Lockheed Martin: Ethics Program - Special Academic Support

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Lockheed Martin is an American aerospace company employing over a hundred thousand employees. As a part of the companys ethics and diversity program, a document was published called Setting the Standard detailing Lockheed Martins code of ethics and business conduct (Setting the standard, 2020). However, some argue that a company of such size and reach is not doing enough to promote the values it is expected to. This paper will review Terriss (2013) arguments about Lockheeds ethics program, consider the extent to which it addresses the current problems and propose potential changes to the program.

To begin with, there is a sentiment that Lockheeds ethics program fails to consider ethical breaches at the highest level of the organization. In particular, Terris states that the program addresses people, but it does not address systems and that the impact of the company as a powerful organisation is not taken into consideration (2013, p. 117). Therefore, the author argues that the senior executives of the company may have too much power and freedom when dealing with ethical misconduct. In turn, Terris identifies four areas of vulnerability in the program that he believes need to be addressed further: leadership, collective responsibility, corporate family and the companys policy and mission. The former relates to the programs lack of focus on the ruling minority of the company, while the second highlights the need to shift from personal to collective responsibility. The third vulnerability addresses the programs overbearing nature towards the employees and the latter one underlines the narrowness of the program in terms of the assessment of ethical implications on a larger scale. Ultimately, one can argue that all of the aforementioned vulnerabilities do prevent the company from preventing ethical breaches at the highest level of the organization.

As far as the companys higher-level executives are concerned, the author questions if the measures put forward by the program are sufficient to assist the executives in making complex decisions regarding the code of ethics and business conduct. Specifically, the program suggests three main initiatives: ensuring the program is openly supported by the high-level executives, making senior executives attend ethics training and modules, and providing professional consultants to advise executives. With respect to the former, Terris (2013) emphasizes that while the higher executives may support the program on paper, there is no guarantee that the same executives will adhere to the values and mission that the program promotes. Moreover, the author doubts that attending the same ethics courses as lower-level employees will give senior executives sufficient background for targeting ethics misconduct at the highest level of the company. Finally, Terris (2013) suggests that the quality of the professional advice provided by the ethics consultants may vary depending on the specific relationships and biases that those consultants potentially have with the senior executives. Thus, the initiatives proposed by the program are relevant but lack nuance and fail to recognize some deeper-rooted problems associated with the power dynamics of the senior management.

With regard to the potential solutions to the issues related to ethics at higher executive levels of the organization, the author offers several counter-initiatives that might assist the company in its pursuit of an ethical workspace. Firstly, Terris indicts Lockheed Martin for applying the same ethics training program to the majority of the companys 15,000 managers of varying ranks (Ethics Awareness Training Resources, 2021). Instead, the author discusses the possibility of composing a specialized ethics course with the level of complexity and insight that would fit the senior executives of the company. Furthermore, Terris (2013, p. 129) argues that informal consultation is helpful, but it is most helpful to those who are already inclined to think most carefully about potential ethics problems. In turn, the author suggests creating a formal ethics committee that would be more diversified and efficient in terms of dealing with and preventing ethics misconduct regarding senior executives. Finally, one might consider the role of transformational leadership and the potential benefit a leader who values the code of ethics and business conduct above all would have on the top-level management of the company.

With respect to the programs issue of mostly addressing individuals rather than the group dynamic, the author provides further pieces of advice for the company. First of all, Terris (2013) believes that Lockheed Martins board of directors diversification with senior executives with a formal background in corporate ethics might challenge the groups decision-making process and promote the required point of view. Moreover, the author states that the company could be more courageous and transparent about framing and publicly tackling emerging ethical issues, such as executive compensation (Terris, 2013, p. 129). An open and honest discussion about the current and potential ethics problems can help increase the awareness of the issues and make a shift in the consciousness of senior executives and lower-level employees alike. Lastly, if Lockheed Martin were to alter its ethics program according to all of the aforementioned criticisms, the company should publicly admit to previous issues with the program and show that it fully understands the weight of its consequences.

In conclusion, although the ethics program conducted by Lockheed Martin addresses relevant and substantive issues within the companys code of ethics and business conduct, it fails to pay sufficient attention to the rights and responsibilities of the senior management. In turn, this could be improved if the program introduces a separate ethics course for the senior executives, establishes a formal ethics committee, includes more managers specialising in corporate ethics on the board of directors and adheres to the policy of openness and sincerity.

References

Ethics Awareness Training Resources (2021). Web.

Setting the standard: Code of ethics and business conduct (2020). Web.

Terris, D. (2013). Chapter 4: Vulnerabilities. Ethics at work: Creating virtue at an American corporation (pp. 117-154). Waltham, MA: Brandeis University Press.

Click Here To Order Now!