Status.net

Ethical Decision Making Models and 6 Steps of Ethical Decision Making Process

By Andre Wyatt on March 21, 2023 — 10 minutes to read

In many ways, ethics may feel like a soft subject, a conversation that can wait when compared to other more seemingly pressing issues (a process for operations, hiring the right workers, and meeting company goals). However, putting ethics on the backburner can spell trouble for any organization. Much like the process of businesses creating the company mission, vision, and principles ; the topic of ethics has to enter the conversation. Ethics is far more than someone doing the right thing; it is many times tied to legal procedures and policies that if breached can put an organization in the midst of trouble.

  • A general definition of business ethics is that it is a tool an organization uses to make sure that managers, employees, and senior leadership always act responsibly in the workplace with internal and external stakeholders.
  • An ethical decision-making model is a framework that leaders use to bring these principles to the company and ensure they are followed.
  • Importance of Ethical Standards Part 1
  • Ethical Decision-Making Model Approach Part 2
  • Ethical Decision-Making Process Part 3
  • PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model Part 4
  • Character-Based Decision-Making Model Part 5

The Importance of Ethical Standards

Leaders have to develop ethical standards that employees in their company will be required to adhere to. This can help move the conversation toward using a model to decide when someone is in violation of ethics.

There are five sources of ethical standards:

Utilitarian

Common good.

While many of these standards were created by Greek Philosophers who lived long ago, business leaders are still using many of them to determine how they deal with ethical issues. Many of these standards can lead to a cohesive ethical decision-making model.

What is the purpose of an ethical decision-making model?

Ethical decision-making models are designed to help individuals and organizations make decisions in an ethical manner.

The purpose of an ethical decision-making model is to ensure that decisions are made in a manner that takes into account the ethical implications for all stakeholders involved.

Ethical decision-making models provide a framework for analyzing ethical dilemmas and serve as a guide for identifying potential solutions. By utilizing these models, businesses can ensure they are making decisions that align with their values while minimizing the risk of harming stakeholders. This can result in better decision-making and improved reputation.

Why is it important to use an ethical decision making model?

Making ethical decisions is an integral part of being a responsible leader and member of society. It is crucial to use an ethical decision making model to ensure that all stakeholders are taken into account and that decisions are made with the highest level of integrity. An ethical decision making model provides a framework for assessing the potential consequences of each choice, analyzing which option best aligns with personal values and organizational principles, and then acting on those conclusions.

An Empirical Approach to an Ethical Decision-Making Model

In 2011, a researcher at the University of Calgary in Calgary, Canada completed a study for the Journal of Business Ethics.

The research centered around an idea of rational egoism as a basis for developing ethics in the workplace.

She had 16 CEOs formulate principles for ethics through the combination of reasoning and intuition while forming and applying moral principles to an everyday circumstance where a question of ethics could be involved.

Through the process, the CEOs settled on a set of four principles:

  • self-interest
  • rationality

These were the general standards used by the CEOs in creating a decision about how they should deal with downsizing. While this is not a standard model, it does reveal the underlying ideas business leaders use to make ethical choices. These principles lead to standards that are used in ethical decision-making processes and moral frameworks.

How would you attempt to resolve a situation using an ethical decision-making model?

When facing a difficult situation, it can be beneficial to use an ethical decision-making model to help you come to the best possible solution. These models are based on the idea that you should consider the consequences of your decision, weigh the various options available, and consider the ethical implications of each choice. First, you should identify the problem or situation and clearly define what it is. Then, you must assess all of the possible outcomes of each choice and consider which one is most ethical. Once you have identified your preferred option, you should consult with others who may be affected by your decision to ensure that it aligns with their values and interests. You should evaluate the decision by considering how it affects yourself and others, as well as how it meets the expectations of your organization or institution.

The Ethical Decision-Making Process

Before a model can be utilized, leaders need to work through a set of steps to be sure they are bringing a comprehensive lens to handling ethical disputes or problems.

Take Time to Define the Problem

Consult resources and seek assistance, think about the lasting effects, consider regulations in other industries, decide on a decision, implement and evaluate.

While each situation may call for specific steps to come before others, this is a general process that leaders can use to approach ethical decision-making . We have talked about the approach; now it is time to discuss the lens that leaders can use to make the final decision that leads to implementation.

PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model

PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model is one of the most used and widely cited ethical models.

To create a clear and cohesive approach to implementing a solution to an ethical problem; the model is set in a way that it gives the leader “ ethical filters ” to make decisions.

It purposely leaves out anything related to making a profit so that leaders can focus on values instead of a potential impact on revenue.

The letters in PLUS each stand for a filter that leaders can use for decision-making:

  • P – Policies and Procedures: Is the decision in line with the policies laid out by the company?
  • L – Legal: Will this violate any legal parameters or regulations?
  • U – Universal: How does this relate to the values and principles established for the organization to operate? Is it in tune with core values and the company culture?
  • S – Self: Does it meet my standards of fairness and justice? This particular lens fits well with the virtue approach that is a part of the five common standards mentioned above.

These filters can even be applied to the process, so leaders have a clear ethical framework all along the way. Defining the problem automatically requires leaders to see if it is violating any of the PLUS ethical filters. It should also be used to assess the viability of any decisions that are being considered for implementation, and make a decision about whether the one that was chosen resolved the PLUS considerations questioned in the first step. No model is perfect, but this is a standard way to consider four vital components that have a substantial ethical impact .

The Character-Based Decision-Making Model

While this one is not as widely cited as the PLUS Model, it is still worth mentioning. The Character-Based Decision-Making Model was created by the Josephson Institute of Ethics, and it has three main components leaders can use to make an ethical decision.

  • All decisions must take into account the impact to all stakeholders – This is very similar to the Utilitarian approach discussed earlier. This step seeks to do good for most, and hopefully avoid harming others.
  • Ethics always takes priority over non-ethical values  – A decision should not be rationalized if it in any way violates ethical principles. In business, this can show up through deciding between increasing productivity or profit and keeping an employee’s best interest at heart.
  • It is okay to violate another ethical principle if it advances a better ethical climate for others  – Leaders may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to prioritize ethical decisions. They may have to choose between competing ethical choices, and this model advises that leaders should always want the one that creates the most good for as many people as possible.

There are multiple components to consider when making an ethical decision. Regulations, policies and procedures, perception, public opinion, and even a leader’s morality play a part in how decisions that question business ethics should be handled. While no approach is perfect, a well-thought-out process and useful framework can make dealing with ethical situations easier.

  • How to Resolve Employee Conflict at Work [Steps, Tips, Examples]
  • 5 Challenges and 10 Solutions to Improve Employee Feedback Process
  • How to Identify and Handle Employee Underperformance? 5 Proven Steps
  • Organizational Development: 4 Main Steps and 8 Proven Success Factors
  • 7 Steps to Leading Virtual Teams to Success
  • 7 Steps to Create the Best Value Proposition [How-To’s and Best Practices]

ethical approach to problem solving

Thinking Ethically

  • Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
  • Ethics Resources
  • Ethical Decision Making

Moral issues greet us each morning in the newspaper, confront us in the memos on our desks, nag us from our children's soccer fields, and bid us good night on the evening news. We are bombarded daily with questions about the justice of our foreign policy, the morality of medical technologies that can prolong our lives, the rights of the homeless, the fairness of our children's teachers to the diverse students in their classrooms.

Dealing with these moral issues is often perplexing. How, exactly, should we think through an ethical issue? What questions should we ask? What factors should we consider?

The first step in analyzing moral issues is obvious but not always easy: Get the facts. Some moral issues create controversies simply because we do not bother to check the facts. This first step, although obvious, is also among the most important and the most frequently overlooked.

But having the facts is not enough. Facts by themselves only tell us what is ; they do not tell us what ought to be. In addition to getting the facts, resolving an ethical issue also requires an appeal to values. Philosophers have developed five different approaches to values to deal with moral issues.

The Utilitarian Approach Utilitarianism was conceived in the 19th century by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill to help legislators determine which laws were morally best. Both Bentham and Mill suggested that ethical actions are those that provide the greatest balance of good over evil.

To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify the various courses of action available to us. Second, we ask who will be affected by each action and what benefits or harms will be derived from each. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest benefits and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the greatest number.

The Rights Approach The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused on the individual's right to choose for herself or himself. According to these philosophers, what makes human beings different from mere things is that people have dignity based on their ability to choose freely what they will do with their lives, and they have a fundamental moral right to have these choices respected. People are not objects to be manipulated; it is a violation of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely choose.

Of course, many different, but related, rights exist besides this basic one. These other rights (an incomplete list below) can be thought of as different aspects of the basic right to be treated as we choose.

The right to the truth: We have a right to be told the truth and to be informed about matters that significantly affect our choices.

The right of privacy: We have the right to do, believe, and say whatever we choose in our personal lives so long as we do not violate the rights of others.

The right not to be injured: We have the right not to be harmed or injured unless we freely and knowingly do something to deserve punishment or we freely and knowingly choose to risk such injuries.

The right to what is agreed: We have a right to what has been promised by those with whom we have freely entered into a contract or agreement.

In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach, then, we must ask, Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone? Actions are wrong to the extent that they violate the rights of individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the action.

The Fairness or Justice Approach The fairness or justice approach to ethics has its roots in the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, who said that "equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally." The basic moral question in this approach is: How fair is an action? Does it treat everyone in the same way, or does it show favoritism and discrimination?

Favoritism gives benefits to some people without a justifiable reason for singling them out; discrimination imposes burdens on people who are no different from those on whom burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism and discrimination are unjust and wrong.

The Common-Good Approach This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own good is inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community members are bound by the pursuit of common values and goals.

The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. More recently, contemporary ethicist John Rawls defined the common good as "certain general conditions that are...equally to everyone's advantage."

In this approach, we focus on ensuring that the social policies, social systems, institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Examples of goods common to all include affordable health care, effective public safety, peace among nations, a just legal system, and an unpolluted environment.

Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society. While respecting and valuing the freedom of individuals to pursue their own goals, the common-good approach challenges us also to recognize and further those goals we share in common.

The Virtue Approach The virtue approach to ethics assumes that there are certain ideals toward which we should strive, which provide for the full development of our humanity. These ideals are discovered through thoughtful reflection on what kind of people we have the potential to become.

Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our highest potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues.

Virtues are like habits; that is, once acquired, they become characteristic of a person. Moreover, a person who has developed virtues will be naturally disposed to act in ways consistent with moral principles. The virtuous person is the ethical person.

In dealing with an ethical problem using the virtue approach, we might ask, What kind of person should I be? What will promote the development of character within myself and my community?

Ethical Problem Solving These five approaches suggest that once we have ascertained the facts, we should ask ourselves five questions when trying to resolve a moral issue:

What benefits and what harms will each course of action produce, and which alternative will lead to the best overall consequences?

What moral rights do the affected parties have, and which course of action best respects those rights?

Which course of action treats everyone the same, except where there is a morally justifiable reason not to, and does not show favoritism or discrimination?

Which course of action advances the common good?

Which course of action develops moral virtues?

This method, of course, does not provide an automatic solution to moral problems. It is not meant to. The method is merely meant to help identify most of the important ethical considerations. In the end, we must deliberate on moral issues for ourselves, keeping a careful eye on both the facts and on the ethical considerations involved.

This article updates several previous pieces from Issues in Ethics by Manuel Velasquez - Dirksen Professor of Business Ethics at Santa Clara University and former Center director - and Claire Andre, associate Center director. "Thinking Ethically" is based on a framework developed by the authors in collaboration with Center Director Thomas Shanks, S.J., Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good Michael J. Meyer, and others. The framework is used as the basis for many programs and presentations at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.

  • Creating Environments Conducive to Social Interaction

Thinking Ethically: A Framework for Moral Decision Making

  • Developing a Positive Climate with Trust and Respect
  • Developing Self-Esteem, Confidence, Resiliency, and Mindset
  • Developing Ability to Consider Different Perspectives
  • Developing Tools and Techniques Useful in Social Problem-Solving
  • Leadership Problem-Solving Model
  • A Problem-Solving Model for Improving Student Achievement
  • Six-Step Problem-Solving Model
  • Hurson’s Productive Thinking Model: Solving Problems Creatively
  • The Power of Storytelling and Play
  • Creative Documentation & Assessment
  • Materials for Use in Creating “Third Party” Solution Scenarios
  • Resources for Connecting Schools to Communities
  • Resources for Enabling Students

These 5 approaches and their history can be found at:

Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v7n1/thinking.html

Frontline Initiative Code of Ethics

The right decision method: an approach for solving ethical dilemmas.

Annie Johnson Sirek, MSW is a Project Coordinator at the Institute on Community Integration at the University of Minnesota. She thanks Marianne and Julie of the Human Services Research Institute, and Amy and Derek of the University of Minnesota, for developing this method to use in daily practice and training.

Share this page

  • Share this page on Facebook.
  • Share this page on Twitter.
  • Share this page on LinkedIn.
  • Share this page on Pinterest.
  • Share this page via email.
  • Print this page.

What is an ethical dilemma? 

An ethical dilemma requires a person to define right from wrong. But, as Direct Support Professionals (DSPs), we know that this is not so simple. We face difficult decisions in our daily practice. There are often many different rules, principles, and opinions at play. We are called to respond in allegiance to the individuals we support. The National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals (NADSP) Code of Ethics provides a roadmap to assist in resolving ethical dilemmas.

How do I resolve ethical dilemmas? 

Ethical dilemmas can be resolved through effective decision-making. Since we are so often called upon to make independent judgments, it is important to incorporate the NADSP Code of Ethics within our daily practice. Many ethical dilemmas can be resolved easily with consultation and reflection. However, some issues cannot. Therefore, to help make it easier to solve difficult ethical dilemmas, consider a framework from which to work. The College of Direct Support has provided an approach to ethical decision-making with the NADSP Code of Ethics. This is called the RIGHT Decision Method. 

RIGHT Decision Method 

  • Recognize the ethical dilemma.
  • Identify points of view.
  • Gather resources and assistance.
  • Have a plan.
  • Take action based on ethical standards.

What is the RIGHT Decision Method? 

Sometimes there really is a “right” way to make decisions under difficult conditions. The RIGHT Decision Method gives us tools to make sound ethical decisions and resolve ethical dilemmas. RIGHT is an acronym that stands for each step of the decision-making process:

R: Recognize the ethical dilemma. 

The first step is recognizing the conflicting obligations and clearly stating the dilemma. It is important to recognize and use the NADSP Code of Ethics as you begin with this step. You may consider —

  • In what ways is the Code of Ethics applicable to this issue?


I: Identify points of view. 

The second step is identifying points of view in the situation. This means considering the viewpoint of the person receiving services, your colleagues, other parties involved, and the NADSP Code of Ethics. Restating the problem clearly to someone else can also help you check out whether you have interpreted the situation accurately. It is important to understand how the person receiving supports feels. Consider —

  • What does the person receiving support expect?

  • Then think about others who are involved in the situation and how they feel.

  • What do these individuals want or need?


G: Gather resources and assistance. 

The third step is gathering resources and assistance that might help you figure out what to do. Now that you have an accurate understanding for the problem and various perspectives, this step encourages you to consider other people who may be able to assist you. You may also need to find important information. For example —

  • Are there agency policies that could be considered? What do these documents say? Are there any laws or regulations in the state that may influence your decision-making?

  • Is this a situation where legal advice is needed? Does the person have a legal representative who must be involved?

  • Are there community resources that might help resolve the problem?


H: Have a plan. 

The fourth step means that you are ready to make your decision. Formulating a plan will help you decide the best way to put your ideas into action. Once you have considered the following issues, write a plan down and identify step-by-step actions that you plan to take —

  • Whom must you speak to first? What will you say? What preparations will you make?

  • What steps can you take to ensure the best possible outcome for your decision?

  • How might people react?


T: Take action based on ethical standards.  

The fifth and final step is implementing the plan you developed in the manner you decided. Then, it is important to monitor its success using the success indicators you identified in the planning process to help you reflect on your decision —

  • What worked well and why?

  • What did not work well and why?

  • What would you do differently after you have evaluated your outcomes?

  • Taylor, M., Silver, J., Hewitt, A., & Nord, D. (2006). Applying ethics in everyday work (Lesson 3) . In College of Direct Support course: Direct support professionalism (Revision 2) . DirectCourse.

Icon(s) used on this page:

External Link Indicator Icon

Discover the latest MyICAEW app for ACA students and members, available to download now. Find out more

  • Benefits of membership

Gain access to world-leading information resources, guidance and local networks.

  • Visit Benefits of membership

Becoming a member

98% of the best global brands rely on ICAEW Chartered Accountants.

  • Visit Becoming a member
  • Pay fees and subscriptions

Your membership subscription enables ICAEW to provide support to members.

Fees and subscriptions

Member rewards.

Take advantage of the range of value added or discounted member benefits.

  • Member rewards – More from your membership
  • Technical and ethics support
  • Support throughout your career

Information and resources for every stage of your career.

Member Insights Survey

Let us know about the issues affecting you, your business and your clients.

  • Complete the survey

From software start-ups to high-flying airlines and high street banks, 98% of the best global brands rely on ICAEW Chartered Accountants. A career as an ICAEW Chartered Accountant means the opportunity to work in any organisation, in any sector, whatever your ambitions.

Everything you need to know about ICAEW annual membership fees, community and faculty subscriptions, eligibility for reduced rates and details of how you can pay.

Membership administration

Welcome to the ICAEW members area: your portal to members'-only content, offers, discounts, regulations and membership information.

  • Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is an integral part of being a successful ICAEW Chartered Accountant.

The ICAEW Chartered Accountant qualification, the ACA, is one of the most advanced learning and professional development programmes available. It is valued around the world in business, practice and the public sector.

3 people huddled at desk

ACA for employers

Train the next generation of chartered accountants in your business or organisation. Discover how your organisation can attract, train and retain the best accountancy talent, how to become authorised to offer ACA training and the support and guidance on offer if you are already providing training.

Digital learning materials via BibliU

All ACA, ICAEW CFAB and Level 4 apprenticeship learning materials are now digital only. Read our guide on how to access your learning materials on the ICAEW Bookshelf using the BibliU app or through your browser.

  • Find out more

Take a look at ICAEW training films

Focusing on professional scepticism, ethics and everyday business challenges, our training films are used by firms and companies around the world to support their in-house training and business development teams.

Attract and retain the next generation of accounting and finance professionals with our world-leading accountancy qualifications. Become authorised to offer ACA training and help your business stay ahead.

CPD guidance and help

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is an integral part of being a successful ICAEW Chartered Accountant. Find support on ICAEW's CPD requirements and access resources to help your professional development.

Leadership Development Programmes

ICAEW Academy’s in-depth leadership development programmes take a holistic approach to combine insightful mentoring or coaching, to exclusive events, peer learning groups and workshops. Catering for those significant transitions in your career, these leadership development programmes are instrumental to achieving your ambitions or fulfilling your succession planning goals.

Specialist Finance Qualifications & Programmes

Whatever future path you choose, ICAEW will support the development and acceleration of your career at each stage to enhance your career.

 Young people

Why a career in chartered accountancy?

If you think chartered accountants spend their lives confined to their desks, then think again. They are sitting on the boards of multinational companies, testifying in court and advising governments, as well as supporting charities and businesses from every industry all over the world.

  • Why chartered accountancy?

 Telescope

Search for qualified ACA jobs

Matching highly skilled ICAEW members with attractive organisations seeking talented accountancy and finance professionals.

Volunteering roles

Helping skilled and in-demand chartered accountants give back and strengthen not-for-profit sector with currently over 2,300 organisations posting a variety of volunteering roles with ICAEW.

  • Search for volunteer roles
  • Get ahead by volunteering

Advertise with ICAEW

From as little as £495, access to a pool of highly qualified and ambitious ACA qualified members with searchable CVs.

Early careers and training

Start your ACA training with ICAEW. Find out why a career in chartered accountancy could be for you and how to become a chartered accountant.

Qualified ACA careers

Find Accountancy and Finance Jobs

Voluntary roles

Find Voluntary roles

While you pursue the most interesting and rewarding opportunities at every stage of your career, we’re here to offer you support whatever stage you are or wherever you are in the world and in whichever sector you have chosen to work.

ACA students

"how to guides" for aca students.

  • ACA student guide
  • How to book an exam
  • How to apply for credit for prior learning (CPL)
  • ACA student induction webinar

Exam resources

Here are some resources you will find useful while you study for the ACA qualification.

  • Certificate Level
  • Professional Level
  • Advanced Level

Digital learning materials

All ACA learning materials are now digital only. Read our guide on how to access your learning materials on the ICAEW Bookshelf via the BibliU app, or through your browser.

  • Read the guide

My online training file

Once you are registered as an ACA student, you'll be able to access your training file to log your progress throughout ACA training.

  • Access your training file
  • Student Insights

Fresh insights, innovative ideas and an inside look at the lives and careers of our ICAEW students and members.

  • Read the latest articles

System status checks

Getting started.

Welcome to ICAEW! We have pulled together a selection of resources to help you get started with your ACA training, including our popular 'How To' series, which offers step-by-step guidance on everything from registering as an ACA student and applying for CPL, to using your online training file.

Credit for prior learning (CPL)

Credit for prior learning or CPL is our term for exemptions. High quality learning and assessment in other relevant qualifications is appropriately recognised by the award of CPL.

Apply for exams

What you need to know in order to apply for the ACA exams.

The ACA qualification has 15 modules over three levels. They are designed to complement the practical experience you will be gaining in the workplace. They will also enable you to gain in-depth knowledge across a broad range of topics in accountancy, finance and business. Here are some useful resources while you study.

  • Exam results

You will receive your results for all Certificate Level exams, the day after you take the exam and usually five weeks after a Professional and Advanced Level exam session has taken place. Access your latest and archived exam results here.

Training agreement

Putting your theory work into practice is essential to complete your ACA training.

Student support and benefits

We are here to support you throughout your ACA journey. We have a range of resources and services on offer for you to unwrap, from exam resources, to student events and discount cards. Make sure you take advantage of the wealth of exclusive benefits available to you, all year round.

  • Applying for membership

The ACA will open doors to limitless opportunities in all areas of accountancy, business and finance anywhere in the world. ICAEW Chartered Accountants work at the highest levels as finance directors, CEOs and partners of some of the world’s largest organisations.

ACA training FAQs

Do you have a question about the ACA training? Then look no further. Here, you can find answers to frequently asked questions relating to the ACA qualification and training. Find out more about each of the integrated components of the ACA, as well as more information on the syllabus, your training agreement, ICAEW’s rules and regulations and much more.

  • Anti-money laundering

Guidance and resources to help members comply with their legal and professional responsibilities around AML.

Technical releases

ICAEW Technical Releases are a source of good practice guidance on technical and practice issues relevant to ICAEW Chartered Accountants and other finance professionals.

  • ICAEW Technical Releases
  • Thought leadership

ICAEW's Thought Leadership reports provide clarity and insight on the current and future challenges to the accountancy profession. Our charitable trusts also provide funding for academic research into accountancy.

  • Academic research funding

Technical Advisory Services helpsheets

Practical, technical and ethical guidance highlighting the most important issues for members, whether in practice or in business.

  • ICAEW Technical Advisory Services helpsheets

Bloomsbury – free for eligible firms

In partnership with Bloomsbury Professional, ICAEW have provided eligible firms with free access to Bloomsbury’s comprehensive online library of over 60 titles from leading tax and accounting subject matter experts.

  • Bloomsbury Accounting and Tax Service

Country resources

Our resources by country provide access to intelligence on over 170 countries and territories including economic forecasts, guides to doing business and information on the tax climate in each jurisdiction.

Industries and sectors

Thought leadership, technical resources and professional guidance to support the professional development of members working in specific industries and sectors.

Audit and Assurance

The audit, assurance and internal audit area has information and guidance on technical and practical matters in relation to these three areas of practice. There are links to events, publications, technical help and audit representations.

The most up-to-date thought leadership, insights, technical resources and professional guidance to support ICAEW members working in and with industry with their professional development.

  • Corporate Finance

Companies, advisers and investors making decisions about creating, developing and acquiring businesses – and the wide range of advisory careers that require this specialist professional expertise.

  • Corporate governance

Corporate governance is the system by which companies are directed and controlled. Find out more about corporate governance principles, codes and reports, Board subcommittees, roles and responsibilities and shareholder relations. Corporate governance involves balancing the interests of a company’s many stakeholders, such as shareholders, employees, management, customers, suppliers, financiers and the community. Getting governance right is essential to build public trust in companies.

Corporate reporting

View a range of practical resources on UK GAAP, IFRS, UK regulation for company accounts and non-financial reporting. Plus find out more about the ICAEW Corporate Reporting Faculty.

Expert analysis on the latest national and international economic issues and trends, and interviews with prominent voices across the finance industry, alongside data on the state of the economy.

  • Financial Services

View articles and resources on the financial services sector.

  • Practice resources

For ICAEW's members in practice, this area brings together the most up-to-date thought leadership, technical resources and professional guidance to help you in your professional life.

Public Sector

Many ICAEW members work in or with the public sector to deliver public priorities and strong public finances. ICAEW acts in the public interest to support strong financial leadership and better financial management across the public sector – featuring transparency, accountability, governance and ethics – to ensure that public money is spent wisely and that public finances are sustainable.

Sustainability and climate change

Sustainability describes a world that does not live by eating into its capital, whether natural, economic or social. Members in practice, in business and private individuals all have a role to play if sustainability goals are to be met. The work being undertaken by ICAEW in this area is to change behaviour to drive sustainable outcomes.

The Tax area has information and guidance on technical and practical tax matters. There are links to events, the latest tax news and the Tax Faculty’s publications, including helpsheets, webinars and Tax representations.

Keep up-to-date with tech issues and developments, including artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain, big data, and cyber security.

  • Trust & Ethics

Guidance and resources on key issues, including economic crime, business law, better regulation and ethics. Read through ICAEW’s Code of Ethics and supporting information.

Communities

Polaroids on pinboard

ICAEW Communities

Information, insights, guidance and networking opportunities on a range of industry sectors, professional specialisms and at various stages throughout your career.

  • Discover a new community

Faculties

ICAEW Faculties

The accountancy profession is facing change and uncertainty. The ICAEW Faculties can help by providing you with timely and relevant support.

  • Choose to join any of the faculties

UK groups and societies

We have teams on the ground in: East of England, the Midlands, London and South East, Northern, South West, Yorkshire and Humberside, Wales and Scotland.

  • Access your UK region

Worldwide support and services

Support and services we offer our members in Africa, America, Canada, the Caribbean, Europe, Greater China, the Middle East, Oceania and South East Asia.

  • Discover our services

ICAEW Faculties are 'centres of technical excellence', strongly committed to enhancing your professional development and helping you to meet your CPD requirements every year. They offer exclusive content, events and webinars, customised for your sector - which you should be able to easily record, when the time comes for the completion of your CPD declaration. Our offering isn't exclusive to Institute members. As a faculty member, the same resources are available to you to ensure you stay ahead of the competition.

Communities by industry / sector

Communities by life stage and workplace, communities by professional specialism, local groups and societies.

We aim to support you wherever in the world you work. Our regional offices and network of volunteers run events and provide access to local accounting updates in major finance centres around the globe.

  • Ukraine crisis: central resource hub

Learn about the actions that ICAEW members are taking to ensure that their clients comply with sanctions imposed by different countries and jurisdictions, and read about the support available from ICAEW.

Insights pulls together the best opinion, analysis, interviews, videos and podcasts on the key issues affecting accountancy and business.

  • See the latest insights
  • Making COP count

This series looks at the role the accountancy profession can play in addressing the climate crisis and building a sustainable economy.

  • Read more on COP28

Professional development and skills

With new requirements on ICAEW members for continuing professional development, we bring together resources to support you through the changes and look at the skills accountants need for the future.

  • Visit the hub

When Chartered Accountants Save The World

Find out how chartered accountants are helping to tackle some of the most urgent social challenges within the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and explore how the profession could do even more.

  • Read our major series

Insights specials

A listing of one-off Insights specials that focus on a particular subject, interviewing the key people, identifying developing trends and examining the underlying issues.

Top podcasts

Insights by topic.

Regulation graphic

ICAEW Regulation

Regulation graphic

  • Regulatory News

View the latest regulatory updates and guidance and subscribe to our monthly newsletter, Regulatory & Conduct News.

  • Regulatory Consultations

Strengthening trust in the profession

Our role as a world-leading improvement regulator is to strengthen trust and protect the public. We do this by enabling, evaluating and enforcing the highest standards in the profession. 

Regulatory applications

Find out how you can become authorised by ICAEW as a regulated firm. 

ICAEW codes and regulations

Professional conduct and complaints, statutory regulated services overseen by icaew, regulations for icaew practice members and firms, additional guidance and support, popular search results.

  • Practice Exam Software
  • Training File
  • Exam Results
  • Routes to the ACA
  • ACA students membership application
  • Join as a member of another body
  • How much are membership fees?
  • How to pay your fees
  • Receipts and invoices
  • What if my circumstances have changed?
  • Difficulties in making changes to your membership
  • Faculty and community subscription fees
  • Updating your details
  • Complete annual return
  • Promoting myself as an ICAEW member
  • Verification of ICAEW membership
  • Become a life member
  • Become a fellow
  • Request a new certificate
  • Report the death of a member
  • Membership regulations
  • New members
  • Career progression
  • Career Breakers
  • Volunteering at schools and universities
  • ICAEW Member App
  • Working internationally
  • Self employment
  • Support Members Scheme
  • CPD is changing
  • CPD learning resources
  • Your guide to CPD
  • Online CPD record
  • How to become a chartered accountant
  • Register as a student
  • Train as a member of another body
  • More about the ACA and chartered accountancy
  • How ACA training works
  • Become a training employer
  • Access the training file
  • Why choose the ACA
  • Training routes
  • Employer support hub
  • Get in touch
  • Apprenticeships with ICAEW
  • A-Z of CPD courses by topic
  • ICAEW Business and Finance Professional (BFP)
  • ICAEW flagship events
  • Financial Talent Executive Network (F-TEN®)
  • Developing Leadership in Practice (DLiP™)
  • Network of Finance Leaders (NFL)
  • Women in Leadership (WiL)
  • Mentoring and coaching
  • Partners in Learning
  • Board Director's Programme e-learning
  • Corporate Finance Qualification
  • Diploma in Charity Accounting
  • ICAEW Certificate in Insolvency
  • ICAEW Data Analytics Certificate
  • Financial Modeling Institute’s Advanced Financial Modeler Accreditation
  • ICAEW Sustainability Certificate for Finance Professionals
  • ICAEW Finance in a Digital World Programme
  • All specialist qualifications
  • Team training
  • Start your training
  • Improve your employability
  • Search employers
  • Find a role
  • Role alerts
  • Organisations
  • Practice support – 11 ways ICAEW and CABA can help you
  • News and advice
  • ICAEW Volunteering Hub
  • Support in becoming a chartered accountant
  • Vacancies at ICAEW
  • ICAEW boards and committees
  • Exam system status
  • ICAEW systems: status update
  • Changes to our qualifications
  • How-to guides for ACA students
  • ACA induction presentation
  • Apply for credits - Academic qualification
  • Apply for credits - Professional qualification
  • Credit for prior learning (CPL)/exemptions FAQs
  • Applications for Professional and Advanced Level exams
  • Applications for Certificate Level exams
  • Tuition providers
  • Latest exam results
  • Archived exam results
  • Getting your results
  • Marks feedback service
  • Marks review service
  • Training agreement: overview
  • Professional development
  • Ethics and professional scepticism
  • Practical work experience
  • Access your online training file
  • How training works in your country
  • Student rewards
  • TOTUM PRO Card
  • Student events and volunteering
  • Xero cloud accounting certifications
  • Student support
  • Join a community
  • Wellbeing support from caba
  • Code of ethics
  • Fit and proper
  • Level 4 Accounting Technician Apprenticeship
  • Level 7 Accountancy Professional Apprenticeship
  • AAT-ACA Fast Track FAQs
  • ACA rules and regulations FAQs
  • ACA syllabus FAQs
  • ACA training agreement FAQs
  • Audit experience and the Audit Qualification FAQs
  • Independent student FAQs
  • Practical work experience FAQs
  • Professional development FAQs
  • Six-monthly reviews FAQs
  • Ethics and professional scepticism FAQs
  • Greater China
  • Latin America
  • Middle East
  • North America
  • Australasia
  • Russia and Eurasia
  • South East Asia
  • Charity Community
  • Construction & Real Estate
  • Energy & Natural Resources Community
  • Farming & Rural Business Community
  • Forensic & Expert Witness
  • Global Trade Community
  • Healthcare Community
  • Internal Audit Community
  • Manufacturing Community
  • Media & Leisure
  • Portfolio Careers Community
  • Small and Micro Business Community
  • Small Practitioners Community
  • Travel, Tourism & Hospitality Community
  • Valuation Community
  • Audit and corporate governance reform
  • Audit & Assurance Faculty
  • Professional judgement
  • Regulation and working in audit
  • Internal audit resource centre
  • Everything business
  • Latest Business news from Insights
  • Strategy, risk and innovation
  • Business performance management
  • Financial management
  • Finance transformation
  • Economy and business environment
  • Leadership, personal development and HR
  • Webinars and publications
  • Business restructuring
  • The Business Finance Guide
  • Capital markets and investment
  • Corporate finance careers
  • Corporate Finance Faculty
  • Debt advisory and growth finance
  • Mergers and acquisitions
  • Private equity
  • Start-ups, scale-ups and venture capital
  • Transaction services
  • Board committees
  • Corporate governance codes and reports
  • Corporate Governance Community
  • Connect and Reflect
  • Principles of corporate governance
  • Roles, duties and responsibilities of Board members
  • Shareholder relations
  • Corporate reporting resources
  • Small and micro entity reporting
  • UK Regulation for Company Accounts
  • Non-financial reporting
  • Improving Corporate Reporting
  • Economy home
  • ICAEW Business Confidence Monitor
  • ICAEW Manifesto 2024
  • Energy crisis
  • Levelling up: rebalancing the UK’s economy
  • Resilience and Renewal: Building an economy fit for the future
  • Social mobility and inclusion
  • Autumn Statement 2023
  • Investment management
  • Inspiring confidence
  • Setting up in practice
  • Running your practice
  • Supporting your clients
  • Practice technology
  • TAS helpsheets
  • Support for business advisers
  • Join ICAEW BAS
  • Public Sector hub
  • Public Sector Audit and Assurance
  • Public Sector Finances
  • Public Sector Financial Management
  • Public Sector Financial Reporting
  • Public Sector Learning & Development
  • Public Sector Community
  • Latest public sector articles from Insights
  • Climate hub
  • Sustainable Development Goals
  • Accountability
  • Modern slavery
  • Resources collection
  • Sustainability Committee
  • Sustainability & Climate Change community
  • Sustainability and climate change home
  • Tax Faculty
  • Budgets and legislation
  • Business tax
  • Devolved taxes
  • Employment taxes
  • International taxes
  • Making Tax Digital
  • Personal tax
  • Property tax
  • Stamp duty land tax
  • Tax administration
  • Tax compliance and investigation
  • UK tax rates, allowances and reliefs
  • Artificial intelligence
  • Blockchain and cryptoassets
  • Cyber security
  • Data Analytics Community
  • Digital skills
  • Excel community
  • Finance in a Digital World
  • IT management
  • Technology and the profession
  • Trust & Ethics home
  • Better regulation
  • Business Law
  • Company law
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Economic crime
  • Help with ethical problems
  • ICAEW Code of Ethics
  • ICAEW Trust and Ethics team.....
  • Solicitors Community
  • Forensic & Expert Witness Community
  • Latest articles on business law, trust and ethics
  • Audit and Assurance Faculty
  • Corporate Reporting Faculty
  • Financial Services Faculty
  • Academia & Education Community
  • Construction & Real Estate Community
  • Entertainment, Sport & Media Community
  • Retail Community
  • Career Breakers Community
  • Black Members Community
  • Diversity & Inclusion Community
  • Women in Finance Community
  • Personal Financial Planning Community
  • Restructuring & Insolvency Community
  • Sustainability and Climate Change Community
  • London and East
  • South Wales
  • Yorkshire and Humberside
  • European public policy activities
  • ICAEW Middle East, Africa and South Asia
  • Latest news
  • Access to finance special
  • Attractiveness of the profession
  • Audit and Fraud
  • Audit and technology
  • Adopting non-financial reporting standards
  • Cost of doing business
  • Mental health and wellbeing
  • Pensions and Personal Finance
  • Public sector financial and non-financial reporting
  • More specials ...
  • The economics of biodiversity
  • How chartered accountants can help to safeguard trust in society
  • Video: The financial controller who stole £20,000 from her company
  • It’s time for chartered accountants to save the world
  • Video: The CFO who tried to trick the market
  • Video: Could invoice fraud affect your business?
  • Where next for audit and governance reform?
  • A taxing year ahead?
  • What can we expect from 2024?
  • COP28: making the business case for nature
  • COP28: what does transition planning mean for accountants?
  • What’s in the Economic Crime Act 2023?
  • ICAEW/CIPFA dual membership, cyber security trends, and economic renewal
  • How to build a workforce of the future
  • VAT exemptions for private schools and final CPD update
  • The PM’s pledges: where are we now?
  • Commercial property: economic bellwether or laggard?
  • More podcasts...
  • Top charts of the week
  • EU and international trade
  • CEO and President's insights
  • Diversity and Inclusion
  • Sponsored content
  • Insights index
  • Charter and Bye-laws
  • Archive of complaints, disciplinary and fitness processes, statutory regulations and ICAEW regulations
  • Qualifications regulations
  • Training and education regulations
  • How to make a complaint
  • Guidance on your duty to report misconduct
  • Public hearings
  • What to do if you receive a complaint against you
  • Anti-money laundering supervision
  • Working in the regulated area of audit
  • Local public audit in England
  • Probate services
  • Designated Professional Body (Investment Business) licence
  • Consumer credit
  • Quality Assurance monitoring: view from the firms
  • The ICAEW Practice Assurance scheme
  • Licensed Practice scheme
  • Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII)
  • Clients' Money Regulations
  • Taxation (PCRT) Regulations
  • ICAEW training films
  • Helpsheets and guidance by topic
  • ICAEW's regulatory expertise and history

Framework for resolving ethical problems

A framework to help resolve ethical problems starting with identifying the problems and parties involved to implementing the course of action and monitoring its progress.

When trying to solve an ethical problem, you may find it useful to refer to the following framework, which is based on the framework included in  ICAEW's Code of Ethics .

The ethics advisory team has also developed a Resolving ethical issues flowchart to help members resolve ethical issues as they arise.

  • View the flowchart

ICAEW framework - how to resolve ethical problems

1) gather the relevant facts and identify the problems.

  • Do I have all the facts relevant to the situation?
  • Am I making assumptions? If so, could facts be identified to replace these assumptions?
  • Is it really your problem? Can anybody else help?

2) Identify the affected parties

  • Who are the individuals, organisations and key stakeholders affected?
  • In what way are they affected?
  • Are there conflicts between different stakeholders?
  • Who are your allies?

3) Consider the ethical issues involved

  • Have you referred to ICAEW's Code of Ethics?
  • What are the professional, organisational and personal ethics issues?
  • Would these ethical issues affect the reputation of the accountancy profession?
  • Would these ethical issues affect the public interest?

4) Identify which fundamental principles are affected

  • What are the threats to compliance with the fundamental principles of:
  • Objectivity
  • Professional competence and due care
  • Confidentiality
  • Professional behaviour
  • Have you considered the following threats?
  • Self interest
  • Self-review
  • Familiarity
  • Intimidation
  • If so, are the treats to compliance with the fundamental principles clearly insignificant?
  • Are there safeguards which can eliminate or reduce the threats to an acceptable level? Safeguards can be created by:
  • Profession, legislation and regulation
  • Work environment

5) Refer to the employing organisation's internal procedures

  • Does your organisation's policies and procedure provide guidance on the situation?
  • How can you escalate concerns within the organisation? Who should be involved, in what role and at what stage?
  • Does the organisation have a whistleblowing procedure?
  • At what point should you seek guidance from external sources such as ICAEW

6) Consider and evaluate alternative courses of action

  • You should consider:
  • Your organisation's policies, procedures and guidelines
  • Applicable laws and regulation
  • Universal values and principles generally accepted by society
  • Consequences
  • Test your proposed course of action. Ask yourself the following questions:
  • Have all the consequences associated with the proposed course of action been discussed and evaluated?
  • Is there any reason why the proposed course of action should not stand the test of time?
  • Would a similar course of action be undertaken in a similar situation?
  • Would the suggested course of action stand to scrutiny from peers, family and friends?

7) Implement the course of action and monitor its progress

When faced with an ethical issue, it may be in your best interests to document your thought processes, discussions and the decisions taken. Written records will be useful if you need to justify your course of action.

Other frameworks

In addition to ICAEW's framework for revolving ethical problems, there are a number of other frameworks for resolving such problems which you may find helpful.

  • Carter McMamara - Ethics Toolkit for Managers
  • Institute of Business Ethics - Simple Ethical Tests for a business decision
  • Jon Pekel and Doug Wallace -The Ten Step Method of Decision-Making (PDF 101KB/13 pages)
  • Josephson Institute of Ethics - Making Ethical Decisions
  • Markula Center for Applied Ethics - A framework for thinking ethically

Read out this code to the operator.

Library homepage

  • school Campus Bookshelves
  • menu_book Bookshelves
  • perm_media Learning Objects
  • login Login
  • how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
  • hub Instructor Commons
  • Download Page (PDF)
  • Download Full Book (PDF)
  • Periodic Table
  • Physics Constants
  • Scientific Calculator
  • Reference & Cite
  • Tools expand_more
  • Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

Business LibreTexts

2.2: Three Frameworks for Ethical Problem-Solving in Business and the Professions

  • Last updated
  • Save as PDF
  • Page ID 20497

  • William Frey and Jose a Cruz-Cruz
  • University of Puerto Rico - Mayaguez

Module Introduction

In this module, you will learn and practice three frameworks designed to integrate ethics into decision making in the areas of practical and occupational ethics. The first framework divides the decision making process into four stages: problem specification, solution generation, solution testing, and solution implementation. It is based on an analogy between ethics and design problems that is detailed in a table presented below. The second framework focuses on the process of testing solution alternatives for their ethics by deploying three ethics tests that will help you to evaluate and rank alternative courses of action. The reversibility, harm, and publicity tests each "encapsulate" or summarize an important ethical theory. Finally, a feasibility test will help you to uncover interest, resource, and technical constraints that will affect and possibly impede the realization of your solution or decision. Taken together, these three frameworks will help steer you toward designing and implementing ethical solutions to problems in the professional and occupational areas.

Two online resources provide more extensive background information. The first, www.computingcases.org, provides background information on the ethics tests, socio-technical analysis, and intermediate moral concepts. The second, onlineethics.org/essays/educa.../teaching.html, explores in more detail the analogy between ethics and design problems. Much of this information will be published in Good Computing: A Virtue Approach to Computer Ethics, a textbook of cases and decision-making techniques in computer ethics that is being authored by Chuck Huff, William Frey, and Jose A. Cruz-Cruz.

Problem-Solving or Decision-Making Framework: Analogy between ethics and design

Traditionally, problem-solving frameworks in professional and occupational ethics have been taken from rational decision procedures used in economics. While these are useful, they lead one to think that ethical decisions are already "out there" waiting to be discovered. In contrast, taking a design approach to ethical decision making emphasizes that ethical decisions must be created, not discovered. This, in turn, emphasizes the importance of moral imagination and moral creativity. Carolyn Whitbeck in Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research describes this aspect of ethical decision making through the analogy she draws between ethics and design problems in chapter one. Here she rejects the idea that ethical problems are multiple-choice problems. We solve ethical problems not by choosing between ready-made solutions given with the situation; rather we use our moral creativity and moral imagination to design these solutions. Chuck Huff builds on this by modifying the design method used in software engineering so that it can help structure the process of framing ethical situations and creating actions to bring these situations to a successful and ethical conclusion. The key points in the analogy between ethical and design problems are summarized in the table presented just below.

Software Development Cycle: Four Stages

(1) problem specification, (2) solution generation, (3) solution testing, and (4) solution implementation.

Problem specification

Problem specification involves exercising moral imagination to specify the socio-technical system (including the stakeholders) that will influence and will be influenced by the decision we are about to make. Stating the problem clearly and concisely is essential to design problems; getting the problem right helps structure and channel the process of designing and implementing the solution. There is no algorithm available to crank out effective problem specification. Instead, we offer a series of guidelines or rules of thumb to get you started in a process that is accomplished by the skillful exercise of moral imagination.

For a broader problem framing model see Harris, Pritchard, and Rabins, Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 2nd Edition, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2000, pp. 30-56. See also Cynthia Brincat and Victoria Wike, Morality and Professional Life: Values at Work, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1999.

Different Ways of Specifying the Problem

  • Many problems can be specified as disagreements. For example, you disagree with your supervisor over the safety of the manufacturing environment. Disagreements over facts can be resolved by gathering more information. Disagreements over concepts (you and your supervisor have different ideas of what safety means) require working toward a common definition.
  • Other problems involve conflicting values. You advocate installing pollution control technology because you value environmental quality and safety. Your supervisor resists this course of action because she values maintaining a solid profit margin. This is a conflict between a moral value (safety and environmental quality) and a nonmoral value (solid profits). Moral values can also conflict with one another in a given situation. Using John Doe lawsuits to force Internet Service Providers to reveal the real identities of defamers certainly protects the privacy and reputations of potential targets of defamation. But it also places restrictions on legitimate free speech by making it possible for powerful wrongdoers to intimidate those who would publicize their wrongdoing. Here the moral values of privacy and free speech are in conflict. Value conflicts can be addressed by harmonizing the conflicting values, compromising on conflicting values by partially realizing them, or setting one value aside while realizing the other (=value trade offs).
  • If you specify your problem as a disagreement, you need to describe the facts or concepts about which there is disagreement.
  • If you specify your problem as a conflict, you need to describe the values that conflict in the situation.
  • One useful way of specifying a problem is to carry out a stakeholder analysis. A stakeholder is any group or individual that has a vital interest at risk in the situation. Stakeholder interests frequently come into conflict and solving these conflicts requires developing strategies to reconcile and realize the conflicting stakes.
  • Another way of identifying and specifying problems is to carry out a socio-technical analysis. Socio-technical systems (STS) embody values. Problems can be anticipated and prevented by specifying possible value conflicts. Integrating a new technology, procedure, or policy into a socio-technical system can create three kinds of problem. (1) Conflict between values in the technology and those in the STS. For example, when an attempt is made to integrate an information system into the STS of a small business, the values present in an information system can conflict with those in the socio-technical system. (Workers may feel that the new information system invades their privacy.) (2) Amplification of existing value conflicts in the STS. The introduction of a new technology may magnify an existing value conflict. Digitalizing textbooks may undermine copyrights because digital media is easy to copy and disseminate on the Internet. (3) Harmful consequences. Introducing something new into a socio-technical system may set in motion a chain of events that will eventually harm stakeholders in the socio-technical system. For example, giving laptop computers to public school students may produce long term environmental harm when careless disposal of spent laptops releases toxic materials into the environment.
  • The following table helps summarize some of these problem categories and then outlines generic solutions.

The materials on moral ecologies come from Huff, C., Barnard, L., and Frey, W. (2008). “Good computing: a pedagogically focused model of virtue in the practice of computing (parts 1 and 2)”, Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, Volume 6, Issues 3 and 4: 246-316. See also, Michael Davis, Thinking Like An Engineer, Oxford, 1998, 119-156.

Instructions for Using Problem Classification Table

  • Is your problem a conflict? Moral versus moral value? Moral versus non-moral values? Non-moral versus non-moral values? Identify the conflicting values as concisely as possible. Example: In Toysmart, the financial values of creditors come into conflict with the privacy of individuals in the database: financial versus privacy values.
  • Is your problem a disagreement? Is the disagreement over basic facts? Are these facts observable? Is it a disagreement over a basic concept? What is the concept? Is it a factual disagreement that, upon further reflection, changes into a conceptual disagreement?
  • Does your problem arise from an impending harm? What is the harm? What is its magnitude? What is the probability that it will occur?
  • If your problem is a value conflict then can these values be fully integrated in a value integrating solution? Or must they be partially realized in a compromise or traded off against one another?
  • If your problem is a factual disagreement, what is the procedure for gathering the required information, if this is feasible?
  • If your problem is a conceptual disagreement, how can this be overcome? By consulting a government policy or regulation? (OSHA on safety for example.) By consulting a theoretical account of the value in question? (Reading a philosophical analysis of privacy.) By collecting past cases that involve the same concept and drawing analogies and comparisons to the present case?

Moral Ecologies

  • "Moral Ecology" refers to the organization in which one works. Calling this organization an "ecology" conveys the idea that it is a system of interrelated parts. These "ecologies" differ depending on the content of the organization's central, identity-conferring values.
  • In finance-driven companies, financial values form the core of the organization's identity. Ethical advocacy requires skills in bringing ethical issues to the attention of decision-makers and getting them to take these issues seriously. It helps to state ethical concerns in multi-disciplinary language. (For example, show that ignoring ethical concerns will cost the company money in the long run.)
  • Customer-driven ecologies place customer values like usability, affordability, and efficiency, in the forefront of group deliberation and decision-making. Often, one must play the role of "ethics advocate" in deliberation and decision-making. One is expected to argue forcefully and persistently ("go to the mat") to make sure that ethical considerations are integrated into group deliberations and decision-making.
  • Quality-driven companies place ethical values into the core of group deliberations and decision-making. Here one is not so much ethics advocate as ethics enabler. This new role requires that one help one's group find creative ways of integrating ethical values with other concerns like customer and financial values.

If you are having problems specifying your problem

  • Try identifying the stakeholders. Stakeholders are any group or individual with a vital interest at stake in the situation at hand.
  • Project yourself imaginatively into the perspectives of each stakeholder. How does the situation look from their standpoint? What are their interests? How do they feel about their interests?
  • Compare the results of these different imaginative projections. Do any stakeholder interests conflict? Do the stakeholders themselves stand in conflict?
  • If the answer to one or both of these questions is "yes" then this is your problem statement. How does one reconcile conflicting stakeholders or conflicting stakeholder interests in this situation?

Framing Your Problem

  • We miss solutions to problems because we choose to frame them in only one way.
  • For example, the Mountain Terrorist Dilemma is usually framed in only one way: as a dilemma, that is, a forced decision between two equally undesirable alternatives. (Gilbane Gold is also framed as a dilemma: blow the whistle on Z-Corp or go along with the excess polution.)
  • Framing a problem differently opens up new horizons of solution. Your requirement from this point on in the semester is to frame every problem you are assigned in at least two different ways.
  • For examples of how to frame problems using socio-technical system analysis see module m14025.
  • These different frames are summarized in the next box below.

Different Frames for Problems

  • Technical Frame: Engineers frame problems technically, that is, they specify a problem as raising a technical issue and requiring a technical design for its resolution. For example, in the Hughes case, a technical frame would raise the problem of how to streamline the manufacturing and testing processes of the chips.
  • Physical Frame: In the Laminating Press case, the physical frame would raise the problem of how the layout of the room could be changed to reduce the white powder. Would better ventilation eliminate or mitigate the white powder problem?
  • Social Frame: In the "When in Aguadilla" case, the Japanese engineer is uncomfortable working with the Puerto Rican woman engineer because of social and cultural beliefs concerning women still widely held by men in Japan. Framing this as a social problem would involve asking whether there would be ways of getting the Japanese engineer to see things from the Puerto Rican point of view.
  • Financial or Market-Based Frames: The DOE, in the Risk Assessment case below, accuses the laboratory and its engineers of trying to extend the contract to make more money. The supervisor of the head of the risk assessment team pressures the team leader to complete the risk assessment as quickly as possible so as not to lose the contract. These two framings highlight financial issues.
  • Managerial Frame: As the leader of the Puerto Rican team in the "When in Aguadilla" case, you need to exercise leadership in your team. The refusal of the Japanese engineer to work with a member of your team creates a management problem. What would a good leader, a good manager, do in this situation? What does it mean to call this a management problem? What management strategies would help solve it?
  • Legal Frame: OSHA may have clear regulations concerning the white powder produced by laminating presses. How can you find out about these regulations? What would be involved in complying with them? If they cost money, how would you get this money? These are questions that arise when you frame the Laminating Press case as a legal problem.
  • Environmental Framing: Finally, viewing your problem from an environmental frame leads you to consider the impact of your decision on the environment. Does it harm the environment? Can this harm be avoided? Can it be mitigated? Can it be offset? (Could you replant elsewhere the trees you cut down to build your new plant?) Could you develop a short term environmental solution to "buy time" for designing and implementing a longer term solution? Framing your problem as an environmental problem requires that you ask whether this solution harms the environment and whether this harming can be avoided or remedied in some other way.

Solution Generation

In solution generation, agents exercise moral creativity by brainstorming to come up with solution options designed to resolve the disagreements and value conflicts identified in the problem specification stage. Brainstorming is crucial to generating nonobvious solutions to difficult, intractable problems. This process must take place within a non-polarized environment where the members of the group respect and trust one another. (See the module on the Ethics of Group Work for more information on how groups can be successful and pitfalls that commonly trip up groups.) Groups effectively initiate the brainstorming process by suspending criticism and analysis. After the process is completed (say, by meeting a quota), then participants can refine the solutions generated by combining them, eliminating those that don't fit the problem, and ranking them in terms of their ethics and feasibility. If a problem can't be solved, perhaps it can be dissolved through reformulation. If an entire problem can't be solved, perhaps the problem can be broken down into parts some of which can be readily solved.

Having trouble generating solutions?

  • One of the most difficult stages in problem-solving is to jump-start the process of brainstorming solutions. If you are stuck then here are some generic options guaranteed to get you "unstuck."
  • Gather Information: Many disagreements can be resolved by gathering more information. Because this is the easiest and least painful way of reaching consensus, it is almost always best to start here. Gathering information may not be possible because of different constraints: there may not be enough time, the facts may be too expensive to gather, or the information required goes beyond scientific or technical knowledge. Sometimes gathering more information does not solve the problem but allows for a new, more fruitful formulation of the problem. Harris, Pritchard, and Rabins in Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases show how solving a factual disagreement allows a more profound conceptual disagreement to emerge.
  • Nolo Contendere. Nolo Contendere is Latin for not opposing or contending. Your interests may conflict with your supervisor but he or she may be too powerful to reason with or oppose. So your only choice here is to give in to his or her interests. The problem with nolo contendere is that non-opposition is often taken as agreement. You may need to document (e.g., through memos) that your choosing not to oppose does not indicate agreement.
  • Negotiate. Good communication and diplomatic skills may make it possible to negotiate a solution that respects the different interests. Value integrative solutions are designed to integrate conflicting values. Compromises allow for partial realization of the conflicting interests. (See the module, The Ethics of Team Work, for compromise strategies such as logrolling or bridging.) Sometimes it may be necessary to set aside one's interests for the present with the understanding that these will be taken care of at a later time. This requires trust.
  • Oppose. If nolo contendere and negotiation are not possible, then opposition may be necessary. Opposition requires marshaling evidence to document one's position persuasively and impartially. It makes use of strategies such as leading an "organizational charge" or "blowing the whistle." For more on whistle-blowing consult the discussion of whistleblowing in the Hughes case that can be found in computing cases.
  • Exit. Opposition may not be possible if one lacks organizational power or documented evidence. Nolo contendere will not suffice if non-opposition implicates one in wrongdoing. Negotiation will not succeed without a necessary basis of trust or a serious value integrative solution. As a last resort, one may have to exit from the situation by asking for reassignment or resigning.

Refining solutions

  • Are any solutions blatantly unethical or unrealizable?
  • Do any solutions overlap? Can these be integrated into broader solutions?
  • Can solutions be brought together as courses of action that can be pursued simultaneously?
  • Go back to the problem specification? Can any solutions be eliminated because they do not address the problem? (Or can the problem be revised to better fit what, intuitively, is a good solution.)
  • Can solutions be brought together as successive courses of action? For example, one solution represents Plan A; if it does not work then another solution, Plan B, can be pursued. (You negotiate the problem with your supervisor. If she fails to agree, then you oppose your supervisor on the grounds that her position is wrong. If this fails, you conform or exit.)
  • The goal here is to reduce the solution list to something manageable, say, a best, a second best, and a third best. Try adding a bad solution to heighten strategic points of comparison. The list should be short so that the remaining solutions can be intensively examined as to their ethics and feasibility.

Solution Testing: The solutions developed in the second stage must be tested in various ways.

  • Reversibility: Would I still think the choice of this option good if I were one of those adversely affected by it? (Davis uses this formulation in various publications.) I identify different stakeholders and then take up their roles. Through this imaginative projection, I should consider how the action under consideration will affect them and how they will view, interpret, and experience this affect.
  • Harm: Does this option do less harm than any available alternative? Here I try to design an action that will minimize harmful effects. I should factor in the likely results of the action under consideration but I should also evaluate how justly these results will be distributed among stakeholders.
  • Publicity: What kind of person will I become if I choose this action? This is Davis' formulation of this test as a virtue test. The key to this test is that you associate the agent with the action. If I (the agent) am publicly judged as a person in terms of this action, what does this say about me as a person? Am I comfortable being judged an irresponsible person on the basis of my being identified with my irresponsible action?
  • Meta-Test - Convergence: Do a quick inventory here. Do the ethics tests come together and agree on ranking this solution as a strong one? Then this solution satisfies the convergence meta-test and this provides independent evidence of the strength of the solution.
  • Meta-Test - Divergence: Again, do a quick inventory of your solution evaluation matrix results to this point. Do the tests differ or diverge on this point? This is independent evidence of the weakness of this solution. Think about why this solution may be strong under one test but weak under the others.
  • The solution evaluation matrix presented just below models and summarizes the solution testing process.

Solution Implementation

The chosen solution must be examined in terms of how well it responds to various situational constraints that could impede its implementation. What will be its costs? Can it be implemented within necessary time constraints? Does it honor recognized technical limitations or does it require pushing these back through innovation and discovery? Does it comply with legal and regulatory requirements? Finally, could the surrounding organizational, political, and social environments give rise to obstacles to the implementation of the solution? In general this phase requires looking at interest, technical, and resource constraints or limitations. A Feasibility Matrix helps to guide this process.

The Feasibility Tests focuses on situational constraints. How could these hinder the implementation of the solution? Should the solution be modified to ease implementation? Can the constraints be removed or remodeled by negotiation, compromise, or education? Can implementation be facilitated by modifying both the solution and changing the constraints?

Different Feasibility Constraints

  • The Feasibility Test identifies the constraints that could interfere with realizing a solution. This test also sorts out these constraints into resource (time, cost, materials), interest (individuals, organizations, legal, social, political), and technical limitations. By identifying situational constraints, problem-solvers can anticipate implementation problems and take early steps to prevent or mitigate them.
  • Time. Is there a deadline within which the solution has to be enacted? Is this deadline fixed or negotiable?
  • Financial. Are there cost constraints on implementing the ethical solution? Can these be extended by raising more funds? Can they be extended by cutting existing costs? Can agents negotiate for more money for implementation?
  • Technical. Technical limits constrain the ability to implement solutions. What, then, are the technical limitations to realizing and implementing the solution? Could these be moved back by modifying the solution or by adopting new technologies?
  • Manufacturability. Are there manufacturing constraints on the solution at hand? Given time, cost, and technical feasibility, what are the manufacturing limits to implementing the solution? Once again, are these limits fixed or flexible, rigid or negotiable?
  • Legal. How does the proposed solution stand with respect to existing laws, legal structures, and regulations? Does it create disposal problems addressed in existing regulations? Does it respond to and minimize the possibility of adverse legal action? Are there legal constraints that go against the ethical values embodied in the solution? Again, are these legal constraints fixed or negotiable?
  • Individual Interest Constraints. Individuals with conflicting interests may oppose the implementation of the solution. For example, an insecure supervisor may oppose the solution because he fears it will undermine his authority. Are these individual interest constraints fixed or negotiable?
  • Organizational. Inconsistencies between the solution and the formal or informal rules of an organization may give rise to implementation obstacles. Implementing the solution may require support of those higher up in the management hierarchy. The solution may conflict with organization rules, management structures, traditions, or financial objectives. Once again, are these constraints fixed or flexible?
  • Social, Cultural, or Political. The socio-technical system within which the solution is to be implemented contains certain social structures, cultural traditions, and political ideologies. How do these stand with respect to the solution? For example, does a climate of suspicion of high technology threaten to create political opposition to the solution? What kinds of social, cultural, or political problems could arise? Are these fixed or can they be altered through negotiation, education, or persuasion?

Ethics Tests For Solution Evaluation

Three ethics tests (reversibility, harm/beneficence, and public identification) encapsulate three ethical approaches (deontology, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics) and form the basis of stage three of the SDC, solution testing. A fourth test (a value realization test) builds upon the public identification/virtue ethics test by evaluating a solution in terms of the values it harmonizes, promotes, protects, or realizes. Finally a code test provides an independent check on the ethics tests and also highlights intermediate moral concepts such as safety, health, welfare, faithful agency, conflict of interest, confidentiality, professional integrity, collegiality, privacy, property, free speech, and equity/access). The following section provides advice on how to use these tests. More information can be found at www.computingcases.org.

Setting Up the Ethics Tests: Pitfalls to avoid

Set-Up Pitfalls: Mistakes in this area lead to the analysis becoming unfocused and getting lost in irrelevancies. (a) Agent-switching where the analysis falls prey to irrelevancies that crop up when the test application is not grounded in the standpoint of a single agent, (b) Sloppy action-description where the analysis fails because no specific action has been tested, (c) Test-switching where the analysis fails because one test is substituted for another. (For example, the public identification and reversibility tests are often reduced to the harm/beneficence test where harmful consequences are listed but not associated with the agent or stakeholders.)

Set up the test

  • Identify the agent (the person who is going to perform the action)
  • Describe the action or solution that is being tested (what the agent is going to do or perform)
  • Identify the stakeholders (those individuals or groups who are going to be affected by the action), and their stakes (interests, values, goods, rights, needs, etc.
  • Identify, sort out, and weigh the consequences (the results the action is likely to bring about)

Harm/Beneficence Test

  • What harms would accompany the action under consideration? Would it produce physical or mental suffering, impose financial or non-financial costs, or deprive others of important or essential goods?
  • What benefits would this action bring about? Would it increase safety, quality of life, health, security, or other goods both moral and non-moral?
  • What is the magnitude of each these consequences? Magnitude includes likelihood it will occur (probability), the severity of its impact (minor or major harm) and the range of people affected.
  • Identify one or two other viable alternatives and repeat these steps for them. Some of these may be modifications of the basic action that attempt to minimize some of the likely harms. These alternatives will establish a basis for assessing your alternative by comparing it with others.
  • Decide on the basis of the test which alternative produces the best ratio of benefits to harms?
  • Check for inequities in the distribution of harms and benefits. Do all the harms fall on one individual (or group)? Do all of the benefits fall on another? If harms and benefits are inequitably distributed, can they be redistributed? What is the impact of redistribution on the original solution imposed?

Pitfalls of the Harm/Beneficence Test

  • “Paralysis of Analysis" comes from considering too many consequences and not focusing only on those relevant to your decision.
  • Incomplete Analysis results from considering too few consequences. Often it indicates a failure of moral imagination which, in this case, is the ability to envision the consequences of each action alternative.
  • Failure to compare different alternatives can lead to a decision that is too limited and one-sided.
  • Failure to weigh harms against benefits occurs when decision-makers lack the experience to make the qualitative comparisons required in ethical decision making.
  • Finally, justice failures result from ignoring the fairness of the distribution of harms and benefits. This leads to a solution which may maximize benefits and minimize harms but still give rise to serious injustices in the distribution of these benefits and harms.

Reversibility Test

  • Set up the test by (i) identifying the agent, (ii) describing the action, and (iii) identifying the stakeholders and their stakes.
  • Use the stakeholder analysis to identify the relations to be reversed.
  • Reverse roles between the agent (you) and each stakeholder: put them in your place (as the agent) and yourself in their place (as the one subjected to the action).
  • If you were in their place, would you still find the action acceptable?

Cross Checks for Reversibility Test (These questions help you to check if you have carried out the reversibility test properly.)

  • Does the proposed action treat others with respect? (Does it recognize their autonomy or circumvent it?)
  • Does the action violate the rights of others? (Examples of rights: free and informed consent, privacy, freedom of conscience, due process, property, freedom of expression)
  • Would you recommend that this action become a universal rule?
  • Are you, through your action, treating others merely as means?

Pitfalls of the Reversibility Test

  • Leaving out a key stakeholder relation
  • Failing to recognize and address conflicts between stakeholders and their conflicting stakes
  • Confusing treating others with respect with capitulating to their demands (“Reversing with Hitler”)
  • Failing to reach closure, i.e., an overall, global reversal assessment that takes into account all the stakeholders the agent has reversed with.

Steps in Applying the Public Identification Test

  • Set up the analysis by identifying the agent, describing the action, and listing the key values or virtues at play in the situation.
  • Association the action with the agent.
  • Describe what the action says about the agent as a person. Does it reveal him or her as someone associated with a virtue or a vice?

Alternative Version of Public Identification

  • Does the action under consideration realize justice or does it pose an excess or defect of justice?
  • Does the action realize responsibility or pose an excess or defect of responsibility?
  • Does the action realize reasonableness or pose too much or too little reasonableness?
  • Does the action realize honesty or pose too much or too little honesty?
  • Does the action realize integrity or pose too much or too little integrity?

Pitfalls of Public Identification

  • Action not associated with agent. The most common pitfall is failure to associate the agent and the action. The action may have bad consequences and it may treat individuals with respect but these points are not as important in the context of this test as what they imply about the agent as a person who deliberately performs such an action.
  • Failure to specify moral quality, virtue, or value. Another pitfall is to associate the action and agent but only ascribe a vague or ambiguous moral quality to the agent. To say, for example, that willfully harming the public is bad fails to zero in on precisely what moral quality this ascribes to the agent. Does it render him or her unjust, irresponsible, corrupt, dishonest, or unreasonable? The virtue list given above will help to specify this moral quality.

Code of Ethics Test

  • Does the action hold paramount the health, safety, and welfare of the public, i.e., those affected by the action but not able to participate in its design or execution?
  • Does the action maintain faithful agency with the client by not abusing trust, avoiding conflicts of interest, and maintaining confidences?
  • Is the action consistent with the reputation, honor, dignity, and integrity of the profession?
  • Does the action serve to maintain collegial relations with professional peers?
  • The ethics and feasibility tests will not always converge on the same solution. There is a complicated answer for why this is the case but the simple version is that the tests do not always agree on a given solution because each test (and the ethical theory it encapsulates) covers a different domain or dimension of the action situation. Meta tests turn this disadvantage to your advantage by feeding the interaction between the tests on a given solution back into the evaluation of that solution.
  • When the ethics tests converge on a given solution, this convergence is a sign of the strength and robustness of the solution and counts in its favor.
  • When a given solution responds well to one test but does poorly under another, this is a sign that the solution needs further development and revision. It is not a sign that one test is relevant while the others are not. Divergence between test results is a sign that the solution is weak.

Application Exercise

You will now practice the four stages of decision making with a real-world case. This case, Risk Assessment, came from a retreat on Business, Science, and Engineering Ethics held in Puerto Rico in December 1998. It was funded by the National Science Foundation, Grant SBR 9810253.

Risk Assessment ScenarioCase Scenario: You supervise a group of engineers working for a private laboratory with expertise in nuclear waste disposal and risk assessment. The DOE (Department of Energy) awarded a contract to your laboratory six years ago to do a risk assessment of various nuclear waste disposal sites. During the six years in which your team has been doing the study, new and more accurate calculations in risk assessment have become available. Your laboratory’s study, however, began with the older, simpler calculations and cannot integrate the newer without substantially delaying completion. You, as the leader of the team, propose a delay to the DOE on the grounds that it is necessary to use the more advanced calculations. Your position is that the laboratory needs more time because of the extensive calculations required; you argue that your group must use state of the art science in doing its risk assessment. The DOE says you are using overly high standards of risk assessment to prolong the process, extend the contract, and get more money for your company. They want you to use simpler calculations and finish the project; if you are unwilling to do so, they plan to find another company that thinks differently. Meanwhile, back at the laboratory, your supervisor (a high level company manager) expresses to you the concern that while good science is important in an academic setting, this is the real world and the contract with the DOE is in jeopardy. What should you do?

Part One: Problem Specification

  • Specify the problem in the above scenario. Be as concise and specific as possible
  • Is your problem best specifiable as a disagreement? Between whom? Over what?
  • Can your problem be specified as a value conflict? What are the values in conflict? Are the moral, nonmoral, or both?

Part Two: Solution Generation

  • Quickly and without analysis or criticism brainstorm 5 to ten solutions
  • Refine your solution list. Can solutions be eliminated? (On what basis?) Can solutions be combined? Can solutions be combined as plan a and plan b?
  • If you specified your problem as a disagreement, how do your solutions resolve the disagreement? Can you negotiate interests over positions? What if your plan of action doesn't work?
  • If you formulated your problem as a value conflict, how do your solutions resolve this conflict? By integrating the conflicting values? By partially realizing them through a value compromise? By trading one value off for another?

Part Three: Solution Testing

  • Construct a solution evaluation matrix to compare two to three solution alternatives.
  • Choose a bad solution and then compare to it the two strongest solutions you have.
  • Be sure to avoid the pitfalls described above and set up each test carefully.

Part Four: Solution Implementation

  • Develop an implementation plan for your best solution. This plan should anticipate obstacles and offer means for overcoming them.
  • Prepare a feasibility table outlining these issues using the table presented above.
  • Remember that each of these feasibility constraints is negotiable and therefore flexible. If you choose to set aside a feasibility constraint then you need to outline how you would negotiate the extension of that constraint.

Decision-Making Presentation

Problem Solving Presentation

Shortened Presentation for Fall 2012

Vigo Socio-Technical System Table and Problems

Test Rubric Fall 2009: Problem-Solving

Logo for University System of New Hampshire Pressbooks

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Seven Ethical Stances to Consider

After studying the concepts of better thinking, the basics of ethical interpretation, and the philosophical conception of objective and subjective thinking, we must focus on various philosophical and ethical approaches that individuals employ daily.  For simplicity’s sake, this chapter has been broken into seven areas of exploration. This compilation is designed to introduce these significant ethical decision-making approaches to understand better how each of us might decide critical ethical issues and so that we can better understand how people and organizations have argued moral theory historically.  This study is also essential for us to become more familiar with how people might best make ethical decisions, thus leading all of us toward continuous improvement over time.

The categories we will explore are:

  • Consequentialism

Natural Law

Individuals and institutions use more than one approach to decision-making. They use a combination or hybrid of theories because moral stances often overlap and dictate differing approaches or perspectives and their use.  Because this is a reality, we must be diligent when studying the ethical theory of these seven concrete categories. We must be mindful that these classifications are theoretically artificial and must be applied in “real-life” situations to develop further meaning and understanding.  By studying these categories, we become more aware of the presumptions and assumptions of those involved in the decision-making process. Hopefully, we will be better equipped to evaluate moral processes and outcomes.

Consequentialist Thinking

  • The teleological approach
  • The issue of Utility
  • Act and Rule Utility
  • Jeremy Bentham and JS Mill

The first general category of ethical thinking is “consequentialist” thinking.  Individuals using this stance believe that the right action in any circumstance or dilemma produces results the result one, either individually or by group consensus, believes is valuable.

Consequentialists hold that ethical decisions can only be accurately judged on the merit of the result or outcome of the decision.  As a result, such philosophical theories as pragmatism and utilitarianism are often referred to as teleological theories. The term teleology comes from the Greek root “telos, ” loosely translated as the end, completion, purpose, or goal of any thing or activity.

An excellent example can be found in Aristotle’s stance on ethics. Aristotle maintains a form of teleology by arguing the result of individual happiness is the essential element when deciding the ethical nature of a subject. Using his idea of the balance point of life as the basis to determine the level of contentment, Aristotle reasons that one’s knowledge of the outcome is the most crucial element to consider when determining the moral validity of a situation.

Consequentiality theory may also be interpreted in the framework of utilitarianism. This moral stance argues that the most moral results in “the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number.”  In both examples, Aristotle’s definition from the fourth century BC and the concept of utility basically center on England’s seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, offering a moral problem-solving approach central to the success and practical use of the theories.  This practicality or success can be understood by formulating other hybrid moral theories.  Philosophers such as Cornman and Frankena use consequentiality in their moral approaches, creating hybrids where moral outcomes are understood in the context of many possible outcomes.  In this sense, such thinkers see morality in terms of contextualism or the idea that situations, circumstances, and personalization play a large part in proper moral decision-making.

  • Order of the world
  • Natural process
  • Thomas Aquinas

The second approach to moral decision-making is natural law.  In this stance, we find arguments that base the morally correct decision on the ability to explore the natural world around us through proper reason.  Using our natural logic or reasoning ability, we can deduce proper moral assessment; thus, correct morality or decision-making should be based on natural processes or connected with nature cycles or natural laws around us.

At the core of this belief is the assertion that principles of human conduct can be derived from a proper understanding of humanity in the context of the universe as a rational whole.  The proper ethical choice can be found in contemplating individuals’ acknowledgment and acceptance of their place with each other and nature.

The prime example of this ethical approach is the Stoic movement of the late Hellenistic Greek and Roman Republic era.  According to the Stoics, one who wishes to live a moral life must understand that life is short and we are limited in our control of many factors.  Therefore, we must accept nature’s control by acknowledging that we are left with nothing in our lives except the ability to control our actions in response to the powers of nature.  Through our understanding of these factors, we should try to live humble life devoted to moral principles found in an organic approach to living that acknowledges this power.

  • Deontological Thinking
  • Categorical Imperative
  • The Principle of Ends
  • Immanuel Kant

The third ethical theory is the conception of duty. The central belief is that morality comes from doing what we understand to be the practical content and application of the convictions we acquire from the world around us and the people in it. This approach, best exemplified by the work of Immanuel Kant, is based on the philosophical conception of deontology.

Deontology refers to the belief that morality is only correctly understood in the context of moral necessity or obligation. Unlike consequentialist theory, deontological thinkers believe that truly right decisions are not based on practical results but rather the moral obligation inherent in the notion of duty found in the natural understanding and right employment of the concept of reason.

In Kant’s nineteenth-century theory, he points to two specific components that are the basis of duty-based ethical approaches.  Individuals often refer to the categorical imperative or a universal moral principle that can be upheld regardless of the situation and the principle of ends. The categorical imperative or universal principle argues that ethically the right decision must be based on the belief that the process of carrying out proper moral decision-making is more important or just as necessary as the proper, reasoned end.  Individuals who approach moral problem-solving from this perspective base their moral decision-making on their obligation to an absolutistic statement found in the base conception of this obligation to principles.   Look at the following link to analyze Kant’s central portion of this theory.

  • History of Rights in the Western World
  • Preservation of Rights
  • The Golden Rule

This fourth moral category relies on the belief that morality is shaped by one’s determination and assessment of human rights.  This stance or moral decision-making process emphasizes justified expectations about the benefits to other people or society and what should be at the basis of that expectation of thought and behavior. These expectations are often understood as morally inherent provisions.

This view illustrates that we are entitled to rights provided we act towards others similarly, thus ensuring corresponding rights for them.  Founded within the English tradition, dating to at least the thirteenth century, the expectation of how we treat others has become connected with a core of values that define life and the importance of each individual.  Ethical evaluation is resolved by preserving agreed-upon respect for others through cooperation.  Right and wrong are abstracted within the framework of expectations concerning benefits for individuals and people in groups.

The process to determine mutual rights is understood through consistent and careful exploration of mutually agreed-upon factors, the preservation of which is exchanging certain essential agreed-upon benefits to the advantage of those involved.  In this sense, for the benefit of all, individuals base their moral conceptions on the practical application of daily life, the vision they have for how it should be carried out, and the preservation and betterment of that life through agreed-upon standards or the preservation of rights best understood in the conception of the idea of the golden rule, for example.

This ideology can also be understood in Thomas Hobbes’ ethical theory from the seventeenth century. He writes the harmful component of the golden rule is perhaps more productive.  He argues that “not doing for others what you don’t want to be done to you” may be a more moral way to formulate or work towards a more moral society.  Not getting in each other’s way by attempting to treat others as you would like to be treated. However, a demonstration of rights-based moral theory respects individual desires and rights. When doing this,  people do not infringe on others’ interests or violate their rights and/or their ability to adhere to proper moral principles.   This approach to morality relies upon understanding what is essential to most people involved in moral decision-making. It can often be seen in the formulation of laws that confirm the preservation of this conception of proper acquisition.

In thinking through the possible argument that ethical determination is founded in a discoverable and agreed-upon conception of what everyone is entitled to, listen to Robert Wright’s assessment of how compassion might be connected to the Golden Rule and our natural inclinations.  Wright argues that our ethical evaluation might be understood within this hybrid of theories by integrating rights, instinct, and natural law.

  • People We Respect
  • Concepts We Prefer
  • Simplistic and Natural

Virtue ethics is the fifth stance.  In studying “ethos” or character, thinkers believe morality is directly connected to peoples’ understanding of what is conceptually “good.”  The idea of a hierarchy of opinion, thought, or ideology becomes the focus of this perspective.  Its conceptualization is correlated with what “behaviors or thoughts” we prefer individuals to possess and less about the reality of where people are in their moral stances.

Virtue ethics is best understood in the framework of the understanding of the terms “ideals or forms”, used by Greeks such as Plato and Aristotle.  Their view maintains that humans have the innate inclination and ability to understand the concept of “betterment” in all avenues of life.  As a result, we must seek to understand “true wisdom” to grasp the values or virtues we hold dear.

By doing this, morality becomes both the compass and motivating factor for our lives.  It also becomes a guideline by encouraging us, through reason and knowledge, towards what are appropriate thoughts and behaviors while pushing us to realize that such ideas are not only subjective.  Thus, these ideals function as factors for proper behavioral practice.  In that process, we find meaning or progress in our lives.  One way to do this is to focus on people that we respect.  By analyzing their behavior and characteristics, we can internalize those values and make them part of our lives.

  • The Importance of Belief
  • Group or Individual Authority
  • Revelation Based
  • Conscience (Soul)

The sixth moral category highlights the concept of morality based on some form of authority, whether as a political, social, or cultural entity.  Often referred to as “belief ethics”, this approach can also be understood as determined by a form of a supernatural or natural authority figure who has given humanity a preferred way or manner of living.

This approach conceptualizes morality as a series of beliefs, concepts, or dictums given to humans for survival.  This belief often is directly connected with the understanding that morality can be closely linked to authority figures and to direct imperatives.  Thus, many assert or argue that religion and/or religious beliefs may be directly tied to one’s understanding of morality or ethical belief.  Therefore the issue is how one attains that moral understanding.

There are many plausible arguments, but I have narrowed it down to two that best explain this perspective.

  • Morality, though steeped in some form of a moral command, is usually connected with a unique situation or understanding, allowing this information to be divulged.  When this unique situation occurs, these ideas are often reason-based and/or virtue oriented and hold to conduct that enhances the well-being or “betterment” of those involved.
  • The authority-based approach to ethical conceptualization often asserts that conscience, or an innate awareness within us, confirms the validity of this understanding.  Thus, some authority-based interpretations argue that morality is known through the combination of directives and solid moral “feelings” or understanding coupled with a strong awareness of inner inclinations.  “Inner awareness” leads or confirms to us that such natural or supernatural authorities dictate proper moral principles.  In the end, authority becomes a basis for people to determine the right course of action in ethical decision-making, understanding that the human is part of that process but not the sole factor in formulating proper ethical standards and/or norms.
  • Community Standards
  • Kinship & Nepotism
  • Reciprocity

The last area of exploration is instinct. This study comes from the belief that morality stems from our natural urges or natural/biological phenomena.  This approach stresses the importance of understanding our instincts’ role in developing morality.  Instinct can be defined as a form of natural control or guidance that influence our thinking and behavior. It is central to how we relate to others in a community.

Unlike the other theories presented, this stance argues that community standards or moral stances are based on our natural need to preserve ourselves or our species/gene pool.  Therefore, morality is staked in self-preservation.

Individuals who defend this viewpoint believe they will naturally favor their kin or biological relations in moral decision-making.  Therefore, their moral stances rely upon biological factors, and they dictate their priorities and moral beliefs.  Additionally, this field of moral analysis asserts that our biological makeup or natural “being” influences us in two other ways.  One, we innately work towards reciprocity or the moral belief that exchanging goods and/or aid is central to morality; and two, the basis of actual ethical decision-making, can be found in sharing “favors” so that individuals benefit.

The core of reciprocity is found in individual right versus wrong assessments and uniting those factors with the self-interest found in community cooperation.  As a result, instinct morality seems to be motivated in many theories by the assumption that reality dictates moral choices and that community norms are simply a reflection of individual and natural rectifications that ultimately maximize individual survival. Listen to Jane Goodall to hear more about the argument of instinct-based morality as a plausible ethical decision-making outcome.

Franz De Waal has defended that animals can teach us much about moral behavior.  Listen to his analysis of the morality of animal behavior that supports the ideology of instinct ethics.

Ultimately, instinct ethics focuses on believing humans have become too complicated in our ethical evaluation.  We may rely too much on education, reason, and complex systems that have yielded unethical returns.  By attempting to return to what is most natural, theorists’ arguments support the idea that we would be more moral if we focused on community, cooperation, and natural need.

Final Thoughts on Seven Approaches to Ethical Problem Solving

The approaches discussed in this chapter are plausible arguments for how morality is formulated and discuss what factors affect how people conceptualize decision-making.  Leaders need to understand these approaches when they weigh difficult decisions or formulate business policies. What is perhaps just as important is that one takes these seven approaches and qualifies that knowledge with the understanding that these approaches are integrated into many ways.  Though these categories are “neat” and “tidy” by definition, they also are explored in an academic setting. The reality of the human experience dictates that we understand these elements in the context of integration.  A person who relies on instinct as the basis of moral decision-making in one instance might appeal to virtues or values in another.  Beyond this, it is commonplace to see individuals appeal to both in the same circumstance, thus creating, as listed above, hybrid theories.  A good example might be the understanding that authority-based ethical theory coincides with instinct and virtue, as individuals argue that God or some supernatural power created virtue, values, or instinct as an ethical gauge.

All appeal to both facets or are multi-layered in their approach to understanding the basics of moral theory and thus make the task of assessing these various approaches extremely difficult.  Perhaps the place to start in the estimation of University of Alabama professor James Rachels is to acknowledge these various approaches and work to see their unique overlapping components and specific connections.  Rachels offers two solid suggestions for dealing with moral basics that should help address these areas as one is confronted by their different stances.

  • First, get as much factual knowledge as possible.
  • Second, attempt to decrease subjective interpretations or human prejudice.

Taking these seven as the beginning of approaches, leaders can begin to understand how individuals approach moral decision-making more fully.  Developing awareness of these categories and their potential hybrids allows us to more clearly, effectively, and carefully address potential problems.

References:

Cotton, J. (2016, April 06). Immanuel Kant. Retrieved from https://www.theschooloflife.com/thebookoflife/immanuel-kant/

Goodall, J. (2002, March). What separates us from chimpanzees? Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/jane_goodall_on_what_separates_us_from_the_apes

Waal, F. D. (n.d.). Moral behavior in animals. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals

Wright, R. (2009, October). The evolution of compassion. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/robert_wright_the_evolution_of_compassion

Chapter 4--Perspectives in Ethical Theory Copyright © 2018 by Christopher Brooks is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

How to Solve Problems Effectively and Ethically

HowtoSolveProblemsEffectivelyandEthically 1024x682

Conflict with your kids is inevitable and necessary. No matter how harmonious a home environment you work to create, your kids will challenge you as you help them grow. You’ll butt heads—often over things you’d least expect. In my case, I found myself challenged by my daughter over a seemingly innocuous treat: Girl Scout Cookies.

Like many young girls, my daughter Annie was an avid Scout. So when it came time to sell their traditional baked goods, Annie approached the task with gusto. She wanted to excel in sales, both for the good of the organization and for the prize that came with high sales.

Annie enlisted me to help her sell cookies at LeapFrog, where I had recently invented the LeapPad and where many young cookie lovers would be delighted to help a sweet Girl Scout. Annie frequently visited the office as a voice talent, recording for the LeapPad, and she knew many people. I looked forward to watching her introduce herself in her Girl Scout uniform. This was a unique bonding opportunity for us and a proud moment for me as a dad.

Unfortunately, there was a problem. My wife and I had learned, well ahead of the general public, of the severe negative health consequences of partially hydrogenated oils, now more commonly known as trans fats. We had eliminated foods containing trans fats from our family’s diet. When I looked at the ingredient list for Girl Scout Cookies, I was astounded to see trans fats as a key ingredient (trans fats have thankfully been largely removed from the cookies since then).

I pointed this out to Annie, and we were instantly in conflict.

“Do you want me to sell my friends cookies that we wouldn’t eat ourselves? That we know are poisonous?” I asked, admittedly ramping up the drama.

“But Dad, they’re Girl Scout Cookies!” Annie said. My campaign against trans fats paled in importance when Girl Scout Cookies were on the line.

“All right, let me think about it,” I said. Annie sighed, knowing that I wouldn’t come back to her with a simple “yes” or “no.” I’d want to talk about the PTS—the problem to solve, something my career had shown me was a foundational part of success.

Related: How to Solve Any Problem That Gets in Your Way

Solving Problems Effectively and Ethically

Annie just wanted to sell the cookies. But I knew they were seriously unhealthy for people. More importantly, I knew that letting Annie compromise our values for the sake of a prize would set a bad example and was not good parenting. So what could we do?

Most ongoing conflicts stem from one critical mistake: People do not clearly define, and agree to, the problem to solve. Worse, they often solve the wrong problem. People typically skip problem definition and focus on treating symptoms. Annie and I needed to identify the core issue, carefully craft the right problem statement, and then agree to solve it.

I really wanted to help my daughter, but not at the cost of our family’s integrity or my colleagues’ health. After a patient exchange of questions and answers, which was frustrating though informative for Annie, we realized that the problem was less about selling boxed cookies and more about helping her raise money. We struck on the idea of baking our own healthy cookies for Annie to sell, assuming we could get the Scout leader’s approval, which provided another opportunity for Annie to learn about making proposals to her supervisors on a project. She obtained this approval, and Annie and I spent a magical weekend baking together. She sold every last cookie to my LeapFrog colleagues and won the prize she had sought.

Why the PTS Matters

The Girl Scout Cookie story is Marggraff family lore now that Annie is an adult, and I look back on it as a defining moment in her journey toward becoming a founder in her own right. Finding the PTS through forensic Q&A changed her attitude toward “unsolvable” problems and became a fun experience instead of a source of frustration.

The desire and ability to pursue and identify the right, clear PTS is absolutely crucial to a founder’s mindset—a way of approaching your work with the productive and insightful perspective of a problem solver. By encouraging Annie to really think about the problem we needed to solve, I helped her think critically about addressing tough scenarios. People often run in circles trying to solve problems because they’re chasing a problem’s symptoms, not its cause. Once you properly articulate the core problem, the solution often presents itself.

Related:  How to Develop Critical Thinking Skills

Learning to identify the correct PTS is a skill. Like any skill, it takes time to cultivate. Here are three steps that are helpful in shaping this critical ability:

1. Begin with your values in mind.

When you have clearly defined values , problem-solving becomes much easier. Right away, you have a framework for approaching an issue because you’re guided by your ethics as valuable constraints in defining your PTS. In the story I shared about Annie, I was committed to solving the problem. I knew that some solutions—such as selling the original Girl Scout Cookies—didn’t align with our family and societal health values. Once she and I understood and agreed to this, we were able, with some coaching, to think creatively to identify the real problem.

2. Identify your problem calmly and one step at a time.

Our instinct when conflict arises is to react immediately. When someone feels slighted at the office, we often say whatever comes to mind to assuage their feelings. When an investor criticizes a product, we often become defensive and try to rationalize our solution or try to solve the same problem a different way. However, this initial instinct does not focus on finding the true PTS.

With slighted colleagues, go ahead and apologize if you feel you created undue offense—but think about why the situation occurred in the first place. Maybe you’re frustrated with performance, or perhaps your communication has been lacking. Addressing those issues will lead to a better working relationship.

In business, if you find yourself on the receiving end of investor criticism, embrace their comments without ego, and don’t jump to an immediate solution. Forensically, respectfully, question the provocateur and listen carefully. Review your core business needs as well as changes that may have occurred in the market and decide whether you’re solving the correct problem. Identifying the right PTS demands deep, comprehensive, critical thinking rather than a rush to action at the first sign of trouble.

3. Ask “why?”

When you think you’ve defined the problem statement, stop and ask “why?” Answer this, then ask “why?” again. Keep asking until you get to the real PTS.

The first time I asked Annie why she wanted to sell Girl Scout Cookies, she said, “Because I have to.” After my second ask, she said, “Because I was told to.” By my fourth “why” to Annie, she became frustrated. By my seventh “why,” she had become engaged and began to think critically. (I was patient and persistent, which is important in these situations.) It was then that we realized it was about fundraising, not boxes of Girl Scout Cookies.

In the years since the great Girl Scout Cookie baking adventure, Annie has blossomed into a successful founder. She is now nationally scaling Step Ahead, a nonprofit program she founded for children on the autism spectrum, and she is full of motivation and clarity of mind. She didn’t develop these skills overnight but rather through persistent practice in many situations (the cookie bakeoff being just one).

Every time you apply yourself to find the right problem to solve, you’ll strengthen the founder’s mindset within yourself and those around you. You’ll do more than just resolve issues effectively—you’ll all become leaders and critical thinkers, as well.

Related:  5 Tips to Inspire an Innovative Mindset

Jim Marggraff 150x150

Jim Marggraff

Jim Marggraff is a serial entrepreneur dedicated to developing innovative technologies. Jim’s latest company, Eyefluence, was recently acquired by Google. He also invented the LeapPad learning system and the Livescribe smartpen. Jim is not only an entrepreneur himself, but a parent of entrepreneurs. Jim’s book, How to Raise a Founder With Heart , is available now.

  • Jim Marggraff https://www.success.com/author/jim-marggraff/ 5 Tips to Inspire an Innovative Mindset

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Library homepage

  • school Campus Bookshelves
  • menu_book Bookshelves
  • perm_media Learning Objects
  • login Login
  • how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
  • hub Instructor Commons
  • Download Page (PDF)
  • Download Full Book (PDF)
  • Periodic Table
  • Physics Constants
  • Scientific Calculator
  • Reference & Cite
  • Tools expand_more
  • Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

Medicine LibreTexts

6.3: Ethical Dilemmas

  • Last updated
  • Save as PDF
  • Page ID 63170

  • Ernstmeyer & Christman (Eds.)
  • Chippewa Valley Technical College via OpenRN

Nurses frequently find themselves involved in conflicts during patient care related to opposing values and ethical principles. These conflicts are referred to as ethical dilemmas. An ethical dilemma results from conflict of competing values and requires a decision to be made from equally desirable or undesirable options.

An ethical dilemma can involve conflicting patient’s values, nurse values, health care provider’s values, organizational values, and societal values associated with unique facts of a specific situation. For this reason, it can be challenging to arrive at a clearly superior solution for all stakeholders involved in an ethical dilemma. Nurses may also encounter moral dilemmas where the right course of action is known but the nurse is limited by forces outside their control. See Table 6.3a for an example of ethical dilemmas a nurse may experience in their nursing practice.

Read more about Ethics Topics and Articles on the ANA website.

According to the American Nurses Association (ANA), a nurse’s ethical competence depends on several factors [1] :

  • Continuous appraisal of personal and professional values and how they may impact interpretation of an issue and decision-making
  • An awareness of ethical obligations as mandated in the Code of Ethics for Nurses With Interpretive Statements [2]
  • Knowledge of ethical principles and their application to ethical decision-making
  • Motivation and skills to implement an ethical decision

Nurses and nursing students must have moral courage to address the conflicts involved in ethical dilemmas with “the willingness to speak out and do what is right in the face of forces that would lead us to act in some other way.” [3] See Figure 6.7 [4] for an illustration of nurses’ moral courage.

Image of a shield shaped icon with the caduceus symbol between letters R and N

Nurse leaders and organizations can support moral courage by creating environments where nurses feel safe and supported to speak up. [5] Nurses may experience moral conflict when they are uncertain about what values or principles should be applied to an ethical issue that arises during patient care. Moral conflict can progress to moral distress when the nurse identifies the correct ethical action but feels constrained by competing values of an organization or other individuals. Nurses may also feel moral outrage when witnessing immoral acts or practices they feel powerless to change. For this reason, it is essential for nurses and nursing students to be aware of frameworks for solving ethical dilemmas that consider ethical theories, ethical principles, personal values, societal values, and professionally sanctioned guidelines such as the ANA Nursing Code of Ethics.

Moral injury felt by nurses and other health care workers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic has gained recent public attention. Moral injury refers to the distressing psychological, behavioral, social, and sometimes spiritual aftermath of exposure to events that contradict deeply held moral beliefs and expectations. [6] Health care workers may not have the time or resources to process their feelings of moral injury caused by the pandemic, which can result in burnout. Organizations can assist employees in processing these feelings of moral injury with expanded employee assistance programs or other structured support programs. [7] Read more about self-care strategies to address feelings of burnout in the “ Burnout and Self-Care ” chapter.

Frameworks for Solving Ethical Dilemmas

Systematically working through an ethical dilemma is key to identifying a solution. Many frameworks exist for solving an ethical dilemma, including the nursing process, four-quadrant approach, the MORAL model, and the organization-focused PLUS Ethical Decision-Making model. [8] When nurses use a structured, systematic approach to resolving ethical dilemmas with appropriate data collection, identification and analysis of options, and inclusion of stakeholders, they have met their legal, ethical, and moral responsibilities, even if the outcome is less than ideal.

Nursing Process Model

The nursing process is a structured problem-solving approach that nurses may apply in ethical decision-making to guide data collection and analysis. See Table 6.3b for suggestions on how to use the nursing process model during an ethical dilemma. [9]

Four-Quadrant Approach

The four-quadrant approach integrates ethical principles (e.g., beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice) in conjunction with health care indications, individual and family preferences, quality of life, and contextual features. [11] See Table 6.3c for sample questions used during the four-quadrant approach.

MORAL Model

The MORAL model is a nurse-generated, decision-making model originating from research on nursing-specific moral dilemmas involving client autonomy, quality of life, distributing resources, and maintaining professional standards. The model provides guidance for nurses to systematically analyze and address real-life ethical dilemmas. The steps in the process may be remembered by using the mnemonic MORAL. See Table 6.3d for a description of each step of the MORAL model. [13] , [14]

PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model

The PLUS Ethical Decision-Making model was created by the Ethics and Compliance Initiative to help organizations empower employees to make ethical decisions in the workplace. This model uses four filters throughout the ethical decision-making process, referred to by the mnemonic PLUS:

  • P: Policies, procedures, and guidelines of an organization
  • L: Laws and regulations
  • U: Universal values and principles of an organization
  • S: Self-identification of what is good, right, fair, and equitable [15]

The seven steps of the PLUS Ethical Decision-Making model are as follows [16] :

  • Define the problem using PLUS filters
  • Seek relevant assistance, guidance, and support
  • Identify available alternatives
  • Evaluate the alternatives using PLUS to identify their impact
  • Make the decision
  • Implement the decision
  • Evaluate the decision using PLUS filters
  • American Nurses Association. (2021). Nursing: Scope and standards of practice (4th ed.). American Nurses Association. ↵
  • American Nurses Association. (2015). Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements. American Nurses Association. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nursing-excellence/ethics/code-of-ethics-for-nurses/coe-view-only / ↵
  • American Nurses Association (ANA). Ethics topics and articles. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nursing-excellence/ethics/ethics-topics-and-articles/ ↵
  • “Moral courage.png” by Meredith Pomietlo for Chippewa Valley Technical College is licensed under CC BY 4.0 ↵
  • Norman, S. & Maguen, S. (n.d.). Moral injury. PTSD: National Center for PTSD, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treat/cooccurring/moral_injury.asp ↵
  • Dean, W., Jacobs, B., & Manfredi, R. A. (2020). Moral injury: The invisible epidemic in COVID health care workers. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 76 (4), 385–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2020.05.023 ↵
  • Crisham, P. (1985). Moral: How can I do what is right? Nursing Management, 16 (3), 44. https://journals.lww.com/nursingmanagement/citation/1985/03000/moral__how_can_i_do_what_s_right_.6.aspx ↵
  • Ethics & Compliance Initiative. (2021). The PLUS Ethical Decision Making Model . https://www.ethics.org/resources/free-toolkit/decision-making-model/ ↵

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Behav Anal Pract
  • v.13(4); 2020 Dec

Promoting Ethical Discussions and Decision Making in a Human Service Agency

Linda a. leblanc.

1 LeBlanc Behavioral Consulting, Golden, CO USA

Olivia M. Onofrio

2 Trumpet Behavioral Health, 390 Union Blvd., Suite #300, Lakewood, CO 80228 USA

Amber L. Valentino

Joshua d. sleeper.

This article describes the development of a system, the Ethics Network, designed to promote discussion of ethical issues in a human services organization. The system includes several core components, including people (e.g., leaders, ambassadors), tools (e.g., hotline, training modules), and resources (e.g., monthly talking points). Data from 6 years of hotline submissions were analyzed to identify the most common concerns, and the data were compared to the pattern of violation notices submitted to the Behavior Analyst Certification Board. Recommendations are provided for creating similar systems in other organizations.

Behavior analysts are held accountable to a code of ethical and professional conduct called the Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB®) Professional and Ethical Compliance Code for Behavior Analysts ( 2014 ), hereafter referred to as the Code. The 10 different sections of the Code cover topics related to responsibility to clients, responsibility to the field, supervision, and research, among others. This Code guides professional ethics and professional behavior in the practice of behavior analysis, as opposed to personal or everyday behavior (Bailey & Burch, 2016 ). The Code was developed to assure that the socially important work that behavior analysts do for our clients (e.g., “finding humane and effective solutions, implementing programs that work) occurs while protecting clients’ rights at all times” (Bailey & Burch, 2016 , p. 30).

Although the Code is relatively straightforward, the applied context in which one might operate according to the Code is much less straightforward. Behavior analysts are likely to be faced with complex ethical issues regularly, given that they often work with vulnerable and at-risk populations (Brodhead & Higbee, 2012 ). These issues become more prominent as the profession continues to grow at a very rapid pace (Rosenberg & Schwartz, 2019 ). Although the Code and published decision-making models exist to guide actions (Bailey & Burch, 2016 ; Rosenberg & Schwartz, 2019 ), there is little data from applied behavior analysis (ABA) human service organizations to suggest which ethical conundrums are most likely to occur. The general suspicion is that ethical issues may be common enough in ABA organizations to warrant infrastructure for ethical guidance and oversight (Brodhead & Higbee, 2012 ).

The BACB ( 2018 ) summarized submitted notices of alleged violations against certificants for the years 2016–2017 and indicated that codes 5.0 (supervision) and 10.0 (failure to report to the Board) had the highest number of submitted violations, whereas code 1.0 represented the third highest category. Subcodes from code 2.0 were in the fifth and eighth most commonly submitted categories. In a recent update, Codes 1.0 and 7.0 became the most frequently substantiated violations, with subcodes related to integrity, multiple relationships, and ethical actions frequently cited. Code 10.0 (failure to report to the Board) moved to third place, whereas Code 5.0 (supervision) moved to fourth place. However, these data may represent underreporting and likely do not capture the daily ethical situations that many Registered Behavior Technicians (RBTs), Board Certified Assistant Behavior Analysts, and Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBAs) contact that are concerning but might not warrant a report to the certifying body. Many ethical situations can likely be resolved directly through conversation (see Code 7.02c; BACB, 2014 ), which is in fact the recommended practice for addressing many ethical issues (Bailey & Burch, 2016 ).

The Trumpet Behavioral Health Ethics Network (hereafter, the Ethics Network) was founded in 2012 by the executive leadership team of a midsize human services agency. The goal was to create a comprehensive ethics network to support team members in being proactive in facilitating open discussion of professional and ethical issues, establishing the highest standards of professional conduct, handling ethical dilemmas swiftly as they arose, and building capacity for ethical conduct at all levels of the organization. The purpose of this article is to describe the Ethics Network for others who might want to replicate the development of the system. In addition, we present data from the first 6 years of the existence of the network to provide a sample of the issues arising in the practice of behavior analysis as a potential guide for other organizations that are developing supports for ethical behavior in human service agencies. Finally, we provide strategies and recommendations for leaders in ABA organizations who might need to modify components of our system to suit the needs of their organizations. This model demonstration represents one option that providers might use as a guide to establish resources for addressing ethics throughout their organization.

The Ethics Team

The Ethics Network team included three groups: (a) the leadership team, (b) the ethics team members, and (c) the clinical and administrative teams throughout the organization. That is, every individual in the organization was considered a member of the Ethics Network, but the leadership team and the ethics team members were most heavily involved in developing and distributing resources and supports (see the section on data-informed resource development). Figure ​ Figure1 1 depicts the relation between the positions.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 40617_2020_454_Fig1_HTML.jpg

Graphic depicting the individuals involved in the Ethics Network

Leadership Team

The highest level of decision making and leadership in the organization (i.e., the executive team) is represented by the director of the Ethics Network. In the 7 years of the Ethics Network’s existence, three people have held the director role, including the first and third authors. They acted as a resource, reviewed data, fueled ideas for resource development, helped facilitate meetings, and received all ethics hotline submissions to determine how, when, and who should respond. The chair and the assistant chair positions were appointed by the executive team and were generally selected from the existing or prior ethics team members. These positions are similar to the ethics coordinator position described by Brodhead and Higbee ( 2012 ). A person was appointed to the role of assistant chair for 1 year and then proceeded into the position of chair for a second year (i.e., the assistant chair became the next chair, and a new assistant chair was appointed to support). These two positions were considered leadership and leadership-training positions, and each person in the position received a small stipend for their work at the end of the year and was allotted additional travel support for conferences and professional development activities in ethics.

Ethics Team Members

The ethics team members were volunteers who chose to participate in the regularly occurring meetings and to assist in the development of resources and training materials. These team members could be in almost any clinical or administrative role in the organization, but most often they were in the role of BCBA clinician or were aspiring to that role and actively accruing fieldwork experience hours in preparation for certification. These volunteer positions had no specified length of term, and team members served as long as they had sufficient capacity and interest or until they were appointed to the assistant chair position. Most team members rotated on and off the team within approximately 12–18 months. The Ethics Network leadership team and volunteer team members met approximately one to two times per month for an hour to plan resources and discuss ethical issues and the Code.

The Clinical and Administrative Teams

The clinical and administrative teams were generally the recipients of the efforts of the leadership team and volunteer team. At least annually, the leadership of the organization (i.e., all executive team members, all operational leaders) and the administrative team participated in a discussion about an ethics topic with general administrative applicability (see additional information in the following sections). For example, one discussion focused on the portions of the Code pertinent to human resources and appropriate professional interactions in the workplace. Another discussion focused on ethics issues related to marketing and public statements (e.g., nonsolicitation of testimonials, importance of evidence-based practices). In addition, the clinical teams at all levels (i.e., RBT to BCBA–Doctoral level) participated in one to three additional ethics trainings and discussions each year (see additional information that follows).

The Training Efforts

Establishing infrastructure and initial training.

Some of the first goals of the Ethics Network were to establish a foundation for conceptualizing and responding to ethics scenarios using a structured problem-solving approach. The emphasis in this initial training and infrastructure was to teach an overarching problem-solving strategy that was broadly applicable to many different situations, including ethical dilemmas and clinical decision making. To accomplish this objective, two resources were created and incorporated into training materials. The first resource was a multistep, structured problem-solving model commonly used with a broad array of individuals, from children with behavior problems, to executives in multinational corporations, to tackle problems as diverse as aggression and social skills problems to cultural sensitivity (Arya, Margaryan, & Collis, 2003 ; LeBlanc, Sellers, & Alai, 2020 ; Smith, Lochman, & Daunic, 2005 ). Different versions of structured problem-solving models include four, five, six, or seven steps, but all focus on the same basic repertoire (Glago, Mastropieri, & Scruggs, 2009 ; LeBlanc et al., 2020 ). We adopted a six-step version of this widely disseminated problem-solving model for all aspects of clinical problem solving, including problem solving for ethical dilemmas. The six steps were (a) recognize the problem, (b) define the problem, (c) generate potential solutions, (d) evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of potential solutions, (e) implement a solution, and (f) evaluate the effects of the solution. Throughout the organization, people were taught to analyze and respond to ethical scenarios based on these six steps as part of their initial (i.e., within the first 2 weeks of hire) training.

The second resource was a conceptualization and depiction of four overarching concepts (selected by the first author) that serve as foundations for ethical and professional behavior in many disciplines, including behavior analysis (Bailey & Burch, 2016 ; Smith, 2005 ; Zur, 2007 ). These four concepts should be adhered to in all professional situations, and failure to do so creates the risk of unethical behavior. Thus, the individual components of the Code and the responses to ethical situations (i.e., the solutions described previously) should all be relevant to one or more of these concepts: do no harm, boundaries, confidentiality, and professionalism. These concepts are similar to the reasons described as underpinning the need for the Code (e.g., humane action, protection of client rights). The graphic used in the initial (i.e., within the first 2 weeks of hire) training materials depicted each concept as a pillar of responsible professional behavior.

Discussion about ethics began early in a staff member’s tenure with the organization, and training was integrated at all levels. As part of their initial training, every employee of the organization completed an online instructional design module that covered various aspects of the Code, the concepts of the pillars of professionalism, and the model for ethical problem solving and decision making. Specific information was included for new therapists and new BCBAs. One version of the module was tailored for the administrative team by focusing on aspects of the Code and ethical problem scenarios that were more likely to be encountered in administrative tasks. Another version of the module focused on aspects of the Code and ethical scenarios that were more likely to be encountered in the delivery of clinical services.

Culture, Contingencies, and Continuous Discussion

The goal of training and ongoing discussion was to create effective and ethical decision makers at all levels of the organization and to facilitate a culture of ethical decision making by identifying and providing contingencies for ethical behavior. In addition, the ethics team regularly invited new volunteer team members from all levels of the organization (e.g., RBTs, aspiring certificants, BCBAs, administrative support professionals). All team members assisted in the development and delivery of trainings and communication resources for the organization and received public acknowledgment as ethics leaders and Ethics Network ambassadors.

After initial training in ethics, there were frequent opportunities for clinical teams to engage in discussion about ethics. The most commonly employed strategies involved the distribution of written material and live dynamic trainings and discussions. The two most frequently used written strategies were monthly talking points and e-mailed information (i.e., ethics “fun facts”). See Table ​ Table1 1 for example topics for each strategy. The monthly talking points were distributed to clinical directors throughout the organization to facilitate discussion about ethics in monthly clinical team meetings. These documents provided a written overview of a common ethical issue (e.g., dual relationships), a detailed review of the relevant codes, and strategies for avoiding or resolving the ethical issue. In addition, the documents often provided scenarios and example scripted responses that could be used in role-plays with team members to help them practice responding to the situation. The ethics fun facts were e-mails distributed organization-wide (i.e., to both administrative and clinical team members of all skill levels). These e-mails were designed to be brief and eye-catching (e.g., infographics, videos) and focused on a single ethics-related topic as a reminder (e.g., the holidays are approaching and we do not accept gifts) or announcements (e.g., there are new ethics codes for RBTs).

Sample Resources Created by the Members of the Ethics Network

The most commonly employed versions of live, dynamic discussions were quarterly clinical team discussions and journal club activities conducted as webinars. See Table ​ Table1 1 for examples of topics. The quarterly clinical team discussions were based on presentations and discussions about advanced ethics and leadership topics (e.g., ethical issues arising when families are separating or divorcing, the importance of operating within your scope of competence). The quarterly discussions were typically created and led by members of the ethics team and were usually created in response to ethical questions that had arisen throughout the year or professional development events from conferences. The journal clubs typically focused on published articles that focused on some aspect of ethical behavior, and the journal clubs were co-led by a member of the ethics team and the author of the article. Finally, each year the ethics leaders conducted a training and discussion with the administrative team about portions of the Code that were particularly pertinent to administrative support activities (e.g., nonsolicitation of testimonials).

The Ethics Hotline

To provide team members with immediate support, an internal ethics hotline was created. The hotline was located on the organization’s intranet and was accessible by any team member. Submissions were anonymous to everyone except the ethics director, who received the submissions via e-mail. Once received, the director removed identifying information. In cases of an emergency, the director contacted the team member within 12 h. In nonemergencies, the director de-identified the submission and reviewed the submission with the chair and assistant chair. These leaders facilitated a discussion about the submission at the next Ethics Network meeting with the volunteers, and one to two team members volunteered to craft a response within 1 week.

The ethics submission form was specifically designed to follow the problem-solving and decision-making steps outlined in the training materials. For example, the form prompts team members to (a) describe their concern (i.e., detect the problem), (b) consider which BACB Code item is relevant to their scenario (i.e., define the problem), (c) nominate possible solutions to their dilemma, and (d) list any pros and cons of the possible solutions. The BACB Code numbers were listed in a drop-down selection menu. See the Appendix .

Data-Informed Resource Development

The ethics leaders and ethics team met regularly (e.g., every 2–4 weeks) to develop and execute the annual resource development and training plan. Sometimes new topics were identified, and sometimes resources that had previously been distributed were redistributed (e.g., information on the ethics of gift giving and receipt from clients was distributed in mid-November each year). The topics were selected based on a review of the recent ethics hotline submissions and direct conversations with individuals in the organization who wanted to offer input (e.g., the managing director suggested a topic on peer interactions in the workplace). Once topics had been suggested, the leaders identified the mechanism that seemed best suited to the topics (e.g., fun fact, monthly talking point, all-staff training). The leaders then recruited members of the ethics team to assist with topics that interested them the most. See Table ​ Table1 1 for a sample of topics covered in each distribution mechanism.

Coding Procedures

We downloaded all ethics hotline submissions submitted by staff members from the conception of the Ethics Network at the end of 2012 through 2019. A total of 137 submissions were reviewed. The submission data were downloaded in a Microsoft Excel® document that included the information completed by each staff member submitter. The fields the submitter completed are included in the Appendix . The names of the submitters were removed before the document was reviewed by the second author.

Data Coding and Analysis

The second author read and coded each submission for the year and month of submission, whether the situation was described as urgent or nonurgent, the position and background of the submitter, and the BACB codes and subcodes identified by the submitter. Next, the coder identified any additional codes or subcodes that were relevant based on the written description of the ethical concern.

The frequency of submissions was calculated for each full year from 2012 to 2019. The percentage of submissions described as urgent by the submitter was calculated by adding the number of submissions marked urgent to the number marked not urgent and dividing by the total number of submissions. The frequency of the positions of submitters was calculated for the following categories and subcategories when applicable: administrative and support services, clinical leadership (i.e., regional director, clinical director), senior clinician, clinician (i.e., clinician, associate clinician), direct care provider (i.e., senior therapist, therapist), and unidentified. The frequency of identification was noted for each of the 10 BACB codes as identified by (a) the submitter and (b) the researchers. Next, the researcher identified the total number of codes and subcodes identified for each submission and calculated an average by dividing the total number of codes and subcodes identified for all submissions by the total number of submissions.

Interobserver Agreement (IOA)

A second independent coder (i.e., the third author) scored 25% of the entries ( n = 35) for the pertinent ethical codes for each submission. The second coder downloaded the same spreadsheet along with the BACB Code and scored every third entry to ensure that the entire time span was sampled. She read each selected submission and identified the relevant codes. The primary and secondary coders’ responses were then compared. For an agreement to be scored, the coders had to agree on all relevant codes for that entry (i.e., the submission generated perfect agreement on all codes identified by the reviewers). The overall agreement was calculated by summing the number of agreements by the number of agreements plus disagreements and multiplying by 100 to obtain a percentage. Of the 35 submissions scored for IOA, there were 30 agreements and 5 disagreements, resulting in an overall IOA score of 86%. The most common type of disagreement was for one coder to identify an additional code that the other had not. A second coder also scored the position of the submitter for each submitter (i.e., IOA scored for 100% of submissions). For these measures, IOA was calculated by dividing the smaller number by the larger number and converting to a percentage. The resulting IOA for the submitters’ positions was 100%.

The frequency of submissions for each full year from 2012 to 2019 is depicted in Fig. ​ Fig.2. 2 . The partial year of 2012 (November and December) is not graphed but had only a single submission. There was an increasing trend for the first full 3 years, with submissions stabilizing between the years 2015 and 2019 ( M = 25.25 for these last four data points). Across all years, the percentage of submissions described as urgent by the submitter was 12%, whereas 88% were described as nonurgent, perhaps suggesting that submitters were using the hotline proactively to initiate discussions about situations that could arise or could become urgent if not addressed.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 40617_2020_454_Fig2_HTML.jpg

Frequency of ethics hotline submissions per year

The frequency of the position of submitters is depicted in Fig. ​ Fig.3. 3 . The category with the lowest number of submissions was “unidentified,” followed by “direct care providers.” The category with the highest number of submissions was “clinician,” which included both BCBAs and those pursuing their credential and serving as a case coordinator under the supervision of a clinical leader. The number of employees of the organization ranged from approximately 600 to 900 during these years, with approximately 75%–80% of employees holding direct service provider positions. Thus, the number of submissions per employee is very low, and clinicians and leadership positions are far overrepresented in reporting compared to direct care providers.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 40617_2020_454_Fig3_HTML.jpg

When two tiers exist for a position (i.e., clinical leadership, clinician, direct care provider), the more junior tier is represented by the filled bar segment, and the more senior tier is represented by the hashed bar segment

The mean number of relevant BACB codes per submission (i.e., identified by the submitter) was 1.0, with a range of 0 to 4. The majority of submissions with no BACB codes indicated “unsure” as the response. In contrast, the mean number of BACB codes identified from the submissions by the reviewing researcher (i.e., identified by an expert) was higher, at 1.43, with a range of 0 to 5 codes per submission. The distribution of the submissions across the Code areas is depicted in Fig. ​ Fig.4, 4 , with the original submitter data represented as a filled bar and the expert reviewer data as a hashed bar. The most frequently identified code area by both submitters and the reviewer was code 2. The second most frequently endorsed area by submitters was “unsure/not applicable,” followed closely by code 1. In contrast, the reviewing researcher identified more items for code 1 and fewer items with no applicable or discernable code. One potential benefit of an ethics network is that people who are unsure about whether a specific code is applicable can seek assistance from a colleague who is more likely to recognize the relevant codes for a situation. A second potential benefit of an ethics network is that behavior analysts who are early in their careers may learn to become better at identifying additional relevant Code violations through their interactions with the ethics hotline team. The reviewing researcher also scored subcodes for the most frequently identified areas (codes 1 and 2) and found that subcodes 1.06 (multiple relationships and conflicts of interest), 2.05 (rights and prerogatives of clients), and 2.06 (maintaining confidentiality). Full data on subcodes for codes 1.0 and 2.0 are available upon request were the most frequently identified.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 40617_2020_454_Fig4_HTML.jpg

Number of times codes were identified by the hotline submitter and expert coder

A direct comparison with the BACB’s reported data is not possible due to the format of the reporting of the BACB data. That is, the BACB reports combine multiple code sections together by category in their reporting of cases for 2018, whereas we report each code area separately. However, some general observations are possible. The Trumpet hotline data indicate that Codes 1.0 and 2.0 are the most commonly submitted. Similarly, the 2018 data from the BACB reveal that several Code 1.0 elements are represented in notices of alleged violations that resulted in substantiated violations and disciplinary action. Code 2.0 elements, however, are only the fifth, seventh, eighth, and ninth most common groupings in the BACB data, with few substantiated violations per grouping. Finally, the BACB reports (2016–2017; BACB, 2018 ) both indicate a high proportion of violations related to failure to comply with BACB rules or reporting requirements (i.e., code 10), whereas none of the Trumpet hotline submissions were related to code 10.

Brodhead and Higbee ( 2012 ) provided recommendations for creating a structure for supporting ethical guidance and training in human service organizations. This article illustrates a system of active supports developed in a large human services agency with the express purpose of fostering open discussion about ethics and systematic problem solving in ethical dilemmas. Many of the components of the system (i.e., the Ethics Network) are similar to the ones described by Brodhead and Higbee ( 2012 ), including a team of directors and a focus on training and supervision. Brodhead, Quigley, and Cox ( 2018 ) suggest that discerning potential employees should evaluate organizations by examining the “extent to which the organization expects employees to engage in ethical conduct, and actively supports those expectations” (p. 165). One way to actively support those expectations for ethical conduct is to create a system such as the Ethics Network described here.

There are several behavioral explanations for why individuals may behave unethically or fail to report others who behavior unethically. The Ethics Network was designed to address each of these potential behavioral explanations. First, reporting and discussing unethical behavior can be unpleasant, which may lead to avoidance of reports and discussions unless systems are developed that facilitate continuous discussion. Positive reinforcement contingencies for asking for help or offering help were built into the ethics system (e.g., immediate response and support from a leader, status and reinforcement for being involved in the network). Having discussions occur at fixed times rather than in response to crises was designed to eliminate any respondent or operant conditioning process that might occur with contingent (i.e., crisis-triggered) discussions of ethical issues. Second, individuals may have a skill deficit in identifying ethical dilemmas. Without specific training and support for individuals, unethical behavior may occur because of ignorance of the Code and the overarching principles that underly the Code. The training components of the Ethics Network were designed to minimize skill deficits and to focus on a structured problem-solving approach used across contexts and a small number of underlying principles rather than numerical codes. Third, the response effort of obtaining support and resources for ethical decision making may lead to reduced reporting and assistance seeking. Resources that are easy to access and use, such as the hotline, the monthly talking points, and the fun facts distributed via e-mail, were designed to reduce the response effort for ethical support. Each of these possibilities likely exists in the lives of behavior analysts faced with making ethical decisions each day and needs to be considered in the context of creating a culture that promotes ethical decision making.

The analysis of the Ethics Network hotline submissions offers a few points of insight. First, there was an ascending slope in the frequency of submissions throughout the first years of the system. This pattern may suggest that it takes time for the competing positive reinforcement contingencies to overcome the inherent negative reinforcement contingencies. It may also suggest that the ongoing training efforts established important prerequisite skills for submission (e.g., knowledge of the Code, sufficient exemplars to identify dilemmas). Second, the most frequently identified codes were codes 1.0 and 2.0. These areas focus on the responsible conduct of behavior analysts and their responsibility to clients, and the most common subcodes focused on dual relationships or conflicts of interest, rights of clients, and confidentiality.

Another finding worthy of note was the fact that those serving in the role of expert usually identified more codes that were relevant than the original submitter. In addition, the most common source of disagreement between the experts was when one of them identified an additional area that might be relevant. These data speak to the fact that most ethical situations have multiple potential implications and areas of concern. Difficult situations do not readily fall neatly into a single code or subcode without other issues being identified. These findings are also evident in the data reported by the BACB ( 2018 ), who found that the majority of violation submissions included multiple violations (i.e., from two to over five). Some of the topics endorsed in hotline submissions differed from the violations reported to the BACB (e.g., no code 10 submissions), but dual relationships and clients’ rights submissions were high for both sources.

Although these data offer some insights into hotline submissions over a span of several years, there was no experimental evaluation of the components of the system as necessary or sufficient to produce robust ethical decision making. The mastery of the instructional design module suggests that certain verbal repertoires were acquired, and the submissions to the ethics hotline suggest that people sought guidance and resources. However, there is no way to know how many actual ethical dilemmas were occurring across the multiyear span as a comparison and means to calculate whether an increasing or substantial percentage of dilemmas was being submitted. Future studies could experimentally evaluate the components included in this ethics network.

The purpose of this article was to provide an example for others who wish to build systems that support ethical behavior and facilitate honest and proactive discussion of difficult situations and potential solutions. In doing so, these types of systems may assist us in our endeavors to do socially important work while protecting clients’ rights at all times (Bailey & Burch, 2016 ). However, human service organizations may differ substantially in size, resources, and expertise. Trumpet Behavioral Health is a relatively large organization with resources committed to systems development, expertise, and infrastructure to support clinical standards implementation. Other organizations might lack expertise or resources and infrastructure for the multicomponent approach taken at Trumpet.

The following suggestions may assist organizations in modifying the approach to meet their needs. First, there may need to be one single leader of the ethics network in a smaller organization. It is important that the leader have influence throughout the organization so that ethical discussions occur among both clinical teams and administrative support teams. Second, organizations may need to rely on existing resources rather than create their own, as was done at Trumpet. Fortunately, many more published resources on ethics exist now than existed in 2012 when the Ethics Network was started at Trumpet. These published resources can be incorporated into a journal club option even if the other resource categories listed in Table ​ Table1 1 are not possible. Third, now that data exist from this analysis and the BACB, an organization might target ethical discussions and resources at the most commonly reported problems. That is, a focus of discussions on dual relationships, responsibility to clients, and privacy and confidentiality would address many existing and potential ethical problems, though certainly not all of them.

Author Note

The Ethics Network was developed as part of the Clinical Standards Initiative at Trumpet Behavioral Health. The authors thank Allie Kane, Heather Loeb, Jessie Mitchell, Kirstin Powers, Sarah Kristiansen, and Michael Wright, who each served as assistant chair, chair, or director of the Ethics Network.

Information Completed by Submitters on the Ethics Hotline Submission Form

No funding was associated with the current study.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The authors of this manuscript declare no conflict of interest regarding this manuscript.

All procedures were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

  • Arya K, Margaryan A, Collis B. Culturally sensitive problem solving activities for multi-national corporations. TechTrends. 2003; 47 :40–49. doi: 10.1007/BF02763283. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bailey JS, Burch MR. Ethics for behavior analysts . 3. New York, NY: Routledge; 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Behavior Analyst Certification Board . Professional and ethical compliance code for behavior analysts . Littleton, CO: Author; 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Behavior Analyst Certification Board . A summary of ethics violations and code-enforcement activities: 2016–2017 . Littleton, CO: Author; 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Brodhead MT, Higbee TS. Teaching and maintaining ethical behavior in a professional organization. Behavior Analysis in Practice. 2012; 5 (2):82–88. doi: 10.1007/BF03391827. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Brodhead MT, Quigley SP, Cox DJ. How to identify ethical practices in organizations prior to employment. Behavior Analysis in Practice. 2018; 11 (2):165–173. doi: 10.1007/s40617-018-0235-y. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Glago K, Mastropieri MA, Scruggs TE. Improving problem solving of elementary students with mild disabilities. Remedial and Special Education. 2009; 30 (6):372–380. doi: 10.1177/0741932508324394. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • LeBlanc LA, Sellers TP, Alai S. Building and sustaining meaningful and effective relationships as a supervisor and mentor . Cornwall on Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing; 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
  • O'Leary, P. N., Miller, M. M., Olive, M. L., & Kelly, A. N. (2015). Blurred lines: ethical implications of social media for behavior analysts. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10 (1), 45–51. 10.1007/s40617-014-0033-0 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
  • Rosenberg NE, Schwartz IS. Guidance or compliance: What makes an ethical behavior analyst? Behavior Analysis in Practice. 2019; 12 (2):473–482. doi: 10.1007/s40617-018-00287-5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Smith CM. Origin and uses of primum non nocere—above all, do no harm! Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2005; 45 (4):371–377. doi: 10.1177/0091270004273680. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Smith SW, Lochman JE, Daunic AP. Managing aggression using cognitive-behavioral interventions: State of the practice and future. Behavioral Disorders. 2005; 30 (3):227–240. doi: 10.1177/019874290503000307. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Zur O. Boundaries in psychotherapy: Ethical and clinical explorations . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
  • PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
  • EDIT Edit this Article
  • EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
  • Browse Articles
  • Learn Something New
  • Quizzes Hot
  • This Or That Game New
  • Train Your Brain
  • Explore More
  • Support wikiHow
  • About wikiHow
  • Log in / Sign up

How to Solve Ethical Issues

Last Updated: April 16, 2023

This article was co-authored by Jeffrey Fermin . Jeffrey Fermin is a Performance Marketing Manager based in Miami, Florida, who currently works for AllVoices. He’s also the Founder of a full-service marketing company called New Theory. With over 10 years of experience, he specializes in digital marketing and content creation. He earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology and a Bachelor of Education from Florida International University. Jeffrey has won a Microsoft Octas Innovation Award and is a TechCrunch Disrupt Runner-Up. This article has been viewed 92,717 times.

Solving ethical issues can be a complex process, and the steps you'll need to take will vary slightly depending on the circumstances. In general, though, you'll need to collect as much information as possible, review your options, and commit to the best possible plan of action.

Method One: Solving Ethical Issues at Work as an Employee

Step 1 Gather as much information as possible.

  • Ask yourself if you really know enough information to determine what's going on. Ideally, you should gather all relevant facts concerning the issue at hand, but if you cannot collect all the facts, you at least need to know enough to make a well-educated hypothesis.
  • You also need to ask yourself if you might be making assumptions. Everyone has their own personal and professional biases. Some of those biases are grounded in experience, but if you aren't careful, they could be skewing your perspective and making you see something that doesn't actually exist.

Step 2 Identify the parties involved.

  • On a direct level, those participating in the ethical violation are certainly involved.
  • On an indirect level, those who will be impacted regardless of having no say in the issue are also involved. Among others, this can include coworkers, customers, and stockholders.
  • You'll also need to determine who, among those involved, will be your allies. Since fixing this issue goes beyond the limits of your power, you will need the support, assistance, and direction of others when solving it. That being the case, knowing who you can trust is a very important matter.

Step 3 Pinpoint the ethical issues involved.

  • Some ethical violations are more obvious than others. For instance, if you caught a coworker stealing expensive equipment, you could make the clear distinction that theft is wrong. In situations dealing with small violations or interdepartmental strife, though, the violation may not be as clear.
  • Review the circumstances again and ask yourself which fundamental principle is affected. Possible options include violations of power, integrity, honesty, objectivity, professional competence, confidentiality, or fairness.

Step 4 Review the company's standard procedure.

  • If you have a company manual or similar documentation, review it now. Look into the organization's policies concerning workplace ethics.
  • Pay close attention to the chain of command. Find out who you should involve at which points, and the correct procedure for doing so.
  • If the company doesn't have a set structure for dealing with ethical issues, you will need to determine who to go to using your own experience and understanding.

Step 5 List and evaluate your options.

  • When evaluating your options, consider how each one fares in the light of your company's internal procedures, any external laws involved, and any general ethical values upheld by society as a whole.
  • Predict the consequences that will result from each option. This includes both positive and negative outcomes. Understand that, in some circumstances, each option may come with both negative and positive consequences.

Step 6 Execute the best option.

  • In most cases, the solution will require you to escalate the issue to an authority within the company. The correct person may depend upon who within the company is guilty of the violation. Moreover, if the highest authorities in the company are guilty, you may need to bring the violation to the attention of an external authority.
  • The best option should address the ethical issue in a productive manner. If multiple ethical values are involved, your solution should usually correct as many violations as possible.
  • Whatever option you choose, be prepared to stand by it. There will always be critics, and there is no guarantee that you can remain anonymous throughout the entire corrective process.

Step 7 Keep a record as you monitor the outcome.

  • As a general rule, it's a good idea to document nearly everything in writing. This includes your own investigations, the reports you've filed, and the discussions you've had concerning this issue. You may need to use these written records to defend yourself later.

Step 8 Take things to the next level when needed.

  • Don't be afraid of going above someone's head if he or she isn't getting the job done. Be reasonable when evaluating how that supervisor has handled things, but don't let yourself be bullied into submission by someone trying to sweep things under the rug.

Method Two: Solving Ethical Issues at Work as an Employer or Supervisor

Step 1 Objectively review the report.

  • If the employee explains the issue to you verbally, request a formal written report. The additional paperwork might seem like a pain, but it should help protect everyone involved, including both you and the whistle-blower.
  • Do not allow your personal and professional relationships with the involved parties affect your judgment. You may think well of the person being reported and poorly of the person doing the reporting, and your instinct might be right when all is said and done. Until you straighten things out, though, you need to treat the complaint as potentially valid and act accordingly.

Step 2 Perform your own investigation.

  • Talk with other employees who might have information to share. Review written reports, computer records, and security footage associated that may shed light on the issue.
  • If your company has a department dedicated to addressing matters like these, make sure that the department is informed. You'll need to work directly with that department during the investigation.

Step 3 Identify all involved parties.

  • From your perspective, the parties directly involved will include both the employee who reported the issue and the employee or employees mentioned in the report.
  • Parties indirectly affected can include other employees, other supervisors, customers, stockholders, and more. Even though these persons have no control over the issue, you will still need to keep their needs and standpoint in mind.

Step 4 Identify the ethical issues involved.

  • If your investigation proved the initial report true, you'll need to evaluate the actions of those reported. Possible ethical violations could include, among others, violations of power, respect, honesty, professional competence, or integrity.
  • If your investigation proved the initial report false, you need to evaluate the actions of the reporter. Ask yourself if the report was made in honest error or if the reporter violated the ethics of honesty and respect by making false accusations.

Step 5 Brainstorm possible solutions.

  • Evaluate your options based on how well they actually address the issue and how well they fit into any internal procedures already established by the company.
  • Try to predict any consequences that will result from each of your options. Consequences can be good, bad, or a mixture of both. When choosing which option or options you'll implement, choose those that have the greatest positive consequences and least significant negative consequences.

Step 6 Ask for external support.

  • Support within the company can come from your own supervisor (when applicable), human resources, or other departments you work with closely.
  • Support from outside the company can come in the form of ethics experts. Lawyers and legal authorities—like the police—may need to be contacted if the ethics violation was also illegal, but for less severe matters, an ethics expert might be a counselor or adviser. [3] X Research source

Step 7 Meet with the affected parties.

  • When an ethics violation was reported in confidence by an external party, you will need to meet separately to protect the identify of the reporting party.
  • If the violation itself involved multiple conflicting parties, you may need to sit down with all parties in conflict at the same time.
  • Take appropriate disciplinary measures. Those who violated an ethical principle should be disciplined for it. Make sure that the consequence fits the severity of the violation, though.
  • Offer counseling and support. If the incident caused trauma or other difficulties to one or more parties, find out from them what sort of support they need to heal.

Step 8 Implement any necessary educational programs.

  • The specifics will vary from situation to situation, but overall, you should aim to make sure that each current and new employee is aware of the ethical issue and how it should be handled.

Method Three: Solving Ethical Issues Involving Minors

Step 1 Consider the setting.

  • Ethical issues involving minors often happen at school, but they can also occur within churches, community centers, or even just in the neighborhood.
  • The role played by the minor may also determine how the ethical issue must be handled within the setting it occurs in.

Step 2 Identify the problem.

  • Ethical violations that also break laws or institutional regulations are usually easy to identify, but for issues that don't strictly violate such guidelines, you may need to think a little more deeply.
  • If your only response is an emotional one, you might not be able to get the issue resolved. You need to be able to clearly and intellectually define why the issue violates some ethical principle (honesty, responsibility, respect, etc.).

Step 3 Collect information.

  • Identify all parties involved. Try to find out exactly what happened, gathering as much evidence as you can in the process.
  • Also gather data about applicable regulations from various governing sources, including professional organizations and government at the federal, state, and local level.

Step 4 Consider issues of accountability.

  • Regarding minors, accountability needs to be assessed at both legal and personal levels. Involved minors might not be legally responsible for certain actions even though they are responsible for others. When no laws were violated, some minors may not be accountable for various aspects of the situation based on their age or level of development.
  • Parents, guardians, teachers, and other adults in the minor's life may also be held accountable for some ethical violation committed by that child, especially if the adult in question had the ability to prevent or control the issue before it became a problem.

Step 5 Identify who has power in the situation.

  • You'll need to keep in mind the minors' rights and the parents' rights. Even though their power may not be able to solve the issue, it is still a power that must be addressed and worked with.
  • Typically, the power to solve the issue rests with multiple people, including some type of authority. Issues taking place at school might require the involvement of school officials. On the other hand, issues taking place in the neighborhood or in a minor's home might require help from police or social workers.

Step 6 Use the resources that are available to you.

  • You might turn to a supervisor or colleague and ask for advice on how to proceed based on his or her past experiences. That individual may also be able to provide you with additional information or clarification.
  • Similarly, you can read articles or books that address the issue according to setting and severity. Doing so will give you greater access to information that is more useful to your specific set of circumstances.

Step 7 Evaluate your options.

  • When reviewing your options and choosing the best one, make sure that the ethical issue is being actively addressed in the best way possible. You need to be able to defend your final decision on an ethical and legal basis.

Step 8 Put your plan into action.

  • Even if the actual power to solve the issue rests outside of your hands, you should still follow up with the process as much as you are legally allowed to do. Make sure that things are being handled properly, and if they aren't, be prepared to elevate the issue to the next level.

Expert Q&A

You might also like.

Become a Successful Professional

Expert Interview

ethical approach to problem solving

Thanks for reading our article! If you'd like to learn more about solving ethical issues, check out our in-depth interview with Jeffrey Fermin .

  • ↑ http://www.icaew.com/en/technical/ethics/framework-for-resolving-ethical-problems
  • ↑ https://www.iaa.govt.nz/for-advisers/adviser-tools/ethics-toolkit/solving-ethical-problems/
  • ↑ http://www.amnhealthcare.com/latest-healthcare-news/10-Best-Practices-Addressing-Ethical-Issues-Moral-Distress/
  • ↑ http://www.asha.org/slp/schools/prof-consult/10step/

About This Article

Jeffrey Fermin

  • Send fan mail to authors

Did this article help you?

ethical approach to problem solving

Featured Articles

Make a Balsamic Reduction

Trending Articles

How to Take the Perfect Thirst Trap

Watch Articles

Wrap a Round Gift

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Info
  • Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

Adviser login

Mobile navigation.

  • For migrants
  • Guides and resources
  • Who can give advice?
  • Working with a licensed immigration adviser
  • How much should an adviser cost?
  • The risks of relying on illegal advice
  • Make a complaint
  • Find an adviser
  • Can I give advice?
  • Who needs a licence?
  • Operating without a licence
  • Information for employers
  • Information for education providers
  • Information for education agents
  • Information for travel agents
  • Information for recruiters
  • Become a licensed adviser
  • How to apply
  • Apply as an Australian registered migration agent
  • Licensing toolkit
  • Supervision toolkit
  • Follow my application
  • Frequently asked questions
  • For advisers
  • Your licence
  • Competency standards
  • Code of conduct
  • Adviser tools
  • Licenced advisers reference group
  • Annual statistics
  • Enforcement Policy
  • Judicial and tribunal decisions

For advisers small banner

Solving ethical problems

When faced with an ethical issue, it is important to remember that there is seldom only one correct way in which to act. The information provided below, however, is intended as a guide to assist you to make professional and ethically responsible decisions.

Making good ethical decisions requires a method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision, and weighing up the considerations that could influence your choice of action.

The following framework provides a method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action. A Worksheet for Ethical Deliberation has also been developed for advisers.

Ethical decision-making framework

The flowchart below outlines the steps in the ethical decision-making process. Each step is described in further detail below.

Recognising that there is an ethical question:

  • requires you to think about how you should act and what you should do in a given situation
  • could relate to a situation and/or a decision that you make, which could be potentially damaging to a client or a stakeholder
  • could involve a choice between a good and a bad outcome – e.g. a situation where Immigration New Zealand would decline your client’s visa application because of certain information that the client has disclosed to you, but of which Immigration New Zealand is unaware.

Understanding the facts of the situation:

  • requires you to consider how you can learn more about the situation including making enquiries and finding additional facts to ensure you have the best possible understanding of the situation.

Understanding the options available to you:

  • requires you to identify and understand each option available to you
  • requires you to take into account any legislative requirements, professional standards (such as the Code), immigration law and instructions, as these may influence your options.

Understanding the consequences of the options:

  • requires you to work out how different parties will be affected by each option - these parties can include the client, stakeholders within the New Zealand immigration system, your employer and other advisers
  • requires you to be aware that your overriding duty is always to act in the lawful and legitimate interests of your client
  • requires you to ask yourself some searching questions, for example:
  • If I am going to act in a way that is adverse to my client’s interests in any way, am I justified in doing so?
  • Which option will produce the most good for my client even if it will upset another person or cause me discomfort or loss?
  • Will this require me to act in a way that will harm someone else or go against my personal beliefs or ethics?
  • Is there a way to act that will not damage my client’s interests but will reduce or prevent harm to another person or institution?
  • Is there a way to act that will not damage my client’s interests and will allow me to act in the way I believe is consistent with the type of adviser that I want to be?

Testing the option you plan to take:

  • requires you to consider the possible effects of all the different options
  • requires you to reflect on and thoroughly review the option that you plan to take – in doing so, you should ask yourself the following questions:
  • Am I feeling uncomfortable with what I am about to do?
  • If so, why am I feeling uncomfortable about this option?
  • Why am I making this decision?
  • Would I be happy if this was done to me?
  • Would I be happy explaining this to different parties within the New Zealand immigration system and explaining why I did what I am planning to do?

Explaining the option you have decided on to those affected and to other interested parties:

  • requires you to act in a way that your client, or another party, may not like or may find difficult to understand
  • requires you to be able to justify your actions in a logical and straightforward manner - if you cannot explain your actions, then it is more likely that you are acting on the basis of your feelings or prejudices
  • will often require you to have kept excellent records that note the essentials of what the issue was, what you did to resolve it, the options you considered and how you communicated your decision to those affected.

Acting on the chosen option:

  • requires you to consider how you will go about implementing your decision
  • requires you to actually carry through with the action you decided to take.

Reflecting on the outcome:

  • requires you to assess how your decision turned out and what you learnt from this specific situation - to objectively evaluate what has happened and whether the option you took worked.

Ethics toolkit related content

2014 code of conduct, worksheet for ethical deliberation.

If you don't already have a RealMe® login, you'll need to create one before you can make any changes. 

IMAGES

  1. Making Ethical Decisions

    ethical approach to problem solving

  2. 5 step problem solving method

    ethical approach to problem solving

  3. Solving ethical problems

    ethical approach to problem solving

  4. Ethical Decision-Making Model

    ethical approach to problem solving

  5. PPT

    ethical approach to problem solving

  6. Making Ethical Decisions

    ethical approach to problem solving

VIDEO

  1. Threats to ethical principles

  2. Threats to ethical principles

  3. consequences of ethics

  4. ethics and values

  5. Solving Ethical Dilemmas in Accounting

  6. ethics issues

COMMENTS

  1. Ethical Decision Making Models and 6 Steps of Ethical Decision Making

    To create a clear and cohesive approach to implementing a solution to an ethical problem; the model is set in a way that it gives the leader "ethical filters" to make decisions. It purposely leaves out anything related to making a profit so that leaders can focus on values instead of a potential impact on revenue.

  2. Thinking Ethically

    The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused on the individual's right to choose for herself or himself. ... Ethical Problem Solving These five approaches suggest that once we have ascertained the facts, we should ask ourselves five questions ...

  3. Thinking Ethically: A Framework for Moral Decision Making

    Here are 5 different ethical approaches to problem-solving: (1) Utilitarian Approach: Benefits most but not all (2) Rights Approach: Protects the rights of all (3) Fairness or Justice Approach: Distributes benefits fairly among all (4) Common Good Approach: Benefits the common good (5) Virtue Approach: Promotes virtue and development of character

  4. The RIGHT Decision Method: An approach for solving ethical dilemmas

    Many ethical dilemmas can be resolved easily with consultation and reflection. However, some issues cannot. Therefore, to help make it easier to solve difficult ethical dilemmas, consider a framework from which to work. The College of Direct Support has provided an approach to ethical decision-making with the NADSP Code of Ethics.

  5. PDF A Method for Ethical Problem Solving Brian H. Childs, Ph.D

    A Method for Ethical Problem Solving Brian H. Childs, Ph.D. Professor of Bioethics and Professionalism Adapted in part from Robert M. Veatch, Amy Haddad and Dan English Case Studies in Biomedical Ethics (Second Edition) I have always thought that if there is a sense that there is an ethics issue at hand, then there

  6. Framework for resolving ethical problems

    In addition to ICAEW's framework for revolving ethical problems, there are a number of other frameworks for resolving such problems which you may find helpful. Carter McMamara - Ethics Toolkit for Managers. Institute of Business Ethics - Simple Ethical Tests for a business decision. Jon Pekel and Doug Wallace -The Ten Step Method of Decision ...

  7. 2.2: Three Frameworks for Ethical Problem-Solving in Business and the

    In contrast, taking a design approach to ethical decision making emphasizes that ethical decisions must be created, not discovered. ... Decision Making Manual V4.pptx Clicking on this figure will allow you to open a presentation designed to introduce problem solving in ethics as analogous to that in design, summarize the concept of a socio ...

  8. Chapter 4-Perspectives in Ethical Theory

    Final Thoughts on Seven Approaches to Ethical Problem Solving. The approaches discussed in this chapter are plausible arguments for how morality is formulated and discuss what factors affect how people conceptualize decision-making. Leaders need to understand these approaches when they weigh difficult decisions or formulate business policies.

  9. Decision support for ethical problem solving: A multi-agent approach

    Consequentialist approaches (Table 1, Items F and G) a third type of normative theories, do not focus on the character of the problem solver, or to the moral worth of acts within the ethical problem, but instead focus on the potential positive or negative consequences that may happen under alternative scenarios [28]. Acts are judged right or ...

  10. PDF Ethical Decision Making and Action

    how ethical decisions are made and take a systematic approach to problem solving. 59 03-Johnson(Ethics)-45065.qxd 10/25/2006 3:52 PM Page 59. ... he realizes that he faces an ethical problem. According to University of Virginia ethics professor Patricia Werhane, many smart, well-meaning managers stumble because they are victims of tunnel ...

  11. The Elusiveness of Closure

    Text Box 5.1: A Model for Ethical Problem Solving in Clinical Medicine [Step 1] Identify the ethical problem: Consider the problem within its context and attempt to distinguish between ethical problems and other medical, social, cultural, linguistic and legal issues. Explore the meaning of value-laden terms, e.g. futility, quality of life. [Step 2]

  12. Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice

    A four-pronged systematic approach to ethical problem-solving and several illustrative cases of conflicts are presented. Comments following the cases highlight the ethical principles involved and clarify the resolution of these conflicts. A model for patient care, with caring as its central element, that integrates ethical aspects (intertwined ...

  13. How to Solve Problems Effectively and Ethically

    1. Begin with your values in mind. When you have clearly defined values, problem-solving becomes much easier. Right away, you have a framework for approaching an issue because you're guided by ...

  14. Decision support for ethical problem solving: A multi-agent approach

    Abstract. This paper suggests that a multi-agent based decision aid can help individuals and groups consider ethical perspectives in the performance of their tasks. Normative and descriptive theories of ethical problem solving are reviewed. Normative theories are postulated as criteria used with practical reasoning during the problem solving ...

  15. Engaging and Supporting Problem Solving in Engineering Ethics

    Engineering ethics problems are complex and ill structured with multiple perspectives and interpretations to address in their solution. In two experiments, we examined alternative strategies for engaging ethical problem solving. In Experiment 1, students studied two versions of an online learning environment consisting of everyday ethics problems.

  16. 6.3: Ethical Dilemmas

    Frameworks for Solving Ethical Dilemmas. Systematically working through an ethical dilemma is key to identifying a solution. Many frameworks exist for solving an ethical dilemma, including the nursing process, four-quadrant approach, the MORAL model, and the organization-focused PLUS Ethical Decision-Making model. [8] When nurses use a structured, systematic approach to resolving ethical ...

  17. Essential Steps for Ethical Problem-Solving

    Essential Steps for Ethical Problem-Solving 1. DETERMINE whether there is an ethical issue or/and dilemma. Is there a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities? ... NASW Office of Ethics and Professional Review, 1-800-638-8799 750 1st Street, NE, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002 . More Ethics Articles . Ethics Resources:

  18. PDF Ethical Reflection as a Part of Creative Problem-solving

    tive problem-solving as a key component. On the other hand, we need to adopt an approach to creative problem-solving that makes greater room for ethical re!ection in situ, in part through greater emphasis on the specifying of aims or goals, task speci"cation, problem-"nding, and the multiplication of options.

  19. Promoting Ethical Discussions and Decision Making in a Human Service

    Some of the first goals of the Ethics Network were to establish a foundation for conceptualizing and responding to ethics scenarios using a structured problem-solving approach. The emphasis in this initial training and infrastructure was to teach an overarching problem-solving strategy that was broadly applicable to many different situations ...

  20. 3 Ways to Solve Ethical Issues

    How to Solve Ethical Issues. Download Article. methods. 1 Method One: Solving Ethical Issues at Work as an Employee. 2 Method Two: Solving Ethical Issues at Work as an Employer or Supervisor. 3 Method Three: Solving Ethical Issues Involving Minors. Other Sections. Related Articles. Expert Interview.

  21. Essential Steps in Ethical Problem Solving

    FOCUS Newsletter - July, 1996. Determine whether there is an ethical issue or dilemma. Is there a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities? (For example, there may be an issue of self-determination of an adolescent versus the well-being of the family.) Identify the key values and principles involved.

  22. Solving ethical problems

    The flowchart below outlines the steps in the ethical decision-making process. Each step is described in further detail below. requires you to think about how you should act and what you should do in a given situation. could relate to a situation and/or a decision that you make, which could be potentially damaging to a client or a stakeholder.

  23. 12 Approaches To Problem-Solving for Every Situation

    Brainstorm options to solve the problem. Select an option. Create an implementation plan. Execute the plan and monitor the results. Evaluate the solution. Read more: Effective Problem Solving Steps in the Workplace. 2. Collaborative. This approach involves including multiple people in the problem-solving process.

  24. Ada Developers Academy on Instagram: "Marian Rogers Croak: A

    4 likes, 0 comments - adadevacademy on February 21, 2024: "Marian Rogers Croak: A Trailblazer in Tech and Black History Icon As Google's VP of Engineering..."