A Model for Moral Decision Making A CASE FOR DISCUSSION—"On Whistleblowing: Profit vs. the Common Good” You are the manager of a toxic waste dump that is located outside of Sacramento, California. The parent company is located in down- ‘town Los Angeles. Some years ago, a cement “pond” was built in sup- posedly impermeable soil. It was built to house toxic waste from the firm's operations throughout northern California. When the toxic waste was combined with other chemicals, the waste was broken down, thereby rendering it considerably less toxic and therefore safe to be contained in the pond. This operation worked well for a nurn- ber of years. 'A few months ago, you noticed a change in the taste of the drink- ing water in your office and home. As a result, you ordered some tests to be run, and to your dismay the tests revealed some leakage that was moving toward the water table. The engineers who conducted the tests were not able to determine for sure if the waste was leaking into the water table, since the soil outside the pond acts as a partial filtering agent. Being a responsible manager and concerned about the commu nity, you report this to your boss in L.A. He consults with the top management of the company and their response is the same as his Because the facility had passed the state inspection only a few months earlier, they chose to ignore the problem because of both the cost involved in cleanup and their continuing compliance with the stan- dards of the state. ‘See Case 123: "Profit ‘Versus Eavionmental Concern’ (pp 301-502)638 Beyond Integrity ‘You maintain that the state's standards clearly are not adequate, ‘but the company is adamant. They will do nothing about the problem unless they are found to be in violation of state standards. You protest that decision, and they warn you to keep to managing the facility and leave these other decisions to the appropriate people. Your dilemma is compounded by the fact that whistle-blowers almost always lose their jobs (which you can ill afford to have hap- pen, since you have a wife and three school-age children dependent on your income) and frequently are blackballed from the industry. ‘As the manager of the facility, what would you do in this situa- tion? How would you justify your actions? What are the various options that you have as the manager? Perhaps as good a question as “What would you do?" in this situa- tion is the question “How would you decide what to do?" The process of making a moral decision can be as important as the decision itself, and many ethical decisions that people encounter are so complex that it is easy to exhaust oneself talking around the problem without actually making any progress toward resolving it. The response to many moral dilemmas is “Where do I start?” and the person who is faced with these decisions often needs direction that will enable him or her to move constructively toward resolution and see the forest as well as the trees, In order to adequately address the ethical dilemmas that people encounter regularly, the following is a model that can be used to insure that all the necessary bases are covered. This is not formula that will automatically generate the “right” answer to every ethical problem. Rather, itis a guideline that questions are being asked in the process of ethical del Given the ethnic and religious diversity of our society, it is impor- tant that the model used for making ethical decisions has “room in it, to accommodate a whole host of different moral and ethical perspec- tives. This model is not tied to any one particular perspective, but can be used comfortably with a variety of cultural, ethnic, and religious backgrounds. This is not a distinctively Judeo-Christian model, though it is consistent with the Scripture, and anyone can use biblical princi- ples in utilizing this model. What makes many moral dilemmas so dif- ficult is that the Scripture does not speak to the issue as clearly as one would wish, because Scripture has not directly addressed the issue. More general principles can be brought to bear on the issue at hand. However, in these instances, there is often disagreement about which biblical principles are applicable to the specific issue under discussion. For example, in the case used in this chapter, the manager can appeal to a number of different principles to justify a wide range of options. He can invoke the principle of loyalty to one’s family, a strong bibli-‘A Model for Moral Decision Making 639 _al imperative to justify not saying anything that will jeopardize his jab and his ongoing ability to support his family. He can also invoke fhe principle of “do no harm” to justify his responsibility to blow the whistle to keep the company from bringing harm to the community's water supply. It is not clear that appeal to principles alone will con- ve this case. Thus to insist that-att ethical dilemmas are resolved simply by appeal ta biblical principles seems t0 oversimplify the matter. Certainly many moral questions are Fesolved conclusively by appeal to Scripture, but there are other cases in which that does not happen. That is not to say that Scripture is not sufficient for the believer's spiritual life but that the special revelation of Scripture is often supplemented by the general revelation of God outside of Scrip- ture. This model makes room for both general and special revelation and gives each a place in helping to resolve the difficult moral dilem- mas facing people today. Here are the elements of a model for making moral decisions: This mode is adapted ffom the seven-sep mode! ef Ds Wiliams W May. School of Regio, Un erst of Southern Ca scan be resolved simply by clarifying frnisihe wsed sis mode the facts of the case in question, Tn those cases that prove to be more Raysirof issues difficult, gathering th the essential first step prior to any eth- ical analysis and reflection on the case. In analyzing a case, we want to know the available facts at hand as well as any facts currently not/ known but that need to be ascertained. Thus one is asking not on "What do we know?” but also “What do we need to know?" in ord to make an intelligent ethical decision. 1. Gather the Facts 2. Determine the Ethical Issues ‘The ethical issues are stated in terms of competing interests or goods It's these conflict >that actually make for an ethical dilemma. The issues should be presented in a versus ____ format in order to reflect the interests that are colliding in a particular ethical dilemma. For example, in business ethics there is often a conflict between the right of a firm to make a fair profit and its obligation to the community. In this case, that obtigation pertains to the environment. — s Have a Bearing on the Case? 3. What Principh In any ethical dilemma, there are certain moral values or principles that are central to the conflicting positions being taken. Itis critical to identify these principles, and in some cases, to determine whether some |640 Beyond Integrity cinciples are to be weighted more heavily than others. Clearly, biblical Panaprer will be weighted the momthewy Theres be other pan ciples that speak to the case that come from other sources. There may be constitutional principles or principles drawn from natural law thee supplement the biblical principles that come into play here. The prin- ciples that come out of your sense of mission and calling are also impor. tant to consider. 4. st the Alternatives Part of the creative thinking involved in resolving an ethical dilemma involves coming up with various alternative courses of action. Although there will be some aitemativesthat you withrule ont ‘without much thought, in general the more alternatives that are listed, the better the chance that your list will include some-imeh=quaitty | ones, In addition, you may come up with some Very creative alterna tives that you had not considered before. 5. Compare the Alternatives With the Principles At this point, the task is one of eliminating alternatives according to the moral principles that have a bearing on the case. In many instances, the Case will be resolved at this point, since the principles vill eliminate all alternatives except one. In fact, the purpose of this Comparison is to see if there is a clear decision that can be made with- out further deliberation. If a clear decision is not forthcoming, then the next part in the model must be considered. At the least, some of the alternatives may be eliminated by this step of comparison 6. Weigh the Consequences f the consequences of the remaining available alternatives is in order. Both positive and negative consequences are to be considered. They should be informally weighed, since some positive consequences are more beneficial than others and some negative consequences are more detrimental than others. E the principles do not yield a clear decision, then a consideration 7. Make a Decision Deliberation cannot go on forever. At some point, a decision must be made, Realize that one common element in ethical dilemmas is that there are no easy and painless solutions to them. Frequently the decision that is made is one that involves the least number of problems or negative consequences, not one that is devoid of them.You believe that there is a leak of toxic materials into the ground water of your community, endangering the water supply. This belief ‘comes from your experience as an engineer and a noticeable differ- ence in the taste of the community's drinking water. Tests to determine whether or not the waste has reached the water table are inconclusive so far. ‘The facility has met all tests and guidelines issued by the state. It is in compliance with state environmental regulations. You have a secure job with the company, and it supports your wife and your three school-age children, You are aware that people who blow the whistle on their employer are most often fired from their job and frequently are black- balled from the industry. You have lodged complaints with upper management, and their response has been that they will not do anything about the site until the state orders them to do so. Upper management still holds you in high regard but is getting tired of your raising the issue of this leak with them. ‘You have started buying bottled water for your family and are dis- creetly encouraging your friends to do likewise. 2. Determine the Ethical Issues ‘The ethical issues in this case revolve around the conflict betw profit and the common good. Companies have a right to make a fair profit, and that profit provides jobs and a good living to those in the community. On the other hand, companies also have a responsibility to avoid endangering the community in which they operate. Thus one ethical issue in this case is the conflict between profit and the public good, namely, environmental protection. A second ethical issue concerns the manager himself, He has a responsibility to his family—to support them and not to do anything that would endanger that support. Yet he has an obligation as man- ager of the facility to do what he can to insure that it is operated safely and does not harm the water supply of the community. This issue can be stated as responsibility to one’s family vs. responsibility to the manage642 Beyond Integrity community. Another way to state it is as conflict between the man- ager's duty to tell the truth (and thus protect the community) and his duty to take care of his family (by not jeopardizing his job) 3. What Principles Have a Bearing on the Case? Asis often the case, here the ethical issues involve chiefly a con- flict of principles. For the manager, there are the principles of taking care of one's family; the importance of truth-telling, especially in dis- closing information that will prevent harm to the community; and the duty to prevent harm when one has the power to do so. For the com- pany, there is the interest in maximizing profit and in not unneces- sarily making expenditures that decrease the bottom line. This is balanced by its obligation to pursue profit in a morally responsible way. An additional principle that speaks to the case is that of employee loyalty to the company that supports him or her, thus not unneces- sarily subjecting the company to risk and negative publicity. Here the weighting of the principles depends on the degree of risk that is known at this time. Should the chances of the waste leaking into the water table be great, that would cast more weight on the prin- ciples of truth-telling and one’s duty to prevent harm to the commu nity. If the manager simply suspects that there is a leak and does not know how far it has proceeded, then the principles of loyalty to one's company and family carry more weight. At this point, the manager does not have clear data indicating that the waste is leaking into the water table of the community. But if he waits until the data are more conclusive, it may be too late to clean up the damage without major ‘expenses being incurred. The fact that the facility has passed all state inspections to date is significant too, but frequently ethics involves responsibilities that go beyond mere compliance with the law. 4. List the Alternatives The manager has a number of options at his disposal. They can be summarized by two main alternatives—make the information public, or keep quiet. First, he can somehow make public the information about the leak in the facility. In an effort to keep the discussion within the company, he can run his own tests, perhaps at his own expense or on his own time to determine further if any leakage into the commu- nity's water table has occurred. He can then take that hard data to upper management and request again, on the basis of new information, that they do something to fix the leak and clean up the damage. This is a prudent and moral first step that, should it prove effective, would sat- isfy all the principles that have a bearing on this case |poral or legal violations ih order to attract attention to these viola” tions in the hope that the company will be forced to comply either “vith the law or with what an employee thinks re applicable moyal principles The manager ‘has various avenues open to him to blow the ‘histle, all of which involve a risk that he will lose his job. “The first of these is alsa the most direct. He can take his concerns directly to theState environmental regulators/and request that they Schedule an inspection of the facility immediately. He can do this gnonymously, but it is unlikely that his involvement can remain a secret for long, given his past record of complaints to upper management bout this matter. Thus whether itis done anonymously or directly, the fesult will likely be the same, Another avenue available to him is to take his concerns to the¢pre}a. There he is assured of wide coverage, and pethaps a public outcry will be sufficient to persuade the company to remedy the problem. However, the risk of losing his job and being blackballed from the industry are even greater if he uses this option “The second alternative is to keep the information to himself. He can continue to discreetly encourage his friends and others in the com- munity to avoid the community's drinking water, but even this sugges- tion to anyone beyond his close friends carries a risk that the information will get out of his control. Perhaps this is what he wants to ‘accomplish, so that the burden of disclosing the information is on some- one else and cannot be traced back to him, thus keeping his job safe. ‘another approach under the second option is to clean up the ‘waste and fix the leak himself, using his budget for the facility to fund the cleanup and repair. This way he can safeguard his job as well as insure that the community's water supply is safe. If this does not involve a substantial amount of money, it is a feasible alternative, ‘dearly the best one. But for a problem of this magnitude, itis unlikely that it can be resolved without making a significant dent in his bud~ get, fit can be afforded at all. A substantial amount of money, even i it ig within his budget, will likely be noticed by upper management, and he will risk their censure. But that is less of a risk than blowing the whistle on the company. For the sake of this discussion, let's ‘assume that the amount of money needed to fix the problem is more than the manager can obtain.644 Beyond Integrity 5. Compare the Alternatives With the Principles The only way to get a clear decision at this point is to decisively weight one of the principles more heavily than the others. The prin- ciples of truth-telling and the duty to prevent harm suggest that the manager should make the information about the leak public. His obli- gation to the company and to his family suggest that he ought to keep the information to himself, at least until he can be sure whether the material has leaked into the water table. Knowing how far if at all the leak has progressed into the water table would help, but given the uncertainty of that important fact, let’s assume that no clear decision is reached at this point. 6. Weigh the Consequences ‘The remaining alternatives are for the manager to somehow dis- close the information or keep it to himself until the state comes to test the facility again. The consequences of the two alternatives form mir- ror images of each other. That is, for the most part positive conse- quences of one option are the reverse of the negative consequences of the other. Thus the weight that the decision makers give to the vari- ous consequences is important for determining which set of conse- quences is the most beneficial or least harmful, The likely consequences of disclosing the information include the following: The company will either be tested immediately by the state or it will be the object of much negative publicity. But remember, the facil- ity is in Sacramento and the company's headquarters are in Los Ange- les, more than four hundred miles away. But if the water is tested and found to be substandard, the burden will be on the company to fix the problem. However, the facility may still pass the state tests, The manager will likely lose his job for defying direct orders from ‘upper management. He may be blacklisted from the industry and have to seek employment in another field, His family may have to move. He may suffer significant financial distress, But remember, if one is a reli- gious person, he can depend on God's sovereignty in situations like these and trust God to provide for the family when one stands up for principles like the good of the community. If the manager does not disclose the information, the likely conse- quences will be the following: The leak will continue unabated, perhaps heading toward the community's water table. ‘The manager will have to live with the knowledge that he had the opportunity to save the community from harm and did not.will be held responsible by nis mics 17. Make a Decision The decision in this case is difficult. What would you do in the manager's place? Is there sufficient evidence to justify going “out on a Timb" and making the information public, either to the press or to the state? Does the biblical principle of self-sacrifice for the good of the community tilt the decision toward disclosing the information? Or does the community also include one's family, giving the manager a responsibility to them too? Where does the sovereignty of God enter into the decision? If the manager does not have religious faith, will his decision likely be different than if he does? Given the uncertainty about the extent of the leak, one could argue that it is best not to disclose the information at present. How: gver, by disclosing it, the manager has the chance to prevent what could be substantial harm. Given that God will care for his family, that tilts the decision in favor of going public.CONCLUSION: Business, Virtue, and the Good Life Much of this book has addressed, from a variety of perspectives, the conflicts that arise when a company's pursuit of profit collides with its obligation to its community. That community may include the company's employees, the environment, the consumers of its prod- ‘ucts and services, or the general public. Many texts in business ethics would leave you with the impression that resolving these conflicts is all there is to the matter. Yet we have tried to show that there are other issues about personal moral development, responsibility, and decision making that are crucial for a full-orbed discussion of business ethics. To put it in terms of moral theory, action-oriented theories of moral- ity are helpful but not sufficient to address the critical component of business ethics and the person. It takes the additional influence of more virtue-oriented emphases in ethics to round out our discussion. Many approaches to virtue are connected with conceptions of the ‘200d life” and the good society. What constitutes a good life is a crit- jal question that anyone who spends forty to fifty hours a week work- ing in business should consider. More specifically, what place do business and the pursuit of profit have in a person’s conception of the good life? What place should they have? How should a person's reli gious faith help form that conception? These are important questions that merit serious personal reflection, not only for a well-rounded dis- cussion of business ethics, but for a well-rounded personal life In his book God and Mammon in America, sociologist Robert Wuth- now discloses that religious faith, though still important in questions of ‘economic life, exercises an ambivalent and therapeutic influence.' He ‘Robert Wathnow, God suggests that the impact of religious views has been weakened by cul- Si Amst fragt tural trends toward greater secularization and that, as a result, they no 994, isin Pree Prem longer shape our views on economic life as much as they reinforce choices made on the basis of prevailing market orientation. He suggests: Brae eee etncant service by being able to address coherently the issues that most businesspeople will face regularly in their places of work. We have tried here to provide such guidance for those making this pilgrimage and for those who assist them. ‘We challenge you to think more carefully about how you view your workplace experience, whether as a calling or as.a career. Earlier in this book we distinguished between these two and encouraged you to consider what is your calling and to pursue that, in contrast t pur- Suing only a career. Youmay-eneounter some tensions between fal- filling your taitimgand making the kind of living you feel you need in order to provide for a family. We are not suggesting a simplistic injunc- tion such as “do what you love and the money will follow.” But we are urging you not to blindly follow the career orientation that is preva- lent in the marketplace today. There is more to your calling than rl position in the organization, your prospects for advancement, and yout earning potential. Your attitudes and values in your working years ard just as important—if not more so—than how you advance your career by moving up a corporate ladder. We also challenge you to think more carefully about how busi- ness its into your conception ofthe gnod lif. What constitutes a good life Tor you? What do your religious beliefs suggest constitutes a good life? How does your definition of success fit with your conception of the good life? The way many people would regard success has more to do with your position and income than with the contribution you have made to your community and the kind of person you have become. That is the orientation of the career, not the calling. To be sure, being recognized and appropriately rewarded for quality work is a reasonable expectation, but if that does not occur—or if it does not occur according to your timetable—it is not uncommon, then, to become disillusioned with your work. By contrast, for someone who adopts a calling orientation toward work, the job is considered inher- ently valuable and motivating, at incement—though impo ently valuable and motivating, and—advancemi i {ants Rok the alsconseening-passinn of one's penfssion “Find difficult to consider people a success, irrespective of their posi- tion and net worth, if they have compromised important personal