The PLUS Decision Making Model The Ethics Resource Center Arlington, VA

Transcription

1 The PLUS Decisin Making Mdel The Ethics Resurce Center Arlingtn, VA Intrductin The traditinal decisin making mdel taught in mst ethics prgrams is beynd the reading cmprehensin level f an estimated 25% f the emplyee ppulatin. We need an alternative mdel capable f ensuring that the ethical issues inherent in rutine business situatins culd be effectively surfaced while making the mdel easy t use by peple wh were functinally semiilliterate. While develping this alternative mdel we kept tw verriding cnatins in mind: Every emplyee is called upn t make decisins in the nrmal curse f ding his/her jb. Organizatins cannt functin effectively if emplyees are nt empwered t make decisins cnsistent with their psitins and respnsibilities. Fr the decisin maker t be cnfident in the decisin's efficacy, every decisin shuld be tested against the rganizatin's plicies and values, applicable laws and regulatins as well as the individual emplyee's definitin f what is right, fair, gd and acceptable. What we were lking fr was a simple set f guidelines that wuld make it easier fr the individual emplyee, regardless f psitin r level, t be cnfident that his/her decisins meet all f the cmpeting standards fr effective and ethical decisin-making used by the rganizatin. The decisin making prcess we adpted was carefully cnstructed t meet several criteria. It had t be: Fundamentally sund based n current theries and understandings f bth decisin making prcesses and ethics. Simple and straightfrward enugh that it culd be easily integrated int every emplyee's thught prcesses. Descriptive (detailing hw ethical decisin are made naturally) rather than prescriptive (defining unnatural ways f making chices). The Decisin Making Prcess We selected a six step decisin making prcess that synthesized the decisin making mdels used in existing training, nt just ethics training. The mdel is descriptive f hw peple intuitively make decisins and makes the steps explicit. The six steps f this natural, intuitive decisin-making prcess are:

2 Step 1: Define the prblem The mst significant step in any decisin making prcess is describing why a decisin is called fr and identifying the mst desired utcme(s) f the decisin making prcess. One way f deciding if a prblem exists is t cuch the prblem is terms f what ne wanted r expected and the actual situatin. In this way a prblem is defined as the difference between expected and/r desired utcmes and actual utcmes. This careful attentin t definitin in terms f utcmes allws ne t clearly state the prblem. This is a critical cnsideratin because hw ne defines a prblem determines hw ne defines causes and where ne searches fr slutins. The limiting aspect f the prblem definitin step is nt widely appreciated. Cnsider this example. Yur cmpany wns an ld, dwntwn ffice building. Tenants are cmplaining that their emplyees are getting angry and frustrated because there is always a lng delay getting an elevatr t the lbby at rush hur. Yu are asked fr a reactin n hw t slve this prblem. As with mst prblem situatins there are several ways t define the situatin and several slutins that suggest themselves. This scenari has been presented t ver 200 grups in a training envirnment. The mst cmmn alternatives these grups ffered were: Flexible hurs- s all the tenants' emplyees wuldn't be at the elevatrs at the same time. Faster elevatrs - s each elevatr culd carry mre peple in a given time perid. Bigger elevatrs - s each elevatr culd carry mre peple per trip. Elevatr banks- s each elevatr wuld nly stp n certain flrs, increasing efficiency. Better elevatr cntrls - s each elevatr wuld be used mre efficiently. Mre elevatrs - s that verall carrying capacity culd be increased. Imprved elevatr maintenance - s each elevatr wuld be mre efficient. Encurage emplyees t use the stairs - s fewer peple wuld use the elevatrs. If yu examine each alternative yu will see that several different definitins f the prblem must have existed. If the slutin is "flexible hurs" the prblem must have been defined as, "T many peple getting ff wrk at a given time." N ther prblem makes sense fr that slutin. "Faster elevatrs" cmes frm, "The elevatrs are t slw." "Bigger elevatrs" cmes frm, "The elevatrs are nt carrying enugh peple." "Mre elevatrs" cmes frm, "T few elevatrs." The real life decisin makers defined the prblem as "peple cming abut having t wait". Their slutin was t make the wait less frustrating by piping music int the elevatr lbbies. The cmplaints stpped. The PLUS Decisin Making Mdel Ethics Resurce Center 2

3 There is n way that the eventual slutin culd have been reached if, fr example, the prblem had been defined as "t few elevatrs". As yu can see, hw yu define the prblem determines where yu g t lk fr alternatives/slutins, s define the prblem carefully. Step 2: Identify available alternative slutins t the prblem The key t this step is t nt limit yurself t bvius alternatives r what has wrked in the past but t be pen t new and better alternatives. Hw many alternatives shuld yu identify? Ideally, all f them. Realistically, we teach that the decisin maker shuld cnsider mre than five in mst cases, mre than three at the barest minimum. This gets away frm the trap f seeing "bth sides f the situatin" and limiting ne's alternatives t tw ppsing chices; either this r that. Step 3: Evaluate the identified alternatives As yu evaluate each alternative, yu shuld be lking at the likely psitive and negative cnes fr each. It is unusual t find ne alternative that wuld cmpletely reslve the prblem and is heads and shulders better than all thers. Differences in the "value" f respective alternatives are typically small, relative and a functin f the decisin maker's persnal perceptins, biases and predispsitins. As yu cnsider psitive and negative utcnes yu must be careful t differentiate between what yu knw fr a fact and what yu believe might be the case. The decisin maker will nly have all the facts in trivial cases. Peple always supplement what facts they have with assumptins and beliefs. This distinctin between fact-based evaluatin and nn-fact -based evaluatin is included t assist the decisin maker in develping a "cnfidence scre" fr each alternative. The decisin maker needs t determine nt just what results each alternative culd yield, but hw prbable it is that thse results will be realized. The mre the evaluatin is fact-based, the mre cnfident he/she can be that the expected utcme will ccur. Step 4: Make the decisin When acting alne this is the natural next step after selecting the best alternative. When the decisin maker is wrking in a team envirnment, this is where a prpsal is made t the team, cmplete with a clear definitin f the prblem, a clear list f the alternatives that were cnsidered and a clear ratinale fr the prpsed slutin. The PLUS Decisin Making Mdel Ethics Resurce Center 3

4 Step 5: Implement the decisin While this might seem bvius, it is necessary t make the pint that deciding n the best alternative is nt the same as ding smething. The actin itself is the first real, tangible step in changing the situatin. It is nt enugh t think abut it r talk abut it r even decide t d it. A decisin nly cunts when it is implemented. As Lu Gerstner (CEO f IBM) said, "There are n mre prizes fr predicting rain. There are nly prizes fr building arks." Step 6: Evaluate the decisin Every decisin is intended t fix a prblem. The final test f any decisin is whether r nt the prblem was fixed. Did it g away? Did it change appreciably? Is it better nw, r wrse, r the same? What new prblems did the slutin create? Ethics Filters Until nw we have been discussing a generic decisin mdel similar t thse taught in every business schl and management training prgram. But ur cncern is nt just decisin making; it is ethical decisin making. The ethical cmpnent f the decisin making prcess takes the frm f a set f "filters". Their purpse is t separate the sught after elements frm their cntaining envirnment. At key steps in the prcess the decisin maker can stp and run his/her cnsideratins thrugh these filters and thereby separate the ethical cnatins frm the remainder f the decisin. This ensures that the ethical issues imbedded in the decisin can be given cnsideratin. In their academic frm, the language fr these filters is t cmplex and academic fr mst emplyees. In simplifying the prcess we risked lsing sme f the finer pints but dramatically increased the utility f the ethics filters prcess. T make it easy t understand and apply these ethics filters we have adapted t mnemnic wrd PLUS. P = Plicies Is it cnsistent with my rganizatin's plicies, prcedures and guidelines? L= Legal Is it acceptable under the applicable laws and regulatins? U = Universal Des it cnfrm t the universal principles/values my rganizatin has adpted? S= Self Des it satisfy my persnal definitin f right, gd and fair? The PLUS Decisin Making Mdel Ethics Resurce Center 4

5 PLUS presumes effective cmmunicatin with all emplyees s there is a cmmn understanding f: the rganizatin's plicies and prcedures as they apply t the situatin. the applicable laws and regulatins. the agreed upn set f "universal" values - in this case Empathy, Patience, Integrity, Curage (EPIC) the individual's sense f right, fair and gd springing frm their persnal values set. PLUS als presumes a frmal mechanism, prvided by the rganizatin, t allw emplyees access t a definitive interpretatin f the plicies, laws and universal values when their wn knwledge f these PLUS factrs is insufficient fr them t make the decisin with a high level f cnfidence. The PLUS filters wrk as an integral part f steps 1, 3 and 6 f the decisin making prcess. The decisin maker applies the fur PLUS filters t determine if the ethical cmpnent(s) f the decisin are being surfaced/addressed/satisfied. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Define the prblem (PLUS surface the ethical issues) Des the existing situatin vilate any f the PLUS cnsideratins? Identify available alternative slutins t the prblem Evaluate the identified alternatives (PLUS assess their ethical impact) Will the alternative I am cnsidering reslve the PLUS vilatins? Will the alternative being cnsidered create any new PLUS cnsideratins? Are the ethical trade-ffs acceptable? Make the decisin Implement the decisin Evaluate the decisin (PLUS surface any remaining/new ethical issues) Des the resultant situatin reslve the earlier PLUS cnsideratins? Are there any new PLUS cnsideratins t be addressed? The user shuld realize that the PLUS filters d nt guarantee an ethical decisin. They merely ensure that the ethical cmpnents f the situatin will be surfaced s that they might be cnsidered. While PLUS suggests a prcess fr assessing the ethical impact f a decisin, ultimately whether r nt the decisin meets the ethical standards f the rganizatin r the individual decisin maker is a matter f persnal respnsibility. After all, ethics is abut chices. The PLUS Decisin Making Mdel Ethics Resurce Center 5