Adherance to Ethics
Adherance to Ethics
(OP)
To what level does the company you currently work for and/or companies you have worked for in the past adhere to their stated ethical standards?
I have found that the two companies I have worked for adhere to their ethics only when it is convenient and relatively painless. One company was a very large coporation (over 5,000 employees) and the other company is a small corporation (under 120 employees). Management talks about ethics a lot and tell you how important ethics are; however, when push comes to shove and the ethical decision would cause a slip in schedule or lost revenue, a convenient explanation is created to rationalize how the unethical decision is actually ethical and thus is OK.
I have found that the two companies I have worked for adhere to their ethics only when it is convenient and relatively painless. One company was a very large coporation (over 5,000 employees) and the other company is a small corporation (under 120 employees). Management talks about ethics a lot and tell you how important ethics are; however, when push comes to shove and the ethical decision would cause a slip in schedule or lost revenue, a convenient explanation is created to rationalize how the unethical decision is actually ethical and thus is OK.





RE: Adherance to Ethics
"Treat others as you want to be treated."
Basic, but it works for everyone, and we try to hold to it at all times.
Jeff Mowry
www.industrialdesignhaus.com
Reality is no respecter of good intentions.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
My current employer is exactly as you described above. My previous employer was halfway to your description and so was the one before that. A retired engineer that I know said: "When engineers speak of professionalism & ethics, its all lip service." He was a Mister Rodgers kind of a guy, the kind to see nothing but good in the world. And he worked for a well thought of employer. If this is his opinion, then think about what it means.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
First employer had no ethics whatsoever.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
RE: Adherance to Ethics
No offense intended to actual ethical MBAs ...
... both of you.
Mike Halloran
NOT speaking for
DeAngelo Marine Exhaust Inc.
Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
RE: Adherance to Ethics
HVAC68
RE: Adherance to Ethics
To take that impression away as much as possible from the general public, bold statements are made very frequently. I noticed that the louder the statement, the more likely it is untrue.
If this goes against your beliefs, don't believe that fighting the windmills will do you any good. Pull out and look for something completely different like a volunteer job.
This realistic, somewhat cynical view replaced optimistic and naive idea I used to have a few years ago.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
Ethical behavior is a moving target. Companies, because they are composed of people, can only reflect the ideals of the leading people. If a particular philosophy is practiced and shown by the leadership, good or bad, it will be reflected throughout. Just as there are bad apples in the good batches, there are good apples in the bad batches. Your best bet for ethical consistency is to know what's right yourself and practice it, without regard to what anyone else does.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
My current company is pretty ethical too- we've substituted some chemicals for greener versions before we were required to by the DTi, there's a real commitment to safety from all the senior guys on the project (although the company MD is a bit of an old fashioned driller in his attitudes!). However with $45 oil maybe they can afford to be ethical and the proof of the pudding will be when oil hits $15/bbl again?
RE: Adherance to Ethics
I do remember for a time back in the earlier '80s a statement being popular that was similar to Theophilus' quote. "Do unto others, just don't get caught". Perhaps taken to heart by some of today's CEOs.
Regards
RE: Adherance to Ethics
When civil law was generally a reflection of biblical teaching, we knew where the standards came from, and even when civil law did not speak on certain situations, there was the 'old standard' to fall back on.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
John
RE: Adherance to Ethics
"Do unto others, Then split"
RE: Adherance to Ethics
RE: Adherance to Ethics
RE: Adherance to Ethics
Like plasgears, I believe that a cultures ethical standards arise from its fundamental belief system. Only in this day and age of (for lack of a better term), a mobile culture, what we have personally long held as a "standard" belief may no longer be so. It seems an evolutionary process, but one not without "growing pains".
Regards,
RE: Adherance to Ethics
...Such uncomfortable restrictions are easily circumvented with a "hold harmless clause" in every contract! And I wouldn't be surprised if a little sign at the plant entrance makes you agree with it automatically as you enter.
It's harder than you might think for governments to keep big evil companies on the straight and narrow path.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
Rubbish (in context). How stupid do you think the OHS bureaucrats are? In the UK and Australia (at least) you can pin as many signs up as you like, the fact is the company WILL be investigated for each serious injury, and the directors or other responsible managers face jail time or heavy fines if the company is found to be at fault. Maybe the fines are not heavy enough, but that is a separate issue.
Equally the employees have a duty of care and will face similar penalties if their behaviour causes accidents.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
Who (or what) is the corporation? The corporation is the composite of it's leaders and employees, so I think Ron nailed it when he said: " Your best bet for ethical consistency is to know what's right yourself and practice it, without regard to what anyone else does."
The ethical corporation is made up of ethical leaders and employees. Now, how often that happens may have more to say about our society than it does about corporations.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
A Corporation is a legal entity of which leaders and employees are but transient parts (not the whole). How a corporation acts toward its employees and competitors is dependent in a large part upon the current ethical composite of the staff (and to a smaller part the historical legacy of the company). As I stated before, I have seen standards in place for individual employee behaviour as well as for the employer/employee relationship. But I have not seen a stated policy in place for how A Corporation will act in regards, to the community, marketplace, or competition.
Regards,
RE: Adherance to Ethics
I realize you are right, in the sense that "a corporation is a legal entity". The point I was trying to make and didn't, is that the corporation may be a LEGAL ENTITY, but I don't believe it is a LIVING ENTITY in the sense that a "corporation" is conscious or has a conscience. The corporation is an invented vehicle to carry out the wishes of the management and board of directors. Ethical leaders and employees make ethical decisions.
Can someone say "I am ethical", but the corporation I am working for is unethical? Ken Lay may try to say so, but it is a cop-out.
This is one reason that the culture of a startup company, under the direction of it's founder, can so dramatically change when it developes into or is sold to a corporation.
"Corporate culture" does matter, but it is the leadership that builds it for good or ill.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
I think one can easily say this. Companies sort of grow their own personality, sure the decicion maker(s), are responsible for this personality but it would be very easy to have one ethical business guy with 5 unethical ones and the personality of the company is set by the 5. Only choice for ethical guy is departure (at the risk of putting his family on the street for lack of pay). Ideally, this would be done after another job is found.
The days of the company man are dwindling away, and happily so. I just cant stand these types. No accusations here but what planet have these people been living on? Companies are out for a profit. Thats the bottom line. Companies used to be out for a profit but were not willing to break ethical behavior or the law to do it. Thats changing.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
We are on the same page. The ethical man cannot work very long for an unethical company. However, I would disagree with your premise that there is anything wrong with the profit motive. After all, profits are what make the world go around, including paying our salaries. When working for various companies I was all for the company making a profit (a company man), BUT not at the expense of my personal ethics or generally accepted societal ethics. Luckily I worked for ethical firms and really only had a couple of instances where ethical dilemas presented themseves to me.
The problem are those who will do anything to increase profits and preserve the corporation. Again, I have to say, it is the individuals not the corporation that needs watching. The corporate culture is the reflection of the individuals running it, not the other way around. At the end of the day, we have to take responsibilty for our decisions, we cannot say "the coroporation made me do it".
RE: Adherance to Ethics
Also I understand that there is a lot of evidence that ethical behaviour (and not just having fine sounding poilicies) boosts profits.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
There is a difference between personal ethics and the ethics of a group. You allude to this in your own post "...generally accepted societal ethics." A group mentality can be very much different from an individual's belief. There is diffusion of ethical responsibility as everyone has the expectation that someone else will do the right thing at the right time. We also tend to "buy in" as a way to be accepted as part of a group. In such a situation, individuals will suppress their own sense of ethics and let the group hold sway. Extreme examples would be riots or mobs. The corporation is a group ethic entity not an individual one and one without a stated guide for it's own behaviour.
Regards,
RE: Adherance to Ethics
RE: Adherance to Ethics
The only choices are to try and find an ethical compromise, put your objections in writing and refuse to support an unethical decision, or find new employment.
RE: Adherance to Ethics
I agree, and practically expecting a playing field in developing countries to be similar to NA is unrealistic and thus this is one of the many pitfalls NA companies and engineers face. All we can do in such a situation is the best we can, however under the microscope it may not hold water.
VOD
RE: Adherance to Ethics
RE: Adherance to Ethics
RE: Adherance to Ethics
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: Adherance to Ethics
NRB = Not Required Back....Oil industry speak for "sacked"
RE: Adherance to Ethics
I see that you are a person who is fond of TLA's.
TLA = Three Letter Acronym
But, I digress, back to the subject at hand:
I've heard that a real test of ethics (or just plain integrity for that matter) is simply this:
"What would you do in a given situation if you knew that you would never be found out?" Think hard before deciding on that one.
I would also have to agree with Ron: You have to apply and follow your own personal ethics without regard as to what others do.
A company is merely a group of individuals; hence, a company's ethics is no better that the sum of its parts.
http://www.spiraleng.com