Values-based decision-making for organisations and individuals
Consulting, workshops, and private practice
What can philosophical consulting do for you?
Smart Choices - Better Decisions™ begin when people have clear definitions of terms and learn how these influence outcomes. Kimberley can help work through complex issues looking at frameworks, key decisions, and their impact on organisations and individuals.
What do people mean when they say something is ethical or not? What is the difference between etiquette, cultural norms, and ethics? Philosophers have discussed this topic for a very long time and continue to discuss it. It is not easy. Quick responses are often a starting point, not a full answer.
Benefits
Choice of ethical approach for each client
Clarity of terms at the beginning of an activity
Consistency when working as a team or with others
Communication in alignment with chosen approach
Types of ethical analysis
Three methods to analyse ethical dilemmas are a foundational approach, a principled approach, and a case-based approach. Each has benefits and challenges when making decisions. Kimberley can work with organisations and private clients in deciding which approach is more suitable to meet their needs.
-
A foundational approach looks at different moral theories and uses the criteria used to establish whether something is ethical or not. The criteria can be applied to different situations with consistency. It is particularly useful when there are common words with different descriptions depending on which theory is defining the term, such as ‘harm’. Defining terms clearly at the beginning of a project means less time and resources wasted in misunderstandings and backtracking.
-
A principled approach is when there are principles used to guide decision-making. Certain principles can be used to direct decisions based on an organisation’s values. For example, the four principles commonly used in biomedical ethics are autonomy, benevolence, non-maleficence, and justice.
-
With a case-based approach people look at how to address an ethical issue by looking for familiarities between cases. It can benefit people from one area by looking at other examples in the same field, as well as those working on interdisciplinary teams by providing relatable cases and providing insight into other disciplines.
One size does not fit all
Looking at the three methods above we can collaborate in finding your best fit.
For private clients: learn which approach is accessible and can work best with your character and personality. Starting small, with a pause, tackling your ideas and assumptions can result in practical and useful insights.
Organisations benefit from clarity and consistency of terms. There is stronger team alignment from the beginning of a project - less meetings and responsible resource allocation. Time, effort, and funds are not misspent regrouping to cover previous ground, or realising team members had different ideas of the expectations and now must go another direction.
Mission statements and organisational values can be used as a starting point when looking at how to improve resource allocation to better reach communities, to improve the bottom line, to streamline communications, and where to include AI.
Individuals learn how to identify and explore their personal values and questions about life. Through assisted discussions and guidance clients can learn how their own ethical framework can help them make attentive and purposeful choices in challenging situations.
For both groups, communications have less opportunity for misunderstandings. Often, these come up when people think they are in agreement about a project and next steps. They tell their teams how to work on deliverables, only to find out later their impressions were not what was expected. Intercultural organisations and teams also have built-in ideas of what is 'the right way to do things'. Similar confusion can show up at a team level, or an individual one, when their approach is not understood or appreciated.
For private clients, they can learn how to ask themselves, and others, curiosity questions to learn whether they too are on the same page, or have superficial agreement, only to learn later that there were fundamental differences in understanding.