Some people pride themselves on being "ethical," and being "ethical" is certainly a quality to strive for. Not only does acting ethically mean you show honorable character traits, like being honest, squaredealing, and following moral principles, but other people feel they can trust you and are more likely to be loyal, motivated, committed, and productive.
However, the problem comes when people define ethics very broadly to include any behavior they think is wrong, unjust, or unfair, so they can claim the moral ground in a situation that is not really an ethical issue. Rather, what they are objecting to as unethical behavior is simply another perfectly acceptable way of doing business—and even a common practice in certain industries. Thus, when one person accuses you of being "unethical," it may be simply because they have different definitions of what’s fair or right than you do. In that case, don’t let their accusations of unethical behavior guilt-trip you to do what they think you should do; instead, regard their accusation as simply their opinion or belief. Then, let the best strategy be your guide, rather than letting their definition of what’s ethical or what isn’t guide you. If the issue isn’t an ethical dilemma, don’t make it one or get drawn into a debate about ethics. Where differing opinions trigger charges of being unethical, the other person usually has strongly felt emotions, and when that’s the case, it’s hard to change anyone’s mind.
Such an attempt to turn a difference of opinion into an accusation of being unethical is what happened to Devon when he was Allen’s partner in a new business. They entered into an agreement with Tom to promote his new Web site designed to link people selling craft items to prospective buyers. Devon and Allen agreed to promote Tom’s site actively in exchange for a one-third commission from sales they generated. Their promotion work would include sending out releases, creating a dedicated Web site, and providing direct links from their own site, which was devoted to promoting artists. In return, Tom agreed to pay a commission for each order.
After Devon set up the site and drafted a few releases, Tom thought they were great, and everything seemed fine, until Tom signed his first client, a very difficult artist, who needed a lot of advice on how to set up and price his items to sell them on line. Though Tom charged the artist for this help, he wrote to Devon saying he thought the originally agreed upon 35% commission on orders for sales was too high to pay on his hourly consulting work. So, Devon responded with a counteroffer, proposing just 10% on the consulting fees, since 10% referral fees were common in the industry. Tom now not only objected to paying any referral fee for his consulting, but also questioned the 35%, claiming it was too high for just a link, when he was paying others at most only 25%. Though Devon pointed out that he and Allan were doing more than providing a link since they had set up a dedicated site and were writing press releases, Tom was still not mollified.
Then, before Devon could explain or propose another counter-offer, his partner Allen chimed in, afraid they might lose the client entirely. But instead of recognizing this as a difference of opinion about fees and everyday business practices, Allen sought to turn the conflict into one with ethical dimensions. "Why are you going after his consulting fees?" he wrote in an urgent e-mail questioning Devon’s request for a commission on Tom’s fees. "Tom is just doing his job to get people to the site to sell the service. So that’s not fair; so it’s unethical to ask for a commission on that."
But while being too demanding might lose the sale, was it unfair and unethical? Devon didn’t think so, since referral fees were a standard business practice in many industries and he especially resented Allan’s "I’m right" attitude in framing the conflict with Tom in ethical terms. How could Allan dare to question his ethics, when this was just a simple matter of negotiating an agreement to get the best deal? He didn’t think he was being unethical, just trying for the best deal he could, and he felt angry with Allan for questioning his ethics on an issue that didn’t involve ethics at all. So what should Devon do?
What Should Devon Do?
Here are some possibilities. In Devon’s place, what would you do and why? What do you think the outcomes of these different options would be?
- Ignore Allan’s claims that he is being unethical and wait for Tom to respond to his latest offer.
- Write a detailed memo to Tom explaining why the referral rate is fair, because Tom is getting extra work, and give a copy to Allan to show him this isn’t an issue of ethics.
- End the arrangement with Tom, because he is trying to change the original agreement and can’t be trusted, and explain this to Allan, his partner.
- Stop doing extra promotional work for Tom and accept a reduced commission rate, and tell Allan this is what you decided to do.
- Drop any claim for a referral fee, since Tom feels this isn’t fair and Allan thinks the claim is unethical, even if you disagree and are just seeking a better bargain.
- Other?
Initially, Devon was inclined to be more persuasive to convince Tom and Allan that he was simply asking for an arrangement that is standard in many industries and be more convincing in explaining that there was nothing unfair or unethical about his proposed arrangement.
Yet after taking a night for further reflection, Devon decided that even though he thought he was being quite reasonable and his offer was not at all unfair or unethical, since the referral was giving Tom additional work, he decided to back down. One concern was that if Tom thought the referral fee was unfair and unethical, however unjust the accusation, he could easily respond by being unethical himself by doing the work without telling Devon and Allen. Another problem was creating more conflicts with his own partner should Tom do this or walk away from their original deal. Thus, as much as he saw the issue as just a simple fee dispute, not a question of ethics, he felt it was best strategically to back down. Besides, most referral fees wouldn’t result in consulting fees anyway. That’s what Devon did, dropping any claim for the additional commission, and dropping any further discussion about the question of ethics. Though he didn’t think ethics had anything to do with the issue in the first place, he decided it was best to let Tom and Allen think their arguments about fairness and ethics had won out; that was the most practical thing to do.
Similarly, if you’re placed in such a position, in which you don’t think the issue is an ethical one but others do, look at it strategically. In some cases, it might be worth discussing to explain why there is no ethical consideration involved. But if that discussion is likely to inflame matters by turning a debate about business considerations into accusations about who is ethical and who isn’t, then do what’s most practical under the circumstances. You’ll generally end up with a more peaceful work or business relationship that way.
Today’s Take-Aways:
- Don’t get into a debate about who’s ethical and who isn’t ifsomeone raises an ethical flag. You’ll only spread more flames than light.
- As long as you think you are doing what’s ethical, do what’spractical when confronted by differing opinions about what’s ethical and what’s not.
- Sometimes the accusation of being unethical is more like a club to force you to do what someone else wants—not really a true guide to what’s ethical in a situation where ethics isn’t involved.
- When someone tries to "ethics" you, it’s generally best not to fight back with "ethics" yourself—you’ll only end up in an ethics match, and you both could lose.