Ethics in the Information Age

The Puritan Work Ethic and Beyond

One gets a sense of the overwhelming importance of character traits for success from reading this month's cover story, "New Millennium Resolutions: Good Habits for the 00's." 

 Through the ages, great thinkers have recognized that there are really only two major questions in ethics: what am I to do? and who am I to be? I want to talk about the latter question here since it is the more fundamental one, and it is really about our character.   

 The early ethical underpinnings for American business life was the "Puritan work ethic." The Puritans answered "who am I to be?" as follows: "I am to be honest, hard working, reliable, sober, mindful of the future, appropriate in my relationships, successful, and thereby give glory to God."  

     Today such character virtues may still receive perfunctory acknowledgment, but their roots in giving glory to God are no longer as widely accepted (to put it mildly). Hence, it is harder to recommend to others, especially young people, that they should be good persons since we can no longer tell them why. Virtues today are like dying plants that have had their roots cut. They are no longer nourished, and are under intense challenge in an age of materialism and selfishness. These virtues are withering almost everywhereăexcept in small communities that practice them and where they still have deeper underpinnings. 

 Those who base their ethics on theological ideas, as I do, should continue to do so. But I am not going to propose a return to days when there was a greater unity in belief about God and business ethics. I can, however, see areas of •overlapping consensus,' that is, ways in which almost all of us can embrace an ethical consensus. 

 I am talking about the way of human dignity. The protection and promotion of human dignity is the guiding purpose behind ethics for diverse writers, institutions (including the United Nations), philosophers, religious leaders (such as the Dalai Lama and John Paul II), and theologians today.

 Today, how might we answer "Who am I to be?" We are to be persons who respect  human dignity in all its material, emotional, and spiritual aspects. In the workplace environment, what can this mean but to be cooperative, responsible and socially conscious, hard working, fair minded, honest, for the protection and promotion of human dignity?

 This doesn't solve all of our ethical problems, but it's a start and one good way to think about them. For example, when an employee is about to be terminated, an employer should be clear about what is necessary to protect the dignity and future of all parties involved. The recent article by the Employment Roundtable tries to do just that. (Entitled "How to Terminate Employees While Respecting Human Dignity," it was published in October edition of The Five O'Clock News.)  

Human Dignity in the Information Age

 "New Millennium Resolutions: Good Habits for the 00's" mentions a number of virtues that several Five O'Clock Clubbers have found critical for their success: persistence, determination, trust, dedication, energy, humility, and self confidence were commonly mentioned. In the table that follows, I would like to expand on these in ways that support the vision of protecting and promoting Human Dignity. I also list corresponding "vices." 

 Like the Puritan work ethic, these virtues represent a convergence of character ethics and efficiency. They contribute to a thriving and productive work environment. 

 

Virtues: Consistent With The Visiono:p>	Vices: Inconsistent With The Vision
Cooperation	Excessive Competitiveness
Hard Work, persistence	Entitlement mentality; Workaholic
Creative and optimistic	Zero sum mentality
Planning	Indifference and haphazard method
Regard for the welfare of others	Out-of-context behavior
Trust in the future	Siege mentality
Flexibility	Rigid, unable to cope with change
Activity based on knowledge	Disconnected activity
Sharing, generous, patient for long-run results	Closed and possessive approach.    Focused on (short term) interests

Trouble in Paradise

 Our age has produced two types of generally unhappy people: workaholics and those with an entitlement mentality.  An exaggerated sense of responsibility for one's own future produces the workaholic; a failure of responsibility produces the entitlement mentality. Both mentalities can infect corporate culture with corrosive results.

 Ideally, we should work and assume the proper degree of responsibility for our own lives. On the other hand, it is incapacitating to assume responsibility for the whole of one's life.  Though that statement may seem strange, its truth is clear when we recognize our inability to control much of what happens to us, and how paralyzing it is constantly to worry about the future (hence, for those who are believers, the need for confidence in God's care). So this message today encourages those who tend towards irresponsibility or laziness to work harder to develop themselves professionally, while cautioning those who devote themselves pathologically in their work to give up some of their controlling nature. A mean between these extremes must be the goal in these frantic times.

Social Virtue

 In ancient times land was the basis for production and economic power. To own land was to be able to meet one's need for food and shelter, as well as to be in a position of power vis a vis other people. Indeed, even today severely uneven distribution of land remains a problem in less developed third world countries. For this reason, many •peasants' have neither food nor shelter. In more recent times, capital became the basis for production and economic power. Those with capital were in a position of advantage with respect to labor, i.e., those who had only their own labor to sell. The uneven distribution of capital remains a problem in many modern economies.

   We sometimes call the American economy today a "post modern" economy in which knowledge and access to it are becoming the primary basis for productivity and economic power. In a real sense, we have entered a new era.

 To share knowledge is to share productive capacity and power. It is to enable others at the same time that one grows and advances. In and of itself, this is a worthy goal in human relations, but anyone with knowledge of the Internet will tell you that it is also a pragmatic necessity. Partnerships are formed, frequently with the exchange of no money whatsoever, to share information (and access to it) and to the mutual advantage of those willing to enter this cycle of giving and receiving.

 Land, labor, knowledge. Human power and prestige have been, and continue to be, tied to all three of these commodities. And the need continues for ethical systems to promote and protect human dignityăno matter the environment or source of power.

Richard Bayer, Ph.D. is an ethicist, economist and theologian, and an author on employment economics. He is co-chair of The Employment Roundtable, COO of The Five O'Clock Club, and a member of the Board of Workforce America, The Five O'Clock Club's not-for-profit arm, which helps adults in Harlem.