This was an interesting article (page 287 in the textbook) that discussed how a group trekking up the Himalayan Mountains encountered an “ethical dilemma” and how their decisions are similar to corporate ethics. Briefly, a group of multi-national individuals embarked on a trip of a life-time up the mountain (presumably Mt. Everest). Along their journey up, another group’s member comes down the mountain and “dumps” a partially naked and hurt Sadhu (Holy man) at their feet. This individual angrily states “I’ve done what I can and you care for him” as he heads back up the mountain to continue his journey. Now this group is faced with an ethical dilemma. Provide minimal support (clothes, food and water) and continue up the mountain or turn around and return back to base camp and provide the sadhu with the proper care. One individual decides that this journey (an experience to achieve personal satisfaction) was more important that the well-being of the stranger. Another individual (who was suffering from the elements himself) attempted to help the Sadhu as best as he could. When these two individuals meet up, he asks his companion “how do you feel about contributing to the death of a fellow man?” Nobody knows for sure if the Sadhu is dead or alive. No one was willing to accept the total responsibility for the Sadhu, but did what they could as long as it was convenient and “passed the buck”.
This story illustrated to me what I believe is so pervasive in our corporate culture; that many individuals, when in a stressful environment, often make decisions that will damage (affect) them the least, regardless if it was the ethical decision to make. This is especially true in a group dynamic. If the group needs to make a difficult choice, it is hard to find that individual who is willing to risk everything (career, goals, bonus, etc.) to do the right thing. What usually happens is that each individual does their share to “get by” and hope that some else will make the ethical decision for them. In light of all the corporate scandals, it seems that many people turn a blind eye or believe that someone else will do the right thing, but in the mean-time, many people’s lives will be impacted.
What would you do if you were in this group? Would you go to the “top of the world” or help a stranger in need?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I find this post to be very relevant. It is sad that the climbers could not see the act of saving another human being as having at least as much inherent value as that of making the spiritual journey up the mountain. I really appreciate your connection to our lack of urgency in considering the impact of our decisions on others. I know that I am unlikely without fault on this as well. Are we more disconnected from humanity today than in the past. Do corporate values give us a moral pass in these situations? My guess is that the spiritual insights that these climbers gained about themselves will have them repenting for the remainder of their days.
Well just as you have said, it is sad to think that most people will do whatever they can to get by with the least scratches, so to speak. Yet I have read the article and seeing as one of the men was an anthropologist, he should have known about the Sadhu's beliefs and why the Sadhu would be there. Although, even if he had known why, it would bring up another question such as, "Should I help this person even though I know he wants to die?" Then you are faced with the ultimate dilemma, in which you save someone and disregard their beliefs, or you let them be and have this decision haunt you the rest of your life.
Post a Comment