Editor’s Pick
APRIL 5, 2009 11:02PM
Being Pressured to do the Wrong Thing in the Workplace: Some Advice
It happens all the time, in business and in the professions. A senior member of the team instructs a junior member to do something that the junior member thinks is plainly unethical. And sometimes, maybe often, the junior person will comply. After all, being the junior person typically means being vulnerable to losing your job, and it also means being liable to question your own judgment when faced with a competing opinion from someone older & more experienced. So, the order gets obeyed.The best explanation I know of for how wrongful obedience happens is the one given by law prof David Luban, of Georgetown University, in his paper "The Ethics of Wrongful Obedience." Basically, Luban's idea is that once the junior person agrees to do some very minor questionable thing, the next slightly-more-questionable thing becomes easier to do, and then the next, and the next, and so on. He calls this the "corruption of judgment" theory. But that's an explanation of how wrongful obedience happens, not a defence of it.
So, what about the rationalization, the claim that the junior person really has to just tow the company line? The first thing to notice about the rationalization is that it is a rationalization — something to make you feel better — rather than an full-fledged justification (i.e., something that would fully justify your behaviour).
As a justification, it doesn't really work very well. Doing the wrong thing is still wrong (and in some cases, illegal!) even when you're pressured to do it.
That being said, junior people really can find themselves in very difficult positions. They may tend to question their own judgment when faced by odd orders from superiors. And sometimes their jobs really are at stake. So it's very hard for me, looking in from the outside, to say "always do the right thing, regardless of the cost to yourself."
When I talk about this problem, the advice I usually give to students, in all professions, is this:
1) Do your best. Recognize the problem and be honest with yourself about it.
2) Pick your battles. Sometimes you'll have to give a little. Only be rigid on matters that are really worthwhile. But be careful: as Luban points out, sometimes small transgressions lead to bigger ones.
3) Ask questions. One of the benefits of being junior is that you can get away with asking "naive" questions, even ones that embarrass your superiors sometimes. For example: "I know I'm new here, but why are we doing it this way...?" If you diplomatically question what's going on, you might embarrass someone into a change of plans.
4) You won't be the junior person in the group forever. Start thinking now about what kind of boss you are going to be, when you finally get there, and what kind of pressure you're going to put on the young people who you see below you on the corporate ladder.
-----
This blog entry began as an email discussion with Blake Sunshine.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
AmyTuteurMD
teendoc
Jason D. Hill
researchethics
SuiJuris94
themadgreek
Salon.com
Comments
I quit. I had to do it. It made me sick.
Fast forward.... the director was found out 2 years down independently with a different hoax and booted. I never published that paper. A change of directorship made me work my behind off to establish the new department's credibility. I got my posters and outstanding scientist award etc etc.
Fast forward a little more....
I am out of a job. With vast experience and honesty intact but with not much to do. Which proves the point that even after doing everything right things may still not work out to satisfaction....but it is still not worth doing things the wrong way. Also that no education or learning is never wasted ...it just carries forward.
Does age really matter then? Or do you think that I did what I did because of my age? That might be right.
"Knowledge as Disaster
To know what he has already learned, the whistle-blower would have to give up what every right-thinking American believes in. To forsake this is particularly difficult for the largest group of whistle-blowers I listened to: conservative middle-aged men. “Hell, I wasn’t against the system,” said Bob Warren, a civil engineer and retired naval officer. “I was the system. I just didn’t realize there were two systems.”
What must the whistle-blower forsake in order to hear his own story?
* That the individual matters.
* That law and justice can be relied upon.
* That the purpose of law is to remove the caprice of powerful individuals.
* That ours is a government of laws, not men.
* That the individual will not be sacrificed for the sake of the group.
* That loyalty is not equivalent to the heard(sic) instinct.
* That one’s friends will remain loyal even if one’s colleagues do not.
* That the organization is not fundamentally immoral.
* That it makes sense to stand up and do the right thing. (Take this literally: that it “makes sense” means that it is a comprehensible activity.)
* That someone, somewhere who is in charge knows, cares, and will do the right thing.
* That the truth matters, and someone will want to know it.
* That if one is right and persistent, things will turn out all right in the end.
* That even if they do not, other people will know and understand.
* That the family is a haven in a heartless world. Spouses and children will not abandon you in your hour of need.
* That the individual can know the truth about all this and not become merely cynical, cynical unto death.
Not only is it hard to come to come to terms with these truths, but when one finally does, it seems one is left with nothing. (emphasis added)
The study provides some explanation why the messenger/writer is not only ostracized by the power mongers (traditional media), but also by supposed peers and larger society, which is really just a “big lie”. It has applicability to the commercial media narrative and why it is that “plain truths” are not only ignored, but are intentionally suppressed."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2267/is_1_74/ai_n19094732/
I would be much better off dead, and that's exactly what the perpetrators achieve - whether or not legally, it's sanctioned and protected in the US.
In both situations I was involved with I was the one who got in trouble while the offenders barely got slaps on the wrist. After that I just said screw it, some other sucker can report the wrongdoing next time.
I see your specialty is business ethics. If I ever see any I'll let you know.
You're right of course...it can happen at any age.
I only focused on "junior" people because they seem to me to be most vulnerable of all, and the question that was originally posed to me involved a hypothetical "junior" member of a team.
Thanks,
Chris.
Ethical business is everywhere. Without it commerce would literally be impossible. Unfortunately, the exceptions that prove the rule are just common enough -- and sometimes brutal enough to the people involved -- that they start to look pervasive.
Chris.
thanks,
Chris.
Rated & Cheers!
They are also at greatest risk for harm and retaliation. Please do not write so blithely. I don't think you realize the consequences for employees.
I would not generalize too quickly from healthcare to other kinds of workplace.
But rest assured, I don't write "blithely" about healthcare, either. If you have an interest in ethical issues in nursing, you've probably seen this website I run: http://www.nursingethics.ca/
Chris.
In the past, we collected donations for a Pakistani journalist and colleague of our site whose home was destroyed on the Pak-Afghan border. This, to us, merited a solicitation of funds from our readers.
With the country this writer desired to visit in ruins, its people struggling for their lives and livelihoods, and a U.S. economy on the skids, we battled with feelings of "insensitive" to blatantly "outrageous" that anyone would ask for money for airfare to visit museums and other cultural points of interest in a country plagued by war, and for a pleasure trip.
Ultimately, we all agreed that asking for money was indeed inappropriate, however, the writer/solictor found our pulling of her article and reasons why, to be baseless. My feelings were that her request was insensitive and yes, unethical.
As online media is my workplace, and editor's struggled until the early morning hours deciding on how best to deal with this situation, we feel we made the right decision, although it did cause great angst. Any thoughts or input would be humbly appreciated.
Appreciately, Jan
The middle ground is a suspicion of a breach. The case with the O-rings and the Space Shuttle is probably an extreme example. But there can be issues of public and private knowledge that get involved, too. Making sure to internally register objections matters. In fact, I've found at some companies that just sending email at all almost forces an action because it leaves a fingerprint that is hard to remove. Once formal notice of something has been taken, those savvy in the significance of that are forced to do something. Things said in hallways are later deniable but making sure there is a paper trail will not be overlooked by many superiors. Then again, it's sometimes better to start informally, without such a fingerprint, allowing people to gracefully repair something before making a mess of things by creating a record, if you assume that the thing is repairable and will be repaired.
I think your “pick your battles” item is the most important. Don't become the person who always makes a mess of things or it's harder to become senior and get to your point 4.
My post Fiduciary Duty vs. The Three Laws of Robotics addresses other twists on this issue.
I am a corporate officer in a small company, just under 50 employees and I have to tell colleagues and co-workers not to say things to me that they might view as mere gossip or a joke or plain old scuttlebutt.
I have a responsibility to act in the "best interests of the corporation", whatever that might be. So telling me on Monday morning that David from Accounting was caught in bed with Sandy the receptionist by her live-in boyfriend MIGHT be a problem for the company and I have to act on it. Is it harassment even if it occurred off-site? Is it actionable? Call the attorney, is there discipline necessary? I would rather not hear about something so trivial.
Don't tell me a joke that has a hint of racial or religious stereotyping, I don't know what I might have to do. As the only Jew in the place I get a lot of jabs around Hanukah and Christmas and I don't want to be in a position of having to call my attorney to discuss a colleague that I consider to be a friend.
On the other hand I want to know if someone did not do full Quality Control on a batch of parts because our product goes into residential and commercial construction and a failure could be harmful to life or property. And I could have personal liability there.
If someone in the warehouse is making sexual overtures to someone else out there, I need to know about it to protect the company and the employee who is being harassed.
But you can't be constantly telling your employees to be snitches on each other, that is a terrible way to run a company. Sometimes you frame it like this, if we are doing something substandard or cutting a corner in production to make a quota, and one part in that batch of parts causes a residential fire, insurance notwithstanding, we could be harming other people AND we could jeopardize our own jobs. If the X-25 part is suspected of causing a fire and UL pulls the certification to re-test and we can't ship, then overtime disappears and hours could get cut.
In sales, ethics can sometimes go out the window. We custom-designed a part for a customer, we own the design. Because it is custom we make a higher margin than if it were a standard part made on an automated line. The product is so good we end up making it part of the regular line and sell it under a different part number at a lower price. This happens over two or three years. Then a subcontractor of the original customer places a big order using the custom number. Do you tell them there is a lower price?
What do you do in a dreadful economy where you are fighting for every point of margin and every dollar of revenue?
The only thing I would really add is this:
My uncle (Willhelm von Bueller, not his real name) worked at a bread factory for about 20 years (this was about 20 years ago, hope that isn't confusing). He's "below average intelligence," but one heckuva guy, lemme tell yah. Anyway, while he was working there he ended up getting about a dozen people fired on several different occasions. Management would always approach him concerning any matters of misconconduct or unethical practices among his co-workers and supervisors.. He always told them the truth. It, according to him, would take him weeks to realize that his input was what ended up getting people canned (well, it was their own fault, but you know what I mean). Not that he cared, or was personally affected by any of it. He's just very honest, if not moral.
What does this add to the discussion? Nothin', I just got to talk about my uncle, which is always fun.
1) When you have dreams about ethical questions involving work, it's a sure sign that you should be getting ready to quit. It may mean a resignation in the morning is essential, but usually it means circulating a resume, developing a business plan for self-employment, or taking other actions that will make new employment part of personal growth.
2) Blowing the whistle is sometimes necessary, but always fatal to one's employment if not career. The key here is to never allow yourself to be in a job that you can't afford to lose, because someone will surely try to use that fact to make you do something from which you will lose more. That is how one gets onto the horns of that dilemma.