1. Ethical violations in the organization

Serious ethical issues are currently emerging at the micro level, within organizations, in areas such as:

Adoption management decisions;

Relationships between managers and subordinates;

Official revelations;

The position of women in the organization;

mutual services.

There are four groups of main arguments justifying the adoption of managerial decisions that are incorrect from an ethical point of view:

The certainty that this activity does not go beyond ethical and legal norms, i.e., in fact, is not immoral;

Confidence that this activity is in the interests of the individual or corporation and that such actions are expected;

Confidence that the activity is “safe” as it will never be discovered and made public;

Confidence that since this activity helps the organization, it will treat indulgently and even protect the person doing it.

A significant number of people caught in an ambiguous business situation, consider all those actions that were not prohibited to be correct. Senior leaders rarely ask their subordinates directly for illegal or careless actions, but often make it clear that they would rather not know about something, while hinting at a significant reward. Line-level managers usually do not have clear instructions as to which aspects of their activities will be overlooked and which will be condemned.

Ambitious managers are looking for ways to attract attention, stand out from others. Some people think it's easy to look good in the short term if you avoid things that will only work in the long term (for example, you can ignore the repair service, or retraining, or the problem of improving the customer experience). Managers are often promoted on the basis of "great" results achieved in these ways, and their less fortunate successors are held responsible for earlier decisions. Many cases of illegal behavior in organizations are never investigated. In moments of crisis, the boundaries of unacceptable actions are generally “forgotten”.

Relations between managers and subordinates affect the entire nature of business communication, largely determining its moral and psychological climate. This concerns, first of all, how and on the basis of what orders are given in the management process, what service discipline is expressed in, whether subordinates participate in decision-making, by what methods subordinates are encouraged to take more active actions, to what extent their individuality is taken into account.

A significant part of people, meeting in organizations with egregious facts of waste, deceit or corruption, does nothing to expose them. Starting from childhood, informing elders about the unseemly deeds of peers, and later - colleagues or direct superiors is perceived by many very negatively. From an ethical point of view, there is indeed a moral dilemma in such situations. The question arises about the criteria for the correctness of this kind of information.

Every year the share of women in production, in management, and in the public service is continuously increasing. Women are increasingly entering paid employment and professions. But, despite the progress made in the position of women in the organization, they continue to face serious problems, including: earnings, unlike men working in the same field, are lower; limiting career advancement to senior management positions (the so-called "glass ceiling"); sexual harassment affecting activities and future careers.

Often in business relations, problems are solved in violation of the existing legal, economic, moral order, by using the position of individuals who have privileged access to goods and services. In the system of reciprocal services, the recipient is obliged to return the service sometime in the future, but - with "interest". And when the service is returned, the person who previously rendered it is again obliged to repay for this even greater service. Growing, the system of this kind of informal relationships on the principle of "you - to me, I - to you" destroys the existing official relations between people and organizations. The situation with the illegal or immoral receipt of certain goods or services can take an ethically more complex form, when a person represents not his own interests, but the interests of the organization, i.e. its staff, customers, consumers. A cultural tradition closely associated with the system of reciprocal favors is gifts. Giving or receiving a gift means much more than just a friendly gesture. Difficulties in the traditional gift exchange are associated with the establishment of criteria for distinguishing a gift from a bribe and the corresponding assessment of staff behavior.

Based on a survey of executives various organizations in the United States, the following ethical issues that arise in business relationships have been identified:

Concealment of facts and incorrect information in reports during inspections;

Release of low-quality products or the need for its constant maintenance;

Overpricing or outright deception in business negotiations;

Excessive self-confidence in judgments, which can lead to damage to the interests of the company;

Unconditional obedience to leadership, no matter how unethical and unfair it may be;

Presence of favorites;

Inability to express one's indignation and disagreement in an atmosphere of constant unethical acts;

Inability to pay due attention to family or personal affairs due to the abundance of work;

Production of products with questionable safety characteristics;

Failure to return any things or valuables taken at the workplace, from colleagues or from company funds;

Deliberately exaggerating the benefits of your work plan to gain support;

Exaggerated attention to moving up the hierarchical ladder to the detriment of the interests of the case;

Moving up the career ladder "over the heads" of colleagues;

Deception of employees in order to obtain benefits for the company;

Forming alliances with dubious partners in the hope of a fluke;

Delays and delays in the performance of their duties, which leads to a waste of time and money for the company;

Rendering negative impact on the socio-political process by amending the legislation for bribes.

To a large extent, this list of problems is also valid for Russian conditions. Managers and workers who face such problems cannot follow only what they have learned about morality in their families, from teachers, in the church, etc., to solve them. Often, immoral decisions are made and impartial acts are committed by people who are extremely honest and have the best intentions. Modern business relationships are extremely saturated with ethical issues. To solve them, it is necessary to develop certain approaches, the establishment of "rules of the game" that contribute to the successful implementation of professional tasks participants business relations and harmonization of the interests of business and society.

Nikolai S., having worked in an insurance company for about a year as an economist, was appointed to the position of head of the civil liability insurance department. This was facilitated by a number of important circumstances that were taken into account by the company's management when making such a decision.

Nikolai S. had a good basic education, knew foreign languages, was sociable, energetic, executive. During his time in the company, he has grown as a specialist, demonstrating outstanding abilities. However, the very first working day of Nikolai S. as a leader was not a success. If, on the whole, the staff of the department met him kindly, but one of the experienced employees, Valentina Grigorievna, defiantly refused to recognize the new leader. In response to the request of Nikolai S., which he addressed to all employees, to submit reports on the work of the past month for review, Valentina Grigoryevna stated the following:

“I have been in the department for twenty years. Your predecessor as head of the department, Ivan Mikhailovich, whom we recently retired with honors, never checked my work. He was always confident in my qualifications and diligence. For the work that I did during these years, I was repeatedly encouraged. Your distrust of me as a specialist offends me.”

Question: What decision should Nikolay S., head of the department, make? Suggest your own version of the manager's sequence of actions in a similar situation.

In my opinion, Nikolai S. should explain to the employee that this is not a personal check of her, this is a group report of the department to the higher management. Thus, Nikolai S., as an experienced manager, must apply the method of persuasion to an employee, which will undoubtedly give positive results.

Thus, the actions of Nikolai S. should follow the following plan:

2. control

3. application of administrative measures

If the employee does not understand and does not fulfill the duties assigned to her, in this case the manager has the right to apply administrative measures to her - from a reprimand to dismissal.

If you are a manager, which of your tasks and powers would you like to delegate to subordinates?

In any case, you need to delegate:

routine work;

Specialized activities (i.e. activities that your employees can perform better than you);

Private questions;

Preparatory work (projects, etc.). In general, in each specific case, check any of your upcoming cases for the possibility of delegation. The principle here is extremely simple - everything that employees can do must be done by employees. To get started, try to evaluate such types of work as:

o preliminary formulation (but not final fixation!) of goals, plans, programs and projects on which you must make decisions.

o attending meetings instead of you, where your projects and proposals can be presented by your employees.

Never delegated:

Goal setting;

Final decision on strategic issues;

Control of results;

Employee motivation;

Tasks of special importance (tasks of group A);

High risk tasks;

Unusual, exceptional cases;

Actual, urgent matters that leave no time for explanations or rechecking;

Confidential tasks.

Delegation should be used in case of significant changes in the working situation that require a redistribution of functions and powers, namely:

When changing the structure of personnel (new appointment, promotion, dismissal, etc.);

When reorganizing or restructuring a department (company, division);

In crisis situations;

In the event of the emergence of new areas of activity or a change in competence.

6. Comment on any two statements: As part of this question, students need to give 5 quotes, aphorisms in the field of management (indicating the author of the statement and the source, as well as their attitude to this statement).

"If a person does not have the data to become a leader, you cannot teach him - teach not teach - you will not teach." (A.P. Lukoshin)

It is difficult to agree with this opinion, in my opinion, leaders are not born, leaders become. And I am sure A.P. Lukoshin himself was not a star of leadership from the very beginning.

All management, in the end, comes down to stimulating the activity of other people (Lee Iacocca)

One of the most important functions of a manager is to stimulate the active work of his subordinates. If people have an incentive, then they will work at full strength and the control function will recede into last place.

When we try to pull out one thing, it turns out that it is connected with everything else (R. Moore). the meaning of the statement is that there are no separate cases and problems in the organization - everything is interconnected. If a manager solves one problem, then it is quite possible that he will have to solve another.

The only process of its kind that combines science, technology, economics, business and management is the process of scientific and technological innovation. It embodies the knowledge that a competent leader, an efficiently working scientist, engineer, intelligent official and simply an educated member of society must have tomorrow. This is the process of transforming scientific knowledge into a physical reality that changes society (I.R. Bright). the meaning of the statement is that at present, for the development of an organization, the most important thing is the introduction of innovations. No coincidence today innovation management actively developing - this is the key to stable development and success.

Be yourself with everyone you meet, but at the same time show the best that you have (S. Goldwyn). In fact, here we see a repetition of the Kantian moral imperative - the manager must use the best in himself - you cannot build a negative relationship with the staff.

When you already have a staff of prepared, smart and energetic people, the next step is to stimulate their creativity (A. Morita). Stimulation is put at the forefront by this manager. One of the most important functions of a manager is to stimulate the active work of his subordinates, and without this the normal functioning of the organization is impossible.

It is much better that you yourself identify and use your strengths and capabilities, rejoice at them and move forward with their help, rather than feel like you are in a wheelchair that others are carrying behind you (S. Herman). The manager must actively stimulate himself, must know all the pluses and minuses of his character and personality. If a manager has problems in some area, then they can be delegated to a competent person, without allowing him to be helped from above.

Bibliography

1. Vesnin V.R. Technology of work with personnel and business partners. – M.: ELITE-2000, 2002.

2. Voropaev V.I. Personnel Management. - M.: Alans, 2005.

3. Gerchikova I.M. Management: Textbook. - M.: Banks and stock exchanges, UNITI, 1997.

4. Glushchenko V.V. Management: system bases. - Railway Moscow. region: LLP IPC "Wings", 2004.

5. Kuznetsov Yu. V., Podlesnykh V.I. Fundamentals of management. - St. Petersburg: OLBIS, 2007.

6. Organizational personnel management: Textbook / Ed. A.Ya. Kabanova. – M.: INFRA-M, 2005.

7. Project management: reference guide/ Ed. I.I. Mazura, V.D. Shapiro. Moscow: Higher school, 2001.

© Placement of material on other electronic resources only accompanied by an active link

In a broad sense, discrimination refers to the violation of human rights. Narrowly applied to employment relationships, any exclusion or preference based on race, color, sex, religion, political opinion, foreign origin or social origin, resulting in the elimination or violation of equality of opportunity or treatment in the field of work and occupation.

Because workers are entitled to equal treatment, discrimination on non-work-related grounds is immoral in hiring, firing, and when deciding on bonuses and promotions.

A company that allows discrimination suffers damage from such a policy, since its decisions are not guided by professional qualities one or another specialist, but other characteristics. Systematic discrimination creates a class of people who are victims of injustice.

Discrimination in labor relations can be divided into several types:

• age. As a rule, people over 45 years of age and younger than 20-23 years of age are most likely to be discriminated against on the basis of age. Age discrimination can also be indirect, when older employees are encouraged by the company's management to retire at an earlier age;
• sexual. As a rule, women are discriminated against on the basis of gender, although this trend has been somewhat weakened recently. But until now, in most European countries, the United States and Russia, there is a difference in the wages of women and men. However, men can also become victims of gender discrimination - for example, they will experience difficulties in finding a job as a secretary, since the prevailing stereotype that this is a “female” position will work here;
• on a national basis. As a rule, the objects of discrimination on the basis of ethnicity are ethnic minorities who do not historically live in the given territory, but who arrived as a result of recent immigration. In Russia, migrants from the former Soviet republics most often become victims of ethnic discrimination. This is also related to the prevailing stereotypes. At the same time, in some areas, especially where unskilled labor is required, employers will rather prefer migrants;
• bad habits. Discrimination against people with so-called bad habits is gaining more and more weight in labor relations. At the same time, the absence of bad habits is expressed in the form of the wishes of the employer, which largely depends on corporate culture company and its leader;
• non-standard requirements. These include living in a certain area of ​​the city, the form of education, marital status, the presence of children. As a rule, such discrimination is dictated by the reasonable considerations of the employer, which is more profitable to hire an employee who is not a full-time student and is not burdened with family problems.

Discrimination is the most common legal and ethical problem in the field of labor relations.

Since discrimination is not always explicit, it is quite difficult to counteract it. At the same time, discrimination undermines the reputation of business activity as an area for the realization of human talents and opportunities that do not depend on nationality, race or other characteristics.

Of great importance for overcoming the practice of allowing discrimination is overcoming the established stereotypes of thinking.

So, during the lecture, we considered the concept of "violation of business ethics", as well as the main forms in which they are expressed.

Russian (and Western) business is still subject to such phenomena as corruption, fraud, unfair competition, and cases of mobbing and harassment occur in the offices of Western and Russian companies.

The manifestation of violations of business ethics is possible at any level, and the task of business ethics, as a scientific discipline, is to identify the mechanism that causes business entities to violate ethical standards and develop ways to overcome it.

One of the ways to overcome violations of business ethics is the awareness by the business entities themselves not only of the inadmissibility of such phenomena, but also of negative consequences in the form of direct economic losses and lost profits.

Overcoming violations of business ethics is possible by codifying and establishing mandatory ethical standards in business. Another way is possible through the formation and improvement of the ethical culture of business participants.

The first direction is already being expressed in the emergence of Codes of Ethics adopted by companies, and observance of which becomes mandatory for every employee.

First, let's talk about what ethics is. From the definition offered by dictionaries, one can make a generalized conclusion that ethics is a philosophical doctrine about morality, about the rules of human behavior. Therefore, professional ethics is a system of norms and rules of conduct for a specialist.

Usually, ethical standards refer to unspoken rules, but some large companies, such as Russian Railways or Gazprom, have consolidated these rules into a single document - the so-called "Code corporate ethics».

The general principles of ethical behavior of employees in the documents of different companies are approximately the same and boil down to the following: compliance with the law and internal regulations of the company, adherence to high moral principles, responsible attitude to official duties, maintaining a positive reputation of the company, respectful attitude towards colleagues and clients, confidentiality of information and more.

Returning to the issue of dismissal. The employee violated the norms of corporate ethics, and it is impossible to dismiss on this basis. What to do, and what should be expressed in violation of corporate ethics, so that dismissal becomes possible from the point of view of Labor Code RF?

1. Disclosure trade secret(subparagraph b of paragraph 6 of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Decision of the Kirovsky District Court of the city of Yekaterinburg No. 2-1942 / 19 (11) dated 04.27.2011.

Claimant CH.E.The. filed a lawsuit against Domofon Service LLC for recognition of the dismissal as illegal, reinstatement, recovery of average earnings for the time of forced absenteeism, compensation for non-pecuniary damage. In support of the claim, she indicated that in the period from 04/01/2010 to 02/04/2011 she worked ... at Domofon Service LLC, on 02/04/2011 she was dismissed at the initiative of the employer under Article 81, paragraph 6, subparagraph "c" for disclosure of trade secrets. In violation of Article 11 of the Federal Law “On Commercial Secrets”, when she was hired, she was not acquainted with confidential information, and she does not know whether Domofon Service LLC has taken measures to protect commercial secrets, she did not sign any agreements on non-disclosure of commercial secrets. She was also not acquainted with the order to terminate the employment contract. The work book was sent to her only on February 15, 2011. The plaintiff asks to recognize her dismissal under subparagraph "c" of paragraph 6 illegal, oblige Domofon Service LLC to change the wording of the grounds for dismissal to dismissal for own will on point 3Article 77 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation , recover from the defendant in her favor the average earnings during the forced absenteeism.

At the hearing, the plaintiff supported the claims.

The representative of the defendant at the court session did not recognize the claims and explained that the plaintiff signed an employment contract and had to not disclose information belonging to the employer, the information became available to third parties without the consent of the director, the information is confidential, economic and protected. It is necessary to recover damages from the employee for the disclosure of trade secrets.

In its decision, the court stated the following.

According to paragraph 43 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 17, 2004 No. 2 “On the application by the courts of the Russian Federation of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation”, if an employee disputes dismissal under subparagraph “c” of paragraph 6 of part one of Article 81 of the Code, the employer is obliged to provide evidence evidencing that the information that the employee disclosed, in accordance with applicable law, refers to state, official, commercial or other secrets protected by law, or to the personal data of another employee, this information became known to the employee in connection with the performance of his labor duties, and he undertook not disclose such information.

In accordance with Article 11 of the Federal Law of July 29, 2004 No. 98-FZ “On Commercial Secrets”, in order to protect the confidentiality of information, the employer is obliged to familiarize the employee, whose access to information constituting a commercial secret, is necessary for the performance of his labor duties, against receipt, with a list of information constituting a commercial secret, the owners of which are the employer and his contractors; familiarize the employee against the receipt of the trade secret regime established by the employer and the measures of responsibility for its violation; create the necessary conditions for the employee to comply with the trade secret regime established by the employer.

This court decision shows the main mistake made by employers who want to establish a trade secret regime in an organization. The absence of provisions on commercial secrets, the list of information constituting a secret, or the employee’s failure to familiarize himself with them are grounds for recognizing the dismissal on the above basis as illegal.

2. Dismissal due to loss of confidence.

Decision of the Volgodonsky District Court of the Rostov Region in case No. 2-2093/11 dated 10/14/2011.

R.O.A. appealed to the court with a claim, taking into account the clarifications accepted by the court toIstok-Design LLC on recognizing the dismissal as illegal, changing the wording of the dismissal, collecting wages and compensation for non-pecuniary damage, indicating that on 06/01/2004 he was hired by Istok-Design LLC as a manager.
From 08/01/2006 he was transferred to the senior managerIstok-Design LLC . From 02.02.2010 R.O.A. promoted to acting director. With R.O.A. concluded an employment contract without a number dated 02.02.2010 with probationary period for six months. On August 2, 2010, by order No. 56-k, he was appointed director for permanent basis. Additionally, an employment contract with R.O.A. did not conclude. Wage R.O.A. was appointed as the director of Istok-Design LLC. in the amount of 45,000 rubles per month. 03/02/2011 R.O.A. fired fromIstok-Design LLC in connection with the commission of guilty actions by an employee directly servicing monetary or commodity values, giving grounds for the loss of confidence in him on the part of the employer, the basis of paragraph 7 of part oneArticle 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation . He considers the dismissal illegal, since he was not a person directly serving material values, an agreement on liability with R.O.A. did not conclude. In the duties of R.O.A. work on the reception, storage, transportation, distribution of products was not included. He did not have access to the furniture warehouse, he did not manage the money. The warehouse was managed by the manager, with whom an agreement on liability was concluded. By virtue of a prisoner with P.O.A. employment contract, his duties did not include control over financial resources and material values. The employer did not bring to the attention of R.O.A. what his guilty actions were, which led to the loss of confidence in him on the part of the employer.

Sh.M.N. and M.I.I., representatives of LLC «Istok-Design», acting by proxy, objected to the satisfaction of claims, the court explained that R.Oh.A. dismissed from the post of director of Istok-Design LLC in connection with the detection in March 2011 of a shortage in the furniture warehouse and a shortage in the accessories warehouse, identified on 03/28/2011. R.O.A. was a materially responsible person for the material assets entrusted to him in the hardware warehouse, since when he was transferred from the position of manager and senior manager to the position of director, he did not transfer the hardware warehouse to anyone. Based on the identified facts of shortages in the furniture warehouse and the accessories warehouse, the founders of Istok-Design LLC decided to dismiss R.O.A. for the commission of guilty actions by an employee directly serving monetary or commodity values, giving grounds for the loss of confidence in him on the part of the employer.

As established by the court, grounds for dismissal R.Oh.A. was the commission of guilty actions by an employee directly servicing monetary or commodity values, if these actions give rise to a loss of confidence in him on the part of the employer.

Labor duties R.O.A. are regulated by the employment contract, job description of the director, the charter of Istok-Design LLC, also on 10/19/2005 with R.O.A. concluded an agreement on full liability as a manager in connection with the maintenance of material assets in the warehouse of accessories. When the plaintiff was transferred to the position of director, he did not transfer the specified warehouse of accessories to other financially responsible persons, which is not disputed by the plaintiff.

At the time of dismissal under clause 7 of part 1Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation the plaintiff worked as a director of Istok-Design LLC.

As follows from the employment contract dated 02.02.2010, job description director of Istok-Design LLC, the charter of Istok-Design LLC, the plaintiff, acting as director, was not a person directly servicing material assets. Materially responsible persons worked in the submission of the plaintiff, directly by virtue of direct labor duties, they carried out the maintenance of material assets.

According to paragraph 45 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Russian Federation dated March 17, 2004 No. 2, the courts need to keep in mind that termination of an employment contract with an employee under paragraph 7 of part one of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation due to loss of confidence is possible only in relation to employees directly servicing cash or commodity values ​​​​(reception, storage, transportation, distribution, etc.), and provided that they committed such guilty actions that gave the employer a reason to lose confidence in them.

From the application order disciplinary action R.O.A. in the form of dismissal, it is not seen, for the commission of which guilty actions that give rise to the loss of the employer's trust in him, the plaintiff will be subject to disciplinary action in the form of dismissal, his guilt in failure to perform labor duties.

The claims have been satisfied.

In most cases, when considering this category of cases, the court takes the side of the plaintiff, making a decision in his favor. The grounds for satisfying the claims are similar, namely, the employer dismisses an employee due to loss of confidence who is not financially responsible, or cannot clearly indicate which actions of the employee caused the loss of confidence.

The Labor Code of the Russian Federation does not contain information about which employees are financially responsible, therefore, when resolving this issue, they refer to the Decree of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated December 31, 2002 No. 85, which defines a list of works during which an agreement on full liability can be concluded. This is indicated by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 2 of March 17, 2004. As noted earlier, paragraph 45 of this resolution instructs the courts to take into account that the termination of an employment contract with an employee under paragraph 7 of part one article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the loss of confidence is possible only in relation to employees directly servicing monetary or commodity values ​​​​(reception, storage, transportation, distribution, etc.), and provided that they committed such guilty actions that gave the employer grounds for loss trust in them.

Another ground for dismissal may be an act that discredits the honor of an employee, and applies to law enforcement officers. This ground is provided, for example, by paragraph 1 of article 41.7 of the law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation".

Decision of the Leningrad District Court of the city of Kaliningrad No. 2-5621 / 2010 of 12/14/2010.

Claimant P.V.N. filed a lawsuit against the Investigation Department of the Investigative Committee under the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation on (...) to invalidate the order No. k dated (...) on dismissal on the basis of subparagraph "c" of paragraph 1 of Article 43, paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 41- 7 of the Federal Law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation" and paragraph 14 of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation for committing an offense discrediting the honor of a prosecutor's worker.

On the merits of the order, he explained that since (...) he was on a business trip in Moscow. DD.MM.YYYY at about 7 p.m., he, together with the investigators of the investigation team R. and I., arrived at Pulkovo Airport, where he purchased air tickets. After purchasing air tickets, while waiting for the flight, he and R. bought a can of beer at a kiosk in the airport building. Initially, he explained that he brought a can of beer on board, where he opened it and began to drink. Then he explained that they began to drink beer even in the airport building, having taken two or three sips, then they passed the pre-flight inspection and boarded the aircraft, holding open cans of beer in their hands. There were no comments from airport workers and flight attendants. The fact that the use of drinks brought with them on the specified flight is not allowed, no one told them. The plaintiff and two other employees took their seats, fastened their seat belts, then took out cans of beer they had brought with them, took a couple of sips, and were approached by the flight attendant of the indicated flight, E., who said that “this is prohibited on board her aircraft.” The plaintiff asked why, after which E., without explaining the reasons, began to snatch cans from the plaintiff and R. directly from the hands, pouring over his and R.'s outerwear. The plaintiff immediately gave her the jar, having fulfilled her demands. The plaintiff asked to be escorted to the commander of the aircraft, he was refused. About 10 minutes later, three police officers entered the plane. None of them introduced themselves or presented any identification. When R. asked what would happen if we did not comply with their requirements, he explained that he would apply physical strength. After that, R. showed his service certificate. The police officers stepped aside after presenting their ID. The plaintiff, R. and I. refused to leave the plane, motivating their actions by the absence of any violations on their part. The plaintiff believes that there were no illegal actions on his part on the ship.

The defendant's representative by proxy O.Yew.M. at the hearing the claim was not recognized in full. On the merits of the claim, he explained that the dismissal of the plaintiff was legal and justified.

When considering this case, the court saw in the plaintiff's actions an act discrediting the honor of a prosecutor's office worker.

The claims were denied.

Another circumstance that serves as a basis for dismissal is the so-called conflict of interest.

Appeal ruling of the Moscow City Court in case No. 33-4944 dated March 6, 2014.

I. filed a lawsuit against Avtodor Civil Code to invalidate the entry in the work book, to recognize the grounds for dismissal as illegal, and to change the wording of the dismissal.

In support of his claims, the plaintiff referred to the fact that he worked for the defendant in the position (...) of the Department of Design, Technical Policy and Innovative Technologies, (...) was dismissed forpoint 7.1 of part 1 of article 81 Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Plaintiff considers his dismissal unlawful and unreasonable.

Representatives of the plaintiff at the hearing supported the claims.

The court of first instance established that by order of (...) year No. (...) I. was hired by Avtodor State Corporation from (...) a year to the Department of Design, Technical Policy and Innovative Technologies for the position (. ..) department.

By order of (...) year No. (...) I. (...) dismissed from the post of Deputy Director of the Department of Design, Technical Policy and Innovative Technologies forpoint 7.1 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party, which gives grounds for the employer to lose confidence in the employee.

The grounds for the dismissal were: the presentation of the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation dated 09/13/2013 "On the Elimination of Violations of Anti-Corruption Legislation", an explanatory note dated (...) year, the protocol of the commission dated (...) on the application of penalties, the recommendation of the Commission on compliance with the requirements for official conduct of employees and settlement of conflicts of interest in Avtodor State Corporation.

According to the results of the audit, it was revealed that in the information about his income, property and liabilities of a property nature for (...) a year, the plaintiff did not indicate information about the ownership of shares in the authorized capitals of LLC NPP YuzhDorNII, LLC Morand, LLC Pallada ”, as well as information about the registration of the plaintiff as an individual entrepreneur.

In addition, the court established and the case materials confirm that, in accordance with the extracts from the Unified state register legal entities NPP YuzhDorNII LLC is an active legal entity, and I. as of (...) is a co-founder of NPP YuzhDorNII LLC, Morand LLC and Pallada LLC, the evidence is in orderarticle 56 The Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, refuting the conclusions of the court, was not presented by the plaintiff.

The Judicial Collegium finds that the procedure for the dismissal of the plaintiff by the defendant was observed, the disciplinary sanction in the form of dismissal was made within the period from the date of receipt of information about the commission of the offense, confirmed during the audit, explanations from the plaintiff were requested (...) years, in connection with which the court rightfully dismissed the plaintiff's claim for invalidating the entry in the work book, recognizing the grounds for dismissal as illegal, and changing the wording of the dismissal.

Summing up, we can say the following. The rules of corporate ethics, unspoken or approved by a local regulatory act, are in fact the rules of conduct and are advisory in nature. Violation of the rules of corporate ethics is not grounds for dismissal of an employee.

Anna Filina, Senior Legal Counsel, GS EL - LAW LLC:

Violation of the rules of corporate ethics often becomes a reason for bringing an employee to disciplinary responsibility. More often, penalties are imposed on employees in the form of remarks or reprimands, but there are cases when a violation of the rules of corporate ethics becomes the basis for dismissal under clause 5 of part 1 of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation - repeated failure by an employee without good reason to perform labor duties if he has a disciplinary sanction.

When considering dismissal disputes on the specified grounds, the employer needs to prove exactly what actions that violate the rules of corporate ethics and at what time the employee committed, how these rules are fixed, whether the employee is familiar with it. To do this, the employer can provide memos, written complaints from customers, local regulations, testimonies, and the like as evidence. An example of how the employer could not provide evidence satisfying the court is the Decision of the Isilkul City Court Omsk region dated February 16, 2012 in case No. 2-116/2012. The budgetary health care institution of the Omsk region "Isilkulskaya CRH" dismissed the senior nurse M.L.N. under clause 5 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The employer blamed the employee for the systematic failure to fulfill her duties, among which he singled out a violation of the rules of ethics of a medical worker, expressed in a discussion in a public place of working moments, which, according to the employer, led to disorganization and nervousness of the clinic staff. As evidence, the employer presented a memorandum of nurses about the incorrect behavior of M.L.N., as well as a number of testimonies. In particular, the head nurse of the hospital testified that “in April 2011, a doctor FULL NAME1 received an oral statement that M.L.N. raised her voice to the doctor in the presence of a nurse, about which she personally made a remark to M.L.N. There were also complaints from the nurses of the polyclinic that the head nurse M.L.N. behaves incorrectly. She received information that the senior nurse of the polyclinic M.L.N. in public transport discusses those issues that are discussed at planning meetings in the clinic, which violated the rules of ethics of a medical worker.

However, in the decision, the court indicated that the said witnesses interrogated at the court session could not explain why the memorandum was set out in general terms, to whom exactly from the staff M.L.N. was rude, when and where this happened. The court considered that the court did not provide evidence of what “actions the plaintiff took that violate the rules of ethics of a medical worker and what moments, and in what public place she discussed working moments that lead to disorganization and nervousness of the clinic staff”. The court ruled in favor of the employee, satisfying her claim in full, recognizing the dismissal as illegal and reinstating her in her position.

However, in judicial practice there are court decisions that are positive for the employer. K.D. He filed a lawsuit against CJSC Bank Intesa for recognition as illegal and the abolition of disciplinary action, compensation for moral damage. By order of the bank, the plaintiff was brought to disciplinary liability in the form of a reprimand for violating a number of items of the job description, as well as violating Article 4 of the Code of Corporate Conduct and the section “Principles of Conduct in Relations with Employees” of the Code of Corporate Ethics, expressed in the manifestation of rudeness towards bank employees. The employer managed to confirm the fact of unethical behavior of K.D. with bank employees during the period of requesting explanations from him regarding the violations of information processing. At the same time, the employer submitted local regulations to the court: the Code of Corporate Ethics of Bank Intesa CJSC, according to which the employee must respect the personality and human dignity of each employee, and the Bank’s Corporate Conduct Code, which establishes that representatives and employees should avoid behavior in a workplace that is not characterized by honesty and the utmost respect for the dignity and morals of every employee. The court took into account the provisions of these acts when making its decision. It is also necessary to pay attention to the fact that the employer has fully complied with the procedure for bringing the employee to disciplinary responsibility. Therefore, the Basmanny District Court of Moscow refused K.D. in satisfaction of his claim, and the Moscow City Court left this decision unchanged, the appeal of K.D. without satisfaction (Appeal ruling of the Moscow City Court dated May 22, 2013 in case No. 11-11717).

Artem Denisov, Managing Partner of Genesis Law Firm, Ph.D. in Law:

In general, the colleague's informative article is aimed more at a formal approach to the study of such a phenomenon as corporate ethics and the generalization of judicial practice precisely on a formal basis. The statement that the rules of corporate ethics, tacit or approved by a local normative act, are in fact the rules of conduct and are advisory in nature. Violation of the rules of corporate ethics is not grounds for dismissal of an employee.

It is conditionally possible to divide the manifestation of the phenomenon of corporate ethics in two frameworks of relations. First, it can be viewed as conditions on the behavior of employees within the corporate structure, where it is expressed by issuing a local labor act. Second: mandatory conditions compliance of an employee within professional communities, for example, lawyer education, audit organizations and so on, where it is the observance of corporate ethics and rules that is a condition and guarantee of the proper performance of labor duties and is the basis for dismissal. They are established both within the framework of industry laws and within the framework of local acts.

In the first case, we can consider the rule when, as an additional reason for terminating the employment contract with the head of the organization on the basis of paragraph 13 of part 1 of Article 81 and articles 278 The Labor Code of the Russian Federation indicates in the contract the violation of the requirements of corporate ethics (ethical code of the organization).

The review of judicial practice on these legal relations is quite extensive, and it is the application of these articles of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, in conjunction with the norms of corporate ethics, that ensures the proper procedure for dismissal in case of violation of the norms of corporate behavior by the dismissed person.

If we consider the second case and use as an example the federal law dated 31.05.2002 No. 63-FZ “On advocacy and advocacy in the Russian Federation”, then the grounds for terminating an employment contract with an assistant lawyer are not only the grounds listed in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Also, as the grounds for terminating an employment contract with a lawyer's assistant, and the assistant is expelled from the composition of the lawyer's assistants, there is a case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment by the lawyer's assistant of his professional duties or non-fulfillment of decisions of corporate standards governing the activities of the bar.

In general, the concept of corporate ethics in Russian legislation is new, but despite this, this phenomenon is a fairly powerful regulator of employee behavior, which can be subject to various sanctions, up to and including dismissal.

Tatyana Bekreneva, lawyer:

The moral requirements of service relations, or otherwise - corporate ethics, have some features. And although the Labor Code of the Russian Federation does not have a clear definition of the concept of corporate ethics, nevertheless, certain requirements for the behavior of an employee can be attributed to the rules of corporate ethics, namely, requirements, non-compliance with which is a disciplinary offense. It is difficult to agree with the author that these requirements are advisory in nature. Giving an example of a lawsuit on dismissal for disclosure of trade secrets, that is, essentially agreeing that the rule on non-disclosure of trade secrets is a rule of corporate ethics, the author at the same time points out in his conclusions that one cannot be fired for violating the rules of corporate ethics, which is a clear contradiction. Especially when you consider that the violation of the above rule is the basis for dismissal in accordance with the Labor Code (paragraph " in» paragraph 5 of article 81).

A clear understanding of the moral requirements, that is, the moral guidelines for the organization's activities, is necessary for the coordinated work of all departments. It seems that the legislator should determine the criteria for the compliance of these moral rules with the requirements of the legislation, as well as the requirements of reasonableness and justice. It is important that, like any rule, the rule of corporate ethics must be reliably protected by law, local regulations, conditions established in employment contract, and is also supported by the real actions of the employer to enforce it - punishments, since the establishment of rules requires not only clear fixation, but also sanctions for their violation. In the charters, rules, codes of corporate ethics or other local regulations, which the employee gets acquainted with when hiring under his personal signature, the employer must prescribe a clear reasonable rule of conduct that the employee must comply with, indicating that failure to comply with this rule is equated to a violation labor discipline. At the same time, it is important that the norms contained in them do not worsen the rights of workers in comparison with the current labor legislation.

The law establishes that employees in terms of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of their labor duties, which include the obligation to comply with corporate acts, bear disciplinary responsibility. Of course, it is impossible, for example, to dismiss a person with the wording in the order: "For violation of corporate ethics." In the work book you can not write: "Fired for violation of corporate ethics." Dismissal for violation of the rules that relate to the rules of corporate ethics implies compliance with the dismissal procedure established by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, indicating in the order and work book the legal basis for dismissal (paragraph 14 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated April 16, 2003 No. 225 "On work books"). But if a violation of these rules really occurs, the employer, in accordance with Articles 192-193 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, is obliged to request an explanatory note from the employee, if it is not provided, an appropriate act is drawn up, after which the employee can be fired.

One cannot but agree that if you correctly fix the relevant requirements, correctly arrange all Required documents to bring an employee to disciplinary liability, no court recognizes the employer's demands as far-fetched and discriminatory. First, all rules must be fixed in a local act. Otherwise, there is no reason for the employer to demand something from employees, and then punish them for non-performance. We cannot agree with the author of the article that the presence of unspoken rules of conduct can influence the issues of holding employees accountable - labor legislation does not provide for such a thing as unspoken rules. Therefore, in the event of a dispute, the employer will have to prove that he has familiarized the employee with the rules of corporate ethics (the obligation not to disclose trade secrets, the obligation to comply with the dress code, for example, employees of railway or air transport). Secondly, when establishing the requirements of corporate culture by the employer, moderation and reasonableness are important, real requirements should be fixed. Thirdly, when punishing non-compliance with the rules, the provisions of articles 192-193 Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Otherwise, the risk of recognizing the order as illegal, as well as the local act, increases, since if employers violate the norms articles 372 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation on the procedure for approving local acts, this gives the employee the opportunity to challenge them, or challenge the actions of the employer based on the illegal norms of the local act. But basically, disputes related to violation of corporate ethics encountered in judicial practice can be divided into two types:

Challenging a disciplinary sanction;

Reinstatement at work in case of dismissal for systematic violation of official duties (clause 5 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Thus, taking into account the above, it is hardly possible to agree with the author of the article that a violation of the rules of corporate ethics cannot be a basis for dismissal of an employee. But it is clear that the issues of corporate ethics require special legal elaboration, since corporate ethics is increasingly becoming part of the general policy of the employer.

Vladimir Alistarkhov, legal expert:

An employee cannot be fired for violating the norms of corporate ethics, but the author of the article proposes to figure out “what should be the violation of corporate ethics in order for dismissal to become possible from the point of view of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation?”

The very formulation of this question already contradicts the norms of the current labor legislation.

Labor legislation, and in particular Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, directly provides for the grounds on which an employee may be dismissed at the initiative of the employer.

The grounds for dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer are exhaustive list, and, accordingly, this ground must be clearly stated in the dismissal order, indicating the article of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the employee is dismissed.

Consideration of the dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer through the prism of the code of corporate ethics is a kind of "tautology" of the procedure for considering the dismissal of an employee on the grounds provided for by law.

For example, for disclosing a secret, access to which is limited by law and so provides for liability - why then consider a violation of the norms of the code of corporate ethics when deciding on the dismissal of an employee?

Currently, there is no judicial practice in which the court would use the fact of violation of corporate ethics as necessary evidence in the case of dismissal of an employee.

The necessary list of evidence in cases of dismissal of employees has long been formed, and if it is available, the employer does not need to be additionally guided in court by a violation of corporate ethics by the employee.

The jurisprudence cited by the author of the article shows that for the dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer, various evidence is presented, but not once any information about the violation of corporate ethics is used as evidence, since this is not necessary.

At the same time, the current lack of judicial practice in which a violation of corporate ethics is considered by the court as necessary evidence does not mean that in the future the courts will not be able to take into account this kind of evidence to justify the dismissal of an employee by an employer, but for these purposes, it is likely that labor laws need to be amended.

The conclusion of the author of the article is correct in that the rules of corporate ethics are advisory in nature and cannot be the basis for the dismissal of an employee, but the question remains whether violations of the rules of corporate ethics can become the basis for the application of other disciplinary measures (in addition to dismissal), which seems more realistic .

Natalia Plastinina, head of the legal support sector:

I don’t quite agree with the author’s conclusion that the rules of corporate ethics are, in fact, rules of conduct and are advisory in nature, and violation of these rules is not a basis for dismissal of an employee. Based on the dispositive norms of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and the norms of other regulatory acts, the employer has the right to establish at his enterprise both the norms of behavior and the style of clothing (uniforms, for example), and the possibility of smoking in designated and equipped places or a complete ban on smoking. In most cases of violations of the requirements of corporate ethics and business style, as practice has shown, it is best for employers to first apply punishments in the form of a remark, reprimand, and in case of “accumulation” of penalties, dismiss them in accordance with paragraph 5 of part 1 of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation (for repeated non-fulfillment by an employee without valid reasons for labor duties, if he has a disciplinary sanction). And the success of the application of such a practice was also proved by the decisions of the courts (see, for example, the decision of the Orenburg District Court of the Orenburg Region dated December 1, 2011 , in which the court concludes that in the actions of the employee there was a violation of the uniform, which is a violation of the established local regulations given company rules).

Despite the fact that employers are more likely to punish employees for non-compliance with uniforms and the business style established in the organization, penalties for violating business ethics are also not uncommon. As a rule, the violation consists in the rudeness committed by the employee in relation to the client of the enterprise, incorrect behavior with colleagues. And the courts, in the absence of revealed violations in the procedure for bringing the employee to disciplinary responsibility, find the actions of employers to punish the employee for violating the rules of ethics lawful.

Too often, however, employers make hurtful mistakes when punishing employees who violate the rules of ethics, conduct and appearance at work. So, for example, according to the conclusions of the court set out in the decision of the Sovetsky District Court of the city of Lipetsk dated August 11, 2009 and the ruling of the Lipetsk Regional Court in case No. 33- ... / 09 , the court concluded that the employee had repeatedly failed to fulfill his labor duties without good reason, which was expressed in unacceptable behavior towards the company's customers and his colleagues. However, due to the fact that the employee allowed such behavior not in the performance of his official duties, and it did not entail negative consequences for the employer as an organization, the court considered the dismissal a disproportionate punishment for the committed violations of ethics and reinstated the employee at work.

It should be noted that the legitimacy of punishing an employee for violating the rules of ethics and style of clothing adopted in the organization will be ensured only if the following conditions are combined:

All requirements of the employer to the ethics of communication, style of behavior, appearance of employees must be recorded in the local and other acts of the employer, be clear and understandable. The local act must be adopted in accordance with the requirements of labor legislation and properly executed as a document. If these requirements are not met, there will be no grounds for punishing employees, since there will be no offense on the part of the employee. So, for example, due to flaws in the execution of a local act establishing the requirements of the employer for the uniform of workers, the court declared the punishment unlawful because of its unreasonableness (see the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court of the city of Murmansk dated September 2, 2010) .

When bringing employees to disciplinary liability for violation of ethics, it is mandatory to comply with the requirements of Articles 192-193 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation for the procedure for fixing, investigating misconduct and applying punishment for violation of discipline (including in terms of the adequacy of the applied punishment to the deed). So, from the decision of the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Yekaterinburg dated November 26, 2010 in case No. 2-3204 / 2010 it follows that, despite the correctness of fixing the requirements of the employer to the appearance of employees, fixing the misconduct of the employee was incomplete, which the court regarded as a violation of the requirements of Article 193 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation for the procedure for bringing to disciplinary responsibility, and the punishment of the employee was declared illegal.

The punishment must be adequate to the deed, that is, comply with the requirements of Part 5 of Article 192 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation: when imposing a disciplinary sanction, the severity of the misconduct committed and the circumstances under which it was committed must be taken into account.

Thus, the grounds provided for by paragraph 5 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, which are not listed in the article, in order to punish employees for violating the rules of ethics, are used in practice much more often than, for example, subparagraph “c” of paragraph 6 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code. of the Code of the Russian Federation (disclosure of secrets protected by law (state, commercial, official and other), which became known to the employee in connection with the performance of his labor duties, including the disclosure of personal data of another employee) or paragraph 7 of the first part of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation (for committing guilty actions by an employee directly servicing monetary or commodity values, if these actions give rise to a loss of confidence in him on the part of the employer).

Violation of ethical standards. Recently, more and more attention has been paid to the ethical aspects of the activities of organizations. However, it is important to remember that ethics (like a goal), as a social concept, is not inherent in organizations, but in people. Although in extreme cases, under the pressure of financial circumstances, managers may commit unethical acts, this does not necessarily mean that they do not adhere to ethical standards of behavior at all. The pressure exerted can be so great that actions that are not ethical from a human point of view, by the firm in the circumstances, can be regarded as the most acceptable and beneficial for the organization. (Task 16.6 at the end of the chapter provides an example of a situation where unethical actions may be taken in response to a financial situation.)

For violation, licenses to carry out auditing activities by the bodies that issued them may be canceled in cases

Let us dwell in more detail on such a very common violation of the ethical standards of auditing as a violation of the principles of confidentiality.

The term propaganda is heavily compromised by politicians and businessmen, for whom the goal - to attract supporters (buyers) and expand the sphere of influence - justifies the arbitrary treatment of facts, the violation of ethical norms, up to the dubiousness of the public and the manipulation of public opinion.

The association enforces the code of ethics by investigating all complaints of violations of it and taking disciplinary action against any member who is found guilty of violating ethical standards.

Violation of ethical standards

In the course of the study of the motives of the activities of sellers of small enterprises and private firms in one of the countries in the transition period of economic development, a certain egoistic orientation of their activities, impudence, frequent violations of ethical standards, but at the same time, the desire for independence, realization of their capabilities, professional growth . The merchant becomes the driving force in that sector of the economy where private ownership of the implements and means of production predominates. In this sense, his motivation is inherent in the fundamental features of volitional activity due to his desire to achieve extreme complacency, avoid difficulties, independence (freedom of action) in own business, making a profit.

Compliance with the Codes of Ethics is quite strictly controlled by national PR associations. The presidents of these associations appoint boards to deal with violations of ethical standards. There are two types of punishment for such violations - warning of unprofessional behavior and expulsion from the membership of the Association. True, it is believed that many misdeeds happen unintentionally and do not seriously undermine the reputation of the profession. It happens that members of ethics councils make mistakes. Therefore, the punished person retains the right to appeal.

D. Tell your friend that you, as a PMP professional, must follow the PMP's code of conduct and code of ethics, and that this situation may be considered a violation of ethical standards.

Illegal - FHJ, which took place as a result of violations of the current legislation, moral and ethical standards.

The Code of Ethics of Auditors summarizes the ethical standards of professional behavior of independent auditors, defines the moral, moral values ​​that the audit community asserts in its environment, ready to protect them from all possible violations and encroachments. Compliance with universal and professional ethical standards is an indispensable duty and the highest duty of every auditor, manager and employee of an audit firm.

Rule 2: A consultant must not accept an assignment or engage in any work that violates the law or certain ethical standards, and must immediately withdraw from work if such a violation is discovered.

While the information gathering techniques we offer are completely legal, some techniques are ethically questionable. It is known that some companies, in order to pump out the information they are interested in from the competitor's employees, specially announced their hiring and demanded from candidates. Although companies are prohibited from taking aerial photographs of competitors' factories, such images are easily found in the materials of the American Geological Society or the Environmental Protection Agency. Some companies do not hesitate to buy competitors' garbage, which is considered no one's property after it is taken out of the enterprise. Clearly, a company needs to develop effective ways of acquiring information about competitors' activities without violating the law or ethical standards. Some of the most effective techniques are described in the box A Marketer's Checklist. Winning the competition with guerrilla market research.

So far, we have been talking about conducting competition within the framework of the law and ethical standards. However, there is also unfair competition. Unfair competition - methods of competition associated with the violation of the norms and rules of competition adopted in the market. Such practices include dumping taking control of a competitor's activities to stop that activity abusing market dominance setting discriminatory prices or commercial terms establishing supply dependency specific goods or services from accepting restrictions on the production or distribution of competing products; collusive bidding and creation of secret cartels; spreading false information and advertising; borrowing trademarks; copying (imitation) of competitors' products; Unfair competition in most industrialized countries is prohibited by relevant laws against illegal business practices, consumer protection, control of monopolies, and civil penal codes.

Ethical responsibility comes in case of violation by the head of ethical norms, which are a system of common values ​​and rules of ethics, the observance of which is mandatory for all employees of the organization. Ethical norms include assessments of the meaning of life, the purpose of a person, the content of good and evil, moral duty, moral principles and ideals (nobility, politeness, endurance, humanism, trust, unity of word and deed, sincerity, truthfulness, adherence to principles, self-control, modesty). Responsibility is realized in the form of a change in public opinion about the leader, issuing him a public censure, announcing his inadequacy for the position for ethical reasons. There are quite a lot of examples of the implementation of such responsibility in world practice.

Studies have shown that corporate ethics are most often violated by senior managers (perhaps because they tend to be people who can think big, and therefore consider ethical issues as a trifle not worthy of attention). However, this does not mean that the violation of ethical principles is not characteristic of managers of other levels. Such violations include bribes, the use of the organization's funds for personal purposes (for example, long-distance telephone calls at the expense of the organization).

Risks caused by the consequences of illegal or incompetent decisions individual workers. These risks arise when the bank's executives exceed the established decision-making powers (in terms of the composition and volume of transactions), non-compliance by the bank's employees with the established procedures for conducting transactions, as well as violations of the rules and ethical standards established in the organized markets of financial instruments (securities, other stock valuables, foreign currency, precious metals).

The most important types operational risks associated with violations of the VC process and bank management. These violations can lead to financial losses when mistakes are made, or cases of fraud, or failure to timely take into account the interests of the bank that have changed under the influence of market trends, or such an impact on the interests of the bank when they are otherwise jeopardized, for example, when dealers, credit or other employees exceed their authority or perform their duties in violation of accepted performance standards, ethical norms or reasonable risk limits.

These can be very different and sometimes unexpected and original means, since the tasks and functions of the PR themselves are very broad and also often non-standard. Therefore, the arsenal of means of a PR specialist can include everything that ultimately, without violating legal and ethical standards, gives the planned result.

Especially many works are devoted to the so-called "prisoner's dilemma", known, as A. Rapoport notes, since the beginning of the 50s [Rapoport. C. 155J. The behavior of A1E0 is typical for an "economic person" who, by definition, is ready to violate ethical norms in situations of impunity [Kozlowski. 1996. S. 61].

There are a number of specific things that managers should do in order to guide ethical behavior36. First, they are required to set an example of such behavior and uphold the traditions of decency. Company decisions must be considered ethical, as actions speak louder than words. Secondly, managers and employees should be educated about what is ethical and what is not possible, ethics training programs will have to be organized and gray areas discussed. Everyone should have the right to raise questions of an ethical nature, and the corresponding discussions should be considered fully justified. Third, senior management should regularly emphasize their unconditional support for the code of ethics and take a firm stand on this issue. Fourth, senior management must be prepared to act as the final arbiter in serious cases, which means removing people from key positions or firing them if ethical standards are violated. It also means punishing those who carelessly enforce these norms. Failure to quickly and decisively punish ethical misconduct is seen as a lack of adherence to the relevant norms.

It goes without saying that employees who are to be disciplined must first of all be aware of existing standards of conduct. A question repeatedly asked by Carl Skuglund, Director of Ethics at Texas Instrumente, was "To what extent are we sure that employees were aware of the incorrectness of their actions" In fact, two-thirds of the calls to the ethics department of Texas Instrumente contained messages about ethical issues, not information about violations of ethical standards.

Such negative consequences must be taken into account when making decisions. In ch. 3, we emphasized the need to take into account the interdependencies of intra-organizational variables and gave several examples indicating the possible negative consequences in the absence of

The ethics of management consulting is usually talked about a lot at various professional gatherings, but it is not customary to write about it. Because the social space is limited, all more or less serious consultants know each other, you never know… Today I’m talking about him, and tomorrow he’s according to my reputation… And reputation means orders, and orders mean money and well-being in general. So we are silent, creating a favorable environment for all sorts of crooks and swindlers. And then they judge the entire consulting community. So our delicacy and respect for each other turn into a disaster for the entire professional community.

Ethical issues of management consulting can be divided into three large groups: problems of interaction between consultants, problems of behavior of consultants in relation to clients and problems of behavior of clients in relation to consultants. From my point of view, the first group of problems completely determines the content of the second. Since a person is a systemic and holistic being, and the way he behaves with his fellow craftsmen inevitably becomes his way of behaving with clients. And, don't dismiss that thought! - both of these groups largely determine how the client will act in relation to the consultant.

Why, nevertheless, is it necessary to talk about ethical standards in the work of consultants? First of all, because any violation of ethical standards leads to the most negative and destructive consequences. So, the client does not receive help from the consultant. Destructive conflicts arise along all lines of interaction. The authority of the professional activity of consultants is falling. In client organizations, "intellectual starvation" sets in, often leading to a fatal outcome for the organization. The unsteady stability of the formation of the market mentality and market economy in the country as a whole… And many other negative consequences.

There is one more issue that should be noted. Speaking about the ethical problems of consultants, one cannot help but talk about violations of ethical standards. And this "casts a shadow" on the community. I don't want this. Let's get out of this situation like this. We will consider cases of deviation from ethical norms in counseling as a warning to clients and consultants, as a way to include a "wake-up call" that will warn each time a potential client or consultant encounters a "convention breaker".

So, ethical issues group number one: norms and principles that consultants most often violate in interaction with each other.

1. They denigrate colleagues in front of potential clients in order to get an order or simply "out of the kindness of their hearts". I have always been amazed by the delight with which some people relish negative information about other people. It doesn’t cost anything to say with a cannibal smile about a colleague: “Ah, this one. This is how his clients are treated after his consultations ... And his wife left him recently ...”. To seem large, bright and qualified against the background of a colleague drenched in mud - this is the focus of such people. And reap the fruits of their dirty deeds. But: evil released into the world always returns to a person in a tenfold amount. This is the law of human life.

2. Steal methods and other tools that represent the know-how of colleagues. I already once wrote about plagiarism in science. Three types of plagiarists are clearly distinguished. First: plagiarist bandit. This one just takes other people's work and appropriates them to himself with clear eyes. And earnestly speaks everywhere about his brilliant achievements. The second type: plagiarist-crook. This one somehow modifies the stolen and appropriated. Well, since he added something from himself, God himself commanded to consider it his own. And the third type: the plagiarist-thief. Sometimes it is "in good faith wrong." Sometimes - "Stole - blushed, stole - blushed ..." And more often they do not blush.

3. Taking credit for others. Most often, this can be found in promotional materials. For example, a significant figure in the consulting industry claims to have created something "for the first time in Russia." And five or seven years before that, another "figure" created this "something" in a developed form, giving a serious practical effect. Therefore, when I hear that one of my colleagues “created something for the first time in Russia,” or even “in world practice,” I am wary and treat these declared feats with caution. The most objective judge is time. And it is it that has the right to judge who said "A" first. And if the person himself shouts about it - for me it is always doubtful.

4. Recommend "bad" clients to each other (who are either not paying, or not ethical, or scandalous, etc.) in order to "make the other person happy." Of course, this violation can be interpreted in another way. For example: if you are such a cool consultant, try to deal with this client... And then they watch with interest how a colleague who has fallen for a provocation, "bleeding", tries to save his reputation and earn money. And they are very upset when he succeeds.

Ethical issues group number two: ethical norms and principles that consultants most often violate when interacting with clients.

1. They make promises that they can't or can't deliver.. The fact is that there are things that, with certain approaches, cannot be done. For example, it is impossible to change anything in an organization if you do not work within the framework of a person-centred approach. Technocratically and naturalistically minded consultants have read or heard that any organization can be made super profitable. And they are trying to do this ... through improving accounting, or increasing the legal literacy of staff, or through improving financial schemes and the like. Which in principle does not allow solving problems of this class. These situations can be considered the same "honest delusion". However, such intrusions of experts, who mistakenly call themselves consultants, into the living fabric of the organization, in most cases do more harm than good (changing some subsystem leads to an imbalance in established connections and interactions). What discredits professional consultants in the eyes of managers and owners.

2. They deceive the client, using template reporting documentation, in which figures obtained in this organization are substituted. This case is a whole song. Some large consulting firms, relying on the undoubtedly correct thesis that business in market conditions is a massive and technologized phenomenon, produce some " model documents"(reports, projects, certificates, etc.), in which pieces of text are italicized, which should be replaced by an "invoice" obtained during a preliminary survey or diagnostics of an organization. In such documents, recommendations are also typical. The trouble is not that there are phenomena and problems that are repeated in different organizations, and that typical ideas about their solution do not come from the organics, features or history of this organization, but from someone else's experience, which has turned into a speculative scheme.Such solutions cannot be used in a particular organization, and when used, cannot solve the problems of these organizations.Competent consultants understand this in the same way that a scientifically minded person understands that you cannot create a perpetual motion machine.

3. Use work in this organization to obtain information in the interests of another, possibly competitive. This case is actually criminal. Since there is the concept of a trade secret, and there is a law that protects this secret. But among consultants, cases are known when a close relationship with one client leads to the fact that a consultant working for another client passes information about the second to the first. In order to confirm their loyalty to the first. And maybe make money. In general human morality, in fact, this is called betrayal. Knowing that such cases happen, some businessmen "on the shore", that is, at the beginning of a relationship with a consultant, "dot the i". So, one of the businessmen, who was recommended to me as an "extremely complex", "difficult person", at the beginning of our cooperation, demanded that the entire team of consultants sign a "Confidentiality Agreement", in which the fine for breach of confidentiality was $10,000. We signed. We have been working together for three years. Not a bad way to prevent information leakage and punish possible leakage. I recommend to all businessmen.

4. They use manipulative technologies that allow bypassing the client's consciousness to force him to act in a certain way. Manipulation is, by definition, forcing a person to act as the manipulator needs, bypassing the consciousness of the person being manipulated. The masters of this business are many political consultants. The ability to manipulate the consciousness of the electorate is an indicator of the level of professionalism of consultants in this area. In the field of business and management consulting, manipulative methods are used less frequently. Maybe because businessmen are more attentive and sophisticated in working with people. It is possible that management consultants are less corrupt than political ones. How does this happen? For example, a consultant needs to receive an order. He makes a preliminary diagnosis and, based on its results, paints a terrible picture for the future customer that awaits if he does not immediately resort to the help of this consultant. Thoughtful phrases like “Maybe it’s too late…”, or “You are in for such an acute crisis as you have never experienced before…” And here an optimistic picture is painted that will become a reality if… and so on. These are the simplest tricks. There are also more sophisticated ones. For example, "anchor" some state of the client in order to call this state when it comes to money matters. Or "mirror" the gestures and behavioral reactions of the client, in order to create a feeling of intimacy and understanding with the consultant. It is clear that in these cases, "do with him what you want" ... You need to know about it.

5. Overestimate (to get more money) or underestimate (to get at least something) the cost of work. "Ask for more - they will give at least half" is a fairly common logic, in accordance with which many consultants act. Not an exact miscalculation of all the parameters of future work, evaluation, use of criteria, and so on, but the expectation that this will increase the image, solidity. I know a rather sly young consulting firm that has set a minimum cost of $30,000 for their work. I ask: "And give?" “But what about it,” a young creature, recently hatched from some provincial university, answers me. “And we also set bonuses ...”. Some consultants, on the contrary, underestimate the cost of work, are "shy", perhaps they have a conscience. But in a civilized society, in general, dumping is flogged with rods. Once a well-known university professor proudly told me: "I made a lot of money this month on consulting." "How much, if not a secret," I asked. "Three thousand rubles," the professor answered importantly. It's just some kind of country of unafraid professors. This is what unprofessionalism is in the field of management consulting. And a violation of corporate ethics. The price must strictly correspond to the volume, complexity and quality of the consultant's work.

6. Violate agreements with the client on the timing, volume, quality and effectiveness of work. Recently, on a plane flying from Helsinki to Moscow, I met the head law firm from Finland. We sat side by side and chatted quickly. I started talking about the topic that has been tormenting me lately about guarantees that business people should give each other, about guarantees that these guarantees are real ... and so on. For him, everything was so simple: all mutual guarantees must be written in the contract as a legal document, and that's it. I say how is everyone? What if they throw? "No," he laughed. "You agreed with him, and wrote it down in the contract." I cautiously asked, but they don’t throw them? It happens, he says, but at the same time a person’s image deteriorates, he loses authority, as a result he loses customers. And there is a whole system, courts, arbitrations, and some other bodies that monitor all this. People know this and are simply afraid to break their word. That is, the ethical norm is supported by a system of legal norms, various organizations and the whole way of life. Well, let's say we also have something. Both the courts and the arbitration system. And we know firsthand about the importance of business authority. And security services in serious firms and banks. And brothers are always on the hook. It’s just that a person should know that for breaking a word, a promise, they will be beaten for a long time and painfully. Then our business ethics will be all right.

7. Organize the work in such a way that the client turns to this consultant again and again("put on the consulting needle"). Many foreign and our IT firms compose programs in such a way that after a certain moment the client who bought this software, there are problems: help is needed. Who to contact? Naturally, to the one who made the corresponding software and installed the system. So you can feed for decades. And some of our management consultants go there too. At the end of some period joint work consultant says: you have a new problem… I have met such people, I know, I can help… Or even more sophisticated move: you need constant consulting service. In world practice, this is called "outsourcing" (transfer to a third-party organization of performing part of the management functions). So maybe it's not about ethics? And in the deepening system of division of labor and progressive specialization? This is a subject for thought.

Ethical Issues Group Three: ethical norms and principles that clients most often violate when interacting with consultants.

1. They refuse to pay, thus discrediting the results of the consultant's work. Terribly unpleasant situation for a consultant. I remember that the driver of one company, who was taking us to an unfamiliar boarding house for a seminar, got lost, and we were an hour and a half late. The enraged leader, meeting us at the entrance, said the first phrase: "You are late, and I fine you a thousand bucks." The conversations were meaningless. And since the beginning was, as you understand, terrible, the seminar went very hard, and at the end we were paid half, motivated by the fact that we "didn't work well." "Well, thank God," I thought with relief. But I would never want to meet this customer again ... . There are other cases. Once the work is done, its value to the client often declines. And for him, in order for him to pay, "you have to run" sometimes for six months. That is why we always try to work with 100% prepayment. What I wish for other consultants.

2. Require the consultant to do more work for the same money, or no money at all. There are practically no norms of intellectual, and especially creative, work in the field of consulting support for management and business. It's just that people negotiate based on generally accepted rather vague concepts about the project, problems, diagnostics, solutions, and so on. And really, what is, for example, "diagnosing"? Firstly, "what" diagnostics - business, management system, problems, human potential? ... Secondly, it can be a multi-month study, a two-hour meeting with the team, or just a conversation with the first person. There are, of course, whole batteries of special diagnostic methods. But the depth of understanding of the situation often depends more not on them, but on the intuition and experience of the consultant. For example, in one hour of a meeting with the first person, I, with my more than twenty years of consulting experience, will receive as much information as an aspiring consultant will receive in half a year of research. And maybe more. So, for an hour, given my experience and depth of understanding of the situation, I have to pay the same amount as he does for half a year of work. However, the client, especially when he is free from ethical standards, can always say that I did not do enough for this. And then - see point one. I came across situations when a potential client used the ideas of consultants for a long time for free, constantly saying that "we'll get our bearings, and then we'll do a big project." This issue is especially acute at the time of "payback", if the consultant allowed full or partial payment of his labor after the work done.

3. They critically evaluate the methods and forms of the consultant's work (they interfere in his "kitchen"), "knocking down" him psychologically. It happens all the time. Just like most people and doctors, and psychologists, and politicians, and experts on how to solve all problems in general, they are also specialists in the field of management consulting. Recently on retreat with one large structure, the head of the security service, a huge man with an impenetrable official face, annoyed me all day with critical remarks like: "Your seminar methods are wrong", or: "You should not do this here, but this ...", or: "And why is this consultant not loaded with you?" And he got me so badly that at some point I came close to him and said with enough charismatic pressure: "Do you think I understand anything in your safety?" At first he was confused, then the combat training worked, and he reported: "No!" "And I climb to you with my opinions about the organization of the work of the security service?" He backed off and answered more quietly: "Well, no ..." "What are you doing?" Hard work of thought was reflected on his face ... Tactless interference of employees of the organization in the consultant's kitchen is more the law than the exception. Well, you won’t arrange an educational program for him on system analysis, consulting methodology, organization development methodology and two or three dozen more extensive disciplines, without which it is impossible to become a professional management consultant? And it is psychologically insanely difficult to control oneself when they give you amateurish advice, or simply say nonsense with an air of importance.

4. Fight consultants against the changes they propose for which they were invited. Sometimes clients stop working halfway through, disrupting the technology of change in the organization and causing irreparable damage to it. One possible reason is problems that arise during the restructuring of the business or management system. In recent years there has been a lot of talk about "management of change" because the main difficulties are concentrated here. A consultant, for example, is brought in to help subdue an unbridled bureaucracy, but the same bureaucracy goes to war with change and its chief agent, the consultant, and often wins the battle. After all, it is precisely the bureaucracy that is the force that cannot be defeated for decades, since it is armed professional methods struggle and self-defense - denunciations, the formation of a negative opinion about a person or some kind of undertaking, intrigues, setting people against each other, inciting hostility and conflicts between groups, and so on and so forth. And since there are elements of bureaucracy in any organization, the changes initiated by a consulting project cause her evil spirit, and she begins to fight against what the consultant was brought in for. And the first face begins to frown. And you smile less. And the solution of even the smallest issues is delayed ...

5. They vilify consultants in front of their potential future clients. in order to psychologically compensate for their own shortcomings, or simply for the same "kindness of soul". Well, when they finished with the consultants, naturally, they talk badly about them. “They worked here alone, we know, they say, these consultants ...” And their friends, buddies, without a twinge of conscience, vilify the unfortunate consultants, fortunately, they cannot get change. And that makes the situation even worse. So, "the customer is always right"?

6. Arrange tenders ostensibly for the selection of consultants, using the knowledge and experience of applicants for free. Three times I participated in such "tenders". Until I figured out all the background. Correct, gallant, smart, concerned about the fate of the market development in Russia... "Please prepare your resume." "Besides you, we have five other consulting firms in the tender." "Now let's have a meeting with the owners." "How would you solve this problem?" "Nothing, think, get ready." "And for this problem, what are the best methods to use?" "And what is the best way to solve this problem?" And so on, two or three months. One such firm hired a "winning" consultant for a project. A month later, she threw him out with a bang, pouring after him with all possible slops. After that, his psyche simply could not stand it. Now he is disabled. Thank God that I did not win any such tender.

So, here is, in fact, a micro-encyclopedia of ethical violations in the world of counseling. Of course, this world does not consist only of such situations. On the contrary, they are not so common. However, in such a concentrated form, violations make a strong impression. And it’s worth thinking about it, realizing your own violations, remembering the situations when you suffered from someone’s unethical behavior. Think about it and clear it. To treat such social suppuration, a surgical path is needed. Which is what I tried to do.

When I finished this article, I decided to check how it made an impression, and read it to my consultant colleague. I didn’t really like the reaction: “It’s like you rolled out in the mud: you try everything on yourself.” But do not write for the hundredth time that consultants have dozens ethical codes. There is such a code in every consulting firm. Every association. Including at the international level. That only those who agree with the norms of these codes are accepted into the professional community. There are many cases when a person was expelled from the community for violating ethical standards. So, here I just outlined the violations that are prohibited in the community. This is a "brick" that prohibits movement, a red traffic light: this cannot be done.

1 V.S. Dudchenko. "Ontosynthesis of Life". - M .: Publishing house "Border", 1999. Chapter 3. Bluff ontosynthesis, ss. 45-50.