There’s a belief that our core decisions are based on unconscious bias.  To test this theory, you can quickly take the Implicit Association Test (IAT).  After you’ve read this post, I strongly encourage you to actually go to the site and complete one or more of the tests.  They don’t take long and the results will amaze you.  The IAT measures the implicit attitudes and beliefs that people are either unwilling (deceiving others) or unable (deceiving themselves) to report.  For example, you may think that men and women share an equal place in the work force.  Yet, your responses to the IAT may show women more greatly associated with the home and men more greatly associated with the office.  It seems there’s proof here that people don’t always know their own mind. 

Consider how many negative compound words and phrases begin with the word “black” (example:  blackmail.)  When training on preconceived notions, I sometimes ask the attendees to take two minutes and write down as many words and phrases they can think of that begin with black.  There are many, but relatively few that are positive in nature.  In a recent session, there were a total of 37 different words listed by the group in two minutes and only three (Black Beauty, Black Beans and Black is Beautiful) were not negative.  In the old westerns, what color hat did the good guy wear?  What color are angels?  What’s a white lie?  Black is the color of death.  Widows wear black when they’re in mourning.  We hang black wreathes to symbolize a death has occurred. Black is bad.  White is good.  We’ve trained our brain to think this way.  I have been asked if I think this color association is related to race.  There is reference to black being evil as early as 1401 BC, prior to a time when cultures and races were geographically mixed.  So, while I don’t know why we’ve trained our brain to make this association, I do not believe it is related to race. 

We have the ability to train our brain in positive ways, too.  Ask any parent if they had to teach their child to lie.  It’s quite the opposite.  Lying is intuitive to a child.  When challenged and they know the true answer will get them in trouble, they will instinctively lie.  It’s self-preservation.  Parents must train their child NOT to lie and hopefully there comes a time when truth telling is instinctive for the child.  Remember the George Washington/Cherry Tree story.  That is purposely taught to early childhood students to stress the importance and self-gratification of being truthful. 

For those of us that are charged with making sound business decisions, these unconscious prejudices should be of great concern.  

When evaluating business decisions consider these issues:

-  Is there a conflict between two or more values?

-  Who has a stake in the decision?  Do you have a tie to an interested party?

-  Who’s being harmed?  Who’s being helped?

-  What’s the worst that can happen?  What the best that can happen? 

-  And, perhaps most importantly:  Can I live with the outcome?  Could my mother see me do this and be proud?  Would I want my children to do this? 

Be mindful of how old attitudes formed by these implicit associations may be tainting your business judgment.  Take the time and energy to overcome these preconceived notions.  One more time, train your brain to make sound, legitimate business decisions based on facts and evidence rather than an antiquated way of thinking.

Photo Credit:  www.marthastewart.com

That line is one of the most famous quotes from English poetry.  Walter Scott’s poem, Marmion, from which the line comes, is about an English Lord (Marmion) who desires a very rich woman (Clara).  Unfortunately, Clara is engaged to another man (Sir Ralph).  Through an elaborate series of lies told by Lord Marmion and with the aid of his mistress, a dishonest nun (Constance) who is completely smitten with Lord Marmion, Sir Ralph is exiled.  Clara is broken-hearted and chooses to go to a convent rather than be with Lord Marmion.  Lord Marmion, devastated about losing Clara, turns on his former partner-in-crime Constance and abandons her.  

That poem was written in 1806 about an event that occurred in 1513.  So, 500 years later, what’s so different?  If we lose the “Sir” and “Lord” titles, the men in this poem are just government employees.  They are military men serving at the request of King Henry VIII.  Is it really so great a stretch to write a current day version of the story?  

Think of how many times we hear of ethics breaches in the workplace.  Corporate and public-sector scandals are the lead stories most evenings on the 6 o’clock news.  More and more companies are designing ethics policies in an attempt to legislate values and morals.  It seems to be the trendy new policy to add to the Employee Handbook.  While it is important for an organization to have an emphasis on ethics, a culture built around respect might be more effective. 

What are ethics anyway?  What impacts them?  This list is probably endless, but some of the things I’ve come up with are:  peer pressure; current circumstances; gender; culture; religion; position; race; who’s watching; geography; power; money; education; status.  These factors, and many more, determine and ultimately develop our moral convictions.

Some ethical issues are obvious.  All cultures place a value on not inflicting harm and on truth telling.  But what about little white lies? What about the lies we tell to protect someone’s feelings?  One of my dad’s favorite stories occurred when he was visiting with friends for a few days.  On the first morning, his friend, the host, burnt the breakfast toast and was very apologetic.  My dad’s response to his friend was, “Oh don’t worry about that.  I like my toast that way.”  For the remainder of his stay, his friend intentionally burnt the toast—thinking he was accommodating my dad’s preference.  

Since ethics are an applied moral code, let’s examine morality.  In “Moral Decision-Making—An Analysis,” Chris MacDonald, Ph.D., says, “Morality is a system of rules that modifies our behavior in social situations.  It’s about the doing of good instead of harm and it sets some standard of virtuous conduct.”  One definition says, “Morals are arbitrarily and subjectively created by society, philosophy, religion and/or individual conscience.”  So, we all may have a different and unique sense of what’s right and what’s wrong or at least a distinct variation of it.

Collectively, our ethics are based on the culture that is in place at the time.  The early U. S. Constitution declared women ineligible for citizenship.  Our constitution writers were responding to, “What is a citizen?”  Even when the culture remains constant, but the circumstances are different, right and wrong changes.  When is it okay to help yourself to a cookie?  If you’re a non-dieting adult, the answer is probably, “whenever you want one.”  But if you’re a three-year old and must push a stool over to the counter, climb onto the stool, then heave yourself onto the counter to stretch into the high cabinet to grab the cookie bag, the answer is probably very different. 

Some of the current hot buttons with which our society is grappling are centered in our personal interpretation of ethics.  For example, what is the definition of marriage and when does life begin?  Regardless of where you stand on these issues, the fact that we are discussing them is an indicator of how values change.

Defining a single ethical code or creating a definitive list of morally acceptable behaviors is beyond challenging.  It’s nearly an impossible task.  Even if attempted, there will always be extenuating circumstances or gray areas. 

I recently read, The Power of Nice by Linda Kaplan Thaler and Robin Koval.  In this book they tell us, “The surest and quickest way to self respect is behaving in a way that makes you respectable.”  Good advice, indeed.  And, in this perfect world, workplace ethics policies would not be required and we’d be off to write a different trendy policy.  Oh!  Wait!  We wouldn’t need ANY workplace policies.

Recently I attended an early evening meeting after already completing a ten-hour workday.  It may be important to know that I might not have been at my (most patient) best.

The meeting started calmly enough, but I was amazed by how many late arrivers disrupted the proceedings by making loud, raucous entrances.  It was like they wanted everyone to know they had arrived and it was irrelevant that they were late.  Clearly, they were under the impression that they were more important than the agenda.  After all, weren’t we all so glad to see them?  Hugs all around.

So, that was the first time I used my “church glare.”  That’s the look my mother used to give me when I would laugh or talk with my friends during church services.  Her eyes would narrow and she would make direct soul-to-soul non-verbal contact revealing her irritation at my irreverence. 

Order restored.  Now, back to our meeting.  One of the attendees didn’t agree with the direction of the discussion regarding the second topic on the agenda and began a loud sidebar with his neighbor.  Church glare number 2.

As the debate continued, the chair requested clarification from the attorney.  Another attendee, who was less than pleased with the attorney’s guidance, then began to argue historical events.  You know the phrase, “we’ve never done it like that before.”  And, he did that without being recognized by the chair.  Church glare number 3 followed by a loud sigh.

At some point, total chaos broke out.  Multiple people were shouting over the person who rightfully had the floor who began to speak louder to be heard over the cacophony of interruptions.  I glanced over at the exasperated secretary who was unsuccessfully attempting to record the proceedings.  My church glare was in overdrive, but I saved the meanest, sternest glare of all for the chair of the proceedings.  Finally, he banged the table and restored order.  Whew.  Relish the calm…

In an appropriately dignified manner, discussion continued.  Then, from the far corner of our elongated boat-shaped conference table came an unrelated, one-person dialogue.  As I realized the individual was actually having a personal cell phone conversation, my glare went into retirement and from my lips exploded, “Are you freakin’ kidding me?”  I really did say, “freakin’.”

What was wrong with these people?  Where was the respect for the other people who were sacrificing their time to contribute to this group?  Oh, I get that they’re passionate about the topics.  Of course they are.  We wouldn’t want ill-informed, apathetic individuals in the group.  But, can we please have a little decorum?

I left that meeting exhausted and mulled over the proceedings on the drive home.  I reached two distinct conclusions: the meeting chair’s duty is to maintain order and my church glare doesn’t pack the same wallop as my mother’s.