A634.9.4.RB_BorutyAlan_A Reflection of My Learning

A Reflection of My Learning

I learned a lot during this course.  I learned about ethical arguments on several topics. I learned about other people and how they may or may not behave in a given situation.  I also learned how the different theorists argue a case.  But I primarily learned about myself.  How I treat people , how I come to decisions and conclusions,  how bias affects me daily, and what I need to do to think ethically and behave morally. 

These were not easy lessons for me to accept, much less think them through.  I had to admit to my limitations.  I had to look myself in the eye and tell me the truth.

 

I now understand some of the more polarized topics in ethics.  I have an opinion on them, and I know why.  The course was very demanding on me in terms of time and emotion and I am better for it.

I will take away many lessons from this course.  The three that I want to discuss  are not necessarily the most important, but lessons that had an immediate impact on me.  One where I thought I knew the answer and learned I was at least partially wrong.  One where I had to accept that I had been lying to myself about since I was a child.  And one where I disagreed with the majority, and successfully argued my position.  My takeaway lessons are the golden rule, religion and racism, and the ethics of eating animals.

The Golden Rule

I have been practicing the golden rule in my life since I was a young man.  Over the years, I came to see it as the best way to interact with people and the morally correct way to treat people.  What I learned is that even if the Golden Rule is the best tool to use when interacting with other people, it simply is not enough.  LaFollette (2007) taught us that morality concerns the interests of others” (p. 15).  We should not act or behave in ways that will hurt or harm other people.  This fits well with the Golden Rule.  But if my behavior indirectly harms, creates the risk of harm, or fails to prevent harm, it becomes less certain whether I acted morally or not. 

When things are not clear we compare them to an accepted standard for determination.  That standard is ethics.  Ethics goes well beyond personal interactions and allows us to consider activities beyond relationships e.g., lying, punishment, and animal rights.

I continue to use the Golden Rule because I am convinced it is the best way to establish relationships between people.  But when I am not sure or want to evaluate both sides of an argument, indeed, there is ethics.  The Golden Rule combines true empathy and compassion with the human spirit and it is powerful.  Johnathan Huie (2011) argues that if the Golden Rule is taken and applied literally, it can cause more harm than it does good.  The lesson becomes be like me. To this, Huie (2011) provided compassion as the solution. “The humanitarian view is that compassion is the bedrock of morality” (para. 11). I argue that without empathy, compassion can be insincere. 

My takeaway…  The Golden Rule is timeless, powerful, and profound (Putnam, 2006), but it is incomplete without ethical standards and norms.  I immediately changed how I think about the Golden Rule and ethics.  They are an inseparable part of the journey to living morally. 

Racism

This was by far the hardest lesson for me.  Simply reading the material made me defensive as it seemed to insinuate that I was someone or something I am not.  I read the material defending against or objecting to or rationalizing my behavior to nearly every remark the author made.  When I was finished reading, I could not discern the real purpose of the chapter nor any of the points the author made.  I had to calm down, open my mind, and re-read the entire chapter to understand what Lafollette (2007) was trying to say.

I grew up in the 60s and 70s in Georgia, times that marked the birth and early growth of the Civil Rights movement in the United States.  I was young and did not understand what the movement was all about, but it was violent, explosive, and in your face and quite honestly, it scared the hell out of me.  

I emerged from that period and joined the Air Force proudly proclaiming my status as a non-racist.  I served an entire career without incident and raised two children to respect human life regardless of color.  I raised them to understand that no matter the differences we had on the outside we are all the same inside.

Then over thirty-five years later I am reading a book that tells me that the blatant, outward forms of racism are gone, only to have been replaced by a new form of racism, formed by habits and the role of social institutions (Lafollette, 2007).  Racism is alive and well, but today it hides in employment applications, policies, and processes (social institutions).  It also hides in the thoughts of individuals.  Thoughts that are automatic responses to situations and unfavorable to different racial groups, especially African Americans (habits).  LaFollette (2007) provided example after example to which I had to plead guilty on a personal level.  I had lied to myself for decades. According to LaFollette’s (2007) description of the new racism, I am racist through habits I picked up as far back as my childhood.  I fully understand the social institution contribution to racism as well.  In both cases, we are completely unaware until it is pointed out and explained.  Then it is obvious and it demands action.

Slavery occurred and ended long before my existence.  None of my ancestors owned slaves.  However, the effects of slavery still linger. I am as guilty as the next person and unless I and those like me can change those habits and the way we think, racism cannot be eliminated. 

Habits that are as deeply ingrained as these are resistant to change.  Change is slow, intentional, and beyond our willpower.  “Habits are changed not by private willing, but (a) identifying and (b) then altering the conditions that make and sustain our habits, and finally, (c) by substituting and sustaining a more productive habit for the old detrimental one” (LaFollette, 2007, p. 80).

My takeaway… we are all responsible for our behavior and correcting it when it goes astray.  I immediately began identifying the issues I must change and have embraced the change process.  I am ashamed and embarrassed to say that I still have some work to do.  I will, however see it through to the end. 

The Ethics of Eating

This course was not easy for me. I seriously struggled early on and considered dropping the course, but I received encouragement to work through it. I am glad that I did.  The ethics of eating does not have a profound take away like those previously discussed.  It does, however, have one that is important to me.

The ethics of eating asked the question: is it ethical to eat animals?  My answer to the surface question was of course it is, that is why they are here.  The end.  Underneath the surface, it seemed like the entire world was saying just the opposite.  I panicked at first wondering whether I had missed something in the reading.  Then I began to doubt and second guess my convictions.  Finally, it occurred to me that if eating animals was unethical, that would make me immoral.  I am certain that I am neither unethical nor immoral. 

I am not much for arguing, in fact, I truly dislike it.  But, I found their argument inconsistent and dependent on stirring the emotions of the opposition.  It was then that I realized what I needed to do, which is what I should have been doing throughout the course: understand and believe in my position and defend it. 

I did an adequate job countering the argument presented to me and I provided additional information supporting my position.  I did not end the debate or convince anyone to change their position and move to my side.  I satisfactorily made my point.

What I did do is remind myself that there are some subjects that I understand and enjoy more than others.  That does not mean that the subjects I understand less are unimportant or that I should not fully participate in an attempt to learn more.  In fact, these courses are the ones I should put the most effort into.  Everyone has something to contribute. Contributing to the course results in feedback.  Feedback promotes learning.  There is nothing earth-shattering or new in my discovery.  I have known it for a long time, yet I still nearly allowed frustration to rob me of an opportunity to learn something new or enhance what I had previously learned.  This is an elementary-level take away.  I hope I do not forget it again anytime soon.

~Pete

References

Huie, J. l. (2011, August 13). The Golden Rule is not always golden. Retrieved from http://www.mind4joy.com/2011/08/golden-rule-is-not-always-golden.html

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.

Putnam, M. S. (2006). Reflections on the golden rule. Global Ethics University. Retrieved from http://www.globalethicsuniversity.com/articles/thegoldenrule.htm

A634.8.3.RB_BorutyAlan_Gun Control: What is the Answer?

Gun Control: What is the Answer?

Gun control has been hotly debated probably since guns were invented.  There is no resolution, it continues to be battled with little or no apparent progress made.  “Regardless of the political stance regarding gun control, it is important to realize that the issue is one that is as old as the inception of the country itself and will continue to be an ever-present issue of dispute for years to come” (Laws.com, 2017, para. 7).

According to Laws.com (2017), while there is a correlation between gun availability and violent crime, empirical evidence does not show that gun control will have any affect.  “Regardless of the measures to be taken, it still remains unclear if further restrictions on firearms or less regulations will effectively help reduce crime and murder rates (para. 12). 

I am not a gun enthusiast.  I have never been a hunter or into competitive shooting.  I did, however, serve a career in the military, so I know how to handle a weapon.  I also know that owning a gun is not about being able to kill someone, but it can be about preventing someone from killing you.  In my mind, there are fundamental flaws with gun control.  I believe we are better off arming more good guys than we would be by disarming all the good guys. 

The primary flaw I see with gun control is the statistics all come from what the bad guys are doing with guns, but all of the controls, restrictions, and actions to ban guns are focused on and will impact the good guys who own guns legally and handle them safely and responsibly.  The bad guys will not be affected.  Adding another criminal charge to their case will not likely change their behavior.  Gun control will only serve to create many more unarmed, helpless victims. 

“You won’t get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens.  There’s only one way to get gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up and if you don’t actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a very long time… It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers.  I happen to know this from personal experience”.  -Ronald Reagan

In 2009, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives estimated there were 310 million guns in the United States.  In 2015, 9.3 million guns were manufactured globally.  About half of those were purchased by people living in the United States.  Yet according to a 2017 Gallup Poll, gun ownership among Americans was 42 percent (Kiger, 2013).  That is almost one gun for every person that lives in the United States but less than half of us claim to own a gun.  There are people stockpiling weapons no doubt.  Who will collect the 150 million or so unaccounted for guns.  This will be a daunting task, if not impossible.

I have never thought of gun ownership as an ethical issue any more than I do car ownership, or crossbow ownership.  Our founding leaders believed that keeping and bearing arms is a right and an important one at that.  They made it unconstitutional to infringe upon that right.  If gun ownership is an ethical issue consider this, if guns exist anywhere, it would be unethical to ban ownership to anyone. 

If all guns were destroyed and banned, I think we would still be having a similar conversation but the object in question would be swords or knives or clubs.  We are attempting to solve the problem (why are people killing each other) by removing the tool.  Any number of tools will accomplish the objective.  Unless, of course, we are only concerned with the killing caused by people using guns.  King (2017) looked at locations that have gun controls in place.  In 1996, Australia implemented strict gun controls.  Indeed, gun violence has been greatly reduced but the murder rate is unchanged.  The same is true for the United Kingdom, and Ireland.  “Gun control has no significant impact on murder rates” (King, 2015, para. 7).

Abolishing gun ownership could easily spark our next civil war.  People will not give up their guns without a fight.  LaFollette (2007) made a prediction based on this concept.  “In the present political climate, the abolition or serious control of guns in the United States is unlikely to work and even less likely to happen.  There are far too many people who desperately want guns.  There are far too many people who own guns.  Any attempt to disarm the society would be beset with problems like those that plagued prohibition” (p. 194). 

The opposing argument is equally passionate.  LaFollette (2007) argued that based on cultural differences and the presence or absence of guns in that culture creates different results.  Not only should the absence of guns reduce murder rates, it could actually change the culture to one less violent by reshaping values which partly (with available guns) lead to the high murder rate in America.

The cost of gun ownership demands limitations.  U. S. children are 17 times more likely to be killed by a gun, twice as likely to commit suicide and ten times more likely to do it with a gun, and nine times more likely to die of an accidental gunshot wound.

Recognizing the gun culture in America, gun control advocates are looking at different ways to achieve their goals.  One is to regulate gun ownership like automobile ownership.  Guns would be tagged and titled at the point of sale, owners would get training and take tests, health requirements would apply, owners would have to purchase liability insurance, and be re-certified on occasion (LaFollette, 2007).  Another is to selectively restrict or ban semi-automatic weapons and/or handguns.

Guns are inherently dangerous and cause unacceptable risk to others. One’s autonomy cannot place the autonomy of another at risk (LaFollette, 2007). 

For every point there is a valid counter point.  This debate will continue until something makes the entire argument obsolete.  Until that time each side will continue to develop arguments and counter arguments.  What else can they do?  There is no answer to the question of gun control.

Thee is not much argument that guns in the wrong hands and used with bad intentions create horrible results: murder, innocent deaths, and suicide.  This is unacceptable but taking guns away from law-abiding citizens is not the answer and will not solve the problem.  How does one isolate the criminals and irresponsible owners from the responsible gun owners?  There is no easy answer to this question.  We must hold people responsible for their crimes.  Yes, even the gun owner that left weapons unsecured at home for the children to discover.  It makes no sense to take any action that does not address the problem.  The first step, if progress is ever going to be made, is for both sides to loosen up their armor a little and communicate instead of arguing.  This could open the door to finding common ground.  Common ground problems can be solved.

~Pete

References

Kiger, P., J. (2013, February 4) 10 big questions in the U.S. gun control debate. HowStuffWorks.com." Accessed 2018, July 24 from https://people.howstuffworks.com/10-questions-in-gun-control-debate.htm

King, J. (2015). The facts that neither side wants to admit about gun control. Retrieved from https://www.mintpressnews.com/the-facts-that-neither-side-wants-to-admit-about-gun-control/207152/

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.

Laws.com (2017). A full overview of gun control. Accessed 2018, July 24 from https://gun.laws.com/gun-control/

Reagan, R. (n. d.). Gun control. Retrieved from http://ronaldreaganquote.com/tag/reagan-on-gun-control/

A634.7.4.RB_BorutyAlan_Ethics and Behaviors

Ethics and Behaviors

How does my organization portray its values?

I have been retired now for over four years, so I cannot truly claim an organization.  I will however, use the U. S. Air Force as my organization since I know it best.  My organization established three core values: 1) integrity first, 2) service before self, and 3) excellence in all we do.  These values have not changed since they were adopted.

The Air Force portrays these values as all-encompassing and fundamental to all of its people for four reasons: “1) The core values identify the attributes all Airmen should live; 2) They point to what is universal and unchanging in the profession of arms; 3) They help us get a fix on the ethical climate of an organization; and 4) they serve as beacons vectoring us back to the path of professional conduct (Air Force Staff Writers, 2015, p. 2).  Closely following the core values ensures the Air Force will not degrade from a climate of ethical commitment into a climate of corrosion (Air Force Staff Writers, 2015).

If you behave consistently with each of the values your actions will almost always be moral.  Adherence to the values is not optional and all violations are taken seriously.  Expectations are understood.  Peers will confront substandard performance with each other directly. 

Fine line between morality and legality

“Because some believe our operating procedures or the requirements levied upon them from above are absurd, they tend to “cut corners” or “skate by.” As time goes by, these actions become easier and they become habitual until the person can no longer distinguish between the “important” taskings or rules and the “stupid” ones. Lying on official forms becomes second nature. Placing personal interests ahead of the mission becomes a natural response. And they develop a ‘good enough for government work’ mentality” (Air Force Staff Writers, 2015, p. 2).   Gallagher (2012) describes his Unethical Continuum in a similar manner. 

Generally, people start out rationalizing things they have learned somewhere and believe them to be okay because everyone does it so, they cut a corner or misrepresent their work.  Just as in the Unethical Continuum they get comfortable and try something more severe the next time.  The difference is with the Unethical Continuum people slowly work their way up to an illegal action with serious consequences.  In the Air Force, the individual committed an illegal act the very first time he cut a corner.  The individual also placed their interests ahead of the lives of an entire aircrew. I encountered two instances of this behavior in my career.  Both cases had to do with aircraft maintenance.  Both Airmen signed off maintenance actions they had not performed.  Both were discovered after the fact.

One was discovered during a higher skill-level follow-up inspection by the supervisor.  When the supervisor asked the Airman, the Airman lied and argued that he had, indeed, done all of the work step-by-step using the technical order.  He did not remove any of the panels called for in the procedures.  The Airman had violated each of the core values.  If the Airman had not lied when confronted the punishment would not have been as harsh.  But he did and it was.  In the end the Airman was convicted on two felony counts by a military court.  Further orders from the court was forfeiture of all pay and allowances, a bad conduct discharge, and one-year confinement.

The other case was a Non-Commissioned Officer (E-5) Staff Sergeant at a different base.  He was experienced, qualified, and skilled.  He signed off a discrepancy that had been recurring in flight but could not be duplicated on the ground.  He was angry that he had to look at it again.  So, he signed it off without ever turning on the system. 

The airplane flew and reported an in-flight emergency for a fire with smoke and fumes.  The entire crew was grounded for a few days due to the smoke and fumes, but otherwise no one was hurt.  The Staff Sergeant’s trainee reported him after the incident.

 

Arrogance and insensitivity stayed with the Staff Sergeant through his court martial.  I did not attend, but I heard he refused to acknowledge that he could have prevented the emergency, if he had done his job.  The court convicted him and he got the same thing as the other person I discussed with two exceptions: reduction in grade to Airman Basic (E-1) and five years confinement.

Conclusion

These two cases show how immoral decisions can result in illegal actions.  As Gallagher said, “every choice has a consequence so, make choices wisely” (Gallagher, 2013).  The first case followed Gallagher’s (2013) slippery slope by the numbers; he had gotten away with the behavior before, became confident, and started sliding.  The Staff Sergeant had never been in trouble and there was no indication he had done anything like it before. 

The individuals in the two examples I provided were not ethically intelligent.  They did not think with compassion for other people.  Had they done so they would have seen the real impact of their decision (Weinstein, 2014).  Instead, they only concerned themselves with their own interests.  Both knew what they did was wrong, if not morally, then legally, but they chose their own interests over everything else.  And, they made the wrong choice.  They had a moral obligation to their oath of enlistment, the Air Force core values, the professional body to which they belonged, but most importantly, they had a moral obligation to the human lives that would trust their maintenance and fly on the aircraft. 

Since they made their choice based on their own self-interests, the egoist would argue that they acted morally (LaFollette, 2007).  LaFollette (2007) taught us that “a person will continually engage in an activity only if it has the effect of satisfying what she perceives to be in her full interest" (p. 277).  For all of these reasons, I believe any moral theory that is based on the pursuit of self-interests alone is not moral and is not much of a theory. 

Morality is something that should be so simple that anyone can act appropriately in a situation.  But we humans are not satisfied until it is so complicated that no one can understand the concept anymore.  There are no right answers, but there are no wrong answers either.  However, chose an unpopular position and you will find that there is more than enough judgement to make up for it.

~Pete

References

Air Force Staff Writers (2015).  The Air Force core values. Air Force Doctrine, Volume 2, Air Force core values. Retrieved from http://www.doctrine.af.mil/Portals/61/documents/Volume_2/V2-D05-Core-Values.pdf

Gallagher C. (2012, January 27) Straight talk about ethics [Video file]. Chuck Gallagher. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUJ00vNGCPE

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Weinstein, B. (2012, August 24). Keynote Speech Excerpts from The Ethics Guy [Video file]. The Ethics Guy. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=eLxbHBpilJQ

A634.6.3.RB_BorutyAlan_What are Virtues

What are Virtues?

Of Ben Franklin’s 13 virtues, I chose order, resolution, and tranquility to consider in my life.  Primarily, I chose them because I could use improvement in these areas. 

“Order…Let all your things have their places. Let each part of your business have its time”.  To me this speaks of balance.  I have many different roles in my life some are more enjoyable than others, but, they are all necessary.  For example, one role is to maintain the house in good working condition (gutters, ac/ heat, and cleaning), another is vehicle maintenance, property upkeep and the list goes on.  Lately school has taken up a disproportionate amount of my time, so other roles have been neglected.  This has affected me profoundly.  The extra time has not made me a better student and I am not “do[ing] the appropriate action” (LaFollette, 2007, p. 212) in my other roles.  As a result, I feel as though I am spinning my wheels and not doing anything well.  It makes me feel out of sync while things that need to be done are growing out of control.  “Aristotle holds that the virtuous person must: (1) do the appropriate action; (2) do so habitually (regularly, and in a variety of circumstances); (3) enjoy acting virtuously; (4) know that it is virtuous; and (5) know why it is virtuous (LaFollette, 2007, p. 213). Lately I have failed on all counts.  I have not let each part of my business have its time. 

“Resolution…Resolve to perform what you ought. Perform without fail what you resolve”.  Not too long ago, this was not a problem.  I looked at what I need to do, roughly planned out how I would go about it, and then I got it done.  I have always enjoyed doing the things that I do.  I have put things off until I am doing things that absolutely have to be done.  The choice is no longer mine and have not finished some things I should have.  I am working harder than I have in a while, yet I am getting far less done and I am not happy with that…far from virtuous.

“Tranquility…Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable”.  Roughly translated, this tells me to not sweat the small stuff.  This is really out of character for me.  Normally, I do not allow myself to get worked up over everyday happenings.  I do not allow stress to go unchecked, and things tend to work themselves out.  Without tranquility, I have found myself being short with people I see every day.  I am not mean, but I am far less social.  I am not myself and people have noticed.  I do not feel like I am functioning properly.  And , I am not happy.

I have not been able to evaluate this until now.  Everything seems so disconnected and I am languishing.  I now see the issues wearing on me (yes, there are more) as interrelated.  The change in my habits, although temporary could have thrown me off center.  But, I will look at my situation closely before making any change.  It may be that I need to adjust my routine to match the changes I have had to make.  Either way, I need to resolve this issue and get back in the game. 

~Pete

Reference

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing

A634.5.4.RB_BorutyAlan_Is Marketing Evil?

Is Marketing Evil?

 Do you feel ethical guidelines make a difference to marketers?

I find it difficult to feel good about putting punitive rules in place that contain words like ‘perceived’ and ‘guidelines’ on any business function.  It does not seem fair.  It sounds like marketing functions in organizations are being set up to fail.   However, (Ferrell, n. d.). presented several cases that indicate that marketing is failing in the ethical arena now and the costs are astronomical.  It is in the company’s best interest to create a program.

 As always, I assume people are generally good and want to do what is right.  Therefore, it is the company’s responsibility to make sure its employees know what right actually is.  That would imply that I believe that ethical guidelines make a difference to marketers.  However, Ferrell (n. d.) discussed a few things that tell me it is not that simple.  “Organizational ethics does not equal personal ethics” (p. ETH-6).  In other words, there are different variables in the organization that influence an individual’s ethical behavior.  Unethical behavior is primarily used in meeting performance goals, not for personal gain.  If meeting performance goals is tied to positive reinforcement or rewards, workers and managers may justify unethical behavior as a necessity.  This is especially true if the guideline that labeled the behavior unethical does not provide for punishment when the rule is broken (Ferrell, n. d.).  I can think of other similar rationalizations marketers could employ.  So, no I do not think that ethical guidelines alone make a difference to marketers.  The competition between individuals to make sales, meet goals and move up the corporate ladder is too intense.

How can companies balance the need to win with being ethical?

 A company cannot balance the need to win with being ethical.  It is not a balancing act.  The company has to change that thinking and recognize that the only way to win is by being ethical.  To do this, the company must establish an ethical organizational culture where its members are trained, educated and motivated to behave legally and ethically (Ferrell, n. d.).  A culture that dictates that any other behavior is unacceptable and met with consequences.  Changing organizational culture is no small task.  Adding a norm of ethical behavior will require time, examples, consistency, persistence, and accountability (Boyatzis & McKee, 2005).  Where ethical organizational culture is about ideals that guide member’s behaviors, ethical climate establishes specifically what is right and what is wrong (Ferrell, n. d.).

 Codes of conduct, ethics policies, management actions on ethical issues, values/moral development of coworkers, and opportunities for misconduct all contribute to an organization’s ethical climate (Ferrell, n. d.).  Managing the ethical climate consistent with the culture will then improve the chances of winning while being ethical.

 Is it ethical to track your buying habits or web visits to target you for marketing purposes?

 My short answer is it depends.  If I am told that my information is being gathered, compiled, and archived for purposes of making advertising that I see more relevant to me and I am given the opportunity to say no, then it is ethical.  If I say yes, then they have a responsibility to protect the information they gather and inform me if that data is ever compromised.  If I do not agree to allow them to gather my information but they do it anyway, it is unethical.  It is no different than spying or stealing.  To remain ethical in their behavior, the information they gather cannot be used for any other purposes.  I usually allow this practice.  I make many of my purchases online and the ads, although still annoying, are at least relevant.  Ferrell (n. d.) discussed how companies entrusted with one’s personal information can be judged quite negatively for failing to protect it.  The company’s reputation can be damaged or destroyed for not doing so. 

 As a leader, how will you manage the ethical aspects of your marketing efforts?

I do not see managing the ethical aspects of my marketers and their operation as being much different than any other leadership effort.  I do not want to oversimplify or overcomplicate the process.  I would ensure my ethics program is in line with the company’s values and vision.  I also need to ensure each of my marketers understand the company’s values and vision and their role in earning the company a reputation for solid ethical behavior.  I would also verify that I have a documented plan for each employee’s continued moral development.  I would then lead by example with character and competence, showing that it can be done and it can be done right without compromising one trait or the other (Ferrell, n. d.). 

 The organization’s ethical culture dictates how every functional operation makes ethical decisions.  Therefore, organizational ethics is a strategic component of decision making.  For the organization to fully benefit, ethical decision-making in marketing would need to be coordinated with the other functional units within the organization to ensure each functional area is correctly applying the strategy.  In this manner decisions throughout the organization will be made using the same rationale and ethical principles (Ferrell, n. d.). 

Over time the company will build a reputation for ethical business practices.  According to Ferrell (n. d.), “its reputation is one of an organization’s greatest intangible assets” (p. ETH-8).  It is incredibly valuable though no exact value can be assessed.  At the same time, reputation is extremely fragile.  Much like trust, reputation is very slow to earn but can be lost in an instant.  Everyone in the organization should be proud of it and protect it through continued ethical business practices.

 ~Pete

References

Boytzis, R., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership: Renewing yourself and connecting with others through mindfulness, hop, and compassion. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

Ferrell, L. (n. d.). Marketing Ethics. University of Wyoming. Retrieved from http://college.cengage.com/business/modules/marktngethics.pdf