In the season six premiere of The Business Integrity School podcast, Cindy Moehring is joined by Mary Gentile, author and creator of the Giving Voice to Values program, which helps business students implement ethics principles into their regular business practices.

During the episode, Cindy and Mary discuss the importance of the Giving Voice To Values program and how each of the program's seven ethics principles can help people speak up when unethical situations in the workplace arise.

The pair discusses how advancements in technology have presented new challenges when it comes to tech ethics. Gentile said often the problems surrounding tech ethics are not unique to that one company but related to the features of the particular technology. When an employee is faced with unethical workplace situations, Gentile stresses the importance of finding influential people in leadership and even talking with the technology groups inside the company when raising concerns, as those groups typically understand the technology best.

 Before concluding the conversation, Gentile put emphasis on speaking up in the workplace by saying that it helps lay the foundation for a career. Speaking up in one situation is likely to help people if they find themselves in similar situations down the road, and influence a company's use of the technology in question.

To learn more about Gentile's ethics program, visit her website or read Gentile's "Giving Voice to Values" book.

Resources From the Episode:

• Mary Gentile's Website: https://givingvoicetovaluesthebook.com/about-mary/
• Giving Voice To Values Program: https://www.darden.virginia.edu/ibis/initiatives/gvv

Hi, everyone. I'm Cindy Moehring, the founder and Executive Chair of the business integrity Leadership Initiative at the Walton College of Business, and this is the business integrity school podcast. Here we talk about applying ethics, integrity and courageous leadership in business and most importantly, in your life today. I've had nearly 30 years of real world experience as a senior executive. So if you're looking for practical tips from a business pro who's been there, then this is the podcast for you. Welcome. Let's get started. Hi, everybody, and welcome back to another episode of the business integrity school. I'm Cindy Moehring, the founder and Executive Chair of the business integrity leadership initiativ es at the University of Arkansas Walton College of Business and I'm really excited to introduce to you today our special guest Mary. Gentile, Mary. Hi, how are you?

Hi, Cindy. How are you? It's great to be here.

It's great to have you back. In addition to being the creator and director of Giving Voice to Values. She is the most recently the Professor of Ethics at the University of Virginia Darden School of Business, also the Senior Advisor at the Aspen Institute, business and society program. Mary is also a consultant on management, education and leadership development and among numerous awards, Mary was very recently inducted into the Thinker's 50 Hall of Fame in 2021. Now Giving Voice to Values it has been Mary, gosh, I mean, it's used in over 1365 Business Schools organizations globally, it's been featured in Financial Times, Harvard Business Review, Stanford Social Innovation Review.

I mean, it's really been very widely adopted. So congratulations to you on that.

Thank you. Thank you. I'm still amazed.

You should be it's it's really wonderful. So we've been fortunate to have you speak with us before, on the approach for giving voice to values that you developed. And we're going to take a different tact on applying those principles today to an emerging field in ethics, which is really tech ethics. But before we get there, can you just very briefly just remind our audience or explain to our audience, for those who are new to your approach, what the seven pillars for giving voice to values are all about?

I always tell people if they can't remember anything else, giving voice to values is about asking and answering a different question. So instead of asking what's right, that's a good question. And it's one that you you do think and talk about, but giving voice to values is about answering the question once you know what you believe is right, how could you get it done effectively? And so in order to answer that question, I gathered stories from people who had in fact confronted values conflicts within their, within their organizations, people right out of school, all the way up to executives, I also looked at a lot of research about how and when people can act and voice on their values. And from that exploration, I gathered the seven pillars, which seem to be ways that people who do effectively act on their values approach the issue. So the first one is values. And, you know, often people will say either values are entirely relative, you know, it depends on your culture, your religion, whatever, or no, there's a core set of values and I know what they are, and it really doesn't matter what you think. Either one of those perspectives means that people can't have the conversation I'm talking about. The way that I've identified people who do this effectively is that they first identify, there are a set of values that tend to be universally shared research suggests that, but it's a short list, and it's really high level. So the first thing we ask is, does the issue you're addressing rise to the level of one of these issues, whether it's fashion or integrity or justice? And then the second question is, if it does, how can I talk about it in a way that's going to appeal to the value that most of us share, rather than using the language or the frameworks or, you know, appealing to the religious system that is unique to me, but not might not be shared by you. That's how we think about that first pillar. The second pillar is choice. And really, the idea there is that giving voice to values is about helping people understand that they they may have more choices than they think they do. A lot of the people that I interviewed and the stories that I gathered here, you know, people when they didn't act on their values, it's because they felt they didn't have the choice. And yet, we found other people who were in similar situations, who found a choice. And so a lot of it is about understanding what enables us to act, what enables us to believe we have a choice and the other pillars are about.

The third pillar is normalization. And the idea there is that people often think about values conflicts ethical conflicts as these, you know, startling, rare occurrences that they hope they never encounter. But if they do encounter them, they're going to just rush through them so they can keep their head down and do their jobs. And people who see them that way as exceptional, tend to have less ability to deal with them effectively. But if you understand that values, conflicts are a normal part of life, they happen in business, they happen in our families, they happen, you know, out in the world. And so you know, if we think about them that way, and we actually think about rehearsing and practicing and building this ability to take them more naturally, you're going to be more able to deal with them effectively. And we have stories about that. The fourth pillar is purpose. And we found that the people who do this effectively tend to reflect consciously, explicitly on what their purpose is, and they tend to define it more broadly. So instead of thinking of your purpose as making the quarterly quota, you know, or pleasing someone on this particular deal. If you think about your purpose more broadly, in terms of what you want your career to mean what you want your profession to mean, do you even think of business as your profession? If you define it that way, it enables people to tap into their own deeper motivation to act on their values. It also gives you a way to appeal to that same sentiment in the people you're trying to influence. And so you're trying to appeal to their better angels in that sense. Let's see, we're up to I think that fifth one now, which is self knowledge and alignment, this is my favorite one because I'm basically an introvert and kind of risk averse. And I thought, therefore, I wasn't really going to be able to voice and act on my values. And what I found from talking to people and gathering stories is that, in fact, anyone can do this, but they do it in different ways. So the people who are risk takers will say, Oh, well, I thought, you know, I take risks. I'm an assertive kind of person, I'll why not take a risk in service of something that matters to me. But the people who are more risk averse, or perhaps more conservative and cautious, will frame the ethical challenge in a way where doing the right thing feels like the safer route. So in other words, they appeal to their own personality, their own predilections. And they also appeal to their own strengths, you know, the people who are better in in debate versus people who are better in writing versus people who are better at asking questions. Or people who work through other people, you know, they talk to someone else who talks at someone. So this this pillar is really about people understanding how you are most effective. Look at your own past experience, even if it wasn't an ethical issue. And just like, oh, how am I most most productive, I'm most effective, and play to your strengths and frame the challenge in a way that appeals to that strength.

I with you, I really liked that one just before because it shows that the approach that you that kind of the framework here is adaptable, it's flexible. And there's a way to make it work for you, regardless of how you're wired, whether it's an extrovert, introvert, whether you like to ask questions or make statements, all of that can work in this approach. You just have to understand who you are, and the way you are most effective at making your points and then use it in that way.

Exactly, exactly. In fact, I find that this is really encouraging to people who see themselves as introverted. I find that if I tell the person who sees him or herself as very assertive and aggressive, and I say you need to be more cautious, you need to be more conservative. They'll say, well, that's great, but it's not who I am. And if you tell the introverted or or risk averse person, you need to have moral courage. They'll say, well, that's great, but it's not who I am. This is saying you can frame the challenge in a way that plays to your strengths. The next pillar is voice. And the idea there is simply that there, as I was alluding to a moment ago, there's lots of different ways of voicing and acting on your values. It's not a matter of, you know, shaking your fist and stamping your foot and speaking truth to power. It can it can mean asking questions, it can mean writing a memo, it can mean making sure that someone you know has a different well informed perspective is listened to or part of the conversation. There's many different ways to voice right, it's a metaphor. And also, this one is about the idea that it's good to rehearse your voice, to practice it, to find colleagues, peers, friends, even family, that you can sort of rehearse what you're doing so that it feels more natural, and so that you are able to do it more comfortably. And then the last pillar is what we call reasons and rationalizations. And the idea here is that from talking to people and gathering stories, it became very clear that there are there are set of objections that you that are pretty common that you hear a lot. I call them reasons or rationalizations or their reasons that people say we'll put forward as reasons why they can't do what you're proposing. They do, why they can't do the ethical thing. And they're powerful, but they're not bulletproof. But the thing is, it's very hard to think of answers to them in the moment. So some of the ones we hear most often are, well, it's not a big enough deal to worry about, you know, it's not material. Or, this is just standard operating procedure in this industry, or in this part of the world, or even in this organization.

Yeah.

Or, you know, yeah, maybe it's problematic, but it's above my paygrade. It's not my responsibility, you know, so I can't deal with it. Sometimes we even just hear I call locus of loyalty, people will say, well, yeah, maybe it's a problem, but, but I feel loyal to, you know, my boss, or my company, or my team or my clients. And so those kinds of arguments come up a lot. And they're persuasive. But we've actually sat down and looked at ways to unpack them and respond to them. And we give people an opportunity to rehearse and practice. And, of course, you have to frame it in a way that's relevant to the particular situation.

Sure, of course.

But I'll give you one quick example, if people say it's not a big deal, you know, that one is, is a great one, because you can say, and that's exactly why we can handle it right now, you know, the cost is so low, the timing is so short, you know, it's going to be much easier to address it. Now. If we wait, it's going to be much more costly, much more dangerous, much more negative implications. And so you know, just things like that, that are hard to think of in the moment. But if you take a minute, you can, you can reflect and practice them. So those are the seven pillars very quickly.

Well, that is a very broad approach. And it truly can be used. Anytime you find yourself in a values conflict, I want to focus the rest of our time today on tech ethics issues in particular. So technology, as we know, is just everywhere. And we're starting to see that there are some ethical issues that are emerging with respect to that technology. And you know, you at UVA, at University of Arkansas, we've been actually working with Duquesne and Notre Dame with the support from Deloitte Foundation to build out some frameworks and some curriculum around this particular topic. And while there are specific tech ethics principles, that we know people now need to be more aware of, so they can bake them into their strategic, let's say, creation of AI, artificial intelligence, or the use of it, they are still going to arrive at this point, if you will, where they're going to be faced with one of those issues. Well, let me ask you a question first. Are these all based, your case studies that you've developed, are they based on like real, real situations?

Yes, yes, I reached out to people who actually work in the field of, of technology and values and ethics. And I asked them to, to look at situations that they had observed or in fact, worked with, and most of these cases are, are composites, where they've looked at situations that are arriving in a variety of context. So they've disguised them, perhaps the industry or perhaps fictionalized an actor, but the issue itself is very real.

And I love that it's a composite because it makes the case example richer, but it is drawing on things that have actually happened. So it's very practical and relevant. So let's dive into one. So let's say that your Gia in this situation so you're no longer Mary, you're now Gia. And you are a young business manager focused on business analytics. A lot of people are these days, and you work for a social media company. Okay. And you've been asked to prepare a research report that presents an analysis of a bunch of user data. And after conducting your research very thoroughly, and reviewing some previous reports, you become concerned about the data that you're uncovering about the negative impact that your social media company's flagship product is having on young users. Now, your supervisor advises you that acting on your concerns is not going to do any good. It's futile, basically get the report done.

But don't raise the concerns. And that if you do it could lead to consequences for your prospects at the company. You're young. You're just starting now you're excited to do this report. You find some concerning things and now your boss tells you this. And despite that, you still want to raise your concerns.

So how do you do that using GVV as the framework without killing your career? And, without sacrificing your relationship with your boss, what's your thoughts on it?

Right? Right. So this is a really challenging situation, because obviously, the products that you're actually doing the research on is, is something that the company expects will will do well, for them, they expect that will help them, not only have more customers right now, but if you're attracting use customers, the idea is that get them young, and you'll you'll keep them, right? And so the idea is that you're building for the future as well. And so it is a challenging situation, one of the things that, that I as Gia, I think need to remember is that, especially with technology, a lot of the ethical issues that we've begun to identify, mostly through experience, you know, through trying something and then having a bad experience. Most of these challenges were not badly intended, it wasn't like somebody was trying intentionally to pay a bribe, or trying intentionally to cook the books, you know, in many things, it's because there was technology that has really potential for very positive impacts. But also, we don't know all the unintended consequences. So I think that's the first thing Gia needs to keep in mind that don't frame them as villains. No, framing them as people who actually are trying to build their business. And especially when you're working with the with the the tech folks, they're people who are excited about the potential of the new technologies they're working with. And so they're thinking, gee, what else could I do with this, you know, and so you need to keep that in mind when you're framing it. So if Gia goes in and simply says, this is really bad, look at all the negative impacts we're having, it's going to trigger a lot of resistance. So I think the first thing you have to do is gather a lot of data. And if I was Gia, I'd be gathering data of both the positive impacts as well as the negative impacts, so that I'm not giving people an easy accusation toward me to say, well, but you haven't looked at this, or what about all these wonderful things that we're doing, we're connecting young people, you know? So you need to be able to be honest with yourself and honest with them, and demonstrate that you understand those kinds of things. So acknowledge and stress the positive potential, and then frame the negative potential with data and credible data, I know preferably from multiple sources frame it as unintended consequences, so that you again, you're not playing against something that what they were set out to do, then you really need to talk to others, see if you can find some allies in the organization. In an issue like this, I would be thinking, you know, other people may have noticed this as well, she may even be gathering data that other people have collected within the organization. So so find some allies, they may have been people who've tried to raise it unsuccessfully, they may have met people who just never raised it. But if you're not alone, it actually gives you strength. And it also is somewhat protective. And it also gives you more credibility.

And so for somebody who's young, yeah, but he's young, like in this situation, Gia or somebody just starting out in their career, I think that point is really important.

Absolutely. Absolutely.

Find allies, talk to others.

Yeah. And another GVV tool that we use a lot, we call it the Giving Voice to Values thought experiment, which is that we'll we'll ask people questions about what if, you know, we'll say, so what if we were kind of, we were trying to design this product in a way that would achieve this goal, without achieving this negative consequence, you know, engage people in experimenting without just pushing your idea, but actually asking them to help you brainstorm together. I call it the furniture moving approach, you know, if you if you ask someone to help you move a piano, they may say they're too busy. If you ask them, how could I get some help and moving this piano, you get them to help you problem solve, and they will get engaged. And so I find to do that, and one of the best ways to do that, in a situation like this, is to talk to the tech folks. Because they're the ones who know the know the technology the best. They're the ones who are really focused on the capabilities of the technology, rather than simply looking at the bottom line immediately. And so if you can get some of those folks excited about the potential, they're going to be really great allies for you in this kind of situation. So use that kind of what if question. And then another thing that I would do if I were Gia is that I might point out, you know, one of the reasons or rationalization she might face is, look, this isn't unique to us. It's just a feature of this new kind of technology and it's happening everywhere. And that may be true, but then your response to that can be yes, that may be true, but the positive solutions can be unique to us. We can take take the lead on figuring out ways to market our product so that it has the positive. But we're also addressing some of folks negative concerns. And so there's a way in which you can, you can twist that one around a little bit so that it can be to your to your benefit. And then if at some point, you want to raise the potential negative consequences, the wider consequences of going forward in this particular situation, you know, there is, you know, increasing public attention to the negative impacts of social media on teens and young people. And there's increasing pressures for regulation, right? And, so you can raise those kinds of things and talk about this is an opportunity for us to, to address some of those things before we become the victims of this kind of negative press and public attention. And so you can use that. I don't usually lead with that. Because it's entirely defensive. And it also feels pretty people will see it as long term, even if it's already happening. And what we know from the research is that people tend to overweight, the immediate consequences of their choices and underweight long term consequences. And they'll, and they'll see something like that as long term. I mean, you look at the government, it takes them a long time, you know,

Right. Right.

And so I would raise that, but I would also try and raise some of these more short term, positive benefits of trying to address these issues. Because yeah, that's gonna have more resonance with people more more quickly, right.

And they're gonna hear you.

Yeah, another thing that I would do, and it would depend on the company you're in, you know, and Gia's fairly new there, so she would probably have to do a little bit of exploration, talking to people to gather this. But look at when you've seen change happen in your organization in the past? And understand how that happened? Are there specific sort of hot buttons that tend to resonate with leadership? Are there specific people who tend to be the most influential? Are there specific questions or ways of framing things that tend to get through? So you can learn from how change has happened in the past, even if it was on an entirely different situation?

Yeah. So that's gathering data, too, right? So so when you say gathering data at the beginning of we were talking about how would Gia handle this, some people may have just thought that you were thinking about data related to this specific issue. But there's all kinds of intelligence related to how does change get made within the organization effectively in gathering that data and intelligence, it's going to be really important too...

Yeah, it's reconnaissance.

Figuring all of that out,

I couldn't remember working in a in a large organization earlier in my career, and there was a particular issue, then a number of the women senior employees were concerned about. And they specifically came to me because they knew I had worked on a similar issue in the past. And so we were able to be effective, because we drew on what we've learned from trial and error on a past situation. So that can be very useful. Another another thing that can sometimes be useful, it depends on the issue is to persuade an organization to engage in a kind of skunkworks, you know, to engage in a kind of, Can we can we do a pilot, can we do an experiment with, you know, if you have some ideas about how to frame this in a way that's going to have positive impact, I would think that this kind of issue that Gia is facing, may have the potential for some very positive media attention, if the company tries to attend to it. It also has the potential for negative media attention. You know, sometimes if you try to do something good, you're just calling attention to yourself. And so I think if she's going to do something like that, she would want to work with the communications department and the media folks in the firm to understand how can we frame this and use the relationships that we have in order to be most positive. And then finally, when you're talking to individuals within the organization, sometimes it's helpful to have to personalize the story to humanize the story to tell the story of, of real individuals, really young people who have had certain kinds of experiences, rather than just using numbers, you know, X percentage of teenagers between the age of 13 and 15. Have this experience. That's great. Right? Use that, especially in a tech company. But on the other hand, it's also good to put a face to some of these stories and to humanize them in some ways. So those are a few of the kinds of things I think depending on how large the company is how well established it is how much it's already doing in this area. In It may be a matter of trying to build something that's going to be a little bit more incremental than something that's going to be in right now we're going to do X, and it's important to keep your eyes open about that. Any individual in this situation has to decide when do I feel that there's really good faith effort going on here to make?

Right, right.

And at what point do I feel like, you know, maybe I don't want to be part of this? And, and that's what we did with the case, because as I say, it was a fictionalized character. And so we ended up, you know, sharing a couple of different scenarios, you know, where she was more impactful and when, where she may have decided it was time to find a different organization.

Yeah. And that may happen. But the important point about the approach, I think, is normalizing, right one of them this situation that can arise not demonizing the situation from the beginning, and figuring out that you're not just faced with the choice of oh, my gosh, I've been asked to do this, I found bad data, I now have to leave the company. I mean, there are ways and strategies to raise issues and work through them. And you may end up deciding if there's not good faith effort that you have to leave. But that doesn't have to be your starting position. You don't have to feel like, I've got to go find a new job, you know, right out of the box.

Exactly. Exactly. And I think also, if it's done well, if it's done carefully, you're actually laying the groundwork for your future success, you know, because those kinds of skills and that kind of a network, you're also building a network within the organization of people who have heard your very careful and thoughtful explanation, and have even perhaps, if you've been able to build a set of allies, it may mean that the change takes a little longer than you had hoped. But you're building an audience rather than it being just you.

And you're being seen as the courageous leader, and somebody who can influence an organization, all of those qualities are what folks look for, right, within a company.

Yeah, that's an important point that you just made, Cindy, when I share this approach, not just around technology, but around any kind of values, conflicts in organizations, when I share it with companies, increasingly, you know, you know, toughen their compliance people or their risk manage people, ethics, folks who will come to me, but increasingly, they're really seeing the resonance of this for their leadership development within the organization, because leadership is about talking about things aren't always that easy to talk about. And sometimes there are ethical issues. Sometimes there's something else, but I feel so similar. Yeah,

I would agree. Well, Mary, thank you for taking the time to explain, very briefly, the GVV approach, but more importantly, how it how it applies in kind of kind of real life situations related to technology that I think any of us today might find ourselves stumbling across. That was really, really helpful. Thank you for creating the case studies as well. And I hope that they find broad use in many universities, because I think it's a really valuable exercise, to help our future business leaders start to think through how to deal with these issues, because they're going to pop up, they're here today. The question is, what are you going to do about it? When you spot it, and how are you going to do it? Great framework! Let me end on one fun question. What's the best book you've read lately, or a movie or documentary you've watched, or maybe something in fact that you've listened to? That highlights some of these issues of ethics and technology that the audience might find interesting and could think about your approach and how they might apply it to that situation?

One of them was The Circle by Dave Eggers. And the other was The Social Dilemma, that which was a Netflix film that I think a lot of people saw, and they they are useful in pointing out what could go wrong. You know, sort of the the dystopia kind of view of how technology can be used, unfortunately, and I think it's good, we need to be aware of those things. But my personal predilection is let's look for ways to work with these really creative, intelligent people who use this technology in constructive and ethical ways.

Mary, this has been a pleasure. Thank you so very much for your time today and for sharing your views and thoughts and your framework with the audience, and I really appreciate it.

It's my pleasure. Thanks, Cindy.