UPI Study › Courses › Ethics in Technology › Free lessons › Lesson 15.4 Free with a free account
Why Organizations Need Clear Distinctions Between Ethics, Morals, and Business Values
Ethics in Technology · Chapter 15: Doing the Right Thing: Ethics, Media Responsibility, and Digital CitizenshipSection 15.4 · lesson 103 of 11616 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 Ethics in Technology.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Ethics in Technology
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Where Legal Compliance Ends and Genuine Ethical Responsibility Begins →← How Personal Values and Professional Ethics Intersect in the Modern WorkplaceNext lesson: Where Legal Compliance Ends and Genuine Ethical Responsibility Begins →
In this lesson
Clear distinctions connect stated priorities with organizational behavior.
- Define ethics, morals and values by source and scope
- Explain values statements and why they can fail
- Distinguish Lencioni’s 4 types of organizational values
- Compare Enron with Johnson & Johnson’s Credo
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 (1,964 words). Read along, or search it.
Doing the Right Thing: Ethics, Media Responsibility, and Digital Citizenship
Ethics, Morals and Business Values
Organizations often use ethics, morals, and values together. The words can seem interchangeable. This lesson separates their organizational meanings, so different workplace disagreements can receive more appropriate responses. First, define the three concepts, paying attention to their typical sources and scopes. Then examine corporate values statements, including why a public list may fail to change behavior. Next, distinguish four value types, in Patrick Lencioni's account. Core values differ from aspirations. They also differ from minimum expectations, and priorities that developed accidentally. Finally, compare two cases: Enron's stated values, and Johnson and Johnson's ranked Credo. The comparison asks whether a declared priority guides conduct, especially when following it costs money. These are practical working distinctions, rather than rigid boundaries across every use of the words. Keep personal conscience, broad priorities, and role standards in view, while evaluating the actual disagreement. The central test is conduct: what does the organization defend, reward, teach, and enforce?
Working Distinctions
3 Concepts Answer Different Organizational Questions
Values answer what matters, for either a person or an organization considering its priorities. They are broad, relatively stable priorities, including honesty, innovation, or a focus on customers. Personal experience and organizational culture help shape which priorities matter, and how strongly they matter. Morals answer what is right for me personally, drawing on an internalized sense of right and wrong. The source connects morals with upbringing, religion, and culture, often formed before entering an organization. The Latin root, mores, refers to customs; it helps explain the source's emphasis on formation. Ethics asks what is right for this role or group, emphasizing shared standards of conduct. The Greek root, ethos, means character; organizational ethics often appears in a written code. External standards can be discussed, taught, and applied by people beyond the individual following them. However, values and moral commitments can also be written; the categories do not forbid that overlap. Use the distinction to clarify the question, rather than assuming only ethics can ever be documented.
Name the Actual Conflict
A Moral Objection Differs From a Code Violation
The three concepts can point in different directions, even when everyone sincerely describes the concern as ethical. An employee may personally object to a business practice, although the company permits it. In the source example, that practice is legal and consistent with the company's written code. The objection can still be real, because personal conscience is not identical to company permission. A different problem arises when a values statement promises something, but rules and incentives support another priority. Here, the concern is a gap between stated values and actual organizational practice. A code violation presents another issue, involving conduct inconsistent with an applicable shared standard. Naming the concern accurately helps identify whether accommodation, discussion, investigation, or another response fits. It does not make legality sufficient for ethical approval, or make the company code exhaustive. Likewise, a moral disagreement should not automatically become a proven finding of misconduct. Describe the actual conflict first, then consider evidence, relevant duties, and the appropriate response.
Corporate Values Statements
A Public List Can Influence Culture, or Become Decoration
A corporate values statement is a short public list, of priorities an organization claims to hold. It may appear on office walls, in annual reports, or during new-hire orientation. Jim Collins and Jerry Porras emphasized core values, in their nineteen ninety-four book, Built to Last. Their argument connected successful companies with principles, helping popularize organizational values statements. In two thousand two, Lencioni reported that roughly eighty percent of Fortune one hundred companies stated values publicly. Treat that figure as his historical estimate, rather than a measurement of companies today. His criticism concerned statements that sounded impressive, but lacked a meaningful connection to organizational behavior. He argued that such statements could disappoint employees, create cynicism, and damage managerial credibility. The useful idea was not simply publishing words; it was defining priorities and actually defending them. A statement becomes hollow when leaders praise a priority, while rewards encourage behavior contradicting it. The next distinction explains why labeling every priority a core value can also confuse employees.
Lencioni’s 4 Types
Published Values Can Describe Very Different Things
Lencioni distinguishes four kinds of organizational values, each describing a different relationship to actual practice. Core values are central to identity, and the organization genuinely defends them despite real costs. The important test is sacrifice, rather than whether the word sounds admirable on a poster. Aspirational values are needed for success, but the organization does not yet practice them reliably. Naming an aspiration honestly can identify development work, without pretending the work is already complete. Permission-to-play values are minimum behavioral expectations, necessary for participation rather than distinctively identifying the company. Their shared character does not make them unimportant. It means they are not automatically differentiators. Accidental values develop through culture, without leaders deliberately cultivating them as organizational priorities. Publishing all four without labels makes an unachieved goal look like an established, defended commitment. Employees cannot tell whether the statement describes current practice, future ambition, or a baseline requirement. Clear categories make the statement more informative, and allow practice to be evaluated against the right claim.
The Enron Contrast
Strong Words Did Not Match the Organization’s Conduct
Enron's two thousand annual report listed four values: Respect, Integrity, Communication, and Excellence. The source also describes their prominent display, in the lobby of the Houston headquarters. Yet Enron collapsed in two thousand one, amid large-scale accounting fraud and manipulated financial reporting. The words did not prevent concealed problems, or misleading statements about company performance. The source contrasts integrity rhetoric with aggressive growth targets, and a ruthless internal ranking system. Those incentives encouraged behavior inconsistent with the values, rather than reliably defending the declared commitments. Sherron Watkins, an Enron vice president, raised internal warnings about the financial problems. The lesson does not depend on claiming that nobody raised concerns before her. Under Lencioni's definition, words contradicted by rewarded conduct were not functioning as genuine core values. A core priority must actually constrain behavior, including when that constraint costs the organization something. Prominent display demonstrates publication; it cannot, by itself, demonstrate the organization's willingness to defend the priority.
Johnson & Johnson’s Credo
An Explicit Priority Order Predated the Crisis
Johnson and Johnson's Credo provides the source's contrast, because it identifies an order of responsibilities. Chairman Robert Wood Johnson wrote the Credo, in nineteen forty-three, before the modern values-statement trend. The first responsibility concerns patients, doctors, nurses, mothers, fathers, and others using the products. Second, the ranking identifies employees, who work for the company throughout the world. Third, it identifies the communities where the company operates, linking business conduct with wider responsibilities. Fourth, it identifies stockholders, including the expectation that they should receive a fair return. The diagram simplifies those groups, preserving their order rather than reproducing every sentence of the Credo. Unlike a list of adjectives, this structure helps compare responsibilities when they pull in different directions. Stockholders remain part of the framework. Their interests are not placed ahead of product users. That ordering existed before the crisis, so leaders had a stated principle available under pressure. The historical example tests whether the organization would follow that principle, despite a substantial financial cost.
The 1982 Tylenol Crisis
Patient Safety Took Priority Despite a Major Financial Cost
In nineteen eighty-two, seven people in the Chicago area died, after taking cyanide-laced Extra Strength Tylenol. Johnson and Johnson recalled roughly thirty-one million bottles nationwide, extending its response beyond the fatal cluster. Management estimated recall, destruction, and replacement costs. Together, these exceeded one hundred million dollars. These figures illustrate the costly priority at issue; they do not make the response a simple decision. The Credo placed responsibility to product users first, ahead of the responsibility to stockholders. The source argues that this preexisting ranking supported patient safety, rather than improvising priorities during the crisis. Following the framework still required difficult action, organization, and acceptance of substantial financial consequences. The case therefore illustrates a priority being tested, rather than words merely displayed in ordinary conditions. Do not infer that a framework eliminates uncertainty, or supplies every operational detail needed during a crisis. Nor does one response prove that every future organizational decision will satisfy the same ethical standard. Its teaching value is the connection between a stated ranking, and costly action consistent with that ranking.
Statements and Consequences
Enforcement Determines Whether a Priority Constrains Conduct
The source's final comparison asks what happens, after an organization publishes a values statement. One possibility connects those priorities with rewards, leadership conduct, and real enforcement. Employees can then see the priority operating as a constraint, rather than merely as an attractive slogan. The Credo example illustrates a decision rule, applied when patient protection created substantial financial costs. Another possibility displays the words, while the actual incentives encourage behavior contrary to them. Enron illustrates the danger of treating publication, as though it were itself protection against misconduct. A third problem is confusing value types, so employees cannot distinguish present practice from future aspiration. That confusion explains why even a sincere list, may fail to communicate what actually governs behavior. Ethical infrastructure includes codes of conduct, enforcement, leadership example, and consequences when standards are violated. Those mechanisms help convert a claimed priority into practice, making expectations visible and actionable. The practical question is whether the organization supports its words, through the conduct it actually rewards.
4 Organizational Reasons
Clear Categories Improve Decisions and Accountability
The source gives four reasons, for maintaining clear distinctions between priorities, conscience, and role standards. First, decisions under pressure benefit from a written ranking, established before the crisis arrives. The framework provides a reference point, rather than leaving priorities to whichever manager happens to be present. Second, personal and organizational conflicts need an accurate description, before selecting an appropriate response. A conscience disagreement may invite accommodation, discussion, escalation, or an assessment of whether to stay. The category does not dictate a remedy; circumstances and applicable duties still matter. Third, culture suffers when a values statement says one thing, while the organization rewards another. Employees may learn that the displayed priorities are decoration, producing the cynicism Lencioni criticized. Fourth, accountability improves when shared standards can be taught, examined, and applied through appropriate processes. Written role standards support that work. Personal convictions and values can also be documented. Organizations need priorities, conscience, and ethical standards working together, rather than one vocabulary replacing the others.
8 Key Terms
Recall the Concepts and the 4 Value Categories
Review eight key terms, beginning with values: broad priorities about what matters to a person or organization. Morals are internalized personal beliefs about right and wrong, shaped by experience and social influences. Ethics here means shared standards for conduct, within a profession, organization, or other group. A corporate values statement publishes the priorities, that the organization says it intends to hold. Core values are genuinely defended, including when the organization must accept real costs. Aspirational values are needed for success, but are not yet reliably expressed in practice. Permission-to-play values describe minimum expectations; accidental values emerge without deliberate cultivation by leaders. The first takeaways distinguish the three questions, compare statements with rewards, and identify the four categories. The next takeaway uses Enron. Declared values can coexist with large-scale misconduct. The Credo takeaway connects a preexisting ranking with costly action, while the last emphasizes shared accountability. Together, they require evaluating actual conduct, instead of assuming that a published statement proves ethical practice.
Review and Apply
Explain the Distinction Behind Each Answer
The first review asks which question each concept answers, and which typically supports external enforcement. Values identify what matters; morals concern personal conscience; role ethics supplies shared standards, often written down. The second asks why statements fail, in Lencioni's account of confusing categories and weak behavioral connections. Explain the missing links to rewards, leadership conduct, and enforcement, rather than blaming the words alone. The third asks about Enron: core values require defense at cost, which contradictory incentives failed to demonstrate. The fourth asks why the Credo helped. Its ranking placed product users ahead of stockholder interests. That principle supported costly protection, although the crisis response still required difficult choices and action. The fifth asks why a conscience conflict differs, from a violation of the organization's ethical standards. One can involve accommodation or personal decisions; the other calls for appropriate attention to misconduct. Avoid dismissing misconduct as opinion, or treating every moral disagreement as a proven code violation. For each answer, connect the category with evidence of practice, and then explain the suitable response.
About Ethics in Technology at UPI Study
Ethics in Technology (Computer Science 195) is a self-paced online course of 116 video lessons in 15 chapters, from cybersecurity basics, privacy and surveillance to big data, hacking, malware, network defense, intellectual property, cybercrime, encryption, emerging technology and digital citizenship. 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 Computer Science courses
Compare: Cybersecurity vs Ethics in Technology · Which ethics course?
Why take it here
Why students take Ethics in Technology with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Ethics in Technology 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 Why Organizations Need Clear Distinctions Between Ethics, Morals, and Business Values
What is the difference between ethics, morals, and values?
What are Lencioni's four types of organizational values?
Why did Enron's values statement fail to prevent fraud?
How did Johnson & Johnson's Credo guide the 1982 Tylenol recall?
About the Ethics in Technology course
How many college credits is Ethics in Technology?
How much does Ethics in Technology cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Ethics in Technology take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Ethics in Technology.
116 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →