7 Questions for Business

By developing regulations that are in synch with the values of its workers and customers, a company can boost its bottom line attract and retain more talent and nurture a favourable image among its clientele.

This is an excerpt from an article in ITBusiness.ca. The article goes on to say that the ethics record of many Canadian IT firms is “spotty at best”. My question is why there’s even a question about the positive effects that a workplace that is safe, sane, and stable will have on employees and therefore the bottom line.

After all, it’s just common sense that people are more productive if they feel secure in the decisions they make and the consequences of their actions.

One of the challenges that many companies face in creating reasonable ethics guidelines is the mistaken attempt to be all things to all people, resulting in a code of conduct that is so vague and convoluted that it almost begs for abuse.

The “kis” principle (keep it simple) is as applicable here as it is anywhere. Provide employees with clear guides and straightforward regulations for conduct and watch the results rack up in the next quarterly statements.

(the above article was written almost a year ago, long before the tumultuous times we now find ourselves in. It is unfortunate that we weren’t listening to people like the author of the ITBusiness article cited above.)

In a recent article in the South African business publication Business Day, Graham Willcock wrote “In order to understand what constitutes moral behaviour, morality needs to be understood as using reason to govern behaviour while giving equal weight to the interests of those affected by that behaviour.”

It isn’t easy for us to give “equal weight” to the interests of others. As a social species we understand the value of cooperation, but as a competitive species, we are vitally aware of the personal benefits to be gained from putting our own interests just a little bit ahead of those of anyone else.

To counter this tendency we create all sorts of elaborate codes and processes to act as checks and balances. The problem of course is that the more elaborate the system, the easier it is to circumvent. Or in case of ethics. the easier it is to convince ourselves that we’re not circumventing it at all.

The 7 Questions takes a minimalist approach to the question of ethics. There are no elaborate manuals, no paragraphs of qualifications. Just 7 Questions that ask us to ask ourselves if the action we’re taking gives “equal weight” to those who will be affected by it.

They’re tough questions. but they’re ethical ones.

If you treat your employees as you would want to treated (or as you would want your wife, kids, parents, etc. to be treated), most employment cases would never be filed - John Hyman

The above is an excerpt from Ohio Employer’s Law Blog. Hyman calls it the “Golden Rule of Employment Relations”.

I am always interested in finding references to the Golden Rule outside of “religion”. For me, the Golden Rule represents the tool for living out our ethics and ideals in all aspects of our lives. That has to include our work lives or it means nothing.

In Hyman’s article he references yet another employment lawyer. The focus of the article is to offer employers advice on how to avoid lawsuits from employees.

That motive should not seem self serving. The Golden Rule isn’t intended to turn us into money-losing doormats. Business still exists to both provide service to its customers and make a profit for its owners and shareholders. But Mutuality means that cause and effect are never separated.

If a manager follows the concept of the Golden Rule appropriately, they cannot help but serve the customer, employees and employer, and in the process benefit all.

Subversive isn’t it?