Ethics

When Should a Leader Pass Blame?

April 1, 2016 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

A leader is the “captain of the ship.” He is responsible for his organization’s every outcome—good or bad. He is wholly accountable for everything that happens under his authority.

If there is a problem caused by his mistakes or errors within his organization, a leader should not shirk responsibility. He should not abandon his team if things go wrong, nor should he pass the blame or use an employee as a scapegoat.

However, a leader cannot see and touch all his people, especially if his organization is large. He cannot be personally responsible for a rogue employee who steals information, misuses funds, or engages in unethical behavior. In such circumstances, the leader may pass blame.

Although a leader cannot police every action taken by every employee, the leader should be held accountable for not instituting and overseeing a rigorous control system to prevent problems, deter unethical actions, and to identify employees that engage in such behavior.

A leader also sets the tone for all his employees—not only in terms of goals and priorities but also in terms of proper organizational behavior. A legendary case in point are the ethical rules that investor Warren Buffett set in his company after the 1991 bond-rigging scandal at Salomon Brothers: “I want employees to ask themselves whether they are willing to have any contemplated act appear the next day on the front page of their local paper, to be read by their spouses, children, and friends, with the reporting done by an informed and critical reporter. If they follow this test, they need not fear my other message to them: Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding; lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless.” Even now, Buffett includes this statement in his biannual letters to his managers and displays a video of this speech at every Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting.

Don’t Assume Conversations with Human Resources Will Remain Confidential

February 19, 2016 By Nagesh Belludi 2 Comments

Human Resources (HR) can be a great resource to help you secure a promotion, be a better manager, and even deal with an employee grievance/claim.

However, if you’re having a serious problem with a manager or a colleague, don’t pour your heart out to your HR person and ask that no action be taken. You cannot count on the confidentiality of your discussions. While your HR person intends to help you, he also has an obligation as well to helping your manager and your colleague deal with you.

Similarly, do not discuss any career-transition plans (switching to another job within your company, resigning, job hunting, or retiring) with HR. HR is obligated to keep your manager informed about any prospective issue concerning staffing or anything that might affect organizational goals.

Human Resources and Confidentiality

HR has no lawful obligation to maintain confidentiality in anything you discuss. You may expect your HR person to remain confidential to the greatest possible extent. However, remember that the HR person’s primary loyalties and responsibilities concern the organization’s business needs. He is duty-bound to investigate employee complaints and involve other levels of management, especially in case of possible discrimination or harassment concerns.

Expect your HR person to pass on any information that’s in the organization’s best interest, even after promising confidentiality. HR should never mislead employees about the level of confidentiality they can expect. Such HR people aren’t behaving ethically and, over time, tend to lose employees’ and managers’ trust.

Go to HR for guidance on solving people problems or for help with organizational policies and procedures. See a reliable friend or a trusted peer to confide problems and challenges. Do not share anything with HR that you wouldn’t share with your manager.

Idea for Impact: HR is obligated to act on serious issues they learn about, whether or not you want them to. Therefore, never assume that conversations with HR will remain wholly confidential. Be discriminating in what you disclose to HR.

Success Conceals Wickedness

January 29, 2016 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Biographies of Steve Jobs (by Walter Isaacson,) Jeff Bezos (by Brad Stone,) and Elon Musk (by Ashlee Vance)

Two common themes in the biographies of Steve Jobs (by Walter Isaacson,) Jeff Bezos (by Brad Stone,) and Elon Musk (by Ashley Vance) are these entrepreneurs’ extreme personalities and the costs of their extraordinary successes.

The world mostly regards Musk, Jobs, and Bezos as passionate, inspiring, visionary, and charismatic leaders who’ve transformed their industries. Yet their biographies paint a vivid picture of how ill-mannered these innovators are (or were, in the case of Jobs). They exercise ruthless control over every aspect of their companies’ products but have little tolerance for underperformers. They are extremely demanding of employees and unnecessarily demeaning to people who help them succeed.

Steve Jobs was renowned for his cranky, rude, spiteful, and controlling outlook. Biographer Isaacson recalls, “Nasty was not necessary. It hindered him more than it helped him.” Jobs famously drove his Mercedes around without a license and frequently parked in handicapped spots. For years, he denied paternity of his first daughter Lisa and forced her and her mother to live on welfare. He often threw tantrums when he didn’t get his way and publicly humiliated employees.
In a 2010 commencement address at Princeton, Jeff Bezos recalled his grandfather counseling, “Jeff, one day you’ll understand that it’s harder to be kind than clever.” Still, according to Brad Stone’s biography, Bezos often imparts insulting rebukes and criticisms to employees: “I’m sorry, did I take my stupid pills today?” “Are you lazy or just incompetent?” “Why are you wasting my life?” and “Do I need to go down and get the certificate that says I’m CEO of the company to get you to stop challenging me on this?”
According to Ashlee Vance’s biography, when an executive assistant asked for a raise, Elon Musk asked her to take a two-week vacation while he contemplated her request. When the assistant returned from vacation, Musk fired her.

“Success covers a multitude of blunders”

The great Irish playwright Oscar Wilde once remarked, “No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly.”

The other great Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw wrote, “Success covers a multitude of blunders.”

British politician and historian Lord John Dalberg-Acton famously said, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. That is the point at which … the end learns to justify the means.”

Ethics Violations by NBC News Anchor Brian Williams

In 2015, NBC suspended prominent news anchor Brian Williams after internal investigations revealed no less than 11 instances where he either embellished facts or bent the truth. Members of his team and NBC staffers who knew about these ethics violations chose to overlook because he was powerful. According to The New York Times,

Mr. Williams has been drawing 9.3 million viewers a night, and his position seemed unassailable. Even as the stature of the nightly newscast faded in the face of real-time digital news, Mr. Williams was one of the most trusted names in America … He was powerful. Williams had the ear of NBC boss Steve Burke. He was a ratings powerhouse. And he spent years overseeing TV’s most watched newscast. He was a winner, for himself, those around him and those above him—until it became clear the man who is supposed be among the most trusted in America had issues with telling the truth.

Power Corrupts the Mind

Brilliant men and women engage in morally wrong conduct simply because they can. They can get away with extreme pride, temper, abuse, and other disruptive behaviors because their spectacular success can and does cover many of their sins, even in the eyes of those at the receiving end of their crudeness.

Our high-achieving culture adores the successful, the powerful, and the rich. And part of this adoration is the exemption we grant these celebrities from the ordinary rules of professional civility.

Idea for Impact: The more people possess power and the more successful they get, the more they focus on their own egocentric perspectives and ignore others’ interests.

Was the Buddha a God or a Superhuman?

June 1, 2015 By Nagesh Belludi 4 Comments

Today is Vesak (or Wesak) in South East Asia, the most prominent of Buddhist festivals and a celebration of the birth, enlightenment, and death of Gautama Buddha, the historical Buddha. Vesak is celebrated on a different day in South Asia.

I’ll take this opportunity to clarify a common conception—or misconception—taken up during casual comparisons between Buddhism and the Abrahamic faiths. I’ll also shed light on Buddhist gods and deities.

Was the Buddha God or Superhuman

The Buddha Never Considered Himself Savior or the Guardian of Truth

According to foundational Buddhist scriptures, Gautama Buddha claimed to be an ordinary man—not a God, superhuman, or prophet. The Buddha even denied that he was omniscient, though he did emphasize that what he knew was all that really matters.

The Buddha presented himself as a philosopher, an enlightened human being. He was only exceptional in having deeply contemplated the true nature of reality. He claimed he had identified the sources of pain and suffering.

The Buddha taught that humans are fundamentally ignorant about the nature of existence and that everything in life is unsatisfactoriness (dukkha) caused by ignorance (avidya) and selfish craving (tanha.) As a teacher, the Buddha was deeply interested in the ethical remaking of a person and declared that it lay within anybody’s capacity to follow his life experience to achieve awakening. The Buddha insisted that his teachings should not be accepted on blind faith—Buddhism is therefore a ‘religion’ of reason and meditation.

Siddhartha Gautama, the Historical Buddha

Do Buddhists Believe in God The entire philosophical edifice of Buddhism centers on Gautama Buddha’s enlightenment. He was born into royalty as Siddhartha Gautama during the sixth century before Christ. According to tradition, at Siddhartha’s naming ceremony, Brahmin astrologers predicted that the newborn was predestined to become an extraordinary ruler of humans, as a great king or holy man. His father desperately wished the former for his long-awaited heir. He isolated Siddhartha within their palace’s protective boundaries and took precautions to ensure that Siddhartha would never experience any trouble, sorrow, or suffering that could cast even the slightest shadow on his happiness.

At age 29, Siddhartha strayed from his palace’s simulated paradise and chanced upon an old man, a diseased man, and a corpse. He also encountered an ascetic who strove to find the cause of human suffering. Depressed by his encounters with human suffering, Siddhartha resolved to follow the ascetic’s example. Leaving his wife and infant son behind (they later became initial disciples), Siddhartha left his affluent palace and lived as a beggar. After pursuing six years of ascetic practice and arduous meditation, he attained new depths of understanding about the nature of life, ego, consciousness, and reality. He achieved enlightenment and thus became the Buddha, the “Awakened One,” or the “Enlightened One.”

Theism is Incompatible with Buddha’s Teachings

The concept of an omnipotent God does not feature substantially in Buddhism. Indeed, scholars quote verse 188 of the Dhammapada, “Men driven by fear go to many a refuge, to mountains, and to forests, to sacred trees, and shrines,” and state that the Buddha believed that the concepts of religion and godliness stem from primal fear, just as sociologists and psychologists have recently posited.

Unlike people of other faiths, Buddhists believe neither in a creator God nor in a personal God entitled to their obedience. Consequently, Buddhism does not derive its system of ethics from any divine authority, but from the teachings of Gautama Buddha.

Buddhism: Gods and Deities

Buddhist doctrines have evolved over the centuries. In some schools of Buddhism, the worship of the Buddha is merely an act of commemoration for the founder of their ancient tradition. Others defy the foundational Buddhist teachings that the Buddha is not an object of prayer or devotion and worship him as a deity who holds supernatural qualities and powers.

Gods in Buddhism Religion - White Tara To account for the misconception of a Buddhist God, the more-religious forms of Buddhism added gods to serve as objects of meditation. According to these schools, living beings can be reborn into various realms of existence, one of which is the realm of the gods. The Buddha was said to have taken various animal and human forms and reborn as a god several times. The gods (those born into the realm of the gods) are mortal and impermanent—i.e., they are born and die like other living beings. These gods do not play any role in the creation or sustenance of the cosmos. Adherents can meditate upon these gods and pray to them for practical (but not spiritual) benefits.

The Mahayana schools of Buddhism also believe in many supernatural beings that feature prominently in Buddhist art: various Buddha-figures, ghosts, demons, and bodhisattvas. Bodhisattvas are would-be Buddhas who represent various virtues of thought and action. In Tibetan Buddhism, for example, the Sitatara or the White Tara (‘star’ in Sanskrit) is a female Bodhisattva. She is a meditation deity who embodies compassion, longevity, and tranquility.

Finally, the Laughing Buddha (Pu-Tai or Budai in Chinese and Hotei in Japanese) is a holy person per Chinese folklore. He represents a future bodhisattva and epitomizes contentment. His popular image is often mistaken for that of Gautama Buddha. Rubbing Budai’s belly is said to bring good luck and prosperity.

Recommended Books & Films

English poet Edwin Arnold’s “The Light of Asia” (1879,) a book that deeply inspired Gandhi. The Light of Asia illustrates the life of Siddhartha Gautama, his enlightenment, character, and philosophy.
German theologian Rudolf Otto’s classic “The Idea of the Holy” (1917) explores the mystic, non-rational aspects of the idea of God and contains abundant references to foundational Buddhist teachings.
Italian filmmaker Bernardo Bertolucci’s “Little Buddha” (1993) includes an remarkable visual retelling of the life of Prince Siddhartha Gautama. Bertolucci also made the epic “The Last Emperor” (1987.)

Gandhi on the Doctrine of Ahimsa + Non-Violence in Buddhism

November 18, 2014 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Non-Violence in Buddhism

“Thou shalt not kill.” This command forbids committing murder—specifically slaying a fellow human. The seventh of the Torah’s Ten Commandments (the Decalogue) allows for the execution of animals.

Non-Violence in Buddhism This specific tenet can be interpreted as comparatively lenient, even indulgent, compared to the mainstream Hinduism and the derivative Jain and Buddhist philosophies. Within these contexts, non-violence is a fundamental building block of ethics. Naturally, this idea of refraining from cruelty proscribes murder, but it also surpasses that guideline. In fact, practicing pacifism deters all varieties of violence against any sentient being, be it a human or an animal. Under the rule of non-violence, these creatures are protected from aggression, hostility, cruelty, sadism, and savagery—all unacceptable forms of conduct.

In accordance with the concept of anatta (the idea of there being no self,) Buddhism teaches us that, should we cling to the illusion of possessing autonomous ‘selves,’ we will fail to fully comprehend non-violence. Upon removal of the sense of the individual self, inflicting damage on another in turn damages the perpetrator. Should you inflict violence upon another, you too will suffer its effects.

Gandhi on the Doctrine of Ahimsa

Violence is the utmost form of asserting oneself over another. An alternative to aggression is Ahimsa or non-violence. This peaceful method was recognized as an entirely credible ethical code when Gandhi adopted it. He took up non-violence in his struggle against injustice and oppression, first as a peace leader in South Africa and then as the leader of India’s independence movement. Gandhi’s own definition of Ahimsa is as follows:

Literally speaking, Ahimsa means “non-killing.” But to me it has a world of meaning, and takes me into realms much higher, infinitely higher. It really means that you may not offend anybody; you may not harbor an uncharitable thought, even in connection with one who may consider himself to be your enemy. To one who follows this doctrine there is no room for an enemy. But there may be people who consider themselves to be his enemies. So it is held that we may not harbor an evil thought even in connection with such persons. If we return blow for blow we depart from the doctrine of Ahimsa. But I go farther. If we resent a friend’s action, or the so-called enemy’s action, we still fall short of this doctrine. But when I say we should not resent, I do not say that we should acquiesce: by the word “resenting” I mean wishing that some harm should be done to the enemy; or that he should be put out of the way, not even by any action of ours, but by the action of somebody else, or, say, by divine agency. If we harbor even this thought we depart from this doctrine of Non-Violence.

Source: ‘Mahatma Gandhi: Essays and Reflections on His Life and Work’ edited by S. Radhakrishnan

Why I Don’t Drink Alcohol

April 18, 2013 By Nagesh Belludi 1 Comment

Drunken Man During my travels, I am asked why I don’t drink alcohol more often than I am asked why I am lacto-vegetarian. I do not even consume food and desserts that use cooking wine or liqueur to enhance flavors.

Deep inside, my abstention from alcohol might perhaps be a subliminal sense of superiority that comes from always being in control of my senses.

Long ago, I determined that the most eloquent justification I could provide for why I am a teetotaler is by merely quoting an adaptation of the fifth precept from Pancasila, the Buddhist code of basic ethics. The fifth percept calls for practitioners to abstain from intoxicants, liquor, and drugs that confuse the mind and cause heedlessness and a lack of restraint. (To be precise, the original Buddhist texts in Pali call for abstention from three fermented drinks in vogue in ancient India.)

Health Benefits?

One assertion that I hear often is that red wine is supposed to have health benefits and that antioxidants in red wine may help prevent heart disease. Research has focused on an antioxidant called resveratrol. Studies done so far on animals—not on humans—propose that resveratrol might fight cholesterol, avoid damage to the blood vessels, and inhibit blood clots. The resveratrol in red wine comes from the skin of grapes. The higher content of resveratrol in red wine (vis-à-vis white wine) comes from a lengthier fermentation cycle involving the skin of red grapes. Therefore, my counter argument is that I gain all the associated health benefits by simply eating grapes and drinking grape juice.

Extra: “From The First Glass To The Grave”

Many people wonder, “Do I drink too much?” and consider the consequences of drinking too much alcohol. “The Drunkard’s Progress: From The First Glass To The Grave” by Nathaniel Currier is a well-known lithograph from the temperance movement of the 19th century. See more temperance posters from that era at the Pictorial Americana collection from the Library of Congress.

Warren Buffett’s Rule of Thumb on Personal Integrity

April 30, 2009 By Nagesh Belludi

On occasion, personal integrity and ethical conduct can be challenging. Greed, selfishness, distrust and other inclinations can result in misrepresentations, deliberate omission of facts to throw a positive spin on things, purposeful oversight, misuse of information and self-interested behavior.

Warren Buffett, one of the world’s most successful investors and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, directs that all his employees follow this rule of ethics in every undertaking.

“… I want employees to ask themselves whether they are willing to have any contemplated act appear the next day on the front page of their local paper—to be read by their spouses, children and friends—with the reporting done by an informed and critical reporter.”

The key to personal integrity is to gather all the relevant data, define the “right thing,” exercise prudence and standup for what is right. Good intentions do not necessarily translate to action. Your thoughts and actions define your credibility at work and in the society.

Credit: Warren Buffett’s picture courtesy of user ‘trackrecord’ on flickr.com

On Recruiting from a Competitor

May 31, 2007 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

In response to my statement on prohibiting current employees from disclosing proprietary information from their former employers, blog reader Alberto from Sao Palo, Brazil, questioned me on the ethics of hiring from a competitor.

Competitors are the principal, sometimes inevitable, source for talent with industry-specific skills and relevant experiences. At first sight, the proposition of hiring from a competitor sounds quite rational: the recruit may be well-trained at the competitor; he/she may be able to jump-start a new venture and establish a customer-network readily. However, depending on the position your recruit held at the competitor, this attempt might be fraught with problems–ethical and legal.

In today’s competitive marketplace for talent, an employee has a fair right to seek employment with competitors of his/her current employer. However, the loss of a key employee and the fear that the former employee may reveal trade secrets to a new employer may lead to contention between the new and former employers. A recent example: the bitter dispute between Google and Microsoft when Google recruited a Microsoft executive to lead Google’s research initiatives in China.

Essential Considerations for Recruiting from a Competitor

Here are three important guidelines to consider when recruiting from a competitor.

Take into account the costs of hiring and retaining your new recruit. The recruit is likely to command a premium over his/her benefits with the former employer. Further, if your new recruit will leave a competitor to join your organization, he/she could leave your organization in the future and return to the former employer or transfer to a third organization. What will motivate him/her to continue to stay with your organization on the medium- and long-term?
During the recruiting process, understand any non-compete or non-disclosure agreements your recruit may have entered with the former employer. Abide by any such commitments—for the duration of the non-compete or non-disclosure agreements, if possible, assign responsibilities that do not conflict with terms of these contracts. Consult legal experts to weigh any potential risks.
If the recruit had held a key position in the competitor, he/she likely has access to proprietary information or trade secrets of your competitor. Do not solicit any proprietary information about the former employer—this is unethical and may expose you to liability.

Job Interviewing #2: Interviewing with a Competitor of your Current Employer

May 18, 2007 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Blog reader Ranganathan from Toronto, Canada asks, “I am interviewing with a competitor of my current employer. Most of my work at my current employer is confidential. How do I describe these projects in the upcoming interview?”

Ethics and Responsibilities

Your employers, both current and former, expect you to treat sensitive and confidential information ethically. Accordingly, you must not disclose such information outside the company—in an interview, trade show or party at home.

During an interview with a competitor of your current or former employer, describe your past projects and accomplishments in terms of concepts and particulars that are public knowledge. If the interviewer presses for additional information, be diplomatic and decline to present confidential information. Interviewers will appreciate your reluctance.

Beware of a Trap: Test for Integrity

Public trust and ethical behavior are vital to organizational and individual success. Recent corporate scandals have underscored the need for organizations to build and foster ethical business environments. Organizations are therefore inclined to select employees who share such moral values.

Good corporate ethics policies prohibit current employees from disclosing proprietary information from/about their former employers. In asking you for sensitive information, the interviewer is probably setting up a trap for you—the interviewer may be checking if you demonstrate a high degree of integrity and professional conduct.

Declining to provide proprietary information will demonstrate your consideration of the ethical consequences of your actions. Consequently, you will earn the respect of the interviewer.

« Previous Page

Ethics

Wondering what to read next?

Human Resources and Confidentiality

Wondering what to read next?

“Success covers a multitude of blunders”

Ethics Violations by NBC News Anchor Brian Williams

Power Corrupts the Mind

Wondering what to read next?

The Buddha Never Considered Himself Savior or the Guardian of Truth

Siddhartha Gautama, the Historical Buddha

Theism is Incompatible with Buddha’s Teachings

Buddhism: Gods and Deities

Recommended Books & Films

Wondering what to read next?

Non-Violence in Buddhism

Gandhi on the Doctrine of Ahimsa

Wondering what to read next?

Health Benefits?

Extra: “From The First Glass To The Grave”

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Essential Considerations for Recruiting from a Competitor

Wondering what to read next?

Ethics and Responsibilities

Beware of a Trap: Test for Integrity

Wondering what to read next?