UPI Study › Courses › Business Essentials › Free lessons › Lesson 1.7 Free with a free account
Building an Ethical Framework: Compliance-Based versus Integrity-Based Approaches
Business Essentials · Chapter 1: The Business Environment and Ethical FoundationsSection 1.7 · lesson 7 of 10512 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Business Essentials.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Business Essentials
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Corporate Social Responsibility within Organizations →← Ethics in Contemporary Business ConductNext lesson: Corporate Social Responsibility within Organizations →
In this lesson
How an organization helps many people act well without supervision.
- Distinguish compliance-based from integrity-based ethics
- Describe the seven components of an ethics program
- Explain the structural conditions behind ethical failure
- Assess an ethical climate from observable evidence
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,758 words). Read along, or search it.
The Business Environment and Ethical Foundations
Building an Ethical Framework: Compliance-Based versus Integrity-Based Approaches
One person can reason carefully through a hard decision. An organization faces a harder problem. It has to arrange things so that many people, most of whom will never meet, tend to act well without being supervised. This section is about how organizations try to do that. We compare two approaches, one built on rules and one built on values, and see why each needs the other. We list the seven components of an ethics program, and the three that everything else depends on. We look at the conditions that quietly produce ethical failure. And we learn to read an organization's ethical climate from evidence, rather than assurances.
Two Approaches
Rules and Values
Two broad approaches have been distinguished. A compliance-based approach sets rules, monitors whether people follow them, and sanctions violations. An integrity-based approach defines values, and develops the judgment of employees. It holds people responsible for decisions that the rules did not anticipate. It is tempting to treat these as rival philosophies. They are not. They are emphases, rather than alternatives. A functioning ethics program contains both. So the design question is never which one to choose. It is how to balance them. The reason becomes clear once you see what each one can, and cannot, deliver. Each approach, used alone, fails in a predictable way.
Strengths And Limits
Each Approach Corrects the Other
Start with compliance. It delivers four things. Clarity, because people know what is required. Consistency, because like cases can be treated alike. Defensibility, because the organization can show what it required, and what it did when a rule was broken. And a floor, below which conduct will not be permitted to fall. What it cannot deliver is good judgment in a situation the rules did not foresee. Rules are written in advance, and no set of rules covers every case. Worse, a business relying on rules alone may find employees treating the absence of a prohibition as permission. Integrity supplies what rules cannot. A way to reason about new situations from shared values, and a sense of personal ownership. Its weakness mirrors the compliance strength. Values without specific standards give a person nothing to point to under pressure. Doing the right thing is easy to endorse, and hard to apply against a manager who insists a shortcut is fine. So the two correct each other. Rules give values a concrete edge. Values give rules a purpose, and cover the gaps between them.
Table 1.7.1
Two Approaches Compared
Here the two approaches are set side by side. Compliance works through rules, monitoring, and sanctions. Integrity works through shared values, developed judgment, and personal responsibility. Compliance delivers clarity, consistency, defensibility, and a floor. Integrity delivers judgment in new situations, ownership, and commitment beyond the minimum. Compliance cannot motivate beyond avoiding sanctions. Integrity cannot protect against a determined, or pressured, individual. And each has its own way of failing. Compliance fails by box-ticking. Conduct meets the letter of the rules, and defeats their purpose. Integrity fails by vagueness. Values that everyone endorses, and no one can apply to a hard case. A program built on one approach alone inherits that approach's failure mode. There is also a legal reason to keep the compliance side strong. Federal sentencing guidelines for organizations take into account whether an organization had an effective compliance and ethics program. That is one reason businesses value the defensibility of documented rules.
Worked Example
Three Gift Policies at Pallister Supply
Watch both approaches handle one problem, gifts from suppliers, at a fictional firm called Pallister Supply. A rules-only policy says no gift above a stated value may be accepted, and all gifts must be logged. It is clear, and easy to audit. But a supplier invites a buyer to an expensive weekend event. It costs the supplier a great deal, and appears nowhere in the gift log. The buyer may reasonably conclude that the event is not a gift, so it is allowed. A values-only policy says employees must never let a supplier relationship affect their judgment. That covers the weekend event. But a junior buyer whose manager says the event is fine has nothing specific to point to. The combined policy states the limit and the logging rule. It adds that any hospitality that could reasonably appear to influence a decision must be declined or disclosed. And it explains why. The rule gives the buyer something to cite. The principle covers what the rule missed.
Ethics Program
Seven Components
An ethics program is the set of formal arrangements through which an organization tries to promote ethical conduct. It usually has seven components. A code of conduct is a written statement of the standards the organization expects. It differs from a statement of values. A value, such as honesty, says what the organization cares about. A code says what a person is to do on Tuesday, such as when a supplier's gift may be accepted. Training builds the ability to recognize and handle situations. It works best with realistic cases, not recited rules. Reporting channels are the routes for raising a concern. Investigation establishes what occurred. Enforcement applies consequences. Leadership behavior is what those in authority do, and what they tolerate. And measurement monitors whether the program is working. Seven parts sounds like a checklist. But three of them carry the rest.
Load-Bearing Parts
Three Components the Rest Depend On
Three components deserve particular emphasis, because their failure disables all the others. First, reporting channels. They must be plural, so nobody has to report to the person the concern is about. And what decides whether any channel is used is non-retaliation. That is the assurance, honored in practice, that someone raising a concern in good faith will not be punished. A channel people believe to be unsafe will be empty, however well it is advertised. Second, consistent enforcement. Its absence damages a program faster than having no program at all. If high performers are excused for violations that get junior staff punished, employees draw a conclusion. The code describes what is said, not what is done. And they behave accordingly. Third, leadership behavior, the strongest signal of all. What leaders tolerate and reward defines the operative standard, whatever the code says. A leader who praises results achieved by doubtful methods has, in effect, amended the code.
Structural Conditions
Failure by Design
When an ethical failure happens, the natural response is to look for a bad individual. Often the more useful question is what conditions made the failure likely. Five are commonly identified. Targets that cannot be met legitimately force a choice between failure and improper conduct. Rewards for outcome, with no regard to method, tell people that only the result matters. Ambiguity about responsibility lets each person assume someone else is answerable. A culture where raising a concern is costly ensures that problems stay hidden. And normalization of deviance lets small departures from the standard become routine. Each condition has a matching control. They address targets, rewards, ownership, culture, and review. Notice that none of these controls is a narrow rule about conduct. Ethical failure is often a failure of design. It is prevented mostly by changing the conditions people work in, not by adding more prohibitions.
Normalization Of Deviance
The Cold Store Log
Normalization of deviance deserves a closer look, because it happens without anyone choosing it. A small departure is tolerated because nothing went wrong. Then the next departure is a little larger, and just as unremarkable. Eventually practice has drifted far from the standard, and nobody ever decided it should. Here is an illustration from a fictional commercial kitchen. Staff must record the cold store temperature every four hours. One busy week, a cook skips a reading. Nothing spoils. Skipped readings become common. Eventually the log is filled in from memory, at the end of the shift. Each step was a small departure from the one before, and each was excused because no harm followed. The control is an independent review of practice against the standard. And a habit of treating a skipped check as an event worth understanding, even though no food was lost.
Ethical Climate
Read Evidence, Not Assurances
An organization's ethical climate is the shared perception of what conduct is expected, and rewarded. It is tempting to assess it by asking managers whether it is good. But assertion is unreliable. It is better assessed through observable indicators. The first is the reporting rate, the number of concerns raised relative to the size of the organization. Its reading is counter-intuitive. A very low rate more often signals distrust of the channel than an absence of problems. Every large organization has some problems that ought to be reported. Other indicators include how quickly reports are investigated and closed, and whether reporters receive feedback. Watch whether reporters later leave, or are moved. And what share of reports are substantiated. Above all, watch the consistency of enforcement across ranks. Employee surveys can show whether people believe it is safe to speak up. But the answers depend on whether respondents trust that they are anonymous.
Worked Comparison
Twelve Reports or One?
A worked comparison shows how to read the reporting rate. The figures are illustrative. Two similar departments each have three hundred employees. Over a year, department A receives twelve reports. It closes most within a month, and tells each reporter the outcome. Department B receives one report. It takes seven months to close, and the reporter never hears back. The tempting conclusion is that department B is the more ethical of the two. The more likely reading is the reverse. B's employees have probably concluded that reporting is pointless, or risky. A's higher rate reflects trust in its channel. Even so, a careful reviewer would not stop there. They would compare the share of reports substantiated, the feedback to reporters, and any complaints of retaliation. The difference in rates is a reason to ask questions. It is not an answer.
Case Vignette
The Code Nobody Used
To close, a composite case. Tomas supervises a warehouse at a fictional freight company. The company has a signed code of conduct, annual training, and a reporting line that leads to each employee's own manager. For months, crews have stacked pallets above the safe limit, to meet dispatch deadlines. Tomas thinks it is dangerous. He does not report it, and his reasons are specific. The only channel goes to a manager who sets the deadlines. Two colleagues who complained earlier were moved to worse shifts, and nobody learned what happened to their complaints. And the regional director has publicly praised the warehouse for its on-time record. Reporting is costly here, and silence is cheap. Non-retaliation, feedback, a route around the direct manager, and leaders who value method as well as result are all missing. This company has a compliance program in form, and an integrity program in neither form nor practice. And its low report count is not evidence that all is well.
About Business Essentials at UPI Study
Business Essentials (Business 100) is a self-paced online course of 105 video lessons in 24 chapters, from the business environment, economics and global markets to ownership, management, leadership, operations, people, marketing, accounting, finance and banking. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Business courses Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Business Essentials with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Business Essentials carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Building an Ethical Framework: Compliance-Based versus Integrity-Based Approaches
What is the difference between compliance-based and integrity-based ethics programs?
Does a low number of ethics complaints mean a company is ethical?
What are the key components of a corporate ethics program?
What is normalization of deviance?
About the Business Essentials course
How many college credits is Business Essentials?
How much does Business Essentials cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Business Essentials take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Business Essentials.
105 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →