Unlike the law, which is codified or ‘black
letter’ as it is often described, ethics
are usually not specifically written down
anywhere.
However, just like the law, ethics is evolving
and contested.
Often a legal system is imbued with the ethics
of the society it emerged from and over time,
ethical norms can be embodied in law.
Similarly, ethical norms can be breached just
as the law can.
However, whereas a court decides whether an
individual or corporation has breached the
law, ethics usually plays out in the ‘court
of public opinion’.
This, in itself, says something about the nature
of ethics.
Ethical reasoning dates back almost as far
as the written word itself.
There are many classical works on ethics,
including those of the ancient Greeks and
arguably foremost among these writers Aristotle
and among the Romans, Cicero was perhaps
known best.
Grace & Cohen note that ‘the term ‘ethics’
owes its origin to ancient Greek, where the
word ‘ethikos’ referred to the authority
of custom or tradition.
When Cicero sought a similar word in Latin,
he chose ‘mos’, from which in modern English,
the word ‘moral’ is derived.
Morals can be thought to differ from ethics
in so far as morals are possessed by the individual
and are embodied by them from moral teaching
by those immediately around them.
The ancients, like us today, realised that
ethics are not clear cut.
Modern conceptions of ethics owe a lot to
philosophers such as Georg Friedrich Hegel,
an early Nineteenth Century philosopher who
agreed that ethics were embedded in the past.
That is to say that, traditions and customs
guide ways of behaving, however, morals are
current and reflect the teaching of principles
of how to comply with these traditions but
in a contemporary setting or context.
Hegel saw morals as being the mechanism for
ethics changing over time.
This distinction is important in helping us
to understand that while everyone may have
different values or morals, the sum of this
morality across a group of people such as
a firm, a profession, an industry or a country
represents their ethical position.
So while there is a distinction, when we speak
of morals or ethics across a community, and
particularly when we are tackling a moral
or ethical issue, we are usually talking about
the same thing at any given point in time.
So what are ethical problems?
Grace and Cohen set out the things that are
actually being considered when we examine
the moral dimensions of a problem:
Considering something ethically requires that
one go outside, or beyond, one’s self-interest
alone in reaching a decision.
Moral opinions are therefore impartial.
An ethical judgement is one that can be ‘universalised’.
It is one that is perceived to apply to everyone
in similar circumstances, and not only to
oneself.
Ethical opinions must be able to be defended
with reasons.
This requirement distinguishes ethical opinions
from biases or mere preferences.
Ethical opinions are not subject to a ‘vote’,
in a way that political opinions and decisions
are.
A moral opinion is not just whatever a majority
decides it is, that is to say that something
does not become moral because it has popular
support, but rather it is already moral before
a vote is actually taken.
Moral or ethical opinions are centrally ‘action
guiding’.
They are not only theoretical or academic
but determine what behavior or actions are
appropriate.
In this sense, inappropriate actions or those
that contravene ethics will be perceived negatively.
As a leader, you will be required to address
ethical issues, both personally and professionally.
There are two reasons why acting ethically
is important:
The first is self-interested in so far as
the modern business environment is becoming
increasingly more regulated and transparent.
Acting unethically is more likely to be uncovered
and communicated to your detriment and that
of your organization.
The second is others focused and aligned to
transformational leadership models, where
a moral or ethical leader is more likely to
produce positive outcomes for followers and
the organizations they lead within.
The second reason is also important since
an understanding of these theories of leadership,
coupled with an understanding of ethics and
a strong positive values system can provide
the foundation for moral reasoning in different
situations.
Grace and Cohen refer to the idea of reflective
equilibrium.
Whereby a balance between personal positive
values and an understanding of general ethical
foundations allows an individual to navigate
moral reasoning.
For example, personal values might produce
a reaction to a new situation which has arisen
as being potentially unethical or immoral.
Once such a situation is recognized they then
fall back upon accepted principles of effective
leadership such as ‘tell the truth’, ‘explain
consequences’, 'advance the welfare of followers’,
‘empower individuals’ and ‘listen attentively
to others’, in order to apply those principles
to the situation, and ask what actions are
most aligned to those principles for the most
people.
They might then compare this result to their
values and ask if they are morally comfortable
with the outcome.
If they are not they would identify why not
and go through another iteration of checking
against principles and perhaps weighting them
differently until they are satisfied with
the answer.
Grace and Cohen note that moral reasoning:
‘...is a matter of bringing into harmony,
or consistency, various particular judgements
with each other and with the principles we
hold...in this respect moral reasoning works
in both directions in order to achieve consistency
among one’s particular judgements (relative
to each other), and among the various principles
to which one personally subscribes (relative
to each other).’
A critical outcome of this process is the relative weighting of personal values
and ethical structures relative to the specific problem,
which may require a no-win choice between a decision that keeps a promise
to one person, while at the very same time breaking one to another.
The reason we can come to an informed, if not necessarily comfortable, decision
is that the process of moral reasoning allows for the modification and
revision of the principles to which one subscribes
as well as of the particular judgements one makes.
 
