Values & Ethical Decision Making

Values and Ethical Decision Making: Procter & Gamble v. Melvin Wake

What are values? According to Robbins and Judge, values are firm beliefs that "carry an individual's idea as to what is right, good, or desirable" (2011). The significance of values is they influence one's attitudes and behavior. Years ago, employers were more interested in identifying desired personality traits in order to match employees to jobs. More recently, employers are concerned with an employee's "flexibility to meet changing situations and commitment to the organization" (Robbins and Judge, 2011). Comparing an employee's personal values with the values of the organization reduces the chances of an employee rebellion and increases the likelihood of ethical decision-making that closely aligns with the organization (Robbins and Judge, 2011).

Personal Values, Organizational Values, and Ethical Decision Making

Four categories of ethical thought are used in the Williams Institute Ethics Awareness Inventory Assessment to analyze some of the characteristics of team member Melvin Wake. These results were evaluated to determine how the team member's results align or do not align with the values of those of Procter & Gamble (P & G), the organization selected by Team D. P & G is a company that has been in business for over 170 years and its core values are integrity, leadership, ownership, passion for winning, and trust (Procter & Gamble, 2012). The company believes in decision-making policies that strive to do right by its customers and employees. "We uphold the values and principles of P & G in every action and decision" (Procter & Gamble, 2012, p. 1).

Furthermore, the principles of P & G among other virtues emphasizes respect for all individuals, and keeping the interests of the company and those of individuals including its customers, inseparable. "We believe that doing what is right for the business with integrity will lead to mutual success for both the Company and the individual. Our quest for mutual success ties us together" (Procter & Gamble, 2012). The values and principles of P & G are those closely tied to sound ethics and is part of the reason this company maintains market share dominance, decade after decade. Some of the core values and principles described are demonstrated in Melville's ethical assessment results. They are a level of alignments in the values of Melvin with those of P & G.

The four categories of the ethics awareness inventory assessment are character, obligation, results, and equity. Melville's ethical profile is most closely aligned with character. The assessment results indicate that integrity and uprightness (key values of P & G) are key factors of Melville's assessment. According to the assessment results, Melvin values qualities as honesty, wisdom, and integrity. In addition, the development of practical wisdom and sound judgment plays a major factor in how ethical decision-making is made by individuals viewed with the ethical style of character. From this vantage point, Melville's values align with those of P & G. However, there are other values of Melville's that were not strongly aligned with P & G, particularly in the area of equity. Melville's ethical profile is least closely aligned with the ethical style of equity. Values based on equity are also important to P & G 's business decision-making process.

Melville's Ethical Decision Making Process

On matters of ethics (not one of legal concerns) should P & G be faced with a decision that could coast the company to forfeit tens of millions of dollars Melvin would take a different ethical profile than the company. Melvin of strong ethical character would look to put the greater good of employees, consumers, and reputation of the company first regardless of the cost. In a recent case in which P & G faced the recall of their Rely brand tampons the company initially denied responsibility. Only after reaching an agreement with Centers for Disease Control allowing P & G to deny any product defect or violation of federal law did the company agree to recall the product (Brand failures, 2006). In this case, P & G failed to demonstrate compassion and moral excellence, two of the key components that would drive Melville's decision-making process. If faced with this decision Melvin of strong ethical character would look to see what the impact would be for the greater good of all stakeholders over the bottom line of the company. He would convey with absolute compassion why the recall of a possible defective product would