ECTRODACTYLY ORGANIZATION

“Neither shall you allege the example of the many as an excuse for doing wrong.” (God /Exodus 23:2)

My younger son is a third year medical student.

During his last vacation with us, when we were witnessing the eye-catching twilight hues of an amazing sunset over the Swan river with refreshing mango margaritas in Perth, Australia, he earnestly shared with me about few unique physical deformities he had observed during his various hospital rounds.

An attention-grabbing topic for sure, but at a very unfitting time and location. However, his child-like vehemence, compelled me to lend him my ears. One such abnormality which registered deep in mind was ‘Ectrodactyly’. Which means absence of one or more central digits of the hand or foot.

Ectrodactyly is a skeletal anomaly or deformity with variable severity. The hands and feet of the person look like a “lobster claw” and may include only the thumb and one finger. A defect in the body due to abnormal interruptions in the embryonic or fetal development.

Back in my rented cottage , while remembering the resonating echo of waves plopping the rock-strewn shoreline, I could not resist thinking about Ectrodactyly…indolently it triggered a chain of parallel thoughts which finally took a shape of my current blog.

I am metaphorically using the term Ectrodactyly Organization to epitomize a familiar but most conceded organizational insufficiency while practicing business ethics. I want to draw a parallel between “lobster-claw” and the predisposition of an organization to be discriminatory in placating moral values for the convenience of ‘clawing’ business gains. Business ethics are fundamental to any organization, and while they can be easily twisted, good organizations believe in institutionalizing them as a deep foundation right from the birth (inception). Nevertheless, in certain organizations, it is an abnormality from the incubation stage itself. Where from the beginning itself, the revenue focused entrepreneurial mind-set of “business at any cost”, costumes the supposedly moral patches of the company fabric.

Just think!

Why corporate corruptions and manipulations are so pervasive?

Are we in a scandal-ridden era of economy?

Lately, there has been a lot of attention focused globally on the perils of lack of ethics in business. In any good organization, a code of ethics is a set of doctrines that directs the conduct of the organization and the people. Business ethics encompasses corporate “right of way” far beyond traditional short term revenue focused objectives of profitability and heightening of shareholders value. Yet, corporate ethics are like ‘ornamental accessories’ which leaders emphatically flaunts by broadcasting it on various platforms. Entirely oblivious to the fact that the rest of the organization rustle softly in the corridors disaffirming their same assertion. Obviously, why would an organization care about ethics when objective is to swell the bottom line? I shy away at the thought of being a part of an organization where leadership is tentative about importance of integrity and values. Where every second day employees have to run into the gossips of compromised practices and quick-fix adventures of their leadership team. Where ethical behavior remains unnoticed and so called ‘tactically-smart- thespians’ are continuously rewarded. I have personally experienced a situation, where in an apex committee, I was the only ‘dissonance-factor’ over a delicate topic and was deceitfully ostracized to avoid any possible resistance to their “programmed’ business conciliation.

How many times, as a professional, you have questioned yourself: “Is this the way I should do my job as a responsible professional or should be mandated to misrepresent the facts to my stakeholders?” 

I am sure, you have!

I am also confident that you will not be pleased, if someone else would take liberty to dishonor your professional role obligations.

Yes, cutthroat competition will tantalize an organization to favor certain debatable actions to shield the profit margins. However, there are many organizations out there that hold themselves to the higher ethical standard. Ethics are much beyond business. Ethics are standards of good/bad or right/wrong behavior. Ethics have more to do with organizational character and sincerity towards society.

Likewise, an individual’s sense of ethics in any organization has a significant bearing on the type of conduct he will exhibit at the work. It is about his abstention from damaging behavior. It has more to do with the interpersonal dimension of his behavior. It is characterized by ethos and collective judgements of individuals in any setup. It complements the prevalent tone of sentiments of the people at large. It means practicing what he believes and walking the talk or being true to his profession.

Same is true for the organization. If you are an experienced professional, you can smell the ethical stance of an organization within a fairly short time by just casually chatting with few leadership team members. Organization as such does not have values and ethics per say, but since it is represented by group of people, the ethical behavior of the organization is moulded by the values and ethics of the people, particularly the senior leadership team. I genuinely believe that a business leader cannot wash-away his accountability by merely delivering ‘feel-good’ sermons on business ethics in various meetings and open-house sessions. For such leaders, every individual is theoretically and logically responsible for his/her ethical behavior and conduct at work. Fair enough! But what about the leadership role?

As Peter Drucker has expressed, “By themselves, integrity and character do not accomplish anything. But their absence faults everything else.” Essentially, first obligation starts at the top and includes the CEO and /or owner, and the board. 

Are they not equally responsible for imbibing that culture?

Aren’t they obliged to demonstrate the type of conduct they would like their employees to inculcate?

The issue of leadership responsibility is a core element in founding organizational ethics. A leader has to be open for retaliation and resistance while standing for any ethical decision. Let’s appreciate one fact that the success of a businesses hinges upon the reputation and a lack of ethical guidelines can seriously ruin a reputation.

Understandably, many small business owners do find it demanding to demonstrate ethical behavior to remain in the survival game. But, what’s about established enterprises?  Surprisingly, ethical lapses are also frequent in many highly acclaimed organizations. Transgressions in financial statements to demonstrate performance is the most common form of ethical violation.

Top leadership sets an ethical tone that should guide every business decision. For me, business ethics mirrors the way a leader perceive and relates with the Eco-system around him. Of late, I have also noticed a nascent intolerance within the Eco-system towards such irresponsible Machiavellian business leaders.

Indisputably, large majority of people in any organization would desire to see their organization as an ethical organization. Yet, reality is far different.

Unfortunately, we do not learn despite hard realization. Whenever a tempting unethical opportunity or a choice re-materializes at work, we do get allured by it. Just like a lobster,. if it loses a claw, it restores (it grows back) in the next moult. Our choices are also made within the context of influences. Some may be inherently shaped by our past experiences and few are the result of peripheral temptations. Let’s briefly look at possible ‘spark off’ sockets compelling people to be unethical at work, particularly in a corporation where ethics is just a tag-on concept:

     Unrealistic Anticipations: When Leaders Are Expecting Unrealisable Goals

Many leaders/CEOs would love to keep very unrealistic goals for various functions. The simple logic is: “If I ask for 120%, I will surely get 100% .” One of the most injudicious bygone-days’ logic. Unworkable pressure from management to deliver results is one such factor that leads an individual to infringe upon ethical rules. In fact, leadership hardly recognizes that they are meanderingly seeding a culture of ethical concessions. As an HR professional, I have closely witnessed many good performing professionals from critical functions (like, Sales, Projects, Research, Manufacturing, EHS, Finance, and Quality) were periodically crucified for their unethical practices at work. Regrettably, most of the time while pronouncing a suitable punishment, I felt that somewhere organization had encouraged them to select that unpoised route of forged success. Unachievable goals and unrealistic expectations were at the root of their act. I strongly recommend that whenever an individual behaves in objectionable way, first evaluate carefully what has pushed him to that compromise. The uncertainty to accomplish expected results will reflexively entice many individual to take a short-cut at work.

     Conflict Of Interest: When Leaders Are Rewarding Quantity To Succeed Quality

Today the characterization of employee incentives is murky at best. Most of the incentive plans archetypally tend to destabilize the very processes they are designed to enrich. Many organizations design their incentive and reward plans around quantitative target achievements. Obviously quality or process compliance gets compromised and final product is far mediocre to the expected. Such conflict of interest is not overtly discernible to the individual or his supervisor. I have seen managers ignoring the obvious signals to meet up the incentive targets. Many organizations hardly ever emphasize upon quality aspect of delivering the results. Many a times, even leadership insist on showering higher rewards for the results rather than the process compliance. Knowing very well that such enticements will inevitably compel an individual to compromise. The question is: does the end justify the means? The rat-race to qualify as most productive department or winning a star-performer certificate, encourages people to consciously put blinkers to disregard ethical demands of the task. For me, it is like bribing the unethical behavior.

 Untraceability Of Deviation: When Manipulations Remain Deceptive

Another factor that contributes to unethical conduct is the apparent time lag between the action and the actual traceability of the resulting damage. It is so common to all of us. Most of the time we do it with the people who have blind trust on us. We all engage in some sort of untraceable manipulations from time to time.  We try and camouflage factual results in an attempt to elicit a favorable appreciation from the superiors at work. The higher likelihood of untraceability of deviation will induce relatively frequent manipulations. I have also observed that such behavior is tacitly encouraged by the superiors in the overall scheme of the business. Moreover, so called ‘tactically-expert-veterans’ in the system customarily give a sort of grounding to the rookies. Just like the older lobsters use their claws to often walk hand–in-hand leading the younger ones. It is so true! Let me share a factual illustration about working on a project in an established organization. While debating the diplomacies for achieving an attractive contract for a business, the finance manager suggested skirting of certain data. Stunned and dumbstruck by this undeniably unethical proposal, I objected the decision only to realize that the ensuing conversation by the rest of the team was as normal as a routine arrangement. However, at times such manipulative acts can take on a murkier tone. It can fold a business venture forever.

Finally, It is all about leadership. As leadership becomes more adept at overlooking deviations, people gradually feel comfortable in encroaching the terrain of manipulation. Conscious ignorance of such deviation is at the root of institutionalization of disgraceful conduct in any organization.

But, ultimately we are to be blamed for being victims of such incognizant influences.

I want to end my blog with a quote by David Hume, a Scottish historian, philosopher, and economist,  “.. that a rule, which, in speculation, may seem the most advantageous to society, may yet be found, in practice, totally pernicious and destructive.” (Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding, 1737, p 193) 

Let’s stop unethical clawing.

Let’s first address Ectrodactyly of our mind.

Please, let me hear your thoughts…!