The Fairness or Justice Approach Aristotle and other Greek philosophers have contributed the idea that all equals should be treated equally. Today we use this idea to say that ethical actions treat all human beings equally-or if unequally, then fairly based on some standard that is defensible. We pay people more based on their harder work or the greater amount that they contribute to an organization, and say that is fair. But there is a debate over CEO salaries that are hundreds of times larger than the pay of others; many ask whether the huge disparity is based on a defensible standard or whether it is the result of an imbalance of power and hence is unfair. The Common Good Approach The Greek philosophers have also contributed the notion that life in community is a good in itself and our actions should contribute to that life. This approach suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others-especially the vulnerable-are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls attention to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective police and fire departments, health care, a public educational system, or even public recreational areas. The Virtue Approach A very ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought to be consistent with certain ideal virtues that provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues are dispositions and habits that enable us to act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth and beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtue ethics asks of any action, "What kind of person will I become if I do this?" or "Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?" Putting the Approaches Together Each of the approaches helps us determine what standards of behavior can be considered ethical. There are still problems to be solved, however. The first problem is that we may not agree on the content of some of these specific approaches. We may not all agree to the same set of human and civil rights. We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even agree on what is a good and what is a harm. The second problem is that the different approaches may not all answer the question "What is ethical?" in the same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives us important information with which to determine what is ethical in a particular circumstance. And much more often than not, the different approaches do lead to similar answers. Making Decisions Making good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically without consulting the specific steps. The more novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the more we need to rely on discussion and dialogue with others about the dilemma. Only by careful exploration of the problem, aided by the insights and different perspectives of others, can we make good ethical choices in such situations. We have found the following framework for ethical decision making a useful method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making Recognize an Ethical Issue 1. Is there something wrong personally, interpersonally, or socially? Could the conflict, the situation, or the decision be damaging to people or to the community? 2. Does the issue go beyond legal or institutional concerns? What does it do to people, who have dignity, rights, and hopes for a better life together? Get the Facts 3. What are the relevant facts of the case? What facts are unknown? 4. What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome? Do some have a greater stake because they have a special need or because we have special obligations to them? 5. What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been consulted? If you showed your list of options to someone you respect, what would that person say? Evaluate Alternative Actions From Various Ethical Perspectives 6. Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm? Utilitarian Approach: The ethical action is the one that will produce the greatest balance of benefits over harms. 7. Even if not everyone gets all they want, will everyone's rights and dignity still be respected? Rights Approach: The ethical action is the one that most dutifully respects the rights of all affected. 8. Which option is fair to all stakeholders? Fairness or Justice Approach: The ethical action is the one that treats people equally, or if unequally, that treats people proportionately and fairly. 9. Which option would help all participate more fully in the life we share as a family, community, society? Common Good Approach: The ethical action is the one that contributes most to the achievement of a quality common life together. 10. Would you want to become the sort of person who acts this way (e.g., a person of courage or compassion)? Virtue Approach: The ethical action is the one that embodies the habits and values of humans at their best. Make a Decision and Test It 11. Considering all these perspectives, which of the options is the right or best thing to do? 12. If you told someone you respect why you chose this option, what would that person say? If you had to explain your decision on television, would you be comfortable doing so? Act, Then Reflect on the Decision Later 13. Implement your decision. How did it turn out for all concerned? If you had it to do over again, what would you do differently? This framework for thinking ethically is the product of dialogue and debate at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. Primary contributors include Manuel Velasquez, Dennis Moberg, Michael J. Meyer, Thomas Shanks, Margaret R. McLean, David DeCosse, Claire André, and Kirk O. Hanson. This article appeared originally in Issues in Ethics, V. 1, N. 2 (Winter 1988). -------------------------- BABSON.BMP (481078 bytes) Home || Faculty || Cases || Essays || Links || Site Map || Feedback Business Ethics Program Ethics: An Introductory Framework The Three Tests* This framework provides a mechanism for discussing and evaluating your ethical choices. Although we also want to discuss actions themselves, considering the reasons people act as they do often helps us evaluate the action’s moral status (right, wrong, forbidden, obligatory, etc.). You will find, with practice, that this framework allows you to have frank discussions about ethical problems without resorting to personal attacks or value judgments that can be destructive to good teamwork. So, when you are contemplating (or evaluating) some action or set of actions, do the following: Identify the reason that, to the best of your knowledge, influences you to choose one action or attitude over others. Do not use the reason that you think others want to hear—that will not give you a valid evaluation. Use the reason (or reasons) that actually moves you. Then ask the questions below. If your reason does not pass one of these three tests, it is suspect as a good ethical reason. Test #1: Golden Rule Test Am I willing to have others use this reason to justify (1) decisions about me or (2) actions that concern me? This test suggests that you are equal to others in your moral value. A good ethical reason must be applicable to all parties, regardless of the situation. You, and your interests, are neither more nor less valuable than someone else’s interests. If you are unwilling to have others apply the reason to you, then your reason fails as a good ethical reason. Test #2: Consistency Test Am I willing to use this reason to justify important decisions in other areas of my life? This test is related, of course, to test #1, but it seeks to avoid ethical arbitrariness, where we just choose whatever reason seems appealing for that particular situation. If a reason is good enough to sway our decision in one area of our lives, it ought to be applicable in other areas, as well. So, if you think it is acceptable to lie in business transactions because (1) "it is a common practice," or because (2) "that’s the way to succeed," then you must ask yourself whether those reasons make lying in other areas of your life equally acceptable. For example, is either reason a good basis for an interpersonal relationship based on lying? If you are unwilling to use the reason in some other area of your life, the reason fails. Test #3: Stakeholder Consensus Test (Community Test) Are the stakeholders in this decision likely to accept your justification as a good reason for making this decision? "Stakeholders" should, of course, be understood as broadly as possible. And while stakeholders can sometimes be mistaken, nonetheless an ethical reason that does not pass the scrutiny of stakeholders is likely to fail as an ethical reason. Stakeholders serve as a useful check, since their interests often compete (or at least represent a variety of viewpoints). This test provides a reality check and aims to prevent self-serving reasons from masquerading as good reasons. If the stakeholders do not accept a reason, it is also suspect as an ethical reason. *Copyright © 1999 by Thomas Sullivan Top of Page