Some decisions are easy to make. Others leave that feeling of uncertainty that continues to make us question our decision. An Ethics Quick Test applied to the decision-making process might help. Many decisions face us every day, some easy and obvious, some not. This Ethics Quick Test provides seven checks to examine the ethical implications of your decisions.
You will notice that we in the Ethics Office can help you with the first two and the last two, providing you with information regarding the applicable rules, procedures and policies. If we cannot provide you an immediate answer, we can research it or direct you to where you can find the answer. However, the middle three depend solely on your personal principles and values.
The following article was recently sent to about 1200 of the top managers at TI to encourage them to conduct a self-evaluation of their leadership style regarding ethical conduct. How would you rate?
Ethical leadership is required from each and every TIer, both at work and at home. A quick evaluation will show what levels of ethical leadership are employed by us and by those around us.
As we conduct our personal and our professional lives, one measure of our character is the degree to which good ethical values enter into our decision-making process and into our dealings with those around us. Each of us, regardless of job or position, faces a number of decisions involving personal and professional ethics every day. The relationship between supervisor and employee is most critical, for it is here where trust, candor, and mutual respect are absolutely vital.
Although many of the qualities of ethical behavior are measured on the annual appraisal form, ethics can never be accurately measured. How would you and those around you stack up against these criteria?
Some thoughts and recommendations from the TI Ethics Office and the Josephson Center for the Advancement of Ethics on judging ethical standards.
The TI code of ethics states very clearly our position on maintaining high standards: We owe it to ourselves to exercise the highest standards and best judgment in making ethical choices. By continuing to uphold these high standards, we will preserve the integrity of our people, the reputation of the company, and the trust and confidence of the public in every part of the world... each of us is expected to understand and live up to these standards so that we can say to ourselves and others, 'TI is a good company, and one reason is that I am part of it.
So how do we insure that our standards are set at the highest level?
How do we evaluate standards, our own and those of others? Here are eight guidelines that will help in that evaluation
Every TIer has the right and the responsibility to evaluate those ethical standards by which we live and work. Perhaps these guidelines will help.
Readers respond with more examples of the silent saboteurs, those subtle and subversive games that people play that damage our work relationships, our productivity, job satisfaction, and trust in our fellow TIers.
Several weeks ago, this article ran several issues on the "silent saboteurs", those subtle games that are so damaging and appear in the way we treat each other, or do the wrong thing because we believe that is what our company wants us to do. You, the readers, responded to those articles more than to any previous article.
Consider these additional examples of silent saboteurs, sent in anonymously on the ethics communications line
The cost of these activities is high in the areas of motivation and morale, stress, quality, turnover, productivity, pride, and customer satisfaction, all of those areas that we want to emphasize in a highly ethical company.
Our daily journey through ethical behavior is made of many small steps. Sometimes the small decisions are as important as big ones.
The danger of this notoriety is that we may become dulled to those ethical problems and issues that occur in our everyday lives. We may begin to think of ethical problems only as those which gain international headlines. On the contrary, those ethical issues that should concern us most are those we face everyday... in our homes and in our work place. Good ethics involves you and it involves me, where we work, where we live, anywhere we face a personal decision.
What do you do when the cafeteria cashier gives you too much change? Would you accept a compliment for your work that honestly should go to another? If you would like to have a day off from work tomorrow, will you call in sick or will you take a day of vacation? Do you give your child pencils and paper for school that you brought home from your work at TI? These are examples of personal, daily ethical decisions that reflect just what sort of a person we really are. Whether we make the right or wrong decision, often the only one who knows the truth is the one who makes the decision.
Dr. Mark Pastin of the Lincoln Center for Ethics at Arizona State recommends the test of "turn-about," a test that will help us make the right decision, even when different cultures and scenarios are involved. How would you want to be treated if the roles were turned about, if someone else were making the decision and the results were to impact you? Many of us know this test as the "Golden Rule". It will serve us well, even when no one else is watching.
David Glidden, a philosopher at the University of California, gives us this final thought:Virtue is its own reward and that, above all else, is why we can be optimistic. People who live virtuous lives live better lives and that's that.
Several months ago in one of our T NEWS Ethics Articles, we asked TIers to submit their examples of the silent saboteurs, those subtle and subversive games that people play that damage our work relationships, our productivity, job satisfaction and trust in our fellow TIers.
Here are more examples.
The cost of these activities is high...in the areas of motivation and morale, productivity, pride, and customer satisfaction, all of those areas that we want to emphasize in a highly ethical company.
The damage done by targeted inappropriate comments can be significant. Sensitivity is a personal responsibility and cannot be dictated by law.
If ethics is defined as the principles and understandings that govern how we deal with each other, then sensitivity in our relationships is certainly an ethical issue. So many of the concerns both from TIers and from those outside of TI, that are received by the TI Ethics Office deal directly with problems between individuals. Often they involve office politics and the games that people choose to play. Sometimes we hear from suppliers or customers who feel that they have not been treated fairly. Regardless, sensitivity in our relationships has great impact and the responsibility for understanding the concerns of others is one that each and every one of us carries.
Many of us have learned the potential for damage through differing circumstances...situations where we might later say, "I wish I hadn't said that". But how many of these situations are never related back to us? How many comments do we make that leave hurt feelings and we never hear about it until it blows up? Or perhaps we never hear about it at all and the offended person simply quits or transfers or silently suffers loss of respect...or, even worse, seeks outright revenge.
How many of us are guilty of participating in gender, culture or race oriented jokes? Who among us is guilty of using derogatory slang expressions to describe those different from us in gender, culture, race, physical ability or religion? Who instinctively refers to TI managers or supervisors as "he"? Who addresses a group or team of mixed gender as "you guys"? (I personally have this bad habit, but I'm trying to improve.) Are there acronyms or slang terms that apply to our program or work that have sexual or cultural connotations?
The list of examples could go on and on. Perhaps a few "quick tests" could help us in our sensitivity and understanding
Segregation of individuals or groups for these kinds of differences is simply not right. Certainly, individual countries maintain laws against some of these activities, but it needs to go so much deeper than that. There needs to be a personal understanding that such activity is not right and a personal commitment to be considerate, fair, and sensitive to individual differences.
Most of our decisions have some ethical issues or impact, here are some guidelines that should raise sensitivity and improve our decision-making process.
Over the past several weeks, we have suggested guides for personal decisions and activity, including what we say, how we approach ethical decision-making, and personal character traits. But how about guidance to determine if the decision even has ethical implications?
Labeling a decision as an "ethical decision" may disguise the fact that almost every decision holds some ethical issue or impact. Perhaps a better approach would be to develop an ability to judge the ethical implications. What role do my ethics play in this decision? How do I recognize an ethical situation or problem? What are the warning signs that this may be a tougher decision with deeper issues and wider impact? Here are some guidelines. Not all apply every time, but they should raise sensitivity and improve our decision-making process.
If you face a tough decision and you feel as if you need help, there are many places to turn. Your supervisor or manager is generally the best for that is the one who understands your situation the best. But there are other sources of good information...the open door to higher levels of management, the ethics booklet, TI Legal, Human Resources, and your TI Ethics Office. Ask and keep asking until you feel you have a good answer that complies with TI standards. Know whats right. Do what's right.
Handling a difference of opinion between you and your manager can be a tough challenge because we have to maintain everyone's personal integrity while accommodating honest differences of opinion and protecting TI's best interest. The Ethics Office has received the following question many times in one form or another. If I believe a senior manager is making a bad decision that will impact me, should I risk my career (or position) by challenging that decision?
The ethics quick test is a seven-step decision-making aid of which the last three items are
The philosophy here is that each of us has a responsibility to challenge what we perceive as bad decisions or improper actions on the part of our managers. But in itself, that could be a very difficult action in some situations. If we as individuals have that responsibility laid upon us, then it is only appropriate that our company provide us some means to reduce or eliminate that risk. Consider these steps
Your objective in this effort must be for you, your supervisor, and this manager to mutually find ways to meet personal and professional goals. This can be a tough challenge, because we have to maintain everyone's personal integrity while accommodating honest differences of opinion and protecting TI's best interest.
Two considerations
At some point in this process, hopefully we will come to the place where we know we have tried every reasonable path to modifying this decision, and if unsuccessful, we accept the position that we are simply agreeing to disagree.
Often there are warning signs that alert us that we are making an especially tough decision that might require special considerations.
If the traffic light is clearly green or red, we have few decisions to make -- at least fewer than if the light turns yellow. Our decision-making process is similar to that. Some decisions are quite clear; there is really not a difficult choice to make. But when the light turns yellow, when it is not a clear decision, when it is a 49 to 51 split, that is when the decision-making gets tough. That is when the warning flags are up. That is when we must be especially careful to examine every contingency, every stakeholder, every aspect of the problem.
But sometimes we are blind to the yellow light, to the warning. Perhaps we are distracted by a passing concern of a speeding diversion. Perhaps our eyes are not on the road. Perhaps we simply do not understand the rules and expectations, or perhaps the dangers. For whatever reason, we do not recognize the warning.
Too often we expect the warnings to come in the obvious forms -- a bell ringing, a flag waving. But when it comes to the workplace, to our co-workers, to our team members, to our own ethical decisions, we must watch for the subtle signals. Consider the following questions to help identify the ethical problem
A "yes" answer to any of these questions might indicate that this is the time for extra caution and consideration in your decision-making. Perhaps this is the time for checking your decision with a friend or co-worker. Perhaps this is the time to consult your manager or supervisor, Human Resources, TI Legal or the Ethics Office. Be careful: this could be a very important decision for you and for those who work around you.
Each time we create a winner, we might also be creating a loser. In many situations, this creates unintentional and unproductive damage to our relationships.
In many situations of life, our objective is to emerge as the winner. But the bittersweet consequence is that each time we create a winner, we may also create a loser. We intentionally divide groups into winners and losers. Take the World Cup Soccer competition, for example. In a very lengthy and competitive process, the loser group grows larger while the winner group finally decreases to only one team, the champions.
While this process is very appropriate for so much that goes on in our lives, it might be destructive to many of our business relationships. In a more global view, it may work against our long term business goals to seek the absolute win if one of our business partners, perhaps a customer or a supplier, must be the loser.
In our individual business relationships with our co-workers or team members, the same principle is true. Each time we create a winner, we may be creating losers. Perhaps it is appropriate in some circumstances, but we must continue to show respect for and protect the dignity of all team members and business associates. Failure to do so can result in damaged relationships that will inhibit our ability to work together in the future.
The loss of face is more critical in some cultures than in others. But it always carries a negative impact. It might show itself in one's attendance or productivity. It might appear in how that person interacts with the team. It may be a silent cancer that eats away at the relationship where the employee chooses to resign or the customer or supplier simply chooses to take their business elsewhere.
The key words are reflected in our TI Commitment, which states, "We will create an environment where people are valued as individuals and treated with respect and dignity, fairness and equality." If we truly subscribe to this, we will instinctively work toward that solution where all stakeholders are considered and treated fairly, where everyone involved can walk away somewhat a winner, their dignity intact, and ready and able to pursue enhanced business relationships.
Common advice to aid the search for a win/win solution