Graydon Wood, the retired ethics officer of what was then the New York phone company once said, “You don’t have to know Aristotle to be an ethics officer.” At the time he was speaking to a group of philosophers who were doing their best to make the case that ethics officers needed to be thoroughly grounded in the theories of Kant, Rawls, Mill and yes – Aristotle. Given the audience Graydon’s pronouncement was pretty gutsy.

While I agree with Graydon for the most part, sometimes a little Aristotle can be a good thing. Take Aristotle’s advice that even noble intentions, when taken to the extreme, can result in vice not virtue. This is good advice and I can think of few times when I wish I had followed it. Here’s one.

In 1999, following the Salt Lake City and International Olympic Committee’s bribery scandals, I was asked to join a newly created Ethics Oversight Committee for the U.S. Olympics. One of my first tasks was to help Pat Rodgers, the Director of Compliance, draft a new Code of Ethics for the U.S. Olympics. Determined to take a strong stand against the mistakes of the past, and committed to protecting the reputation of the U.S. Olympic movement, we wrote that executives and staff should avoid “even the appearance of conflicts of interest.” These were high-minded sentiments but as we learned just a few years later they were impossible to enforce. What exactly constituted an “appearance of a conflict?” We quickly found that it was subject to wildly differing interpretations.

My experience is not unique. I know of others who have also been led by good intentions into similar Code drafting blunders. A few years ago I became familiar with an organization’s Code that included the promise: “We will always tell the complete truth.” Once again, a noble aspiration but it subsequently raised problems. For example, could employees claim the company violated its own Code when it failed to inform them of impending layoffs? What if they asked and management didn’t tell all they knew? In fact, something very much like this did happen. The problem could have been avoided if the organization had used more common wording such as We Value Honesty. They really didn’t need to promise to always tell the complete truth.

This advice might be timely since there seems to be a lot of companies reviewing and updating their Codes. I recommend they follow Aristotle’s advice and take a close look at the aspirations and promises they make. Is the $25 gift and entertainment limit well meaning but impractical? Do they really mean it when they say “retaliation in all its forms will never be tolerated”? All its forms? How do they plan to enforce that?

They should also review similar language in other communications. Are they over-promising about their ability to maintain confidentiality? Is External Affairs making claims about the company’s commitments to social responsibility that employees read as over-the-top hyperbole (and consequently question the company’s credibility)?
Have you seen other examples of Codes, policies or corporate communications that have over-promised or otherwise gone too far? Let me know. I look forward to hearing from you.