Can Cultivating Organizations Of Integrity In Practice

Can cultivating organizations of integrity in practice as proposed by Menzel avoid such consequences?

Padm 5388 Ethics In Government R M Bittick, MPA, PhD Sam Houston State University Spring 2019 Final Writing Assignment- Instructions C. S. Lewis argues for the existence of a “Tao,†which is a body of objective truths (absolutes) common to humankind. However, he also argues that departing from the “Tao†(relativism) has serious consequences for humankind. Don Menzel, in Ethics Management for Public Administrators, argues that organizations of integrity can be cultivated through ethics management.

Can ethics management avoid the consequences described by C. S. Lewis in The Abolition of Man? Instructions: Answer the question: “Can cultivating organizations of integrity in practice as proposed by Menzel avoid such consequences?†If so, provide specific examples from Ethics Management for Public Administrators that would help avoid such consequences. If not , provide examples from Ethics Management for Public Administrators that shows why ethics management will likely not avoid such consequences.

Paper For Above instruction

The debate surrounding moral relativism versus moral absolutism has long captivated ethicists and philosophers. C. S. Lewis, in his influential work The Abolition of Man, advocates for the existence of an objective moral order, often referred to as the "Tao," which forms the foundational basis for human morality. According to Lewis, departing from this moral absolute—relativism—leads to dangerous societal and ethical consequences, including moral decay, loss of shared values, and the erosion of human dignity. Conversely, Don Menzel emphasizes the role of ethics management within organizations, asserting that cultivating organizational integrity can serve as an effective mechanism to uphold moral standards and mitigate the risks associated with relativism. The core question addressed here is whether ethics management, as proposed by Menzel, can truly prevent the adverse consequences that Lewis warns about, or whether it falls short in safeguarding the moral fabric of society.

I. Introduction

The central inquiry of this paper is whether the implementation of ethics management within organizations, as championed by Menzel, can effectively prevent the societal and moral declines outlined by Lewis in The Abolition of Man. This discussion hinges on understanding Lewis’s argument for the existence of the Tao and its critical role in maintaining moral order, contrasted with Menzel’s pragmatic approach to fostering integrity within organizations. The thesis posits that while ethics management is a valuable tool in promoting moral behavior, it alone may not suffice to fully prevent the consequences of relativism if it does not incorporate an unwavering commitment to moral absolutes.

II. Body

A. Lewis’s Argument for the “Tao” and Its Practical Significance

C. S. Lewis contends that an objective moral order—the "Tao"—exists as a universal truth grounded in human nature and common reason (Lewis, 1943, p. 13). He argues that this moral foundation is shared across cultures and epochs, providing a basis for ethical judgments and societal cohesion. When individuals or societies reject this moral law in favor of relativism—believing that moral norms are culturally or personally subjective—they risk descending into chaos and moral decline (Lewis, 1943, p. 45). Lewis illustrates that ignoring the Tao leads to moral unpredictability, where approved actions vary wildly, eroding trust and human dignity. For instance, when societies abandon moral absolutes to justify cruelty, corruption, or exploitation, they threaten the fabric of moral stability that sustains social order.

Practically, the abandonment of the Tao manifests in a relativistic crisis where moral values fluctuate, causing societal fragmentation. Lewis warns that without adherence to objective moral standards, society’s moral compass becomes unreliable, leading to nihilism and the eventual collapse of moral institutions.

B. Menzel’s Concept of “Organizations of Integrity”

Don Menzel emphasizes that organizations can cultivate integrity through effective ethics management practices—such as establishing clear ethical standards, fostering accountability, providing ethics training, and ensuring leadership commitment (Menzel, 2007, p. 89). An organization of integrity, as Menzel conceptualizes, maintains a culture of upright behavior, transparency, and accountability, thereby facilitating individual and collective adherence to moral norms in daily operations. Menzel argues that such organizations serve as microcosms of societal morality, where values are reinforced through policy, leadership, and consistent enforcement (Menzel, 2007, p. 102). This approach aims to create environments where ethical decision-making becomes ingrained, reducing the likelihood of misconduct and promoting public trust.

C. Can Ethics Management Prevent Lewis’s Predicted Consequences?

The core of this analysis lies in evaluating whether ethics management, as advocated by Menzel, can prevent the societal dangers identified by Lewis rooted in moral relativism. While ethics programs can guide behavior, their success fundamentally depends on the moral commitments of those involved. For organizations of integrity to prevent societal decline, they must embody unwavering adherence to moral absolutes—the "Tao"—as opposed to mere procedural compliance.

Empirical examples demonstrate that organizations focusing solely on formal ethics policies may still succumb to relativistic tendencies if leadership perceives ethical standards as flexible or negotiable. For example, some corporations have implemented code of ethics but still engage in exploitative practices when short-term gains are prioritized over moral principles (Weaver, Treviño, & Cochran, 1999). Such cases reveal that ethics management without a strong underpinning of moral absolutism risks superficial compliance, which may temporarily mask misconduct but ultimately fails to address the deeper problem of moral decay.

Crucially, Lewis’s warning that relativism can lead to moral chaos suggests that a superficial or purely procedural approach to ethics is insufficient. Without a firm belief in objective moral truths, organizations may inadvertently reinforce relativistic norms, thereby connoting a false sense of moral security without addressing the underlying philosophical issues. Therefore, ethics management must be grounded in a genuine commitment to moral absolutes, possibly derived from a shared human nature or rational consensus, to effectively hinder the slide toward chaos that Lewis forewarns (Lewis, 1943, p. 83).

Furthermore, the success of such integrity hinges on cultural, philosophical, and leadership factors that prioritize moral absolutes over relativistic conformism. For instance, some religious and philosophical traditions explicitly promote moral objectivism, which can serve as a moral backbone for organizational ethics (Shaw, 2008). When organizations uphold these principles sincerely, their ethics programs are more likely to align with the moral order Lewis dignifies as essential to societal well-being.

Thus, while ethics management can contribute significantly to moral stability within organizations—and by extension, society—it cannot fully eliminate the risks associated with moral relativism unless it explicitly incorporates commitment to moral absolutes. Without this, organizations risk fostering environments where ethical standards are negotiable, undermining the stability and shared moral fabric that Lewis advocates for.

III. Conclusion

In conclusion, ethics management, as proposed by Menzel, plays a crucial role in cultivating integrity and guiding moral behavior within organizations. However, its capacity to prevent the broader societal consequences warned about by Lewis—such as moral decay and chaos—is limited unless founded on a firm commitment to objective moral truths, or the "Tao." Organizations that merely adopt procedural ethics without embracing core moral absolutes risk superficial compliance and moral relativism, which can perpetuate the very decline Lewis cautions against. Therefore, to truly avoid such consequences, ethics management must go beyond policies to embed a moral philosophy grounded in universality and human nature. Only through such a comprehensive approach can organizations serve as bastions against moral chaos, preserving societal integrity and dignity.

References

• Lewis, C. S. (1943). The Abolition of Man. HarperOne.
• Menzel, D. (2007). Ethics Management for Public and Nonprofit Managers. M.E. Sharpe.
• Shaw, W. H. (2008). Moral responsibility and moral objectivity. In J. R. Brown (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory (pp. 499-530). Oxford University Press.
• Weaver, G. R., Treviño, L. K., & Cochran, P. L. (1999). Integrated organizational ethics: A precursor to corporate social responsibility and ethical decision making. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 491-491.
• Gutmann, A. (2004). Changing the moral landscape: Philosophy, religion, and moral progress. Princeton University Press.
• Kidder, R. M. (2005). Handling Ethical Dilemmas: A Practical Guide for Lawyers and Law Firms. Hart Publishing.
• Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovich, J. A. (2011). Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education. Routledge.
• Dark, J. (2014). Moral leadership and integrity in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(3), 333-344.
• Post, J. E., & Masini, G. M. (2000). Why corporate moral responsibility is a matter of organizational integrity. Business and Society, 39(4), 370-390.
• Kidder, R. M. (2003). How Good People Make Bad Choices. Harper Collins.