Labor Day Thoughts on Ethics, Civilization, and Business
Ethics lies at the heart of what it means to be civilized, not morality, though what may count as immoral behavior is rarely ethical either. Morality is based on following established beliefs, teachings, and precepts, often specific to a particular religious tradition. It also varies from culture to culture, so what is considered important for morals in a strict Muslim household may differ profoundly from the precepts a strict Hindu, Jewish, or Christian household would follow. Ethics is based on the use of human reason to guide behavior—as is Slow Leadership—and a belief that whoever exercises reason most is likely to behave best. To this must be added a deep faith in individual freedom, since destroying freedom is nearly always the first step of any tyranny, religious or secular.
Morality may be based on dogma; ethics is not.To take an ethical position means to demand sound, rational reasons for people’s actions: reasons that can stand up to scrutiny and questioning, providing a basis for basing decisions on more than personal self-interest or prior belief. And whereas morality is fixed, ethics (and reason) are never finished with seeking greater understanding.
One of the hallmarks of today’s conventional management thinking is how dogmatic much of it has become. When people believe that already know all the answers, what need is there to question further, or even review what they believe they already know? It is this dogmatic belief in conventional business principles that has fueled much of the macho, narrow-minded thinking among today’s leaders. Where someone with an ethical cast of mind sees fresh questions to be explored and new principles to be considered, the conventional leader sees only known tasks to be completed as quickly and cheaply as possible. For one of the most fiercely-held dogmas of conventional leaders is an unquestioning belief in the primacy of profit, whether it is over people, principles, or the passion that makes work worth doing.
Overwork, stress, leadership through fear and manipulation, the exploitation of the many on behalf of a chosen few, are ethically unacceptable because reason and experience tells us that they cause harm to individuals and society at large. I believe this to be true, not because of any dogma, but because I can think through the consequences of such actions as these and see the results. Living and working in an atmosphere of fear and threats produces alienation and hatred, with results that range from personal feuds and labor disputes, through social unrest, to terrorism. When a select few manipulate and exploit others for their own benefit, there can neither be freedom nor democracy. As many totalitarian societies have proved (and not a few authoritarian corporations as well), the result is a long slide into corruption and repression. The elect suppress those they exploit out of fear that their corrupt rule will be overthrown and their cosy lives ruined. The exploited come to hate their masters and so plot secret rebellion.
Much of management theory is unscientific, not because it lacks potentially verifiable ideas, but because it is not constantly subjected to rigorous questioning or tested against changing experience. It is more like the teachings of religious faith: statements to be taken on trust because of the reverence accorded to those who made them, often in different circumstances far in the past. Slow Leadership aspires to be more than a movement concerned with improving work/life balance or workplace culture. We suggest that you slow down, but not simply to rest and renew your energy. Most of all it is to allow you to use your innate powers of reasoning to find solutions to the dilemmas that face you; and to question, again and again, whatever others tell you that you must accept on the basis of obedience to doctrine.
I’m not blind to the failures and drawbacks of human reason, nor its limitations, but it’s hard to see that there is a better guide to how we should behave in business life.Civilized societies do not indulge in mindless prejudice or pogroms; nor do they block each individual’s freedom to seek out a personal answer to the problems of life. And though human reason can err—especially when people’s desires cause them to defend positions they want to be true, even though they can sense they may be not—it still provides the best safeguard against being taken in by plausible liars. As I read recently, asking people to go through life without recourse to reason is like like telling someone groping through a dark place by the light of a single candle to blow their candle out. I’m not blind to the failures and drawbacks of human reason, nor its limitations, but it’s hard to see that there is a better guide to how we should behave in business life.
Morality may be based on dogma; ethics is not.To take an ethical position means to demand sound, rational reasons for people’s actions: reasons that can stand up to scrutiny and questioning, providing a basis for basing decisions on more than personal self-interest or prior belief. And whereas morality is fixed, ethics (and reason) are never finished with seeking greater understanding.
One of the hallmarks of today’s conventional management thinking is how dogmatic much of it has become. When people believe that already know all the answers, what need is there to question further, or even review what they believe they already know? It is this dogmatic belief in conventional business principles that has fueled much of the macho, narrow-minded thinking among today’s leaders. Where someone with an ethical cast of mind sees fresh questions to be explored and new principles to be considered, the conventional leader sees only known tasks to be completed as quickly and cheaply as possible. For one of the most fiercely-held dogmas of conventional leaders is an unquestioning belief in the primacy of profit, whether it is over people, principles, or the passion that makes work worth doing.
If you know all the answers, there is nothing to learn. If you know only that you will never know for sure, there is every reason to go on testing and exploring, in the hope either of adding further certainty or disproving what once you thought you knew.The principles that ethical thinkers follow are what others have called “strong beliefs, lightly held.” Their strength comes from having a firm basis in reason. Most have been fiercely argued, tested, and validated by experience. They are lightly held because reason shows us that what we think we know today may be disproved by some change in circumstances or fresh understanding. The basis of dogma is faith and clinging to set ideas; the basis of ethics is learning and a readiness to let go of anything that can no longer be justified, however dear it may be to our past thinking. If you know all the answers, there is nothing to learn. If you know only that you will never know for sure, there is every reason to go on testing and exploring, in the hope either of adding further certainty or disproving what once you thought you knew.
Overwork, stress, leadership through fear and manipulation, the exploitation of the many on behalf of a chosen few, are ethically unacceptable because reason and experience tells us that they cause harm to individuals and society at large. I believe this to be true, not because of any dogma, but because I can think through the consequences of such actions as these and see the results. Living and working in an atmosphere of fear and threats produces alienation and hatred, with results that range from personal feuds and labor disputes, through social unrest, to terrorism. When a select few manipulate and exploit others for their own benefit, there can neither be freedom nor democracy. As many totalitarian societies have proved (and not a few authoritarian corporations as well), the result is a long slide into corruption and repression. The elect suppress those they exploit out of fear that their corrupt rule will be overthrown and their cosy lives ruined. The exploited come to hate their masters and so plot secret rebellion.
To set aside macho, brutalized, and dogmatic business beliefs is to set aside what must, in the end, destroy the very people and organizations who hold to them.Do long-hours cultures and high-pressure workplaces exploit and demean those who work in them? Are there better ways of producing higher productivity that do not demand that people subordinate the whole of life to the pursuit of profit for others? Can we balance the need for profits to sustain a business with the need of its people for stimulation, personal development, and a sense of meaning and satisfaction in what they do? These are all ethical questions, and the answers are most likely to be found by exercising our reason to consider the consequences to our actions and explore the alternatives. The basis for civilized work is a reasoned and ethical approach to business life. To set aside macho, brutalized, and dogmatic business beliefs is to set aside what must, in the end, destroy the very people and organizations who hold to them. Look at Enron.
Much of management theory is unscientific, not because it lacks potentially verifiable ideas, but because it is not constantly subjected to rigorous questioning or tested against changing experience. It is more like the teachings of religious faith: statements to be taken on trust because of the reverence accorded to those who made them, often in different circumstances far in the past. Slow Leadership aspires to be more than a movement concerned with improving work/life balance or workplace culture. We suggest that you slow down, but not simply to rest and renew your energy. Most of all it is to allow you to use your innate powers of reasoning to find solutions to the dilemmas that face you; and to question, again and again, whatever others tell you that you must accept on the basis of obedience to doctrine.
What distinguishes a leader is not primarily skill or technique: it is character and values, with both firmly based on taking whatever time is needed to exercise your freedom to think and seek out what is beneficial to all, not merely convenient for a few.When Mrs. Thatcher (a lady not noted for flexibility of mind or belief) was Prime Minister of Great Britain, she was fond of saying: “There is no alternative.” This was meant to end all debate in her favor. But there are always alternatives. If we believe there are none, it is either because we have not allowed ourselves time to find them, or we do not like those we can see. Management and leadership are about practical ethics. There is no basis in either one for unchallengeable doctrine or dogma, just as there is no known ethical basis for dishonesty, fraud, discrimination, or greedy exploitation of others. What distinguishes a leader is not skill or technique: it is character and values, with both firmly based on taking whatever time is needed to your exercise freedom to think and seek out what is beneficial to all, not merely convenient for a few. That is truly Slow Leadership.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home