Any organization is inside the country, are you asking that the organization can have a different ethic climate beyound and above a country?

Hello Linda,

Could not see your response!? if you can provide this response please.

Thanks and regards

Theodora Issa

Ok, I will restate here, I think any organizations inside their country should have followed the code of conduct. Are you asking whether the organization can have a different ethic climate beyond and above the country?

Hello Linda,

Thank you for that - well, I am not sure why your first submission was not uploaded! but thank you for re-instating - indeed, there might be some companies within the country with highly educated CEOs who might imitate the way things are done in the country where they obtained their education - thus will be a bit different than the country's own ethical climate.

Regards

Theodora Issa

Do they establish a better climate or worse? I know people studied or trained overseas tend to pick up some habits or beliefs and when they have the power then they can influence the ethical climate. I am curious why you use climate instead of culture?

Hi Theodora,

Your question is certainly interesting and timely, especially in light of the fact that you intend to engage in scientific research that will lead to a multifaceted answer. I note from reading your article in AUSTRALIAN ETHICS that you will undertake a thoroughgoing study consisting of an analysis of “quantitative and qualitative data, interviews and focus group interviews … aimed at triangulation, amplification and modification of the results generated.” (Issa, p. 7, AUSTRALIAN ETHICS, June 2012, available at https://www.arts.unsw.edu.au/aapae/publications/Newsletters/Australian%20Ethics-6-2012.pdf). Indeed, since you have already identified six critical components of an ethical mindset in individuals, you are halfway to proving that the existence of ethical individuals in a corrupt organizational environment makes absolutely no difference at all in terms of enhancing the ethical climate of an organization.

Why do I make this pessimistic observation? To quote my mother, “If you lie down with dogs, you get fleas.” Indeed, I warn my Business School students that it does not matter how strong their ethical compass is when they leave home (or leave business school) because if they join an organization with a culture of profit-maximization at any cost, they will soon “learn” to conform to the established corporate norms or they will be shown the door. (By the time I tell them this, I have already shown them the Enron film, THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM; and the scene with the intentional electric utility blackouts in California is permanently etched in their minds, as is the final scene of the film in which a young Enron employee bemoans that he didn’t “ASK WHY” because he was afraid of the truth; i.e., that what he was doing was unethical, if not illegal.)

In this vein, Theodora, why did you drop the “truth seeking” component (mindset item No. 5) after the focus group interviews in your original study of individual ethical mindsets? I think “truth seeking” is the most telling component of the 8 components comprising an ethical mindset. The fact that you decided to merge it into one of the six final components is puzzling-- especially given that “interconnectedness” included in your final 6 components seems to have sprung from nowhere. Keep in mind that “interconnectedness” in a corrupt environment might be indicative of a “herd mentality” that is incompatible with autonomous thinking, which is Kohlberg’s third (and final) stage of moral development.

I would also encourage you to question Hutton’s proposition that “fairness” is a cornerstone of capitalism; if as you state, he makes this claim; I wholeheartedly disagree with him. The “invisible hand” is the cornerstone of capitalism and it certainly does not lead to fairness. Fairness (and justice) might be viewed as a cornerstone of DEMOCRACY; but is hard for me to maintain this view given that today my pedigreed democratic homeland (U.S.) is in the 4th day of a government shut-down to prevent the offering of baseline healthcare to the have-not’s in our country.

After reading the detailed description of your research project in AUSTRALIAN ETHICS, I note with unabashed joy that your question on RG allows for improving the “ethical climate” of organizations notwithstanding their own (corrupt) internal culture or the existence of questionable cultural norms (such as child labor) in a host country. So, here (finally) is my answer to your question. Yes, indeed, it is possible to accomplish an organizational moral renaissance by way of strong laws that motivate organizations to (1) adopt internal “Ethics and Compliance Codes,” (2) hire Ethics Officers to run training programs for the employees, officers, and directors of an organization, and (3) install anonymous whistle-blowing systems with monetary incentives for blowing the whistle and monetary fines for organizations that take retaliatory action against truth-tellers. The U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SARBOX”) is just such a law and you can read about it ad nauseam on my RG homepage. Additionally, I just yesterday uploaded on RG the full text of an article “After Shame” in which I offer an alternative to my Mother’s succinct explanation of why even the most ethical and professional of beings tends to sink to the level of their surroundings. See Section 4.2, “Luhmann’s Systems Differentiation” (p. 14 of the pdf pagination of “After Shame”) for a sociological and far less colorful explanation of this fact of human nature.

Gwen

Gwen,

Thank you for your insightful post. I am not in business but I heard the business world is competitive and can be dirty. It would be difficult to maintain your ethics when you already have a contaminated culture. Howard Gardner (2007) in his :The Ethical Mind" said " In business, it's easy to wander off the proper path, because professional standards are a vocational option, not part of the territory." I think if we have conscientious leaders we might produce some positive changes.

Wow, Linda; that is a really comical observation ("a vocational option, not part of the territory"). I must remember to quote that truism when talking about "professional standards" and "business ethics" with my Business School students. It's depressing; but, oh, so true. And, at least they will be forewarned before embarking upon their corporate careers. Thank you.

Gwen

I would like to suggest value clarification, cultural sensitivity, and cultural proficiency to enhance the ethical climate in organizations without being limited to the organization and country's cultures. Existing in muticultural organizational climate needs to clarify value because we relate our self to others, organization, and to the society. Clarify our own values first before clarifying others value. Value clarification should be based on universal ethical principle. In case we experience personal, professional, organizational value mismatch we should be constructive in resolving the differences. Also, clear, updated, transparent, communicated and consistent implementation of organizational policy enhances ethical climate in organization.

Florencia,

I agree with you that we need to have value clarification. It depends on which culture's value. Context can determine things that we do or say. We may use Golden rules but it needs to be agreed-upon. Yes, some clear expectations and policy will let people know what to follow or obey, then are we making our world like a robot world?

Thank you Linda. Your enlightenment is well appreciated.

I read some information from Sidney Perkourtz: Digital People, according to her, robots have three laws: A robot must not injure human beings or allow them to come to harm; a robot must obey the orders given to them, and, a robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first and the second law. Don't you think human world can use these laws as well? The postmodern thoughts imply that we need not to follow the authority, this is very different from Asian culture traditionally. What would the culture be if we apply these three laws in a collective culture?

This is great wonderful share of Linda Chiang, the robot laws. It conveys respect to human race and emphasis on the Golden Rule.

We definitely still put human above robots. I wonder what happen when human can create robots which can think and feel,what will this world be?

HI,

You may be interested by this recent paper:

When Organizational Identification Elicits Moral Decision-Making: A Matter of the Right Climate

Suzanne van Gils, Michael A. Hogg, Niels Van Quaquebeke

Journal of Business Ethics, April 2017, volume 142, issue 1, Pages 155-168

Best regards.