Oct 14, 2021
Week 30, 2021 — Issue #162
Normative Ethics: Deontology, Utilitarianism, and Virtue Ethics
Each week: three ideas on and about the future of work. This week: three ideas on morality and ethics.
As is about to become apparent, I never took philosophy in school. I never studied ethics. But I still find it to be a fascinating topic. So much so that I’d like to devote this issue to the practical means with which organizations can determine the moral course of action.
Let’s dig in.
1. Deontological Ethics
The action is good if it follows the rules
Deontological Ethics (aka Duty Ethics) focuses on actions; it holds that actions are moral if they abide by rules laid down by an external source, regardless of what the outcomes might be. This is good in the sense that it underscores equality and human rights (e.g., we’re all equal under the law). But it’s problematic in the sense that it can create tensions if and when people abide by different rules.
2. Utilitarian Ethics
The action is good if the consequences are good
Utilitarian Ethics (aka Consequentialism) is outcome-focused; it holds that actions are moral if they maximize the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is good in that it holds the actor accountable for the outcome of their action. But it’s problematic in the sense that it’s often hard to predict beforehand what that outcome will be.
3. Virtue Ethics
The action is good if it’s what a virtuous person would do.
Last but not least: Virtue Ethics is teleological in nature; it holds that actions are moral if they abide by virtues that help to maximize the wellbeing and fulfillment of the individual. This is good in that it’s holistic, focusing not on one action but on the actor’s life as a whole. But it’s problematic in that it assumes one person’s ‘good life’ benefits all.
Hopefully, I’ve managed to stay out of trouble so far. But that’s about to change. Up next: an attempt to connect ethics and morality with decision making and organizational design:
- Deontological Ethics seems to me to be built-in to traditional command and control structures. The boss is the ‘external source’ that lays down the rule of law, and everyone else is expected to follow suit. If you’re lucky, you get a gold watch at some point.
- Utilitarian Ethics seem to me to be more reasonable. But I can also see how it might be problematic to connect morality with uncertain outcomes. This would disincentivize long-term thinking and risk-taking, instead of placing undue focus on the quarterly earnings call.
- Virtue Ethics? At first blush, that too seems problematic given that the ‘good life’ remains undefined. But it occurs to me that this is exactly what an organization’s mission and core values are supposed to do, right? They should help us align on what is virtuous and what is not.
That puts core values in a rather different light, does it not? Few organizations bother to define core values, must less connect them to wellbeing and fulfillment. But maybe the old Greeks were on to something? Maybe it’s time that we reconsider our use and disuse of core values?
Food for thought.
That’s all for this week.
Until next time: make it matter.
Disclaimer: any and all errors found in the above are mine and mine alone. Such errors should under no circumstance tarnish the 2,000+ years of human thought that came before.
