October 3, 2023
by Stephen T. Messenger
A few weeks ago, I wrote about my son fracturing his arm playing soccer. The doctor this week looked at it and cleared him to play… Sort of. The healing was just about complete, and the decision to remain on the sidelines or play could go either way.
The doctor put the choice back on my son—he could either sit out the last two weeks of the season and ensure complete, risk-free healing, or he could start playing again and most likely be fine.
This put the young man in a choice between two rights. Neither decision would be wrong; it would just be a decision. All leaders need to be able to make right versus right decisions, and a way is using three simple criteria called the ethical triangle created by Dr. Jack Kem.
The Choice between Two Rights
Ethical decisions are not choices between right and wrong. Deciding to cheat on your spouse is not an ethical decision-it’s just wrong and amoral. Instead an ethical decision is the choice between two rights.
I see this all the time at work. I’m faced with decisions every day that do not have a right or wrong answer. They’re merely choices to make along the path of life. Many leaders stress out over these right versus right decisions (myself included sometimes), praying they made the correct one. The reality is, however, there is often no right or wrong choice, only a choice.
Dr. Kem, in an article studied by every United States Army Major on their professional journey, The Ethical Triangle, discusses the challenge in making these decisions. He categorizes them as ethically based and proposes a framework for helping leaders make decisions based on three criteria.
Principles-Based
Act as if the maxim of your action was to become a universal law of nature. This comes from Immanuel Kant who opines that we all know what’s the right thing to do, and we should all do that. Therefore, we should all act in the same manner in the same situation. Here, the law shape decisions.
The key questions to ask are “what rules exist” and “what are my moral obligations?”
Consequences-Based
Do what produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. John Stuart Mill brought utilitarianism into the conversation citing that decisions are judged by consequences or the results of the actions. This included security, pleasure, dignity, and a host of other factors to consider.
The question here is “who wins,” who loses,” and “what generates the most benefit?”
Virtues-Based
Do unto others as your would have them do unto you. The final criteria is virtues-based from Plato and Aristotle. This is about making decisions to be a good person and citizen. Here the character of a person matters. While principles- and consequence-based ethics both have a legal or resultant based outcome, virtues does not.
One must ask, “what would my mom say about my actions” or the newspaper?
An Ethical Example
Let me provide an example. Your child gets hurt (nothing life-threatening), and you jump in the car to take him to the hospital. As you travel into town, he’s in significant pain, and you roll up to a red light with a few cars in sight.
Should you run the red light?
The principles-based approach is easy. The law says to stop at every red light and wait for it to turn green. In this approach, if one person was allowed to run the red light, it would become a universal law, and everyone would blow the light resulting in anarchy at every intersection. Principles-based response is to wait for it to turn green.
In the consequences-based approach, running the light would be the right answer. There are no cars or people in danger. Your child is in pain. Getting to the hospital faster would alleviate suffering for one while not causing damage to any others. The consequences-based response would have you blowing the light and getting your child help faster.
Finally, a virtues-based approach would look at what your mom would say or a newspaper article the next day. If a police officer saw you run the light, they would most likely pull you over but then escort you to the hospital—they may internally judge you after based on the severity of the injury. Your mom would want her precious grandchild to get help immediately. And this wouldn’t even make the news unless it resulted in a traffic accident. Virtues-based would depend on the exact circumstances.
This red light decision is a choice between two rights, and variables matter such as the extent of the injury, the number of cars around, the visibility, and other environmental factors. However, if you quickly think through the factors, you can make an informed decision.
Right Versus Right
Our lives are full of right versus right decisions. My son understood all this as he chose to sit out the rest of the soccer season. He was legally cleared to play, he understood the risks of another injury, and he knew both what the coaches and his mom would want based on their different virtues systems. He wasn’t wrong. Both decisions were right.
The Ethical Triangle can help you shape your decision. Regardless of the choices you make in the challenging circumstances you’ll face as a leader, the key is to understand the laws, know the consequences, and think about virtues prior to making one.
Subscribe above to join The Maximum Standard community. We are looking for others to lead along with us, write about leadership, and improve organizations. Clicking above will place you on our weekly, free email distribution list – no ads, no fluff. Just leaders connecting with leaders. Join us!
The Maximum Standard 