don's report archive

by Donald B. Ardell, Ph. D.

Wellness in the Headlines
(Don's Report to the World)

In my run for mayor of Tampa, I have been quoting philosopher Paul Kurtz on the subject of "common moral decencies," largely because some decencies are not so common as they ought to be. These decencies are described in detail in Kurtz' book, Embracing the Power of Humanism (pp. 143-156), Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD. 2000. I have promised that, if elected, I'll be guided by "common decency" beliefs and core values and I will promote such virtues in every way possible. The common decencies are:

1. Integrity (truthfulness, promise keeping, sincerity and honesty.)
2. Trustworthiness (fidelity or loyalty, dependability.)
3. Benevolence (goodwill, refraining from harming others personally or their property, consent and beneficence.)
4. Fairness (gratitude, accountability, justice, tolerance and cooperation.)

The need to remind people about such decencies extends beyond Tampa politics; it seems important for the entire business sector of American society. The problem extends not just within secular businesses: Who is not acquainted with the unethical cover-ups of crimes committed by predatory clergy?

As a student in the Stanford Executive Program in the summer of 1977, shortly after the Watergate era and a series of extensive aerospace bribery scandals, I was surprised at the absence of ethics courses that could have balanced somewhat the accounting, marketing, finance, macro economics, technology and other sophisticated topics that kept us all dazzled and overwhelmed. Actually, I was probably hoping for a dose of case studies designed to draw us out on ethical issues in the hope that such a course would be just a bit less difficult to grasp than all that other stuff!

Now, twenty years later, it's beginning to look like I had a good idea, albeit for the wrong reasons. It is rather obvious that ethics did not have much of a hold on the top executives at firms like Arthur Anderson, Tyco, Merrill Lynch, Sotheby's and Christie's and, most infamously of all, Enron. One stock expert refers to the ethical crisis that continues to deflate stock values as the "School for scandal" and notes that even Martha Stewart is caught up in it (for trading stock shares on inside information.) Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill says, "I think people who abuse our trust, we oughta hang them from the very highest branch." (A reporter adds, "I think he was exaggerating. Although maybe not." Source: Andy Serwer, "Street Life," 06/13/2002 at Fortune.com.)

To what extent are common decencies taught, promoted and reinforced in today's business schools? Have the stock market manipulations and subsequent losses of vast sums of retirement monies brought an increased level of attention to ethics? Did the disappearance of billions of shareholder dollars evaporated in corporate scandals change anything? In recent stories in varied business journals, the sense is that there is concern and a lot of serious lip service, but the curricula have not changed much. Most commentators believe change is slow to come to the professional training schools that provide most of the leadership of corporate America.

The resistance to the teaching of ethics courses in business schools might be similar to the resistance I'll find promoting common decencies in Tampa along the campaign trail! That is, concerns such as whether the topic is worthy of curriculum status or, in the case of local politics, resistance might take this form: "Are you implying we NEED to be reminded? How dare you?!" Another challenge is that time is always of the essence -- there is so much on the table in business and other graduate schools, in the business world and during political races that finding time for and segues into such matters will always be a challenge. Obviously, courses and campaign speeches on this topic must be informative AND non-threatening/non-accusatory.

Another way to approach ethics and the common decencies is to argue that these matters are economically as well as morally viable and consequential. Arthur Anderson and Enron, for example, suffered grievous, most likely fatal, penalties for poor ethics -- how can a community be served by ethical innocence? An Australian study looked at 30 years of corporate data that exhibited a direct link between ethics (broadly interpreted) and financial performance. The lesson? Virtue pays. It is also its own reward! It would be the best policy even if it did NOT pay, but it's nice to know it does.

Things have changed a lot -- nearly all business schools offer instruction about ethics, in fact, it is even a requirement for accreditation! Stanford, Northwestern, Wharton and Harvard, among others, have set up institutes for ethics and/or social responsibility. However, some critics say that is not enough -- the need is to convince professors and others to weave ethics into all courses taught by experts in varied esoteric and core disciplines. After all, Enron's President (Jeffrey Skilling) held a Harvard MBA and Michael Milken, infamous for financial manipulations, was a Wharton grad. Naturally, this is not to imply that a course, an institute, or even integrated lessons on ethics and common decencies applied to the business world will prevent everyone from shady dealing. Human nature does not work that way. Just the same, it can't hurt -- not at the business schools and not on the campaign trail. Let's hope for the best and look on the bright side.

(Note: This essay will be filed in the archives in the PHYSICAL DOMAIN under the skill area of appearance and aging. Additional articles related to this theme may be found there.)

(Ed. Note: Views expressed in this and other columns are those of the author and not necessarily those of the SeekWellness Editorial Board.)

 Send e-mail to Don Ardell