The Ethical Context Of HRM

In determining the ethical course of action, HR professionals have to consider their dual memberships in the business organization and in the profession. Their professional loyalties may place them in direct conflict with their organization's business goals (Wiley, 1998). It is not unusual for the HR practitioner's values and expectations to be contrary to the organization's values (Archer, 1986). Because professionals place a premium on expertise, specialization and objectivity, they are appalled when they observe managers making decisions based upon non-objective techniques, intuitive speculation or seat-of-the-pants approaches (Wiley, 1998).

This development notwithstanding, some scholars have attempted to provide a better understanding of the concept. Legge (2007) for instance, presents a very succinct definition of the concept as ‘the identification of the good and its just or fair distribution’. This view is consistent with that of Stewart and Rigg (2011) who see ethics as ‘the study of right and wrong as well as to a specification of what is right and what is wrong’. Torrington and Hall (1998) cited in Stewart and Rigg (2011) suggest an important distinction between the singular and plural forms of the word, arguing that the singular refers to ‘moral value’ and the ‘principles that ought to govern conduct’; while the plural describes ‘codes of behaviour considered to be correct, especially that of a particular group or profession’. A broader definition of the concept is presented by Cornock and Johns (1995) to include:

● Fairness.

● Deciding what is right and wrong.

● The practices and rules that underpin responsible conduct between individuals and groups.

Billington (2003) cited in Kew and Stradwick (2008) lists some of the distinctive characteristics of ethics to include:

● Nobody can avoid ethical decisions. We all make ethical decisions every day.

● Other people are always involved in ethical decisions. There is no such thing as private morality.

● Ethical decisions matter – they affect the lives of others.

● Although ethics is about right and wrong, there are no definitive answers. The philosopher can forward principles which should guide decisions, but the ultimate decision is always down to the individual.

● Ethics is always about choice – a decision where the individual has no choice cannot be considered unethical.

Given the foregoing, it is plausible to argue that while it is true that there is no consensus on definition, there seems to be a general agreement that ethics is concerned with ‘establishing the principles of what is right or moral and subsequently transmitting what is established as right or moral into a system of codes or rules which govern behaviour of individuals in a particular context (Stewart & Rigg, 2011). What is important therefore is to be clear about what is being established and about which meaning is being applied to it. Indeed, the need to be clear about what is being established and the meaning applied thereof becomes even more critical, considering the eclectic and contested nature of the concept of ethics

References

Archer, E. R. (1986). Human resource professionalism: an unexpected source of conflict. Personnel Administrator, 31, 97-104.

Wiley, C. (1998). Re-examining perceived ethics issues and ethics roles among employment managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(2) (Jan): 147 – 161. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1023/A:1005795731002

Torrington, D., and Hall, L. (1998). Human resource management, 4th ed. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall Europe.