Who Do You Work For? UX Ethics Start Here
Why shouldn’t I work for the N.S.A.? That’s a tough one, but I’ll take a shot. Say I’m working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. Maybe I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I’m real happy with myself, ’cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never met, never had no problem with, get killed. Now the politicians are sayin’, “Oh, send in the Marines to secure the area” ’cause they don’t give a shit. It won’t be their kid over there, gettin’ shot. Just like it wasn’t them when their number got called, ’cause they were pullin’ a tour in the National Guard. It’ll be some kid from Southie takin’ shrapnel in the ass. And he comes back to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, ’cause he’ll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile, he realizes the only reason he was over there in the first place was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And, of course, the oil companies used the skirmish over there to scare up domestic oil prices. A cute little ancillary benefit for them, but it ain’t helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. And they’re takin’ their sweet time bringin’ the oil back, of course, and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and fuckin’ play slalom with the icebergs, and it ain’t too long ’til he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So now my buddy’s out of work and he can’t afford to drive, so he’s got to walk to the fuckin’ job interviews, which sucks ’cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin’ him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he’s starvin’, ’cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat, the only blue plate special they’re servin’ is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what did I think? I’m holdin’ out for somethin’ better. I figure fuck it, while I’m at it why not just shoot my buddy, take his job, give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected president.
~Will Hunting, Good Will Hunting
This is, perhaps, one of my favorite scenes and quotes in one of my favorite movies. I love it because it illustrates the connectivity and long-reaching effects of our work. More importantly, Will has a deep understanding of the ethical dilemma we face in who we work for. And, that is where we start when exploring design ethics. Who do you work for?
This is what I consider an existential aspect of ethics in design. It is existential because it is about who you are as a designer, the meaning of your work and the impact of the designs you create. At the end of a life lived, how will you look back and assess your contribution to the world we live in? What have you contributed and what were you a part of?
This issue is greater than the weekly or monthly paycheck we’ll draw from gainful employment. Early in our careers, we often are forced to sacrifice our principles or our ethics and work for any company that will hire us. We do, after all, have bills to pay and mouths to feed. But even at that stage, there are lines most of us would not be willing to cross.
A prime example is illustrated in Tobias van Schneider’s article, “Did Hitler have great designers? Can good design be bad design?” Would you design for Hitler? This, admittedly, is an extreme example. However, consider some of our average corporations today. Would you work for Philip Morris developing designs for tobacco products? Would you work as a designer for Smith & Wesson? Would you, like me, work for corporations in healthcare who profit from the illness of others?
These are examples where our values can clearly misalign with the company values. That is, it is an easy decision to not work for a tobacco company if someone in your family died of lung cancer or if you are adamantly opposed to tobacco products and their effects on humans. But, the ethical dilemmas we face when choosing what company we’ll work for are not always this clear. That is where Will Hunting’s perspective — quoted above — becomes a prolific analysis of just how far-reaching our work as designers can be.
The ethics of where you work are not always so simple or clear-cut. Consider my own career, for example. I work exclusively as a designer in healthcare. A good percentage of the organizations I have worked for over the years profit from the misfortune of others, charge individuals more for the same service than they do insurance companies and have at least some questionable business practices. This is a very dismal view of the industry I choose to work in. In a more positive light, I work for an industry that has the primary intent of helping people. The ultimate question is: Does the benevolence counterbalance the attempts at profitability?
Let’s suppose you work for a company exposed by the media of exploiting customers for its own gain (like Enron) or a corporation embroiled in a scandal involving the deceit of its users (big tobacco and Facebook’s Fake News scandal). Or maybe you work for an insurance company — an industry that profits, in part, by denying claims. Or perhaps you are employed by a company where a few people made a poor decision and dragged an innocent person off a plane injuring him in the process.
In all of these examples, the companies or corporations are not evil through and through. They still provide a service, help people or give most customers something they want and enjoy. Your intention in working for these companies is to do great work and benefit others (along with making a paycheck to pay the bills, of course). The intent of the corporation you work for is to also make enough money to pay the bills along with providing a service, making the world a better place or any number of other goals organizations choose.
The question becomes one of intent when we present dilemmas in this context. Intent is an important topic in ethics and can supersede the outcome of an event. Let’s suppose you were intending to serve your spouse a cup of coffee and accidentally added rat poisoning instead of sugar. Your spouse dies as a result. Your intent was not to kill your spouse. It was an accident. We are more forgiving of the action taken out in this scenario whereas we would be less forgiving if the situation was reversed and the intent was to kill the spouse, but instead they survived because you did not give a high enough dose. In this latter scenario, your intent was clear and it is unforgivable.
Another example of the importance of intent involves the classic scenario of Hitler being saved by a local priest at the age of four from nearly drowning. This story, whether true or false, forces us to consider how a person’s actions are related to their intent versus the outcome. Of course, the priest did not know this young boy would eventually become responsible for the death of millions. His intent was to save a young child. Idly standing by and watching the child die, in almost any scenario, would give us cause to label him as negligent (or even a monster). His intent in that instant is viewed through the lens of not the longterm outcome, but the immediate outcome and the priest’s humanity.
How do we determine intent in the scenario of who we work for? It is quite simple to determine your own intent and quite difficult to determine the intent of the organization you are employed with or are considering employment with. As I have often written: Organizations are comprised of individuals and groups of individuals. These groups and individuals can often act in their own interest. They make mistakes, have different goals than you might and are fallible, just as we all are. So what are we to do when facing an ethical decision or evaluation with this level of complexity?
The best advice I have come across regarding this dilemma comes from Richard Friedman’s book, The Best Place to Work. He describes a scenario where you have arrived at an evening party and are alone. The host of the party greets you, takes your coat and asks, “So, where do you work?” How do feel in that instant? Do you proudly state your place of employment or do you internally shrink back from the question? That, to me, is the litmus test for evaluating the ethics of who you are working for.
Keeping with this train of thought, I recently left a position where the culture had taken a turn for the worse. While in that position, I had taken the responsibility of interviewing numerous local candidates as we attempted to build out our team. My own litmus test involved a period of time when I no longer could look a candidate straight in the eye and tell them why this was such a great place to work. I was conducting a phone screen one day and the candidate on the line asked me what was the best thing about working on my team. The first answer that jumped into my head was “Nothing.” I realized, in that moment, I had a problem and it was time for me to begin thinking about my exit.
I have written before about how you know when it is time to leave your job as a designer. I think the above test is, perhaps, one of the strongest key indicators for staying or leaving. How much pride you have in your organization is directly related to how well you will perform in the position. How well you perform in a position is directly related to how long your tenure will likely be. Additionally, organizations should take heed of this point. Employees who bear a strong sense of pride will be more likely to give accolades to others about the company via word of mouth. That is, organizations who care about their reputation should care about instilling pride in their employees. This obviously involves doing the right thing and curating the right culture.
This brings us to one other point of consideration in the ethics of who you work for. How are other employees treated? Are they mistreated? How do you ethically justify working for an organization where your fellow employees are abused, berated or mistreated in some way? If the organization allows this, what else do they turn a blind eye to?
The utilization of these methods of evaluation generally require you to be actively employed with a company. It is far more difficult to determine the ethical aspects of a company and nearly impossible to determine culture unless you are employed with the organization. However, asking yourself if you would be proud to say you worked for the company will, at the very least, give you a clear idea as to whether you should pursue employment. Evaluating the culture will give you an ethical perspective on whether you should stay.
When we consider the ethics of design, this is the first place we have to begin. Who we work for and how we feel about that will act as a filter for everything we design or create. We cannot develop a clear perspective on design ethics unless we first consider this key element.
As Will Hunting notes in the quote above, what we do and who we do it for can have long-reaching ethical consequences in the world.
