CHAPTER 7
Leadership Ethics: Doing Right While Doing the Right Thing
ETHICS SERVES AS one of the great mantras of modern corporate life. Repeated like some ancient tribal chant by CEOs and consultants, the typical manager will probably hear the term ethics more often than the average seminary student will. “Acting ethically,” “being socially responsible,” and “responding to our stakeholders”—the cries fill our boardrooms, our conference rooms, and our company newsletters, but only rarely are the terms elaborated upon. Like some set of secular scriptures, the organizational mission statement will exhort its managers to act ethically; meanwhile, the CEO will pound away at his pulpit encouraging all employees to take the straight and narrow path to social responsibility (while maximizing profits, naturally). Yet when the sermon is over, the congregation members—pardon me, the managers—are left to ponder the meanings on their own. What does it mean to be ethical? What does it mean to act ethically?
The problem is only exacerbated when the term ethics is joined with that equally vague and maltreated term leadership. As it has been pointed out repeatedly in the earlier chapters, leadership, as defined by the authors, is more than a gift of divine beneficence bestowed by the gods upon the chosen ones. Rather, leadership is an attitude, a belief system, and a set of skills that can be developed like any other talent. Likewise, ethics is more than just a collection of mere homilies. Managers can develop the skills for discerning moral dilemmas, prioritizing various values, and arriving at ethical (i.e., just) conclusions based upon rational reasoning.
The need to develop ethical reasoning skills is especially important in the field of project management. The very same characteristics that make project management such an excellent tool also provide the basis for ethical dysfunction. The world of the project manager is often filled with rapid change and uncertainty, two key ingredients that can lead to moral ambiguity. The project manager, perhaps more than any of his fellow managers, must constantly look ahead, anticipating moral challenges, and providing the ethical leadership for his team and project to survive and thrive.
ETHICS IN BUSINESS
Business ethics is a hot topic. It does not seem that a day goes by without Peter Jennings, Dan Rather, or Tom Brokaw featuring at least one story concerning some aspect of how American business relates with its ethical environment. From the pristine shores of Alaska (the land of leaky tankers) to the shiny office towers of Wall Street (the land of greedy bankers), business is being bulls-eyed as never before.
A major problem confronting business is that outside the government, business is the chief game in town. When a major corporation, its officers, managers, or employees make mistakes, they tend to do it BIG TIME, with lots and lots of press coverage. Ethical lapses by businesses serve forever to tar those companies. Remember Morton Thiokol with its booster rockets, Salomon Brothers with its bond buying, and Ford with its Pinto? Pushing the ethical envelope can have serious consequences, economic and otherwise, for organizations.
This is true for all businesses, no matter what the size. As a manager, you appreciate what your customers and others think of you. An important thing that we all sell is our image. And whether you are the low-cost producer or the premium player in a market, to a great extent the ethical personality you project is going to determine your position in the marketplace. All other things being equal, most parties, whether they are vendors or customers, will prefer to deal with a business and its managers that have a reputation for honesty. Consider the number of parties that you interact with on a daily basis and the possible ethical problems that could arise. Figure 15 reveals just the tip of the iceberg.
A recent Gallup poll shows that the public puts business people somewhere in the middle of the pack in ranking honesty and ethics among professional groups. We rank higher than politicians and lawyers (small comfort, isn't it?), yet not as high as doctors, dentists, and pharmacists. Of course, certain specific business professionals, such as salesmen and insurance agents, achieve far more dubious distinction. The public is demanding more and exerting pressure on all institutions, including business, to clean up their acts.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAY LEAD TO ETHICAL DYSFUNCTION
Philosophically speaking, most concepts, belief systems, and technologies are dialectic. That is, the very elements that make something a success can lead to its failure; the positive and negative are inherently intertwined. For example, the internal combustion engine has both positive (increased mobility, enhanced distribution systems) and negative (pollution, monster truck rallies) ramifications. Likewise, the characteristics of project management that make it distinctive and successful may lead to specific problems and ultimately moral dilemmas.
Figure 16 helps to demonstrate the linkage between project management attributes and ethical and project dysfunction. Negative side effects can help to produce an ethically inert environment that can further moral vagueness and produce possible problems. Project managers must realize that role overload, hyperactivity, altered structures and systems, riskiness of the project, and unrealistic goals and upper management pressure are parts of the project management landscape that can lead to dilemmas. Recognition of these potential pitfalls is the first step for project managers taking control of their ethical environments.
Role Overload
A hallmark of project management is that project managers play many roles: organizer, leader, nagger, boss, tough guy, and exemplar. This profusion of roles allows managers greater flexibility in the formulation and implementation of their projects. But if the number of roles results in confusion and a lack of prioritizing, these multiple roles may actually serve to muddle the perspective of the project manager. As a result, personal goals can get out of alignment with organizational and ethical objectives. This role confusion may often be the first step to either intentional or unintentional malfeasance.
For example, John has the responsibility for verifying his employees’ expenses. Due to the severe time constraints of the project, John has found that allowing his assistants (who are on the road quite a bit) to use company vehicles for personal errands to be an excellent motivator, as long as it is “within reason.” That is, John has allowed employees to use the company vehicle while technically on company time to run errands and go to doctors’ appointments. Yet, company policy clearly states that one can only use vehicles for “business” purposes. In this case, we see two roles, controller and motivator, that seem to be in conflict. Under the unrelenting pressure that most managers face, John has made a decision that has definite moral components. Yet, so harried, he has probably never thought of the long-term ramifications.
Hyperactivity and Superficiality
One of the major characteristics of project management is that of life span. For many project managers, the term deadline is especially appropriate. Go past the timeframe contemplated for a project and bang, you're dead, at least in an organizational sense. While most management activities have some types of finishing dates, project management is unique in that its very essence is one of time constraint. Think of project management as the tape cassette in Mission Impossible—ten seconds, and it self-destructs.
The project manager, as compared to his nonproject brethren, has an extremely hectic schedule. Many activities and functions have to be addressed, and often many are given relatively short shrift. This lack of attention, and the speed at which so many actions have to be completed, limits the amount of time needed to analyze possible consequences. As a result, ethical issues may arise without the project manager ever fully recognizing that the problem was ever there.
Altered Organizations and Systems
Organizations impose structures and systems that reflect their world-views and priorities. A company that values entrepreneurship will have a different organizational structure than one that is seeking to retain stable markets. A company that is in a highly regulated industry will possess distinct systems from those of an organization participating in free markets. The policies, SOPs, and the hierarchy developed by a company reflect its ethical values. Many firms have well-developed systems for addressing ethical conflicts and these, too, may differ according to how an organization views its attitude toward ethical behavior. Regardless of the ones sculpted, the structures and systems help to link the manager back to the organizational perspective and values, a lighthouse, so to speak, in troubled times.
Project teams can take on a number of forms that reflect the needs of the contemplated project and the parties involved. Obviously, this is one of the great strengths of project management. However, unless the company has a history of utilizing projects, often the structures and systems are created on an ad hoc basis. This may work out very well for the project. Likewise, it can result in the structural and systems equivalent of a Frankenstein monster.
The project manager, in creating her project structure, will tend to create a lean, mean machine. In certain situations, this may actually increase the ethical efficacy of the subunit, as the manager creates more direct modes of communication or spawns a more responsive structure. Yet, there is a danger that in building this new creature, the project manager may cut away at some of the ethical muscle that the organization has grown in order to help police itself.
For instance, consider the concept of formalized hierarchy. We have all bemoaned the slowpoke pace of the stupid bureaucracy. Who has not at some point been the victim of some organizational mistake that has arisen upstairs. Thus, most project managers, in structuring their teams, will try to reduce the number of levels to a minimum. Yet, a hierarchy does serve important purposes, especially in creating an ethical environment, that allow more objective decisions to be made by mandating a distance between organizational members. A manager in a more formalized relationship with a subordinate will probably look upon his employee's actions in a different light than will one in a more intimate setting.
This is not to say that creating less-formalized structures and systems is bad; obviously, current management theory, as well as commonsense, point toward the simpler organization. In crafting these new structures and systems, the project manager must take care to create alternative means of assessing and protecting its internal ethical environment.
High-Risk Environment
Project managers are constantly on the firing line. Most projects should have a large banner attached, saying: If I Fail, Go Ahead and Shoot Me. Projects tend to be highly visible with fairly definite objectives. The simplified project organization structure often has an unintended consequence for managers; there is no place to hide.
Given the potential cost of subpar performance, it is quite understandable that project managers may be willing to bend the rules. Obviously, problems can arise as managers attempt to meet goals in a highly visible arena. Ethical behavior may be the first thing jettisoned in an overheated environment.
Unrealistic Goals and Upper-Management Pressure
Be prepared to give 110 percent. This overused management cliche has inadvertently contributed to countless ethical dilemmas. Realistic objective and goals are essential, not only from a management and control perspective but from an ethical viewpoint. Unrealistic, fairytale goals can lead to managers taking unnecessary risks in order to succeed, and they may have dire ethical implications.
This problem is only accentuated by upper-management pressure to succeed no matter what the costs. The birth of an actual project typically requires that some top-management type championed it. This means that somebody has expended a great deal of political capital, and his butt may be on the line. This upper-level stress on the project manager may be overt or hidden, but it is like the ocean tide—it is always there, exerting inexorable pressure.
WHAT ETHICS IS NOT
One trap that many managers fall into is that of ethical relativism. This holds that ethics is situational and that the appropriate standard of behavior is altered as one changes settings—in other words: When in Rome, do as the Romans do. This mode of thinking is often adopted in the business world in the belief that people's ethics can be different in a business setting, as opposed to one's home life. Therefore, misrepresenting your ability to complete a job in a bid is seen as okay since everybody else does it. On the other hand, lying in the home front, a different setting, is seen as unethical.
On the surface, this can be a very attractive proposition, since as long as you are following the local customs, you are safe. However, if one merely examines the extreme situations that can result from this line of thinking, the fallacy of moral relativism quickly sets in.
For example, many American businesspeople feel stymied by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act that bans the use of bribes in securing contracts. Their argument is that their inability to offer bribes hampers their capability to compete overseas, and since so many other countries not only tolerate it but also condone it, the offer of bribes in itself is not unethical in those situations.
Yet, let us expand this situation ever so slightly. In some countries, the purpose of a bribe may be increased from merely giving you an equal opportunity to keeping your competitors out. In some countries, efforts to destroy your competitors’ goods may be tolerated as long as the proper palms have been greased. Where does one stop? Unreasonable delays in shipping? Arson? Murder? Obviously, being in Rome does not excuse you from throwing Christians into the lion's den.
Moral relativism is a slippery slope. Whether the setting is in a Third World nation or in the boardroom, the concept that ethics change with the situation is a major-league copout. What it all comes down to is that ethics requires people to draw a line in the sand. Redrawing the line for every situation is not acting ethically.
THE BASIS OF ETHICAL REASONING
Ronnie's company is bidding a new steam-generating boiler project for a large manufacturer of corn products. This project, if won, could be the first in a series of such projects for Ronnie's company. Further, her company has not been doing all that well lately, and upper management has let Ronnie know that they vitally need this win. Ronnie has a professional contact with the firm soliciting bids. She calls her friend to get the inside track on what that company is looking for and is given a detailed set of decision specifications that have not been made available to other bidding organizations.
Question: Is Ronnie acting ethically? In order to understand this question, we must first address a broader concept—that of values: What is a value?
Value is one of those overused terms that we just love. Ask a ten-year-old kid, and he will probably tell you that it relates to fast-food menus. Ask a politician, and she will probably tell you that it is a term that goes right after the word family. The word has been homogenized and over-utilized nearly to death. Yet, it is an important concept that serves as the basis of understanding ethical reasoning.
A value is essentially a concept that expresses the relative worth or importance of an idea or an object. Values are the basis for all types of decision-making. They help us to try to define problems and serve as gateways to induce more orderly decision-making and, ultimately, a more orderly society. Values serve two basic roles in society and business: decision criteria, and as a definer of sanctions.
Decision Criteria
You like vanilla and hate chocolate. That is a value statement. Values allow us to make shortcuts in most of our decisions. You go into Baskin-Robbins and see two types of people. The first is the person with a well-defined set of values (at least in regard to ice cream) who walks right in and orders vanilla. The other is the person without a clear set of values who insists on getting a sample of all thirty-two flavors.
In business we often categorize decisions as programmed or nonprogrammed. With programmed decisions, the values are so well set that the term decision-making is almost a misnomer. In this situation, values providing the selection criteria of the appropriate alternative are so well defined that further debate is often meaningless. Values play a more critical role in nonprogrammed decisions. They provide the necessary basis for making the decision that is unusual and different.
Sanction Definer
By assessing a relative importance to concepts, a value helps to define the punishment or costs when one breaks a rule. For instance, most members of our society have decided that to kill someone with premeditated intent is worse than if one kills in the heat of passion. Thus, the punishment attached to capital murder is harsher than that for manslaughter.
VALUES IN SOCIETY
Values are woven into our society through three basic mechanisms: norms, laws, and ethics.
Norms
Let us assume that you are waiting, trying to get out of a parking lot at an intersection in heavy traffic. The cars are shuffling along, barely moving, extending for miles (starting to sound familiar?). You are in an unfavorable situation because, by law, nobody has to let you out. Yet, invariably someone slows down and waves for you to enter traffic. Why does he do it?
Norms are the unwritten rules that govern most interactions between people in society. Think of the example above. As soon as your fellow motorist slows down and permits you to enter traffic, what do you do? That's right; you wave back in order to express your gratitude. That is another of the norms involved.
How essential are norms? Think once again of driving. We all took driver's education so that we can have an understanding of the laws involved, but the most important rules governing driving are not laws but norms. In the United States, slower traffic keeps in the right-hand lane. Do not tailgate. Allow adequate space between cars. Norms govern 99 percent of all social interactions.
Likewise, norms are the basis of most of our interactions in the business setting. In what order do people speak at meetings? What is the standard delivery date for this type of product? Who puts the new filter in the coffee machine? Norms are so important in business that we sometimes come up with new names for them, such as industry standards. Company policy that typically states suggested guidelines is nothing more than a restatement of important intracompany norms.
Laws
Certain norms are seen as so important that society decides that these should be codified and applied to everybody. One important difference between norms and laws is that of punishment and enforcement.
Norms are values and, as stated previously, values help to define sanctions. Do norms come with sanctions? Of course—next time you are taking a Sunday drive, violate a few driving norms and notice the number of angry stares and gestures you receive. A major difference between norms and laws is that the sanctions applied to violating a law are much more severe and formalized—a jail sentence, for example.
The other important distinction between the two concerns is that of enforcement. Society members enforce norms informally, although the penalties may actually be quite harsh, such as ostracizing. Laws typically have institutional enforcement mechanisms, such as courts or hearing boards, that attempt to implement the punishment in an unbiased manner.
Ethics
Norms that address concepts of basic human concerns constitute ethics. Ethics as a field of study is concerned with determining the rightness or wrongness of a given decision.
Ethics deals essentially with relationships, two-way interactions between persons living in a complex society. Two essential questions have formed the basis of ethical thought throughout history: What is wrong or right? What is bad or good? As we will discover, a modern approach to ethics addresses both questions.
Is ethics equal to the law? To many managers, equating the two would be a relief. No matter how much we may dislike a particular law, at least such an approach would make it easier to determine the ethical standard in a given situation. In truth, law and ethics often overlap. Some commentators have said that the law is codified ethics. Yet, the question remains—are the two the same?
To answer this, let us get back on the road. You are going about thirty miles per hour when you see that flashing red light, and the police officer cites you for speeding in a twenty-five-mile-per-hour zone. Are you acting unethically? Unless you're driving with your grandmother, most people would probably argue that violating this particular ordinance is not immoral. However, let's say that you are going the same speed on a similar road except this street has a DEAF CHILD sign. This particular law, to drive responsibly in an area with handicapped children, would strike many people as having a definite ethical connotation. On the other hand, a speeding law looks suspiciously like a revenue-raising scheme.
Therefore, when examining what is ethical, do not ignore the laws and rules. Law is a multifaceted construct that serves many purposes. However, for ethical decision-making, use the law as a baseline, not as a substitute for ethics.
ETHICAL DILEMMAS
An examination of ethics must begin with commonsense. Moral commonsense is what your parents taught you, and it has probably served you pretty well. Share your toys. Do not lie. Be loyal. Keep your promises. Do not go swimming for at least one hour after eating. These are the basic moral precepts that most people live their lives by. However, a complex world with complex problems can quickly alter your perceptions of these little homilies.
For example, June is getting ready for an important meeting when her copresenter, Ward, calls up and tells her that he cannot attend because he has not adequately prepared. He pleads with her to tell their boss that he is sick. Obviously, June has a problem. On one hand, she has been taught all her life that one simply does not lie. On the other hand, it has also been impressed upon her that she should be loyal to her friends.
This is the essence of ethical dilemmas. What happens when one (or more) principle(s) conflicts with another? Which should we follow? How do we prioritize? Ethical reasoning allows us to address these conflicts in an orderly and rational manner.
MEANS VERSUS THE ENDS
Most ethical dilemmas involve a conflict between the means and the ends. Is it allowable to let individuals suffer if it results in the group being better off? Should we follow basic moral principles regardless of the consequences even if it results in individuals, the group, or the organization being harmed?
When concepts of right and wrong (means) and good and bad (ends) clash, one needs systematic thinking in order to manage the task of selecting the most morally defensible decision. The two must strike a balance.
THREE KEY QUESTIONS
Philosophers have spent the past several millenniums exploring the central questions of ethics in styles that are often enlightening but more often obscuring. Each of these schools has their strengths, but often their philosophical one-mindedness can leave their hapless followers up those famous creeks without those infamous paddles.
A broader approach, as suggested by Bremer, suggests that a sound basis in ethical reasoning can be pursued by addressing three basic questions (1983).
- What is?
- What ought to be?
- How do we get from what is to what ought to be?
What Is?
Typically the most critical question faced by the manager is this one. Determining what is can be a difficult process. This is especially so for the project manager, given the constraints that we previously outlined.
This question actually has two components. First, the manager must assess the factual nature of the situation. One must gather pertinent information, which, in itself, can be a difficult thing to do. Also one has to identify the affected stakeholders and assess possible impacts.
Second, the project manager must identify the important controlling values at four different levels: personal, business, professional, and societal. Remember that values are more than just good thoughts. Values act as decision rules and provide guidance to the project manager when faced with an ethical dilemma. Violations of stated values have definite real-world ramification. Thus, this four-prong identification is crucial to the ethical process because each level is an important influence upon a leader's actions (see Figure 17).
What Ought to Be?
Whereas, the first question is descriptive, this one is normative and addresses what we earlier called the ends. It is essentially a policy question that addresses the ethical concept of doing the right thing.
However, once again conflicting values can make this assessment difficult. For example, Gene is staffing his new team and must pick either Fred or Ginger for a particularly sensitive position. As with many decisions, the ought to bes can be numerous and conflicting. Upper management has told Gene that it is important to have a diversified team. Seeking both racial and gender diversity is a goal supported by most organizations. Fred is African-American, and Ginger is female. Both are well qualified for the position. Which one gets the nod? How does Gene dance around this one?
Probably no part of the ethical decision-making process is as tied to being an effective leader as is determining what should be. Creating an ethical vision for your organization or subunit is at the heart of leading wisely. In fact, many have argued that leadership devoid of ethics is not leadership at all.
How Do We Get from What Is to What Ought to Be?
Here is world-class myth #1: Ethics is the sole province of people who sit around all day drinking wine and arriving at great thoughts. Wrong; learning to manage ethically is a lot like learning to drive a car. Remember practicing in your parent's driveway: forward, reverse, forward, reverse? A piece of cake, but as soon as you got out on the highway with cars whizzing past, you really started to worry. The principles are still the same, but, in practice, it becomes incredibly more difficult.
The very complexity of modern life requires that every manager be philosopher and doer. With all respect to the philosophers of old, in today's world the emphasis of business ethics is on the present, and a moving target is always more difficult to hit. Did Aristotle ever worry about meeting a payroll? Did Locke ever sweat to meet a shipping schedule? The business environment makes it much harder to determine how to move from your current state to achieve your ethical vision. Yet, this is the essence of being a good manager.
RELATING THE THREE QUESTIONS
Being effective project leaders requires us to take a complex, multifaceted world and translate it into something by which we can motivate and inspire. However, simple strategic statements do not mean that a good leader is unidimensional. Rather, he occupies a number of roles. In discussing ethical leadership, each of the three questions puts prominence on a different role.
What is places the emphasis on your ability to see clearly without bigotry and prejudice. To act as a scout means that you should be able to move between examining the horizon to looking at the ground only a few feet away from you. This essential role allows you to see without blinders and to alert yourself to potential ethical pitfalls.
The captain determines what ought to be. This role is concerned with ethical goal setting and creating an effective vision.
Finally, the wrangler addresses how do we get from what is to what ought to be. This is essentially a strategy question that requires you to formulate and assess alternatives and then implement the most appropriate.
WHAT DOES OUR MOTIVATION HAVE TO DO WITH THIS?
What does it matter what my intentions are? Many managers are pragmatists and identifying the motivation behind their actions is seen as not only bothersome, but as having little value. Does it really matter whether my motivation for giving to the United Way was because I want to help needy people or because my boss is on my back?
Once again, we come back to means versus the ends. We can probably agree that, in an ideal world, altruistic intentions should motivate people. But, in our baser real world, are our intentions irrelevant? Carroll suggests that an analogous situation is one to motivating employees. One can take two organizations that have essentially the same employment policies, but in one the workers strive harder because they sense that they are being valued as individuals. In the other organization, the workers know that they are being manipulated and perform accordingly.
But even this explanation seems to fall back on exacting some result to achieve an advantage. Perhaps a better approach is by examining our home lives. Your daughter bounds to you as you get home from work. Would it affect you if you knew that her motivation solely was to get an increase in her allowance? Would you want to be married to a person whose only reason for being with you was because you're a meal ticket? Even the most pragmatic of people would be horrified if these were the motives behind our family members’ actions. In this case, the intentions of the parties are paramount.
Thus, the question remains: Why does motivation matter greatly in one situation (home) but matters little in another (work)? Many thinkers and philosophers would argue that intention is the key factor in determining whether an action is ethical or not. In making this determination, one should look at her motivation in deciding whether to act. If the motive is one that would be just if applied by everybody, then it is ethical.
CREATING AND IMPLEMENTING AN ETHICAL VISION
Producing and selling an ethical vision is one of the most difficult roles of a leader. When compared to Let's increase profitability by 10 percent, a statement like Be honest in our dealings with customers and suppliers can seem trite and hackneyed. Part of your job, as a leader, is to make the commonplace and mundane full of meaning. This demands that there must be more than just words. Your public and private actions are the keys to promoting ethical behavior.
Tie Ethical Performance to the Reward System
Many compensation systems unwittingly reward unethical behavior. One must construct these systems with an eye to the future. Remember that the reward system that you create gives one of the most important messages of what you consider important.
Now, in most situations it is difficult or even impossible to directly reward doing the right thing. In addition, many would argue that to specifically reward such behavior does not truly create ethical actions, only responsive ones. Rather the emphasis on how you put together and implement such a system should be on not creating incentive or bonus systems that encourage unethical behavior.
Communicate Your Moral Expectations
Think of the last few meetings that you have attended and what was said. Was anything concerning the right or wrong nature of a situation mentioned? Were the ethical dilemmas of a situation analyzed? Now, one could argue that saying to act ethically is an unnecessary repetition. We are expected to act ethically, so why restate the obvious? Yet how many obvious messages are repeated ad nauseam in the business context? Increase profitability. Enhance shareholder value. Maximize employee output. How many times are these and similar sentiments communicated to the organization, the team, and the individual? Repeating the obvious is more than just yadda-yadda-yadda. Rather, it is a statement of values and the priority that the leader places on these values.
Now, are we exhorting project managers to become television evangelists? Obviously not—a balanced approach to communication is important. Teaching, not preaching, is the key.
Focus on the Actual
Even for those managers that make a practice of exhorting ethical behavior, painting with a broad brush can leave a lot of corners untouched. Therefore, it is essential that you couple your more expansive ethical vision with a willingness to explore the ethical implications of actual situations.
Managing ethically is just like any other management situation. As a manager, you must strike a balance between thinking broadly and acting narrowly. But this ability to strike the balance and perceive and act from both perspectives is the difference between the successful and unsuccessful manager.
Be Aware of Potential Ethical Problems in the Planning Stage
Unfortunately, many managers believe that ethics is situational and is, by definition, only something that they can examine in the here-and-now. Make ethical analysis a part of the planning process. This does not necessarily need to be a formal stage in planning. Such formality actually may segregate ethics. Rather, integrate it throughout the process.
Related to this is the importance of scanning the environment. Identification of stakeholders and their values is an extremely important part of this process.
Study and Read Ethics
When it comes to being prepared for moral dilemmas, many managers are Barney Fifes with only the proverbial single bullet in their pockets. Increasing the scope and number of your available ethical techniques requires you to make a concentrated effort. Ethical judgment is like a muscle. Training your moral sense demands that you put the time and effort into it. Is it going to be rock-hard ethical abs or a flabby moral belly?
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this chapter has been to discuss the necessity of making ethics an integral part of leadership. Ethics—addressing issues of right and wrong—is one of the three major ways that values are integrated within society and business. Certain basic attributes of project management can result in ethical dysfunction if mismanaged. As a result, active management of ethical issues is a must. Three questions were introduced that permit project managers to discuss and explore ethical issues in an informal and informative manner. Finally, the chapter concluded with some practical advice on tying ethical reasoning to project management.