EthixBizine

Ask Dr. EthixBiz

Everybody has a right to “Ask Dr. EthixBiz.”  Submit your question or ethical dilemma to ask@ethixbiz.com who will take it to the Doctor for examination.  Dr. EthixBiz will respond directly by e-mail to as many cases as he can handle but can’t promise to see or treat every problem coming his way.  Cases and commentaries that may be of broader interest will be published in the EthixBiz e-zine and archived here in the Archive section.

Good Boss Under the Influence?

Dear Dr. EthixBiz,

My boss has been great to work for these past three years.  But on a recent occasion I smelled alcohol on his breath when he arrived back at the office after a long lunch at an off site location.  He has been such a great boss; he is scheduled to retire in two years; his personal life has brought him terrible pain recently.  Is this an ethics problem?  How should I handle it?
— Lyndon Baume

Dear Lyndon:

Red flags are waving, but let’s be real careful.  We don’t want to hurt this good guy who is going through some personal hell right now—but neither can we stand by and let him hurt others, the company, or himself.  Harm is a key ethical value here, along with loyalty and care.  But some factual discovery is critical:  was he driving back from lunch---or walking or taking a cab?  Does the business have a stated policy prohibiting drinking or being under the influence on the job (or are you all employees at a brewery?  Just asking!).  Also—does he smell of alcohol because he finished lunch with one drink…or just burped…or someone spilled a drink on him…or because he really did drink too much and is inebriated?

If he is really drunk, if he was driving, if he is belligerent, if this has happened several times . . . you probably need to report him to your supervisor or whoever is in charge right away.  We can’t risk harm to innocent victims of his driving.  We can’t let this behavior create a precedent for others in the workplace.  Nevertheless, if the transgression is less severe, my inclination would be to call a taxi and send him home for the day (or drive him home myself) and then have a heart-to-heart chat with him later, maybe helping him get some counseling support.
—Dr. EthixBiz

Google in China: Ethical Compromise or Smart Business?

Dear Dr. EthixBiz,

A while ago (in the SF Chronicle, 13 April 06, actually). I was bothered to read that Google has agreed to the Chinese government that it will censor its web site to comply with Chinese policy.  For example, a search of “Tiananmen Square” outside China gives photos and info about China’s violent suppression of a free speech demonstration---but in China such a Google search deletes these negative images and facts.  CEO Eric Schmidt defends the decision as necessary to reach the lucrative market of 111 million Internet users and argues that it is arrogant to walk into a new country and tell them how to operate. How do you figure out what’s right and wrong in this global business case?
Horace Keinfressen

Dear Horace:

I was troubled by this story just like you.  But let’s think it through.  Google’s actions don’t seem illegal, and don’t seem to break company ethical standards---though some observers will charge Google with “doing evil” in contradiction to their motto. In the end, this case requires a judgment call.  It is not clear that there is one right way to go.  It bothers most of our personal moral compasses to think of being party to a government lying to its people. People are harmed by such disinformation (if they believe it).
But think about it this way:  if you were in China, would you rather have 99% of Google access—or no access until it is 100%?  If you were computer-literate and politically-savvy in China, would you be taken in by their Tiananmen censorship?  Chances are you wouldn’t believe a word they say under any circumstances.  (After all, are you naïve about press releases and news spin from your own government). And is Google permitted to occupy 99% of the info space and believe that the remaining 1% will come before very long? (This is a lot more than just getting the proverbial nose of the camel in the tent). 
Two suggestions: let’s try to ask some Chinese scholars and travelers over here, and even some Chinese citizens on the ground in China, what they would like Google to do in this case.  Isn’t it a bit patronizing for us to decide for them?  Let’s find out what they want Google to do.  If the dominant voice of the Chinese people is “boycott”---then I’m for that.  Final thought:  could Google just post NO information for “Tiananmen Square,” rather than post a misleading flower show at that site?  That way Google is making a quiet but clear statement: no partnership in deception.
I think the takeaway here is that if our company or organization must compromise or adapt as the condition of entering another region or market, let’s try to get real clear on the ethics and values aspects of the deal, seek the opinion of all the critical stakeholders who will be affected by our choices, and make a collaborative judgment on the wisest course of action.  Let’s be clear about the trade-offs.
—Dr. EthixBiz

Executive Compensation Ethics at Sun

Dear Dr. EthixBiz:

I am an employee at Sun Microsystems and while I enjoy a lot of things about my job and company I was pretty ticked off to read that our Board Chairman’s compensation rose from $4.2 million in 2005 to $16.5 million in 2006.  Our CEO’s compensation rose from $3 million in 2005 to $22.8 million in 2006. I know that some huge compensation packages are justified (but are they really justified?) by increases in stock price or company profits.
But over the past five years Sun has experienced annual layoffs, declining revenue, and a stock price decline of 93%. So where is the justification of the huge executive pay-outs?   Is this an ethics issue or just a “market” reality?  If it is ethically problematic, who should take responsibility?  What should be done?
“Pat” (not my real name)

Dear “Pat”:

What you describe is a brief sketch of the executive compensation ethics debates that swirl around us.  These kinds of compensation don’t seem to be illegal or violate company or professional codes of ethics.  But these practices do trouble many consciences and personal values (it seems to many people to be grossly unfair and out of scale to pay anyone like this---especially when revenue and stock price are plummeting).  Whenever publicized, these practices do create an uproar---which is usually an ethics red flag.  And investors, if not also employees and customers, may be harmed by the diversion of so much money to two leaders in this manner ands under these circumstances.  Ethics is about protecting people from harm.
It is easy for those outside the executive suite to call this legalized “theft”---but easy for the recipients to call it “market value” for talented executives like yours at Sun.  The range of effective responses to these practices (should one decide they are unethical) seems very limited (protest, write letters, foment unrest, appeal to congress, quit working for company. Boycott company products, etc.). 
The problem here is twofold:  (1) are these compensation practices unethical? The answer to this question is very complex but it does seem wrong on the face of it if the rich get richer by oppressing, exploiting, and squeezing the poor. So in your case I would want to know if line employees were having pension commitments broken, benefits reduced, etc., in order to fund executive excess. On the other hand if everybody is at least marginally better off, then it doesn’t grate on our sense of justice so much that our leaders are doing especially well. 
 (2) What can we do about the problem?  In my opinion a great deal more research and discussion is needed to come to some agreement on the ethics of compensation (not just for executives but at all levels---including questions about retirement, health care, etc.).  And a great deal of work remains to be done to figure out how best to respond to the problem (whether to constrain unethical practices---or to better explain the justice of practices in the interest of peace).  For the moment, I’m just going to agitate and press for that bigger research and discussion and I suggest the same for you and your upset colleagues.
—Dr. EthixBiz