Download Moral psychology at work

Moral psychology at work
Øyvind Kvalnes, Norwegian Business School, BI
In this workshop we explore how concepts and ideas from moral psychology can enhance the
understanding of ethical wrongdoing in organizations. In particular, we will discuss how decision-makers
can experience moral dissonance at work, and end up acting contrary to their initial moral convictions after
a process of moral neutralization. Wrongdoing may not be a sign of bad moral character, but rather a
result of processes where the decision-makers are not sufficiently challenged in their moral reasoning, and
get away with poor justifications. The criminologists Sykes and Matza developed a theory of moral
neutralization, including a set of neutralization techniques, which can be useful in challenging attempts to
overcome moral dissonance in professional settings. Conflict of interest situations in professions can
serve as examples where the decision-maker can be tempted to act contrary to his or her moral
convictions. A doctor, lawyer, or accountant can be in a position to give priority to self-interest over
patient/client interest, with minimal risk of detection. The professional can engage in moral neutralization
in order to convince him- or herself that it is after all acceptable to go ahead and prioritize self-interest.
Whether this happens or not depends to a considerable degree on the communication climate at work,
and more specifically on whether the professional gets away with these justifications, or is challenged by
colleagues who are able to spot signs of neutralization when they see or hear them.
This will be an interactive workshop, with a combination of brief conceptual accounts and reflections on
real life cases and experiences.