Análisis e interpretación de resultados

In a professional capacity there are never certainties. These uncertainties are often connected with the safety, quality or health factors that we think we have designed out, but because of the unique nature of the project, there are still some risks remaining. These risks are likely to have been assessed on a prob- ability basis, but also on a severity or impact basis and it is the seriousness of the 1 per cent chance of something going wrong that is a concern. If someone gets killed or if the company is going to be exposed financially beyond its means so that many will lose their jobs, or if a product fault would affect a large number of people’s safety or health, then the ‘warning bells may ring’ and we need to consider how ethical it is to take the risk. The ethical nature of the decision goes beyond efficiency and optimisation of resources, important as these decisions are, because it has a long-term effect which may ruin people’s quality of life. Often, ethical sensitivity is needed to comprehend how serious a potential disaster might be. The evidence that supports a cautious approach is often provided very late, when delays or cancellations create extensive extra costs and/or loss of reputation and momentum so the problem becomes a management decision.

Case study 2.6 The Challenger space shuttle

The Challenger space shuttle was a case in question when all the crew were killed in an unprecedented explosion, because a ‘question mark’ over an ‘O’ ring’s unsuitability to work at certain temperatures was ignored as unproven and too disruptive to investigate at the late stage in the proceedings when questions were asked. Proper contingencies and risk mitigation and back-up systems need to be in place in the event of failure of critical components. This was patently not so and to go ahead on the following day had adverse implica- tions for the whole shuttle programme. Management overruled the decision on the basis of a political and strategic, rather than an ethical, basis.

What is a suitable ethical model to adopt to avoid a future problem? St Augus- tine’s model was not robust. The issue was legal. Checks had been made for all known problems. NASA would have supported the manager’s decision to pro- ceed with it and the newspapers would have made him more embarrassed if he had stopped the launch and, if it had been discussed with the astronauts they would probably have still been keen to continue. This issue revolved around the likelihood and impact of possible future outcomes.

Case study 2.7 The Channel Tunnel

The Channel Tunnel suffered from a serious fire not long after it opened in 1998. This fire was in the centre of the tunnel and completely destroyed several carriages and their cargo of large trucks. However, the situation was judged to be a success because no one was hurt even though there was a full load on the train. The fire fighters were able to reach the passengers from a refuge off the third tunnel which had been designed to cope in such a contingency. The central tunnel and refuges were kept at a higher pressure so the fire that spread was contained in the main tunnels, and cargo in the lorries had been registered so that the correct fire fighting equipment was taken in to contain the fire without life-threatening spread.

These contingencies, together with training, provided sufficient back-ups, not to stop the risk of a fire and the damage to property, but to save serious injury and to ensure the reputation of the company so that people retained confidence in the service, so that many did not lose their jobs. In the event, freight trains were able to travel in the undamaged tunnel after three days and passengers after 15 days.

Case study 2.8 The Mont Blanc Tunnel

A similar incident in the Mont Blanc Tunnel a year later (1999), in which 39 people were killed, closed the tunnel completely for three years. The tunnel was completely rebuilt and new safety features were built into the tunnel and special procedures for registration, monitoring and inspection were instituted.32

The tunnel was built in 1961 and had an inferior ventilation system which could not remove the smoke quickly enough, even though there were pressurised emergency shelters. The case was taken to court after a long investigation and 16 people are facing manslaughter charges, including the tunnel operators and the lorry driver, the Mayor of Chamonix and the manufacturers of the lorry that burst into flames. The tunnel now employs more than 300 personnel33 _{to ensure}

safety and as a measure to rebuild confidence, which was badly shattered.34

Case study 2.9 Dell computers recall

Dell recalled 4.4 million Sony lithium batteries fitted in their laptop computers, because of the chance that they might catch fire and cause injury. A spokesman said: ‘In rare cases, a short-circuit could cause the battery to overheat, causing a risk of smoke and or fire. It happens in rare cases but we opted to take this broad action immediately.’35

Dell advised people to only use the computer on the mains and set up a website so that a free replacement battery could be claimed. They said they were aware of six cases of catching fire in nine months, but the US Consumer Product Safety Commission said that they were aware of 339 such instances in the period 2003–2005 – not just in Dell computers. At first sight, Dell appears to be very safety conscious and provide satisfactory back-up, but in the light of the CPSC statement it seems only a short time before an accident could be more serious. Questions which come to mind are:

•

Was a free replacement battery sufficient compensation for the risk?

•

Was this an ethical slip-up which could have been avoided?

•

Was the liability Dell’s or Sony’s for the compensation or any subsequent claims?

The BBC also reported a story a few days earlier that Dell had made false advertising claims for laptops sold in China which actually included cheaper components.36 _{Dell said that advertising literature had been out of date.}

It is difficult for a company to foresee every problem, but its fragile reputation is only as good as the people who work for it. However high its ethical standards, a company also needs to have contingencies which can spontaneously correct the errors. Enron had a 65-page ethical policy document Berenbeim (2002),37

but unfortunately it appeared to employ senior people who ignored their own advice.

Labour dilemmas Offshoring

This ethical dilemma covers the practice of using resources outside the country as a way of procuring services more efficiently or effectively, often where cheaper labour is available. The core business remains in the developed economy. It has become controversial as the practice has spread in the past 10 years, with the accessibility and efficiency of global communications, and many in production have lost their jobs because labour abroad is cheaper. The rationale for more efficiency is to offer better value of money to customers, allow access to leading-edge technology with flexible and adaptable solutions, decrease product cycle times and of course the economic arguments for being more competitive and surviving where, if they do not do it, their competitors will, and they will not have a job anyway. Companies could also argue that in the case of expansion, this encourages quicker returns and leaves room for the remaining employees to progress their careers in a post-industrial developed world.

There are some residual ethical issues: to whom, if anyone, do the company owe their allegiance most? If they outsource remotely, they are likely to have more difficult quality and production control problems in their supply chains which may affect their reputation and the health, safety and sustainability of their products. If they keep the product at home, it will become uncompetitive. These actions might be seen as helping the economy of the developing country with employment opportunities or the distortion and ‘milking’ of the economy by large multinationals leaking profits out of the economy.

The practice is also controversial because labour conditions are perceived to be unfair, for example, ‘sweat shop’ labour and child labour. The company may pay less regard to pollution of the local environment or create an imbalance in the developing economy. Their reputation may be affected by customers per- ceived drop in the product quality or the ethics of the service provided. In short, it is important to make sure that there is a product fit which is effective in the long run. In their defence, larger businesses justify the creation of employment opportunities which can alleviate poverty in developing countries and through their intervention improve working conditions and quality of life and know- ledge transfer through training programmes.

In construction, there are particular issues to do with the design contracts being outsourced abroad in India. Construction itself is not easy to outsource

as it is geographically based. However, it is obvious that a lot of the manu- factured goods are moving their manufacture to other countries where produc- tion is cheap enough to justify bigger transport costs. This is not sustainable, particularly with heavy materials which are heavy on fuel costs and are not carbon neutral. Globalisation has led to consolidation of manufacturing and large multinationals are formed to remain competitive and centralise produc- tion facilities to make use of economy of scale.

Using migrant labour

Migrant labour is an ethical dilemma because it is a solution that provides cheap good quality labour to help offset the continuing shortage of labour in the industry. Polish and other East European immigrants are taking over some of the jobs that may have been available for locals. A survey (2004)38 _indicated

that 10 per cent of all construction labour have English as a second language. Some 100,000 migrant workers work in the construction industry alone and many of these are illegal workers. This has occurred because of the shortage of labour. These statistics indicate that there could be major health and safety problems due to a lack of knowledge of the language and training of a large influx of workers unaccustomed to the safety regime. Brumwell (2004)39 _pointed

out that migrant labour is helping the construction industry to survive, but a boom in the accession countries would attract immigrant workers back to their homes and make the shortage even worse.

Ethical decision-making models

Badaracco (1998)40 _{sees character as being formed at the point where responsi-}

bilities clash with values. He calls these occasions ‘defining moments’. It is a useful way of looking at the decision-making process. Ethical decision-making is a process of weighing up the different ethical, economic, legal and policy issues that afford choices which have an impact on others. These are quite often long-term issues and affect personal/professional or company reputations with their customers and stakeholders. The balance achieved may be the intentional creation of a particular image, e.g. caring, tough, fair or unintentional, in that there is a limited consideration of all the impacts. Personal ethics may often clash with the company policy. Wesley Cragg (1997)41 _{talks about the dimen-}

sions of ethics and identifies three outcomes which are important to the oper- ation of decision-making in terms of: (1) actual, rational choices based on ethical principles; (2) ethical awareness and self-knowledge; and (3) personal development which is about fulfilling one’s potential. This suggests that the process of decision-making is just as important as the decision and it is hard to impose a single solution even for similar contexts.

Moral intensity

A descriptive decision-making model tries to look at the priorities. One such model by Crane and Matten (2004),42 _{in view of the uncertainty of the outcome}

of some decisions, measures the moral intensity (impact), by pondering:

•

The magnitude of the consequences – are some of the consequences too

serious for certain stakeholders?

•

The social consensus – is there a strong opposition by some who believe that the situation is unethical?

•

Probability of effect – what is the likelihood of an unacceptable ethical outcome?

•

Immediacy – are the consequences short- or long-term?

•

The proximity (moral distance) of the outcomes – is this affecting my

customers or close stakeholders?

•

Concentration of effort – is there a small, widespread negative effect or a concentrated one?

This model is mainly a consequential approach and does not hold moral abso- lutes in order to dilute the impact of a negative effect. This system could be quite helpful in trying to assess the most acceptable decision for a number of stakeholders.

A business model

The Bagley model43 _{is a fairly traditional approach and comprises three}

questions:

•

Is it legal?

•

Does it maximise shareholder value?

•

Is it ethical?

The model is a consequentialist one, maximising shareholder value and it has two levels for legal and ethical. Shareholder value might be justified on the basis of benefit to other stakeholders, and boundaries will probably be created to link cost to long-term or non-financial benefit. Managers are likely to balance maximising shareholder value with giving benefit to other stakeholders. A company culture will give some indication though culture is strengthened by ethical guidelines to allow some delegation of such decision-making.

The case of Nick Leeson and Barings Bank is illustrative of the way in which an unsupervised policy led to unethical practice for the bank, leading to disas- trous results. The bankruptcy of the bank led to loss of jobs, and account holders and customers and others lost money in the crash. The consequences were unplanned, but could be defined as unethical in the process and not the

consequence in spite of the high reputation of the bank, based on employee and customer trust previously. The bank collapsed in February 1995, losing £1.4bn after a prolonged trading spree by Far East manager, Nick Leeson, who ‘got out of his depth’ in the trading of future incomes which failed to materialise in a downward market.

As an alternative to Bagley, a more Kantian approach might be adopted which is based upon ‘doing it right’ and being consistent in how you approach a problem while ensuring impartiality, integrity, respect, transparency and con- scientiousness. This is more of an internalisation of ethical awareness and ‘getting it right’. Many organisations would like to communicate this to their clients and customers to build confidence in a range of actions and it is more than a code of conduct which mainly is provided as a basic minimum.

A professional or virtue ethics model

The virtue ethics model needs to define a community of similar belief and value for the good of society, with a commitment to continuous improvement and building up a culture and social norms. Environment ethics falls into this category, which depends on building a widely acceptable concern to preserve scarce resources for the future of the planet, restrictions on pollution and CO₂ emissions to stop climate change and promoting good health. An example of this culture building is Ahrens’ (2003)44 _{ethics project to educate engineers who}

had a role to play in forming a consistent European ethical view of engineer- ing education, to improve interaction with partners and clients in terms of cooperation, contracting liability and environmental responsibilities, personal development and the relationship between values. The project to formalise some common beliefs for students of civil engineering came about because many engineers were finding themselves in multi-cultural projects where a culture of respect and commonly understood moral and ethical values could be established to ease conflict over decision-making and professional conduct. In addition, the European Council for Civil Engineers (ECCE) needs to consider the divergent views in awarding mutual recognition of professionals. These views dealt with a common understanding of professional behaviour towards colleagues, employees, clients and the public, and were intended to develop values in the area of functionality, health and safety, economy and prosperity. This project has a sense of creating common language and wider citizenship principles as the moral distance has been shortened by the desire for common trading and a more ‘level playing field’.

Blockley (2005)45 _{argues that ethics matters in the production of buildings}

because building professionals are human, and ethics is at the heart of being human and holding a moral responsibility towards each other, and therefore we can define standards of conduct. It also matters because we need to manage differences and relationships with each other and clients, and agree common standards of good and right. More specifically, it matters at the level of defining

quality and value in the buildings we produce and the jobs that we do in the built environment, where quality is a ‘degree of excellence’ and value is ‘the worth we give to the purposes we have both collectively and individually’. This is a useful application as it helps to define in terms of quality and value what a ‘good’ building is. Unethical action will therefore emerge from a superficial definition of quality as designed to specification, and value as functionality, as if all of us thought the same in these areas. Blockley concludes that the latter two levels take us deeper than a professional code of conduct and suggests some soft value scoring. The test that we should apply to our actions, after a respon- sible consideration of quality and value, is whether we would be able to ‘sleep soundly’ having taken those actions.

Reputation and integrity model

Harrison (2005)46 _{makes the point that ethical action based on the idea of}

building up integrity may be an apparent short-term moral action, but the decision to build integrity into the company to gain such an organisational reputation may be based on an egoististical long-term business aim to procure more business and be able to charge more for it. In truth, it is a position of mutual gain and not an entirely altruistic move – ‘for the good of society’. Reputation may be attached to a particular decision-maker such as a director or to an organisation as a whole. Buchanan and Badham (1999)47 _{define reputation}

as ‘a socially defined asset dependent on one’s behaviour and on the observa- tions, interpretations and memories of others’.

Buchanan and Badham are concerned not only with the ethical nature of the decision, but also the credentials of the decision-maker or in their context, the ‘change driver’, and use the term ‘warrant’ as a way of assessing the source of authority. A formal warrant is one sanctioned by the organisation’s ethical code and a tacit personal warrant relates to a manager’s assessment of an appropriate ethical action. They are also concerned with the wider effect on the stakeholders. This leads to a four-part procedure to test the ethics of an action

In document Capacitación a los docentes de preescolar acerca de la importancia del vínculo entre el desarrollo motor del niño y la lectoescritura (página 50-0)