Tags
application, coaching, Consideration, Courage, culture, Ethics, executive, human resources, identification, individual, Leaders, Leadership, Manager, Multi-National Corporations, Organizational Climate, Organizational Culture, Organziation, politics, practical, Responsibility, theory, Trust, Vision, Workplace
Today I would like to discuss ethical theories researched by Brannmark and Sahlin (2010) and their practical application for leaders in organizations. This topic creates conversation by the very differences we hold as leaders about ethics through our different cultural backgrounds. We as leaders must apply and stand for ethics while representing ourselves and the organizations where we work. As leaders we could design an organizational culture founded on share beliefs of the common definition of good ethics throughout the organization.
I found research of global ethical theories that is very interesting. The authors, Brannmark and Sahlin (2010) remarked on three non-exclusive ethical theories
- Low Theory;
- Middle Theory; and
- High Theory (p. 155).
These theories are well-defined. I will attempt to summarize the theories to create the foundation of my logic when analyzing how the theories affect organizations leadership when conducting business domestically and internationally.
First, Low Theory; this theory expands on the individual applying ethics to “types of situation or case (e.g. the ethics of abortion or euthanasia)” (p. 155). This global ethical theory prescribes thinking about situations such as human rights violations. This type of ethical thinking and applies to global situations from child labor to human rights and environmental issues of corporate social responsibility (CSR).
Were one to only do low theory it would be applied ethics without applying anything; one would focus on conceptualizing types of situation, and the ethnical stakes involved, in the hope of improving our understanding of them so that we could, in the course of actual events, better handle individual cases of the relevant type (Brannmark & Sahlin, 2010, p. 155).
The low theory applies to one aspect of critical thinking. The next theory presented is
Middle Theory: applying to spheres of human concern and interaction (e.g. the ethics of friendship, research ethics, just war theory). This is more systematic than low theory in that it proceeds by grouping certain types of situation or choice into sets constituting spheres of strongly interconnected issues (Brannmark & Sahlin, 2010, p. 155).
The middle theory prescribes another dimension to ethical theories that considers more than the situation. The theory expands into multiple considerations and “identify and articulate core norms and key heuristics in a way that allows us to improve our behavior within these practices or spheres” (Brannmark & Sahlin, 2010, p. 155). The theory creates yet another aspect of critical thinking by tuning into identification and articulation of the subject and creates thoughts to improve situations and human behavior (Brannmark & Sahlin, 2010, p. 155).
The last theory, High Theory, becomes complex critical thinking.
Applying to human morality in general (e.g. utilitarianism, Kantianism, Aristotelianism). While high theorists will recognize both low and middle theory (although they might not see the need for middle theory if we have high theory), they will tend to see these as areas where we apply the general theory of morality. The very notion of applied ethics (which is often used to refer to issues considered with low theory) conveys this idea of starting at the peaks of generality and abstraction and then moving down to the jungles of concreteness and particularity (Brannmark & Sahlin, 2010, p. 155).
Although fundamental understanding does not need to take hold, the reason for such detailed explanation is ethics is the essence of critical thought, or at the least the need for critical thought. These theories affect organizations in various ways.
The low theory applies critical situational thought to a particular situation. Leaders may use this type of ethical theory tracking an ongoing problem, or situation, which requires ethical consideration. This theory literally affects the organization in the long-term as all aspects outside the situation are not considered and may create repetition of the situation.
Middle theory affects an organization’s root cause analysis ethical theory. Leaders attempt to find the outlying and causing agents of the ethical dilemma for creation of a solution. The high theory affects organizations in every way. This applies directly to the humans who are employed in organizations and the theory is the pinnacle of critical thinking and consideration.
Organizations are affected by high theory most when people do not use high theory constructing solutions to potential ethical issues. This theory offers the most comprehensive result. The downside is the result takes longer than the two former theories when leaders formulate strategic operations.
All the ethical theories offer some level of risk to the organization, whether the risk is not taking the time to think through the ethical issue or taking too long to affect the outcome promptly. The risk mitigated through joint use of the theories is essential when finding ethical solutions to current organizational problems (Brannmark & Sahlin, 2010, p. 157). Practical application of all the theories listed is consideration from theft, resource mismanagement, contamination, human rights violations, child labor violations, to lying to the stakeholders or shareholders. Therefore, we could conclude that the severity of ethical violation requires leaders to have a firm moral and ethical foundation. Critical ethical thinking applies to all situations that organizations, both domestic and international, faces or will face in the future. These theories DO have a practical application for Leaders to learn.
Please comment. This topic is very important for leaders and organizations wanting to be considered responsible no matter where they conduct business in the world.