The Ethical Barometer

Roger Boisjoly was the engineer employed by Morton Thiokol, the company responsible for making the rocket boosters for the NASA Challenger launches. In January 1986, when NASA was faced with the decision of whether to postpone the launch of the Challenger (the one with teacher Christa McAuliffe aboard) yet a third time. The problem was that Florida was experiencing freezing temperatures, and Mr. Boisjoly had been studying the effect of freezing temperatures on the o-rings in the boosters. During a teleconference call between Morton Thiokol engineers and NASA, Mr. Boisjoly showed NASA executives photos of the damage cold temperatures did to the boosters and other Challenger shuttles. “How the hell can you ignore that?” was his question to the managers Continue reading →

Under internal foundation rules, the Susan G. Komen Foundation can no longer fund organizations that are under investigation. Such a rule is not unusual for charitable foundations. It just doesn’t advance causes or reputations much when you are throwing money at potential felons. Because Planned Parenthood is under congressional investigation, the Komen Foundation pulled its $700,000 annual donations to the group. There was resulting hoopla and grousing, “Grant- making decisions are not about politics,” say those who protest. Actually, here’s the deal. Those who run foundations are in charge of their money. Continue reading →

The pattern is always the same. Bright young star, brilliant career, and then the edges begin to fray a bit. David Einhorn, the head of hedge fund, Greenlight Capital, got his first whiff of fraying last week. Mixed metaphors aside, the Barometer senses hubris overtaking reason.

Mr. Einhorn held a one-hour conference call with investors, media, etc. to explain how the British regulators, with whom he had just settled an insider trading case for £7.2 million (about $11 million), were out to lunch. The fine was settlement for civil charges related to Greenlight’s sale of shares in Punch Taverns immediately following an Einhorn conference call with management Continue reading →

Ethics tantrums are on the rise, and they are troublesome. Ethics tantrums are the fits folks throw when they have an ideological bone to pick with an individual, a business, an industry, a state. . . Examples? James Lileks describes one beautifully: An employee at a design company begged his boss to “dump” a pesticide client, a client that the employee deemed to be of dubious ethics because, well, you know, pesticides and oil and all. Petrophobia is a crippling psychological impairment these days. The boss, having that bottom-line thing going on, refused, so the employee fixed them all: He did a “shoddy job” on the pesticide company’s design work. One imagines the cockroaches had the incorrect number of legs in the graphics or some such entomological faux pas. There you have it, right from the revenge is the best ethical tactic when you disagree with someone’s views, product, political leanings, etc.

There are two others from Ariel Kaminer’s New York Times, “The Ethicist.” An employee of a small start-up company supports the Occupy Wall Street movement but has come to realize that his employer’s start-up is financed primarily by one of Wall Street’s biggest companies. He wishes to know if he should resign immediately. By all means, quit your job and begin a search to find a company that has not been touched by a Wall Street company. He might join with the petrophobic to pool resources to see if they can find a company that does not have ties to oil in some way.
Then there was the grandma who did not want to take her granddaughter to a local production of The Nutcracker because she learned that David Koch’s foundation was one of the donors for the production. Mercy, you would not want your grandchildren exposed to culture when you have no idea where the funds used have been. That’s showing those Koch brothers!

Be prepared for the Super Bowl ads because the tantrums have already begun. A greyhound protection group is fixin’ to boycott Skechers because its Super Bowl ad shows a dog walking around a track in four tiny, red Skechers shoes. Are they protesting the indignity of a bulldog being forced to wear shoes? Nay, they are protesting the fact that the dog is walking on a track where greyhounds run and are allegedly mistreated. The Barometer knows that she would have recognized that track instantly and been nauseous at the thought of a company using such a backdrop to sell dog shoes? Skechers?

The mental gymnastics tantrumites go through atop their high horses are a wonder to behold. A recent photo in the Wall Street Journal showed the U.S. Park Police tracing an extension cord in the Washington, D.C. McPherson Square Occupy folks because the police discovered that the crowd had spliced wires Continue reading →

Most ethics organizations and ethical lists try to name “the most ethical” (person) (company) etc. The Barometer is risk averse. Point to someone or some organization as the most ethical for a year and by the end of the next year they will do something stupid and you will look like an idiot. The Barometer far prefers a look at the mistakes for the sole purpose of introspection — “There but for the grace of God, go I.”

The following list is a head-turner because ethical lapses can happen to anyone. We study those who slip so that we can do the introspection, learn, and, hopefully, prevent ourselves Continue reading →