3 steps for solving ethical problems

• EXPLORE Random Article

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 93,922 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

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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

• 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.

• 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

• 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.

• 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.).

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

Expert Interview

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

Did this article help you?

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

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:

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

7 Ways to Improve Your Ethical Decision-Making

• 03 Aug 2023

Effective decision-making is the cornerstone of any thriving business. According to a survey of 760 companies cited in the Harvard Business Review , decision effectiveness and financial results correlated at a 95 percent confidence level across countries, industries, and organization sizes.

Yet, making ethical decisions can be difficult in the workplace and often requires dealing with ambiguous situations.

If you want to become a more effective leader , here’s an overview of why ethical decision-making is important in business and how to be better at it.

Access your free e-book today.

The Importance of Ethical Decision-Making

Any management position involves decision-making .

“Even with formal systems in place, managers have a great deal of discretion in making decisions that affect employees,” says Harvard Business School Professor Nien-hê Hsieh in the online course Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “This is because many of the activities companies need to carry out are too complex to specify in advance.”

This is where ethical decision-making comes in. As a leader, your decisions influence your company’s culture, employees’ motivation and productivity, and business processes’ effectiveness.

It also impacts your organization’s reputation—in terms of how customers, partners, investors, and prospective employees perceive it—and long-term success.

With such a large portion of your company’s performance relying on your guidance, here are seven ways to improve your ethical decision-making.

1. Gain Clarity Around Personal Commitments

You may be familiar with the saying, “Know thyself.” The first step to including ethics in your decision-making process is defining your personal commitments.

To gain clarity around those, Hsieh recommends asking:

• What’s core to my identity? How do I perceive myself?
• What lines or boundaries will I not cross?
• What kind of life do I want to live?
• What type of leader do I want to be?

Once you better understand your core beliefs, values, and ideals, it’s easier to commit to ethical guidelines in the workplace. If you get stuck when making challenging decisions, revisit those questions for guidance.

2. Overcome Biases

A bias is a systematic, often unconscious inclination toward a belief, opinion, perspective, or decision. It influences how you perceive and interpret information, make judgments, and behave.

Bias is often based on:

• Personal experience
• Cultural background
• Social conditioning
• Individual preference

It exists in the workplace as well.

“Most of the time, people try to act fairly, but personal beliefs or attitudes—both conscious and subconscious—affect our ability to do so,” Hsieh says in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability .

There are two types of bias:

• Explicit: A bias you’re aware of, such as ageism.
• Implicit: A bias that operates outside your awareness, such as cultural conditioning.

Whether explicit or implicit, you must overcome bias to make ethical, fair decisions.

Related: How to Overcome Stereotypes in Your Organization

3. Reflect on Past Decisions

The next step is reflecting on previous decisions.

“By understanding different kinds of bias and how they can show themselves in the workplace, we can reflect on past decisions, experiences, and emotions to help identify problem areas,” Hsieh says in the course.

Reflect on your decisions’ processes and the outcomes. Were they favorable? What would you do differently? Did bias affect them?

Through analyzing prior experiences, you can learn lessons that help guide your ethical decision-making.

4. Be Compassionate

Decisions requiring an ethical lens are often difficult, such as terminating an employee.

“Termination decisions are some of the hardest that managers will ever have to make,” Hsieh says in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “These decisions affect real people with whom we often work every day and who are likely to depend on their job for their livelihood.”

Such decisions require a compassionate approach. Try imagining yourself in the other person’s shoes, and think about what you would want to hear. Doing so allows you to approach decision-making with more empathy.

5. Focus on Fairness

Being “fair” in the workplace is often ambiguous, but it’s vital to ethical decision-making.

“Fairness is not only an ethical response to power asymmetries in the work environment,” Hsieh says in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “Fairness–and having a successful organizational culture–can benefit the organization economically and legally as well.”

It’s particularly important to consider fairness in the context of your employees. According to Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability , operationalizing fairness in employment relationships requires:

• Legitimate expectations: Expectations stemming from a promise or regular practice that employees can anticipate and rely on.
• Procedural fairness: Concern with whether decisions are made and carried out impartially, consistently, and transparently.
• Distributive fairness: The fair allocation of opportunities, benefits, and burdens based on employees’ efforts or contributions.

Keeping these aspects of fairness in mind can be the difference between a harmonious team and an employment lawsuit. When in doubt, ask yourself: “If I or someone I loved was at the receiving end of this decision, what would I consider ‘fair’?”

6. Take an Individualized Approach

Not every employee is the same. Your relationships with team members, managers, and organizational leaders differ based on factors like context and personality types.

“Given the personal nature of employment relationships, your judgment and actions in these areas will often require adjustment according to each specific situation,” Hsieh explains in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability .

One way to achieve this is by tailoring your decision-making based on employees’ values and beliefs. For example, if a colleague expresses concerns about a project’s environmental impact, explore eco-friendly approaches that align with their values.

Another way you can customize your ethical decision-making is by accommodating employees’ cultural differences. Doing so can foster a more inclusive work environment and boost your team’s performance .

7. Accept Feedback

Ethical decision-making is susceptible to gray areas and often met with dissent, so it’s critical to be approachable and open to feedback .

The benefits of receiving feedback include:

• Learning from mistakes.
• Having more opportunities to exhibit compassion, fairness, and transparency.
• Identifying blind spots you weren’t aware of.
• Bringing your team into the decision-making process.

While such conversations can be uncomfortable, don’t avoid them. Accepting feedback will not only make you a more effective leader but also help your employees gain a voice in the workplace.

Ethical Decision-Making Is a Continuous Learning Process

Ethical decision-making doesn’t come with right or wrong answers—it’s a continuous learning process.

“There often is no right answer, only imperfect solutions to difficult problems,” Hsieh says. “But even without a single ‘right’ answer, making thoughtful, ethical decisions can make a major difference in the lives of your employees and colleagues.”

By taking an online course, such as Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability , you can develop the frameworks and tools to make effective decisions that benefit all aspects of your business.

Ready to improve your ethical decision-making? Enroll in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability —one of our online leadership and management courses —and download our free e-book on how to become a more effective leader.

About the Author

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]

• Training & Certification
• Knowledge Center
• ECI Research
• Business Integrity Library
• Career Center
• The PLUS Ethical Decision Making Model

Seven Steps to Ethical Decision Making –  Step 1: Define the problem  (consult  PLUS filters ) –  Step 2: Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support  –  Step 3: Identify alternatives –  Step 4: Evaluate the alternatives  (consult  PLUS filters ) –  Step 5: Make the decision –  Step 6: Implement the decision –  Step 7: Evaluate the decision  (consult  PLUS filters )

Introduction Organizations struggle to develop a simple set of guidelines that makes it easier for individual employees, regardless of position or level, to be confident that his/her decisions meet all of the competing standards for effective and ethical decision-making used by the organization. Such a model must take into account two realities:

• Every employee is called upon to make decisions in the normal course of doing his/her job. Organizations cannot function effectively if employees are not empowered to make decisions consistent with their positions and responsibilities.
• For the decision maker to be confident in the decision’s soundness, every decision should be tested against the organization’s policies and values, applicable laws and regulations as well as the individual employee’s definition of what is right, fair, good and acceptable.

The decision making process described below has been carefully constructed to be:

• Fundamentally sound based on current theories and understandings of both decision-making processes and ethics.
• Simple and straightforward enough to be easily integrated into every employee’s thought processes.
• Descriptive (detailing how ethical decision are made naturally) rather than prescriptive (defining unnatural ways of making choices).

Why do organizations need ethical decision making? See our special edition case study, #RespectAtWork, to find out.

First, explore the difference between what you expect and/or desire and the current reality. By defining the problem in terms of outcomes, you can clearly state the problem.

Consider this example: Tenants at an older office building are complaining that their employees are getting angry and frustrated because there is always a long delay getting an elevator to the lobby at rush hour. Many possible solutions exist, and all are predicated on a particular understanding the problem:

• Flexible hours – so all the tenants’ employees are not at the elevators at the same time.
• Faster elevators – so each elevator can carry more people in a given time period.
• Bigger elevators – so each elevator can carry more people per trip.
• Elevator banks – so each elevator only stops on certain floors, increasing efficiency.
• Better elevator controls – so each elevator is used more efficiently.
• More elevators – so that overall carrying capacity can be increased.
• Improved elevator maintenance – so each elevator is more efficient.
• Encourage employees to use the stairs – so fewer people use the elevators.

The real-life decision makers defined the problem as “people complaining about having to wait.” Their solution was to make the wait less frustrating by piping music into the elevator lobbies. The complaints stopped. There is no way that the eventual solution could have been reached if, for example, the problem had been defined as “too few elevators.”

How you define the problem determines where you go to look for alternatives/solutions– so define the problem carefully.

Step 2: Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support

Once the problem is defined, it is critical to search out resources that may be of assistance in making the decision. Resources can include people (i.e., a mentor, coworkers, external colleagues, or friends and family) as well professional guidelines and organizational policies and codes. Such resources are critical for determining parameters, generating solutions, clarifying priorities and providing support, both while implementing the solution and dealing with the repercussions of the solution.

Step 3: Identify available alternative solutions to the problem The key to this step is to not limit yourself to obvious alternatives or merely what has worked in the past. Be open to new and better alternatives. Consider as many as solutions as possible — five or more in most cases, three at the barest minimum. This gets away from the trap of seeing “both sides of the situation” and limiting one’s alternatives to two opposing choices (i.e., either this or that).

Step 4: Evaluate the identified alternatives As you evaluate each alternative, identify the likely positive and negative consequence of each. It is unusual to find one alternative that would completely resolve the problem and is significantly better than all others. As you consider positive and negative consequences, you must be careful to differentiate between what you know for a fact and what you believe might be the case. Consulting resources, including written guidelines and standards, can help you ascertain which consequences are of greater (and lesser) import.

You should think through not just what results each alternative could yield, but the likelihood it is that such impact will occur. You will only have all the facts in simple cases. It is reasonable and usually even necessary to supplement the facts you have with realistic assumptions and informed beliefs. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the more the evaluation is fact-based, the more confident you can be that the expected outcome will occur. Knowing the ratio of fact-based evaluation versus non-fact-based evaluation allows you to gauge how confident you can be in the proposed impact of each alternative.

Step 5: Make the decision When acting alone, this is the natural next step after selecting the best alternative. When you are working in a team environment, this is where a proposal is made to the team, complete with a clear definition of the problem, a clear list of the alternatives that were considered and a clear rationale for the proposed solution.

Step 6: Implement the decision While this might seem obvious, it is necessary to make the point that deciding on the best alternative is not the same as doing something. The action itself is the first real, tangible step in changing the situation. It is not enough to think about it or talk about it or even decide to do it. A decision only counts when it is implemented. As Lou Gerstner (former CEO of IBM) said, “There are no more prizes for predicting rain. There are only prizes for building arks.”

Step 7: Evaluate the decision Every decision is intended to fix a problem. The final test of any decision is whether or not the problem was fixed. Did it go away? Did it change appreciably? Is it better now, or worse, or the same? What new problems did the solution create?

Ethics Filters

The ethical component of the decision making process takes the form of a set of “filters.” Their purpose is to surface the ethics considerations and implications of the decision at hand. When decisions are classified as being “business” decisions (rather than “ethics” issues), values can quickly be left out of consideration and ethical lapses can occur.

At key steps in the process, you should stop and work through these filters, ensuring that the ethics issues imbedded in the decision are given consideration.

We group the considerations into the mnemonic PLUS.

• P  = Policies Is it consistent with my organization’s policies, procedures and guidelines?
• L = Legal Is it acceptable under the applicable laws and regulations?
• U  = Universal Does it conform to the universal principles/values my organization has adopted?
• S = Self Does it satisfy my personal definition of right, good and fair?

The PLUS filters work as an integral part of steps 1, 4 and 7 of the decision-making process. The decision maker applies the four PLUS filters to determine if the ethical component(s) of the decision are being surfaced/addressed/satisfied.

• Does the existing situation violate any of the PLUS considerations?
• Step 2:   Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support
• Step 3: Identify available alternative solutions to the problem
• Will the alternative I am considering resolve the PLUS violations?
• Will the alternative being considered create any new PLUS considerations?
• Are the ethical trade-offs acceptable?
• Step 5: Make the decision
• Step 6: Implement the decision
• Does the resultant situation resolve the earlier PLUS considerations?
• Are there any new PLUS considerations to be addressed?

The PLUS filters do not guarantee an ethically-sound decision. They merely ensure that the ethics components of the situation will be surfaced so that they might be considered.

How Organizations Can Support Ethical Decision-Making  Organizations empower employees with the knowledge and tools they need to make ethical decisions by

• Intentionally and regularly communicating to all employees:
• Organizational policies and procedures as they apply to the common workplace ethics issues.
• Applicable laws and regulations.
• Agreed-upon set of “universal” values (i.e., Empathy, Patience, Integrity, Courage [EPIC]).
• Providing a formal mechanism (i.e., a code and a helpline, giving employees access to a definitive interpretation of the policies, laws and universal values when they need additional guidance before making a decision).
• Free Ethics & Compliance Toolkit
• Ethics and Compliance Glossary
• Definitions of Values
• Why Have a Code of Conduct?
• Code Construction and Content
• Common Code Provisions
• Ten Style Tips for Writing an Effective Code of Conduct
• Five Keys to Reducing Ethics and Compliance Risk
• Business Ethics & Compliance Timeline

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

Confronting Ethical and Moral Dilemmas: Don’t Go It Alone

September 13, 2021 • 8 min read.

In this Nano Tool for Leaders, Wharton’s G. Richard Shell explains how “the power of two” can help when you are faced with a moral or ethical dilemma at work.

Nano Tools for Leaders® — a collaboration between Wharton Executive Education and Wharton’s Center for Leadership and Change Management — are fast, effective leadership tools that you can learn and start using in less than 15 minutes, with the potential to significantly impact your success as a leader and the engagement and productivity of the people you lead.

Contributor: G. Richard Shell, Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics and author of The Conscience Code: Lead with Your Values. Advance Your Career .

Strengthen your ability to confront ethically questionable acts or wrongdoings by bringing in allies.

According to a 2021 report from the Ethics and Compliance Initiative, 63% of middle managers were pressured by bosses to violate their firm’s ethical code of conduct in 2020. Over half of middle and upper managers observed ethical misconduct, while 79% of employees experienced retaliation for reporting it. Well-run corporate compliance programs and healthy corporate cultures can reduce this problem significantly, but these are hard to sustain across large enterprises over long periods of time. And too many companies give only lip service to both.

When you are faced with a moral or ethical dilemma at work, it’s common to believe that your choices are limited to three less-than-optimal options: remain silent, single-handedly confront the perpetrator(s), or report him or her (and perhaps the whole team) to a higher authority. For those who are conflict averse — and those who don’t feel options two and three are viable for other reasons — the first option is the most appealing. But there is another way.

In fact, believing you have to handle this situation alone, no matter which option you choose, violates the Conscience Code — a set of 10 rules developed to help you lead with your values while advancing your career. Specifically, Rule #6 explains the importance of leveraging the Power of Two: an ally can bolster your confidence, help you think more clearly about next steps, and keep you grounded when people try to make it look as if you are the problem. In fact, when it comes to resisting pressure from peers and authority to “just go along with it” or “look the other way,” 1 + 1 equals much more than 2. Psychologists report that the best workplace allies are those who help you better understand the situation you are in and then provide the confidence boost you need to manage it. For ideas about when and how to leverage alliances, see the Action Steps below.

Action Steps

When you face wrongdoing at work, instead of choosing one of the less-than-optimal options described above, consider testing out your viewpoint in private with one other person, perhaps a quieter one who might be open to hearing your perspective and creating an alliance. If that is too risky, consider reaching out to the person who recruited you, a mentor, or a colleague who had been at the firm longer than you. If you are a woman or minority, research shows that you may find strength by conferring with one another in the face of situations involving sexism or racism.

Here are three ideas for leveraging the Power of Two:

• Deal with peer pressure. Another voice speaking truth will help you feel less isolated in your position and more confident in asserting your point of view. Professor Solomon Asch’s work on peer pressure showed that when everyone in a group says that “X is true,” the final holdout will go along with them more often than you might expect — even when they know that X is not true. This finding highlights the power of social contagion: A strong group can make dissenters too embarrassed to go against the crowd, or even make them actually believe something they knew previously to be false. In a follow-up experiment, Asch gave his subjects an ally or “true partner” — one voice in the room that spoke the correct rather than the incorrect answer. This caused subjects’ willingness to tell the truth to jump from 65% to 95%.
• Stand up to authority. Stanley Milgram’s infamous power-of-authority studies investigated why ordinary German people had gone along with the Holocaust in World War II. His experiments demonstrated that ordinary citizens could be pressured into delivering what appeared to be lethal levels of electric shocks to human “victims.” In one version of the experiment, Milgram created teams of three to deliver the shocks, with each team including two “dissenters” who were instructed to quit after a specified number of low-level shocks were “delivered.” With the two dissenters breaking off during the process, 90% terminated the experiment prior to the lethal shock level — with 25 of them quitting at a level less than half that. The takeaway? Having allies at your side can empower you to act on your values more quickly and decisively than relying on your inner resources alone. And having supportive peers may be especially important for those with more accommodating and conflict-averse personalities.
• Gain a fresh perspective. Professor Philip Zimbardo’s troubled Stanford Prison Experiment, in which he placed randomly selected undergraduate students in roles of “guards” and “prisoners,” attempted to prove that social roles and systemic pressures can distort the behavior of otherwise normal people. Although the guards’ behavior became troubling very quickly, it took an outsider to bring an end to the out-of-control proceedings. PhD student Christina Maslach was so disturbed by what she saw that she persuaded Zimbardo to end his experiment immediately on ethical grounds, applying both common-sense morality and the norms of social science. Research on ethical conflicts revealed numerous instances of ordinary people swept up in wrongdoing by peers and bosses — but who were saved by a perceptive spouse or friend who could see more clearly than they what was happening. The Power of Two thus extends to people completely outside your workplace “bubble” — people who can point out how far you have strayed from your ethical commitments and bring you back to your senses before it is too late.

How Leaders Use It

By now, the story of charismatic 19-year-old Stanford undergraduate Elizabeth Holmes and her idea for a new approach to blood testing is well known. What’s often missing from tales of the Theranos scandal are Tyler Shultz and Erika Cheung, two twentysomething employees who were faced with immense pressure from their superiors and peers to go along with what was clearly a massive fraud. Their story demonstrates the power of an ally when you encounter real-world conflicts.

New hires Shultz and Cheung worked together on a team that was testing the accuracy of the Edison — Holmes’s blood testing machine. When they noticed that data showing results that deviated too far from expected performance never made it into reports, they were told that it was standard practice to ignore these “outliers.” They also became concerned that the firm was misreporting a variety of metrics on the Edison’s accuracy for different types of blood tests, and that, compared with accurate results from traditional machines, the Edison failed. When Shultz and Cheung pushed back, they were admonished for not being “team players.” Finally, after their superiors knowingly submitted false data to regulators, Shultz turned in an anonymous complaint to investigators and sent an email to Holmes with details of his concerns (many of which came from Cheung). Berated once again, the two decided to quit. Cheung filed a formal complaint with the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services about the misconduct she had observed. The complaint triggered a formal investigation, which, in combination with a series of front-page investigative stories in the Wall Street Journal (sourced in part by Shultz and Cheung) and Shultz’s anonymous filing with regulators, brought an end to Theranos. Shultz and Cheung leveraged the Power of Two, feeding off each other’s energies; advancing each other’s strategic thinking; and providing independent, credible information from the inner workings of a corrupt organization that could be used as evidence by the legal system.

Knowledge in Action: Related Executive Education Programs

Richard Shell teaches in Negotiation and Influence: Making Deals and Strategy Work , Advanced Management Program , and Executive Development Program .

Additional Resources

• Access all Wharton Executive Education Nano Tools
• Download this Nano Tool as a PDF

More From Knowledge at Wharton

For New Ideas, Think Inside (This) Box

Geostrategy by Design | Witold Henisz

Better Decisions with Data: Asking the Right Question

Looking for more insights.

Sign up to stay informed about our latest article releases.

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.

Ethical Dilemma

A problem in the decision-making process between two possible but unacceptable options from an ethical perspective

What is an Ethical Dilemma?

An ethical dilemma (ethical paradox or moral dilemma) is a problem in the decision-making process between two possible options, neither of which is absolutely acceptable from an ethical perspective. Although we face many ethical and moral problems in our lives, most of them come with relatively straightforward solutions.

On the other hand, ethical dilemmas are extremely complicated challenges that cannot be easily solved. Therefore, the ability to find the optimal solution in such situations is critical to everyone.

Every person may encounter an ethical dilemma in almost every aspect of their life, including personal, social, and professional .

How to Solve an Ethical Dilemma?

The biggest challenge of an ethical dilemma is that it does not offer an obvious solution that would comply with ethics al norms. Throughout the history of humanity, people have faced such dilemmas, and philosophers aimed and worked to find solutions to them.

The following approaches to solve an ethical dilemma were deduced:

• Refute the paradox (dilemma): The situation must be carefully analyzed. In some cases, the existence of the dilemma can be logically refuted.
• Value theory approach: Choose the alternative that offers the greater good or the lesser evil.
• Find alternative solutions: In some cases, the problem can be reconsidered, and new alternative solutions may arise.

Some examples of ethical dilemma include:

• Taking credit for others’ work
• Offering a client a worse product for your own profit
• Utilizing inside knowledge for your own profit

Ethical Dilemmas in Business

Ethical dilemmas are especially significant in professional life, as they frequently occur in the workplace. Some companies and professional organizations (e.g., CFA ) adhere to their own codes of conduct and ethical standards. Violation of the standards may lead to disciplinary sanctions.

Almost every aspect of business can become a possible ground for ethical dilemmas. It may include relationships with co-workers, management, clients, and business partners.

People’s inability to determine the optimal solution to such dilemmas in a professional setting may result in serious consequences for businesses and organizations. The situation may be common in companies that value results the most.

In order to solve ethical problems, companies and organizations should develop strict ethical standards for their employees. Every company must demonstrate its concerns regarding the ethical norms within the organization. In addition, companies may provide ethical training for their employees.

More Resources

CFI now offers the Business Essentials Bundle with courses on Microsoft Excel, Word, and PowerPoint, business communication, data visualization, and an understanding of corporate strategy. To keep learning, we suggest these resources:

• Business Ethics
• Kantian Ethics
• Types of Due Diligence
• Whistleblower Policy
• See all ESG resources

• Share this article

Create a free account to unlock this Template

Access and download collection of free Templates to help power your productivity and performance.

Already have an account? Log in

Supercharge your skills with Premium Templates

Take your learning and productivity to the next level with our Premium Templates.

Upgrading to a paid membership gives you access to our extensive collection of plug-and-play Templates designed to power your performance—as well as CFI's full course catalog and accredited Certification Programs.

Already have a Self-Study or Full-Immersion membership? Log in

Access Exclusive Templates

Gain unlimited access to more than 250 productivity Templates, CFI's full course catalog and accredited Certification Programs, hundreds of resources, expert reviews and support, the chance to work with real-world finance and research tools, and more.

Already have a Full-Immersion membership? Log in

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Navigating Complex, Ethical Problems in Professional Life: a Guide to Teaching SMART Strategies for Decision-Making

Tristan mcintosh.

1 Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA

Alison L. Antes

James m. dubois.

This article demonstrates how instructors of professionalism and ethics training programs can integrate a professional decision-making tool in training curricula. This tool can help trainees understand how to apply professional decision-making strategies to address the threats posed by a variety of psychological and environmental factors when they are faced with complex professional and ethical situations. We begin by highlighting key decision-making frameworks and discussing factors that may undermine the use of professional decision-making strategies. Then, drawing upon findings from past research, we present the “SMART” professional decision-making framework: seeking help, managing emotions, anticipating consequences, recognizing rules and context, and testing assumptions and motives. Next, we present a vignette that poses a complex ethical and professional challenge and illustrate how each professional decision-making strategy could or should be used by characters in the case. To conclude, we review a series of educational practices and pedagogical tools intended to help trainers facilitate trainee learning, retention, and application of “SMART” decision-making strategies.

Our aim is to illustrate how to effectively educate professionals on ways to apply decision-making strategies when they are faced with complex professional and ethical issues. Appropriate and effective application of these strategies is a trainable skill that can be developed in individuals from a range of backgrounds, disciplines, and career stages. We first explore the complexities of professional decision-making in a research context and highlight an innovative compensatory strategy framework. Then, we present a case example of proper and improper application of these strategies when navigating complex professional and ethical situations. We then showcase pedagogical techniques intended to integrate these compensatory strategies into training activities and facilitate retention and application of these strategies. The term “trainees” is used throughout and refers to any individual, regardless of career stage, who learns from and takes part in training on professional decision-making strategies. In sum, the intent of the present effort is to describe how to provide trainees with strategy-based knowledge and skills needed for professional decision-making. These strategies ultimately serve to facilitate better ethical decision-making and professionalism.

Professional Decision-Making Frameworks

Professionals, including those who conduct research, regularly face complex circumstances that require professional decision-making skills. Although professionalism has been defined in multiple ways, for the purposes of the present effort, we define professionalism as integrating ethics and other relevant factors (e.g., competence, collegiality, institutional and departmental culture) needed to ensure public trust and achieve the goals of the profession (e.g., healing in medicine, generating new knowledge in research) ( Stern and Papadakis 2006 ; Swick 2000 ; van Mook et al. 2009 ). Unfortunately, the nature of situations professionals encounter and unconscious self-serving biases all professionals have may undermine the effectiveness of professional decision-making. Therefore, professional decision-making necessitates careful navigation and includes weighing different options to address the issue at hand, forecasting likely implications of actions, and gathering more information from multiple reliable sources ( Antes et al. 2010 ; Stenmark et al. 2011 ).

Two different frameworks of professional decision-making can be useful when professionals are confronted with these challenging circumstances: 1) a rational decision-making framework ( Goodwin et al. 1998 ; Oliveira 2007 ), and 2) a psychological framework ( DuBois et al. 2015a ; Mumford et al. 2008 ). Rational decision-making, also referred to as normative decision-making, is characterized by adherence to a set of established principles that guide decision-making, often in a group setting ( Hoch et al. 2001 ; Oliveira 2007 ). Specifically, rational decision-making involves the identification of key components of a situation and justifying decisions related to this situation when different viewpoints are in conflict with one another ( DuBois 2008b , 2013 ). Moreover, those who engage in rational decision-making analyze a number of possible alternative outcomes prior to making a definitive choice and make their decision based on the most likely and best possible outcome ( Hoch et al., 2001 ). This type of decision-making lends itself well to circumstances when professionals are unsure how to address an ethical dilemma, when a group is trying to establish best policies, or when there is disagreement among stakeholders on issues such as relevant facts and norms ( DuBois 2013 ). As it relates to ethical dilemmas, rational decision-making facilitates identification of key ethical concerns that society acknowledges as integral to rational discussions about ethical issues ( DuBois 2013 ).

The psychological framework related to professional decision-making is characterized by a confluence of situational complexities and self-serving biases that influence the way people frame and approach problems ( Bazerman and Moore 2013 ; Mumford et al. 2008 ). Oftentimes, a “correct” or “best” approach to these problems may not be apparent because of factors such as conflicting interests or needing to address concerns of multiple stakeholders ( Dana and Loewenstein 2003 ; Mumford et al. 2007 ; Weick et al. 2005 ). Being able to make sense of and effectively respond to these problems hinges on one’s ability to manage biases and attend to and utilize relevant information appropriately. This approach to professional decision-making lends itself well to situations in which professionals, when faced with complex ethical dilemmas, intend to take the best course of action but have difficulty doing so due to personal and environmental constraints ( Antes 2013 ). Such constraints may include complexity of social dynamics, heightened emotions, conscious and unconscious biases, uncertainty, and ambiguity.

The present effort will highlight strategies intended to facilitate the psychological framework of professional decision-making, as opposed to rational decision-making, because these strategies enable bias management and quality information integration, application, and synthesis. Moreover, these strategies are beneficial in situations where environmental constraints act to undermine an individual’s intent to take the best possible course of action. These strategies help professionals deal with moral distress, situational limitations (e.g., political tensions, increases in regulations, cultural differences), and internal limitations (e.g., ignoring key elements of a situation, self-centered thinking, unwarranted certainty) ( DuBois et al. 2016 , 2015b ).

In what follows, we will demonstrate the utility of a psychological decision-making framework within the context of the research profession, the SMART professional decision-making framework: s eeking help, m anaging emotions, a nticipating consequences, r ecognizing rules and context, and t esting assumptions and motives. Research provides a useful context for illustrating SMART strategy training because research frequently involves complexity, ambiguity, assumptions, stress, ethical considerations, and conflicts of interest. Further, ethics training is mandated for all federally-funded research trainees and many key personnel on grants involving human or animal subjects. We believe the SMART professional decision-making framework can add value to ethics training programs in research and other professions.

Constraints to Professional Decision-Making

Several factors can interfere with optimal professional decision-making. We discuss four factors that can be effectively addressed through the use of SMART decision-making strategies: Complexity, ambiguity, biases, and unusually high or negative emotions.

Professionals must carefully address and navigate complex and dynamic issues throughout their careers. For researchers, complexity often characterizes data management, mentoring relationships, protection of research participants, institutional hierarchies, and conflicts of interest ( Anderson et al. 2007 ; DuBois 2008a ; Jahnke and Asher 2014 ). These issues oftentimes involve multiple competing goals, guidelines, and stakeholder interests and are not simple to address ( Werhane 2008 ).

For example, a researcher may have competing interests between their funding agency’s research priorities and their own profession’s methodological norms and standards. These conflicting interests and complex relationships between funding agencies and researchers may undermine confidence in the quality of research being conducted if not appropriately managed ( Irwin 2009 ). Researchers are responsible for identifying and navigating conflicts of interest. Navigating conflicts of interest necessitates reconciling conflicting values, perspectives, and agendas of multiple stakeholders at the individual, institutional, governmental, and national levels. Failing to do so may result in public mistrust of research, harm to others, tarnished personal and professional relationships, or ruined careers. Thus, professional decision-making strategies can be applied when attempting to identify, prioritize, and reconcile complex stakeholder interests. The multifaceted nature of ethical and professional situations in a research context has the potential to derail professional decision-making if not handled appropriately.

Uncertainty

It is common for individuals in research fields to be exposed to new and unfamiliar environments and projects where considerable gaps in knowledge may exist. Uncertainty may arise when regulations grow in complexity over time, when a researcher moves into a new research space, or when a researcher moves to a new nation with a different culture or an unfamiliar set of rules and norms ( Antes et al. 2017 ; DuBois et al. 2016 ). Navigating social and professional life in a new culture, with a new language, and with possibly different ethical standards can be challenging and stressful.

Uncertainty may inadvertently lead to the misinterpretation of norms and other social and professional cues integral to making professional and ethical decisions ( Palazzo et al. 2012 ). This is because individuals may lack essential information needed for interpreting a given situation appropriately ( Sonenshein 2007 ), which may result in failure to think of long-term downstream consequences of their actions or failure to consider the entire range of possible courses of action. Moreover, “unknown unknowns” may result in a breakdown of quality professional decision making if help is not sought from other individuals or resources that are able to provide sound guidance on these issues.

For example, a lab manager may task a new postdoctoral fellow with collecting data from participants using a certain technique, but the postdoc may be unfamiliar with the standard procedures for doing so. Tense lab dynamics between the lab manager and other lab members may worsen this uncertainty by making it uncomfortable or difficult for the postdoc to seek help from another lab mate. Similarly, these lab dynamics may signal to the postdoc that limited or hostile communication is the norm in the lab, which may prompt the postdoc to proceed with their work in isolation. Failure to seek help due to social ambiguities may result in costly protocol violations or detrimental outcomes for both the participants and researchers involved. Without proper use of professional decision-making strategies, facing uncertainty or unfamiliar norms may lead to poor decision-making and negative consequences.

Despite even the best intentions to maintain objectivity, professionals may be subject to unconscious biases when processing information ( Hammond et al. 1998 ; Kahneman 2003 ; Palazzo et al. 2012 ). This poses a considerable challenge to professionals who aim to accurately and objectively process available information relevant to a given situation and to make a sensible, unbiased decision ( Bazerman and Moore 2013 ). Many of these judgment errors, or cognitive distortions, are automatic, making it challenging for individuals to fully understand the negative influence of biases on decision-making and information processing ( Kahneman 2003 ; Moore and Loewenstein 2004 ). Biases such as rationalization ( Davis et al. 2007 ; DuBois et al. 2015a ), tunnel vision ( Posavac et al. 2010 ), self-preservation ( Bandura et al. 1996 ; Oreg and Bayazit 2009 ), rigorous adherence to the status-quo ( Samuelson and Zeckhauser 1988 ), and diffusion of responsibility ( Voelpel et al. 2008 ) may contribute to flawed decision-making on the part of professionals.

To illustrate, a researcher may cut corners during the informed consent process as they think to themselves, “nobody reads consent forms anyway” (i.e., assuming the worst) ( DuBois et al. 2015a ). In yet another example, a researcher may decide to drop outliers from a dataset without reporting it as they think to themselves, “it’s not like I fabricated any data” (i.e., euphemistic comparison). Both of these examples depict poor professionalism. These biased behaviors may occur subconsciously or be actively justified by an individual as in the cases above ( DuBois et al. 2015a ). Regardless, the characters in these examples failed to utilize professional decision-making strategies that could have helped inoculate against the effects of detrimental self-serving biases.

While professional decision-making requires a certain degree of objective and rational thought in order to be successful, professionals are not always rational and objective in their approach to making decisions ( Kahneman et al. 2011 ; Tenbrunsel et al. 2010 ). It is easy to see how heightened emotions could undermine professional decision-making, for example, when working long hours, applying for intensely competitive grant funding, dealing with a difficult colleague, or trying to impress a world-famous and notably erudite senior faculty member. Stress, negative emotions, or intense emotions left unregulated or unacknowledged have been shown to lessen the cognitive resources needed for effective professional decision-making ( Gino et al. 2011 ; Haidt 2001 ; Mead et al. 2009 ). When cognitive resources are depleted, reasoning is impaired and individuals tend to make hasty, biased decisions ( Angie et al. 2011 ; Bazerman and Moore 2013 ; Gross 2013 ). Professional decision-making strategies can help counteract these effects.

SMART Strategies

Despite obstacles to effective professional decision-making, certain compensatory strategies exist that enable professionals to help offset these obstacles. Taking a structured approach to making these decisions can help professionals effectively apply strategies that guide ethical decision-making, bias management, and quality information processing ( Bornstein and Emler 2001 ; DuBois et al. 2018 ; Thiel et al. 2012 ). Furthermore, this systematized thought process balances the aforementioned constraints that can negatively influence professional decision-making ( DuBois et al. 2015b ).

Building on the sensemaking work of Mumford ( Mumford et al. 2008 ) and the bias reduction work of Gibbs ( Gibbs et al. 1995 ), DuBois and his colleagues ( DuBois 2014 ; DuBois et al. 2015b ) in the Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program (P.I. Program) developed a structured decision-making aid to help professionals remember and recall a comprehensive set of compensatory strategies. Strategy-based training has proven to be effective in developing cognitive skills ( Clapham 1997 ), and has met success in increasing professional decision-making in the P.I. Program ( DuBois et al. 2018 ). These strategies shape professional decision-making and help professionals work through ethical dilemmas. Professional decision-making strategies comprise the acronym “SMART”, and encompass five domains: Seek help, Manage emotions, Anticipate consequences, Recognize rules and context, and Test assumptions and motives. Table 1 depicts key dimensions of each strategy and reflection questions that can be used to apply each strategy. While these strategies have distinct components, they are related to one another and conceptually overlap. Each professional decision-making strategy is described in detail below.

SMART strategies

Seeking Help

This strategy is characterized by 1) gathering information such as facts, options, and potential outcomes, 2) requesting the mediation of an objective third party, and 3) asking for and welcoming feedback and correction. By deliberately processing context-relevant information and consulting with objective others, it is possible to correct for biases and challenge initial assumptions ( Sonenshein 2007 ). This allows the information that may have been formerly disregarded or misconstrued to be revealed and utilized effectively ( Mumford et al. 2008 ). When attempting to apply this strategy, professionals should reflect on questions such as, “Do I welcome feedback or input from others?”, “Where could I seek additional unbiased, objective information or opinions?”, or “Have I owned up to mistakes and apologized to all involved to move forward?”

Managing Emotions

The strategy of managing stress and emotion is characterized by 1) identifying the emotions being experienced, 2) managing those emotions, and 3) acknowledging both positive and negative emotions such as excitement and anxiety. When attempting to apply this strategy, professionals should ask themselves questions such as, “What are my emotional reactions to this situation?”, “How are my emotions influencing my decision-making?”, “Would taking a timeout or a deep breath help the situation?”

Anticipating Consequences

The strategy of anticipating consequences is characterized by 1) anticipating consequences to both oneself and others, 2) anticipating both long-term and short-term consequences, 3) anticipating both positive and negative consequences, 4) considering formal and informal responses, and 5) managing and mitigating risk. When attempting to apply this strategy, professionals should reflect on questions such as, “What are the likely short- and long-term outcomes of a variety of choices?”, “Who will be affected by my decisions and how?” and “How can risks be minimized and benefits be maximized?”

Recognizing Rules and Context

This strategy is characterized by 1) recognizing formal rules, such as laws and policies, 2) recognizing informal rules, such as social norms, and 3) recognizing the power dynamics of individuals involved in a given situation. Professionals attempting to apply this strategy should ask themselves, “What are the causes of the problem in this situation that I can change?”, “What ethical principles, laws, or regulations apply in this situation?”, and “Who are the decision-makers in this situation?”

Testing Assumptions and Motives

This strategy is characterized by 1) addressing the possibility you might be making faulty assumptions, 2) examining your motives compared to the motives of others, and 3) comparing your assumptions and motives with those of others in an empathetic manner. When attempting to apply this strategy, professionals should reflect on questions such as, “Could I be making faulty assumptions about the intentions of others?”, “What are my motives?”, and “How will others view my choices?”

Not only have compensatory strategies been demonstrated to be a helpful tool for high-quality professional decision-making, but these strategies are also learnable, trainable, and applicable to a wide variety of challenges and situations ( DuBois et al. 2015b ; Kligyte et al. 2008 ). The generalizability of strategies is noteworthy because they apply across contexts (e.g., human subjects research, animal research, translational research) and challenges faced by professionals (e.g., compliance, personnel management, integrity, bias). Moreover, these compensatory strategies, when applied correctly, can facilitate more critical analysis of a problem, improve information gathering and information evaluation, and contribute to better decision-making that leads individuals to make more professional and ethical decisions ( DuBois et al. 2015b ; Thiel et al. 2012 ).

Compensatory Strategy Case Application

Below we present a case with an ethical, professional dilemma and discuss how each SMART strategy can be properly applied in this example. We then caution against flawed application of these SMART strategies and highlight potential pitfalls to effective strategy application. It should be noted that, while the main character in the following case is a research assistant, applying the SMART strategies is a skill that can be learned and utilized by individuals across career stages and professions. The dilemma is as follows:

Sara is a new research assistant in the social science lab of Dr Jackson. She recently emigrated from China. Knowing that Sara is great with quantitative data analysis, Dr. Jackson asked her to run some statistics on data gathered by other research assistants on a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant that Dr. Jackson received two years ago. She ran the statistics, but none of Dr. Jackson’s hypotheses were confirmed. She thinks the study was simply under-powered. When she speaks with Dr. Jackson, he tells her she is mistaken and he asks her to run the tests again. She does so with the same results as before. This time, Dr. Jackson is angry, calls her incompetent, and says he will give her one more chance before he hires a new research assistant to run the statistics. Sara is fearful that she will lose her student visa if she loses her funded position. She drops several outliers and changes the data for several subjects and produces results that Dr. Jackson likes very much.

The above illustration is a great teaching case because, at first glance, Sara appears to be a victim: Dr. Jackson did not help her to do good work; rather, he bullied her to get the results he wanted. At the same time, the case perfectly illustrates a failure to use good decision-making strategies in a stressful situation with competing interests where few good options readily present themselves. Sara made a very bad decision: she committed research misconduct through her data falsification, the project was federally-funded, and now she and her institution could be prosecuted for this federal crime. While not every difficult situation requires the use of every one of the SMART strategies, Sara may have benefited from using each of them.

Sara could have asked other research assistants, graduate students, or postdocs for help with addressing problems with analyses and strategies for approaching and communicating with Dr. Jackson. If issues with Dr. Jackson had been persistent overtime, Sara could have sought support from colleagues or other faculty members who could provide advice for navigating the troubling work relationship. Ideally, the environment in the department would allow Sara to feel comfortable approaching another faculty member or others for help. Sara could have referred to objective field standards for conducting the analyses and determining how to proceed after unsuccessful analyses. After conducting the initial analyses, Sara could have asked a member in her lab to re-run the analyses with her in attempt to address any potential mistakes. Doing so may have affirmed her initial findings and assuaged concerns that she had approached the analyses incorrectly. Sara could have involved a mediator, such as a university ombudsperson, to help find a viable solution if she was unable to do so after exhausting the aforementioned options. A more complete picture presents itself after seeking help and additional information, and more ethical and professional courses of action become more apparent.

Because of the threat the situation poses to Sara’s personal and professional goals, emotions run high in this scenario. Sara wishes to be successful in her career and education, maintain her position in the United States, and earn Dr. Jackson’s approval. Sara is also likely aware that Dr. Jackson wishes to maintain a successful reputation in his field, publish interesting findings, and be productive throughout his career. She should introspectively identify her emotional reactions of anxiety, fear, frustration, and stress. When Sara was chastised by Dr. Jackson, she could have taken a “time out” to calm down and acknowledge how her emotions could override taking a more rational approach to addressing the problem instead of hastily reacting to Dr. Jackson’s response. At a broader level, taking time to manage stress each day would help Sara cope with the pressures and day-to-day stressors of her work. By identifying and managing the range of emotions experienced when faced with ethical and professional situations, clearer and more thoughtful judgment is likely to result.

Considering both the long-term and short-term consequences for all possible individuals is central to making a quality professional and ethical decision. Specifically, Sara should consider how falsifying data could end up negatively impacting not only her career trajectory and her immediate ability to work in the United States, but the careers and reputations of Dr. Jackson, her fellow lab mates, and the university where she works. Data falsification also undermines public trust in the field and scientific enterprise more broadly. In addition to attempting to minimize risk, Sara could have also considered how to maximize the benefits of, or make the best of, the situation. Perhaps by addressing the limitations of the analytical approach and bringing the analysis issue to light, a learning opportunity for everyone in the lab could have presented itself, paving the way for smoother management of similar situations in the future. Forecasting downstream consequences for all individuals that could be impacted by a given course of action is essential to maximizing benefits and minimizing harm to oneself and others.

Taking time to identify formal laws and policies and informal professional and social norms will help elucidate the context in which an ethical or professional dilemma unfolds. Sara could have identified the causes of problems and tensions in the situation, including publication pressures, Sara being new to the job, job stressors, and the like. By doing so, she could have more concretely comprehended the factors that limit her choices and could have avoided tunnel vision or narrow-mindedness in approaching the problem. Sara could have taken time to reflect on relevant ethical principles and regulations as they relate to falsifying data. Doing so may have cued her to not manipulate the data to obtain certain findings.

For better or worse, Dr. Jackson is her supervisor, and she must figure out a way to navigate the interpersonal problem in the case: He is upset and has threatened to fire her. Some of the strategies described above under “Seeking Help” might assist her in navigating the political dimension of this situation. Additionally, if these strategies fail, she should recognize that Dr. Jackson’s lab is situated within a larger institutional context. She could have reached out to other individuals within the university (e.g., department chair, research integrity officer) who prioritize responsible research and mentoring after exhausting alternative courses of action. These individuals, in turn, could have provided support and helped Sara navigate a path forward. Realizing the entirety of the context opens up a wider realm of options in navigating this challenging and threatening situation.

Understanding the motives of oneself and others provides the opportunity to consider multiple perspectives and take steps to avoid biased decision-making. While it can be challenging when one feels affronted, it can be helpful to consider the perspective and motives of other parties in the situation. For example, Sara could have considered whether Dr. Jackson was having a stressful day and overreacted when she initially approached him. She could have better managed self-serving and self-protecting biases perpetuated by her fear of not being allowed to work in Dr. Jackson’s lab by acknowledging how they may be distorting her perception of the situation. Sara might have questioned whether her analysis was correct; perhaps she did make an error and the study was not underpowered. That is, Sara should have questioned her assumption that, if she did conduct the analyses correctly, falsifying data was the only available option that would allow her to keep her position. Seldom is professional decision-making served well by engaging in simplistic either-or thinking. It is likely that multiple alternate courses of action would have presented themselves if she had engaged these strategies. Being proactive in managing biases by engaging in self-reflection and considering the perspectives and motives of others is beneficial to quality professional decision-making.

Questioning one’s assumptions is also a classic emotion management strategy used in cognitive behavioral therapy. Sometimes just realizing that we are making assumptions about how others perceive the situation and about our limited options can relieve anxiety.

Evaluate and Revise

If one wishes to take these strategies a step further to engage in “SMART-ER” professional decision-making, they can: 1) Evaluate their decision and its outcomes and 2) Revise future behavior in similar situations. By acknowledging what did and did not work well in past situations and attempts at strategy use, modified and improved approaches to professional decision-making can be taken when faced with other professional and ethical challenges in the future.

Considerations for Applying SMART Strategies

While the SMART strategies are an excellent tool for professional decision-making, it is equally important to recognize the several important considerations when utilizing this approach. While a five-part decision-making aid has the opportunity to be highly useful for navigating complex, ambiguous professional situations, it is not a perfect algorithm or panacea for all ethical and professional conundrums. Given situational limitations and available contextual information, it may not always be possible to use each strategy fully, and challenges navigating the problem will still exist. Not all strategies will be equally applicable across all situations and may not be applied in the same order in all situations. However, SMART strategies are generalizable to myriad contexts, professions, and dilemmas and are not limited to major ethical transgressions such as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism.

An additional consideration for using SMART strategies is that people may have a preference for or tendency to use one strategy over the others. While the SMART strategies are interrelated, over-attending to one strategy may result in biased or incomplete information gathering and information processing and, ultimately, sub-optimal professional decisions. When individuals face emotional, stressful, or ethically-charged situations, it is important that they consider and use multiple strategies to inform well-rounded decision-making. When educating trainees on SMART strategies, educators should encourage trainees to use a balanced approach and consider multiple strategies.

Perhaps one of the most considerable challenges educators may encounter is motivating trainees to use these compensatory strategies regularly. Simply teaching the strategies does not guarantee constructive application of strategies. In situations where individuals are overconfident or rushed to solve a problem that needs to be resolved quickly, immediately turning to the SMART strategies is unlikely to be an automatic course of action. Furthermore, if individuals engage in cognitive distortions in such a way that disengages from compliance or harms quality professional decision-making, they may fail to see the need or utility of SMART strategies ( DuBois et al. 2015a ). Educators should make professionals aware of how they might fall prey to these pitfalls.

A final consideration is that other mechanisms exist aside from training professionals to use SMART strategies that reinforce the recall and application of professional decision-making strategies. Such mechanisms include creating ethical and supportive organizational and departmental cultures, developing and enacting ethical leadership and management practices, and establishing institutional policies and procedures that reinforce the use of professional decision-making strategies.

Training SMART Strategies

Below, we examine practices that are useful in conducting professional decision-making training programs and creating pedagogical tools that can be implemented by a research ethics or professionalism course instructor. We focus on training practices designed for adult learners that support their professional growth and advancement ( Knowles et al. 2012 ). This is not an exhaustive list of considerations for designing and planning for an ethics or professionalism training program, and a systematic approach should be taken when developing any instructional program ( Antes 2014 ; Antes and DuBois 2014 ). Rather, the pedagogical practices described below were selected because of their implications for the transfer of complex skills, such as professional decision-making, to the workplace after training has occurred. That is, facilitating trainee learning, retention, and application of the content learned during training is essential to improving professional decision-making and making the training successful ( Noe 2013 ).

SMART Training Program Practices

Establish learning objectives.

Prior to presenting training content, provide trainees with stated objectives of the training program that define the expected outcomes of training and what it is they will be expected to accomplish as a result of completing the training ( Moore et al. 2008 ). Doing so alerts trainees to what is important and helps consolidate learning. Learning objectives have three components: 1) a statement of expected performance standard or outcome, 2) a statement of the quality or level of expected performance, and 3) a statement of the conditions when a trainee is expected to perform the skill learned in training ( Mager 1997 ). An example learning objective for a professional decision-making, or “SMART” strategies-focused, training is: Trainees will be able to apply professional decision-making strategies when they are faced with uncertain, complex, and high-stakes professional and ethical decisions in the workplace.

Create Meaningful Content

Explaining to trainees how a SMART strategies-focused training will directly benefit them and describing how training content is specifically linked to experiences in their profession will help garner buy-in from trainees ( Smith-Jentsch et al. 1996 ). Trainee dedication to achieving learning objectives is essential for learning and retention to occur and for transferring knowledge and skills to the work environment ( Goldstein and Ford 2002 ; Slavin 1990 ). To demonstrate the benefits of training, the content of training needs to be practically useful and applicable. This includes presenting content that is relevant to trainees’ professions and that addresses ethical and professional issues they have faced or are likely to face in their careers. Discussing a case or critical incident that the trainees have encountered, or something similar to what they have encountered, is an effective way to get them engaged with and derive meaning from training content.

Engage Multiple Pedagogical Activities

Pedagogical activities that occur during training reinforce key training concepts, help trainees derive meaning from training content, and facilitate active learning of professional decision-making skills. How trainees learn is equally as important as what trainees learn during training. Integrating case studies, individual reflection activities, think-pair-share exercises, and role plays into training fosters learning more than a traditional lecture format ( Bransford et al. 1999 ; DuBois 2013 ; Handelsman et al. 2004 ). These pedagogical activities vary in terms of their complexity and length, resulting in dynamic training content. Engaging trainees with these activities provides them with the opportunity to examine and connect their existing knowledge, experiences, and perspectives to the learning material. Table 2 provides a brief overview of how to implement various pedagogical activities, along with estimated level of complexity and duration.

Pedagogical activities

Case Studies

Applied to professionalism and research, case-based learning consists of using factual or fictional scenarios to illustrate examples of complex and ambiguous ethical and professional situations researchers may face ( Bagdasarov et al. 2013 ; Johnson et al. 2012 ; Kolodner 1992 ). Case-based learning helps trainees link course concepts to realistic, real-world scenarios by immersing themselves in these scenarios and exploring how to apply professional decision-making strategies ( Miller and Tanner 2015 ). The positive effects of case-based learning are magnified when trainees work together in small groups to collectively seek out important information, ask relevant questions, and find solutions to the problem ( Allen and Tanner 2002a ). This enables greater breadth and depth of understanding of decision-making strategies that can be used to address issues related to the case. Trainees can also use what they learned during this practice when applying these decision-making skills to a situation in the future that is similar. That is, trainees can draw upon their case-based knowledge to make sense of future professional and ethical situations and navigate these situations when they arise ( Kolodner et al. 2004 ).

Individual Reflection

Because of the personal and interpersonal nature of ethical and professional problems, reflecting on personal experiences and processing cases individually reinforces the knowledge base that influences ethical and professional decision-making ( Antes et al. 2012 ). Moreover, when professionals are confronted with ethical dilemmas, they are likely to draw upon personal experiences to make sense of the dilemma and generate solutions ( Mumford et al. 2000 ; Scott et al. 2005 ; Thiel et al. 2012 ). Drawing on past experiences allows professionals to consider important aspects of these past experiences such as causes and outcomes, which are essential for effective professional decision-making ( Stenmark et al. 2010 ).

Think-Pair-Share

Think-pair-share activities consist of having students initially think about a solution to a problem individually, then pairing with a neighboring student to exchange ideas, and finally reporting out to the larger group key points from their discussion ( Allen and Tanner 2002b ). Discussion between peers enhances understanding of complex subject matter even when both trainees are uncertain initially ( Smith et al. 2009 ). This may be due to the cognitive reasoning and communication skills needed to relay and justify perspectives about complex subject matter to others. Conversely, similar evaluative skills are needed to appraise the viewpoints of the other and determine if their explanation and rationale make sense in context.

Role plays are training activities where trainees take on the role of someone in a hypothetical scenario and model what it is like to have the perspective of that character ( Thiagarajan 1996 ). For example, trainees in a role play can model social interactions between characters faced with an ethical or professional dilemma regarding authorship, human subjects protections, mentor-trainee relationships, or data management ( DuBois 2013 ). Role plays enable trainees to learn how to identify, analyze, and resolve these dilemmas because they provide trainees with the opportunity to practice navigating these situations ( Chan 2012 ; DuBois 2013 ). This technique is particularly effective in trainings that involve exploration and acquisition of complex social skills, such as professional decision-making ( Noe 2013 ). Role play activities have been shown to be effective in ethics instruction ( Mumford et al. 2008 ). They can involve a select few volunteers who perform for the class while the remainder of trainees observe, or involve all trainees divided into small groups of two or three where all trainees take part in the role play activity. Role play activities have been shown to promote a deep understanding of the complexities involved with ethical and professional dilemmas ( Brummel et al. 2010 ).

In order to be effective, however, certain activities must take place before, during, and after the role play ( Noe 2013 ; Thiagarajan 1996 ). Specifically, before the role play, trainees should be provided with background information that gives context for the role play and a script with adequate detail for trainees to understand their role. During the role play, actors and observers should be able to hear and see one another, and trainees should be provided with a handout detailing the key issues of the role play scenario. After the role play has commenced, both actors and observers should debrief on their experience, how the role play relates to the concepts being taught in training, and key takeaways. Trainees should also be provided with feedback in order to reinforce what was learned during the role play experience ( Jackson and Back 2011 ).

Provide Practice Opportunities

Trainees will need multiple opportunities to practice applying the professional decision-making skills they are learning. Practice opportunities can take the form of the various pedagogical tools, as discussed above, including case studies, individual reflection, and role-play activities. These tools promote active learning and create a safe mechanism for trainees to experiment with SMART strategy application ( Bell and Kozlowski 2008 ). Instructors should also have trainees periodically recall the SMART strategies throughout training. This active recall will increase the likelihood of strategy use beyond practice during training.

Give Feedback

Immediately after each practice activity, instructors should provide feedback to trainees by noting what was done well and where there are opportunities for change or improvement. Feedback should be specific and frequent in order to convey to trainees what resulted in poor professional decision-making performance and good professional decision-making performance ( Gagné and Medsker 1996 ). Carefully guiding feedback-oriented discussions can further enhance learning, retention, and application of SMART strategies.

Professionals across various fields, especially in research contexts, encounter complex situations involving multiple stakeholders that necessitate professional decision-making skills. Fortunately, these skills are trainable, and the SMART strategies decision tool helps facilitate professional decision-making skill retention and application. In the present effort, we approach professional decision-making using a compensatory strategy framework and showcase how each of the SMART strategies could be applied to a scenario involving a professional dilemma. We also discuss how to maximize the effects of a SMART strategy-oriented training program and highlight pedagogical tools to guide SMART strategy education.

This paper provides a guide for educators and institutions with the goal of integrating training on professional decision-making skills into their curriculum. We provide educators with a robust understanding of the steps involved in mitigating negative effects of self-serving biases and making sense of complex professional dilemmas. Additionally, we discuss the individual-level and environmental-level constraints that influence the way problems are framed and approached, and the strategies that individuals can use to counteract the negative effects of these constraints on decision-making. Educators can take this understanding, along with the knowledge of effective training and pedagogical practices, to create training content that prepares its trainees to effectively navigate multifaceted professional issues they may face in their careers.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank John Gibbs, John Chibnall, Raymond Tait, Michael Mumford, Shane Connelly, and Lynn Devenport for their insight and prior work that led to many of the ideas discussed in this manuscript.

Funding/Support This paper was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1 TR002345). The development of the Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program (PI) was funded by a supplement to the Washington University Clinical and Translational Science award (UL1 TR000448). The U.S. Office of Research Integrity provided funding to conduct outcome assessment of the PI Program (ORIIR140007). The effort of ALA was supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute (K01HG008990).

Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

• Allen D, & Tanner K (2002a). Answers worth waiting for: One second is hardly enough . Cell Biology Education , 1 , 3–5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Allen D, & Tanner K (2002b). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Questions about questions . Cell Biology Education , 1 , 63–67. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, & Martinson BC (2007). What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists' misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded scientists . Academic Medicine: Journal of The Association of American Medical Colleges , 82 , 853–860. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Angie AD, Connelly S, Waples EP, & Kligyte V (2011). The influence of discrete emotions on judgement and decision-making: A meta-analytic review . Cognition & Emotion , 25 , 1393–1422. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL (2013). An ethics instructor’s guide to sensemaking as a framework for case-based learning (Vol. 1 ): Office of Research Integrity. [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL (2014). A systematic approach to instruction in research ethics . Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance , 21 , 50–67. 10.1080/08989621.2013.822269. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, & DuBois JM (2014). Aligning objectives and assessment in responsible conduct of research instruction . Journal Of Microbiology & Biology Education , 15 , 108–116. 10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.852. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Wang X, Mumford MD, Brown RP, Connelly S, & Devenport L (2010). Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making . Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges , 85 , 519–526. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Thiel CE, Martin LE, Stenmark CK, Connelly S, Devenport LD, & Mumford MD (2012). Applying cases to solve ethical problems: The significance of positive and process-oriented reflection . Ethics & Behavior , 22 , 113–130. 10.1080/10508422.2012.655646. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, English T, Baldwin KA, & DuBois JM (2017). The role of culture and acculturation in researchers' perceptions of rules in science . Science and Engineering Ethics , 24 , 1–31. 10.1007/s11948-017-9876-4. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bagdasarov Z, Thiel CE, Johnson JF, Connelly S, Harkrider LN, Devenport LD, & Mumford MD (2013). Case-based ethics instruction: The influence of contextual and individual factors in case content on ethical decision-making . Science and Engineering Ethics , 19 , 1305–1322. 10.1007/s11948-012-9414-3. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, & Caprara GV (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71 , 364–374. 10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.125. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bazerman MH, & Moore DA (2013). Judgment in managerial decision making (8th ed.). New York: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bell BS, & Kozlowski SW (2008). Active learning: Effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability . Journal of Applied Psychology , 93 , 296–316. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bornstein BH, & Emler AC (2001). Rationality in medical decision making: A review of the literature on doctors’ decision-making biases . Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice , 7 , 97–107. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bransford JD, Brown A, & Cocking R (1999). How people learn: Mind, brain, experience, and school . Washington, DC: National Research Council. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brummel BJ, Gunsalus C, Anderson KL, & Loui MC (2010). Development of role-play scenarios for teaching responsible conduct of research . Science and Engineering Ethics , 16 , 573–589. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan ZC (2012). Role-playing in the problem-based learning class . Nurse Education in Practice , 12 , 21–27. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clapham MM (1997). Ideational skills training: A key element in creativity training programs . Creativity Research Journal , 10 , 33–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dana J, & Loewenstein G (2003). A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry . Journal of the American Medical Association , 290 , 252–255. 10.1001/jama.290.2.252. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Davis MS, Riske-Morris M, & Diaz SR (2007). Causal factors implicated in research misconduct: Evidence from ORI case files . Science and Engineering Ethics , 13 , 395–414. 10.1007/s11948-007-9045-2. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM (2008a). Identifying and managing conflicts of interest. In Ethics in mental health research: Principles, guidance, and cases (1st ed., pp. 202–224). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM (2008b). Solving ethical problems: Analyzing ethics cases and justifying decisions : New York: Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM (2013). ORI casebook: Stories about researchers worth discussing .
• DuBois JM (2014). Strategies for professional decision making: The SMART approach . St. Louis: Professionalism and Integrity in Research Progra. [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Chibnall JT, & Gibbs JC (2015a). Compliance disengagement in research: Development and validation of a new measure . Science and Engineering Ethics , 22 , 965–988. 10.1007/s11948-015-9681-x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Chibnall JT, Tait RC, Vander Wal JS, Baldwin KA, Antes AL, & Mumford MD (2015b). Professional decision-making in research (PDR): The validity of a new measure . Science and Engineering Ethics , 22 , 391–416. 10.1007/s11948-015-9667-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Chibnall JT, Tait RC, & Vander Wal JS (2016). Lessons from researcher rehab . Nature , 534 , 173–175. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Chibnall JT, Tait RC, & Vander Wal JS (2018). The professionalism and integrity in research program: Description and preliminary outcomes . Academic Medicine , 93 , 586–592. 10.1097/acm.0000000000001804. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gagné RM, & Medsker KL (1996). The conditions of learning: Training applications . Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt-Brace. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gibbs JC, Potter G, & Goldstein A (1995). The EQUIP program: Teaching youth to think and act responsibly . Champaign, IL: Research Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gino F, Schweitzer ME, Mead NL, & Ariely D (2011). Unable to resist temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 115 , 191–203. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldstein IL, & Ford KJ (2002). Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development, and evaluation (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodwin P, Wright G, & Phillips LD (1998). Decision analysis for management judgment . Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gross JJ (2013). Emotion regulation: Taking stock and moving forward . Emotion , 13 , 359–365. 10.1037/a0032135. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haidt J (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment . Psychological Review , 108 , 814–834. 10.1037//0033-295x.108.4.814. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammond JS, Keeney RL, & Raiffa H (1998). The hidden traps in decision making . Harvard Business Review , 76 , 47–58. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Handelsman J, Ebert-May D, Beichner R, Bruns P, Chang A, DeHaan R, Gentile J, Lauffer S, Stewart J, Tilghman S, & Wood W (2004). Scientific teaching . Science , 304 , 521–522. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoch, Kunreuther H, & Gunther R (2001). Wharton on making decisions . New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. [ Google Scholar ]
• Irwin RS (2009). The role of conflict of interest in reporting of scientific information . Chest , 136 , 253–259. 10.1378/chest.09-0890. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jackson VA,& Back AL (2011). Teaching communication skills using role-play: An experience-based guide for educators . Journal of Palliative Medicine , 14 , 775–780. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahnke LM, & Asher A (2014). The problem of data: Data management and curation practices among university researchers . In Council on Library and Information Resources Retrieved from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub154/problem-of-data . [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson JF, Bagdasarov Z, Connelly S, Harkrider LN, Devenport LD, Mumford MD, & Thiel CE (2012). Case-based ethics education: The impact of cause complexity and outcome favorability on ethicality . Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics , 7 , 63–77. 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.63. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman D (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice - mapping bounded rationality . American Psychologist , 58 , 697–720.i 10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman D, Lovallo D, & Sibony O (2011). Before You Make That Big Decision … Harvard Business Review , 89 , 50–60. Retrieved from <Go to ISI>://WOS:000290694700034. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kligyte V, Marcy RT, Waples EP, Sevier ST, Godfrey ES, Mumford MD, & Hougen DF (2008). Application of a sensemaking approach to ethics training in the physical sciences and engineering . Science and Engineering Ethics , 14 , 251–278. 10.1007/s11948-007-9048-z. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knowles MS, Holton III EF, & Swanson RA (2012). The adult learner (7th ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kolodner JL (1992). An introduction to case-based reasoning . Artificial Intelligence Review , 6 , 3–34. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kolodner JL, Owensby JN, & Guzdial M (2004). Case-based learning aids . Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology , 2 , 829–861. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mager RF (1997). Preparing instructional objectives (5th ed. ed.). Belmont: Lake Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mead NL, Baumeister RF, Gino F, Schweitzer ME, & Ariely D (2009). Too tired to tell the truth: Self-control resource depletion and dishonesty . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 45 , 594–597. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller S, & Tanner KD (2015). A portal into biology education: An annotated list of commonly encountered terms . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 14 , fe2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore DA, & Loewenstein G (2004). Self-interest, automaticity, and the psychology of conflict of interest . Social Justice Research , 17 , 189–202. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore S, Ellsworth JB, & Kaufman R (2008). Objectives—Are they useful? A quick assessment . Performance Improvement Quarterly , 47 , 41–47. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mumford MD, Zaccaro SJ, Harding FD, Jacobs TO, & Fleishman EA (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems . The Leadership Quarterly , 11 , 11–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mumford MD, Friedrich TL, Caughron JJ, & Byrne CL (2007). Leader cognition in real-world settings: How do leaders think about crises? The Leadership Quarterly , 18 , 515–543. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mumford MD, Connelly S, Brown RP, Murphy ST, Hill JH, Antes AL, Waples EP, & Devenport LD (2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists: Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness . Ethics & Behavior , 18 , 315–339. 10.1080/10508420802487815. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Noe RA (2013). Employee training and development (6th ed.): McGraw-Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oliveira A (2007). A discussion of rational and psychological decision-making theories and models: The search for a cultural-ethical decision-making model . Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies , 12 , 12–13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oreg S, & Bayazit M (2009). Prone to bias: Development of a bias taxonomy from an individual differences perspective . Review of General Psychology , 13 , 175–193. [ Google Scholar ]
• Palazzo G, Krings F, & Hoffrage U (2012). Ethical blindness . Journal of Business Ethics , 109 , 323–338. 10.1007/s10551-011-1130-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Posavac SS, Kardes FR, & Brakus JJ (2010). Focus induced tunnel vision in managerial judgment and decision making: The peril and the antidote . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 113 , 102–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Samuelson W, & Zeckhauser R (1988). Status quo bias in decision making . Journal of Risk and Uncertainty , 1 , 7–59. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott GM, Lonergan DC, & Mumford MD (2005). Conceptual combination: Alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics . Creativity Research Journal , 17 , 79–98. [ Google Scholar ]
• Slavin RE (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith MK, Wood WB, Adams WK, Wieman C, Knight JK, Guild N, & Su TT (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions . Science , 323 , 122–124. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith-Jentsch KA, Jentsch FG, Payne SC, & Salas E (1996). Can pretraining experiences explain individual differences in learning? Journal of Applied Psychology , 81 , 110–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sonenshein S (2007). The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking-intuition model . Academy of Management Review , 32 , 1022–1040. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stenmark CK, Antes AL, Wang X, Caughron JJ, Thiel CE, & Mumford MD (2010). Strategies in forecasting outcomes in ethical decision-making: Identifying and analyzing the causes of the problem . Ethics & Behavior , 20 , 110–127. doi:Pii 920034165. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stenmark CK, Antes AL, Thiel CE, Caughron JJ, Wang XQ, & Mumford MD (2011). Consequences identification in forecasting and ethical decision-making . Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics , 6 , 25–32. 10.1525/jer.2011.6.1.25. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stern DT, & Papadakis M (2006). The developing physician—Becoming a professional . New England Journal of Medicine , 355 , 1794–1799. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Swick HM (2000). Toward a normative definition of medical professionalism . Academic Medicine , 75 , 612–616. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tenbrunsel AE, Diekmann KA, Wade-Benzoni KA, & Bazerman MH (2010). The ethical mirage: A temporal explanation as to why we are not as ethical as we think we are . Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews , 30 , 153–173. 10.1016/j.riob.2010.08.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thiagarajan S (1996). Instructional games, simulations, and role-plays. In Craig R (Ed.), The ASTD training and development handbook (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thiel CE, Bagdasarov Z, Harkrider LN, Johnson JF, & Mumford MD (2012). Leader ethical decision-making in organizations: Strategies for sensemaking . Journal of Business Ethics , 107 , 49–64. 10.1007/s10551-012-1299-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Mook WNKA, van Luijk SJ, O'Sullivan H, Wass V, Harm Zwaveling J, Schuwirth LW, & van der Vleuten CP (2009). The concepts of professionalism and professional behaviour: Conflicts in both definition and learning outcomes . European Journal of International Medicine , 20 , e85–e89. 10.1016/j.ejim.2008.10.006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Voelpel SC, Eckhoff RA, & Förster J (2008). David against goliath? Group size and bystander effects in virtual knowledge sharing . Human Relations , 61 , 271–295. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM, & Obstfeld D (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking . Organization Science , 16 , 409–421. 10.1287/orsc.1050.0133. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Werhane PH (2008). Mental models, moral imagination and system thinking in the age of globalization . Journal of Business Ethics , 78 , 463–474. [ Google Scholar ]

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.

• Membership regulations

Members are required to supply certain information to the members’ registrar and to pay annual fees and subscriptions. These matters are governed by regulations.

• 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.

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.

ICAEW flagship events

ICAEW boasts an extensive portfolio of industry-leading conferences. These flagship events offer the opportunity to hear from and interact with all the key players in the industry. Find out what's coming up.

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.

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?

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)

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 around 80 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

ICAEW Communities

Information, guidance and networking opportunities on industry sectors, professional specialisms and at various stages throughout your career. Free for ICAEW members and students.

• Discover a new community

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.

• Election explainers

ICAEW experts offer simple guides to help understand the technical, economic jargon that will be at the heart of political debates in the coming weeks.

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

• See the latest insights

ICAEW podcasts

ICAEW produces two podcast series that count towards your CPD: Accountancy Insights for news from across the profession, and The Tax Track for specialist analysis from the ICAEW Tax Faculty.

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
• Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity and inclusion is a key pillar of ICAEW's strategy. Discover the latest insights on equality, diversity and inclusion. You can also join our Diversity & Inclusion Community.

• Find out more on our hub
• Join the community

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.

ICAEW Regulation

• 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
• Ethics Cpd Course
• 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
• Practising certificates
• Advancement to fellowship regulations
• Regulations relating to membership cessation, readmission and resignation
• ICAEW's guide to directors' duties and responsibilities
• Information to be supplied by members
• Payment of annual subscription
• Power to change subscription fees
• 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 Annual Conference 2024
• Audit & Assurance Conference 2024
• Restructuring & Insolvency Conference
• Virtual CPD Conference
• Virtual Healthcare Conference 2024
• All our 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
• 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
• Exam admin check
• 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
• Student mentoring programme
• Student conduct and behaviour
• 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
• ICAEW acting on audit quality
• 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 and board effectiveness
• Corporate governance codes and reports
• Corporate Governance Community
• Principles of corporate governance
• Roles, duties and responsibilities of Board members
• Stewardship and stakeholder relations
• Corporate Governance thought leadership
• 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
• Spring Budget 2024
• Energy crisis
• Levelling up: rebalancing the UK’s economy
• Resilience and Renewal: Building an economy fit for the future
• Social mobility and inclusion
• 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
• Making COP count
• 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
• UK 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
• Latest news
• The World’s Fastest Accountant
• 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
• Ukraine crisis: central resource hub
• 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?
• Groupthink: the boardroom’s most pervasive problem?
• Corporate reporting update and VAT on private hire vehicles
• AI in audit: the good, the bad and the ugly
• Company size thresholds and CGT on residences
• Lessons in leadership from ICAEW's CEO
• So you want to be a leader?
• A busy new tax year, plus progress on the Economic Crime Act
• Does Britain have a farming problem?
• Budget 2024: does it change anything?
• Will accountants save the world? With ICAEW CEO Michael Izza
• Crunch time: VAT (or not) on poppadoms
• More podcasts...
• Top charts of the week
• EU and international trade
• CEO and President's insights
• 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.

Toll free number 1-800-993-3354   Section Navigation Get Our FREE Working Resources Newsletter Name: e-mail: Leadership: Facing Moral and Ethical Dilemmas "We need a Nobel Prize in business, awarded to organizations that demonstrate how business effectiveness (meaning survival, market share, profits, and stock value) results directly from ethical behavior. A society that is not built on ethics – on fairness, freedom, and mature hearts and minds – cannot survive for long." -- Peter Koestenbaum, 2002 Last year in the U.S. alone 257 public companies with $258 billion in assets declared bankruptcy . This was a huge increase over the previous year's record of 176 companies with $95 billion. Big Fortune 500 companies aren't supposed to collapse, yet this year is expected to be worse. Taking a look at what went wrong and why these companies failed reveals moral and ethical shortcomings. Many negative factors contributed to their demise: a bad economy, financial risks that didn't pay off, accounting manipulations that seemed smart at the time, loss of competitive advantage, breakdowns in execution, growing too fast, and rapidly changing market preferences. But to understand truly, one must look deeper, into the very hearts and souls of the leaders who guide corporate responsibility. One must look at the moral and ethical stance of an organization and the role of leadership in creating a culture of values. September 11 th was a tragedy that brought harsh consequences for many businesses for which one can blame terrorism. These bankruptcies, on the other hand, are more frightening in that we brought them on ourselves. True, one can point fingers at the CEO's in charge. There is no doubt that some were in a position to know when to jump ship before the rest of us. But how do large organizations get to that point virtually overnight? What creates the organizational culture that allows a house of cards to be built in the first place? What drives good leaders to make unethical choices? To assume that all of the leaders in Enron were evil, greedy and selfish is too simplistic. There is more to the story, and we must understand how such ethical violations and consequent collapses occur. How Can It Happen? In 1986 the space shuttle Challenger exploded causing the death of seven astronauts. A subsequent investigation of the culture at NASA revealed important lessons. There was not one single error that occurred, and neither did the managers intentionally commit wrongdoing. Yet it could have been prevented. The errors were years in the making. NASA engineers noticed damage to crucial O-rings yet they repeatedly convinced themselves that this level of damage was acceptable. One analyst described it as "an incremental descent into poor judgment." The culture at NASA was extremely success-oriented. They had hired the best of the best, and had set highly complex and sophisticated performance goals. The pressure to succeed gradually mounted until minor violations of standards became the standard. Nothing looked wrong until it was all over. The culture at Enron was very similar. They hired the brightest from graduate schools. Success was rewarded and non-performers shunned. The emphasis was on the numbers and immediate success rather than on long term values. There was a gradual descent into poor judgment, denial, failure to challenge the system, greed, deceit, ego, wishful thinking, poor communications and lax oversight. But it was apparent only in retrospect. No one noticed at the time as everyone was immersed in the culture. The question to ask is not how did this happen at Enron, but how is it happening in one's own organization right now? What are the standards and how and to what degree are they communicated and reinforced? Where are standards being violated? As a leader, in what ways is one contributing to a loosening of ethical and moral values? Is Business Ethics an Oxymoron? Robert Jackall (1997) suggests that the modern bureaucracy has created a "society within a society" in which there is a set of ethical standards that may not be consistent with those of the larger society. This might help explain how certain corporate leaders could do what they did and still look at themselves in the mirror. Our current capitalistic society goes along with these sub-societies, as long as they are successful. Enron was touted as one of the most innovative organizations five years in a row by Fortune magazine. Only when there is a collapse is there a cry of "foul." In America , the Protestant work ethic at one time formed the basis of good business relationships. A person's word was his bond and business could be counted on with a handshake. Personal integrity and reputation mattered. But in business, there is also a "dog eat dog" mentality. Somehow, when it comes to business, there is such an emphasis on success, that morals and ethics sometimes take a back seat. The larger an organization, the more complex the strategy and operations. Thus, the easier it becomes to stretch standards and change numbers to reflect what is desired, rather than what is. Meeting the numbers seems more desirable than sticking to reality. Besides, one might reason that "reality" or "truth" is really just a question of which version, which perspective, is applied. Here's the way one cynical executive put it: "Let's be honest. We lie and our colleagues lie to us. People prefer to tell each other what they want to hear... I don't need perfect people, I need successful people who can think for themselves and get the job done. If they need to tell a little white lie, I can live with that." Many corporations value stock prices and dividend and financial reports over customers, product or service quality. There is such an emphasis on the bottom line, that even customer satisfaction becomes secondary. Jim Collins, in his research for his book Good to Great , emphasizes that sustainably successful companies are the ones that always focus on understanding and meeting customer needs. When this is done successfully, it delivers stakeholder return. Facing Ethical Dilemmas: Living in the Gray In business, not only are we faced with questions between right and wrong, but between right and right. According to Joseph Badaracco (1998), "We have all experienced situations in which our professional responsibilities unexpectedly come into conflict with our deepest values...we are caught in a conflict between right and right. And no matter which option we choose, we feel like we've come up short." "Between right and wrong is a troublesome gray area." – Boeing ethics poster Research on moral standards and business ethics is sparse. Weber in 1998 found that 85.9 percent of managers claim that they draw their moral standards at work from the expectations perceived in the work environment. Trevino (1990) adds that organizational norms that are embodied by the corporation's culture are strong determinants of individual thought and behavior in the workplace. Gillespie (1997) notes that corporate culture is recognized as a key contextual influence in establishing and maintaining norms. The morality and ethics of the modern workplace are influenced by the leaders of the organization. There is an increasing sense of distrust of leaders' motives since they are seen to serve shareholders and themselves, rather than the employees, the community, the environment, or even the customers! They are seen as not telling the truth, and doing whatever it takes to increase stock value. Such erosion of trust may be pandemic. What happened at Enron and WorldCom colors all employees' views of how leaders operate. When corporate culture is undermined by distrust, the original excitement and enthusiasm about a job turns to cynicism, alienation and disengagement. When this happens, work suffers. Leaders Have a Responsibility for Creating Trust and Cultural Values Leaders are the most important and powerful influence on the culture of an organization and are responsible for creating credibility and trust. It is obvious that employees contribute more when they are working for something they believe in. Kouzes and Posner (1987) put it well: "There is more to work than is commonly assumed. There is rich opportunity here for leaders to appeal to more than just the material rewards. Great leaders, like great companies and countries, create meaning, not just money." The aim is to operate organizations in such a way that they achieve stated goals and do so in a manner that is consistent with the higher values of the organizational community. When employees have no clear picture of the moral or ethical stance of the organization, they tend to operate at the lowest perceived level. Creating and promoting institutional integrity becomes one of the most important functions of leadership. Moral and ethical stances need to be consistently reiterated and clarified. One of the most pervasive issues in the American workplace today is the injustice of corporations paying millions in bonuses to executives and haggling over pennies with salaried and hourly employees. Until this issue is addressed and adjustments made, leaders will have a hard time rebuilding trust and credibility in organizational cultures. An analysis of the relationship between ethical behavior and effective leadership reveals that it is a matter of examining both ends and means. A business enterprise must be profitable in order to survive. Service organizations must satisfy consumers' expectations. Government must meet the needs of its citizens. The ends are the very reason for existence of the enterprise. At the same time, the means by which they achieve those ends are increasingly important. What can be done to foster a clear and consistent moral and ethical stance for an organization's culture? 1. Leadership development must include programs on ethical reasoning and decision making. This must be an ongoing process, not a one-shot affair at fulfilling a requirement. The most effective leadership development programs include coaching and/or mentoring. Through executive coaching, issues of personal ethics and moral responsibility must be explored and aligned with organizational values. 2. Leadership programs must include selection, development, evaluation and rewards policies that are aligned in such a way as to reflect their support of the values of the organization. When a person is selected for promotion, or is rewarded, the organization is making a statement: this person represents our values and standards. There are powerful economic, political, social and cultural forces at play in our lives today that may lead us to feel powerless to oppose them. It may seem easier to go along rather than to speak out. Each person must weigh alternatives and make choices in light of personal values and goals, but also with consideration to organizational and professional success. As leaders wake up to needed reforms, there will be an increased emphasis on the need for leadership development programs that include coaching on ethical and moral values. There must be a drive for ethical responsibility if organizations are to thrive. "Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead How to Solve an Ethical Dilemma Peter Drucker (2001) refers to the Hippocratic oath of 2500 years ago in his writing about business ethics. A professional should promise he or she will "not knowingly do harm." He states that it is not an easy rule to live up to, but that "its very modesty and self-constraint make it the right rule for the ethics that managers need, the ethics of responsibility." Given that ethical and moral dilemmas present themselves on a daily basis, what do the experts say are the steps for solving an ethical dilemma? Life and business are rarely simple, and between right and wrong there is a lot of gray area. There are two major approaches that philosophers use in handling ethical dilemmas. One is to focus on the practical consequences of what we do, and the other focuses on the actions themselves and the rightness of the action alone. The first school of thought argues "no harm, no foul." The second claims that some actions are simply wrong in and of themselves. Here is a three-step process for solving an ethical problem: Step One: Analyze the consequences • Who will be helped by what you do? • Who will be harmed? • What kind of benefits and harms are we talking about? (Some are more valuable or more    harmful than others: good health, someone's trust and a clean environment are very valuable    benefits, more so than a faster remote control device.) • How does all of this look over the long run as well as the short run? Step Two: Analyze the actions • Consider all of the options from a different perspective, without thinking about the consequences. • How do the actions measure up against moral principles like honesty, fairness, equality, respecting the dignity of others, people's rights? • Do any of the actions "cross the line?" • If there's a conflict between principles or between the rights of different people involved, is there a way to see one principle as more important than the others? • Which option offers actions that are least problematic? Step Three: Make a decision Take both parts of your analysis into account and make a decision. How to Solve an Ethical Dilemma by The Center for Business and Ethics at Loyola Marymount University (2002 May 4). Source: www.ethicsandbusiness.org/strategy.htm Badaracco, J.L., Jr. "The discipline of building character." Harvard Business Review (1998): 115-124. Collins, J. Good to Great, Harper Collins (2001). Drucker, P. The Essential Drucker, Harper Collins (2001). Drucker, P. Post-Capitalist Society , Harper Collins (1993). Fusaro, P.C., & Miller, R.M. What Went Wrong at Enron: Everyone's guide to the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, John Wiley & Sons, (2002). Gardner , H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Damon, W. Good Work: When Excellence and Ethics Meet, Basic Books (2001). Gillespie, J. "The moral reasoning of corporations: A normative analysis." Paper presented at the Society for Business Ethics Annual Meeting, August 7-10, Boston MA (1997). Harshman, E. F. & Harshman, C.L., "Leadership in Business and the Ethical Dilemma, A view through the eyes of the fish." Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations , 2 (2000): 129-159. Harshman, E.F. & Harshman, C.L. "Communicating with employees: Building on an ethical foundation." Journal of Business Ethics, 19 (1999): 3-19. Jackall, R. Moral Mazes: Bureaucracy and managerial work. In P.J. Frost, V. Mitchell & W.R. Nord (Eds.), Organizational reality: Reports from the firing line. Harper Collins (1992). Koestenbaum, P. Leadership: The inner side of greatness. Jossey-Bass (1991). Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B. Z., The leadership challenge : How to get extraordinary things done in organizations . Jossey-Bass (1987). McGregor, D. M., "The human side of the enterprise." Management Review, November (1957). Robinson, D., & Garratt, C., Introducing Ethics, Icon Books UK (1999). Shaw, R.B., Trust in the Balance: Building successful organizations on results, integrity and concern, Jossey-Bass (1997). Trevino, L. K. "A cultural perspective on changing and developing organizational ethics." Research in Organizational Change and Development, 4, (1990): 195-230. Wilkins, A.K. Developing Corporate character. Jossey-Bass (1989). Weber, J. The relationship between managerial value orientations and stages of moral development: Theory development and empirical investigation with behavioral implications. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh (1988). Working Resources is a Leadership Consulting, Training and Executive Coaching Firm Helping Companies Assess, Select, Coach and Retain Emotionally Intelligent People; Emotional Intelligence-Based Interviewing and Selection; Multi-Rater 360-Degree Feedback; Career Coaching; Change Management; Corporate Culture Surveys and Executive Coaching. Dr. Maynard Brusman Consulting Psychologist and Executive Coach Trusted Advisor to Senior Leadership Teams Subscribe to Working Resources FREE E-mail Newsletter. E-mail: [email protected] . Type Subscribe Newsletter. Voice: 415-546-1252 Web: www.workingresources.com E-mail This Article to a Collegue... Return to Professional Effectiveness Articles Index Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages. Ethical Decision-Making DOI link for Ethical Decision-Making Click here to navigate to parent product. This chapter presents three strategies for solving ethics problems. For simple ethics questions, tips are given about finding the person who can solve the problem, how to address the problem, and how to follow up. For more complex problems, an 11-step flowchart is offered. This includes defining the issue, identifying the relevant parties, gathering your documentation, evaluating all the options, taking action, and evaluating the outcome. The third model involves seven steps that begin determining if the incident is covered by the ethics code, listing the stakeholders, and developing contingency plans if the first solution does not work or is unacceptable. Privacy Policy Terms & Conditions Cookie Policy Taylor & Francis Online Taylor & Francis Group Students/Researchers Librarians/Institutions Connect with us Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Certification Publications Continuing Education Practice Management Audiologists Speech-Language Pathologists Academic & Faculty Audiology & SLP Assistants A 10-Step Process for Resolving Ethical Issues The following is a 10-step process for addressing ethical issues in schools: Identify the problem as you see it. Get the story straight—gather relevant data. (including federal, state, and local regultations, professional practice documents, ASHA Code of Ethics) Ask yourself if the problem is a regulatory issue or a process issue related to regulatory requirements. Compare the issue to a specific rule in ASHA's Code of Ethics . Determine if rules the Code of Ethics apply to your problem and can help develop a course of action for you to pursue. Identify who has the power and control in the situation. Identify what is in your control and what is not. Identify your resources. These can be a supervisor, special education director, or colleague. Ask yourself if you need more information, clarification, or ideas from others who have had a similar problem. Make a list of possible actions and their positive and negative consequences. Make a plan that you can defend professionally and ethically—and one that meets the requirements of the regulations. Take action and evaluate your plan as you proceed to determine next steps. Reference American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2007). Ethics and IDEA: A guide for speech-language pathologists and audiologists who provide services under IDEA (Rev. ed.) [First edition published 2003]. Information About Developmental Norms ASHA's Workload Calculator Salary and Compensation School Services FAQs Contact the Schools Team Advertising Disclaimer Advertise with us ASHA Corporate Partners Become A Corporate Partner The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) is the national professional, scientific, and credentialing association for 234,000 members, certificate holders, and affiliates who are audiologists; speech-language pathologists; speech, language, and hearing scientists; audiology and speech-language pathology assistants; and students. All ASHA Websites Work at ASHA Marketing Solutions Information For Get involved. ASHA Community Become a Mentor Become a Volunteer Special Interest Groups (SIGs) Connect With ASHA American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 2200 Research Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850 Members: 800-498-2071 Non-Member: 800-638-8255 MORE WAYS TO CONNECT Media Resources Press Queries Site Help | A–Z Topic Index | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use © 1997- American Speech-Language-Hearing Association TechRepublic Account information, share with your friends. Three steps to making an ethical decision Your email has been sent In my last article, Ethical consulting: The Lone Ranger provides guiding principles , I asserted that the level of enforcement of ethics codes and negative consequences for unethical behavior would determine the purity of the consulting world. If you value your reputation and want to be successful, it is essential to establish trust in your relationships with your clients. Therefore, it is imperative that you conduct your business based on a set of ethical standards. But in some situations, consultants may not have cut-and-dried rules to guide their behavior. If you need some guideposts to making an ethical decision, examine it in terms of the three-step decision-making model offered by the Josephson Institute of Ethics , a nonprofit organization “dedicated to the advancement of ethics and the development of individual character through its programs, workshops, and publications.” Step one: Follow the Golden Rule Step one of the Josephson Institute (JI) model states, “All decisions must take into account and reflect a concern for the interests and well-being of all stakeholders.” It suggests that you observe the Golden Rule as a first step to testing a decision’s ethical rating: ”Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Of course, this is not always easy. Different stakeholders can be affected by the same decision in either a beneficial or detrimental way, and the Golden Rule does not tell us how to make a choice that is best for everyone. The JI model explains, “We cannot demonstrate equal love or caring to every person affected by our decisions. Sometimes we must prioritize certain interests over others and advance the well-being of some people, even at a cost to others.” Step two: Do the right thing Step two of the JI model asserts, “Ethical values and principles always take precedence over unethical ones.” Although it sounds like an obvious statement, people’s choices are not always clearly definable in terms of ethical and unethical. People may sometimes have a conflict that they see “arising from the clash between what they want or ‘need’ and ethical principles that might deny them their desires. A rationalization process then kicks in, transforming self-interested, unethical motives into others-centered, ethical ones.” Step three: Very rarely do wrongs make it right Step three of the JI model says “it is ethically proper to violate an ethical principle only when it is clearly necessary to advance another true ethical principle, which, according to the decision-maker’s conscience, will produce the greatest balance of good in the long run.” As discussed above, our self-interest often clouds our judgment. “The consequentialist facet of JI’s decision-making model acknowledges the need to prioritize among competing ethical values in particular cases, but only when it is clearly necessary to do so because the only viable options require the sacrifice of one ethical value to advance another.” In these cases, we must act for the greater good. “An ethical consequentialist must assert the necessary justification on two separate levels: The purpose of the conduct must be deemed necessary, and the specific conduct contemplated must be necessary to accomplish that purpose.” Final thoughts: Use common sense, be kind to others You know it’s clearly wrong. Your decision may embarrass you or your company. You did not disclose an existing conflict of interest. Your decision reveals a conflict of interest. You wouldn’t want a family member to have made the same decision. You cannot defend it as a principle of good conduct. The behavior would be considered immoral by most other people. The action would be considered an accounting irregularity. The action is in conflict with your professional association’s code of ethics. Your reputation may be damaged or adversely affected. You could lose the contract—or your job. Your client will question your integrity or objectivity. If any of these statements are true, you can be certain that you’re considering an unprincipled decision. But all of these thoughts and guidelines can essentially be distilled into one “rule of thumb.” The next time you are faced with a workplace dilemma requiring you to make a business decision, just follow the Golden Rule. It’s really that simple. If you’re interested in further reading or research on this topic, read the Complete Guide to Ethics Management: An Ethics Toolkit for Managers . Edwin Smith is vice president of training for Intralinux, Inc. and founder and CEO of ITtalent.com . Is this a practical guide to ethics for IT consultants? Are there other principles they should follow which aren’t included here? Start a discussion below or send us a note. Subscribe to the Executive Briefing Newsletter Discover the secrets to IT leadership success with these tips on project management, budgets, and dealing with day-to-day challenges. Delivered Tuesdays and Thursdays Create a TechRepublic Account Get the web's best business technology news, tutorials, reviews, trends, and analysis—in your inbox. Let's start with the basics. * - indicates required fields Sign in to TechRepublic Lost your password? Request a new password Reset Password Please enter your email adress. You will receive an email message with instructions on how to reset your password. Check your email for a password reset link. If you didn't receive an email don't forgot to check your spam folder, otherwise contact support . Welcome. Tell us a little bit about you. This will help us provide you with customized content. Want to receive more TechRepublic news? You're all set. Thanks for signing up! Keep an eye out for a confirmation email from our team. To ensure any newsletters you subscribed to hit your inbox, make sure to add [email protected] to your contacts list. Quick Links Get in touch. Unlock the Latest Knowledge that Can You Help You Achieve More in Life with More Confidence Print and Digital Options Available How to Solve Problems Effectively and Ethically 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 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. 5473 Blair Road, Suite 100 PMB 30053 Dallas, TX 75231 Copyright © 2024 SUCCESS Magazine. All rights reserved. Staff and Board Mission and Strategic Plan Berkshire Region Central Region Northeast Region Pioneer Valley Region Southeast Region Shared Interest Groups / Activities / Task Forces Donate to NASW-MA Chapter Membership Benefits Student Membership Join or Renew Action Center Legislative Agenda & Priority Bills Legislative Education & Advocacy Day (LEAD) Political Action for Candidate Election (PACE) Additional Advocacy Resources Employment Lawyers and Legal Resources Clinical Alerts Private Practice Supervision Workplace Safety Social Work Assistance Network (SWAN) Therapy Matcher FOCUS CE Mailer PDF Archive CE Webinars MLK Jr. Forum 2025 - coming soon Virtual Symposium 2025 Call for Proposals Nursing Home & Elder Issues Conference 2024 Virtual School Social Work Conference 2023 CE Events Calendar Online CE Institute CE Authorization by NASW-MA CE Frequently Asked Questions CE Advertisements Student Resource Center BIPOC Student Membership Program Graduation Cords Legislative Education and Advocacy Day (LEAD) Licensing Test Prep Career Services Professional Mentoring Loan Forgiveness Scholarships / Fellowships Student Ambassador Program Intern with NASW-MA Social Work Voice (member only) Email Newsletter (member only) Office Space CE Programs & Trainings Supervision, Groups, and Services Volunteer, Research, Other Place an Ad Award Nominations 2024 Awards 2023 Awards Information and History Name: Category: Share: 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. What meanings and limitations are typically attached to these competing values? (For example, rarely is confidential information held in absolute secrecy; however, we typically hold that decisions about access by third parties to sensitive content should be contracted with clients.) Rank the values or ethical principles which in your professional judgment are most relevant to the issue or dilemma. What reasons can you provide for prioritizing one competing value/principle over another? (For example, your client's right to choose a beneficial course of action could bring hardship or harm to others who would be affected.) Develop an action plan that is consistent with the ethical priorities that have been determined as central to the dilemma. Have you conferred with clients and colleagues, as appropriate, about the potential risks and consequences of alternative courses of action? Can you support or justify your action plan with the values and principles on which the plan is based? (For example, have you conferred with all necessary persons regarding the ethical dimensions of planning for a battered wife's quest to secure secret shelter and the implications for her teenaged children?) Implement your plan utilizing the most appropriate practice skills and competencies. How will you make use of core social work skills such as sensitive communication, skillful negotiation, and cultural competence? (For example, skillful colleague or supervisory communication and negotiation may enable an impaired colleague to see her/his impact on clients and to take appropriate action.) Reflecting on the outcome of this ethical decision making process. How would you evaluate the consequences of this process for those involved: client(s), professional(s), and agency (ies)? (Increasingly, professionals have begun to seek support, further professional training, and consultation through the development of Ethics Review Committees or Ethics Consultation processes.)     Ethics Resources: (formerly COI) Other Ethics Information: 7 hours ago SUPER ACT PASSED IN THE HOUSE! 6/28/2024 A Note from Executive Director Rebekah Gewirtz about the Social Work Interstate Compact in MA 6/7/2024 Liability Insurance Information 6/4/2024 Symposium 2025 Call for Proposals is NOW OPEN! 7/18/2024 Virtual License Test Prep Course 8/8/2024 Virtual License Test Prep Course 9/3/2024 Webinar - Living in the In-Between: Unpacking Mental Health, Assimilation... (1.5 CEUs) 9/12/2024 Webinar - Childhood Trauma & Emotional Eating: A Trauma-Informed... (1.5 CEUs) National Association of Social Workers - Massachusetts Chapter 6 Beacon Street, Suite 915, Boston MA 02108 tel: (617)227-9635 fax: (617)227-9877 email: chapter [email protected] Copyright 2020, NASW-MA. All rights reserved. Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World Read our research on: Full Topic List Regions & Countries Publications Our Methods Short Reads Tools & Resources Read Our Research On: Americans’ Views of Government’s Role: Persistent Divisions and Areas of Agreement 1. Government’s scope, efficiency and role in regulating business Table of contents. Views on the efficiency of government Views on the government’s regulation of business Confidence in the nation’s ability to solve problems Views on the effect of government aid to the poor Views on government’s role in health care Views on the future of Social Security Trust in government Feelings toward the federal government Acknowledgments The American Trends Panel survey methodology American s are evenly divided in their preferences for the size of government. Yet a somewhat greater share wants the government to do more to solve problems than say it is doing too much better left to others. There is a persistent belief that government is wasteful: 56% say it is “almost always wasteful and inefficient.” However, a majority of Americans (58%) say government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public good. Divisions on government’s size, scope Overall, 49% say they would prefer a smaller government providing fewer services, while 48% say they would rather have a bigger government providing more services. Most Democrats prefer a larger government. For nearly half a century, Democrats and Republicans have differed in their preferences for the size of government. Today, those differences are as wide as they have ever been: Nearly three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (74%) favor a bigger government, providing more services. By comparison, in 2015, a smaller majority of Democrats (59%) said they preferred a bigger government. Just 20% of Republicans and Republican leaners prefer a bigger government; nearly four times as many want smaller government with fewer services. Republicans’ views of the size of government have changed less than Democrats’. Still, when George W. Bush was running for reelection in 2004, roughly a third of Republicans favored a bigger government. When asked about the proper role of government, about half of Americans (53%) say the government should do more to solve problems, while 46% say the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals. An overwhelming share of Democrats (76%) say government should do more to solve problems, while about a quarter (23%) say it is doing too many things better left to individuals and businesses. By contrast, Republicans prefer a more limited role for government: 71% say government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals, while 28% say government should do more to solve problems. There are also sizable demographic differences in these views: White adults (54%) are the most likely to say government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals, while smaller shares of Asian (34%), Black (31%) and Hispanic (29%) adults say the same. Younger adults are more likely than older adults to favor a larger role for government, with adults ages 18 to 29 (66%) being the most likely to say government should do more to solve problems. Among income groups, a majority of lower-income adults (61%) say government should do more to solve problems, while smaller shares of upper- and middle-income adults (53% and 48%, respectively) say the same. Views among partisans by race, ethnicity and income Among partisans, there are wide demographic differences on the preferred role of government – especially among Republicans. Hispanic Republicans (58%) are much more likely than White Republicans (21%) to favor a larger role for government. Views among Democrats are much less divided, with at least seven-in-ten Democrats in each racial and ethnic group saying government should do more to solve problems. Nearly half of lower-income Republicans (46%) say that the government should do more to solve problems, while smaller shares of middle- (22%) and upper-income (19%) Republicans say the same. Wide majorities of Democrats across income groups say government should do more to solve problems. In assessments of the efficiency of the government, a majority of Americans (56%) find it to be “almost always wasteful and inefficient.” A smaller share (42%) say government “often does a better job than people give it credit for.” Overall, views on the efficiency of government have remained somewhat steady since 2019, with views today mirroring those five years ago. Among partisans, a majority of Democrats (63%) say the government often does a better job than people give it credit for, while a large majority of Republicans (77%) say government is often wasteful and inefficient. Views on the efficiency of government in both parties have remained steady since 2021. While Democrats are generally more likely than Republicans to say government does not get enough credit, these views vary somewhat depending on which party holds the presidency: Democrats are now more likely to give credit to the government than they were during the Trump administration. Among Republicans, views of government efficiency were more positive during the Trump administration. This is consistent with shifts in views during prior administrations . On the topic of government regulation of business, about six-in-ten Americans (58%) say that government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest. Four-in-ten, however, say government regulation of business usually does more harm than good. These views have remained largely unchanged since 2017. As with other attitudes about government, Republicans and Democrats differ on the impact of government regulation of business: About two-thirds of Republicans (65%) say government regulation does more harm than good. Roughly eight-in-ten Democrats (82%) say government regulation is necessary to protect the public interest. Among other demographic differences: White adults (45%) are the most likely to say government regulation does more harm than good, while smaller shares of Hispanic (32%), Asian (29%) and Black (27%) adults say the same. Younger adults are more likely than older adults to say government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest, with adults ages 18 to 29 (64%) being the most likely to say this. Americans are divided in their views on the country’s ability to solve important problems. About half (52%) of Americans say “this country can’t solve many of its important problems,” while 47% say that “as Americans, we can always find ways to solve our problems and get what we want.” More Americans express confidence in the country’s ability to solve problems now than a year ago (47% now, 43% then). Still, the share saying this is lower than it was from 2019 to 2022. Unlike assessments of government, there are no partisan differences in views on the country’s ability to solve its important problems. In both parties, about half say the U.S. can’t solve many of its important problems, while slightly narrower shares say Americans can always find ways to solve the country’s problems. Views among age groups Among age groups, younger adults are the most likely to express skepticism in the country’s ability to solve its important problems. About six-in-ten adults ages 18 to 29 (62%) say the U.S. can’t solve many of its important problems, while smaller shares of older adults say the same. Overall, the shares of adults in each age group who voice skepticism on the country’s ability to solve its problems remain higher than they were in 2022. However, older adults have grown slightly more optimistic on this issue in the past year. Views among the youngest adults are relatively unchanged from 2022. Sign up for our weekly newsletter Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings Sign up for The Briefing Weekly updates on the world of news & information Election 2024 Federal Government Government Spending & the Deficit Health Care Partisanship & Issues Social Security & Medicare Trust in Government Third-party and independent candidates for president often fall short of early polling numbers 6 facts about presidential and vice presidential debates, biden, trump are least-liked pair of major party presidential candidates in at least 3 decades, cultural issues and the 2024 election, more than half of americans are following election news closely, and many are already worn out, most popular, report materials. 1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries Research Topics Email Newsletters ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts . © 2024 Pew Research Center 221 IMAGES Solving ethical problems 3 Ways to Solve Ethical Issues Sam Young: Process Model for Ethical Problem-solving PPT 3 Ways to Solve Ethical Issues Steps in resolving ethical dilemmas VIDEO Three Ethical Decision Criteria 3 steps solving factorization #maths #mathshorts #easy Interview Question : Work Ethics . Why the question and How to answer ? ETHICS CASE STUDY|PART-1|HOW TO SOLVE ETHICS CASE STUDY|UPSC|MPPSC|RAS|UPPCS|RAKSHA ACADEMY| ETHICS CASE STUDY|PART-3|HOW TO SOLVE ETHICS CASE STUDY|UPSC|MPPSC|RAS|UPPCS|RAKSHA ACADEMY| ETC || B.E.Sem-3 || Chapter-4 ||Ethical Dilemma || Steps to Resolve It || COMMENTS 3 Ways to Solve Ethical Issues How to Solve Ethical Issues. 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. References. 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. 7 Ways to Improve Your Ethical Decision-Making 7. Accept Feedback. Ethical decision-making is susceptible to gray areas and often met with dissent, so it's critical to be approachable and open to feedback. The benefits of receiving feedback include: Learning from mistakes. Having more opportunities to exhibit compassion, fairness, and transparency. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making Ethics Resources. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making. This document is designed as an introduction to thinking ethically. Read more about what the framework can (and cannot) do. We all have an image of our better selves—of how we are when we act ethically or are "at our best.". We probably also have an image of what an ethical ... Ethical Decision Making Models and 6 Steps of Ethical Decision Making 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. The PLUS Ethical Decision Making Model Seven Steps to Ethical Decision Making. - Step 1: Define the problem (consult PLUS filters) - Step 2: Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support. - Step 3: Identify alternatives. - Step 4: Evaluate the alternatives (consult PLUS filters) - Step 5: Make the decision. - Step 6: Implement the decision. Confronting Ethical and Moral Dilemmas: Don't Go It Alone According to a 2021 report from the Ethics and Compliance Initiative, 63% of middle managers were pressured by bosses to violate their firm's ethical code of conduct in 2020. Over half of middle ... Thinking Ethically 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. ... 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 ... How To Handle Ethical Dilemmas in the Workplace (With Tips) Here are seven steps for how to handle an ethical dilemma in the workplace: 1. Analyze what's at risk. Weigh the pros and cons of what's at risk in the scenario to help you determine what steps to take. For example, if your colleague clocks out early every day, one might consider that theft of company time. PDF Practioner's Guide to Ethical Decision Making If the problem is not resolved by reviewing the ACA Code of Ethics, then you have a complex ethical dilemma and need to proceed with further steps in the ethical decision-making process (Bradley & Hendricks, 2008; Forester-Miller & Davis, 1996). Levitt, Farry, and Mazzarella (2015) indicated that decision-making models can be time consuming. 2.2: Three Frameworks for Ethical Problem-Solving in Business and the 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-technical system, and provide an orientation in the four stages of problem solving. This presentation was given February 28, 2008 at UPRM ... Ethical Dilemma The following approaches to solve an ethical dilemma were deduced: Refute the paradox (dilemma): The situation must be carefully analyzed. In some cases, the existence of the dilemma can be logically refuted. Value theory approach: Choose the alternative that offers the greater good or the lesser evil. Find alternative solutions: In some cases ... Navigating Complex, Ethical Problems in Professional Life: a Guide to If one wishes to take these strategies a step further to engage in "SMART-ER" professional decision-making, they can: 1) Evaluate their decision and its outcomes and 2) Revise future behavior in similar situations. ... Applying cases to solve ethical problems: The significance of positive and process-oriented reflection. Ethics & Behavior ... Essential Steps for Ethical Problem-Solving From discussion by Frederick Reamer & Sr. Ann Patrick Conrad in Professional Choices: Ethics at Work (1995), video available from NASW Press 1-800-227-3590. Format developed by Sr. Vincentia Joseph & Sr. Ann Patrick Conrad. NASW Office of Ethics and Professional Review, 1-800-638-8799. 750 1st Street, NE, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002. 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. Leadership: Facing Moral and Ethical Dilemmas Here is a three-step process for solving an ethical problem: Step One: Analyze the consequences ... Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations , 2 (2000): 129-159. Harshman, E.F. & Harshman, C.L. "Communicating with employees: Building on an ethical foundation." Journal of Business Ethics, 19 (1999): 3-19. Ethical Decision-Making This chapter presents three strategies for solving ethics problems. For simple ethics questions, tips are given about finding the person who can solve the problem, how to address the problem, and how to follow up. For more complex problems, an 11-step flowchart is offered. This includes defining the issue, identifying the relevant parties ... A 10-Step Process for Resolving Ethical Issues The following is a 10-step process for addressing ethical issues in schools: Identify the problem as you see it. Ask yourself if the problem is a regulatory issue or a process issue related to regulatory requirements. Compare the issue to a specific rule in ASHA's Code of Ethics. Determine if rules the Code of Ethics apply to your problem and ... Three steps to making an ethical decision Sometimes we must prioritize certain interests over others and advance the well-being of some people, even at a cost to others.". Step two: Do the right thing. Step two of the JI model asserts ... How to Handle Ethical Issues in the Workplace The cautious handling of workplace ethics issues can resolve personal and business dilemmas. By identifying the alternatives, the next step can take place. Using ethical reasoning to decide on a course of action. Ethical reasoning skills are essential to making ethical decisions. A variety of methods exist including: How to Solve Problems Effectively and Ethically 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 ... 3-Step Approach to solve an ethical problem.docx Ethical problems are at times very challenging to solve, however, one can solve the ethical problem by use of the 3-Step Approach. The following are the steps involved in the 3-Step Approach used to solve an ethical problem. 3-STEP APPROACH Analyze the consequences - Before making any actions to deal with the ethical problem, one should critically identify and analyze all the possible effects ... 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. 1. Government's scope, efficiency and role in regulating business In both parties, about half say the U.S. can't solve many of its important problems, while slightly narrower shares say Americans can always find ways to solve the country's problems. Views among age groups. Among age groups, younger adults are the most likely to express skepticism in the country's ability to solve its important problems. case study cover letter presentation problem solving rewiew prompts websites tips