training and not
themselves).



As a leader, going beyond the behaviors of people
is the key toward creating systemic change. The
following figure is adopted from Neurolinguistic
programming (NLP) and knowledge management
theories. What you see in behaviors is usually
content. The context is the internal thought
processes that are driven by one‟s identity and
beliefs/values.





For example, think of an individual you know who sees the
world as against them. In their conversations, someone or
something is always out to get them. They tend to blame
others and events for everything bad that happens to them.
With so many lawyers, there‟s an abundance of those
examples. The identity of those people is victims. They see
themselves as powerless/helpless. They have a belief that the
world is against them or certain people/groups such as
management is always out to get them. As a result, they
behave with little ownership or responsibility. Here‟s the tough
pill to swallow: each of you have some level of this in some
area of your life at some point in your journey. We all go
through such a stage.
For working professionals with a strong victim identity, all the
training in the world will not effectively change the behaviors
systemically. If you hope to change someone, you must start
at the core of the individual. This is where real leaders make a
difference.

ETHICS WITHIN THE WORLD OF COMPETITION AND
SCARCITY


As we begin to dig deeper into leadership and ethics, some of the
basic beliefs dominating the capitalist society must be critically
examined. Going beyond surface behaviors, two powerful beliefs drive
the behaviors of people: the policies of organizations and the politics
of governments. Some of the defining foundations of capitalism are
competition and scarcity. In order to be successful, capitalism
promotes healthy competition in a constant struggle for scarce
resources. From the humanistic perspective of ethics, competition and
scarcity heavily influence many of the ethical challenges that exist
today. Let‟s look at the concept of scarcity in industrialized nations. An
intrinsic belief in scarcity calls for actions that fight for resources
required for survival. Do we really have a scarcity of resources related
to survival? For example, during the depression and different stages of
human evolution, food and water was a scarce resource. Today, you
can turn on the faucet for ample water in some countries or go to a
church or food kitchen for food and shelter. Many governments have a
myriad of programs to help the poor and needy. Even people within
the levels of poverty in industrialized nations are considered well off
compared to the large portion of the world. Countless scholars have
stated that we‟re in an age of knowledge and information. Within this
type of economy, does scarcity really exist?



Knowledge is scarce” – can there be a lack of
knowledge? Looking at every aspect of an
organization, knowledge of
processes, products, services, cultures and structures is
abundant. Remember the last time you had a disagreement
with someone? Didn‟t they have plenty of reasons for their
position as you had for your position? The challenge with most
organizations is not that knowledge is scarce. Instead, the
lack of translating tacit knowledge into organizational
knowledge creates the appearance of scarcity in knowledge.
For many organizations, they spend a great deal protecting
their scarce knowledge. Consider this minor investigation in
your organization – determine the number of people your
organization has in two areas: 1). in security (both technology
and physical space) and 2). in innovations (people dedicated
to new knowledge creation). What does that ratio look like? If
you want to go further, how much funding is given toward
scarcity (fear of one‟s knowledge) versus innovations (i.e.
departments who are strictly interested in creating new
knowledge)?



The belief in scarcity creates endless competition for
those resources. What if organizations spent more time
on innovations? Rather than training programs
“protecting” perceived scarce resource (knowledge)
and “forcing” conformity, shouldn‟t they focus the
attention on innovation and inspiration? Consider a
company or individual that is constantly innovating –
new ideas, new processes, new products/services, it
would be impossible for any competitor to keep up by
copying these innovations. By the time a competitor
copied an innovation, your organization would be a few
steps ahead with another innovation. Their presence in
the market place can only enhance the market
awareness of your innovation and keep the market
looking for your next innovation.



One of the basic principles mentioned in quantum
physics, neurobiological studies/cognitive psychology
and energy anatomy is the power of intention. The
principle states: you will get what you focus
on. Although this principle may not be conclusive, it
does offer an interesting perspective on life. For those
people who believe that there is not enough of
anything, they‟ll constantly fear the lack of the resource
and fight for it. As you‟ve seen, in fear, the human
potential is greatly limited to three responses
(flee, freeze, or fight). For example, people who don‟t
think they have enough money…even when they win
the lottery, they feel they don‟t have enough
money. Shortly after winning the lottery, they end up in
worse shape than they started.





The opposing belief to scarcity is abundance. Within
abundance, there are ample resources including
food, shelter, knowledge, money, rewards, etc. Since one‟s
limited mental resources are not busy with fear of scarcity, the
power of inspiration opens the door to higher order thought.
Competition is another challenging concept that thrives in
business and leadership. Many of today‟s business executives
understand the premise of leadership, yet, their primal instinct to
compete creates policies that limit imagination. In order to
compete, many companies institute strict measures for
performance. In a major technology firm, these strict measures
are used to maintain a high level of competitiveness within the
industry. Those managers who don‟t perform up to these
standards are eliminated. In order to survive, many of these
managers began to distort the numbers to meet these
standards. In their mind, managers‟ efforts have not paid off to
meet those standards. To continue the required support for their
family (scarcity), they needed to skew the numbers within their
department. Although the actual figures of these adjustments
were minor within the department, the compounding effect of
these departments causes a major exaggeration of
reality. Within a following year, this technology giant‟s stock
prices dropped dramatically as these minor distortions at the
department level killed the company. Do you know which
company this is?



In competition, there is only one winner and many
losers. It utilizes scarcity to eliminate the possibility of
everyone winning. Competition also creates an
immense dependence on outcome measures. In order
to determine success in competition, the only aspect of
a project/service that matters is the outcome. While this
may be logical to machines, human beings are much
more complex. Within the world of fear, humanity‟s
potential is very limited. Within the world of inspiration
and abundance, our potential is endless. Take for
example the last time you went on vacation. How much
work were you able to complete the day before you
left? You may find yourself completing 2 to 4 times
more, especially if you made a check list. This is the
power of inspiration.



True competition only exists within you. It is not an
external concept of comparison. When you begin
to mark yourself with your own performance
standards, your creativity has the potential to help
you learn. Without a conclusive end of a dictated
outcome, learning becomes a focus. This growth
allows every individual to win. As you live your life
over the next week, consider whether the context of
your decisions and actions are out of scarcity and
competition. When you learn to live in
abundance, you‟re powerful enough to leave any
job (since there are plenty of careers out there) just
to maintain the congruence to yourself. When you
have that integrity, being ethical in the context of
relationships with others becomes simple.

See how your tendencies of
competition and scarcity compare
with the actions that are congruent
with your values. You are capable
and powerful enough to change the
world.

SOLIDIFYING PERSONAL ETHICS


In order for any leader to make a positive impact on
people and sustain that impact, a solid personal
value statement with minimal ambiguity is the
start. Without an internal guide to deepen selfawareness, leaders begin to allow one‟s left-brain
interpreter to gain control and rationalize every
action as just and reasonable.



In a recent engagement of a leadership development
program, there was a person (we‟ll call that person Pat)
who was in charge of hiring the experts to conduct the
development. As I engaged this organization, it became
apparent that management principles of dictation and
conformity were valued. Instruction on how to behave
strictly governed all participants within the program. The
leaders within the organization, including Pat, attempted
to apply those principles to me in my role. “Here‟s how I
want you to teach the members using this… and that
…”. Without ever asking me what I had thought, Pat
constantly provided “management” corrections after
every session in a 6- week program. When I chose not
to adopt these management corrections, Pat chose to
tell me how disrespectful I was toward her. Methods of
accomplishing a task gave birth to disagreements; these
disagreements grew to be disrespectful actions, while
no inquiries of methods emerged.



How interesting, I thought. Here are “leaders” by position, so
insecure in their place that they have to make everyone else
wrong and generalize events into someone doing something
to them. Without asking simple questions like – “Can you
share with me your thoughts on this method?” Pat chose to
blame. In one specific incident, Pat chose to tell me that I had
challenged another leader concerning her area of
expertise. Interestingly enough, when the second time that
Pat chose to use it as an example again, this other leader of
the organization was present. I looked at her and asked, “Did
you see that as a challenge?” She came out and said no and
softly apologized to Pat that she did not feel that at all. She
felt it was rather helpful to see other
perspectives. Immediately, Pat chose to tell this other
person, “Well, you mislead me.” More blame, in the endless
cycle of management behaviors.





After 3 weeks of this attempt to “manage” the program and
myself, I began to reflect on the purpose of the program. Within
the environment created by these managers who desire
conformity, will a leadership program reach its intended
goal? Worse yet, even if the program is incredibly
successful, these members will have a more difficult time in the
conforming environment of people like Pat. From a leadership
perspective, I was not about to be “micromanaged” by
anyone. My staff was not about to be further abused and picked
on for every little action. In looking at the overall context of the
program, what was the contextual message we provided to the
participants of the program if we walked away? Looking back at
my personal/organizational values, the contextual message given
to many young people is vastly more important than dealing with
the negative content of a few.
Below is an example of a personal/organizational values
statement. To maintain congruence and simplicity of emotional
peace, reflection utilizing this statement provides a contextual
guide to all situations. Once you have built a solid
foundation, move it toward a values statement for your most
intimate organization and then your larger organization.

EXAMPLE: ORGANIZATIONAL VALUE
STATEMENT









Balance – having the balance of multiple intelligences: intellect/analytical
intelligence, emotional intelligence, spiritual / systems intelligence, and
somatic intelligence. Maintaining a life style that incorporates the
balanced developments of all intelligences and passions.
Growth – constant learning through knowledge creation spiral: being
challenged, applying newly gained knowledge and measuring all aspects
of learning, conducting longitudinal research to continue growth
internally. The best investment is the constant reinvention of self.
Integrity – doing what is promised at all times; BE what we teach; stay in
congruence with all environments; being honest with self.
Truth – always be willing to share 100% of the truth; always be open to
the truths of other people through respect and lack of any
judgment. Deliver the truth in a way that moves people, especially when
the truth is ugly. Consider that people may not be ready for that truth
and allow the wisdom of the system to take them on their paths.
Humanity – people are at the core of every event, organization, or
product/service. Value people and always focus on people as an
ultimate purpose of life – creating systemic change from within for human
evolution.







Passion – be what lights the fire inside at all
times, nothing less. Conscious chose every
engagement.
Systemic wisdom – always seek to apply mental and
emotional energies at the root cause, creating systemic
changes that sustains effort. Rarely being the Band-Aid
to any problem or situation.
Empowerment – consistent empower people to take
action and engage in relationships that empower all
involved. Calling out victim-mentality and offer a
different path toward creating an empowered BEING.
Choose to live beyond the reach of traditional
management assumptions and paradigms.












Innovation – live without a box. Recreate every reality from
an abundance, multiplicity and inspirational perspective.
The values provide a solid foundation for a vision
statement. A vision statement has many content criteria and
just one simple contextual requirement. A vision statement
must inspire you to be greater than who you are. Once it is
inspiring to you, it will also inspire others.
The content basics include:
Brief – 2-3 sentences, easy to remember
Clear
Abstract – leaves some room for interpretation
Challenging
Future Oriented – the impact
Stable – very long term

EXAMPLE VISION STATEMENT: TO BE THE
WORLD’S LEADING ELECTRONICS PRODUCER








As you move forward within creating a personal vision
statement, start with NO FEAR. There should be no
blame, excuses or denial (in B.E.D.). Take the most optimal
view of your accomplishments. Once you get a statement
down, work further and ask yourself – “What is the impact
when you‟ve done that?” And ask again once you answered it
once, “What is the impact when you‟ve done that?” Only after
a number of iterations, can you get to the larger picture of how
you can be for society.
Once you have a solid foundation of self, do a quick reference
check on your relationships with people. Ask yourself these
questions in reflect of these values, vision and the people that
are in your life:
Who is critical to my life development and to what
extent?
Who sustains me and to what extent?
Who challenges me and to what extent?

JUDGMENT – THE ENEMY OF ETHICS


Think back for a moment, to a time when you sat in
a classroom waiting to get your exams back. As
the teacher called out the names of students, your
heart beats a thousands beats per minute. Did I
study enough, you ask yourself. Am I going to pass
the class? Please, don’t let me be at the bottom of
the curve…What will my parents think if I don’t get
a good grade…?



Now think back to a performance review with your
boss. How did it feel as you prepared your
responses to last year‟s improvement plan? Did
you find yourself digging deep to find examples of
how you might have been an exemplary
employee? As you walked into your boss‟s office
and sat down, what thoughts went through your
mind as he pulled out your file… Am I going to get
a raise this year…? I really deserve that 3% and
need it. I heard money was tight this year…did I
outperform my co-workers to get that raise I
wanted…?

Looking at the two experiences, how were they
similar? In one instance, you were a child, full of
hope and uninhibited dreams. In the other, work life
has taught you to have tougher skin, while your
goals and dreams are a lot more “logical”.
 Remember the last wedding you went to? When
there was no one else on the dance floor, just after
dinner, you probably saw a bunch of little kids just
dancing and having a great time. How old were
they? At some point, you may also recognize that
there were older children who chose not to
dance. How old were they? Why do you think they
didn‟t get out there to dance anymore? If you
asked them, they‟d probably tell you that they don‟t
want to look stupid – a common fear that many
people have. When do we become fearful of
judgment of others?








According to well-known authors and researchers, “the main
purpose of grades is to compare one student against
another. Most people are also aware that competition puts a
strain on friendships and too often consigns students to a
solitary journey”. In another recent study of grades given to
85 9th grade students, grade variances from the first opinion
rarely changes. In other words, once the teacher made up
his/her mind about a certain student, that‟s the grade they‟ll
get for the rest of the year. What does this behavior teach our
children…?
Consider this contextual lesson – if you want to be
successful, you need to worry about what your
teachers/superiors think and do what they want you to do.
Although this is a tough pill to swallow, the form of
programming was designed into the system to create
subservient workers. Current application of grades is a
common form of judgment. They throw students into a
maelstrom of back
stabbing, competition, subservience, cheating, and
scarcity. As you get into the professional world or even as a
business owner, these grading scales are still present to force
conformity within the system. How much time do you spend
worrying about what your superior thinks of you?






Grades and performance reviews are labels created by
human beings. When I was in an Engineering
Mechanics class, the teacher informed us that 1/3 of the
class were honors students. I was not in that group at
the time. As a programmed competitor, I decided that I
was smarter than those honors students and I was
going to beat them all. As I worked diligently with every
homework assignment, I didn‟t help anyone else, fearing
that they might beat me. At the end of the course, I was
3rd in the class with no new friendships. What did it
mean to be 3rd?
Is there only a limited amount of A‟s to be given or a
limited amount of reward?
NO! The concept of judgment is often not within any
specific content. Within the context of the
educational/organizational system, judgment creates the
desire to conform to other people‟s perceived
desires. Why bother chasing what you think might be
the goal of someone else? Why not value your goals
and desires?



Our society provides abundance! There‟s always plenty of A‟s
in any class. There are always plenty of rewards/money to
give out. The trick to all of this is to give yourself an
A, according to Zander & Zander (2000), and truly believe in
your A-abilities. This is self-love; it yields self confidence.
Then, look at everyone around you – they are all A-people as
well, waiting to blossom. Moving this into basic daily
practices, anytime when you make a statement including the
word “you”, it may be a form of judgment. Go ahead, try and
make a statement about someone and see how that can be a
judgment. “You‟re always late to meetings”. “You‟re not doing
this right”. “You need to work harder”. In each of these
statements, you‟re making a judgment about someone else‟s
performance based on your own perceptions with limited
knowledge of the circumstance. Judgment is a common form
of blame, taking power away from people.



What if you changed the wording to avoid judgment and
blame. In the statement above – “You‟re always late to
meetings”, change the statement to be empowering with a first
person reference. “Can you please help me understand your
rationale for coming to meetings late and what can I do to
help”? Asking for clarification and understanding empowers
others to analyze their behavior, without getting into a
competitive mindset. It opens the mind for possible solutions
and the continuing conversation becomes a partnership of
problem-solving.
Imagine a world where the possibility to achieve anything they
desired is present. In that belief system, the universal desire
in the people to contribute to others and their community
shines. In such a business, there is no fear of judgment or
competition, only collaboration between equal partners; how
innovative will this business be? What kind of revenues are
generated when every person is focused on, and believes in
their ability to achieve anything? Some might call that a
empowering vision statement. Without judgment, there is only
one failure – you only fail if you stop making an
effort. Otherwise, as long as you stay on the journey of
learning, all outcomes are perfect outcomes! Even if you
make a horrible mistake, such a mistake becomes a great
lesson for future improvements.










Giving yourself an A is free. In practice, start with the following:
On a weekly basis, revisit various areas of your life and see
where judgment placed you inside a context that is drastically
smaller than your dreams. Anytime when you catch yourself say
“I can‟t do that” – that‟s a self-judgment. Realize that those
judgments are human invented realities having nothing to do with
you.
When working at any task, ask yourself – is this what a A-student
or business leader would do? Allow yourself the room to be the
best and give the best.
At times, you‟ll often find yourself judging others. When that
occurs, ask yourself, do I have the right to judge another
person? For example, coming from New York, it‟s common to
verbally abuse someone who cuts you off while driving. In a mild
mood, you might call that person a “jerk” – which is a judging
word. What if that person was compassionate enough not to hit
a rabbit or a child that you simply cannot see? What if that
person simply did not see you? Many possibilities open up once
you minimize judgment of others.
These simple practices will help you create a new reality. Egypt
has plenty of people who blame, make excuses, and are in
denial. You don‟t have to be one. Just give yourself an A and
walk outside the system of judgment.

ETHICAL ORGANIZATIONS: REDUCTION OF
CONTROL MENTAL...


Are you being controlled by your organization? How are
you “controlling” those around you? Consider this –
ethical organizations minimize control by allowing
people to flow. These organizations have organic or
flexible structures that allow the innovative minds of
humanity to function without boundaries. Every
employee is capable of changing the world, not to
mention the organization. This fundamental belief drives
structures to be flexible and often flat. This is a huge
leap from management principles to true
leadership. Before moving into this realm, a historical
view of control mentality provides the context of our
journey as a species.



Many managers and proclaimed leaders of today still apply
Taylor‟s principles of scientific measurement – where the
manager‟s role is to simply manage the tasks and get the
results (Jacques, 1996). Some of the basic assumptions in
Taylor‟s principles of scientific measurement include: human
beings are not creative where they are not capable of
identifying problems and creating solutions for them;
employees are child-like and need to be managed by
managers (extrinsic motivation for control); people need to be
categorized for maximum efficiency. According to Bowles
(1997), many myths of rationality dominate most technical
fields. Although there is a slight shift toward human capital
(Jacques, 1996) and the importance of motivation and
leadership, most organizations lack the awareness required to
provide the proper education to managers and managedemployees. The system and structure required for the human
dimension to flourish does not exist in most structures. There
is a definite need to provide the appropriate knowledge for
both managers and managed-employees to enhance their
working relationships, while redesigning the system/context
that organizations function under.

THE CURRENT MANAGER/MANAGEDEMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP


The manager/managed-employee relationship has not changed much
since the early 1900‟s. The mindset of management still relies much on
the principles of scientific measurement. In many cases, an individual
learns the skills of his/her duty and performs the tasks of the job. When
they become the best technicians, these individuals are promoted to
perform management duties. These technicians receive little to no
management training. Although they are masterful tacticians at task
accomplishment, effective manager/managed-employee relationship
skills are relatively low, resulting in many protective legal departments
which require all forms of training from ethics to sexual conduct. The
management mindset has been one of the Industrial realities, which
treats people as interchangeable parts of a machine. Modern structural
organizational theory is dominant in many corporations. The most
common myth that perpetuates management in large corporations is
rationality. People are being handled like numbers and tasks. According
to Bowles, a well-known theorist, “the rational approach to management
decisions hinges on information, modeling and analysis, attempting to
reduce all organizational phenomena to numbers. What cannot be
reduced to numbers cannot be managed and therefore is not worthy of
attention. Consequently, the human and social reality of
organizations, which cannot be decomposed into mere numbers, is
discounted”.



In Verizon Wireless, a large telecommunications company, the
new senior management team came aboard and slashed
thousands of jobs with no apparent reason, at least not from
the regional employee perspective. From an internal
perspective, these jobs were responsible for one of the most
profitable markets in the company. Thousands lost their jobs
while few were left to care about the people that made the
company successful. Even those had to bend to the new
culture of rationalism and control. Blaming a tough
economy, corporations and businesses are laying people off
by the thousands. Although much of it is due to economic
reasons, the people who have the knowledge to turn the
business around are being let go. While many executives
speak of human capital, the organizational knowledge within
each individual is rarely captured. What fails to show up on
the accounting books is the knowledge/innovation necessary
to help the organization thrive.



In an ideal world of the manager and the managedemployee, much consideration for one‟s personal goals is
required in everyday activities. In one firm in
Columbus, Ohio, managers and managed-employees discuss
on a monthly basis the personal goals and dreams of the
managed-employee and how the organization can help make
it a reality. Using the alignment of one‟s personal goals and
those of the organization, intrinsic motivation for hard work
takes over daily practices. A break in the myth of rationality is
necessary in order to have a well-functioning
relationship. The practice of total inclusion at all levels
created higher levels of motivation. In this practice, a
manager would solicit managed-employees‟ input on any
decision relevant to the managed-employees. Through the
inclusion practice, the managed-employees will have the
empowerment they require to feel like they are a part of the
management team. Therefore, they eliminate the
interchangeable parts mentality of the managedemployee. Slowly, the concept of an employee fades away
and the concept of human innovation as equal partners take
over.

STRUCTURED-ORGANIZATIONAL BIRTH
WITHIN THE INDUSTRY...


Most of the structure in today‟s organizations came from the Industrial
Revolution. Before the Industrial Revolution, the Federalist reality is
highly admired in comparison to the hierarchy of the Industrial reality. In
the Federalist reality, one‟s personal worth comes from long-term
relationships within the community. Character, credibility and honor were
the foundations to wealth. The differentiating point between the two
realities is in one‟s character and his or her relationship with the
community. If a worker wanted to change his/her way of life, he or she
can go to the bank and obtain resources based on one‟s character. In
the Federalist reality, the sole purpose of a business is to make a profit
through selling their products or services. Money and power does not
reflect success like those in the Industrial reality; wealth is in the
character of the owner and his/her ability to serve the customer. Since
the wealth of the individual is directly tied to the wealth of the community,
the difference in wealth is relatively small. Everyone could have more
than his or her share of the wealth. In addition, the entrepreneurial spirit
provided each individual the room to dream and to work in their own
business in a few years. In the Federalist reality, there is room to dream,
to build relationships and to be supported by the community.



In the Industrial reality, the need for skilled labor in
factories dominated society. The birth of educational
systems intended to have a controllable workforce (the
employee) during the vocational movement in the early
1900‟s. Due to the large organizations, additional
expertise was required. Massive assembly lines
achieved maximum efficiency by treating people as
parts of the industrial machine. As social Darwinism
took over, competitiveness has increasingly become the
hallmark of organizational life in the twentieth
century. As the frontiers of capitalism have expanded
globally, experience of an increasingly competitive world
has come about. The drive for performance, market
share and penetration, return on investment, and profit
are the critical indicators through which organizations
and management assess their competitive position.



As the focus on profit and competitiveness grew, the
individual employee was lost. The hierarchies of the
organizations from the capitalist to the employee grew
greater, as well as the difference in wealth. According to
one famous author (Jacques), the sense of community
was lost as each group fought for their individual
interest. Owners were only interested in the levels of
profit; employees were concerned with absolute levels
of labor and compensation; managers were interested in
the production levels of the employees and their own
security; and the consumers focused on the price and
quality of the product. With such a diversified
interest, each group took actions to maximize their
interest. For managers, owners and capitalists, the
principles of scientific management created the mindset
that employees are interchangeable parts.

Within the context of control – consider
this – is it ethical to control human
behavior? To what degree might it be
acceptable?

THE NEW PARADIGM OF LEADERSHIP:
ORGANIC STRUCTURES
While the control structures of hierarchical organizations continue to limit human
potential, a few organizations are starting to realize the pain limitation of control
structures. To embrace the endless potential of the human mind, organic
structures do not have a strict hierarchy. Instead, they are flexible with ample
room for individual growth. Significant cross training between all levels of the
organization creates boundary spanners with diverse knowledge base. The
organization has a focus on learning that balances the focus on profit and
performance. Performance evaluations are holistic and designed with timely
feedback. Stakeholders from all areas of the organizations provide valuable
double loop feedback. Stakeholder groups like
family, community, peers, customers, leaders and the most vital stakeholder –
the individual perspective encompass a balanced view of relationships and
performance. Utilizing technology as a tool for data gathering, feedback
gathered throughout provides a learning mechanism so that change becomes
the norm. Policies that promote failure and learning dominate the
organization, rather than those that create fear and expect dictated
performance. In order to maintain an organic structure, humility balances ego.
Individuals share a belief that every person has valuable input. Hierarchies fall
to the side giving way to passion for learning.



Consider the initiation of a simple belief – all people
are equally valuable to an organization. When you
take a proactive approach to create understanding
of others, your world will begin to shift. Even if you
have a strict hierarchy, you‟ll gain tremendous
influential power by asking others for their input
before you state your opinion. The following table is
a brief list of behaviors that exhibit
control/management mentalities compared to
empower/leadership principles. Please keep in
mind that a balance of the two is ideal.

You’re a manager, if you….

You’re a leader, if you…

Tell people what do you on certain projects –
micromanagement

Ask people what they think they should do;
provide direction, but never how to get
there. Trust in people

In order to get something your way, you knock on
multiple people‟s doors, playing the politics.

Your way is only one perspective. Seek
understanding of multiple perspectives and
always address the relationship between people.

Provide performance metrics for everyone to
meet at year end.

Create a collaborative process that allow every
individual to provide unique input into their
performance metrics

Conduct annual performance reviews

Provide timely feedback (weekly/monthly) utilizing
multiple stakeholder perspectives while
measuring both performance and learning
achieved

Use extrinsic motivations and money rewards to
influence behaviors

Take the time to ask – “what motivates you or
what are you passionate about?” Utilizes intrinsic
motivations that are sustainable and significantly
cheaper.

Solves problems (playing the hero archetype)

Empowers all people to engage in understanding
of challenges and allow them to make the proper
decisions.

Blame other people/groups/events for failures

Looks at self-contributions for failures and takes a
personal step toward learning

Talk about thinking outside the box while
expecting people to work within certain job
descriptions

Eliminate the box entirely and inspire the boldest
dreams through career development

Uses rules and policies to maintain control

Uses inspiration, values and visions to lift people
outside their comfort zone

Pays special attention to the negative emotional
outbursts (letting people‟s child archetype to
dominate attention)

Pay equal attention toward inspired and driven
people, as well as those in need

Lives in a context of failure and success

Thrives in the journey of endless improvement,
with minimal focus on outcomes.

Business Contextual ethics

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Business Contextual ethics

Recently uploaded

Business Contextual ethics