The Importance of Ethics in the Training Industry (or any industry for that matter)

Ethics is defined as moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or the conduct of an activity. It is above and beyond legality. It is a relationship that is taken for granted both ways; one equates both as twins that can’t exist separately, while others take for granted that they are two different mutually exclusive parts. The latter state is a convenient way of justifying actions, especially unsavoury ones; they are legal but unethical. They are even those that are oblivious to the existence of ethics.

If I were to simplify the relationship between law and ethics, I would use the analogy of rice. White rice is what legal is: basic, standard, applicable to all. It is the bare minimum of what a rice should be. Ethics is the condiment that makes the basic white rice wonderful. Turning it into nasi goreng, nasi lemak, nasi lemuni, nasi ayam etc.

As human being full of fallible, we need law and order to make things legal; have a set of standards and principle governing us. For good or bad, it is a necessity. Religion is a form of law too; in my opinion, for its functions and purpose is the same. Imagine a world without law and order. It will be chaos and we won’t be able to live our fullest life and potential.

Now, if there is already law that make things legal, why do we need ethics?

As human being, we do not just exist. Each one of us thrive to be a better version of ourselves. Inert in each of us is the desire to move up Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Here is where ethics come into play. Ethics allows us to not just survive (lower needs) but to thrive (upper needs). It self-actualizes us; it allows us to self-govern ourselves, it brings in empathy, consideration into our daily life.

It makes our life alive; just like the condiments makes the white rice exciting.

In the training industry (as in all industry, I presume) there are many examples of unethical practices that gives a bad undertone to the industry. Let me give an example.

When you are employed in a training company, you will manage clients on behalf of the company. This is part of your work. The client gave the job because of the company. You are paid to fulfil the commitment contracted between the company and the client. In this case, the client is not yours. It is the company’s.

Now, when you are no more employed by the company and the client not knowing any better contacts you to do the same job as before, you have two choices.

The first choice is to inform the client you are no more employed with the company. You and the client than refer to the company on this new job. It is up to the company to then decide what to do. This is ethical.

The second choice is to take the job and do it yourself. In this case it is legal yet not ethical.

In the second case, it leaves a negative undercurrent because the company that employed you have the first right of refusal over you.

You might ask, why does the company have the first right of refusal?

The company have spent effort in obtaining the client. The company has a track record. The company has invested in reputation capital such that their goodwill is known. The company is capable. These are why the company got the job in the first place. All this effort is not your effort and must be respected.

If ethics were applied here, there is a huge possibility that a win win can be achieved. Yet, because the stand taken was more legal than ethical, a negative undertone exists.

Who needs law if there is ethics? -The Importance of Ethics in the Training Industry (or any industry for that matter)

Ethics is defined as moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or the conduct of an activity. It is above and beyond legality. It is a relationship that is taken for granted both ways; one equates both as twins that can’t exist separately, while others take for granted that they are two different mutually exclusive parts. The latter state is a convenient way of justifying actions, especially unsavoury ones; they are legal but unethical. They are even those that are oblivious to the existence of ethics.

If I were to simplify the relationship between law and ethics, I would use the analogy of rice. White rice is what legal is: basic, standard, applicable to all. It is the bare minimum of what a rice should be. Ethics is the condiment that makes the basic white rice wonderful. Turning it into nasi goreng, nasi lemak, nasi lemuni, nasi ayam etc.

As human being full of fallible, we need law and order to make things legal; have a set of standards and principle governing us. For good or bad, it is a necessity. Religion is a form of law too; in my opinion, for its functions and purpose is the same. Imagine a world without law and order. It will be chaos and we won’t be able to live our fullest life and potential.

Now, if there is already law that make things legal, why do we need ethics?

As human being, we do not just exist. Each one of us thrive to be a better version of ourselves. Inert in each of us is the desire to move up Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Here is where ethics come into play. Ethics allows us to not just survive (lower needs) but to thrive (upper needs). It self-actualizes us; it allows us to self-govern ourselves, it brings in empathy, consideration into our daily life.

It makes our life alive; just like the condiments makes the white rice exciting.

In the training industry (as in all industry, I presume) there are many examples of unethical practices that gives a bad undertone to the industry. Let me give an example.

When you are employed in a training company, you will manage clients on behalf of the company. This is part of your work. The client gave the job because of the company. You are paid to fulfil the commitment contracted between the company and the client. In this case, the client is not yours. It is the company’s.

Now, when you are no more employed by the company and the client not knowing any better contacts you to do the same job as before, you have two choices.

The first choice is to inform the client you are no more employed with the company. You and the client than refer to the company on this new job. It is up to the company to then decide what to do. This is ethical.

The second choice is to take the job and do it yourself. In this case it is legal yet not ethical.

In the second case, it leaves a negative undercurrent because the company that employed you have the first right of refusal over you.

You might ask, why does the company have the first right of refusal?

The company have spent effort in obtaining the client. The company has a track record. The company has invested in reputation capital such that their goodwill is known. The company is capable. These are why the company got the job in the first place. All this effort is not your effort and must be respected.

If ethics were applied here, there is a huge possibility that a win win can be achieved. Yet, because the stand taken was more legal than ethical, a negative undertone exists.