I work for a high tech company and love the work. But the environment has become increasingly tense because of the actions of our senior executive. He has discovered blogging, and his writing is sexist and hateful. He believes that his blog is personal and divorced from his role with the company. But because of his high profile with the company I don’t see how he can separate his role with the company and his personal views. It seems to me that everything he says reflects negatively on the company, hurting us both externally and internally. It would be great if he could use his writing to promote the company, or at least be broadly supportive of company objectives, but he instead wants to write about strong and controversial personal opinions.

Is there anything that I can or should do? I am personally frustrated, but also frightened for the future of the company.

Frustrated

RESPONSE

Dear Frustrated,

Not knowing the content of his postings, it’s difficult for me to get a sense for their tone. Do other people have the same reaction you do? If his postings are indeed sexist and hateful, you are right to be concerned. As a senior executive, he is a public representative of the company. Moreover, offensive postings (if they are read by employees) may undermine his ability to lead within your organization. This is a matter that should concern other senior executives as well as your company board. If he does have a high profile and his posts are so distasteful, I would be surprised (in our age of social media) if they are not already aware of the situation.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I run a financial consulting group where we work with many small businesses. Generally we work on a retainer, and provide both specific financial services as well as counsel for the businesses. One particular client has been on a “death spiral” for a couple of years. We have laid out some specific things they need to do as a business to survive, and the client has been unwilling to follow the advice we have provided. With no change, they will be out of business within five years. It is difficult to take their money and know they don’t accept our recommendations. Since they do not follow our advice, would it be appropriate for us to “fire” this client?

Looking for the Bottom Line

RESPONSE

Dear Looking,
It’s very honorable of you to feel as though you are not earning your fees since your client will not act upon your recommendations. I’m not sure you need to feel this way. You are putting in the work and, ultimately, it’s the client’s choice whether or not to accept your advice. That said, I think its fine to “fire the client,” especially since the demise of the company will bother you and may come back to haunt you in other ways too. Perhaps, your act will be a statement that serves to command the client’s attention to the point of initiating some real changes.
Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I was in a senior management position at one of the banks that failed in the economic crisis. I was offered a great position with the company that took over our bank, but decided rather to take some time off before resuming my career. While on sabbatical, I concluded that I wanted to continue in an executive role, but wanted to be in Chicago (we had moved to a place downtown to be near extended family) and have time to devote to my wife and two young sons. After extensive interviewing, I found a consulting firm wanting to start a Chicago practice. They assured me that I could pace my time to allow for family, and that I could develop clients in the city, which would give me a great commute.

When I reported, they had a near-term opportunity they wanted me to develop, about an hour-and-a-half drive from my home. After talking with the client, they said they would work with our firm if I was the principal on the engagement, which would last about two years. Saying I could not do that upset both the client and the management of the consulting firm. I felt like I had been lied to about the opportunity. I have tried to find a compromise position for myself, the client, and our company, but was told by my new boss that it would take time to develop the “in city” practice, and in the meantime they needed me to be billable. What should I do?

Trying to Balance Work and Family

RESPONSE

Thanks for writing. Having worked in consulting myself (for a firm based in Chicago, ironically), I can personally identify with your predicament. Not having been in on your hiring discussions, it’s difficult for me to say if you were intentionally deceived or if there was some type of communication problems and/or differences in perceptions about what a work-life balance looks like.

Given the nature of consulting (billable hours and working with clients at different locations), what may be a key issue here is the amount of time that you have been given to develop local clients. Was this discussed openly? If so and they have changed the terms, you have been legitimately wronged and should pursue further conversations. If no progress is made, you can leave with a clean conscience (provided there are no legal issues involved). Or, given current economic times, you can swallow hard and live with the long commute while working toward changing the situation (perhaps bringing on another consultant to handle parts of the engagement).

If the amount of time was left open and undefined, then this may be more of a legitimate misunderstanding and some further grace on your part toward your employers may be due.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I am a senior partner in a Chicago-area boutique advertising firm. Early in our existence, we had a strong founder/leader and we were a small company. Culture seemed to happen by our leader’s presence every day, his hiring practices, and his general philosophy, which came out clearly in his regular communications. We attracted clients who appreciated our values and the company grew significantly. Several years ago the founder stepped away from day-to-day management. In his place is an office manager and a team of senior partners who establish direction for the firm.

Recently, one of the younger partners wanted to bring in a client who was just not the kind of customer some of us were comfortable having in our portfolio. Some of us felt this would damage our image, making us more like any other firm. We believe some of our clients pay a bit more for our services because they believe in our values, but such a client would tell our other customers that we are not distinct. This has become a deeply contentious issue among the partners, and threatens to tear the partnership apart.

What would you recommend that we do?

A Frustrated Senior Partner

RESPONSE

Thanks for writing. Maintaining a strong place for values within an organization’s culture is very important for the sake of integrity. And, as you state, clients (and I suspect likely, employees) have been attracted to your firm on account of these values, providing a form of competitive advantage. In the end, this is about values, as in what really matters to the partners in the firm. Is it growth (or survival) at all costs? Or, could a smaller operation that stays true to the founding vision and values be acceptable?

I understand the nature of the advertising business to be highly competitive. Are the founding values now detrimental to growing (or maintaining) the firm? If so, this issue (and the jobs that go along with it) will continue to be a source of contentious disagreement among the partnership. If it can’t be resolved, then going separate ways may actually be desirable in the long term. Employees who were attracted to the firm’s original values may not be motivated to do their best for clients they don’t like or support. Or, is this just a case of a younger partner feeling the pressure to bring in clients and going about it the wrong way? If this is the situation, then the compensation system needs to be re-thought or firm’s values may need to be re-emphasized.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I am a student working summers (and part time throughout the year) for a landscaping company. Due to the economic downturn, our company’s business has dropped significantly, and the workers have had their hours scaled back. I need the work to enable me to pay for college. In my work, I have no employment contract and I receive no benefits.

Recently a former client contacted me personally and said he liked the way I worked and had another job, but didn’t want to go through the company I worked for. He asked me if I would be willing to take on the job myself, perhaps recruiting a few colleagues to help. The pay would be better than I would have received working for the company, and I don’t think this client would contract with my employer in any case.

I admit this feels a bit awkward, and wondered what you would recommend I do.

A Hard-Working Student

RESPONSE

Dear Hardworking,

Drawing an appropriate distinction between stealing business from your employer and fair competition is tricky territory to navigate. Many employers frown upon accepting side work from a client, considering it a cause for dismissal. Yet this occurs frequently, especially in your line of work or when people launch their own businesses in a variety of service industries.

While I sympathize with your need to pay for college, I don’t think it should play a role in determining right from wrong. People who make unethical choices usually have “good” ends they are trying to achieve.

That said, I believe several facts may make accepting this work fair. First, the nature of your relationship with your “employer” is critical in determining your duties. From your description, you appear more to be a contractor than an employee (no employment contract or benefits) with reciprocal rights. Thus, you may “owe” less than a true employee. Second, the amount of time that has elapsed between when your employer last worked for this particular client is also important to consider. While you do not state the time, a particular firm cannot “own” a client forever.

Although ethics may be on your side, if you take the work, you are also accepting the risk that your current employer may terminate any future work directed toward you. I think this risk is magnified by recruiting others to join you.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I am a middle-level manager in a Midwest company. The place I now work has become increasingly frustrating as they have made promises they have not kept, they have participated in behavior I regard as unethical, and I find it increasingly difficult to go to work.

I have tried working things out with my boss, but many of the issues are out of his control. In the past when I have been in a situation like this, I simply resigned and moved on to another assignment, but that is very difficult to do this time for several reasons: I am older and sense the market will not be as flexible for someone my age; my husband recently started his own business and in the startup phase I am the one providing insurance and stable income; and the present economic conditions simply make the market less inviting right now.

Do you have any advice for me?

Wanting to be Ethical

RESPONSE:

Dear Wanting,

You are in a difficult position. You didn’t provide any details of the type or severity of the unethical behavior practiced at your workplace, but it is important to note that there are no perfect organizations. Every organization (in every industry) engages in behavior of some sort that can be considered unethical. Your own experience attests to this fact as you have faced similar circumstances in the past. So, moving on to a new employer (if you can get hired at this point) offers no guarantee that you will be free from facing the type of dilemma that is now in front of you.

There is no easy answer here, but you may want to consider the severity of the behavior in your current situation. Is it severe enough that people are getting hurt and that the organization and your own career will be damaged in the future? Is it worth staying to try to make changes rather than to leave and let a bad situation get worse?

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I work as a furnace technician for a heating and air conditioning company. I like my job and believe I am good at it. That includes relating well to the customers. One of the major assignments I have is to do annual service inspections for customers who sign up for this.

Because of the economic downturn (I think, no one really explained it), we recently had our compensation changed, moving us from salary to primarily commission. We have been told that financially we can do better than we did before, but to do this we must sell services or repairs to customers whether they need them or not. This makes me very uncomfortable, since I have always tried to build an honest relationship with my customers, and know a great deal more about their furnace than they do. Can you see any options I might have other than to quit, a very tough choice in this economy?

A West Coast Repair Technician

RESPONSE:

Dear West Coast,
Thanks for writing. Poorly designed compensation systems often create conflicts of interest for sales people. Examples of some fairly recent cases in which employees had to choose between honesty and higher compensation or losing their jobs include financial services (i.e., mortgage banking), auto repair (Sears), and telephone services (Qwest).

Instead of quitting, have you tried to speak with the leaders of your company? You can first appeal to their sense of ethics. Perhaps they are not aware of the pressures to oversell. If this doesn’t work, you can try to persuade them on the long-term value of a good name, using the examples above of what happens when dishonest overselling becomes public knowledge. If they are receptive to your suggestions, then the commission systems needs to be modified. Perhaps the quotas or target levels that trigger bonuses could be lowered. In addition, an ethics code and some strong guidelines concerning when to recommend replacement or repair need to be put in place are needed.

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace, email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org), or post your dilemma here. We will publish some of these on Ethix along with our diagnosis.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

All I did was obey the law and stop for a red light. I was rear-ended by a young man, insured by xxx, driving a rental car from yyy in Columbus, Ohio. The xxx company did an extremely timely and accommodating follow-up to the accident. My claim was filed that afternoon with my convenience and preference a high priority for location in regards to the estimate and repairs to my car. The adjuster was at my home the next day, and I had the paperwork to begin those repairs by July 21. I took the papers and car to the body shop and all looked in order. I was scheduled to bring the car back on July 27 for repair.

When the body shop called that same day to ask for two hours of labor to finish up the minor bumper repairs, xxx said they were not the primary insurer because the car that rear-ended me was a rental car – and the problem was dumped into my lap.

That led to 11 days of battle. I was able to bring our car home on August 11 – 15 days after repairs were completed. The short of it: Neither will work with the other to resolve who will pay $510. It has cost me multiple hours of time on the phone prodding and playing insurance-world games to have my claim tended to. It was utterly exhausting and kept me from my own work — not to mention the stress, inconvenience, and travel costs to keep an eye on post-accident pain.

I made it a priority to keep costs down on this as much as possible both for the insurer. I did not rent a car and kept medical bills to a minimum.

What should I do?

Rear-Ended
Columbus, Ohio

RESPONSE

Dear Rear-Ended:
I am sorry to hear of your travails. It sounds to me like you are not only out $510 but also had hours of inconvenience and many carless days.

Unfortunately you don’t have many options. When the amount in dispute is relatively small, companies have an incentive to deny coverage and hope that the “hassle factor” for you will be greater than the possible recovery of the amount in dispute. In short, they hope you will give up and go away.

Theoretically, you could hire an attorney to pursue a claim for you, but this would almost certainly cost you more in attorney’s fees than you would ever be able to recover. You could bring an action in small claims court (without an attorney). While I am unfamiliar with the court system in Ohio, most states have courts designed to adjudicate smaller claims, and attorneys are typically not allowed in these courtrooms. You could sue the individual who rear-ended you, as well as the rental car company, and trust that this will get the attention of individuals authorized to settle the dispute. The disadvantage of this approach, however, is that it continues to add to the time and costs that you have already sunk into this matter.

Sometimes, writing a letter to the “President” of the company can get attention focused on your concern. You might enhance your leverage somewhat if you also included a letter that you plan to send to the Better Business Bureau, to the attorney general’s consumer protection division or to some comparable agency if your claim is not resolved. The company may be interested in ensuring that it does not have a “black eye” on record with one of these consumer-protection groups.

Lastly, the no doubt least palatable but perhaps most sensible approach would be to simply eat the costs and move on. One of the unfortunate truths of our judicial system is that for relatively small disputes the transaction costs typically associated with establishing the rectitude of your position can easily dwarf the amount in controversy. Sometimes as unjust as it is, it is simply wiser to absorb the loss associated with a random casualty rather than continuing to invest in seeking a more fair resolution.

At a deeper level, your conundrum highlights how important “trust” is in business relationships. If no companies honored their contractual obligations except when forced to do so by court orders, our entire system would collapse under the weight of attorney’s fees, court costs, and other attendant delays. In fact, most companies do routinely honor their obligations even when it would be possible to get away with not doing so. I regret that you have not had a better experience with the companies you are dealing with.

Jeff Van Duzer
Dean, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I moved to New York, hoping to get into the fashion business. But I needed an income, so I took a position as a sales clerk at a women’s clothing store. I am a hard worker, and soon found out many around me were not. Within six months, I had several promotions, including the most recent one, where I was made the supervisor of the cashiers. I took the responsibility seriously because it is important to make sure the money is handled well.

Not long ago, my boss came to me and told me to fire one of the cashiers for what I considered a small offense and not worthy of dismissal. It did not involve missing money. I explained that this was a minor, first offense, and the person had not received either the proper warning or any training related to doing better. I wanted to work with the person and give her a chance to succeed. My boss insists that the person must be terminated and I am the one who must do this. What should I do?

An East Coast Store Manager

RESPONSE:

Dear East Coast:

Thanks for writing. Unfortunately, getting caught between the demands of a supervisor and a task you deem to be unfair is not an uncommon situation in a work setting. With the facts you present, you should be credited for seeing the situation as one that possibly involves injustice, and for wanting to work with the employee in question.

Is it possible to go to your supervisor again to ask the reasons for firing the employee in question? Perhaps there is more to the picture than what you are seeing. If your supervisor insists that you fire the employee based only on the reason you have conveyed, you could: (1) Object and try to persuade him or her to reconsider based upon principles of fairness. (2) Take your concerns up the chain of command or to human resources. (3) Quit in protest.

I suggest trying options 1 and 2 first. The third option would likely be the least helpful, since your employee will probably lose her position, too, and nothing will have been accomplished in addressing the fairness of the situation.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.

I have a peculiar question about business ethics — I think it must be business ethics, but isn’t of the usual sort. Our company has been chronically suffering from a bad case of being “too nice.” I am really getting concerned that it will put us out of business before we get a good perspective of what the fine distinction is between being pushover managers and tyrants.

Case in point: We have a very difficult time enforcing standards. Even when we find out about employee fraud, it is a slap on the wrist and a warning. We’ve kept on certain staff who seem bent on breaking rules that have compromised standard safety, normal business expectations, and productivity. Not that we should have ever let it continue on like this, but in this recession, I am very concerned that it will be our undoing.

I am starting to see this as a business-ethics issue. Certainly it comes down to poor management, but it seems unethical to compromise the viability of the entire company because we don’t enforce standards and manage so badly. We’re trying to turn the business around, and everything is on the table for scrutiny and possible change. But most of the obstacles to real, substantial, and beneficial change have been “morale.”

A West Coast Business Owner

RESPONSE:

Dear West Coast:

You are right to see this problem as both an issue of poor management and one of ethics. In fact, these categories are often conjoined. You are also correct to see this problem as having the potential to lead to the complete meltdown of your organization as failing to demonstrate the courage to enforce stated policies (provided they are reasonable) undermines your ability to lead, period. Lack of enforcement of rules becomes a vicious cycle over time.

Moreover, once a broader group of stakeholders is brought into the picture, the problem you describe does not sound like one of “niceness” at all, but of passive permissiveness. Allowing fraud, safety, and productivity issues to go unchecked is not at all kind to owners/ investors, fellow employees, and to the very employees committing the transgressions.

While the following analogy certainly has limits in its applicability to business, consider parents who make rules, but then fail to enforce them. Most people would conclude that they are not being “nice” to their children (or to those impacted by the actions of the children involved). Nor would most people see parents who make and enforce reasonable rules as tyrants. The distinction between being a pushover and a tyrant is quite consistent with what most employees expect (and respect) in terms of rules: fairness and consistency.

Kenman Wong
Professor of Ethics, School of Business and Economics
Seattle Pacific University

If you have an ethical dilemma at your workplace,
email Ethics at Work (eaw@ethix.org).
We will publish some of these in Ethix along with our diagnosis.