When should managers speak out?

Speaking-out over ethical issues is a complex and sensitive issue. In the last seminar we
examined moral relativism. This alerts us to the idea that different attitudes to speaking out
about ethics in business depend on the way in which values are prioritised, particularly
towards the telos of business and how the free market should operate.

Can you recall the ethical basis for an unlimited free market and what the alternative is? Go
back over your notes and check.

With regard to speaking out about ethics, the libertarian/utilitarian perspectives focus on two
things: freedom and costs/benefits. Drawing on Drumwright and Murphy (2004), it can be
argued that when faced with an ethical dilemma, the libertarian will argue that interfering with
a persons choices would be limiting their freedoms as a law-abiding consumer if consumers
demand something, then it is up to business to supply it. Indeed, as long as the goods and
services provided are legal then businesses and consumers have the right to sell and buy them.
The libertarian would also argue that we have no right to pass judgment on another persons
action providing it is not interfering with anybody elses rights and freedoms. We are obliged
to look the other way.
The utilitarian would argue that ethics is something that complicates business decisions
unnecessarily adding cost and time to doing business which would mean that other
businesses that do not do this would be more competitive and have an advantage in the
market. This could mean the difference between staying in business and going bust. For the
utilitarian we should leave our ethics at the office door for the sake of the business. We
should keep quiet about ethics.
According to Bird and Waters (1989) ethical issues often do not enter discussion at either
individual or business level. Managers tend not to recognizably communicate their moral
concerns in settings where it is fitting. When it might be expected they voice no moral
sentiments or communicate in ways that obscure their moral beliefs and commitments. These
appear as:

Negative expressions eg not blowing the whistle on illegal practices.

Positive expressions not speaking up for ideals
Not holding others sufficiently accountable not providing adequate feedback to
subordinates.

Drumwright and Murphy (2004) use the term Moral Myopia to describe not seeing the
ethical dimension and Moral Muteness to describe not speaking about ethics.
While many business people adopt and can justify these behaviours, this can lead to long-term
problems such as habitual lying, whistle blowing, loss of reputation, and even criminal
prosecution.

Copyright - D. Pick - 2010G.P.O. Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845 d.pick@curtin.edu.au All rights
reserved. No reproduction without permission of the author.

Describe and example of moral muteness and moral myopia that you have seen at work or in
the news media.
One way of avoiding the problems we have just discussed is to adopt the perspective of the
seeing-talking practitioner (Drumwright and Murphy, 2004). This perspective is based on the
ideas of duty and virtue. The seeing talking practitioner has three main characteristics:
Readily recognise ethical issues when they arise, being able to identify the ethical
context and background and understand it.
An ability to communicate in an overt and direct way, often with an ethical dimension
Display moral imagination an ability to think outside the box, seeing alternatives
that others do not
Businesses that encourage seeing-talking practitioners are more likely to avoid ethical
problems as they are discussed and resolved before a decision is taken.
To what extent are you a seeing-talking practitioner?
Being a seeing-talking practitioner is not an easy option. It requires thought and practice. It
means you must focus on both process and outcomes of decisions and be aware of your own
ways of thinking and being able to see and understand alternatives.
Now that you understand about Talking (the T in S-T-A-R). Next seminar we begin
exploring acting (A) that is how to decide and do the right thing.

Copyright - D. Pick - 2010G.P.O. Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845 d.pick@curtin.edu.au All rights
reserved. No reproduction without permission of the author.