This document discusses ethics and decision-making in business and the military. It explores moral character and values, the different types of power that influence decisions, and the importance of training to develop competence in ethical reasoning and decision-making. The document emphasizes that ethical decisions are best made by applying organizational policies, procedures, and military doctrine learned through training, in order to make choices that are clear, concise, and consistently right.

1. In this week’s assignments we are tasked with looking at times when ethics and moral standards may
be tested. It is within this test that we find intrinsic value of our upbringing, cultural differences, and the
moral DNA that each of us hold. It is often stated that business ethics is a misnomer. In other words,
business and ethics do not go hand-in-hand. This cannot be further from the truth. Business that reflect
the highest moral character, also show the highest returns from business by utilizing transparent
communication and building trust. So the values that are instilled from solid military training are to be
seen in our day-to-day living as well. Ethics can be seen from varied points of view. Whether that is
teleological or deontological the approach is either linear or parallel. But it is not the ethical and moral
differences that we each encompass, but rather that compass within organizational values or military
guidelines.
When encountering an ethical situation, the true test is not to be judged upon right or wrong.
That is in the eyes of each individual and not within the course of military doctrine, laws, or
organizational policies and procedures. There are five types of power that each of us at one time come
into contact with or yield. That is legitimate (the position you hold of given authority) coercive and
reward (extends from the legitimate position), expert (power based upon knowledge such as your
doctor or lawyer) and finally referent (the position as the one people come to base upon what they hold
in experience and knowledge, but not in any recognized leadership position).
When you find someone in authority that abuses or misrepresents a legitimate position of
power it is there that your courage withstands the test of time. The abil ity for soldiers to understand
these concepts lie within the base training that they have received. That training must also be based
upon a soldier’s level of competence. The level of training and need for ongoing training is derived from
their state and level of readiness psychologically.
The first level is unconscious incompetence: this means we don't know what we don't know. As
soon as we find out the areas we were not aware, we have hit the second level of readiness called
conscious incompetence: which means we know, but do not have the test of time or current knowledge
to make any corrective change. After time in training, we are able to move to the third level of
readiness, which is conscious competence: which means we have an ability to handle the responsibility,
but have to think about it every time we do so. Ultimately, through training and repetition we get the
fourth level of readiness, which is unconscious competence: this means we are able to make decisions
or actions unconsciously based upon training and practice.
Combined with your moral DNA, which in essence is three ways that we process our decision-making.
We leverage predominately one and then utilize the last two as outlying support. The three
levels are principled conscious, which means how we feel, our education, and experience guide that our
decision should be made regardless of the rules or laws abiding. The second is social conscience, which
includes societal concepts, laws, and the belief for the greater good of many people. And the third is rule
compliance, which, as it’s stated, our decisions are based upon rule obedience first and foremost.

2. Our internal ethical drivers or cultural upbringing in history, plus training combined with our
moral DNA allows us to make decisions inside or outside the scope of policies and procedures. It is
knowledge and that no one follows the exact same course of actions from these historical events that
we will educate and train through the four stages of learning, so each individual can better grasp the
decision that needs to be made based upon organizational philosophy, laws, and military doctrine.
The varied scenarios that have been applied in the assignments for week one are adhering to the
philosophies mentioned above. Soldiers are very aware of UCMJ and the results of their actions can
incur coercive or punitive action based upon the third type of power. That fear or acknowledgement
doesn't necessarily alter their path or decision. We have to also consider the impact upon others, based
upon the decision of one or very few.
In general business practice disparate treatment versus disparate impact leverages a very high
percentage of EEOC cases that are filed every day. Disparate impact means that our treatment of
someone is based upon the job itself and therefore may prevent them from doing the job are being part
of the process though the actions were not intentional not discriminatory, just purely job or action
based need. The individual is impacted yet only because they are unable to do the job or process by
something that prevents them physically or mentally and therefore cannot meet the job BFOQ’s or Bona
Fid Occupational Qualifiers that drives the job description as an example. Disparate treatment means
that there was nothing legitimate in the actions or the treatment itself and therefore, discrimination or
alienation on face value. By a high percentage it is not the desire of any organization or the desire of any
military branch to violate someone’s personal belief or go against codes of conduct. It is rather the
inability to properly evaluate someone, promote them to heightened levels of responsibility without
adequate training, or not monitor growth properly. Actions such as this often results in disparate
treatment by the actions of individuals not by design or structure integrity.
Remembering that all actions taken by individuals or as groups still involve basic psychology of human
dynamics. It is the foundation of trust or lack of trust that strengthens or erodes the relationship. The
actions are based upon body language and tonality at over 90% of the communication process instead
of the actual words that may be spoken. The daily process of working with someone and realizing that is
not necessarily what is said, but how it is said or maybe what's not said all. Trust or what is called an
engaged employee increases efficiency, productivity, and final product or service by over 50%. This can
also be eroded or reduced by 50%. Once we have violated trust we find ourselves with a fully
disengaged employee or soldier.
Once we have acknowledged consistent behavioral changes we should then realize this is a
reflection of organizational behavior and mismanagement from leadership, and therefore significant
corrective action must be taken. The elements within each of these scenarios gives us moments to
pause and make a decision based upon guiding principles and training. But is the elements of fear,
concern for another, which can fall into your ethical thought process, can alter what makes a correct or

3. incorrect decision. Remembering the actions of one or in many cases the inactions of one can erode the
baseline trust of everyone within the units and subsequently the organizational structure. The adage
that trusts can take forever to gain, and a second to lose definitely applies here.
A hostile work environment in the civilian world is not generally created when an individual is in fear
of any physical repercussion. Therefore, the term hostile might be misleading. A hostile work
environment means that that individual or group of individuals is unable to perform at the same level
they have in the past, based upon an event or series of events that they have witnessed, heard, or been
part of and therefore inhibits their cognitive ability on a daily basis.
There is a philosophy called the billboard or newspaper principal, which reads that any action
you take or do not take in an event that you would not feel comfortable having posted on the front page
of a newspaper on the local billboard by major freeway because it would make you feel uncomfortable.
This ethical philosophy is one that should be considered when ethics and actions are to impact decisions
that should be guided by doctrine or policies and procedures. Whether you take a linear process, which
means that you are considering what the end result must be based upon action, or process that is
parallel, in which each action has a determinate ending and weighted one against the other to
determine the best moral decision is made, is not relevant here.
It is only relevant when adding doctrine or policies and procedures. All actions, and therefore
decisions are subjective without guidelines. It is within the knowledge of doctrine and policies and
procedures that allow the decision-making process to be very clear, concise, and at the level of
unconscious competence were the right decision is made, every time, based upon acceptable actions.
The links and videos provided are to help supplement and support this course and each week’s
assignments. The process of values, ethics, and morals are both subjective and objective, depending
upon what and who they impact. It is a legitimate power that exists and the acknowledgment of reward
power or coercive power combined, with training from expert power and support from referent power
that allows us in the military or civilian structure to excel and make the correct decision. The ideology of
right or wrong can be debated, much later, but that debate will be based upon the law, rule or
regulation, or policies and procedures as being incorrect. Not your decision based upon those.