Epilogue

Human history more and more becomes a race between education and catastrophe
H.G. Wells (1866-1946) Outline of History, 1920

In this book, we have suggested that there are three distinct dimensions of ethics and that it is impossible, in the connected world of the early 21st Century, to contemplate one without recognising the influence on and by the other two. Personal ethics cannot be separated from the organisational context in which most of us are destined to spend the majority of our lives, be it working for a multinational corporation, a government department or agency, a not-forprofit organisation or simply volunteering at the local pre-school. Humans are gregarious by nature and seek out the company of other humans in communities that are increasingly focused around the workplace. Similarly, to retain their social licence to operate, organisations have to be sympathetic to the values and expectations of the wider social context in which they function.

Intergenerational equity

We would suggest, in fact, that there is a fourth dimension - a parallel world, if you like, which sits alongside our present world - and that is the future world. Eminent mythologist Joseph Campbell suggests in The Power of Myth (Doubleday, 1988) that, when we humans have children, we ourselves begin to die. In saying that, he is suggesting that the introspective, inner world that weinhabit as solo human beings changes forever when we have children and our focus turns towards them. Their life begins where ours has now left off. Suddenly we are faced with the awful thought that we will be succeeded by this person we have created. We are less important in the wider scheme of things than our heir and successor and she/he will outlive us.

The fourth dimension, therefore, belongs to tomorrow's generations and demands our ethical accountability: to those who cannot speak for themselves, for what we bequeath to them; and to what is left of nature's world and the vitality of the economic, social and spiritual realms they will inherit. Surely we have a duty, an ethical responsibility, to patrol the boundaries of the society for whom we are custodians - for our children and our children's children.

Sustainable development

IBM became the most powerful corporation in the world because of its philosophy of 'passing the baton' from leader to leader. Its philosophy was that the current leader was simply the custodian of the corporate culture and it was his (they were all men in those days) responsibility to protect this precious flower for the next generation. IBM endured for over a century of change as a result of that philosophy and the culture remained intact for several decades. Companies 'built to last' today share a similar philosophy.

This responsibility to future generations is often referred to as the notion of 'intergenerational equity'. In the context of sustainability, it is used to describe the responsibility of present generations to safeguard the interests of future generations. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development defines sustainability as 'forms of progress that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs'.

In 'Corporate citizenship and corporate social investment', Alyson Warhurst and her colleagues at the UK's Warwick Business School [Journal of Corporate Citizenship 1 (2001) 57-73] define sustainable development in the following terms; it can be seen that each rests on recognition and honouring of the relationship and inter-relationship context:

• Connectivity embraces ecological, social and economic interdependence;
• Equity suggests fairness, within and across generations and species;
• Prudence connotes duties of care and prevention, technologically, scientifically and politically;
• Security demands safety from chronic threats and protection from harmful disruption.

So, if we accept these definitions of sustainability, and the notion that individual gain must be tempered with consideration of community prosperity then we cannot fail to see that

we are custodians of the ethical personality of civilised society.

By ignoring such interdependencies, we have passed a challenging baton onto Generation Y - who will have to remediate the excesses of their forefathers. So then what price Generation Y, the heirs of our future? Conservative predictions put the life expectancy of most of the world's natural resources at 70 years. The UN claims that oil supplies will peak in 2008. There have been no new significant oil finds in the last 20 years. Electricity, dependent as it is in most developed communities on coal, will probably last for one to two generations longer.

In 'Basic choices and constraints on long-term energy supply', Paul B. Weisz, Emeritus Professor of Chemical and Bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania (Physics Today, February 2005), estimates that most fossil fuels will be used up within one lifetime; he emphasises the paramount importance of an appropriate public policy response to address the looming crisis.

What all this means is that the present generation of young people will very likely see the extinction of natural resources that we currently take for granted. At present rates of consumption, their children will not have access to natural resources we took for granted. Along with disappearing energy resources, we have also eliminated plant and animal kingdoms and, some would argue, dwindled our social capital - by spawning a society where a small percentage of the world's population enjoys individual wealth by pursuing unlimited growth at the expense of the majority - through inequity and unfairness.

Intergenerational ethics

So, out of the notion of 'intergenerational equity' can be derived the notion of 'intergenerational ethics'. What responsibility do current generations of workers and employees owe to younger employees - such as Generation Y - and their future? Surely we have evolved beyond the 'greed is good' business culture of the 1980s. In the 21st Century people exhibit business behaviours, values and attitudes that treat the earth's valuable resources as more than 'free goods' for unbridled consumption. We have become aware of our responsibilities in the global connections between the environment and natural resources, culture, health and social equity, and business and consumer behaviour. We are part of an interconnected, interdependent world with mutual responsibilities and accountabilities for our behaviour and our survival. We know that we have left the planet's resources depleted and its environment in a critical state - far beyond help from new technologies for future generations. The corporate sustainability movement developed in response to this.

In 'Corporate Sustainability' (eContent, 2004) Dexter Dunphy argues that 'there is no technological "fix".. The task is not only to redesign our tools but also ourselves' (Conclusion: 362). In the same book, Joseph Petrick (p.165) argues for global managerial 'moral complexity' skills development, while Mark Starik (p.167) proposes that governance occurs at multiple levels through multiple connecting systems - with individuals, organisations and society each responsible for sustainability governance through their respective actions.

Ray Anderson, Interface's CEO [The Corporation (Movie), 2005] talks about 'intergenerational tyranny', to describe the fact that every facet of the biosphere is in decline as a consequence of the actions of those living in the 20th Century. Most of the blame is attributed home to those leading our public, global corporations. By destroying many aspects of the natural environment, we are denying our children's children's children the right to inherit a healthy planet Earth and as a result, a healthy economy, healthy social life and healthy 'self '.

We singled out Generation Y (born 1978-1994) for two reasons:

• according to today's researchers, they are the first generation to survive the education system with their self-esteem relatively intact and are genuinely concerned about social equity and environmental protection; and
• they are perhaps the first generation of employees to have an expectation that they can be the same person at work as they are outside the workplace.

Baby boomers growing up in the 1950s and reaching adulthood in the mid-1960s championed basic freedoms, hard won in the civil rights movements They subscribed to value-sets around hard work, conscientiousness, deferred gratification, loyalty and reward-follows-good endeavour. Now Generation Y believes in instant gratification, loyalty to self, work/life balance, equality as a right rather an earned privilege, and a two-year time horizon of continuous employment. Between these two generations is Generation X (born 1962-1977), raised between the first oil crisis of 1973 and the stock market crash of 1987 into a society that could no longer guarantee employment: a society that created the phenomenon of workforce 'casualisation' and 'multi-skilling'; an era where employability became more important than employment; and where the so-called '40/40' syndrome of past generations (40 hours a week for 40 years, followed by 2-10 years of retirement before death) was laid to rest. The priority values of each of these groups shape their world view. The resulting generational and cultural diversity makes managing a complex organism like an organisation both a social and an economic challenge (see: Generation Y: Thriving and Surviving with Generation Y at work, by Peter Sheahan, Hardie Grant Books, 2005).

New concepts, such as 'emotional intelligence', responsible corporate citizenship, learning organisations, mentoring, partnering, networking and ethical relating are reflections of the changing nature of leadership, management and work experiences in a 21st Century context.

The choice of priority values is what makes each generation, and each individual, unique. As we have seen in Chapter 3, Maturana's definition of ethics [H.R. Maturana and F.J. Varela (1992) The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding, Shambhala, Boston] places heavy emphasis on the sanctity of relationship and interrelationships within each generation; of the need to respect the values and needs of others; of the imperative for self-knowledge as the vital precursor to human co-existence and ethical progress. To use the old cliché,

Ethics is not an end, it's a journey.

The journey began with ancient philosophers, Eastern and Western, seeking to understand the meaning of life and to provide frameworks for educated humans not only to make sense of their own worlds but also to guide others towards a meaningful existence. As many Western countries loosened the shackles of fundamentalist Christianity and as the power of the corporation expanded on a global scale, a need for a more universal understanding of ethics in a secular or pluralist context has emerged. Today, questions of ethics focus on relationship accountability, equity and fairness and the importance of a sound character - individually and collectively, as represented by organisational life - to balance self interest with social prosperity.

In our experience working in the field of business ethics within Australia's largest corporations and public sector organisations, employees want to hear more about this 'heart stuff'. They are much more engaged with relevant and timely conversations about ethics in contemporary times than they are in academic or legal prescriptions about how they should behave.

Ethical challenges are continual, various and manifold. Each of us, in each sphere of our daily life, faces a myriad of situations that will test our character's ethical fitness. Every situation carries within it the opportunity to hone our powers of ethical discretion. As Paul Tillich expressed it so beautifully (Paul Tillich: An Appraisal by J. Heywood Thomas, Westminster, 1963):

'Ethics is not a subject, it's a life put to the test in a thousand different moments.'

Ethics can be learned, just as we learn other behaviours. The challenge for each of us is to look inside ourselves and make such learning intrinsically rewarding. There will always be 'free riders', those who exploit the 'goodness' as well as the 'weakness' of others, but in the end, they are also the losers - because their worldview is an impoverished one, where self is pitted against the world rather than living in harmony with it.

There is no doubt that ethics will become the defining quality of 21st Century life. Our children's children's children depend on the choices we make today. Let's willingly draw back from the precipice of a worldview that lauds the absurdity 'You can have it all.' Let's recognise that there's more than me on the planet. Instead, we can move to the high ground, and hone a personal character that rises willingly and capably to the challenge of being fully human, and takes the needs of our fellow travellers into consideration.

The virtues of 'truth' and 'honour' can take us as far as we need to go.