Status.net

Ethical Decision Making Models and 6 Steps of Ethical Decision Making Process

By Andre Wyatt on March 21, 2023 — 10 minutes to read

In many ways, ethics may feel like a soft subject, a conversation that can wait when compared to other more seemingly pressing issues (a process for operations, hiring the right workers, and meeting company goals). However, putting ethics on the backburner can spell trouble for any organization. Much like the process of businesses creating the company mission, vision, and principles ; the topic of ethics has to enter the conversation. Ethics is far more than someone doing the right thing; it is many times tied to legal procedures and policies that if breached can put an organization in the midst of trouble.

  • A general definition of business ethics is that it is a tool an organization uses to make sure that managers, employees, and senior leadership always act responsibly in the workplace with internal and external stakeholders.
  • An ethical decision-making model is a framework that leaders use to bring these principles to the company and ensure they are followed.
  • Importance of Ethical Standards Part 1
  • Ethical Decision-Making Model Approach Part 2
  • Ethical Decision-Making Process Part 3
  • PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model Part 4
  • Character-Based Decision-Making Model Part 5

The Importance of Ethical Standards

Leaders have to develop ethical standards that employees in their company will be required to adhere to. This can help move the conversation toward using a model to decide when someone is in violation of ethics.

There are five sources of ethical standards:

Utilitarian

Common good.

While many of these standards were created by Greek Philosophers who lived long ago, business leaders are still using many of them to determine how they deal with ethical issues. Many of these standards can lead to a cohesive ethical decision-making model.

What is the purpose of an ethical decision-making model?

Ethical decision-making models are designed to help individuals and organizations make decisions in an ethical manner.

The purpose of an ethical decision-making model is to ensure that decisions are made in a manner that takes into account the ethical implications for all stakeholders involved.

Ethical decision-making models provide a framework for analyzing ethical dilemmas and serve as a guide for identifying potential solutions. By utilizing these models, businesses can ensure they are making decisions that align with their values while minimizing the risk of harming stakeholders. This can result in better decision-making and improved reputation.

Why is it important to use an ethical decision making model?

Making ethical decisions is an integral part of being a responsible leader and member of society. It is crucial to use an ethical decision making model to ensure that all stakeholders are taken into account and that decisions are made with the highest level of integrity. An ethical decision making model provides a framework for assessing the potential consequences of each choice, analyzing which option best aligns with personal values and organizational principles, and then acting on those conclusions.

An Empirical Approach to an Ethical Decision-Making Model

In 2011, a researcher at the University of Calgary in Calgary, Canada completed a study for the Journal of Business Ethics.

The research centered around an idea of rational egoism as a basis for developing ethics in the workplace.

She had 16 CEOs formulate principles for ethics through the combination of reasoning and intuition while forming and applying moral principles to an everyday circumstance where a question of ethics could be involved.

Through the process, the CEOs settled on a set of four principles:

  • self-interest
  • rationality

These were the general standards used by the CEOs in creating a decision about how they should deal with downsizing. While this is not a standard model, it does reveal the underlying ideas business leaders use to make ethical choices. These principles lead to standards that are used in ethical decision-making processes and moral frameworks.

How would you attempt to resolve a situation using an ethical decision-making model?

When facing a difficult situation, it can be beneficial to use an ethical decision-making model to help you come to the best possible solution. These models are based on the idea that you should consider the consequences of your decision, weigh the various options available, and consider the ethical implications of each choice. First, you should identify the problem or situation and clearly define what it is. Then, you must assess all of the possible outcomes of each choice and consider which one is most ethical. Once you have identified your preferred option, you should consult with others who may be affected by your decision to ensure that it aligns with their values and interests. You should evaluate the decision by considering how it affects yourself and others, as well as how it meets the expectations of your organization or institution.

The Ethical Decision-Making Process

Before a model can be utilized, leaders need to work through a set of steps to be sure they are bringing a comprehensive lens to handling ethical disputes or problems.

Take Time to Define the Problem

Consult resources and seek assistance, think about the lasting effects, consider regulations in other industries, decide on a decision, implement and evaluate.

While each situation may call for specific steps to come before others, this is a general process that leaders can use to approach ethical decision-making . We have talked about the approach; now it is time to discuss the lens that leaders can use to make the final decision that leads to implementation.

PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model

PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model is one of the most used and widely cited ethical models.

To create a clear and cohesive approach to implementing a solution to an ethical problem; the model is set in a way that it gives the leader “ ethical filters ” to make decisions.

It purposely leaves out anything related to making a profit so that leaders can focus on values instead of a potential impact on revenue.

The letters in PLUS each stand for a filter that leaders can use for decision-making:

  • P – Policies and Procedures: Is the decision in line with the policies laid out by the company?
  • L – Legal: Will this violate any legal parameters or regulations?
  • U – Universal: How does this relate to the values and principles established for the organization to operate? Is it in tune with core values and the company culture?
  • S – Self: Does it meet my standards of fairness and justice? This particular lens fits well with the virtue approach that is a part of the five common standards mentioned above.

These filters can even be applied to the process, so leaders have a clear ethical framework all along the way. Defining the problem automatically requires leaders to see if it is violating any of the PLUS ethical filters. It should also be used to assess the viability of any decisions that are being considered for implementation, and make a decision about whether the one that was chosen resolved the PLUS considerations questioned in the first step. No model is perfect, but this is a standard way to consider four vital components that have a substantial ethical impact .

The Character-Based Decision-Making Model

While this one is not as widely cited as the PLUS Model, it is still worth mentioning. The Character-Based Decision-Making Model was created by the Josephson Institute of Ethics, and it has three main components leaders can use to make an ethical decision.

  • All decisions must take into account the impact to all stakeholders – This is very similar to the Utilitarian approach discussed earlier. This step seeks to do good for most, and hopefully avoid harming others.
  • Ethics always takes priority over non-ethical values  – A decision should not be rationalized if it in any way violates ethical principles. In business, this can show up through deciding between increasing productivity or profit and keeping an employee’s best interest at heart.
  • It is okay to violate another ethical principle if it advances a better ethical climate for others  – Leaders may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to prioritize ethical decisions. They may have to choose between competing ethical choices, and this model advises that leaders should always want the one that creates the most good for as many people as possible.

There are multiple components to consider when making an ethical decision. Regulations, policies and procedures, perception, public opinion, and even a leader’s morality play a part in how decisions that question business ethics should be handled. While no approach is perfect, a well-thought-out process and useful framework can make dealing with ethical situations easier.

  • How to Resolve Employee Conflict at Work [Steps, Tips, Examples]
  • 5 Challenges and 10 Solutions to Improve Employee Feedback Process
  • How to Identify and Handle Employee Underperformance? 5 Proven Steps
  • Organizational Development: 4 Main Steps and 8 Proven Success Factors
  • 7 Steps to Leading Virtual Teams to Success
  • 7 Steps to Create the Best Value Proposition [How-To’s and Best Practices]

Frontline Initiative Code of Ethics

The right decision method: an approach for solving ethical dilemmas.

Annie Johnson Sirek, MSW is a Project Coordinator at the Institute on Community Integration at the University of Minnesota. She thanks Marianne and Julie of the Human Services Research Institute, and Amy and Derek of the University of Minnesota, for developing this method to use in daily practice and training.

Share this page

  • Share this page on Facebook.
  • Share this page on Twitter.
  • Share this page on LinkedIn.
  • Share this page on Pinterest.
  • Share this page via email.
  • Print this page.

What is an ethical dilemma? 

An ethical dilemma requires a person to define right from wrong. But, as Direct Support Professionals (DSPs), we know that this is not so simple. We face difficult decisions in our daily practice. There are often many different rules, principles, and opinions at play. We are called to respond in allegiance to the individuals we support. The National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals (NADSP) Code of Ethics provides a roadmap to assist in resolving ethical dilemmas.

How do I resolve ethical dilemmas? 

Ethical dilemmas can be resolved through effective decision-making. Since we are so often called upon to make independent judgments, it is important to incorporate the NADSP Code of Ethics within our daily practice. Many ethical dilemmas can be resolved easily with consultation and reflection. However, some issues cannot. Therefore, to help make it easier to solve difficult ethical dilemmas, consider a framework from which to work. The College of Direct Support has provided an approach to ethical decision-making with the NADSP Code of Ethics. This is called the RIGHT Decision Method. 

RIGHT Decision Method 

  • Recognize the ethical dilemma.
  • Identify points of view.
  • Gather resources and assistance.
  • Have a plan.
  • Take action based on ethical standards.

What is the RIGHT Decision Method? 

Sometimes there really is a “right” way to make decisions under difficult conditions. The RIGHT Decision Method gives us tools to make sound ethical decisions and resolve ethical dilemmas. RIGHT is an acronym that stands for each step of the decision-making process:

R: Recognize the ethical dilemma. 

The first step is recognizing the conflicting obligations and clearly stating the dilemma. It is important to recognize and use the NADSP Code of Ethics as you begin with this step. You may consider —

  • In what ways is the Code of Ethics applicable to this issue?


I: Identify points of view. 

The second step is identifying points of view in the situation. This means considering the viewpoint of the person receiving services, your colleagues, other parties involved, and the NADSP Code of Ethics. Restating the problem clearly to someone else can also help you check out whether you have interpreted the situation accurately. It is important to understand how the person receiving supports feels. Consider —

  • What does the person receiving support expect?

  • Then think about others who are involved in the situation and how they feel.

  • What do these individuals want or need?


G: Gather resources and assistance. 

The third step is gathering resources and assistance that might help you figure out what to do. Now that you have an accurate understanding for the problem and various perspectives, this step encourages you to consider other people who may be able to assist you. You may also need to find important information. For example —

  • Are there agency policies that could be considered? What do these documents say? Are there any laws or regulations in the state that may influence your decision-making?

  • Is this a situation where legal advice is needed? Does the person have a legal representative who must be involved?

  • Are there community resources that might help resolve the problem?


H: Have a plan. 

The fourth step means that you are ready to make your decision. Formulating a plan will help you decide the best way to put your ideas into action. Once you have considered the following issues, write a plan down and identify step-by-step actions that you plan to take —

  • Whom must you speak to first? What will you say? What preparations will you make?

  • What steps can you take to ensure the best possible outcome for your decision?

  • How might people react?


T: Take action based on ethical standards.  

The fifth and final step is implementing the plan you developed in the manner you decided. Then, it is important to monitor its success using the success indicators you identified in the planning process to help you reflect on your decision —

  • What worked well and why?

  • What did not work well and why?

  • What would you do differently after you have evaluated your outcomes?

  • Taylor, M., Silver, J., Hewitt, A., & Nord, D. (2006). Applying ethics in everyday work (Lesson 3) . In College of Direct Support course: Direct support professionalism (Revision 2) . DirectCourse.

Icon(s) used on this page:

External Link Indicator Icon

  • Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

  • Browse content in Arts and Humanities
  • Browse content in Archaeology
  • Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
  • Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
  • Archaeology by Region
  • Archaeology of Religion
  • Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
  • Biblical Archaeology
  • Contemporary and Public Archaeology
  • Environmental Archaeology
  • Historical Archaeology
  • History and Theory of Archaeology
  • Industrial Archaeology
  • Landscape Archaeology
  • Mortuary Archaeology
  • Prehistoric Archaeology
  • Underwater Archaeology
  • Urban Archaeology
  • Zooarchaeology
  • Browse content in Architecture
  • Architectural Structure and Design
  • History of Architecture
  • Residential and Domestic Buildings
  • Theory of Architecture
  • Browse content in Art
  • Art Subjects and Themes
  • History of Art
  • Industrial and Commercial Art
  • Theory of Art
  • Biographical Studies
  • Byzantine Studies
  • Browse content in Classical Studies
  • Classical History
  • Classical Philosophy
  • Classical Mythology
  • Classical Literature
  • Classical Reception
  • Classical Art and Architecture
  • Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
  • Greek and Roman Epigraphy
  • Greek and Roman Law
  • Greek and Roman Papyrology
  • Greek and Roman Archaeology
  • Late Antiquity
  • Religion in the Ancient World
  • Social History
  • Digital Humanities
  • Browse content in History
  • Colonialism and Imperialism
  • Diplomatic History
  • Environmental History
  • Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
  • Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
  • Historical Geography
  • History by Period
  • History of Emotions
  • History of Agriculture
  • History of Education
  • History of Gender and Sexuality
  • Industrial History
  • Intellectual History
  • International History
  • Labour History
  • Legal and Constitutional History
  • Local and Family History
  • Maritime History
  • Military History
  • National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
  • Oral History
  • Political History
  • Public History
  • Regional and National History
  • Revolutions and Rebellions
  • Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
  • Social and Cultural History
  • Theory, Methods, and Historiography
  • Urban History
  • World History
  • Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
  • Language Learning (Specific Skills)
  • Language Teaching Theory and Methods
  • Browse content in Linguistics
  • Applied Linguistics
  • Cognitive Linguistics
  • Computational Linguistics
  • Forensic Linguistics
  • Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
  • Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
  • History of English
  • Language Acquisition
  • Language Evolution
  • Language Reference
  • Language Variation
  • Language Families
  • Lexicography
  • Linguistic Anthropology
  • Linguistic Theories
  • Linguistic Typology
  • Phonetics and Phonology
  • Psycholinguistics
  • Sociolinguistics
  • Translation and Interpretation
  • Writing Systems
  • Browse content in Literature
  • Bibliography
  • Children's Literature Studies
  • Literary Studies (Asian)
  • Literary Studies (European)
  • Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
  • Literary Studies (Romanticism)
  • Literary Studies (American)
  • Literary Studies (Modernism)
  • Literary Studies - World
  • Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
  • Literary Studies (19th Century)
  • Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
  • Literary Studies (African American Literature)
  • Literary Studies (British and Irish)
  • Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
  • Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
  • Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
  • Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
  • Literary Studies (History of the Book)
  • Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
  • Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
  • Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
  • Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
  • Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
  • Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
  • Literary Studies (War Literature)
  • Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
  • Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
  • Mythology and Folklore
  • Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
  • Browse content in Media Studies
  • Browse content in Music
  • Applied Music
  • Dance and Music
  • Ethics in Music
  • Ethnomusicology
  • Gender and Sexuality in Music
  • Medicine and Music
  • Music Cultures
  • Music and Religion
  • Music and Media
  • Music and Culture
  • Music Education and Pedagogy
  • Music Theory and Analysis
  • Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
  • Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
  • Musicology and Music History
  • Performance Practice and Studies
  • Race and Ethnicity in Music
  • Sound Studies
  • Browse content in Performing Arts
  • Browse content in Philosophy
  • Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
  • Epistemology
  • Feminist Philosophy
  • History of Western Philosophy
  • Metaphysics
  • Moral Philosophy
  • Non-Western Philosophy
  • Philosophy of Science
  • Philosophy of Language
  • Philosophy of Mind
  • Philosophy of Perception
  • Philosophy of Action
  • Philosophy of Law
  • Philosophy of Religion
  • Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
  • Practical Ethics
  • Social and Political Philosophy
  • Browse content in Religion
  • Biblical Studies
  • Christianity
  • East Asian Religions
  • History of Religion
  • Judaism and Jewish Studies
  • Qumran Studies
  • Religion and Education
  • Religion and Health
  • Religion and Politics
  • Religion and Science
  • Religion and Law
  • Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
  • Religious Studies
  • Browse content in Society and Culture
  • Cookery, Food, and Drink
  • Cultural Studies
  • Customs and Traditions
  • Ethical Issues and Debates
  • Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
  • Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
  • Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
  • Sports and Outdoor Recreation
  • Technology and Society
  • Travel and Holiday
  • Visual Culture
  • Browse content in Law
  • Arbitration
  • Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
  • Commercial Law
  • Company Law
  • Browse content in Comparative Law
  • Systems of Law
  • Competition Law
  • Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
  • Government Powers
  • Judicial Review
  • Local Government Law
  • Military and Defence Law
  • Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
  • Construction Law
  • Contract Law
  • Browse content in Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure
  • Criminal Evidence Law
  • Sentencing and Punishment
  • Employment and Labour Law
  • Environment and Energy Law
  • Browse content in Financial Law
  • Banking Law
  • Insolvency Law
  • History of Law
  • Human Rights and Immigration
  • Intellectual Property Law
  • Browse content in International Law
  • Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
  • Public International Law
  • IT and Communications Law
  • Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
  • Law and Politics
  • Law and Society
  • Browse content in Legal System and Practice
  • Courts and Procedure
  • Legal Skills and Practice
  • Primary Sources of Law
  • Regulation of Legal Profession
  • Medical and Healthcare Law
  • Browse content in Policing
  • Criminal Investigation and Detection
  • Police and Security Services
  • Police Procedure and Law
  • Police Regional Planning
  • Browse content in Property Law
  • Personal Property Law
  • Study and Revision
  • Terrorism and National Security Law
  • Browse content in Trusts Law
  • Wills and Probate or Succession
  • Browse content in Medicine and Health
  • Browse content in Allied Health Professions
  • Arts Therapies
  • Clinical Science
  • Dietetics and Nutrition
  • Occupational Therapy
  • Operating Department Practice
  • Physiotherapy
  • Radiography
  • Speech and Language Therapy
  • Browse content in Anaesthetics
  • General Anaesthesia
  • Neuroanaesthesia
  • Browse content in Clinical Medicine
  • Acute Medicine
  • Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Clinical Genetics
  • Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
  • Dermatology
  • Endocrinology and Diabetes
  • Gastroenterology
  • Genito-urinary Medicine
  • Geriatric Medicine
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Medical Toxicology
  • Medical Oncology
  • Pain Medicine
  • Palliative Medicine
  • Rehabilitation Medicine
  • Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
  • Rheumatology
  • Sleep Medicine
  • Sports and Exercise Medicine
  • Clinical Neuroscience
  • Community Medical Services
  • Critical Care
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Forensic Medicine
  • Haematology
  • History of Medicine
  • Browse content in Medical Dentistry
  • Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
  • Paediatric Dentistry
  • Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
  • Surgical Dentistry
  • Browse content in Medical Skills
  • Clinical Skills
  • Communication Skills
  • Nursing Skills
  • Surgical Skills
  • Medical Ethics
  • Medical Statistics and Methodology
  • Browse content in Neurology
  • Clinical Neurophysiology
  • Neuropathology
  • Nursing Studies
  • Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Gynaecology
  • Occupational Medicine
  • Ophthalmology
  • Otolaryngology (ENT)
  • Browse content in Paediatrics
  • Neonatology
  • Browse content in Pathology
  • Chemical Pathology
  • Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
  • Histopathology
  • Medical Microbiology and Virology
  • Patient Education and Information
  • Browse content in Pharmacology
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Browse content in Popular Health
  • Caring for Others
  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Self-help and Personal Development
  • Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
  • Cell Biology
  • Molecular Biology and Genetics
  • Reproduction, Growth and Development
  • Primary Care
  • Professional Development in Medicine
  • Browse content in Psychiatry
  • Addiction Medicine
  • Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
  • Forensic Psychiatry
  • Learning Disabilities
  • Old Age Psychiatry
  • Psychotherapy
  • Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health
  • Browse content in Radiology
  • Clinical Radiology
  • Interventional Radiology
  • Nuclear Medicine
  • Radiation Oncology
  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Browse content in Surgery
  • Cardiothoracic Surgery
  • Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
  • General Surgery
  • Neurosurgery
  • Paediatric Surgery
  • Peri-operative Care
  • Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
  • Surgical Oncology
  • Transplant Surgery
  • Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
  • Vascular Surgery
  • Browse content in Science and Mathematics
  • Browse content in Biological Sciences
  • Aquatic Biology
  • Biochemistry
  • Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology and Conservation
  • Evolutionary Biology
  • Genetics and Genomics
  • Microbiology
  • Molecular and Cell Biology
  • Natural History
  • Plant Sciences and Forestry
  • Research Methods in Life Sciences
  • Structural Biology
  • Systems Biology
  • Zoology and Animal Sciences
  • Browse content in Chemistry
  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Computational Chemistry
  • Crystallography
  • Environmental Chemistry
  • Industrial Chemistry
  • Inorganic Chemistry
  • Materials Chemistry
  • Medicinal Chemistry
  • Mineralogy and Gems
  • Organic Chemistry
  • Physical Chemistry
  • Polymer Chemistry
  • Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
  • Theoretical Chemistry
  • Browse content in Computer Science
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Computer Architecture and Logic Design
  • Game Studies
  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Mathematical Theory of Computation
  • Programming Languages
  • Software Engineering
  • Systems Analysis and Design
  • Virtual Reality
  • Browse content in Computing
  • Business Applications
  • Computer Security
  • Computer Games
  • Computer Networking and Communications
  • Digital Lifestyle
  • Graphical and Digital Media Applications
  • Operating Systems
  • Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
  • Atmospheric Sciences
  • Environmental Geography
  • Geology and the Lithosphere
  • Maps and Map-making
  • Meteorology and Climatology
  • Oceanography and Hydrology
  • Palaeontology
  • Physical Geography and Topography
  • Regional Geography
  • Soil Science
  • Urban Geography
  • Browse content in Engineering and Technology
  • Agriculture and Farming
  • Biological Engineering
  • Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
  • Electronics and Communications Engineering
  • Energy Technology
  • Engineering (General)
  • Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
  • History of Engineering and Technology
  • Mechanical Engineering and Materials
  • Technology of Industrial Chemistry
  • Transport Technology and Trades
  • Browse content in Environmental Science
  • Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
  • Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
  • Environmental Sustainability
  • Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
  • Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
  • Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
  • Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
  • Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
  • Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
  • History of Science and Technology
  • Browse content in Materials Science
  • Ceramics and Glasses
  • Composite Materials
  • Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
  • Nanotechnology
  • Browse content in Mathematics
  • Applied Mathematics
  • Biomathematics and Statistics
  • History of Mathematics
  • Mathematical Education
  • Mathematical Finance
  • Mathematical Analysis
  • Numerical and Computational Mathematics
  • Probability and Statistics
  • Pure Mathematics
  • Browse content in Neuroscience
  • Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
  • Development of the Nervous System
  • Disorders of the Nervous System
  • History of Neuroscience
  • Invertebrate Neurobiology
  • Molecular and Cellular Systems
  • Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
  • Neuroscientific Techniques
  • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • Browse content in Physics
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
  • Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
  • Biological and Medical Physics
  • Classical Mechanics
  • Computational Physics
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
  • History of Physics
  • Mathematical and Statistical Physics
  • Measurement Science
  • Nuclear Physics
  • Particles and Fields
  • Plasma Physics
  • Quantum Physics
  • Relativity and Gravitation
  • Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
  • Browse content in Psychology
  • Affective Sciences
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Criminal and Forensic Psychology
  • Developmental Psychology
  • Educational Psychology
  • Evolutionary Psychology
  • Health Psychology
  • History and Systems in Psychology
  • Music Psychology
  • Neuropsychology
  • Organizational Psychology
  • Psychological Assessment and Testing
  • Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
  • Psychology Professional Development and Training
  • Research Methods in Psychology
  • Social Psychology
  • Browse content in Social Sciences
  • Browse content in Anthropology
  • Anthropology of Religion
  • Human Evolution
  • Medical Anthropology
  • Physical Anthropology
  • Regional Anthropology
  • Social and Cultural Anthropology
  • Theory and Practice of Anthropology
  • Browse content in Business and Management
  • Business Strategy
  • Business Ethics
  • Business History
  • Business and Government
  • Business and Technology
  • Business and the Environment
  • Comparative Management
  • Corporate Governance
  • Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Health Management
  • Human Resource Management
  • Industrial and Employment Relations
  • Industry Studies
  • Information and Communication Technologies
  • International Business
  • Knowledge Management
  • Management and Management Techniques
  • Operations Management
  • Organizational Theory and Behaviour
  • Pensions and Pension Management
  • Public and Nonprofit Management
  • Strategic Management
  • Supply Chain Management
  • Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
  • Criminal Justice
  • Criminology
  • Forms of Crime
  • International and Comparative Criminology
  • Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
  • Development Studies
  • Browse content in Economics
  • Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
  • Asian Economics
  • Behavioural Finance
  • Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
  • Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
  • Economic Systems
  • Economic History
  • Economic Methodology
  • Economic Development and Growth
  • Financial Markets
  • Financial Institutions and Services
  • General Economics and Teaching
  • Health, Education, and Welfare
  • History of Economic Thought
  • International Economics
  • Labour and Demographic Economics
  • Law and Economics
  • Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
  • Microeconomics
  • Public Economics
  • Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
  • Welfare Economics
  • Browse content in Education
  • Adult Education and Continuous Learning
  • Care and Counselling of Students
  • Early Childhood and Elementary Education
  • Educational Equipment and Technology
  • Educational Strategies and Policy
  • Higher and Further Education
  • Organization and Management of Education
  • Philosophy and Theory of Education
  • Schools Studies
  • Secondary Education
  • Teaching of a Specific Subject
  • Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
  • Teaching Skills and Techniques
  • Browse content in Environment
  • Applied Ecology (Social Science)
  • Climate Change
  • Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
  • Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
  • Natural Disasters (Environment)
  • Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
  • Browse content in Human Geography
  • Cultural Geography
  • Economic Geography
  • Political Geography
  • Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
  • Communication Studies
  • Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
  • Browse content in Politics
  • African Politics
  • Asian Politics
  • Chinese Politics
  • Comparative Politics
  • Conflict Politics
  • Elections and Electoral Studies
  • Environmental Politics
  • Ethnic Politics
  • European Union
  • Foreign Policy
  • Gender and Politics
  • Human Rights and Politics
  • Indian Politics
  • International Relations
  • International Organization (Politics)
  • International Political Economy
  • Irish Politics
  • Latin American Politics
  • Middle Eastern Politics
  • Political Methodology
  • Political Communication
  • Political Philosophy
  • Political Sociology
  • Political Behaviour
  • Political Economy
  • Political Institutions
  • Political Theory
  • Politics and Law
  • Politics of Development
  • Public Administration
  • Public Policy
  • Quantitative Political Methodology
  • Regional Political Studies
  • Russian Politics
  • Security Studies
  • State and Local Government
  • UK Politics
  • US Politics
  • Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
  • African Studies
  • Asian Studies
  • East Asian Studies
  • Japanese Studies
  • Latin American Studies
  • Middle Eastern Studies
  • Native American Studies
  • Scottish Studies
  • Browse content in Research and Information
  • Research Methods
  • Browse content in Social Work
  • Addictions and Substance Misuse
  • Adoption and Fostering
  • Care of the Elderly
  • Child and Adolescent Social Work
  • Couple and Family Social Work
  • Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
  • Emergency Services
  • Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
  • International and Global Issues in Social Work
  • Mental and Behavioural Health
  • Social Justice and Human Rights
  • Social Policy and Advocacy
  • Social Work and Crime and Justice
  • Social Work Macro Practice
  • Social Work Practice Settings
  • Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
  • Welfare and Benefit Systems
  • Browse content in Sociology
  • Childhood Studies
  • Community Development
  • Comparative and Historical Sociology
  • Economic Sociology
  • Gender and Sexuality
  • Gerontology and Ageing
  • Health, Illness, and Medicine
  • Marriage and the Family
  • Migration Studies
  • Occupations, Professions, and Work
  • Organizations
  • Population and Demography
  • Race and Ethnicity
  • Social Theory
  • Social Movements and Social Change
  • Social Research and Statistics
  • Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
  • Sociology of Religion
  • Sociology of Education
  • Sport and Leisure
  • Urban and Rural Studies
  • Browse content in Warfare and Defence
  • Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
  • Land Forces and Warfare
  • Military Administration
  • Military Life and Institutions
  • Naval Forces and Warfare
  • Other Warfare and Defence Issues
  • Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
  • Weapons and Equipment

The Ethical Chemist: Professionalism and Ethics in Science (2)

  • < Previous chapter
  • Next chapter >

The Ethical Chemist: Professionalism and Ethics in Science (2)

6 Ethical Problem Solving

  • Published: September 2018
  • Cite Icon Cite
  • Permissions Icon Permissions

An ethical problem is not like a mathematics problem or most science problems that have unique solutions that are either right or wrong. Instead, ethics problems are more like design problems for which several acceptable solutions can be found. Design problems are problems of making or repairing things or processes that satisfy human desires or needs (Whitbeck 1996). The most familiar example in chemistry is design of a synthesis, an example of process design. There is usually more than one way to make a particular molecule. Deciding on which method is “best” involves a large number of considerations, including cost of materials, yield, quantity and purity of product, safety, purification methods, and reaction conditions, among others. Two different chemists might choose two different routes based on individual considerations. For example, while one route might provide a higher yield but require an expensive piece of equipment, the second route has a lower yield but can be done less expensively. The chemist who already owns the specialized equipment will probably choose the first alternative, but a colleague whose research budget is limited might accept the lower yield to save money. In a second kind of synthesis design problem, the end use is known, but several molecules or materials might actually accomplish this goal. Drug design is a good example. A chemist might take on (or be assigned) the task of developing a compound that controls blood pressure by blocking an enzyme that constricts blood vessels. A number of compounds might work, and the “best” solution to the problem will depend on factors such as ease of synthesis and purification, cost, medical side effects, and safety and environmental considerations involved in the manufacture of the drug. In general, the design's success depends on whether it achieves the desired end within the imposed criteria and constraints. There is a close analogy between design problems and real-life ethical problems. In an ethical problem, a chemist or chemistry student must devise possible courses of action, evaluate them, and then decide what to do.

Personal account

  • Sign in with email/username & password
  • Get email alerts
  • Save searches
  • Purchase content
  • Activate your purchase/trial code
  • Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

  • Sign in with username/password
  • Recommend to your librarian
  • Institutional account management
  • Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

  • Click Sign in through your institution.
  • Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
  • When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
  • Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

  • Click Sign in through society site.
  • When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

  • View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
  • View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

Month: Total Views:
October 2022 1
February 2023 2
August 2023 1
October 2023 3
November 2023 3
January 2024 1
April 2024 3
May 2024 2
  • About Oxford Academic
  • Publish journals with us
  • University press partners
  • What we publish
  • New features  
  • Open access
  • Rights and permissions
  • Accessibility
  • Advertising
  • Media enquiries
  • Oxford University Press
  • Oxford Languages
  • University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • Cookie settings
  • Cookie policy
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Change Password

Your password must have 6 characters or more:.

  • a lower case character, 
  • an upper case character, 
  • a special character 

Password Changed Successfully

Your password has been changed

Create your account

Forget yout password.

Enter your email address below and we will send you the reset instructions

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password

Forgot your Username?

Enter your email address below and we will send you your username

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username

Psychiatry Online

  • Spring 2024 | VOL. 22, NO. 2 Autism Across the Lifespan CURRENT ISSUE pp.147-262
  • Winter 2024 | VOL. 22, NO. 1 Reproductive Psychiatry: Postpartum Depression is Only the Tip of the Iceberg pp.1-142

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use , including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

A Model for Ethical Problem Solving in Medicine, With Practical Applications

  • Edward M. Hundert , M.A., M.D.

Search for more papers by this author

Despite the dramatic increase over recent years in the research and teaching of medical ethics, there exists no theoretical framework within which to conceptualize ethical problems in medicine, to say nothing of solutions to these problems. The model proposed here attempts to fill this void by developing a conceptual understanding of the nature of moral dilemmas that can be applied to both theoretical and practical problems in medicine. Practical applications are demonstrated in three areas: personal ethical problem solving, hospital ethics committees, and the teaching of medical ethics. Suggestions are offered for the extension of these and other applications of the model, a model proposed as a foundation to be built upon through further research and daily experiences in a world of conflicting values.

A difficult problem becomes a “dilemma” when we are quite sure that we will be making a big mistake regardless of whatever path we choose. It is instructive to consider moral dilemmas in this context. The anxiety we experience as we face each unpalatable alternative informs us about the nature of moral dilemmas. It seems that any decision we make will violate one or another value which we hold dear. Unfortunately, the many values that bear on any given dilemma are what philosophers call “incommensurable.” That is, it is impossible to quantify just how much one value (say, social welfare or telling the truth) is “worth” in terms of another value (say, individual liberty or relief from suffering). Yet, as we choose among possible actions, we are often forced to balance one incommensurable value against another, to balance a patient’s individual liberty against social welfare, to balance our standards of truth-telling against the relief of suffering.

Perhaps the only scale we have to carry out such a balancing act is the anxiety that our conscience dutifully provides in the process. By striving to find the path that makes us least anxious, we presumably balance a host of incommensurable values according to the scale of our conscience: our anxiety increases as we contemplate trading off too much liberty in the name of social welfare or too much of the truth in the name of relieving suffering. This still leaves us feeling as if we have made a big mistake (since we have compromised values that we hold dear), but at least it is a good strategy for “cutting losses.” We typically go through this process unconsciously, and it is quite difficult to articulate the pattern of balancing of values that we have achieved. It is, in fact, difficult just to list all of the relevant values that stand in need of balancing.

If we could articulate the various patterns of balanced values offered by our conscience, what we would have in their raw form are what we commonly refer to as our “moral principles.” While we do not usually think of them in this way, our moral principles are the “equations” we claim to use when forced to measure incommensurable values against one another.

M oral principles versus moral actions: a place for consistency

The “balancing equations” that are our moral principles are generally much more complicated than the moral actions that we take as a result of the balancing—the unplugging of a respirator, the abortion, the psychiatric commitment. This distinction is important because doctors are typically concerned with where consistency fits into all of this—and it is no small matter that the demand for consistency applies at the level of principles, not actions.

This point is illustrated by the following true case of an obstetrician-gynecologist whose confusion about this issue led her to perform an abortion that she herself thought unethical. The doctor had always been a strong supporter of the abortion rights movement, and she firmly believed in “abortion on request” as a general principle. But in the case in question, an abortion had been requested only because modern technology, in ruling out various congenital abnormalities, had also determined that the fetus was female, and the mother decided she would rather have a boy. The doctor’s own “instincts” (e.g., conscience) told her that this was not a good reason for an abortion. But, because she had always agreed to perform requested abortions in the past, she felt that “to be consistent,” she would have to agree to do this one. She could not, however, seem to get the case out of her mind.

After further reflection, the doctor realized for the first time that her personal moral principle on abortion was much more complicated than could possibly be embodied in a universal action rule like “abortion on request.” The case forced her to consider all of the values she held dear (autonomy of the mother, health and welfare of the mother and baby, social welfare, and so forth) that weighed on both sides of the abortion question. She then realized that she held the mother’s autonomy and health as a preeminent value but not the only value—that in our modern world with its multiplicity of goods, ends, and values, no single value can have infinite and universally overriding weight. Her actual moral principle concerning abortion did indeed assign very great, but not infinite, weight to the mother’s autonomy. The case was problematic for her because it was one in which that particular value was outweighed by others in the “balancing equation” that represented her moral principle. Only later did she come to understand that the demand for consistency applies at the level of principles, not actions. This was indeed one case where, to be consistent, she would not want to do an abortion when it was requested.

This case illustrates only the first step in this doctor’s struggle to bring her articulated “moral principles” into harmony with her actual moral experience (i.e., the feelings engendered by her conscience as she considers each possible moral action). She is now armed with a new moral principle to guide her decision making, and her moral experience will be different, for having worked through this case, when she faces her next moral dilemma. Thus our moral experience and our moral principles are kept in an ever-evolving equilibrium as throughout our careers we have new moral experiences and reflect on our working moral principles. Early in this process it is easy to fall into the trap of believing that moral principles take a simple, universal form with the addition of a small number of exceptions, such as “abortion on request except for sex selection” or “tell the whole truth unless the patient specifically requests otherwise.” But with more experience the exceptions build, and the addenda “unless the patient requests otherwise, or unless a life will be endangered, or unless . . .” become recognized as the balancing of a set of values that come into play in diverse and seemingly unrelated ethical problems.

A model for ethical problem solving

The earlier conceptualization of how our moral principles and moral experience evolve has the advantage of reflecting our actual experience with the process. In teaching medical ethics to first- and second-year medical students over several years, I have been struck by the simplicity of medical students’ early articulations of their principles (“never lie to a patient,” “always do everything to save your patient’s life”) and by the evolution of their more mature principles as they struggle with the classic problem cases. When I was a second-year medical student, I once wrote an article defending the position of always telling patients the whole truth—a true testimony to the process I am now describing. (That article was, mercifully, rejected for publication.) Once I was in the clinical setting, it did not take long for my conscience to inform me of the problems with my simple principle, although my other early formulations still went something like: “tell the whole truth unless it will result in X, Y, or Z,” as each successive problem case gave rise to another “exception.” It was only later that I realized how many of these exceptions were the manifestations of other values competing with the value of truth-telling in my own value-balancing process. At that point it became possible to see how the megaequation of all the relevant basic values and their relative weights can become a practical tool for keeping moral experience and principles in their dynamic equilibrium: each new dilemma exposes a novel division of values conflicting around the facts of a case and thus sharpens our own weighting system as we reflect on the problems associated with each alternative action.

This is a variation of John Rawls’s notion ( 1 ) of a “reflective equilibrium.” As shown in figure 1 , each new moral dilemma we face helps us clarify our moral principles as we reflect on the conflict between basic incommensurable values weighing on each side of a case. Armed with our new understanding of the principles on which we plan to base our future decisions, we find that our moral experience is also different when we face the next problem case. Obviously, these problem cases or dilemmas are more than simply nasty situations: they also present a new opportunity to learn about our principles and realign them with our moral experience. (It is often difficult to appreciate this opportunity in the heat of the moment, and it is usually in later reflection that equilibrium is restored—hence a “reflective” equilibrium!)

A good way to carry out this process is by actually writing lists of the conflicting values in each case. An example of a basic list for the ethical problem of psychiatric commitment is shown in figure 2 . This is typical of an initial list one might devise when approaching a commitment case for the first time. With added experience, many more values are identified as weighing on each side of the scale. The best vehicle for developing one’s own moral understanding comes from saving these lists and watching how they develop over time. By observing the evolution of these lists of values in conflict, it becomes possible to watch one’s own “figure 1 ” develop around a given ethical dilemma.

W hat is meant by “ medical ethics ”?

By following the evolution of lists of values such as those described earlier, it also becomes possible to understand how the expression “medical ethics” can have real meaning. At first, this common expression may not appear to be at risk for lacking substantive meaning, but the weight of hundreds of years of moral philosophy is against it. If Immanuel Kant ( 2 ) left any legacy of thought at all, it is our modern notion that “moral rules” must by definition apply to every person equally. For the past decade, Americans have been quick to remember this when a suggestion is made that “Presidential ethics” can refer to something other than the ethics that apply to all of the rest of us. Thus, the notion of a separate field of “Congressmen’s ethics” would immediately raise the question of meaning in a way that medical ethics seem not to do.

One simplistic solution is that, since doctors are engaged in making certain types of decisions that others are not, medical ethics refers to the field of ethical issues that tend to be faced by doctors because of the work they do. This conceptualization is coherent, but it lacks depth, especially as increasing numbers of nonmedical professionals find themselves entwined in these same ethical issues. A second simplistic solution would be to try to abolish the expression “medical ethics,” reminding people of the dangers that lurk if doctors (or politicians) start to think that they have a different code of ethics from everyone else just because of their role in society. This solution is neither practical nor desirable, given that there is a third and useful way to conceptualize the problem of medical ethics.

The third solution focuses on the pattern that develops as doctors struggle with lists of values and their relative weights around the many ethical problems they face each day. By studying such lists across diverse moral dilemmas, it becomes possible to uncover a pattern of value balancing that is characteristic of medicine as an institution and that distinguishes medicine from other professions. Dedicated as it is to the relief and prevention of suffering, medicine is anything but value-neutral from the start. It is therefore not surprising that medicine gives relatively more weight to considerations of welfare than to considerations of justice as compared to the legal profession, for example. In law, the crucial factor in what to do now is often that of justice, which forces lawyers to painstakingly assess how people got into their current predicament. In medicine, the backward-looking issues of justice and guilt weigh less heavily than in law. In allocating resources to two patients with liver disease, doctors consider the patients’ welfare (i.e., the consequences for the patients’ health) much more than they consider whether or not one patient is more to blame for his or her condition (for example, when one case was caused by excessive ingestion of alcohol, while the other came from inadvertently eating the wrong clam). Medicine as a profession thus manifests a certain pattern of value balancing that distinguishes it from the legal profession. The suggestion here is that the pattern of value balancing that is characteristic of medicine (e.g., assigning relatively less weight to justice than to welfare as compared to the legal profession) is what gives meaning to the expression “medical ethics,” which refers to this medical pattern.

How this pattern came to be and how it is perpetuated are no small matters. Obviously, a two-way street exists, wherein young people choose medicine as a profession because they have been raised with and already hold this pattern of values while, at the same time, the established profession, through medical education, teaches this pattern to medical students and house staff, who become “socialized” into the profession, or “professionalized” (to friends of the process). Given these strong forces at work, it is not surprising that attempts to force radical changes on the values of medicine are likely to fail. Those who would like to use insurance ploys to force doctors to treat differently those two patients with liver disease underestimate the power of medical ethics. Some insurers may wish to charge higher premiums to smokers or obese people, but they should not be surprised if doctors refuse to give less care to smokers than to nonsmokers when treating their cancers.

A dded levels of complexity

Before we move to applications of the model described earlier, a number of added levels of complexity should at least be mentioned. For example, a distinction is often made in moral philosophy between what J.L. Mackie ( 3 ) has called “morality in the broad sense” and “morality in the narrow sense.” Morality in the broad sense refers to the search for general action-guiding principles. As we consider the moral thing to do (in the broad sense), we might weigh aesthetic considerations, the demands of etiquette, our own selfish wishes, and so forth. In addition to these, we would also weigh what is often called the issue of “morality,” taken now in the narrow sense. Morality in this narrow sense refers to only those considerations which are founded on basic values and which seem to operate through our consciences to counteract some natural tendency we might otherwise have to be selfish ( 4 ). It thus makes sense to say “I know morality dictates X, but there are other considerations here,” only when speaking of morality in the narrow, not the broad, sense. Both of these senses of morality are commonly used (and often confused), and we all too often achieve some understanding of one only to apply that understanding inappropriately to the other.

What I have written earlier applies to morality in the narrow sense. It is possible to use the same framework to model medical morality in the broad sense, but it is much more complex. In addition to the basic value-balancing act we face with a given moral dilemma, we are also operating within a web of institutions (our culture, state and federal law, a hospital), each of which has a somewhat different characteristic pattern of balancing values. It is the conflict among these different patterns that gives rise to the deepest of conflicts of interest in medicine. Thus, in the commitment example in figure 2 , it may be fine to decide that a patient’s individual liberty outweighs his or her need for treatment in a given case, but if the patient is mentally ill and at all homicidal, the law requires that he or she be committed. (The law assigns relatively more weight than does medicine to the consideration of individuals other than the one in question.) Similarly, the current debate over for-profit hospital corporations focuses on the effects that must inevitably result when doctors choose to operate within yet another institution with yet another pattern of value balancing which differs from that of the institution of medicine ( 5 ).

Examples in which doctors are forced to act as “double agents” (as when psychiatrists [6] are called on by society to protect society from dangerous mentally ill people and not just serve their patients) highlight the difference between morality in the narrow and the broad senses, but these added levels of complexity are always operating, since decisions are always being made within a web of institutions. It would be possible to add “obedience to the law” to the values in figure 2 , but it would have to be placed on both sides of the scale, since it might weigh in either direction depending on the facts of the case.

In fact, legal considerations are not the only ones to weigh on both sides of the scale, and this represents another added level of complexity. It is not uncommon for a value, such as personal autonomy, to weigh on both sides of a case—especially when this value arises with regard to two different individuals. But the same value may appear on both sides of the scale even with regard to the same person, as when there are quality of life issues weighing on both sides of a case concerning artificial life support. In these cases, it becomes useful to examine how these values come to appear on both sides and in what context they do so. As will be seen later, it is the working through of such problems that usually makes the best decision clear.

Finally, as one more added level of complexity, it is worth noting that if medical ethics is meaningful as a characteristic pattern of balancing values, this may differ from the pattern that represents the personal moral principles of an individual physician. It is one thing to observe the “two-way street” of medicine inculcating medical values in young doctors and young people choosing medicine because they hold those values already, but it is another to pretend that personal codes of ethics on the part of even the most well-intentioned physicians will always coincide with those of the profession as an institution. This is particularly a problem for young doctors who have not yet had enough experience to internalize many of the values of the profession. When such conflicts arise in medical students and house staff between, as one fourth-year medical student once put it, “what I feel I should do as a doctor and what I feel I should do as a person,” it is important not to underestimate the power of that experience in the process of professionalization. Within medicine’s characteristic pattern of balancing values, there is great scope for differences of opinion between intelligent and “ethical” doctors. This is indeed what makes medical ethics such an important (and lively) field for discussion and research.

A pplications to personal ethical problem solving

When we apply the model of ethical problem solving to the ethical dilemmas we face daily as physicians, the most striking quality that stands out is just how personal the process is. It is not surprising that once physicians start writing out their lists of competing values over time, they keep those lists under lock and key. The personal nature of our moral principles is hardly surprising, since these principles reveal parts of us that we often hide from ourselves, let alone from friends or colleagues. (Even in the confidence of psychoanalysis, it is often only through analyzing our resistance to facing such matters that the analyst comes to understand them!)

This emotional side of what might otherwise be considered a rigorous intellectual procedure for solving ethical problems should warn against a dangerous trap—that of using the procedure to lie to ourselves. Consider, for example, the case of a terminally ill patient in great pain from the bony metastases of her cancer, who seems unable to be weaned from her respirator. We set out to use our conscience to balance the values involved by anticipating the anxiety we feel as we contemplate our various alternatives. But maybe what we are really doing as we choose to “pull the plug” is not carrying on our reflective equilibrium at all: perhaps it is merely processing the anxiety we are feeling because our own mother or grandmother is (or was) in a similar situation in which we felt powerless to change things. This is the factor that might be called “countertransference distortion” (by analogy with the distortion arising from the analyst’s own unconscious issues in a psychoanalysis). It is a factor that is difficult to separate from the process described earlier, but one that must be considered in every case. Our personal experiences outside our professional lives must and should influence our moral experiences within our professional lives. We must, however, be on guard for “outlying points on the curve,” like the asterisk in figure 1 . Notice that, as drawn, the asterisk would have been less of an outlier earlier in time, however. Indeed, it is only by having a fairly good idea of where our equilibrium is and has been (i.e., by being the “well-analyzed analysts of our dilemmas”) that we can prevent ourselves from letting such personal issues interfere with our professional moral integrity—one of the most difficult challenges of all.

When we have made the effort to work through this difficult balancing act, the personal rewards are equally great. We can, for one thing, defend our decisions against the criticism of others, as well as against our own self-doubt. A doctor may be criticized (or criticize himself or herself) for having failed to give enough weight to a patient’s individual liberty when the patient is committed into a hospital, for example. The accusation is made: “Well, I guess that person’s individual liberty did not mean much to you” (or “to me” in the case of self-doubts). Having worked through the difficult balancing of values, however, we know that the patient’s liberty meant quite a bit to us—it was, in fact, the value we attached to the patient’s liberty that made the decision so difficult. Once such trade-offs are understood within the context of the model, then, it is of the utmost importance to remember that the values which are outweighed in a given case were far from “nothing” to us. The pains we take in making decisions in the face of dilemmas testify to the priority that we did indeed attach to those values which were ultimately outweighed. It is in this way that we can understand what is meant when we say that we give honor to life not by always preserving life at any cost but by the pains we take when we make decisions that have the opposite effect.

A pplications to hospital ethics committees

Many institutions, particularly hospitals, have recently developed standing ethics committees that serve functions varying from support group, to educator, to tribunal. Some of these committees merely form a forum for discussion, while others hand down actual (binding or nonbinding) recommendations for action ( 7 ). Since many of the most difficult ethical problems within an institution are now addressed by a committee, it is worth mentioning how the model described earlier might be used (or abused) in such a setting.

Each member of an ethics committee brings to it a great variety of experience with balancing values one against another in a great variety of contexts and within a great variety of institutions. A certain amount of self-selection usually occurs, and members of the committee typically have relatively strong, well-articulated moral principles. They may not put it in these words, but they each know pretty well how much safety they are willing to trade off for how much privacy, how much welfare for how much justice. The ethics committee itself, however, forms a new and unique institution that tends to polarize its members: the member who gives the most weight to justice considerations (relative to other values)—even if only marginally so—will quickly become the group’s “defender of justice” (this member will often be a lawyer if there is one on the committee, for reasons discussed earlier). As case after case is addressed by the committee, members soon come almost to expect the “defender of privacy,” the “defender of social welfare,” and the “defender of patient autonomy” each to take his or her ground. Indeed, the knowledge that the defenders of patient autonomy and privacy are at the committee meeting makes it easier for the defender of social welfare, for example, to argue for the involuntary commitment of an arguably dangerous mentally ill patient. After all, the balancing of many other values against social welfare no longer has to be carried out in the mind of any given member; it instead gets carried out among members, each of whom argues for the weight of one or two values only.

The group dynamic I am now describing is, of course, one of the most basic of group behaviors. A form of group projective identification, it is the process by which conflicts really occurring in the mind of each group member get played out within the group, as each member accepts and “holds for the group” one part of the story. In observing this process as a member of a medical-school-affiliated community hospital ethics committee, I have been impressed by how vividly the committee as a group can demonstrate the model that I have proposed for individual ethical problem solving. This is not merely an interesting group dynamic; it has important practical correlates as well. Ethics committees are often charged with making policy recommendations to the hospital’s governing body (or actually setting policy in some cases, either through precedent or more formally). In choosing among a wide spectrum of policy options, an ethics committee can use to great advantage the process by which competing values become represented by different members, as the following example will demonstrate.

Our ethics committee was asked to consider the case of a nurse who had accidentally stuck her finger with a needle that had been used to draw blood from a homosexual patient suffering from pneumocystis pneumonia. The patient had a presumptive diagnosis of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), although he refused laboratory testing for both T-cell subset ratios and human T-cell lymphotrophic virus type III (HTLV-III) antibody titers. He stated that he had no desire to know the results of such tests himself and feared that the information would be used against him, if not in the hospital, then by potential employers who might ask about such tests should he, at least temporarily, be back in the job market. The nurse said she wanted to know the patient’s HTLV-III immune status, even though she claimed to know all the data on needle stick “exposures” to AIDS and problems with HTLV-III antibody testing. She said she realized it was not like a needle stick exposure to hepatitis, in which the hepatitis immune status of the patient might lead to prophylaxis for the nurse, since her behavior in this case would be unaffected by the result of the test. (She stated that she planned to have her own HTLV-III antibody titer checked every 6 months.) She did, however, believe that she had a right to the information, and she based her claim partly on her having sustained the needle stick in the course of caring for the patient.

A deadlock ensued when the patient repeatedly refused to give consent for the tests, and the case was brought before the ethics committee. As the committee members took up their “established positions” (the “defender of privacy” speaking for the patient’s fears of discrimination, and so forth), a number of constructive new policy options were articulated as the members sought specific ways of preserving the values that seemed to conflict. If the patient’s decision to refuse the test was really based only on his fear that the information would get into the wrong hands (or even if he himself also wanted not to know), perhaps the pathology department could devise a triple-blind coding system so that only the patient and nurse (or even only the nurse) could ever find out the result. The value of privacy could then be upheld without having to trade off anything else. If the patient still refused, his autonomy stood in direct conflict with the nurse’s wishes, and privacy was not the issue. Other supports could then be put in place for the nurse, including further education about such tests and their meaning, to give what reassurance she sought without having to compromise the patient’s right to refuse the tests (which the committee felt must outweigh the nurse’s desire to know the result). And so what was in the beginning a question of “should we do the test or not” turned into a discussion of the numerous actions that might maximize all of the values that seemed to conflict, before any trade-offs must, in the end, be made.

The policies developed by an ethics committee are the analogue of an individual’s moral principles. The policies define the “balancing equations” that calculate how much of one value is to be traded off for others when such trade-offs must be made. We see in the development of such policies the same equilibrium discussed earlier: people’s moral experiences, offered by their consciences, affect the policies developed; but the policies, once photocopied and hung around the hospital, will also affect people’s moral experiences when the next problem case arises. Since their policies affect the moral experience of the entire hospital community, ethics committees must take extra care in deciding when, how, and whether or not to establish any given policy. Even a well-written and thoughtful policy, if poorly timed, can disrupt the moral environment of an institution strained by values in conflict. (It is easier to discuss how the professions of medicine and law might differ in their characteristic pattern of balancing values than to note the obvious fact that nursing, social work, hospital administration, and other related professions each also have their own pattern of balancing values which differs from that of medicine—a fact that we often find embarrassing and try to ignore.)

The main point here, however, is that an ethics committee can use the process by which it balances values among members to create new policies that alleviate the need for trading off one value for another, and the same outcome can and should be achieved by individuals balancing values within their own conscience. Once the values in conflict are understood, the original dilemma—stated as an unpalatable choice between “tell the whole truth or lie” or “commit the patient or just let him go”—may dissolve through the many options that might preserve the truth and relieve suffering, respect the patient’s liberty and preserve social welfare. This, after all, is the most desirable outcome when we are faced with a dilemma: not to have to choose after all between the “big mistakes” in question.

A pplications to teaching medical ethics

I shall conclude by discussing the proposed model with regard to the teaching of medical ethics in medical schools and residency training programs. I do not mean to discuss here the practical side of how a given group of students might apply the model to learn about various specific moral issues (which could be done in a variety of ways). What I would like to address is, in essence, the relationship between theory and practice.

The dynamic equilibrium represented in figure 1 is, in a way, an equilibrium between theory and practice, between one’s intellectual understanding of one’s moral position and one’s actual moral experience. It may well be that the curve will end up in the same place eventually whether the first step in the equilibrium comes from the theory or the practice side, but early on the difference may well be dramatic. If, for example, one’s first struggle to articulate personal principles about abortion occurs after, as a third-year medical student, one has assisted with a second-trimester abortion, the practical, experience side will likely set the equilibrium in a definite direction. (This is why the antiabortion movement uses grotesque photographs to “educate” people to consider the pros and cons of abortion.) If, instead of the practice side, the theory side started off the process—if as first- or second-year students the individuals in question were forced to balance the values involved for themselves—their moral experience in the operating room would likely be somewhat different, and the equilibrium would be set in motion initially in a somewhat different direction.

The relationship between theory and practice, and which comes first in medical training, is thus no small matter. Of course, theory cannot exist in complete isolation from practice, and so cases must be used to focus the theory even in preclinical ethics courses. But this effort pays off when the students, in their clinical training, come to new moral experiences with more mature moral principles. In medical training we do not wait until people’s lives are at stake to teach anatomy and physiology. Neither should we wait until moral choices must be made to teach medical ethics. Ethics must be taught alongside every clinical decision, but solid foundations must be laid for moral as well as clinical decision making.

For the past 5 years I have been teaching medical ethics to first- and second-year medical students at Harvard Medical School. My belief that the equilibrium should start with theory goes beyond the preclinical stage of training of the students in the classroom. The course itself begins by introducing the values themselves—what is meant by welfare, justice, liberty, and so forth. If these concepts become the tools that are used to dissect ethical problems, surely they should be analyzed before their meaning might be prejudiced by weighing one against the next in a medical context. Indeed, to resist the effects of the class’s prejudices, the values in question are introduced through a historical review of their development and of the various moral theories through the ages that emphasized the primacy of each. Only then are the classically problematic moral issues in medicine addressed, week by week, by students prepared to methodically balance the many values that conflict around each case.

This application to the teaching of medical ethics thus enables each future doctor to sharpen his or her own moral position by using a rigorous problem solving method. By focusing each student’s attention on his or her own moral experience, the model I have described provides a tool for thinking about ethical problems—a tool that teaches how to think, not what to think. Teaching medical students what to think about ethical issues has no place in medical education in a free society—it is merely propagandizing of the worst kind. As a tool for conceptualizing ethical problem solving, the model I have discussed enables teachers to teach the proper subject of the medical ethics curriculum: how, not what to think.

Each of us can use the model to come to our own conclusions about how to act in any given case. By focusing our attention on the particular values in conflict, we sharpen our own moral position and evolve in the reflective equilibrium that exists between our moral principles and our moral experience. But the model does a bit more than that. It also provides a context within which we can carry out meaningful and productive moral argument. Just as I challenge my students to define their own pattern of how each value is to be weighed against all others, we must all continually challenge one another to do the same as the process of moral education continues through our lives. Only then can we understand how different points of view really conflict, and only then can we each preserve the vitality of our own morality.

S ummary and conclusions

In this article I have introduced a model for ethical problem solving in medicine and discussed a few of its practical applications. It is a descriptive model in that it seeks to demonstrate certain basic principles by modeling the behavior we see around us every day. In particular, the model focuses on the conflicting values that give rise to the “dilemma” nature of ethical problems. Moral principles are conceptualized as the “equations” offered by our conscience that compute how much each value is “worth” in terms of each of the other conflicting values, and these principles are found to evolve in a dynamic “reflective equilibrium” with our moral experiences. The moral actions we take are determined by the ultimate balance of relative weights assigned to all of the competing values as they arise from the particular facts of a problematic case and so each new dilemma helps us develop our principles by introducing new patterns of conflicting values. The effort it takes to carry out such a balancing act in a problematic case reminds us that the outweighed values were not “nothing” to us in that process, and this itself can help avoid many misunderstandings and confusions.

The model dismisses the simple-minded position of those who define their moral principles in terms of adherence to a consistent action (always tell the whole truth, always preserve life at all costs) by emphasizing that consistency applies at the level of principles, not actions. If one’s principle incorporates a given trade-off among the preservation of life, individual autonomy, and relief from suffering, different cases are bound to result in different actions, but consistency is still found at the deeper and appropriate level. Medicine itself is not neutral with respect to trade-offs between values, and the pattern of value balancing characteristic of medicine as a profession gives rise to what is commonly called “medical ethics”—an ethics that may conflict with that of other institutions within which doctors must make moral decisions (and may at times conflict even with doctors’ personal codes of ethics, particularly at early stages of their training).

The practical application of the model to ethical problem solving reveals a number of advantages, not the least of which is the possibility of finding alternative solutions that avoid the “dilemma position” altogether. By considering the actual values that are in conflict, we may discover options that alleviate the need to trade one off against another—the best of all possible solutions when it can be achieved. Keeping track of our own reflective equilibrium thus not only prevents our stated moral principles from straying too far from our moral experiences, it presents a strategy for maximizing adherence to all of the values that we hold dear. It also enables us to defend our moral position against criticism, to identify where points of real conflict exist with others and thus make moral discourse more meaningful, and, crucially, it can enable us to see when personal (countertransference) issues are giving rise to feelings that lie far off the curve of our reflective equilibrium. Writing successive lists of values on pieces of paper over time may seem like a simple-minded exercise, but it is one of the only ways to avoid the dangerous trap of lying to ourselves about our own moral position when difficult personal issues confuse our rational approach to ethical problem solving.

My introduction of a few practical applications of the model (to hospital ethics committees, medical ethics teaching, and personal ethical problem solving) is intended only as a beginning. A great number of applications can be made. For example, cross-cultural ethical problems can be understood by recognizing that different lists of values are in conflict, rather than merely different weightings of the same lists (as is usually assumed but is true only in single-culture problems). Health policy issues might be analyzed in terms of the competition within the political arena of each relevant institution’s characteristic pattern of value balancing. And so on. My goal here has simply been to introduce a method of conceptualizing ethical problem solving in medicine. The examples are meant primarily to define the model better and show how it might be put to work. just as theory and practice sharpen one another in an evolving equilibrium within the model, so too will the model itself evolve as it is applied in different contexts by different people. This is how deeper understanding develops, both within the medical community and within each of us.

Figure 1.

Figure 1. Change Over Time in Relative Weight We Attach to a Given Value as Reflected in Our Moral Experience and Articulated Moral Principles

Figure 2.

Figure 2. Model of Conflicting Values in the Ethical Problem of Psychiatric Commitment

(Reprinted with permission from the American Journal of Psychiatry 1987 ; 144:839–846)

1 Rawls J: A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press, 1971 , pp 48–51 Google Scholar

2 Kant I: Critique of Practical Reason (1788). Translated by Beck LW. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1949 Google Scholar

3 Mackie JL: Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. Baltimore, Penguin Books, 1977 , pp 106–107 Google Scholar

4 Warnock GJ: The Object of Morality. London, Methuen, 1971 Google Scholar

5 Reiman AS: The new medical-industrial complex. N Engl J Med 1980 ; 303:963–970 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

6 O’Brien Steinfels M, Levine C (eds): In the Service of the State: The Psychiatrist as Double Agent. Hastings-on-Hudson, NY, Hastings Center, 1978 Google Scholar

7 Fost N, Cranford RE: Hospital ethics committees. JAMA 1985 ; 253:2687–2692 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

  • Examination of Ethical Decision-Making Models Across Disciplines: Common Elements and Application to the Field of Behavior Analysis 29 November 2022 | Behavior Analysis in Practice, Vol. 16, No. 3
  • Bibliography for Ethics, Professionalism, and End of Life Care 1 October 2007 | FOCUS, Vol. 5, No. 4
  • The American Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 5, No. 6

what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  • Training & Certification
  • Knowledge Center
  • ECI Research
  • Business Integrity Library
  • Career Center
  • The PLUS Ethical Decision Making Model

Seven Steps to Ethical Decision Making –  Step 1: Define the problem  (consult  PLUS filters ) –  Step 2: Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support  –  Step 3: Identify alternatives –  Step 4: Evaluate the alternatives  (consult  PLUS filters ) –  Step 5: Make the decision –  Step 6: Implement the decision –  Step 7: Evaluate the decision  (consult  PLUS filters )

Introduction Organizations struggle to develop a simple set of guidelines that makes it easier for individual employees, regardless of position or level, to be confident that his/her decisions meet all of the competing standards for effective and ethical decision-making used by the organization. Such a model must take into account two realities:

  • Every employee is called upon to make decisions in the normal course of doing his/her job. Organizations cannot function effectively if employees are not empowered to make decisions consistent with their positions and responsibilities.
  • For the decision maker to be confident in the decision’s soundness, every decision should be tested against the organization’s policies and values, applicable laws and regulations as well as the individual employee’s definition of what is right, fair, good and acceptable.

The decision making process described below has been carefully constructed to be:

  • Fundamentally sound based on current theories and understandings of both decision-making processes and ethics.
  • Simple and straightforward enough to be easily integrated into every employee’s thought processes.
  • Descriptive (detailing how ethical decision are made naturally) rather than prescriptive (defining unnatural ways of making choices).

Why do organizations need ethical decision making? See our special edition case study, #RespectAtWork, to find out.

First, explore the difference between what you expect and/or desire and the current reality. By defining the problem in terms of outcomes, you can clearly state the problem.

Consider this example: Tenants at an older office building are complaining that their employees are getting angry and frustrated because there is always a long delay getting an elevator to the lobby at rush hour. Many possible solutions exist, and all are predicated on a particular understanding the problem:

  • Flexible hours – so all the tenants’ employees are not at the elevators at the same time.
  • Faster elevators – so each elevator can carry more people in a given time period.
  • Bigger elevators – so each elevator can carry more people per trip.
  • Elevator banks – so each elevator only stops on certain floors, increasing efficiency.
  • Better elevator controls – so each elevator is used more efficiently.
  • More elevators – so that overall carrying capacity can be increased.
  • Improved elevator maintenance – so each elevator is more efficient.
  • Encourage employees to use the stairs – so fewer people use the elevators.

The real-life decision makers defined the problem as “people complaining about having to wait.” Their solution was to make the wait less frustrating by piping music into the elevator lobbies. The complaints stopped. There is no way that the eventual solution could have been reached if, for example, the problem had been defined as “too few elevators.”

How you define the problem determines where you go to look for alternatives/solutions– so define the problem carefully.

Step 2: Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support

Once the problem is defined, it is critical to search out resources that may be of assistance in making the decision. Resources can include people (i.e., a mentor, coworkers, external colleagues, or friends and family) as well professional guidelines and organizational policies and codes. Such resources are critical for determining parameters, generating solutions, clarifying priorities and providing support, both while implementing the solution and dealing with the repercussions of the solution.

Step 3: Identify available alternative solutions to the problem The key to this step is to not limit yourself to obvious alternatives or merely what has worked in the past. Be open to new and better alternatives. Consider as many as solutions as possible — five or more in most cases, three at the barest minimum. This gets away from the trap of seeing “both sides of the situation” and limiting one’s alternatives to two opposing choices (i.e., either this or that).

Step 4: Evaluate the identified alternatives As you evaluate each alternative, identify the likely positive and negative consequence of each. It is unusual to find one alternative that would completely resolve the problem and is significantly better than all others. As you consider positive and negative consequences, you must be careful to differentiate between what you know for a fact and what you believe might be the case. Consulting resources, including written guidelines and standards, can help you ascertain which consequences are of greater (and lesser) import.

You should think through not just what results each alternative could yield, but the likelihood it is that such impact will occur. You will only have all the facts in simple cases. It is reasonable and usually even necessary to supplement the facts you have with realistic assumptions and informed beliefs. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the more the evaluation is fact-based, the more confident you can be that the expected outcome will occur. Knowing the ratio of fact-based evaluation versus non-fact-based evaluation allows you to gauge how confident you can be in the proposed impact of each alternative.

Step 5: Make the decision When acting alone, this is the natural next step after selecting the best alternative. When you are working in a team environment, this is where a proposal is made to the team, complete with a clear definition of the problem, a clear list of the alternatives that were considered and a clear rationale for the proposed solution.

Step 6: Implement the decision While this might seem obvious, it is necessary to make the point that deciding on the best alternative is not the same as doing something. The action itself is the first real, tangible step in changing the situation. It is not enough to think about it or talk about it or even decide to do it. A decision only counts when it is implemented. As Lou Gerstner (former CEO of IBM) said, “There are no more prizes for predicting rain. There are only prizes for building arks.”

Step 7: Evaluate the decision Every decision is intended to fix a problem. The final test of any decision is whether or not the problem was fixed. Did it go away? Did it change appreciably? Is it better now, or worse, or the same? What new problems did the solution create?

Ethics Filters

The ethical component of the decision making process takes the form of a set of “filters.” Their purpose is to surface the ethics considerations and implications of the decision at hand. When decisions are classified as being “business” decisions (rather than “ethics” issues), values can quickly be left out of consideration and ethical lapses can occur.

At key steps in the process, you should stop and work through these filters, ensuring that the ethics issues imbedded in the decision are given consideration.

We group the considerations into the mnemonic PLUS.

  • P  = Policies Is it consistent with my organization’s policies, procedures and guidelines?
  • L = Legal Is it acceptable under the applicable laws and regulations?
  • U  = Universal Does it conform to the universal principles/values my organization has adopted?
  • S = Self Does it satisfy my personal definition of right, good and fair?

The PLUS filters work as an integral part of steps 1, 4 and 7 of the decision-making process. The decision maker applies the four PLUS filters to determine if the ethical component(s) of the decision are being surfaced/addressed/satisfied.

  • Does the existing situation violate any of the PLUS considerations?
  • Step 2:   Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support
  • Step 3: Identify available alternative solutions to the problem
  • Will the alternative I am considering resolve the PLUS violations?
  • Will the alternative being considered create any new PLUS considerations?
  • Are the ethical trade-offs acceptable?
  • Step 5: Make the decision
  • Step 6: Implement the decision
  • Does the resultant situation resolve the earlier PLUS considerations?
  • Are there any new PLUS considerations to be addressed?

The PLUS filters do not guarantee an ethically-sound decision. They merely ensure that the ethics components of the situation will be surfaced so that they might be considered.

How Organizations Can Support Ethical Decision-Making  Organizations empower employees with the knowledge and tools they need to make ethical decisions by

  • Intentionally and regularly communicating to all employees:
  • Organizational policies and procedures as they apply to the common workplace ethics issues.
  • Applicable laws and regulations.
  • Agreed-upon set of “universal” values (i.e., Empathy, Patience, Integrity, Courage [EPIC]).
  • Providing a formal mechanism (i.e., a code and a helpline, giving employees access to a definitive interpretation of the policies, laws and universal values when they need additional guidance before making a decision).
  • Free Ethics & Compliance Toolkit
  • Ethics and Compliance Glossary
  • Definitions of Values
  • Why Have a Code of Conduct?
  • Code Construction and Content
  • Common Code Provisions
  • Ten Style Tips for Writing an Effective Code of Conduct
  • Five Keys to Reducing Ethics and Compliance Risk
  • Business Ethics & Compliance Timeline

what is an ethical problem solving methodology

A Framework for Ethical Decision Making

  • Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
  • Ethics Resources

A Framework for Ethical Decision Making image link to story

This document is designed as an introduction to thinking ethically. Read more about what the framework can (and cannot) do .  

We all have an image of our better selves—of how we are when we act ethically or are “at our best.” We probably also have an image of what an ethical community, an ethical business, an ethical government, or an ethical society should be. Ethics really has to do with all these levels—acting ethically as individuals, creating ethical organizations and governments, and making our society as a whole more ethical in the way it treats everyone.

What is Ethics?

Ethics refers to standards and practices that tell us how human beings ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves—as friends, parents, children, citizens, businesspeople, professionals, and so on. Ethics is also concerned with our character. It requires knowledge, skills, and habits. 

It is helpful to identify what ethics is NOT:

  • Ethics is not the same as feelings . Feelings do provide important information for our ethical choices. However, while some people have highly developed habits that make them feel bad when they do something wrong, others feel good even though they are doing something wrong. And, often, our feelings will tell us that it is uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is difficult.
  • Ethics is not the same as religion . Many people are not religious but act ethically, and some religious people act unethically. Religious traditions can, however, develop and advocate for high ethical standards, such as the Golden Rule.
  • Ethics is not the same thing as following the law. A good system of law does incorporate many ethical standards, but law can deviate from what is ethical. Law can become ethically corrupt—a function of power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow groups. Law may also have a difficult time designing or enforcing standards in some important areas and may be slow to address new problems.
  • Ethics is not the same as following culturally accepted norms . Cultures can include both ethical and unethical customs, expectations, and behaviors. While assessing norms, it is important to recognize how one’s ethical views can be limited by one’s own cultural perspective or background, alongside being culturally sensitive to others.
  • Ethics is not science . Social and natural science can provide important data to help us make better and more informed ethical choices. But science alone does not tell us what we ought to do. Some things may be scientifically or technologically possible and yet unethical to develop and deploy.

Six Ethical Lenses

If our ethical decision-making is not solely based on feelings, religion, law, accepted social practice, or science, then on what basis can we decide between right and wrong, good and bad? Many philosophers, ethicists, and theologians have helped us answer this critical question. They have suggested a variety of different lenses that help us perceive ethical dimensions. Here are six of them:

The Rights Lens

Some suggest that the ethical action is the one that best protects and respects the moral rights of those affected. This approach starts from the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se or on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the basis of such dignity, they have a right to be treated as ends in themselves and not merely as means to other ends. The list of moral rights—including the rights to make one's own choices about what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth, not to be injured, to a degree of privacy, and so on—is widely debated; some argue that non-humans have rights, too. Rights are also often understood as implying duties—in particular, the duty to respect others' rights and dignity.

( For further elaboration on the rights lens, please see our essay, “Rights.” )

The Justice Lens

Justice is the idea that each person should be given their due, and what people are due is often interpreted as fair or equal treatment. Equal treatment implies that people should be treated as equals   according to some defensible standard such as merit or need, but not necessarily that everyone should be treated in the exact same way in every respect. There are different types of justice that address what people are due in various contexts. These include social justice (structuring the basic institutions of society), distributive justice (distributing benefits and burdens), corrective justice (repairing past injustices), retributive justice (determining how to appropriately punish wrongdoers), and restorative or transformational justice (restoring relationships or transforming social structures as an alternative to criminal punishment).

( For further elaboration on the justice lens, please see our essay, “Justice and Fairness.” )

The Utilitarian Lens

Some ethicists begin by asking, “How will this action impact everyone affected?”—emphasizing the consequences of our actions. Utilitarianism, a results-based approach, says that the ethical action is the one that produces the greatest balance of good over harm for as many stakeholders as possible. It requires an accurate determination of the likelihood of a particular result and its impact. For example, the ethical corporate action, then, is the one that produces the greatest good and does the least harm for all who are affected—customers, employees, shareholders, the community, and the environment. Cost/benefit analysis is another consequentialist approach.

( For further elaboration on the utilitarian lens, please see our essay, “Calculating Consequences.” )

The Common Good Lens

According to the common good approach, life in community is a good in itself and our actions should contribute to that life. This approach suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others—especially the vulnerable—are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls attention to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of everyone—such as clean air and water, a system of laws, effective police and fire departments, health care, a public educational system, or even public recreational areas. Unlike the utilitarian lens, which sums up and aggregates goods for every individual, the common good lens highlights mutual concern for the shared interests of all members of a community.

( For further elaboration on the common good lens, please see our essay, “The Common Good.” )

The Virtue Lens

A very ancient approach to ethics argues that ethical actions ought to be consistent with certain ideal virtues that provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues are dispositions and habits that enable us to act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth and beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtue ethics asks of any action, “What kind of person will I become if I do this?” or “Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?”

( For further elaboration on the virtue lens, please see our essay, “Ethics and Virtue.” )

The Care Ethics Lens

Care ethics is rooted in relationships and in the need to listen and respond to individuals in their specific circumstances, rather than merely following rules or calculating utility. It privileges the flourishing of embodied individuals in their relationships and values interdependence, not just independence. It relies on empathy to gain a deep appreciation of the interest, feelings, and viewpoints of each stakeholder, employing care, kindness, compassion, generosity, and a concern for others to resolve ethical conflicts. Care ethics holds that options for resolution must account for the relationships, concerns, and feelings of all stakeholders. Focusing on connecting intimate interpersonal duties to societal duties, an ethics of care might counsel, for example, a more holistic approach to public health policy that considers food security, transportation access, fair wages, housing support, and environmental protection alongside physical health.

( For further elaboration on the care ethics lens, please see our essay, “Care Ethics.” )

Using the Lenses

Each of the lenses introduced above helps us determine what standards of behavior and character traits can be considered right and good. There are still problems to be solved, however.

The first problem is that we may not agree on the content of some of these specific lenses. For example, we may not all agree on the same set of human and civil rights. We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even agree on what is a good and what is a harm.

The second problem is that the different lenses may lead to different answers to the question “What is ethical?” Nonetheless, each one gives us important insights in the process of deciding what is ethical in a particular circumstance.

Making Decisions

Making good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for ethical decision-making is essential. When practiced regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically without consulting the specific steps.

The more novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the more we need to rely on discussion and dialogue with others about the dilemma. Only by careful exploration of the problem, aided by the insights and different perspectives of others, can we make good ethical choices in such situations.

The following framework for ethical decision-making is intended to serve as a practical tool for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action.

Identify the Ethical Issues

  • Could this decision or situation be damaging to someone or to some group, or unevenly beneficial to people? Does this decision involve a choice between a good and bad alternative, or perhaps between two “goods” or between two “bads”?
  • Is this issue about more than solely what is legal or what is most efficient? If so, how?

Get the Facts

  • What are the relevant facts of the case? What facts are not known? Can I learn more about the situation? Do I know enough to make a decision?
  • What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome? Are the concerns of some of those individuals or groups more important? Why?
  • What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been consulted? Have I identified creative options?

Evaluate Alternative Actions

  • Evaluate the options by asking the following questions:
  • Which option best respects the rights of all who have a stake? (The Rights Lens)
  • Which option treats people fairly, giving them each what they are due? (The Justice Lens)
  • Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm for as many stakeholders as possible? (The Utilitarian Lens)
  • Which option best serves the community as a whole, not just some members? (The Common Good Lens)
  • Which option leads me to act as the sort of person I want to be? (The Virtue Lens)
  • Which option appropriately takes into account the relationships, concerns, and feelings of all stakeholders? (The Care Ethics Lens)

Choose an Option for Action and Test It

  • After an evaluation using all of these lenses, which option best addresses the situation?
  • If I told someone I respect (or a public audience) which option I have chosen, what would they say?
  • How can my decision be implemented with the greatest care and attention to the concerns of all stakeholders?

Implement Your Decision and Reflect on the Outcome

  • How did my decision turn out, and what have I learned from this specific situation? What (if any) follow-up actions should I take?

This framework for thinking ethically is the product of dialogue and debate at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. Primary contributors include Manuel Velasquez, Dennis Moberg, Michael J. Meyer, Thomas Shanks, Margaret R. McLean, David DeCosse, Claire André, Kirk O. Hanson, Irina Raicu, and Jonathan Kwan.  It was last revised on November 5, 2021.

Ethical problem-solving and decision-making


The rational problem-solving process includes identifying the problem, clarifying objectives, analysing alternatives, deciding on a solution, implementing the solution, and following through to ensure its effectiveness. To begin solving a problem, the current situation needs to be diagnosed to understand and define the problem as accurately as possible.

When making decisions the immediate and long-term effects of all alternative solutions on other people and situations should be considered.

Decisions should also be ethical, meaning that the decision maker has an obligation to insure that the alternative chosen conforms to accepted standards of conduct. Useful criteria when making ethical decisions include public justification, moral principles, legal rights, and distributive and retributive justice.

Effective implementation of an action plan depends on the parties’ commitment to make it work. Commitment to the agreed-on solution usually is gained when problems, needs, and objectives are identified mutually, and solutions are reached through participation and consensus of all involved.

Individuals learn different habits for processing information when making decisions resulting in decisive, flexible, hierarchic, integrative, or systematic decision styles. Groups are also important to the decision making process. The group process can be made more effective by encouraging creativity and applying techniques such as brainstorming, the nominal group technique, the Delphi techniques, and decision support systems.




To learn more about the book this website supports, please visit its .
and .
is one of the many fine businesses of .
You must be a registered user to view the in this website.

If you already have a username and password, enter it below. If your textbook came with a card and this is your first visit to this site, you can to register.
Username:
Password:
'); document.write(''); } // -->
( )
.'); } else{ document.write('This form changes settings for this website only.'); } //-->
Send mail as:
'); } else { document.write(' '); } } else { document.write(' '); } // -->
'); } else { document.write(' '); } } else { document.write(' '); } document.write('
TA email: '); } else { document.write(' '); } } else { document.write(' '); } // -->
Other email: '); } else { document.write(' '); } } else { document.write(' '); } // -->
"Floating" navigation? '); } else if (floatNav == 2) { document.write(' '); } else { document.write(' '); } // -->
Drawer speed: '; theseOptions += (glideSpeed == 1) ? ' ' : ' ' ; theseOptions += (glideSpeed == 2) ? ' ' : ' ' ; theseOptions += (glideSpeed == 3) ? ' ' : ' ' ; theseOptions += (glideSpeed == 4) ? ' ' : ' ' ; theseOptions += (glideSpeed == 5) ? ' ' : ' ' ; theseOptions += (glideSpeed == 6) ? ' ' : ' ' ; document.write(theseOptions); // -->
1. (optional) Enter a note here:

2. (optional) Select some text on the page (or do this before you open the "Notes" drawer).
3.Highlighter Color:
4.
Search for:
Search in:
Course-wide Content





Quizzes


More Resources



Instructor Resources



Course-wide Content





Instructor Resources











American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

  • Certification
  • Publications
  • Continuing Education
  • Practice Management
  • Audiologists
  • Speech-Language Pathologists
  • Academic & Faculty
  • Audiology & SLP Assistants

A 10-Step Process for Resolving Ethical Issues

The following is a 10-step process for addressing ethical issues in schools:

  • Identify the problem as you see it.
  • Get the story straight—gather relevant data. (including federal, state, and local regultations, professional practice documents, ASHA Code of Ethics)
  • Ask yourself if the problem is a regulatory issue or a process issue related to regulatory requirements.
  • Compare the issue to a specific rule in ASHA's Code of Ethics . Determine if rules the Code of Ethics apply to your problem and can help develop a course of action for you to pursue.
  • Identify who has the power and control in the situation.
  • Identify what is in your control and what is not.
  • Identify your resources. These can be a supervisor, special education director, or colleague. Ask yourself if you need more information, clarification, or ideas from others who have had a similar problem.
  • Make a list of possible actions and their positive and negative consequences.
  • Make a plan that you can defend professionally and ethically—and one that meets the requirements of the regulations.
  • Take action and evaluate your plan as you proceed to determine next steps.

Reference American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2007). Ethics and IDEA: A guide for speech-language pathologists and audiologists who provide services under IDEA (Rev. ed.) [First edition published 2003].

Information About

  • Developmental Norms
  • ASHA's Workload Calculator
  • Salary and Compensation
  • School Services FAQs
  • Contact the Schools Team
  • Advertising Disclaimer
  • Advertise with us

ASHA Corporate Partners

  • Become A Corporate Partner

Stepping Stones Group

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) is the national professional, scientific, and credentialing association for 234,000 members, certificate holders, and affiliates who are audiologists; speech-language pathologists; speech, language, and hearing scientists; audiology and speech-language pathology assistants; and students.

  • All ASHA Websites
  • Work at ASHA
  • Marketing Solutions

Information For

Get involved.

  • ASHA Community
  • Become a Mentor
  • Become a Volunteer
  • Special Interest Groups (SIGs)

Connect With ASHA

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 2200 Research Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850 Members: 800-498-2071 Non-Member: 800-638-8255

MORE WAYS TO CONNECT

Media Resources

  • Press Queries

Site Help | A–Z Topic Index | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use © 1997- American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

Discover the latest MyICAEW app for ACA students and members, available to download now. Find out more

  • Benefits of membership

Gain access to world-leading information resources, guidance and local networks.

  • Visit Benefits of membership

Becoming a member

98% of the best global brands rely on ICAEW Chartered Accountants.

  • Visit Becoming a member
  • Pay fees and subscriptions

Your membership subscription enables ICAEW to provide support to members.

Fees and subscriptions

Member rewards.

Take advantage of the range of value added or discounted member benefits.

  • Member rewards – More from your membership
  • Technical and ethics support
  • Support throughout your career

Information and resources for every stage of your career.

Member Insights Survey

Let us know about the issues affecting you, your business and your clients.

  • Complete the survey

From software start-ups to high-flying airlines and high street banks, 98% of the best global brands rely on ICAEW Chartered Accountants. A career as an ICAEW Chartered Accountant means the opportunity to work in any organisation, in any sector, whatever your ambitions.

Everything you need to know about ICAEW annual membership fees, community and faculty subscriptions, eligibility for reduced rates and details of how you can pay.

Membership administration

Welcome to the ICAEW members area: your portal to members'-only content, offers, discounts, regulations and membership information.

  • Membership regulations

Members are required to supply certain information to the members’ registrar and to pay annual fees and subscriptions. These matters are governed by regulations.

  • Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is an integral part of being a successful ICAEW Chartered Accountant.

The ICAEW Chartered Accountant qualification, the ACA, is one of the most advanced learning and professional development programmes available. It is valued around the world in business, practice and the public sector.

3 people huddled at desk

ACA for employers

Train the next generation of chartered accountants in your business or organisation. Discover how your organisation can attract, train and retain the best accountancy talent, how to become authorised to offer ACA training and the support and guidance on offer if you are already providing training.

Digital learning materials via BibliU

All ACA, ICAEW CFAB and Level 4 apprenticeship learning materials are now digital only. Read our guide on how to access your learning materials on the ICAEW Bookshelf using the BibliU app or through your browser.

  • Find out more

Take a look at ICAEW training films

Focusing on professional scepticism, ethics and everyday business challenges, our training films are used by firms and companies around the world to support their in-house training and business development teams.

Attract and retain the next generation of accounting and finance professionals with our world-leading accountancy qualifications. Become authorised to offer ACA training and help your business stay ahead.

CPD guidance and help

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is an integral part of being a successful ICAEW Chartered Accountant. Find support on ICAEW's CPD requirements and access resources to help your professional development.

ICAEW flagship events

ICAEW boasts an extensive portfolio of industry-leading conferences. These flagship events offer the opportunity to hear from and interact with all the key players in the industry. Find out what's coming up.

Leadership Development Programmes

ICAEW Academy’s in-depth leadership development programmes take a holistic approach to combine insightful mentoring or coaching, to exclusive events, peer learning groups and workshops. Catering for those significant transitions in your career, these leadership development programmes are instrumental to achieving your ambitions or fulfilling your succession planning goals.

Specialist Finance Qualifications & Programmes

Whatever future path you choose, ICAEW will support the development and acceleration of your career at each stage to enhance your career.

 Young people

Why a career in chartered accountancy?

If you think chartered accountants spend their lives confined to their desks, then think again. They are sitting on the boards of multinational companies, testifying in court and advising governments, as well as supporting charities and businesses from every industry all over the world.

  • Why chartered accountancy?

 Telescope

Search for qualified ACA jobs

Matching highly skilled ICAEW members with attractive organisations seeking talented accountancy and finance professionals.

Volunteering roles

Helping skilled and in-demand chartered accountants give back and strengthen not-for-profit sector with currently over 2,300 organisations posting a variety of volunteering roles with ICAEW.

  • Search for volunteer roles
  • Get ahead by volunteering

Advertise with ICAEW

From as little as £495, access to a pool of highly qualified and ambitious ACA qualified members with searchable CVs.

Early careers and training

Start your ACA training with ICAEW. Find out why a career in chartered accountancy could be for you and how to become a chartered accountant.

Qualified ACA careers

Find Accountancy and Finance Jobs

Voluntary roles

Find Voluntary roles

While you pursue the most interesting and rewarding opportunities at every stage of your career, we’re here to offer you support whatever stage you are or wherever you are in the world and in whichever sector you have chosen to work.

ACA students

"how to guides" for aca students.

  • ACA student guide
  • How to book an exam
  • How to apply for credit for prior learning (CPL)

Exam resources

Here are some resources you will find useful while you study for the ACA qualification.

  • Certificate Level
  • Professional Level
  • Advanced Level

Digital learning materials

All ACA learning materials are now digital only. Read our guide on how to access your learning materials on the ICAEW Bookshelf via the BibliU app, or through your browser.

  • Read the guide

My online training file

Once you are registered as an ACA student, you'll be able to access your training file to log your progress throughout ACA training.

  • Access your training file
  • Student Insights

Fresh insights, innovative ideas and an inside look at the lives and careers of our ICAEW students and members.

  • Read the latest articles

System status checks

Getting started.

Welcome to ICAEW! We have pulled together a selection of resources to help you get started with your ACA training, including our popular 'How To' series, which offers step-by-step guidance on everything from registering as an ACA student and applying for CPL, to using your online training file.

Credit for prior learning (CPL)

Credit for prior learning or CPL is our term for exemptions. High quality learning and assessment in other relevant qualifications is appropriately recognised by the award of CPL.

Apply for exams

What you need to know in order to apply for the ACA exams.

The ACA qualification has 15 modules over three levels. They are designed to complement the practical experience you will be gaining in the workplace. They will also enable you to gain in-depth knowledge across a broad range of topics in accountancy, finance and business. Here are some useful resources while you study.

  • Exam results

You will receive your results for all Certificate Level exams, the day after you take the exam and usually five weeks after a Professional and Advanced Level exam session has taken place. Access your latest and archived exam results here.

Training agreement

Putting your theory work into practice is essential to complete your ACA training.

Student support and benefits

We are here to support you throughout your ACA journey. We have a range of resources and services on offer for you to unwrap, from exam resources, to student events and discount cards. Make sure you take advantage of the wealth of exclusive benefits available to you, all year round.

  • Applying for membership

The ACA will open doors to limitless opportunities in all areas of accountancy, business and finance anywhere in the world. ICAEW Chartered Accountants work at the highest levels as finance directors, CEOs and partners of some of the world’s largest organisations.

ACA training FAQs

Do you have a question about the ACA training? Then look no further. Here, you can find answers to frequently asked questions relating to the ACA qualification and training. Find out more about each of the integrated components of the ACA, as well as more information on the syllabus, your training agreement, ICAEW’s rules and regulations and much more.

  • Anti-money laundering

Guidance and resources to help members comply with their legal and professional responsibilities around AML.

Technical releases

ICAEW Technical Releases are a source of good practice guidance on technical and practice issues relevant to ICAEW Chartered Accountants and other finance professionals.

  • ICAEW Technical Releases
  • Thought leadership

ICAEW's Thought Leadership reports provide clarity and insight on the current and future challenges to the accountancy profession. Our charitable trusts also provide funding for academic research into accountancy.

  • Academic research funding

Technical Advisory Services helpsheets

Practical, technical and ethical guidance highlighting the most important issues for members, whether in practice or in business.

  • ICAEW Technical Advisory Services helpsheets

Bloomsbury – free for eligible firms

In partnership with Bloomsbury Professional, ICAEW have provided eligible firms with free access to Bloomsbury’s comprehensive online library of around 80 titles from leading tax and accounting subject matter experts.

  • Bloomsbury Accounting and Tax Service

Country resources

Our resources by country provide access to intelligence on over 170 countries and territories including economic forecasts, guides to doing business and information on the tax climate in each jurisdiction.

Industries and sectors

Thought leadership, technical resources and professional guidance to support the professional development of members working in specific industries and sectors.

Audit and Assurance

The audit, assurance and internal audit area has information and guidance on technical and practical matters in relation to these three areas of practice. There are links to events, publications, technical help and audit representations.

The most up-to-date thought leadership, insights, technical resources and professional guidance to support ICAEW members working in and with industry with their professional development.

  • Corporate Finance

Companies, advisers and investors making decisions about creating, developing and acquiring businesses – and the wide range of advisory careers that require this specialist professional expertise.

  • Corporate governance

Corporate governance is the system by which companies are directed and controlled. Find out more about corporate governance principles, codes and reports, Board subcommittees, roles and responsibilities and shareholder relations. Corporate governance involves balancing the interests of a company’s many stakeholders, such as shareholders, employees, management, customers, suppliers, financiers and the community. Getting governance right is essential to build public trust in companies.

Corporate reporting

View a range of practical resources on UK GAAP, IFRS, UK regulation for company accounts and non-financial reporting. Plus find out more about the ICAEW Corporate Reporting Faculty.

Expert analysis on the latest national and international economic issues and trends, and interviews with prominent voices across the finance industry, alongside data on the state of the economy.

  • Financial Services

View articles and resources on the financial services sector.

  • Practice resources

For ICAEW's members in practice, this area brings together the most up-to-date thought leadership, technical resources and professional guidance to help you in your professional life.

Public Sector

Many ICAEW members work in or with the public sector to deliver public priorities and strong public finances. ICAEW acts in the public interest to support strong financial leadership and better financial management across the public sector – featuring transparency, accountability, governance and ethics – to ensure that public money is spent wisely and that public finances are sustainable.

Sustainability and climate change

Sustainability describes a world that does not live by eating into its capital, whether natural, economic or social. Members in practice, in business and private individuals all have a role to play if sustainability goals are to be met. The work being undertaken by ICAEW in this area is to change behaviour to drive sustainable outcomes.

The Tax area has information and guidance on technical and practical tax matters. There are links to events, the latest tax news and the Tax Faculty’s publications, including helpsheets, webinars and Tax representations.

Keep up-to-date with tech issues and developments, including artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain, big data, and cyber security.

  • Trust & Ethics

Guidance and resources on key issues, including economic crime, business law, better regulation and ethics. Read through ICAEW’s Code of Ethics and supporting information.

Communities

Polaroids on pinboard

ICAEW Communities

Information, guidance and networking opportunities on industry sectors, professional specialisms and at various stages throughout your career. Free for ICAEW members and students.

  • Discover a new community

Faculties

ICAEW Faculties

The accountancy profession is facing change and uncertainty. The ICAEW Faculties can help by providing you with timely and relevant support.

  • Choose to join any of the faculties

UK groups and societies

We have teams on the ground in: East of England, the Midlands, London and South East, Northern, South West, Yorkshire and Humberside, Wales and Scotland.

  • Access your UK region
  • Worldwide support and services

Support and services we offer our members in Africa, America, Canada, the Caribbean, Europe, Greater China, the Middle East, Oceania and South East Asia.

  • Discover our services

ICAEW Faculties are 'centres of technical excellence', strongly committed to enhancing your professional development and helping you to meet your CPD requirements every year. They offer exclusive content, events and webinars, customised for your sector - which you should be able to easily record, when the time comes for the completion of your CPD declaration. Our offering isn't exclusive to Institute members. As a faculty member, the same resources are available to you to ensure you stay ahead of the competition.

Communities by industry / sector

Communities by life stage and workplace, communities by professional specialism, local groups and societies.

We aim to support you wherever in the world you work. Our regional offices and network of volunteers run events and provide access to local accounting updates in major finance centres around the globe.

  • Election explainers

ICAEW experts offer simple guides to help understand the technical, economic jargon that will be at the heart of political debates in the coming weeks.

Insights pulls together the best opinion, analysis, interviews, videos and podcasts on the key issues affecting accountancy and business.

  • See the latest insights

ICAEW podcasts

ICAEW produces two podcast series that count towards your CPD: Accountancy Insights for news from across the profession, and The Tax Track for specialist analysis from the ICAEW Tax Faculty.

Professional development and skills

With new requirements on ICAEW members for continuing professional development, we bring together resources to support you through the changes and look at the skills accountants need for the future.

  • Visit the hub
  • Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity and inclusion is a key pillar of ICAEW's strategy. Discover the latest insights on equality, diversity and inclusion. You can also join our Diversity & Inclusion Community.

  • Find out more on our hub
  • Join the community

Insights specials

A listing of one-off Insights specials that focus on a particular subject, interviewing the key people, identifying developing trends and examining the underlying issues.

Top podcasts

Insights by topic.

Regulation graphic

ICAEW Regulation

Regulation graphic

  • Regulatory News

View the latest regulatory updates and guidance and subscribe to our monthly newsletter, Regulatory & Conduct News.

  • Regulatory Consultations

Strengthening trust in the profession

Our role as a world-leading improvement regulator is to strengthen trust and protect the public. We do this by enabling, evaluating and enforcing the highest standards in the profession. 

Regulatory applications

Find out how you can become authorised by ICAEW as a regulated firm. 

ICAEW codes and regulations

Professional conduct and complaints, statutory regulated services overseen by icaew, regulations for icaew practice members and firms, additional guidance and support, popular search results.

  • Practice Exam Software
  • Training File
  • Ethics Cpd Course
  • Routes to the ACA
  • ACA students membership application
  • Join as a member of another body
  • How much are membership fees?
  • How to pay your fees
  • Receipts and invoices
  • What if my circumstances have changed?
  • Difficulties in making changes to your membership
  • Faculty and community subscription fees
  • Updating your details
  • Complete annual return
  • Promoting myself as an ICAEW member
  • Verification of ICAEW membership
  • Become a life member
  • Become a fellow
  • Request a new certificate
  • Report the death of a member
  • Practising certificates
  • Advancement to fellowship regulations
  • Regulations relating to membership cessation, readmission and resignation
  • ICAEW's guide to directors' duties and responsibilities
  • Information to be supplied by members
  • Payment of annual subscription
  • Power to change subscription fees
  • New members
  • Career progression
  • Career Breakers
  • Volunteering at schools and universities
  • ICAEW Member App
  • Working internationally
  • Self employment
  • Support Members Scheme
  • CPD is changing
  • CPD learning resources
  • Your guide to CPD
  • Online CPD record
  • How to become a chartered accountant
  • Register as a student
  • Train as a member of another body
  • More about the ACA and chartered accountancy
  • How ACA training works
  • Become a training employer
  • Access the training file
  • Why choose the ACA
  • Training routes
  • Employer support hub
  • Get in touch
  • Apprenticeships with ICAEW
  • A-Z of CPD courses by topic
  • ICAEW Business and Finance Professional (BFP)
  • ICAEW Annual Conference 2024
  • Audit & Assurance Conference 2024
  • Restructuring & Insolvency Conference
  • Virtual CPD Conference
  • Virtual Healthcare Conference 2024
  • All our flagship events
  • Financial Talent Executive Network (F-TEN®)
  • Developing Leadership in Practice (DLiP™)
  • Network of Finance Leaders (NFL)
  • Women in Leadership (WiL)
  • Mentoring and coaching
  • Partners in Learning
  • Board Director's Programme e-learning
  • Corporate Finance Qualification
  • Diploma in Charity Accounting
  • ICAEW Certificate in Insolvency
  • ICAEW Data Analytics Certificate
  • Financial Modeling Institute’s Advanced Financial Modeler Accreditation
  • ICAEW Sustainability Certificate for Finance Professionals
  • ICAEW Finance in a Digital World Programme
  • All specialist qualifications
  • Team training
  • Start your training
  • Improve your employability
  • Search employers
  • Find a role
  • Role alerts
  • Organisations
  • Practice support – 11 ways ICAEW and CABA can help you
  • News and advice
  • ICAEW Volunteering Hub
  • Support in becoming a chartered accountant
  • Vacancies at ICAEW
  • ICAEW boards and committees
  • Exam system status
  • ICAEW systems: status update
  • Changes to our qualifications
  • How-to guides for ACA students
  • Apply for credits - Academic qualification
  • Apply for credits - Professional qualification
  • Credit for prior learning (CPL)/exemptions FAQs
  • Applications for Professional and Advanced Level exams
  • Applications for Certificate Level exams
  • Tuition providers
  • Latest exam results
  • Archived exam results
  • Getting your results
  • Marks feedback service
  • Exam admin check
  • Training agreement: overview
  • Professional development
  • Ethics and professional scepticism
  • Practical work experience
  • Access your online training file
  • How training works in your country
  • Student rewards
  • TOTUM PRO Card
  • Student events and volunteering
  • Xero cloud accounting certifications
  • Student support
  • Join a community
  • Wellbeing support from caba
  • Student mentoring programme
  • Student conduct and behaviour
  • Code of ethics
  • Fit and proper
  • Level 4 Accounting Technician Apprenticeship
  • Level 7 Accountancy Professional Apprenticeship
  • AAT-ACA Fast Track FAQs
  • ACA rules and regulations FAQs
  • ACA syllabus FAQs
  • ACA training agreement FAQs
  • Audit experience and the Audit Qualification FAQs
  • Independent student FAQs
  • Practical work experience FAQs
  • Professional development FAQs
  • Six-monthly reviews FAQs
  • Ethics and professional scepticism FAQs
  • Greater China
  • Latin America
  • Middle East
  • North America
  • Australasia
  • Russia and Eurasia
  • South East Asia
  • Charity Community
  • Construction & Real Estate
  • Energy & Natural Resources Community
  • Farming & Rural Business Community
  • Forensic & Expert Witness
  • Global Trade Community
  • Healthcare Community
  • Internal Audit Community
  • Manufacturing Community
  • Media & Leisure
  • Portfolio Careers Community
  • Small and Micro Business Community
  • Small Practitioners Community
  • Travel, Tourism & Hospitality Community
  • Valuation Community
  • Audit and corporate governance reform
  • Audit & Assurance Faculty
  • Professional judgement
  • Regulation and working in audit
  • Internal audit resource centre
  • ICAEW acting on audit quality
  • Everything business
  • Latest Business news from Insights
  • Strategy, risk and innovation
  • Business performance management
  • Financial management
  • Finance transformation
  • Economy and business environment
  • Leadership, personal development and HR
  • Webinars and publications
  • Business restructuring
  • The Business Finance Guide
  • Capital markets and investment
  • Corporate finance careers
  • Corporate Finance Faculty
  • Debt advisory and growth finance
  • Mergers and acquisitions
  • Private equity
  • Start-ups, scale-ups and venture capital
  • Transaction services
  • Board committees and board effectiveness
  • Corporate governance codes and reports
  • Corporate Governance Community
  • Principles of corporate governance
  • Roles, duties and responsibilities of Board members
  • Stewardship and stakeholder relations
  • Corporate Governance thought leadership
  • Corporate reporting resources
  • Small and micro entity reporting
  • UK Regulation for Company Accounts
  • Non-financial reporting
  • Improving Corporate Reporting
  • Economy home
  • ICAEW Business Confidence Monitor
  • ICAEW Manifesto 2024
  • Spring Budget 2024
  • Energy crisis
  • Levelling up: rebalancing the UK’s economy
  • Resilience and Renewal: Building an economy fit for the future
  • Social mobility and inclusion
  • Investment management
  • Inspiring confidence
  • Setting up in practice
  • Running your practice
  • Supporting your clients
  • Practice technology
  • TAS helpsheets
  • Support for business advisers
  • Join ICAEW BAS
  • Public Sector hub
  • Public Sector Audit and Assurance
  • Public Sector Finances
  • Public Sector Financial Management
  • Public Sector Financial Reporting
  • Public Sector Learning & Development
  • Public Sector Community
  • Latest public sector articles from Insights
  • Making COP count
  • Climate hub
  • Sustainable Development Goals
  • Accountability
  • Modern slavery
  • Resources collection
  • Sustainability Committee
  • Sustainability & Climate Change community
  • Sustainability and climate change home
  • Tax Faculty
  • Budgets and legislation
  • Business tax
  • Devolved taxes
  • Employment taxes
  • International taxes
  • Making Tax Digital
  • Personal tax
  • Property tax
  • Stamp duty land tax
  • Tax administration
  • Tax compliance and investigation
  • UK tax rates, allowances and reliefs
  • Artificial intelligence
  • Blockchain and cryptoassets
  • Cyber security
  • Data Analytics Community
  • Digital skills
  • Excel community
  • Finance in a Digital World
  • IT management
  • Technology and the profession
  • Trust & Ethics home
  • Better regulation
  • Business Law
  • UK company law
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Economic crime
  • Help with ethical problems
  • ICAEW Code of Ethics
  • ICAEW Trust and Ethics team.....
  • Solicitors Community
  • Forensic & Expert Witness Community
  • Latest articles on business law, trust and ethics
  • Audit and Assurance Faculty
  • Corporate Reporting Faculty
  • Financial Services Faculty
  • Academia & Education Community
  • Construction & Real Estate Community
  • Entertainment, Sport & Media Community
  • Retail Community
  • Career Breakers Community
  • Black Members Community
  • Diversity & Inclusion Community
  • Women in Finance Community
  • Personal Financial Planning Community
  • Restructuring & Insolvency Community
  • Sustainability and Climate Change Community
  • London and East
  • South Wales
  • Yorkshire and Humberside
  • European public policy activities
  • ICAEW Middle East
  • Latest news
  • The World’s Fastest Accountant
  • Access to finance special
  • Attractiveness of the profession
  • Audit and Fraud
  • Audit and technology
  • Adopting non-financial reporting standards
  • Cost of doing business
  • Mental health and wellbeing
  • Pensions and Personal Finance
  • Ukraine crisis: central resource hub
  • More specials ...
  • The economics of biodiversity
  • How chartered accountants can help to safeguard trust in society
  • Video: The financial controller who stole £20,000 from her company
  • It’s time for chartered accountants to save the world
  • Video: The CFO who tried to trick the market
  • Video: Could invoice fraud affect your business?
  • Corporate reporting update and VAT on private hire vehicles
  • AI in audit: the good, the bad and the ugly
  • Company size thresholds and CGT on residences
  • Lessons in leadership from ICAEW's CEO
  • So you want to be a leader?
  • A busy new tax year, plus progress on the Economic Crime Act
  • Does Britain have a farming problem?
  • Budget 2024: does it change anything?
  • Will accountants save the world? With ICAEW CEO Michael Izza
  • Crunch time: VAT (or not) on poppadoms
  • Where next for audit and governance reform?
  • More podcasts...
  • Top charts of the week
  • EU and international trade
  • CEO and President's insights
  • Sponsored content
  • Insights index
  • Charter and Bye-laws
  • Archive of complaints, disciplinary and fitness processes, statutory regulations and ICAEW regulations
  • Qualifications regulations
  • Training and education regulations
  • How to make a complaint
  • Guidance on your duty to report misconduct
  • Public hearings
  • What to do if you receive a complaint against you
  • Anti-money laundering supervision
  • Working in the regulated area of audit
  • Local public audit in England
  • Probate services
  • Designated Professional Body (Investment Business) licence
  • Consumer credit
  • Quality Assurance monitoring: view from the firms
  • The ICAEW Practice Assurance scheme
  • Licensed Practice scheme
  • Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII)
  • Clients' Money Regulations
  • Taxation (PCRT) Regulations
  • ICAEW training films
  • Helpsheets and guidance by topic
  • ICAEW's regulatory expertise and history

Framework for resolving ethical problems

A framework to help resolve ethical problems starting with identifying the problems and parties involved to implementing the course of action and monitoring its progress.

When trying to solve an ethical problem, you may find it useful to refer to the following framework, which is based on the framework included in  ICAEW's Code of Ethics .

The ethics advisory team has also developed a Resolving ethical issues flowchart to help members resolve ethical issues as they arise.

  • View the flowchart

ICAEW framework - how to resolve ethical problems

1) gather the relevant facts and identify the problems.

  • Do I have all the facts relevant to the situation?
  • Am I making assumptions? If so, could facts be identified to replace these assumptions?
  • Is it really your problem? Can anybody else help?

2) Identify the affected parties

  • Who are the individuals, organisations and key stakeholders affected?
  • In what way are they affected?
  • Are there conflicts between different stakeholders?
  • Who are your allies?

3) Consider the ethical issues involved

  • Have you referred to ICAEW's Code of Ethics?
  • What are the professional, organisational and personal ethics issues?
  • Would these ethical issues affect the reputation of the accountancy profession?
  • Would these ethical issues affect the public interest?

4) Identify which fundamental principles are affected

  • What are the threats to compliance with the fundamental principles of:
  • Objectivity
  • Professional competence and due care
  • Confidentiality
  • Professional behaviour
  • Have you considered the following threats?
  • Self interest
  • Self-review
  • Familiarity
  • Intimidation
  • If so, are the treats to compliance with the fundamental principles clearly insignificant?
  • Are there safeguards which can eliminate or reduce the threats to an acceptable level? Safeguards can be created by:
  • Profession, legislation and regulation
  • Work environment

5) Refer to the employing organisation's internal procedures

  • Does your organisation's policies and procedure provide guidance on the situation?
  • How can you escalate concerns within the organisation? Who should be involved, in what role and at what stage?
  • Does the organisation have a whistleblowing procedure?
  • At what point should you seek guidance from external sources such as ICAEW

6) Consider and evaluate alternative courses of action

  • You should consider:
  • Your organisation's policies, procedures and guidelines
  • Applicable laws and regulation
  • Universal values and principles generally accepted by society
  • Consequences
  • Test your proposed course of action. Ask yourself the following questions:
  • Have all the consequences associated with the proposed course of action been discussed and evaluated?
  • Is there any reason why the proposed course of action should not stand the test of time?
  • Would a similar course of action be undertaken in a similar situation?
  • Would the suggested course of action stand to scrutiny from peers, family and friends?

7) Implement the course of action and monitor its progress

When faced with an ethical issue, it may be in your best interests to document your thought processes, discussions and the decisions taken. Written records will be useful if you need to justify your course of action.

Other frameworks

In addition to ICAEW's framework for revolving ethical problems, there are a number of other frameworks for resolving such problems which you may find helpful.

  • Carter McMamara - Ethics Toolkit for Managers
  • Institute of Business Ethics - Simple Ethical Tests for a business decision
  • Jon Pekel and Doug Wallace -The Ten Step Method of Decision-Making (PDF 101KB/13 pages)
  • Josephson Institute of Ethics - Making Ethical Decisions
  • Markula Center for Applied Ethics - A framework for thinking ethically

Read out this code to the operator.

  • Creating Environments Conducive to Social Interaction

Thinking Ethically: A Framework for Moral Decision Making

  • Developing a Positive Climate with Trust and Respect
  • Developing Self-Esteem, Confidence, Resiliency, and Mindset
  • Developing Ability to Consider Different Perspectives
  • Developing Tools and Techniques Useful in Social Problem-Solving
  • Leadership Problem-Solving Model
  • A Problem-Solving Model for Improving Student Achievement
  • Six-Step Problem-Solving Model
  • Hurson’s Productive Thinking Model: Solving Problems Creatively
  • The Power of Storytelling and Play
  • Creative Documentation & Assessment
  • Materials for Use in Creating “Third Party” Solution Scenarios
  • Resources for Connecting Schools to Communities
  • Resources for Enabling Students

Benefits most but not all  Protects the rights of all  Distributes benefits fairly among all Benefits the common good virtue and development of character

Examples which can be used in early childhood settings:

. Benefits most but not all. Eminent Domain is an excellent example of this. A city may wish to put in a new road or airport, for instance, and what is in the way may have to be removed or relocated (houses, fields, stores, etc.). This could be reacted with puppets, a felt story, drawings, etc. The block area would be a nice setting for it.

Protects the rights of all. For example, everyone in an early childhood center deserves to be treated with respect and kindness, to have a chance to tell their side of a story, to be able to seek help when needed, to have water when thirsty, access to food when hungry, access to the bathroom when needed, access to rest when tired, and so forth. Many school settings have the children generate a Code of Conduct which applies to everyone. When children are part of the generation of a Code of Conduct, they are more invested in it and more understanding of what it is about.

. Distributes benefits fairly among all. Here is an example from an early childhood center in NH: “We had an example of the Justice Model today! The children were gathered, ready to go outside to the playground. However, the door through which we usually exit was blocked due to a painting project by our maintenance peole. So, the problem to be solved was: How do we get outside today? As a group, we processed possible solutions. One child said, “We can go out through Miss Lori’s room!” Another child said, “We can go out through the kitchen!” Other options included not going out at all, or waiting until the painting project was completed. At this point, a heavy discussion ensued as to which room we should exit from. Children had very strong opinions on this. It was clear that the group was all in favor of going outside right away, but some wanted to exit through Miss Lori’s door and others through the kitchen door. I was going to facilitate our usual method of voting to determine the solution, but suddenly the Justice Ethical Model popped into my mind. Perhaps there was a way to satisfy everyone – distributing the benefits of the solution equally… I brought this up to the children, and asked if there was a solution where everyone could get their way. A couple of children said that we could go out in two groups! One group through Miss Lori’s door and the other group through the kitchen door! So we did this! Esther led the “Miss Lori door” group, and I the kitchen door group! Only an hour earlier I had been musing about how to present these rather abstract, complex ethical models to the children in a way they could understand. Fate easily resolved this situation!”

Benefits the “common good.” Here is an example from an early childhood center whose children wished to have a seesaw for their playground – benefiting all of them! The story follows:

 

Promotes virtue and development of character. Sometimes a solution to a problem may hurt someone’s feelings, or interfere with a personal vision. An example might be if a child were building a tower in the block area, and others wanted to join in. Should it then become a group building project? Collaboration, and so forth? Or should the original child be allowed to finish what he had started (Imagine if Michelangelo had had help on a sculpture, or da Vinci on one of his works…) Sometimes collaboration is good, and sometimes individual expression is good. It can be a process deciding which is most beneficial in a situation…

Philosophers have developed five different approaches to values to deal with moral issues.


Utilitarianism was conceived in the 19th century by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill to help legislators determine which laws were morally best. Both Bentham and Mill suggested that ethical actions are those that provide the greatest balance of good over evil.

To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify the various courses of action available to us. Second, we ask who will be affected by each action and what benefits or harms will be derived from each. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest benefits and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the greatest number.


The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused on the individual’s right to choose for herself or himself. According to these philosophers, what makes human beings different from mere things is that people have dignity based on their ability to choose freely what they will do with their lives, and they have a fundamental moral right to have these choices respected. People are not objects to be manipulated; it is a violation of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely choose.

Of course, many different, but related, rights exist besides this basic one. These other rights (an incomplete list below) can be thought of as different aspects of the basic right to be treated as we choose.

In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach, then, we must ask, Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone? Actions are wrong to the extent that they violate the rights of individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the action.


The fairness or justice approach to ethics has its roots in the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, who said that “equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally.” The basic moral question in this approach is: How fair is an action? Does it treat everyone in the same way, or does it show favoritism and discrimination?

Favoritism gives benefits to some people without a justifiable reason for singling them out; discrimination imposes burdens on people who are no different from those on whom burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism and discrimination are unjust and wrong.


This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own good is inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community members are bound by the pursuit of common values and goals.

The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. More recently, contemporary ethicist John Rawls defined the common good as “certain general conditions that are…equally to everyone’s advantage.”

In this approach, we focus on ensuring that the social policies, social systems, institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Examples of goods common to all include affordable health care, effective public safety, peace among nations, a just legal system, and an unpolluted environment.

Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society. While respecting and valuing the freedom of individuals to pursue their own goals, the common-good approach challenges us also to recognize and further those goals we share in common.


The virtue approach to ethics assumes that there are certain ideals toward which we should strive, which provide for the full development of our humanity. These ideals are discovered through thoughtful reflection on what kind of people we have the potential to become.

Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our highest potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues.

Virtues are like habits; that is, once acquired, they become characteristic of a person. Moreover, a person who has developed virtues will be naturally disposed to act in ways consistent with moral principles. The virtuous person is the ethical person.

In dealing with an ethical problem using the virtue approach, we might ask, What kind of person should I be? What will promote the development of character within myself and my community?


These five approaches suggest that once we have ascertained the facts, we should ask ourselves five questions when trying to resolve a moral issue:

This method, of course, does not provide an automatic solution to moral problems. It is not meant to. The method is merely meant to help identify most of the important ethical considerations. In the end, we must deliberate on moral issues for ourselves, keeping a careful eye on both the facts and on the ethical considerations involved.

This article updates several previous pieces from by Manuel Velasquez – Dirksen Professor of Business Ethics at Santa Clara University and former Center director – and Claire Andre, associate Center director. “Thinking Ethically” is based on a framework developed by the authors in collaboration with Center Director Thomas Shanks, S.J., Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good Michael J. Meyer, and others. The framework is used as the basis for many programs and presentations at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.

These 5 approaches and their history can be found at:

Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v7n1/thinking.html

what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  • Staff and Board
  • Mission and Strategic Plan
  • Berkshire Region
  • Central Region
  • Northeast Region
  • Pioneer Valley Region
  • Southeast Region
  • Shared Interest Groups / Activities / Task Forces
  • Donate to NASW-MA Chapter
  • Membership Benefits
  • Student Membership
  • Join or Renew
  • Action Center
  • Legislative Agenda & Priority Bills
  • Legislative Education & Advocacy Day (LEAD)
  • Political Action for Candidate Election (PACE)
  • Additional Advocacy Resources
  • Employment Lawyers and Legal Resources
  • Clinical Alerts
  • Private Practice
  • Supervision
  • Workplace Safety
  • Social Work Assistance Network (SWAN)
  • Therapy Matcher
  • FOCUS CE Mailer PDF Archive
  • CE Webinars
  • MLK Jr. Forum 2025 - coming soon
  • Virtual Symposium 2025 Call for Proposals
  • Nursing Home & Elder Issues Conference 2024
  • Virtual School Social Work Conference 2023
  • CE Events Calendar
  • Online CE Institute
  • CE Authorization by NASW-MA
  • CE Frequently Asked Questions
  • CE Advertisements
  • Student Resource Center
  • BIPOC Student Membership Program
  • Graduation Cords
  • Legislative Education and Advocacy Day (LEAD)
  • Licensing Test Prep
  • Career Services
  • Professional Mentoring
  • Loan Forgiveness
  • Scholarships / Fellowships
  • Student Ambassador Program
  • Intern with NASW-MA
  • Social Work Voice (member only)
  • Email Newsletter (member only)
  • Office Space
  • CE Programs & Trainings
  • Supervision, Groups, and Services
  • Volunteer, Research, Other
  • Place an Ad
  • Award Nominations 2024
  • Awards 2023
  • Awards Information and History
Name:
Category:
Share:
Essential Steps in Ethical Problem Solving

FOCUS Newsletter - July, 1996

Determine whether there is an ethical issue or dilemma. Is there a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities? (For example, there may be an issue of self-determination of an adolescent versus the well-being of the family.)

Identify the key values and principles involved. What meanings and limitations are typically attached to these competing values? (For example, rarely is confidential information held in absolute secrecy; however, we typically hold that decisions about access by third parties to sensitive content should be contracted with clients.)

Rank the values or ethical principles which in your professional judgment are most relevant to the issue or dilemma. What reasons can you provide for prioritizing one competing value/principle over another? (For example, your client's right to choose a beneficial course of action could bring hardship or harm to others who would be affected.)

Develop an action plan that is consistent with the ethical priorities that have been determined as central to the dilemma. Have you conferred with clients and colleagues, as appropriate, about the potential risks and consequences of alternative courses of action? Can you support or justify your action plan with the values and principles on which the plan is based? (For example, have you conferred with all necessary persons regarding the ethical dimensions of planning for a battered wife's quest to secure secret shelter and the implications for her teenaged children?)

Implement your plan utilizing the most appropriate practice skills and competencies. How will you make use of core social work skills such as sensitive communication, skillful negotiation, and cultural competence? (For example, skillful colleague or supervisory communication and negotiation may enable an impaired colleague to see her/his impact on clients and to take appropriate action.)

Reflecting on the outcome of this ethical decision making process. How would you evaluate the consequences of this process for those involved: client(s), professional(s), and agency (ies)? (Increasingly, professionals have begun to seek support, further professional training, and consultation through the development of Ethics Review Committees or Ethics Consultation processes.)

 

 

Ethics Resources:

(formerly COI)

Other Ethics Information:

6/7/2024 Liability Insurance Information

6/4/2024 Symposium 2025 Call for Proposals is NOW OPEN!

5/23/2024 SUPER Act Social Worker Sign-On Letter

5/16/2024 FY25 State Senate Budget Advocacy

7/18/2024 Virtual License Test Prep Course

8/8/2024 Virtual License Test Prep Course

9/14/2024 Virtual License Test Prep Course

10/5/2024 Virtual License Test Prep Course

National Association of Social Workers - Massachusetts Chapter 6 Beacon Street, Suite 915, Boston MA 02108 tel: (617)227-9635 fax: (617)227-9877 email: chapter [email protected] Copyright 2020, NASW-MA. All rights reserved.

Adviser login

Mobile navigation.

  • For migrants
  • Guides and resources
  • Who can give advice?
  • Working with a licensed immigration adviser
  • How much should an adviser cost?
  • The risks of relying on illegal advice
  • Make a complaint
  • Find an adviser
  • Can I give advice?
  • Who needs a licence?
  • Operating without a licence
  • Information for employers
  • Information for education providers
  • Information for education agents
  • Information for travel agents
  • Information for recruiters
  • Become a licensed adviser
  • How to apply
  • Apply as an Australian registered migration agent
  • Licensing toolkit
  • Supervision toolkit
  • Follow my application
  • Frequently asked questions
  • For advisers
  • Your licence
  • Competency standards
  • Code of conduct
  • Adviser tools
  • Licenced advisers reference group
  • Annual statistics
  • Enforcement Policy
  • Judicial and tribunal decisions

For advisers small banner

Solving ethical problems

When faced with an ethical issue, it is important to remember that there is seldom only one correct way in which to act. The information provided below, however, is intended as a guide to assist you to make professional and ethically responsible decisions.

Making good ethical decisions requires a method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision, and weighing up the considerations that could influence your choice of action.

The following framework provides a method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action. A Worksheet for Ethical Deliberation has also been developed for advisers.

Ethical decision-making framework

The flowchart below outlines the steps in the ethical decision-making process. Each step is described in further detail below.

Recognising that there is an ethical question:

  • requires you to think about how you should act and what you should do in a given situation
  • could relate to a situation and/or a decision that you make, which could be potentially damaging to a client or a stakeholder
  • could involve a choice between a good and a bad outcome – e.g. a situation where Immigration New Zealand would decline your client’s visa application because of certain information that the client has disclosed to you, but of which Immigration New Zealand is unaware.

Understanding the facts of the situation:

  • requires you to consider how you can learn more about the situation including making enquiries and finding additional facts to ensure you have the best possible understanding of the situation.

Understanding the options available to you:

  • requires you to identify and understand each option available to you
  • requires you to take into account any legislative requirements, professional standards (such as the Code), immigration law and instructions, as these may influence your options.

Understanding the consequences of the options:

  • requires you to work out how different parties will be affected by each option - these parties can include the client, stakeholders within the New Zealand immigration system, your employer and other advisers
  • requires you to be aware that your overriding duty is always to act in the lawful and legitimate interests of your client
  • requires you to ask yourself some searching questions, for example:
  • If I am going to act in a way that is adverse to my client’s interests in any way, am I justified in doing so?
  • Which option will produce the most good for my client even if it will upset another person or cause me discomfort or loss?
  • Will this require me to act in a way that will harm someone else or go against my personal beliefs or ethics?
  • Is there a way to act that will not damage my client’s interests but will reduce or prevent harm to another person or institution?
  • Is there a way to act that will not damage my client’s interests and will allow me to act in the way I believe is consistent with the type of adviser that I want to be?

Testing the option you plan to take:

  • requires you to consider the possible effects of all the different options
  • requires you to reflect on and thoroughly review the option that you plan to take – in doing so, you should ask yourself the following questions:
  • Am I feeling uncomfortable with what I am about to do?
  • If so, why am I feeling uncomfortable about this option?
  • Why am I making this decision?
  • Would I be happy if this was done to me?
  • Would I be happy explaining this to different parties within the New Zealand immigration system and explaining why I did what I am planning to do?

Explaining the option you have decided on to those affected and to other interested parties:

  • requires you to act in a way that your client, or another party, may not like or may find difficult to understand
  • requires you to be able to justify your actions in a logical and straightforward manner - if you cannot explain your actions, then it is more likely that you are acting on the basis of your feelings or prejudices
  • will often require you to have kept excellent records that note the essentials of what the issue was, what you did to resolve it, the options you considered and how you communicated your decision to those affected.

Acting on the chosen option:

  • requires you to consider how you will go about implementing your decision
  • requires you to actually carry through with the action you decided to take.

Reflecting on the outcome:

  • requires you to assess how your decision turned out and what you learnt from this specific situation - to objectively evaluate what has happened and whether the option you took worked.

Ethics toolkit related content

2014 code of conduct, worksheet for ethical deliberation.

If you don't already have a RealMe® login, you'll need to create one before you can make any changes. 

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Logo of pheelsevier

Problem solving through values: A challenge for thinking and capability development

  • • This paper introduces the 4W framework of consistent problem solving through values.
  • • The 4W suggests when, how and why the explication of values helps to solve a problem.
  • • The 4W is significant to teach students to cope with problems having crucial consequences.
  • • The paper considers challenges using such framework of thinking in different fields of education.

The paper aims to introduce the conceptual framework of problem solving through values. The framework consists of problem analysis, selection of value(s) as a background for the solution, the search for alternative ways of the solution, and the rationale for the solution. This framework reveals when, how, and why is important to think about values when solving problems. A consistent process fosters cohesive and creative value-based thinking during problem solving rather than teaching specific values. Therefore, the framework discloses the possibility for enabling the development of value-grounded problem solving capability.The application of this framework highlights the importance of responsibility for the chosen values that are the basis for the alternatives which determine actions. The 4W framework is meaningful for the people’s lives and their professional work. It is particularly important in the process of future professionals’ education. Critical issues concerning the development of problem solving through values are discussed when considering and examining options for the implementation of the 4W framework in educational institutions.

1. Introduction

The core competencies necessary for future professionals include problem solving based on complexity and collaborative approaches ( OECD, 2018 ). Currently, the emphasis is put on the development of technical, technological skills as well as system thinking and other cognitive abilities (e.g., Barber, 2018 ; Blanco, Schirmbeck, & Costa, 2018 ). Hence, education prepares learners with high qualifications yet lacking in moral values ( Nadda, 2017 ). Educational researchers (e.g., Barnett, 2007 ; Harland & Pickering, 2010 ) stress that such skills and abilities ( the how? ), as well as knowledge ( the what? ), are insufficient to educate a person for society and the world. The philosophy of education underlines both the epistemological and ontological dimensions of learning. Barnett (2007) points out that the ontological dimension has to be above the epistemological one. The ontological dimension encompasses the issues related to values that education should foster ( Harland & Pickering, 2010 ). In addition, values are closely related to the enablement of learners in educational environments ( Jucevičienė et al., 2010 ). For these reasons, ‘ the why ?’ based on values is required in the learning process. The question arises as to what values and how it makes sense to educate them. Value-based education seeks to address these issues and concentrates on values transfer due to their integration into the curriculum. Yazdani and Akbarilakeh (2017) discussed that value-based education could only convey factual knowledge of values and ethics. However, such education does not guarantee the internalization of values. Nevertheless, value-based education indicates problem solving as one of the possibilities to develop values.

Values guide and affect personal behavior encompassing the ethical aspects of solutions ( Roccas, Sagiv, & Navon, 2017 ; Schwartz, 1992 , 2012 ; Verplanken & Holland, 2002 ). Therefore, they represent the essential foundation for solving a problem. Growing evidence indicates the creative potential of values ( Dollinger, Burke, & Gump, 2007 ; Kasof, Chen, Himsel, & Greenberger, 2007 ; Lebedeva et al., 2019) and emphasizes their significance for problem solving. Meanwhile, research in problem solving pays little attention to values. Most of the problem solving models (e.g., Newell & Simon, 1972 ; Jonassen, 1997 ) utilize a rational economic approach. Principally, the research on the mechanisms of problem solving have been conducted under laboratory conditions performing simple tasks ( Csapó & Funke, 2017 ). Moreover, some of the decision-making models share the same steps as problem solving (c.f., Donovan, Guss, & Naslund, 2015 ). This explains why these terms are sometimes used interchangeably ( Huitt, 1992 ). Indeed, decision-making is a part of problem solving, which emerges while choosing between alternatives. Yet, values, moral, and ethical issues are more common in decision-making research (e.g., Keeney, 1994 ; Verplanken & Holland, 2002 ; Hall & Davis, 2007 ; Sheehan & Schmidt, 2015 ). Though, research by Shepherd, Patzelt, and Baron (2013) , Baron, Zhao, and Miao (2015) has affirmed that contemporary business decision makers rather often leave aside ethical issues and moral values. Thus, ‘ethical disengagement fallacy’ ( Sternberg, 2017, p.7 ) occurs as people think that ethics is more relevant to others. In the face of such disengagement, ethical issues lose their prominence.

The analysis of the literature revealed a wide field of problem solving research presenting a range of more theoretical insights rather empirical evidence. Despite this, to date, a comprehensive model that reveals how to solve problems emphasizing thinking about values is lacking. This underlines the relevance of the chosen topic, i.e. a challenge for thinking and for the development of capabilities addressing problems through values. To address this gap, the following issues need to be investigated: When, how, and why a problem solver should take into account values during problem solving? What challenges may occur for using such framework of thinking in different fields of education? Aiming this, the authors of the paper substantiated the conceptual framework of problem solving grounded in consistent thinking about values. The substantiation consists of several parts. First, different approaches to solving problems were examined. Second, searching to reveal the possibilities of values integration into problem solving, value-based approaches significant for problem solving were critically analyzed. Third, drawing on the effect of values when solving a problem and their creative potential, the authors of this paper claim that the identification of values and their choice for a solution need to be specified in the process of problem solving. As a synthesis of conclusions coming from the literature review and conceptual extensions regarding values, the authors of the paper created the coherent framework of problem solving through values (so called 4W).

The novelty of the 4W framework is exposed by several contributions. First, the clear design of overall problem solving process with attention on integrated thinking about values is used. Unlike in most models of problem solving, the first stage encompass the identification of a problem, an analysis of a context and the perspectives that influence the whole process, i.e. ‘What?’. The stage ‘What is the basis for a solution?’ focus on values identification and their choice. The stage ‘Ways how?’ encourages to create alternatives considering values. The stage ‘Why?’ represent justification of a chosen alternative according particular issues. Above-mentioned stages including specific steps are not found in any other model of problem solving. Second, even two key stages nurture thinking about values. The specificity of the 4W framework allows expecting its successful practical application. It may help to solve a problem more informed revealing when and how the explication of values helps to reach the desired value-based solution. The particular significance is that the 4W framework can be used to develop capabilities to solve problems through values. The challenges to use the 4W framework in education are discussed.

2. Methodology

To create the 4W framework, the integrative literature review was chosen. According to Snyder (2019) , this review is ‘useful when the purpose of the review is not to cover all articles ever published on the topic but rather to combine perspectives to create new theoretical models’ (p.334). The scope of this review focused on research disclosing problem solving process that paid attention on values. The following databases were used for relevant information search: EBSCO/Hostdatabases (ERIC, Education Source), Emerald, Google Scholar. The first step of this search was conducted using integrated keywords problem solving model , problem solving process, problem solving steps . These keywords were combined with the Boolean operator AND with the second keywords values approach, value-based . The inclusion criteria were used to identify research that: presents theoretical backgrounds and/or empirical evidences; performed within the last 5 years; within an educational context; availability of full text. The sources appropriate for this review was very limited in scope (N = 2).

We implemented the second search only with the same set of the integrated keywords. The inclusion criteria were the same except the date; this criterion was extended up to 10 years. This search presented 85 different sources. After reading the summaries, introductions and conclusions of the sources found, the sources that do not explicitly provide the process/models/steps of problem solving for teaching/learning purposes and eliminates values were excluded. Aiming to see a more accurate picture of the chosen topic, we selected secondary sources from these initial sources.

Several important issues were determined as well. First, most researchers ground their studies on existing problem solving models, however, not based on values. Second, some of them conducted empirical research in order to identify the process of studies participants’ problem solving. Therefore, we included sources without date restrictions trying to identify the principal sources that reveal the process/models/steps of problem solving. Third, decision-making is a part of problem solving process. Accordingly, we performed a search with the additional keywords decision-making AND values approach, value-based decision-making . We used such inclusion criteria: presents theoretical background and/or empirical evidence; no date restriction; within an educational context; availability of full text. These all searches resulted in a total of 16 (9 theoretical and 7 empirical) sources for inclusion. They were the main sources that contributed most fruitfully for the background. We used other sources for the justification the wholeness of the 4W framework. We present the principal results of the conducted literature review in the part ‘The background of the conceptual framework’.

3. The background of the conceptual framework

3.1. different approaches of how to solve a problem.

Researchers from different fields focus on problem solving. As a result, there still seems to be a lack of a conventional definition of problem solving. Regardless of some differences, there is an agreement that problem solving is a cognitive process and one of the meaningful and significant ways of learning ( Funke, 2014 ; Jonassen, 1997 ; Mayer & Wittrock, 2006 ). Differing in approaches to solving a problem, researchers ( Collins, Sibthorp, & Gookin, 2016 ; Jonassen, 1997 ; Litzinger et al., 2010 ; Mayer & Wittrock, 2006 ; O’Loughlin & McFadzean, 1999 ; ect.) present a variety of models that differ in the number of distinct steps. What is similar in these models is that they stress the procedural process of problem solving with the focus on the development of specific skills and competences.

For the sake of this paper, we have focused on those models of problem solving that clarify the process and draw attention to values, specifically, on Huitt (1992) , Basadur, Ellspermann, and Evans (1994) , and Morton (1997) . Integrating the creative approach to problem solving, Newell and Simon (1972) presents six phases: phase 1 - identifying the problem, phase 2 - understanding the problem, phase 3 - posing solutions, phase 4 - choosing solutions, phase 5 - implementing solutions, and phase 6 - final analysis. The weakness of this model is that these phases do not necessarily follow one another, and several can coincide. However, coping with simultaneously occurring phases could be a challenge, especially if these are, for instance, phases five and six. Certainly, it may be necessary to return to the previous phases for further analysis. According to Basadur et al. (1994) , problem solving consists of problem generation, problem formulation, problem solving, and solution implementation stages. Huitt (1992) distinguishes four stages in problem solving: input, processing, output, and review. Both Huitt (1992) and Basadur et al. (1994) four-stage models emphasize a sequential process of problem solving. Thus, problem solving includes four stages that are used in education. For example, problem-based learning employs such stages as introduction of the problem, problem analysis and learning issues, discovery and reporting, solution presentation and evaluation ( Chua, Tan, & Liu, 2016 ). Even PISA 2012 framework for problem solving composes four stages: exploring and understanding, representing and formulating, planning and executing, monitoring and reflecting ( OECD, 2013 ).

Drawing on various approaches to problem solving, it is possible to notice that although each stage is named differently, it is possible to reveal some general steps. These steps reflect the essential idea of problem solving: a search for the solution from the initial state to the desirable state. The identification of a problem and its contextual elements, the generation of alternatives to a problem solution, the evaluation of these alternatives according to specific criteria, the choice of an alternative for a solution, the implementation, and monitoring of the solution are the main proceeding steps in problem solving.

3.2. Value-based approaches relevant for problem solving

Huitt (1992) suggests that important values are among the criteria for the evaluation of alternatives and the effectiveness of a chosen solution. Basadur et al. (1994) point out to visible values in the problem formulation. Morton (1997) underlines that interests, investigation, prevention, and values of all types, which may influence the process, inspire every phase of problem solving. However, the aforementioned authors do not go deeper and do not seek to disclose the significance of values for problem solving.

Decision-making research shows more possibilities for problem solving and values integration. Sheehan and Schmidt (2015) model of ethical decision-making includes moral sensitivity, moral judgment, moral motivation, and moral action where values are presented in the component of moral motivation. Another useful approach concerned with values comes from decision-making in management. It is the concept of Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) proposed by Keeney (1994) . The author argues that the goals often are merely means of achieving results in traditional models of problem solving. Such models frequently do not help to identify logical links between the problem solving goals, values, and alternatives. Thus, according to Keeney (1994) , the decision-making starts with values as they are stated in the goals and objectives of decision-makers. VFT emphasizes the core values of decision-makers that are in a specific context as well as how to find a way to achieve them by using means-ends analysis. The weakness of VFT is its restriction to this means-ends analysis. According to Shin, Jonassen, and McGee (2003) , in searching for a solution, such analysis is weak as the problem solver focuses simply on removing inadequacies between the current state and the goal state. The strengths of this approach underline that values are included in the decision before alternatives are created. Besides, values help to find creative and meaningful alternatives and to assess them. Further, they include the forthcoming consequences of the decision. As VFT emphasizes the significant function of values and clarifies the possibilities of their integration into problem solving, we adapt this approach in the current paper.

3.3. The effect of values when solving a problem

In a broader sense, values provide a direction to a person’s life. Whereas the importance of values is relatively stable over time and across situations, Roccas et al. (2017) argue that values differ in their importance to a person. Verplanken and Holland (2002) investigated the relationship between values and choices or behavior. The research revealed that the activation of a value and the centrality of a value to the self, are the essential elements for value-guided behavior. The activation of values could happen in such cases: when values are the primary focus of attention; if the situation or the information a person is confronted with implies values; when the self is activated. The centrality of a particular value is ‘the degree to which an individual has incorporated this value as part of the self’ ( Verplanken & Holland, 2002, p.436 ). Thus, the perceived importance of values and attention to them determine value-guided behavior.

According to Argandoña (2003) , values can change due to external (changing values in the people around, in society, changes in situations, etc.) and internal (internalization by learning) factors affecting the person. The research by Hall and Davis (2007) indicates that the decision-makers’ applied value profile temporarily changed as they analyzed the issue from multiple perspectives and revealed the existence of a broader set of values. The study by Kirkman (2017) reveal that participants noticed the relevance of moral values to situations they encountered in various contexts.

Values are tightly related to personal integrity and identity and guide an individual’s perception, judgment, and behavior ( Halstead, 1996 ; Schwartz, 1992 ). Sheehan and Schmidt (2015) found that values influenced ethical decision-making of accounting study programme students when they uncovered their own values and grounded in them their individual codes of conduct for future jobs. Hence, the effect of values discloses by observing the problem solver’s decision-making. The latter observations could explain the abundance of ethics-laden research in decision-making rather than in problem solving.

Contemporary researchers emphasize the creative potential of values. Dollinger et al. (2007) , Kasof et al. (2007) , Lebedeva, Schwartz, Plucker, & Van De Vijver, 2019 present to some extent similar findings as they all used Schwartz Value Survey (respectively: Schwartz, 1992 ; ( Schwartz, 1994 ), Schwartz, 2012 ). These studies disclosed that such values as self-direction, stimulation and universalism foster creativity. Kasof et al. (2007) focused their research on identified motivation. Stressing that identified motivation is the only fully autonomous type of external motivation, authors define it as ‘the desire to commence an activity as a means to some end that one greatly values’ (p.106). While identified motivation toward specific values (italic in original) fosters the search for outcomes that express those specific values, this research demonstrated that it could also inhibit creative behavior. Thus, inhibition is necessary, especially in the case where reckless creativity could have painful consequences, for example, when an architect creates a beautiful staircase without a handrail. Consequently, creativity needs to be balanced.

Ultimately, values affect human beings’ lives as they express the motivational goals ( Schwartz, 1992 ). These motivational goals are the comprehensive criteria for a person’s choices when solving problems. Whereas some problem solving models only mention values as possible evaluation criteria, but they do not give any significant suggestions when and how the problem solver could think about the values coming to the understanding that his/her values direct the decision how to solve the problem. The authors of this paper claim that the identification of personal values and their choice for a solution need to be specified in the process of problem solving. This position is clearly reflected in humanistic philosophy and psychology ( Maslow, 2011 ; Rogers, 1995 ) that emphasize personal responsibility for discovering personal values through critical questioning, honest self-esteem, self-discovery, and open-mindedness in the constant pursuit of the truth in the path of individual life. However, fundamental (of humankind) and societal values should be taken into account. McLaughlin (1997) argues that a clear boundary between societal and personal values is difficult to set as they are intertwined due to their existence in complex cultural, social, and political contexts at a particular time. A person is related to time and context when choosing values. As a result, a person assumes existing values as implicit knowledge without as much as a consideration. This is particularly evident in the current consumer society.

Moreover, McLaughlin (1997) stresses that if a particular action should be tolerated and legitimated by society, it does not mean that this action is ultimately morally acceptable in all respects. Education has possibilities to reveal this. One such possibility is to turn to the capability approach ( Sen, 1990 ), which emphasizes what people are effectively able to do and to be. Capability, according to Sen (1990) , reflects a person’s freedom to choose between various ways of living, i.e., the focus is on the development of a person’s capability to choose the life he/she has a reason to value. According to Webster (2017) , ‘in order for people to value certain aspects of life, they need to appreciate the reasons and purposes – the whys – for certain valuing’ (italic in original; p.75). As values reflect and foster these whys, education should supplement the development of capability with attention to values ( Saito, 2003 ). In order to attain this possibility, a person has to be aware of and be able to understand two facets of values. Argandoña (2003) defines them as rationality and virtuality . Rationality refers to values as the ideal of conduct and involves the development of a person’s understanding of what values and why he/she should choose them when solving a problem. Virtuality approaches values as virtues and includes learning to enable a person to live according to his/her values. However, according to McLaughlin (1997) , some people may have specific values that are deep or self-evidently essential. These values are based on fundamental beliefs about the nature and purpose of the human being. Other values can be more or less superficial as they are based on giving priority to one or the other. Thus, virtuality highlights the depth of life harmonized to fundamentally rather than superficially laden values. These approaches inform the rationale for the framework of problem solving through values.

4. The 4W framework of problem solving through values

Similar to the above-presented stages of the problem solving processes, the introduced framework by the authors of this paper revisits them (see Fig. 1 ). The framework is titled 4W as its four stages respond to such questions: Analyzing the Problem: W hat ? → Choice of the value(s): W hat is the background for the solution? → Search for the alternative w ays of the solution: How ? → The rationale for problem solution: W hy is this alternative significant ? The stages of this framework cover seven steps that reveal the logical sequence of problem solving through values.

Fig. 1

The 4 W framework: problem solving through values.

Though systematic problem solving models are criticized for being linear and inflexible (e.g., Treffinger & Isaksen, 2005 ), the authors of this paper assume a structural view of the problem solving process due to several reasons. First, the framework enables problem solvers to understand the thorough process of problem solving through values. Second, this framework reveals the depth of each stage and step. Third, problem solving through values encourages tackling problems that have crucial consequences. Only by understanding and mastering the coherence of how problems those require a value-based approach need to be addressed, a problem solver will be able to cope with them in the future. Finally, this framework aims at helping to recognize, to underline personal values, to solve problems through thinking about values, and to take responsibility for choices, even value-based. The feedback supports a direct interrelation between stages. It shapes a dynamic process of problem solving through values.

The first stage of problem solving through values - ‘ The analysis of the problem: What? ’- consists of three steps (see Fig. 1 ). The first step is ‘ Recognizing the problematic situation and naming the problem ’. This step is performed in the following sequence. First, the problem solver should perceive the problematic situation he/she faces in order to understand it. Dostál (2015) argues that the problematic situation has the potential to become the problem necessary to be addressed. Although each problem is limited by its context, not every problematic situation turns into a problem. This is related to the problem solver’s capability and the perception of reality: a person may not ‘see’ the problem if his/her capability to perceive it is not developed ( Dorst, 2006 ; Dostál, 2015 ). Second, after the problem solver recognizes the existence of the problematic situation, the problem solver has to identify the presence or absence of the problem itself, i.e. to name the problem. This is especially important in the case of the ill-structured problems since they cannot be directly visible to the problem solver ( Jonassen, 1997 ). Consequently, this step allows to determine whether the problem solver developed or has acquired the capability to perceive the problematic situation and the problem (naming the problem).

The second step is ‘ Analysing the context of the problem as a reason for its rise ’. At this step, the problem solver aims to analyse the context of the problem. The latter is one of the external issues, and it determines the solution ( Jonassen, 2011 ). However, if more attention is paid to the solution of the problem, it diverts attention from the context ( Fields, 2006 ). The problem solver has to take into account both the conveyed and implied contextual elements in the problematic situation ( Dostál, 2015 ). In other words, the problem solver has to examine it through his/her ‘contextual lenses’ ( Hester & MacG, 2017 , p.208). Thus, during this step the problem solver needs to identify the elements that shape the problem - reasons and circumstances that cause the problem, the factors that can be changed, and stakeholders that are involved in the problematic situation. Whereas the elements of the context mentioned above are within the problematic situation, the problem solver can control many of them. Such control can provide unique ways for a solution.

Although the problem solver tries to predict the undesirable results, some criteria remain underestimated. For that reason, it is necessary to highlight values underlying the various possible goals during the analysis ( Fields, 2006 ). According to Hester and MacG (2017) , values express one of the main features of the context and direct the attention of the problem solver to a given problematic situation. Hence, the problem solver should explore the value-based positions that emerge in the context of the problem.

The analysis of these contextual elements focus not only on a specific problematic situation but also on the problem that has emerged. This requires setting boundaries of attention for an in-depth understanding ( Fields, 2006 ; Hester & MacG, 2017 ). Such understanding influences several actions: (a) the recognition of inappropriate aspects of the problematic situation; (b) the emergence of paths in which identified aspects are expected to change. These actions ensure consistency and safeguard against distractions. Thus, the problem solver can now recognize and identify the factors that influence the problem although they are outside of the problematic situation. However, the problem solver possesses no control over them. With the help of such context analysis, the problem solver constructs a thorough understanding of the problem. Moreover, the problem solver becomes ready to look at the problem from different perspectives.

The third step is ‘ Perspectives emerging in the problem ’. Ims and Zsolnai (2009) argue that problem solving usually contains a ‘problematic search’. Such a search is a pragmatic activity as the problem itself induces it. Thus, the problem solver searches for a superficial solution. As a result, the focus is on control over the problem rather than a deeper understanding of the problem itself. The analysis of the problem, especially including value-based approaches, reveals the necessity to consider the problem from a variety of perspectives. Mitroff (2000) builds on Linstone (1989) ideas and claims that a sound foundation of both naming and solving any problem lays in such perspectives: the technical/scientific, the interpersonal/social, the existential, and the systemic (see Table 1 ).

The main characteristics of four perspectives for problem solving

Characteristic of perspectivesTechnical/scientific perspectiveInterpersonal/social perspectiveExistential perspectiveSystemic perspective
GoalProblem solving focuses on implementation and a productAction, stability, processLives and fates of individual human beings and their life-worldsProblem within the context of a larger whole; trying to establish the nature of different relationships
Mode of inquiryModelling, data, analysisConsensual and adversaryIntuition, learning, experienceEncompass all above mentioned; connecting to the whole
Ethical basisRationalityJustice, fairnessMoralityHolistic approach
Planning horizonLong-termIntermediateShort-term and long-termLong-term, focus on the consequences
CommunicationTechnical report, briefingLanguage differs for insiders, publicPersonality importantPersonality important as a part of a whole

Whereas all problems have significant aspects of each perspective, disregarding one or another may lead to the wrong way of solving the problem. While analysing all four perspectives is essential, this does not mean that they all are equally important. Therefore, it is necessary to justify why one or another perspective is more relevant and significant in a particular case. Such analysis, according to Linstone (1989) , ‘forces us to distinguish how we are looking from what we are looking at’ (p.312; italic in original). Hence, the problem solver broadens the understanding of various perspectives and develops the capability to see the bigger picture ( Hall & Davis, 2007 ).

The problem solver aims to identify and describe four perspectives that have emerged in the problem during this step. In order to identify perspectives, the problem solver search answers to the following questions. First, regarding the technical/scientific perspective: What technical/scientific reasons are brought out in the problem? How and to what extent do they influence a problem and its context? Second, regarding the interpersonal/social perspective: What is the impact of the problem on stakeholders? How does it influence their attitudes, living conditions, interests, needs? Third, regarding the existential perspective: How does the problem affect human feelings, experiences, perception, and/or discovery of meaning? Fourth, regarding the systemic perspective: What is the effect of the problem on the person → community → society → the world? Based on the analysis of this step, the problem solver obtains a comprehensive picture of the problem. The next stage is to choose the value(s) that will address the problem.

The second stage - ‘ The choice of value(s): What is the background for the solution?’ - includes the fourth and the fifth steps. The fourth step is ‘ The identification of value(s) as a base for the solution ’. During this step, the problem solver should activate his/her value(s) making it (them) explicit. In order to do this, the problem solver proceeds several sub-steps. First, the problem solver reflects taking into account the analysis done in previous steps. He/she raises up questions revealing values that lay in the background of this analysis: What values does this analyzed context allow me to notice? What values do different perspectives of the problem ‘offer’? Such questioning is important as values are deeply hidden ( Verplanken & Holland, 2002 ) and they form a bias, which restricts the development of the capability to see from various points of view ( Hall & Paradice, 2007 ). In the 4W framework, this bias is relatively eliminated due to the analysis of the context and exploration of the perspectives of a problem. As a result, the problem solver discovers distinct value-based positions and gets an opportunity to identify the ‘value uncaptured’ ( Yang, Evans, Vladimirova, & Rana, 2017, p.1796 ) within the problem analyzed. The problem solver observes that some values exist in the context (the second step) and the disclosed perspectives (the third step). Some of the identified values do not affect the current situation as they are not required, or their potential is not exploited. Thus, looking through various value-based lenses, the problem solver can identify and discover a congruence between the opportunities offered by the values in the problem’s context, disclosed perspectives and his/her value(s). Consequently, the problem solver decides what values he/she chooses as a basis for the desired solution. Since problems usually call for a list of values, it is important to find out their order of priority. Thus, the last sub-step requires the problem solver to choose between fundamentally and superficially laden values.

In some cases, the problem solver identifies that a set of values (more than one value) can lead to the desired solution. If a person chooses this multiple value-based position, two options emerge. The first option is concerned with the analysis of each value-based position separately (from the fifth to the seventh step). In the second option, a person has to uncover which of his/her chosen values are fundamentally laden and which are superficially chosen, considering the desired outcome in the current situation. Such clarification could act as a strategy where the path for the desired solution is possible going from superficially chosen value(s) to fundamentally laden one. When a basis for the solution is established, the problem solver formulates the goal for the desired solution.

The fifth step is ‘ The formulation of the goal for the solution ’. Problem solving highlights essential points that reveal the structure of a person’s goals; thus, a goal is the core element of problem solving ( Funke, 2014 ). Meantime, values reflect the motivational content of the goals ( Schwartz, 1992 ). The attention on the chosen value not only activates it, but also motivates the problem solver. The motivation directs the formulation of the goal. In such a way, values explicitly become a basis of the goal for the solution. Thus, this step involves the problem solver in formulating the goal for the solution as the desired outcome.

The way how to take into account value(s) when formulating the goal is the integration of value(s) chosen by the problem solver in the formulation of the goal ( Keeney, 1994 ). For this purpose the conjunction of a context for a solution (it is analyzed during the second step) and a direction of preference (the chosen value reveals it) serves for the formulation of the goal (that represents the desired solution). In other words, a value should be directly included into the formulation of the goal. The goal could lose value, if value is not included into the goal formulation and remains only in the context of the goal. Let’s take the actual example concerning COVID-19 situation. Naturally, many countries governments’ preference represents such value as human life (‘it is important of every individual’s life’). Thus, most likely the particular country government’s goal of solving the COVID situation could be to save the lifes of the country people. The named problem is a complex where the goal of its solution is also complex, although it sounds simple. However, if the goal as desired outcome is formulated without the chosen value, this value remains in the context and its meaning becomes tacit. In the case of above presented example - the goal could be formulated ‘to provide hospitals with the necessary equipment and facilities’. Such goal has the value ‘human’s life’ in the context, but eliminates the complexity of the problem that leads to a partial solution of the problem. Thus, this step from the problem solver requires caution when formulating the goal as the desired outcome. For this reason, maintaining value is very important when formulating the goal’s text. To avoid the loss of values and maintain their proposed direction, is necessary to take into account values again when creating alternatives.

The third stage - ‘ Search for the alternative ways for a solution: How? ’ - encompasses the sixth step, which is called ‘ Creation of value-based alternatives ’. Frequently problem solver invokes a traditional view of problem identification, generation of alternatives, and selection of criteria for evaluating findings. Keeney (1994) ; Ims and Zsolnai (2009) criticize this rational approach as it supports a search for a partial solution where an active search for alternatives is neglected. Moreover, a problematic situation, according to Perkins (2009) , can create the illusion of a fully framed problem with some apparent weighting and some variations of choices. In this case, essential and distinct alternatives to the solution frequently become unnoticeable. Therefore, Perkins (2009) suggest to replace the focus on the attempts to comprehend the problem itself. Thinking through the ‘value lenses’ offers such opportunities. The deep understanding of the problem leads to the search for the alternative ways of a solution.

Thus, the aim of this step is for the problem solver to reveal the possible alternative ways for searching a desired solution. Most people think they know how to create alternatives, but often without delving into the situation. First of all, the problem solver based on the reflection of (but not limited to) the analysis of the context and the perspectives of the problem generates a range of alternatives. Some of these alternatives represent anchored thinking as he/she accepts the assumptions implicit in generated alternatives and with too little focus on values.

The chosen value with the formulated goal indicates direction and encourages a broader and more creative search for a solution. Hence, the problem solver should consider some of the initial alternatives that could best support the achievement of the desired solution. Values are the principles for evaluating the desirability of any alternative or outcome ( Keeney, 1994 ). Thus, planned actions should reveal the desirable mode of conduct. After such consideration, he/she should draw up a plan setting out the actions required to implement each of considered alternatives.

Lastly, after a thorough examination of each considered alternative and a plan of its implementation, the problem solver chooses one of them. If the problem solver does not see an appropriate alternative, he/she develops new alternatives. However, the problem solver may notice (and usually does) that more than one alternative can help him/her to achieve the desired solution. In this case, he/she indicates which alternative is the main one and has to be implemented in the first place, and what other alternatives and in what sequence will contribute in searching for the desired solution.

The fourth stage - ‘ The rationale for the solution: Why ’ - leads to the seventh step: ‘ The justification of the chosen alternative ’. Keeney (1994) emphasizes the compatibility of alternatives in question with the values that guide the action. This underlines the importance of justifying the choices a person makes where the focus is on taking responsibility. According to Zsolnai (2008) , responsibility means a choice, i.e., the perceived responsibility essentially determines its choice. Responsible justification allows for discovering optimal balance when choosing between distinct value-based alternatives. It also refers to the alternative solution that best reflects responsibility in a particular value context, choice, and implementation.

At this stage, the problem solver revisits the chosen solution and revises it. The problem solver justifies his/her choice based on the following questions: Why did you choose this? Why is this alternative significant looking from the technical/scientific, the interpersonal/social, the existential, and the systemic perspectives? Could you take full responsibility for the implementation of this alternative? Why? How clearly do envisaged actions reflect the goal of the desired solution? Whatever interests and for what reasons do this alternative satisfies in principle? What else do you see in the chosen alternative?

As mentioned above, each person gives priority to one aspect or another. The problem solver has to provide solid arguments for the justification of the chosen alternative. The quality of arguments, according to Jonassen (2011) , should be judged based on the quality of the evidence supporting the chosen alternative and opposing arguments that can reject solutions. Besides, the pursuit of value-based goals reflects the interests of the individual or collective interests. Therefore, it becomes critical for the problem solver to justify the level of responsibility he/she takes in assessing the chosen alternative. Such a complex evaluation of the chosen alternative ensures the acceptance of an integral rather than unilateral solution, as ‘recognizing that, in the end, people benefit most when they act for the common good’ ( Sternberg, 2012, p.46 ).

5. Discussion

The constant emphasis on thinking about values as explicit reasoning in the 4W framework (especially from the choice of the value(s) to the rationale for problem solution) reflects the pursuit of virtues. Virtues form the features of the character that are related to the choice ( Argandoña, 2003 ; McLaughlin, 2005 ). Hence, the problem solver develops value-grounded problem solving capability as the virtuality instead of employing rationality for problem solving.

Argandoña (2003) suggests that, in order to make a sound valuation process of any action, extrinsic, transcendent, and intrinsic types of motives need to be considered. They cover the respective types of values. The 4W framework meets these requirements. An extrinsic motive as ‘attaining the anticipated or expected satisfaction’ ( Argandoña, 2003, p.17 ) is reflected in the formulation of the goal of the solution, the creation of alternatives and especially in the justification of the chosen alternative way when the problem solver revisits the external effect of his/her possible action. Transcendent motive as ‘generating certain effects in others’ ( Argandoña, 2003, p.17 ) is revealed within the analysis of the context, perspectives, and creating alternatives. When the learner considers the creation of alternatives and revisits the chosen alternative, he/she pays more attention to these motives. Two types of motives mentioned so far are closely related to an intrinsic motive that emphasizes learning development within the problem solver. These motives confirm that problem solving is, in fact, lifelong learning. In light of these findings, the 4W framework is concerned with some features of value internalization as it is ‘a psychological outcome of conscious mind reasoning about values’ ( Yazdani & Akbarilakeh, 2017, p.1 ).

The 4W framework is complicated enough in terms of learning. One issue is concerned with the educational environments ( Jucevičienė, 2008 ) required to enable the 4W framework. First, the learning paradigm, rather than direct instruction, lies at the foundation of such environments. Second, such educational environments include the following dimensions: (1) educational goal; (2) learning capacity of the learners; (3) educational content relevant to the educational goal: ways and means of communicating educational content as information presented in advance (they may be real, people among them, as well as virtual); (5) methods and means of developing educational content in the process of learners’ performance; (6) physical environment relevant to the educational goal and conditions of its implementation as well as different items in the environment; (7) individuals involved in the implementation of the educational goal.

Another issue is related to exercising this framework in practice. Despite being aware of the 4W framework, a person may still not want to practice problem solving through values, since most of the solutions are going to be complicated, or may even be painful. One idea worth looking into is to reveal the extent to which problem solving through values can become a habit of mind. Profound focus on personal values, context analysis, and highlighting various perspectives can involve changes in the problem solver’s habit of mind. The constant practice of problem solving through values could first become ‘the epistemic habit of mind’ ( Mezirow, 2009, p.93 ), which means a personal way of knowing things and how to use that knowledge. This echoes Kirkman (2017) findings. The developed capability to notice moral values in situations that students encountered changed some students’ habit of mind as ‘for having “ruined” things by making it impossible not to attend to values in such situations!’ (the feedback from one student; Kirkman, 2017, p.12 ). However, this is not enough, as only those problems that require a value-based approach are addressed. Inevitably, the problem solver eventually encounters the challenges of nurturing ‘the moral-ethical habit of mind’ ( Mezirow, 2009, p.93 ). In pursuance to develop such habits of mind, the curriculum should include the necessity of the practising of the 4W framework.

Thinking based on values when solving problems enables the problem solver to engage in thoughtful reflection in contrast to pragmatic and superficial thinking supported by the consumer society. Reflection begins from the first stage of the 4W framework. As personal values are the basis for the desired solution, the problem solver is also involved in self-reflection. The conscious and continuous reflection on himself/herself and the problematic situation reinforce each step of the 4W framework. Moreover, the fourth stage (‘The rationale for the solution: Why’) involves the problem solver in critical reflection as it concerned with justification of ‘the why , the reasons for and the consequences of what we do’ (italic, bold in original; Mezirow, 1990, p.8 ). Exercising the 4W framework in practice could foster reflective practice. Empirical evidence shows that reflective practice directly impacts knowledge, skills and may lead to changes in personal belief systems and world views ( Slade, Burnham, Catalana, & Waters, 2019 ). Thus, with the help of reflective practice it is possible to identify in more detail how and to what extent the 4W framework has been mastered, what knowledge gained, capabilities developed, how point of views changed, and what influence the change process.

Critical issues related to the development of problem solving through values need to be distinguished when considering and examining options for the implementation of the 4W framework at educational institutions. First, the question to what extent can the 4W framework be incorporated into various subjects needs to be answered. Researchers could focus on applying the 4W framework to specific subjects in the humanities and social sciences. The case is with STEM subjects. Though value issues of sustainable development and ecology are of great importance, in reality STEM teaching is often restricted to the development of knowledge and skills, leaving aside the thinking about values. The special task of the researchers is to help practitioners to apply the 4W framework in STEM subjects. Considering this, researchers could employ the concept of ‘dialogic space’ ( Wegerif, 2011, p.3 ) which places particular importance of dialogue in the process of education emphasizing both the voices of teachers and students, and materials. In addition, the dimensions of educational environments could be useful aligning the 4W framework with STEM subjects. As STEM teaching is more based on solving various special tasks and/or integrating problem-based learning, the 4W framework could be a meaningful tool through which content is mastered, skills are developed, knowledge is acquired by solving pre-prepared specific tasks. In this case, the 4W framework could act as a mean addressing values in STEM teaching.

Second is the question of how to enable the process of problem solving through values. In the current paper, the concept of enabling is understood as an integral component of the empowerment. Juceviciene et al. (2010) specify that at least two perspectives can be employed to explain empowerment : a) through the power of legitimacy (according to Freire, 1996 ); and b) through the perspective of conditions for the acquisition of the required knowledge, capabilities, and competence, i.e., enabling. In this paper the 4W framework does not entail the issue of legitimacy. This issue may occur, for example, when a teacher in economics is expected to provide students with subject knowledge only, rather than adding tasks that involve problem solving through values. Yet, the issue of legitimacy is often implicit. A widespread phenomenon exists that teaching is limited to certain periods that do not have enough time for problem solving through values. The issue of legitimacy as an organizational task that supports/or not the implementation of the 4W framework in any curriculum is a question that calls for further discussion.

Third (if not the first), the issue of an educator’s competence to apply such a framework needs to be addressed. In order for a teacher to be a successful enabler, he/she should have the necessary competence. This is related to the specific pedagogical knowledge and skills, which are highly dependent on the peculiarities of the subject being taught. Nowadays actualities are encouraging to pay attention to STEM subjects and their teacher training. For researchers and teacher training institutions, who will be interested in implementing the 4W framework in STEM subjects, it would be useful to draw attention to ‘a material-dialogic approach to pedagogy’ ( Hetherington & Wegerif, 2018, p.27 ). This approach creates the conditions for a deep learning of STEM subjects revealing additional opportunities for problem solving through values in teaching. Highlighting these opportunities is a task for further research.

In contrast to traditional problem solving models, the 4W framework is more concerned with educational purposes. The prescriptive approach to teaching ( Thorne, 1994 ) is applied to the 4W framework. This approach focuses on providing guidelines that enable students to make sound decisions by making explicit value judgements. The limitation is that the 4W framework is focused on thinking but not executing. It does not include the fifth stage, which would focus on the execution of the decision how to solve the problem. This stage may contain some deviation from the predefined process of the solution of the problem.

6. Conclusions

The current paper focuses on revealing the essence of the 4W framework, which is based on enabling the problem solver to draw attention to when, how, and why it is essential to think about values during the problem solving process from the perspective of it’s design. Accordingly, the 4W framework advocates the coherent approach when solving a problem by using a creative potential of values.

The 4W framework allows the problem solver to look through the lens of his/her values twice. The first time, while formulating the problem solving goal as the desired outcome. The second time is when the problem solver looks deeper into his/her values while exploring alternative ways to solve problems. The problem solver is encouraged to reason about, find, accept, reject, compare values, and become responsible for the consequences of the choices grounded on his/her values. Thus, the problem solver could benefit from the 4W framework especially when dealing with issues having crucial consequences.

An educational approach reveals that the 4W framework could enable the development of value-grounded problem solving capability. As problem solving encourages the development of higher-order thinking skills, the consistent inclusion of values enriches them.

The 4W framework requires the educational environments for its enablement. The enablement process of problem solving through values could be based on the perspective of conditions for the acquisition of the required knowledge and capability. Continuous practice of this framework not only encourages reflection, but can also contribute to the creation of the epistemic habit of mind. Applying the 4W framework to specific subjects in the humanities and social sciences might face less challenge than STEM ones. The issue of an educator’s competence to apply such a framework is highly important. The discussed issues present significant challenges for researchers and educators. Caring that the curriculum of different courses should foresee problem solving through values, both practicing and empirical research are necessary.

Declaration of interests

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Both authors have approved the final article.

  • Argandoña A. Fostering values in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics. 2003; 45 (1–2):15–28. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1024164210743.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
  • Barber S. A truly “Transformative” MBA: Executive education for the fourth industrial revolution. Journal of Pedagogic Development. 2018; 8 (2):44–55. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Barnett R. McGraw-Hill Education; UK): 2007. Will to learn: Being a student in an age of uncertainty. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Baron R.A., Zhao H., Miao Q. Personal motives, moral disengagement, and unethical decisions by entrepreneurs: Cognitive mechanisms on the “slippery slope” Journal of Business Ethics. 2015; 128 (1):107–118. doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2078-y. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Basadur M., Ellspermann S.J., Evans G.W. A new methodology for formulating ill-structured problems. Omega. 1994; 22 (6):627–645. doi: 10.1016/0305-0483(94)90053-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Blanco E., Schirmbeck F., Costa C. International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation . Springer; Cham: 2018. Vocational Education for the Industrial Revolution; pp. 649–658. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Chua B.L., Tan O.S., Liu W.C. Journey into the problem-solving process: Cognitive functions in a PBL environment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2016; 53 (2):191–202. doi: 10.1080/14703297.2014.961502. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Collins R.H., Sibthorp J., Gookin J. Developing ill-structured problem-solving skills through wilderness education. Journal of Experiential Education. 2016; 39 (2):179–195. doi: 10.1177/1053825916639611. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Csapó B., Funke J., editors. The nature of problem solving: Using research to inspire 21st century learning. OECD Publishing; 2017. The development and assessment of problem solving in 21st-century schools. (Chapter 1). [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Dollinger S.J., Burke P.A., Gump N.W. Creativity and values. Creativity Research Journal. 2007; 19 (2-3):91–103. doi: 10.1080/10400410701395028. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Donovan S.J., Guss C.D., Naslund D. Improving dynamic decision making through training and self-reflection. Judgment and Decision Making. 2015; 10 (4):284–295. http://digitalcommons.unf.edu/apsy_facpub/2 [ Google Scholar ]
  • Dorst K. Design problems and design paradoxes. Design Issues. 2006; 22 (3):4–17. doi: 10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Dostál J. Theory of problem solving. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 174 :2798–2805. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.970. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Fields A.M. Ill-structured problems and the reference consultation: The librarian’s role in developing student expertise. Reference Services Review. 2006; 34 (3):405–420. doi: 10.1108/00907320610701554. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Freire P. Continuum; New York: 1996. Pedagogy of the oppressed (revised) [ Google Scholar ]
  • Funke J. Problem solving: What are the important questions?. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society; Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society; 2014. pp. 493–498. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hall D.J., Davis R.A. Engaging multiple perspectives: A value-based decision-making model. Decision Support Systems. 2007; 43 (4):1588–1604. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2006.03.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hall D.J., Paradice D. Investigating value-based decision bias and mediation: do you do as you think? Communications of the ACM. 2007; 50 (4):81–85. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Halstead J.M. Values and values education in schools. In: Halstead J.M., Taylor M.J., editors. Values in education and education in values. The Falmer Press; London: 1996. pp. 3–14. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Harland T., Pickering N. Routledge; 2010. Values in higher education teaching. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hester P.T., MacG K. Springer; New York: 2017. Systemic decision making: Fundamentals for addressing problems and messes. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hetherington L., Wegerif R. Developing a material-dialogic approach to pedagogy to guide science teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching. 2018; 44 (1):27–43. doi: 10.1080/02607476.2018.1422611. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Huitt W. Problem solving and decision making: Consideration of individual differences using the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Journal of Psychological Type. 1992; 24 (1):33–44. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ims K.J., Zsolnai L. The future international manager. Palgrave Macmillan; London: 2009. Holistic problem solving; pp. 116–129. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Jonassen D. Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. 2011; 5 (2):95–119. doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1256. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Jonassen D.H. Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development. 1997; 45 (1):65–94. doi: 10.1007/BF02299613. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Jucevičienė P. Educational and learning environments as a factor for socioeducational empowering of innovation. Socialiniai mokslai. 2008; 1 :58–70. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Jucevičienė P., Gudaitytė D., Karenauskaitė V., Lipinskienė D., Stanikūnienė B., Tautkevičienė G. Technologija; Kaunas: 2010. Universiteto edukacinė galia: Atsakas XXI amžiaus iššūkiams [The educational power of university: the response to the challenges of the 21st century] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kasof J., Chen C., Himsel A., Greenberger E. Values and creativity. Creativity Research Journal. 2007; 19 (2–3):105–122. doi: 10.1080/10400410701397164. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Keeney R.L. Creativity in decision making with value-focused thinking. MIT Sloan Management Review. 1994; 35 (4):33–41. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kirkman R. Problem-based learning in engineering ethics courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. 2017; 11 (1) doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1610. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lebedeva N., Schwartz S., Plucker J., Van De Vijver F. Domains of everyday creativity and personal values. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; 9 :1–16. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02681. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Linstone H.A. Multiple perspectives: Concept, applications, and user guidelines. Systems Practice. 1989; 2 (3):307–331. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Litzinger T.A., Meter P.V., Firetto C.M., Passmore L.J., Masters C.B., Turns S.R.…Zappe S.E. A cognitive study of problem solving in statics. Journal of Engineering Education. 2010; 99 (4):337–353. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Maslow A.H. Vaga; Vilnius: 2011. Būties psichologija. [Psychology of Being] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mayer R., Wittrock M. Problem solving. In: Alexander P., Winne P., editors. Handbook of educational psychology. Psychology Press; New York, NY: 2006. pp. 287–303. [ Google Scholar ]
  • McLaughlin T. The educative importance of ethos. British Journal of Educational Studies. 2005; 53 (3):306–325. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00297.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • McLaughlin T.H. Technologija; Kaunas: 1997. Šiuolaikinė ugdymo filosofija: demokratiškumas, vertybės, įvairovė [Contemporary philosophy of education: democracy, values, diversity] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mezirow J. Jossey-Bass Publishers; San Francisco: 1990. Fostering critical reflection in adulthood; pp. 1–12. https://my.liberatedleaders.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/How-Critical-Reflection-triggers-Transformative-Learning-Mezirow.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mezirow J. Contemporary theories of learning. Routledge; 2009. An overview on transformative learning; pp. 90–105. (Chapter 6) [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mitroff I. Šviesa; Kaunas: 2000. Kaip neklysti šiais beprotiškais laikais: ar mokame spręsti esmines problemas. [How not to get lost in these crazy times: do we know how to solve essential problems] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Morton L. Teaching creative problem solving: A paradigmatic approach. Cal. WL Rev. 1997; 34 :375. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nadda P. Need for value based education. International Education and Research Journal. 2017; 3 (2) http://ierj.in/journal/index.php/ierj/article/view/690/659 [ Google Scholar ]
  • Newell A., Simon H.A. Prentice-Hall; Englewood Cliffs, NJ: 1972. Human problem solving. [ Google Scholar ]
  • OECD . PISA, OECD Publishing; Paris: 2013. PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework: Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy . https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/PISA%202012%20framework%20e-book_final.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
  • OECD . PISA, OECD Publishing; 2018. PISA 2015 results in focus . https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
  • O’Loughlin A., McFadzean E. Toward a holistic theory of strategic problem solving. Team Performance Management: An International Journal. 1999; 5 (3):103–120. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Perkins D.N. Decision making and its development. In: Callan E., Grotzer T., Kagan J., Nisbett R.E., Perkins D.N., Shulman L.S., editors. Education and a civil society: Teaching evidence-based decision making. American Academy of Arts and Sciences; Cambridge, MA: 2009. pp. 1–28. (Chapter 1) [ Google Scholar ]
  • Roccas S., Sagiv L., Navon M. Values and behavior. Cham: Springer; 2017. Methodological issues in studying personal values; pp. 15–50. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rogers C.R. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt; Boston: 1995. On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Saito M. Amartya Sen’s capability approach to education: A critical exploration. Journal of Philosophy of Education. 2003; 37 (1):17–33. doi: 10.1111/1467-9752.3701002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Schwartz S.H. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: Zanna M.P., editor. Vol. 25. Academic Press; 1992. pp. 1–65. (Advances in experimental social psychology). [ Google Scholar ]
  • Schwartz S.H. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of social issues. 1994; 50 (4):19–45. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Schwartz S.H. An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. 2012; 2 (1):1–20. doi: 10.9707/2307-0919.1116. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sen A. Development as capability expansion. The community development reader. 1990:41–58. http://www.masterhdfs.org/masterHDFS/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Sen-development.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sheehan N.T., Schmidt J.A. Preparing accounting students for ethical decision making: Developing individual codes of conduct based on personal values. Journal of Accounting Education. 2015; 33 (3):183–197. doi: 10.1016/j.jaccedu.2015.06.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Shepherd D.A., Patzelt H., Baron R.A. “I care about nature, but…”: Disengaging values in assessing opportunities that cause harm. The Academy of Management Journal. 2013; 56 (5):1251–1273. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0776. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Shin N., Jonassen D.H., McGee S. Predictors of well‐structured and ill‐structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2003; 40 (1):6–33. doi: 10.1002/tea.10058. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Slade M.L., Burnham T.J., Catalana S.M., Waters T. The impact of reflective practice on teacher candidates’ learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2019; 13 (2):15. doi: 10.20429/ijsotl.2019.130215. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Snyder H. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research. 2019; 104 :333–339. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sternberg R. Teaching for ethical reasoning. International Journal of Educational Psychology. 2012; 1 (1):35–50. doi: 10.4471/ijep.2012.03. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sternberg R. Speculations on the role of successful intelligence in solving contemporary world problems. Journal of Intelligence. 2017; 6 (1):4. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence6010004. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Thorne D.M. Environmental ethics in international business education: Descriptive and prescriptive dimensions. Journal of Teaching in International Business. 1994; 5 (1–2):109–122. doi: 10.1300/J066v05n01_08. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Treffinger D.J., Isaksen S.G. Creative problem solving: The history, development, and implications for gifted education and talent development. The Gifted Child Quarterly. 2005; 49 (4):342–353. doi: 10.1177/001698620504900407. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Verplanken B., Holland R.W. Motivated decision making: Effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002; 82 (3):434–447. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.434. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Webster R.S. Re-enchanting education and spiritual wellbeing. Routledge; 2017. Being spiritually educated; pp. 73–85. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Wegerif R. Towards a dialogic theory of how children learn to think. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2011; 6 (3):179–190. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2011.08.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Yang M., Evans S., Vladimirova D., Rana P. Value uncaptured perspective for sustainable business model innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017; 140 :1794–1804. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.102. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Yazdani S., Akbarilakeh M. The model of value-based curriculum for medicine and surgery education in Iran. Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgical Sciences. 2017; 6 (3) doi: 10.5812/minsurgery.14053. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Zsolnai L. Transaction Publishers; New Brunswick and London: 2008. Responsible decision making. [ Google Scholar ]

IMAGES

  1. Solving ethical problems

    what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  2. Sam Young: Process Model for Ethical Problem-solving

    what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  3. Ethical Problem Solving Techniques Note

    what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  4. Essential steps for ethical problem solving

    what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  5. Ethical Problem Solving Techniques Note

    what is an ethical problem solving methodology

  6. ethical-problem-solving-techniques12620

    what is an ethical problem solving methodology

COMMENTS

  1. Essential Steps for Ethical Problem-Solving

    1. DETERMINE whether there is an ethical issue or/and dilemma. Is there a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities? (For example, there may be an issue of self-determination of an adolescent versus the well-being of the family.) 2.

  2. Ethical Decision Making Models and 6 Steps of Ethical Decision Making

    An ethical decision-making model is a framework that leaders use to bring these principles to the company and ensure they are followed. Importance of Ethical Standards Part 1. Ethical Decision-Making Model Approach Part 2. Ethical Decision-Making Process Part 3. PLUS Ethical Decision-Making Model Part 4.

  3. A Model for Ethical Problem Solving

    Abstract. Chapter 1 begins with a five-step model for analyzing a case posing ethical questions in pharmacy: (1) responding to a "sense" or feeling that something is wrong, (2) gathering information and making an assessment, (3) identifying the ethical problem, (4) seeking a resolution, and (5) working with others to choose a course of action.

  4. The RIGHT Decision Method: An approach for solving ethical dilemmas

    Many ethical dilemmas can be resolved easily with consultation and reflection. However, some issues cannot. Therefore, to help make it easier to solve difficult ethical dilemmas, consider a framework from which to work. The College of Direct Support has provided an approach to ethical decision-making with the NADSP Code of Ethics.

  5. PDF A Method for Ethical Problem Solving Brian H. Childs, Ph.D

    agnosing ethical issues in medical practice and research isthe notion th. t there is a conflict. s of medical ethics: the res. ect for autonomy; beneficence;nonmaleficence; and justice. An ethics i. sue arises when one or more of these general pr. nciples arefound to be in conflict in specific situations.

  6. Thinking Ethically

    This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own good is inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community members are bound by the pursuit of common values and goals. The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero.

  7. The Elusiveness of Closure

    Text Box 5.1: A Model for Ethical Problem Solving in Clinical Medicine [Step 1] Identify the ethical problem: Consider the problem within its context and attempt to distinguish between ethical problems and other medical, social, cultural, linguistic and legal issues. Explore the meaning of value-laden terms, e.g. futility, quality of life. [Step 2]

  8. Ethical Problem Solving

    This simple example shows that ethical problem solving, or ethical decision-making if you prefer, is a complex process. While there is no simple algorithm for ethical problem solving, a systematic four-step approach can be outlined. ... The methodology developed in this chapter is meant to provide a flexible approach to solving ethical problems ...

  9. A Model for Ethical Problem Solving in Medicine, With Practical ...

    The model proposed here attempts to fill this void by developing a conceptual understanding of the nature of moral dilemmas that can be applied to both theoretical and practical problems in medicine. Practical applications are demonstrated in three areas: personal ethical problem solving, hospital ethics committees, and the teaching of medical ...

  10. Decision support for ethical problem solving: A multi-agent approach

    Integrating these definitions of "ethics" and "problem solving", and the Four Component Model: ethical problem solving is the iterative process of interpreting one's environment by identifying a moral problem based upon what one values morally, framing and re-framing the problem or sub-problems from various morally value laden ...

  11. The PLUS Ethical Decision Making Model

    Seven Steps to Ethical Decision Making. - Step 1: Define the problem (consult PLUS filters) - Step 2: Seek out relevant assistance, guidance and support. - Step 3: Identify alternatives. - Step 4: Evaluate the alternatives (consult PLUS filters) - Step 5: Make the decision. - Step 6: Implement the decision.

  12. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making

    Ethics Resources. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making. This document is designed as an introduction to thinking ethically. Read more about what the framework can (and cannot) do. We all have an image of our better selves—of how we are when we act ethically or are "at our best.". We probably also have an image of what an ethical ...

  13. Ethical problem-solving and decision-making

    Ethical problem-solving and decision-making. The rational problem-solving process includes identifying the problem, clarifying objectives, analysing alternatives, deciding on a solution, implementing the solution, and following through to ensure its effectiveness. To begin solving a problem, the current situation needs to be diagnosed to ...

  14. Applying Cases to Solve Ethical Problems: The Significance of Positive

    In fact, the primary intent of the widely applied case method approach to ethics instruction is to construct a more complete, complex collection of cases that can later be reflected upon and applied to solve ethical problems (Jonassen & Hernandez-Serrano, 2002; McWilliams & Nahavandi, 2006; Pimple, 2007), but relatively little is known about ...

  15. A 10-Step Process for Resolving Ethical Issues

    The following is a 10-step process for addressing ethical issues in schools: Identify the problem as you see it. Ask yourself if the problem is a regulatory issue or a process issue related to regulatory requirements. Compare the issue to a specific rule in ASHA's Code of Ethics. Determine if rules the Code of Ethics apply to your problem and ...

  16. Framework for resolving ethical problems

    A framework to help resolve ethical problems starting with identifying the problems and parties involved to implementing the course of action and monitoring its progress. When trying to solve an ethical problem, you may find it useful to refer to the following framework, which is based on the framework included in ICAEW's Code of Ethics.

  17. 2.2: Three Frameworks for Ethical Problem-Solving in Business and the

    Problem-Solving or Decision-Making Framework: Analogy between ethics and design. Traditionally, problem-solving frameworks in professional and occupational ethics have been taken from rational decision procedures used in economics. While these are useful, they lead one to think that ethical decisions are already "out there" waiting to be ...

  18. Ethical problems in nursing management

    Ethics committees, written guidelines and codes are also used in ethical problem-solving, but less frequently than own values and discussions [1, 8, 9]. ... Method of solving ethical problem Frequency of use (scale 1-5) a Usefulness (scale 1-4) b; categ. Mean Median SD often % always % n order of usefulness Mean Median SD

  19. Thinking Ethically: A Framework for Moral Decision Making

    The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the greatest number. The Rights Approach. The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused on the individual's right to choose for herself or himself.

  20. Essential Steps in Ethical Problem Solving

    FOCUS Newsletter - July, 1996. Determine whether there is an ethical issue or dilemma. Is there a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities? (For example, there may be an issue of self-determination of an adolescent versus the well-being of the family.) Identify the key values and principles involved.

  21. Decision support for ethical problem solving: A multi-agent approach

    Integrating these definitions of "ethics" and "problem solving", and the Four Component Model: ethical problem solving is the iterative process of interpreting one's environment by identifying a moral problem based upon what one values morally, framing and re-framing the problem or sub-problems from various morally value laden ...

  22. Solving ethical problems

    Ethical decision-making framework. The flowchart below outlines the steps in the ethical decision-making process. Each step is described in further detail below. Recognising that there is an ethical question: could involve a choice between a good and a bad outcome - e.g. a situation where Immigration New Zealand would decline your client's ...

  23. Total ethics fashion: The holistic approach one nonprofit is ...

    Here's an example of what can happen if a company doesn't take a total ethics approach: They choose to follow a slow fashion business model to create jackets free from animal skin, but they still ...

  24. Problem solving through values: A challenge for thinking and capability

    2. Methodology. To create the 4W framework, the integrative literature review was chosen. According to Snyder (2019), this review is 'useful when the purpose of the review is not to cover all articles ever published on the topic but rather to combine perspectives to create new theoretical models' (p.334).The scope of this review focused on research disclosing problem solving process that ...