Results tagged “business” from Marilyn Sewell

Students in the current graduating class of M.B.A. students at Harvard are being asked to sign on the dotted line--no, not for a fancy job that will bring in six figures--they are being asked by their peers to sign the "M.B.A. Oath," a pledge to act responsibly and ethically and to refrain from advancing their "own narrow ambitions" at the expense of other people.  Seems simple enough.  Doctors have to sign a pledge saying that they will try to heal people.  Judges have to pledge that they will uphold the Constitution.  Ministers promise a variety of things, often including the exceedingly difficult one, "to speak the truth to power."  But only a scant 20% of the Harvard M.B.A. class was willing to sign. 

The headline in the NY Times (5/30, p. B4) reads "A Promise to Be Ethical in an Era of Immorality," and the writer seems to be impressed that all these young business people are signing such a vow.  I'm wondering about the other 80%--are they not planning to act responsibly and ethically?  Are they planning to advance their own narrow ambitions, in spite of who gets hurt?  If so, could we have the names of the non-signers?  They'll probably be investing our retirement funds in a few short years.

When I read this article, I was reminded of a graduating law student, a member of First Unitarian Church, who told me some years ago that he had asked his fellow graduates to sign a pledge reading: "Before I take any job, I will ask myself whether or not this job contributes to the greater good."  Note that the pledge doesn't ask anyone to refuse a job that doesn't contribute to the good, but merely to "ask myself" the question.  As I remember, seven law students agreed to sign.

So what's going on?  Change is rearing its difficult head, and it's going to take a while before ethical behavior becomes the norm in business, if it ever does.  But this is a new leaning in the right direction.  The norm can shift.  People will become ashamed of shoddy behavior  when enough of their compatriots clearly disapprove of such behavior instead of admiring it, if it makes a buck.

This is not to say that all business people are unethical and money-hungry--not at all.  And when I see a business like Neil Kelly or New Seasons and watch the values they operate by, I take hope for the future.  It's just that they seem to be the exception and not the rule. 

Bruce Kogut, director of the Sanford C. Bernstein & Company Center for Leadership and Ethics, says that students are beginning to think about how they earn their income, not just how much.  (What a concept!)  He says,"They see inequities and the role of business of address them."  I ask you, how could business students at a school this sophisticated not understand the role of business in addressing economic inequities?  Adam Smith understood something about the relationship of capitalism to community and the larger good--don't Harvard M.B.A. students read Smith, like in the first semester of B school?

The fact is, though, it doesn't matter what you read, or what your teachers say, if the cultural ethic is all about greed.  People will do what other people do, almost always.  Those who don't, surprise us with their integrity. Change will come with leadership and education around these issues, and when the norm becomes service, these grads will want to serve.

Sleazy business practice will then become like smoking--you'll have to leave the group and sneak around out back to do it.  I can hardly wait.

 Share this

One really nice thing about flying--perhaps the only nice thing these days--is the opportunity for a little quiet time.  If I can adequately discourage a loquacious seatmate, I generally settle into a thoughtful book of essays or a moving novel.  I often find myself making notes about future sermons, because any break in my usual world of stimulation and task-orientation gives rise to creativity.

And now I read (NY TImes, 9/14) that American Airlines is offering Aircell's in-flight internet access, called Gogo.  Oh, no!  Please, no Go-go!

Passengers are not allowed to use their enhanced laptops to make phone calls, but the capability is built in--so how long will it be before the techno-wizards figure out how to make that "emergency" phone call (to their business partner for strategy, to their girlfriend to make amends, or to their mom on her birthday)?  I venture to say, not long.  Maybe about 20 minutes after lift-off.

Now I understand the need to speak to others about important matters.  I do that all the time myself.  But I also rue the day when I began to listen to other people's conversations in restaurants, in grocery stores, at the pharmacy, in the quiet of the spa, while waiting at the coffee shop for my turn, while walking down the street, while taking a leisurely train trip.. 

A recent train trip to Seattle was perhaps the most offensive cell-phone experience I've had lately, when a young woman treated the rest of the car to her end of an anguished argument with her boyfriend.  After fifteen minutes, I got out of my seat, walked back to her, and said, "Excuse me, but do you know that everyone on this car can hear everything you are saying?"  She thanked me and hung up.

There is a principle we seem to somehow miss in American culture--the principle of considering not just individual desire, but how one's behavior might affect the community.  So someone is allowed to put up a building that is a painful contrast to surrounding historic structures.  Gasoline-powered leaf-blowers, used to render private sidewalks and yards pristine, invade our neighborhoods, and we all suffer from the noise.  Billboards face major roadways, where we cannot fail to see their messages, distracting us from driving and disturbing the beauty of the landscape.  Individuals should not be allowed to invade our senses of hearing, smell, vision, etc., for their own private purposes.

Quite honestly, the cell phone is one of the most disturbing evolutions of this generation, for me. Of course there are legitimate uses for the beast--for road emergencies, to keep up with errant children, to let someone know that you have been irrevocably delayed for whatever reason.  But they should be used in private.  If you count yourself my friend, please do not answer your cell phone while we're conversing, and I'm pouring out my heart to you about . . . whatever.  Congregants and visitors to the church, please do not interrupt the sermon ever again--or at least interrupt it at a funny moment, not when I'm trying to advise people about their immortal souls.  Or for God's sake, please don't allow your phone to ring during the memorial service, as happened in one service I was conducting, when the ring went on and on and on during a most solemn moment in the service.  Thanking you ahead of time.

One playful fellow I know likes to approach people who are having one-sided conversations outloud in public places and just get in on the conversation.  "So how is Sam, anyway?" he'll say to the person speaking on the cell phone.  He figures that if he's pursuant to the conversation, he wants to know the whole story.  I myself have fantasized about handing out a small card to cell phone offenders, with the following message: "Please don't involve me in your private conversation."  But then I feel petty and mean-spirited.  Cell phones turn me  petty and meanspirited, I suppose.  I should work on that.  Maybe meditate more.

But please, please, please, American Airlines!  Don't let them start using cell phones on airplanes.  We should all fly less anyway, to save our dear planet.  Well, if  passengers start talking on cell phones, I won't fly at all.  I can't bear it.

 Share this