Since reading the posts related to my friend's ethical dilemma (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6984)
I have been mulling over the question of when a company formally crosses the line into unethical behavior.

Most of the posts were in agreement, that the knowing violation of a regulatory requirement is indeed, an ethical problem. Randy, however, (as is his wont) had a different take on it. He suggested that all companies bend the rules and my friend should grow up and get over it. While not in agreement with his statement, it did cause me to start looking at the bending which I've observed over the years and wonder what the line is between "normal" business rule bending and unethical behavior.

For example: (these have been accumulated over the years and not necessarily representative of where I currently work)

1. A customer audit is coming up. You know in advance that they have a hot button about drawings being available on-line vs on hard copy. Your company still uses hard copy. You're directed by a senior manager to "fudge" it and have a number of this customer's drawings in pdf form for the audit, so it appears that we do have such a system. Normal rule bending, or unethical?

2. A customer requires notification and approval if you change manufacturing locations. You missed one, and you have a problem that needs to be resolved with the customer. Top management directs you to lie about the location that the product is being made in to avoid problems. Normal rule bending, or unethical behavior?

3. A competitor has had several problems with product that has caused deaths and been through a highly publicized recall. You have a product that could well cause the same problems. An expensive test will tell you if your product is safe. You recommend the testing. Top management doesn't want to spend the money. Is this normal risk management or is this negligence?

4. You utilize a sister division's plant in Asia to provide a lower cost product. However, top management insists that everyone refer to that location as belonging to your own division, to prevent the customer from going directly to the sister division. Corporate management will do nothing to prevent one division from robbing the business of another, so long as it stays in the family. Is referring to the sister plant as one of your own bending the rules or unethical?

Your opinions please?

*****All IMHO*****

1. You're directed by a senior manager to "fudge" it and have a number of this customer's drawings in pdf form for the audit, so it appears that we do have such a system. Normal rule bending, or unethical?
Why would you "fudge"? If you don't do electronic, you don't do it. If you are going to put some in, why not all? I find this neither of the options, but possibly a management committment thing, choose a system and be willing to defend it.

2. You missed one, and you have a problem that needs to be resolved with the customer. Top management directs you to lie about the location that the product is being made in to avoid problems. Normal rule bending, or unethical behavior?
Unethical, this is a lawsuit waithing to happen if there are liability issues

3. An expensive test will tell you if your product is safe. You recommend the testing. Top management doesn't want to spend the money. Is this normal risk management or is this negligence?
Can you spell "lawsuit"? Not only is this unethical, it is pretty short-sighted

4. Corporate management will do nothing to prevent one division from robbing the business of another, so long as it stays in the family. Is referring to the sister plant as one of your own bending the rules or unethical?
Wow, I can't believe that corporate would slit the throat of one of their divisions like that....Unethical, probably not, but it sounds like it could go past the line?

1. Any Customer who knows how to audit could easily pick up on such a ploy. I agree with SteelMaiden here... pick a system and be willing to defend it.

2. This appears to be unethical. I believe the supplier should admit they screwed up and rectify/fix any issues with the customer, not lie about it.

3. I think Unethical is not quite a strong enough word to describe what I think about this scenario. I do not believe normal "Risk Management" was even considered in the scenario you provided.

4. Our facility is one of several manufacturing facilities which all produce similar products. Our normal operations are to make the product where it most makes sense to manufacture it, regardless of location. We have one Company Name on our Products, and our Customers have never cared at which facility we manufacture the product, so long as it meets their requirements. I have heard of some companies who make a practice of having their sister divisions compete for business... they cull out the lesser performers and keep the divisions that don't go home at night... Not a place I would want to work.

PS: The October 2003 Quality Progress makes for some interesting reading as it deals with many of these questions.
http://www.asq.org/portal/page?_pageid=33,39211,33_39258&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&in_url=/pub/qualityprogress/index.html (http://www.asq.org/portal/page?_pageid=33,39211,33_39258&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&in_url=/pub/qualityprogress/index.html)

1. Clearly unethical. Besides, I'm not payed to lie. It's not in my work description.

2. See above

3. That is criminal negligence.

4. Tag Groo's reply on here.

/Claes

What Claes said. :agree:

What Mike said that Claus said!

They are all unethical. You are only as good as your tools. Integrity is a tool which sometimes earns you the title of "whistle blower." Train your management to use the tool.

I was once paid $20 to sit at a desk for an hour and be ready to pretend to be a company's QM. As I was also pretending at my regular job, I figured, "Why not?" Does that make me a bad person or just an unethical one or both? :vfunny:

I was once paid $20 to sit at a desk for an hour and be ready to pretend to be a company's QM. As I was also pretending at my regular job, I figured, "Why not?" Does that make me a bad person or just an unethical one or both? :vfunny:

I think that it makes you the Scourge of Quality - the source of all that has gone wrong in the world of quality today. :eek: :biglaugh:

Here's how I handled each:
1. I refused to lie, and documented my reasons in an email to management. Issue didn't come up during the audit, but it eroded my relationship with and confidence in my management. I was laughingly referred to as "The company conscience" from then on out.

2. I fessed up to the customer which cost me some points in MArketing, but ultimately worked out for the best.

3. I enlisted the help of a senior research scientist, who I knew had the respect of the CEO, and he sold the CEO on the need for testing. The CEO was still angry about it and just about threw the lab analysis in my face when the results came back negative for the condition I was concerned about. He viewed it as wasted money, I viewed it as permission to sleep at night.

4. The issue is still open and being worked. Don't know how this one will end up yet.

I feel reassured that all of you viewed these issues the same way I did. After Randy's comments in the last post, I was concerned that maybe my judgement was off, and I was being a goody two shoes.

I feel reassured that all of you viewed these issues the same way I did. After Randy's comments in the last post, I was concerned that maybe my judgement was off, and I was being a goody two shoes.
I believe what you saw in Randy's posts was the reality of what can happen by making issues personal. Being right is one thing, force feeding your feelings of "correctness" to management is another. Now, having said that, I have won battles and defintely lost wars. This situation with you and management will only disappear when you leave. Make it your choice, not theirs. Was it worth it? Was it because they weren't listening to you or your deep concern for what you was sure was an issue? Don't answer that. One more thing, Rosie, fessing up to the Customer is, IMO, way out of line and can prove harmful to your health. If this company refuses to do business with your company and the reason is known, you're all done. This test came back negative and that's all Management will remember, besides your stand and airing their dirty laundry in public. Fact of life. Others who say that they are always honest and don't bend some rules are not being completely honest. Employees in certain positions do what they are told or leave. You know, they get a little dust in their eye exactly the same time an infraction occurs? The words "Why aren't you a "Team PLayer" come to mind when I balked at "minor" issues. Or, "Here. Are you satisfied now?" (A situation very similar to yours) You fight tooth and nail only against those things that can land you in jail or keep you awake at night. This lofty view of what is considered "unethical" is usually from those who have never been put on the "hotseat" and looks good in print. Blah Blah. Time to find other employment.:agree:

You fight tooth and nail only against those things that can land you in jail or keep you awake at night. This lofty view of what is considered "unethical" is usually from those who have never been put on the "hotseat" and looks good in print. Blah Blah. Time to find other employment.:agree:

I guess there is a big difference between people in what keeps them awake at night. I've had the lectures from the President about "seeing the gray areas", I've had some co-workers up to VP level think I was the worst SOB on the planet because I would not fudge test data the way my predecessor did. I've shut down lines that had run "problem free" for years when I found that the problems were only being covered-up. Was I a non-team-player? Maybe, but I don't think so. See, I always gave the Top Dog an option to do what he/she wanted -- all he/she had to do was sign the paper themselves, or give me a signed order to do whatever it was they wanted me to do. If they were willing to take full responsibility -- why not because they wanted me to -- they could still ship the product (no direct life-and-death issues involved). Sometimes they signed, sometimes this request made them suddenly see the reason in my position really quick! It never cost me my job, but it could have a few times. Win some, lose some. But I have had customers tell the Top Dogs they ordered from us and not a competitor because they knew they could trust me -- the lowly QM. That helped. Eventually one of the Presidents I worked for went out of his way to point out in presentations to customers at how I often went to war with him over Q issues -- he used it as a marketing tool.

Yep, you gotta decide on your own which battles are worth fighting and how hard to push it -- knowing it might mean your job. Risk/reward. One thing you should do in any ethical issues such as this is CYA :ca: very, very carefully. If the worst happens, make sure the paper trail does not point to you.

See, I always gave the Top Dog an option to do what he/she wanted -- all he/she had to do was sign the paper themselves, or give me a signed order to do whatever it was they wanted me to do.

Yes, Mike, that was what I was alluding to. I once told my Boss that I wasn't going to sign a document because we did something/not do something that we traditionally did. He said, "You're not?" through those beady little narrow slitted eyes reserved for those tense moments between subordinates and himself. When I told him why, he said make the document the way you want and "Sign it". No problem with that. He knew I wasn't going to sign a blank check and, IMO, I went up a few pegs in his estimation. All subsequent advancements came through him and there were many. :agree:

I too worked for an ambitious VP as my first job as QM in 1969 for a plastics trim company for automotive interior trim.
This was a very educated (2 masters), but very profit centered. he would take parts out of the scrap bins, and tell me to ship them anyway. I used also used a responsibility sign off memo, and he reluctantly signed them on this and other occasions. Well, I was sure we were going to hear from out big 3 customer on those parts, but..guess what we never heard a peep. But, it did get his attention about so readily shipping everything.
He went on to support quality, and ended up as one of the better top executives I had worked for.

Does anyone else see the irony of energy posting in an "ethics" thread? :biglaugh:

I won't lie for the company but I don't go out of my way to publicly point a spot light on areas I know can use cleaning up.
Even with my first comment, what energy and Mike have stated about battles is very true. But, never, never compromise your principles. Once that is done, they have you.

I was once paid $20 to sit at a desk for an hour and be ready to pretend to be a company's QM. As I was also pretending at my regular job, I figured, "Why not?" Does that make me a bad person or just an unethical one or both? :vfunny:
Just easy, you should have held out for $100. :vfunny:

I won't lie for the company but I don't go out of my way to publicly point a spot light on areas I know can use cleaning up.
Even with my first comment, what energy and Mike have stated about battles is very true. But, never, never compromise your principles. Once that is done, they have you.
I was doing some contract work not so very long ago and the first week I went to the fellow I reported to and told him I would not lie for him or the company. I took the approach you did. I told him I will not lie for him but I would not address any issues which called for lying and that I would refer them to him. I even included a printout of a warning from a customer web site which flat out said, in so many words, 'Hey - we know some of you are doing this and we're going to find out'. In that company I had to tell management - finally upper management in a meeting, that I would not lie for them. It was a joke in the company - not me, but that upper management lied to customers regularly. Sometimes for no apparent reason. Deceit was common place. Not only in their relationship to customers, but internally as well.

As a consultant and contractor I have choices most people do not have the luxury of having. When an employee is told to, asked to, or it is 'implied' that they should lie or mislead (deceive) a customer, the employee typically has little choice as many times it is a simple issue of the possibility of losing one's job. Even in a 'good' economy few people will choose to lose their income rather than surrender their ethics at least with respect to the company and its business.

I ended up quitting right in the middle of a meeting when the equivalent of the production manager cussed me out even using the 'F' word with a gal present. That was and is the way the company works. It's culture. Of course this made a big buzz, especially when everyone knew the fellow had been fired from his prior job for the same 'personality' trait. Interviews were had - the gal could have easily sued, but didn't - and the whole thing. Bottom line: Reprimand. That was it.

Also of interest was the company had a personnel department as strict as they come.

In many companies, lying is part of the culture - the way they do business. A 'bad' personality company.

[The words "Why aren't you a "Team PLayer" come to mind when I balked at "minor" issues. Or, "Here. Are you satisfied now?" (A situation very similar to yours) You fight tooth and nail only against those things that can land you in jail or keep you awake at night. This lofty view of what is considered "unethical" is usually from those who have never been put on the "hotseat" and looks good in print. Blah Blah. Time to find other employment.:agree:[/QUOTE]

Having been hit with both of the phrases energy used here it comes to mind that the "lofty views" are something that is much more deeply held than the value of the position! If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything.

I have been asked to lie, commit fraud, and overlook regulatory non-conformities at a previous employer and refused. The result was being "down sized" and 5 months without a job. I slept well during that time. My current employer asked during the interview what the worst part of my previous job was and when I responded with being asked to commit fraud, the plant manager smiled & asked what the outcome was? When I responded that I was sitting here interviewing with him, he was impressed with the character it demonstrated. Integrity can not be bought or sold.

I feel reassured that all of you viewed these issues the same way I did. After Randy's comments in the last post, I was concerned that maybe my judgement was off, and I was being a goody two shoes.
Good for you, Rosie! It's not lofty to stick to what you believe is right. The QA person is usually not at the top of the chain of command. You are there to be the Quality Conscience. If your superiors wish to behave badly, it is their prerogative. In the October Quality Progess, Dennis Arter says, "You might want to keep a Pearl Harbor private record in a safe place for your own protection."..."That's something to protect you when the planes are bombing all around you." When the prez wants to ship product even though it fails the prescribed tests, get him to sign the waiver. It's his company. And your shield when the warranty return rate is >100%.

Being principled does not pay off when working for those who lack principle. Working for those who lack principle doesn't pay off in the long run, either. Bigfoot's posts illustrates that your ethics pay off in the long run, even if you encounter resistance and suffering in the short run.