Good Citizenship: A Series - Part 3

5 Ds, 3 Es and One Good Citizen

by The Good Project Team

Given recent events in the United States—increasing political division, yawning inequality between the country’s richest and poorest inhabitants, and well-documented violence directed towards people of color—the need for “good citizens'' is compelling. And that’s just within our borders. We need to attend as well to worldwide issues such as climate change and the current COVID-19 pandemic. Everyone is now a global citizen as well.

Our overarching goal at The Good Project is to help foster moral and ethical reflection in students and adults. One promising means of doing so is to practice reflecting on real-life dilemmas as they are encountered. In our conception, such reflection optimally draws on “Five Ds”:

• Defining the dilemma one is faced with;

• Discussing the dilemma with others;

• Debating the pros and cons of various courses of action;

• Deciding on an action (or deciding not to act); and

• Debriefing the dilemma by reflecting on what went right, wrong, or what might be done better next time one encounters a similar situation.

Let us take each of these in turn.

Defining the Dilemma

In our work on dilemmas, we speak about times when people are not sure about the “right course of action” or feel torn between conflicting responsibilities. To date, we’ve compiled fifty dilemmas in our online dilemmas database; these can be drawn on in discussions on all sorts of topics, across the range of ages, demographies, and fields of endeavor.

As just one example, let’s use our dilemma “Divided Loyalties.”

 Sara is the executive director of a national nonprofit that represents the concerns of America’s independent workforce, including freelancers, consultants, part-timers, and the self-employed. Sara’s grandfather was vice president of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, and although she never met her grandfather, she has been very much influenced by his work as a union organizer.

Soon after being recognized as one of a group of outstanding social entrepreneurs, Sara was invited to the World Economic Forum (WEF), a meeting of leaders of governments and corporations from around the world. Because the WEF gathers so many powerful individuals together, there are often protests of one form or another, and Sara would have been forced to cross a picket line in order to attend the WEF. In this case, she felt torn between a loyalty to her roots in the labor movement and a responsibility to her role as a noted social entrepreneur.

Clearly Sara feels a dilemma. One way to clarify that dilemma is to say that she is torn between her sense of neighborlly morality and the ethics of her role. Neighborly morality refers the ways in which individual treats those in their immediate social circles; it includes behaviors such as honesty, kindness, caring, attentiveness, and other prosocial behaviors. In contrast, ethics of roles refers to the standards, norms, and regulations expected of those acting in a professional capacity (including students); one might think of the Hippocratic Oath for those in the medical field or the ethics expected of a journalist, a lawyer, a teacher, an auditor..

 In Sara’s case, she is being asked to adhere to the ethics of her role as a social entrepreneur—to advance the causes that she espouses in a responsible way. On the other hand, feelings of neighborly morality might call for her to show respect to those on the picket line—especially given her strong feelings of familial loyalty.

Discussing and Debating the Dilemma

 How should Sara decide what to do? What would it mean for her to act as a good citizen in this situation? In turning to discussing and debating the dilemma, we often suggest that individuals turn to respected others—mentors—in order to ask for their advice. Importantly, a mentor might not always be a single person to whom one looks up; rather, that mentoring role might be assumed by a fictional character, or individuals might pull different lessons from several individuals, a process we’ve referred to as “frag-mentoring.” At The Good Project, we also speak of the importance of “anti-mentors”—looking to examples of who we don’t want to be in a situation. Thus, in this situation, Sara might ask mentors in her life what they would do in a similar situation in order to be respectful to both family and work responsibilities, or, instead, what they did if they ever encountered a similar experience. (And if the mentors were not available, she might try in her imagination to recreate the advice that they might have given.)

In debating the possible courses of action, Sara should also refer to the Rings of Responsibility—whom will each course of action serve? To whom will she be acting responsibly if she crosses the picket line? What about if she elects to skip the WEF meeting altogether? Which action allows her to better serve her communities in an ethical, engaged, and excellent manner? For example, Sara might consider that:

• By attending, she might help her national nonprofit; she also could be furthering the needs of the communities that her nonprofit serves; she would be upholding her ethics of as a social entrepreneur; and she would be fulfilling a responsibility to wider society by serving an underrepresented workforce.

• By not attending, she might serve her image of herself as a supporter of workers as she honors the picket line; she could be serving her family by upholding her grandfather’s union legacy; or she might be serving her community (and the broader society) if she is publicly displays her support of others in the labor movement.

In wrestling with this dilemma, Sara would also need to consider her own values and how they might affect her decision regarding this dilemma. Perhaps she is already aware of her own values; or perhaps she might conduct an inventory, by taking a survey such as The Good Project’s Value Sort. Which course of action would be more aligned with Sara’s own values? We often speak about alignment as something that occurs when various groups or parties want the same thing or are working towards a common goal; but this desired balance can also occur within an individual when someone’s thoughts, actions, and values align with one another.

 Deciding on a Course of Action

Which course of action should Sara take? As we’ve described it, a “good citizen” is someone who acts in accordance with all three “Es” —specifically taking into account the community or communities to which that person belongs. Again, she might consider:

• Ethics: Sara has acted ethically if she makes a decision in light of her responsibilities to her several communities (to her organization, to the unions, to the ideals represented by the freedom to demonstrate), and if she acts in a manner that she believes will ultimately do the most good.  

• Excellence: Sara knows the norms and rules of her various communities well and in fact, her desire to adhere to the norms of one of those communities (i.e., not to cross a picket line) was what brought about her quandary. She recognizes that if she does an excellent job at the event, the potential impact she might have will expand her connections within the political community.

• Engagement: Sara has been deeply engaged in her work. Because this event brought together multiple communities of which she considered herself a part, the issues were especially relevant. She also is engaged with her family and does not take that affiliation lightly.

 Debriefing

When posing such a dilemma to students, we typically do not reveal an answer—it’s the process of applying the 5 Ds that is crucial.

However, here we can reveal that Sara elected to cross the picket line. She concluded that the harm her action might cause would ultimately be outweighed by the good she might be able to achieve by attending the event, making contacts, speaking on behalf of her beliefs about labor, and ultimately, furthering her cause. She acted in accordance with what she felt might, eventually, do the most good. In some ways, she chose long term over short term gain. Upon reflection, Sara was not fully at peace with her decision (she said she could never feel fully at ease crossing a picket line), but she felt that she made the best choice she could have at the time.

As mentioned above, there may at times be overlap between “good work” and “good citizenship.” In this particular case, Sara understands herself to be responsible to multiple communities and does her best to take these communities into account in her decision-making. The good work of a nonprofit director requires Sara to be a good citizen.

 Debriefing also involves a consideration of longer term consequences. Did Sara’s decision cause any family estrangement? What did she accomplish at the event, and were these accomplishments worth crossing the picket line? Would she make a different decision in the future, and why? These are the types of questions to consider in our efforts to foster good work and good citizenship.

Good Citizenship: A Series - Part 2

Good Person, Good Worker, Good Citizen

By Lynn Barendsen 

At The Good Project, our primary focus over the past two and a half decades has been on understanding the nature of “work,” identifying the features of good work across the  professions, and developing frameworks, tools, and resources to help nurture good workers and good work.

However, we have not been concerned solely with the individual in the workplace. Although “work” has been our research focus, we recognize that individuals are not only workers. We all play other roles outside of work environments; such roles often require responsibilities to our families and friends, to our neighbors, to society, and to the wider world. In addition to being a good worker, what does it mean to be a good person and a good citizen?

To unpack these questions, it’s helpful to think about two concepts: neighborly morality and ethics of roles.

First, what does it mean to be a good person? This is where the concept of neighborly morality is useful. We often describe neighborly morality as the Golden Rule: treating others in the way that you yourself would like to be treated. We notice ‘good people” in the grocery store (offering to help others carry packages), in our neighborhoods (shoveling walks for elderly neighbors), or on the road (waving others into lines of waiting traffic). Good people think the consequences of their actions upon other—especially those whom they encounter in daily life. 

A good worker is judged on work performed—and here we can make use of the concept of ethics of roles: the standards by which different professions measure their workers. Is it of high quality in terms of the standards of that particular workplace? Additionally, is the work ethical, taking into account the particular ethical standards of that workplace or profession? To be sure, not all workers are subject to the equivalent of a Hippocratic oath; nonetheless, workers are (or should be!) attuned to the ethical implications of their work or an ethical code which might include “doing no harm” or taking responsibility for one’s efforts. And does the worker find meaning in work? To be clear, a good worker may not feel excellent, ethical, and engaged every single day; but in general, a “good” worker strives to meet each of these criteria to the best of his/her ability.

As we consider good citizenship, it might be argued that neighborly morality and ethics of roles both come into play. Think “good person” with a civic lens: good neighbors consider their responsibilities to their neighborhood and treat others as they themselves would like to be treated. These are the elements of neighborly morality.

However, the ethics of the role of citizen are also relevant, involving knowing the expectations of a citizen in one’s community, region, or nation. In the US, for example, do individuals vote, and when they do so, are they well informed about candidates and questions on the ballot? Do they consider their responsibilities as citizens and recognize the impact of their civic actions (or lack thereof)? And finally, are they engaged—paying attention, educating themselves about current issues, and taking action, as appropriate? Of course, the meaning, rules and values of citizenship may vary from place to place. Nonetheless, the 3 Es constitute a useful starting point for considering how individuals understand their civic duties.

Recently, there has been a resurgence of attention to civics education—overdue, in my opinion, and vitally important. At The Good Project, we embrace an approach that guides not only the citizen, but also the person and the worker, by encouraging responsibility in all the spheres of our lives. We advocate a sense of neighborly morality, acknowledging that our “neighbors” are now global as well as local.

 The rules governing many spheres of work are also changing—new roles are being created (for example, in the digital realm), and old ones are disappearing (in many white collar positions). Alas, we can’t always rely only on overly politicized educational systems to offer guidance about standards for good work. Across many communities and institutions, including in educational systems, responsible adults need to model appropriate behaviors and attitudes. Only in that way can we hope to have members of the emerging generation accept their responsibilities in all they do, as persons, as workers, and as citizens.

New Dilemma: The Pediatric Protector

by The Good Project Research Team

Have you ever felt torn between your professional responsibilities and your friends and family? Perhaps you are one of the 56% of American adults who find it difficult to balance work and family responsibilities. Or perhaps you’re a student who struggles to balance your responsibilities to school while also finding time to hang out with your peers--how much time do you have to spend on homework, and how much time is it okay to spend texting with friends? 

At The Good Project, we talk about this balancing act between professional and more personal responsibilities as a balance between neighborly morality and ethics of roles. Neighborly morality refers to how an individual might show kindness and respect to those in their immediate social circles; it includes behaviors such as honesty and other prosocial actions. In contrast, ethics of roles refers to the standards, norms, and regulations expected of those acting in a professional capacity (including students); one might think of the Hippocratic Oath for those in the medical field.

A new dilemma posted on our website deals with this tension between wanting to maintain one’s duty to one’s profession versus wanting to uphold one’s responsibilities to one’s neighbors. Please keep in mind that this dilemma deals with the sensitive topic of child abuse. Entitled The Pediatric Protector, it reads: 

Eliza is a retired former pediatrician who now works as a private language tutor. She often spends time bringing her grandchildren, ages eight and five, to their nearby playground. Her grandchildren recently struck up a friendship with a new six year old girl on the playground, who told them that her mother had “banged her up” at her home for playing on the stairs, so much so that she was in pain on the playground. After hearing about this from both her grandchildren, Eliza is not sure what to do. As a pediatrician, she was a mandated reporter, required to report any child abuse to the appropriate authorities. But she also knows that children can exaggerate or make mistakes; perhaps the mother was trying to keep the child safe, or she had fallen on her own. Eliza is told by a child welfare hotline that it is her decision whether to report or not. Her pediatrician friends urge her to report, and she feels obligated to as a former doctor. But Eliza worries the child could end up in a foster home where she might not be cared for.

The full dilemma can be read here. How would you describe the tension between the ethics of roles and neighborly morality Eliza is feeling? If you were in a similar situation, is there someone you would consult for advice?

On the one hand, as a former practicing pediatrician, Eliza is dealing with the requirements of her former responsibilities as a mandated reporter, an ethics of roles issue. On the other hand, Eliza cares for the children involved and is worried about their welfare should they end up in poor care, an issue of neighborly morality. What decision should she make, and what factors should she weigh in her decision making?

Black Lives Matter

At The Good Project, we seek to help people engage in important but difficult conversations, to enhance their self-awareness, and to reflect on our obligations to one another. For two decades, we have encouraged the idea that good work must be ethical, excellent, and engaging.

While we know that our words and tools are not adequate, we cannot be silent in response to the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery. We believe, without qualification, that Black lives matter. Systemic racism has been and continues to be a reality in the United States. For us to do good work, we must all engage in the hard work of reflecting on our relationships with systemic racism.

We know this work can be challenging; good work is often challenging. And we want to help.

First, we encourage you to use the tools we have developed to aid in these conversations. As examples, our ethics of roles and neighborly morality may provide a useful framing for thinking about the current situation; the value sort tool can prompt conversations about your own action or inaction during this time; and our ethical dilemmas can help you think through the ways racism shows up in our schools and local communities.

We have also put together a list of resources for talking about racism and resistance, found below.

Finally, we want to share a thought-provoking excerpt from a message released by Dean Bridget Terry Long of the Harvard Graduate School of Education in response to the recent events:

So much of the discussion related to these recent events is tied up in this notion of what America is.  Simply put, America—or any society or community—is what individuals make it.  Yes, this country was founded on the important ideals of liberty, but we know those rights were narrowly defined by our founders to include only a subset of human beings.  And though we have taken steps forward through laws and policies, it’s crucial to question whether we, as a country, have really interrogated what equality and respect for all means in practice. 

Resources (links in titles):

7 Virtual Mental Health Resources Supporting Black People Right Now

31 Children's books to support conversations on race, racism and resistance

Black Youth Project

A Parent’s Guide to Discussing Racism

What White Parents Must Teach Our Kids About George Floyd, Christian Cooper & Ongoing Racism In America

Do the work: an anti-racist reading list

How to Be an Antiracist Educator

Teaching for Black Lives

Reflecting on George Floyd’s Death and Police Violence Towards Black Americans

Beyond the Hashtag: How to Take Anti-Racist Action in Your Life

The Good Project and COVID-19

by Howard Gardner, Shelby Clark, and Kirsten McHugh

At this time—unprecedented for almost everyone—it is important for those of us who have so far remained healthy to consider what we might do that is constructive for others. And for those of us who curate this website, the following question arises and looms large: After over two decades of research, can The Good Project offer anything that might address current challenges?  To be sure, in no way can we be as timely and as helpful as researchers who are investigating the disease and/or attempting to find a treatment or vaccine. But we believe that the conceptual toolkit that we have created might be helpful.

On the project we speak about the ethics of roles—the thoughts and behaviors that are appropriate for the role of ‘professional’ or ‘worker’ as well as for the role of citizen.

Take the role of scientific researcher: We believe that the researcher should be well informed—or excellent; given the stakes, we assume that the researcher would be deeply engaged. But it is crucial as well that the researcher be ethical—continuously pondering what’s the better course of action in the current environment.

To list just two issues:

1. Should preliminary promising results be published and promulgated, or should one hold back until proper analyses have been carried out and necessary controls have been implemented?

2. Should one share all of one’s findings with other research laboratories, including ones with which one usually competes; or should one hold back, so that the credit (or the blame) remains squarely within one’s own laboratory?

Turn, next, to the role of citizen—for convenience, let’s assume that you are a citizen of the United States. We hope that you know and obey the laws that govern our form of government. We hope that you also are engaged as a citizen—keeping up with the news, discussing what you are learning, writing letters, voting, perhaps volunteering to help with ongoing restorative efforts in your community. But it’s also important that you confront the ethical dilemmas of a citizen:

For example, should you support efforts to vote by absentee ballot (safe but open to tampering or delays); or, instead, should you push for voting that can occur in a neighborhood but without risking the health of anyone else in the precinct?

In thinking about these issues, it is also useful to consider what we have termed the rings of responsibility. As you ponder “to whom or what do you feel responsible,” try to think beyond yourself and your family. In addition, consider more broadly your trade, the community in which you live, and even the broader geographic regions of our planet.

In addition to the ethics of roles, COVID also raises issues of neighborly morality—the range of situations addressed in the Ten Commandments and in the Golden Rule. We have all observed individuals who wear face masks and maintain social distance, as well as individuals who flaunt one or both of these norms. One does not require professional training or courses in citizenship to understand that by such flaunting, one is putting at risk not only oneself but also all those with whom one comes in contact. Not only does a mask-less mien violate the Golden Rule—it foregrounds particular disrespect to those who are older or have medical conditions and, accordingly, are more vulnerable.

Returning to the area of work, we raise one more timely issue. In our professional roles, each of us faces a personal dilemma: Should we devote all of our efforts to addressing the challenges posed by COVID19? Should we, instead, continue doing our customary work as best we can—noting that our ability to draw on our expertise in this situation is strictly limited? Or should we try to strike some kind of balance?

In recent Good Project blogs. we have taken up these questions and tensions. For example, in “The Financial Fallout of COVID-19: Business as Usual?" our colleague Daniel Mucinskas takes up the tension between a local Boston tenant who has lost his job due to COVID-19 and who has appealed to his apartment landlord for an extension on his rent. In this case, the landlord has to consider both his ethics of roles as a landlord, but also his role as a citizen during these difficult pandemic times.

In another COVID19-related blog entitled, “Remotely Polite and Professional,” Kirsten McHugh discussed how communicating online via Zoom can raise new ethical dilemmas. This blog describes how private chat transcripts between two other colleagues were released after a Zoom call. The transcripts reveal that a woman’s colleagues had ridiculed her weight. The woman then must pit consideration of neighborly morality versus the ethics of roles. To be specific,  she debates whether to approach her colleagues directly about their insensitivity—or instead to put her professional ethics first and report her colleagues directly to the relevant officer of HR (Human Resources). Such situations highlight how the “new normal” of COVID can foreground issues of neighborly morality, ethics of roles, and the role of a citizen.

On The Good Project, we regularly employ a tool—the 5Ds—designed to help individuals or teams determine which course of action to follow. When faced with a difficult decision, we work as a team to:

1. Define the Dilemma: Through conversation (over email, in person, or remote), we explain the overview of the situation and what we currently see as the possible options.

2. Discuss the Dilemma: In as much detail as possible, group members consider alternative viewpoints and scenarios.

3. Debate the Dilemma: We think through the pros and cons of each course of action, including whatever new options emerge. We each try to determine the optimal approach.

4. Deciding: We make a final decision on the best next steps, considering all we have discussed.

5.   Debriefing: No matter what the outcome, after a reasonable amount of time has played out and events unfold following out decision and action, we re-examine our process. We reflect on what we did right and what we could have done better. This step is key in making better decisions in the future.

Once one uses the 5Ds regularly, it becomes second nature to apply this procedure to matters big and small. As an example, we recently heard from a publisher interested in using our materials but concerned about a decades-old funder listed in the acknowledgements of the original work. First, a team member flagged the email and request as a matter that should be considered carefully and shared the communication with the rest of the team. Second, the group met online to discuss the problem space and what we saw as possible next steps. Third, we debated the merits and downfalls of each available option, trying our best to think of any short- and long-term repercussions (both positive and negative). Should we delete the funders name, leave the document “as is”, add an explanation of our termination of the funding relationship, or is there some other alternative scenario? Next, we came back together as a group and agreed upon the appropriate course of action. We reached out to the requester with our final decision. Ultimately, once enough time has passed, we will revisit this scenario and examine how our decisions played out—good or bad.

This is but one recent example—the 5Ds can be applied to any of the dilemmas outlined here.

In Howard’s case as a teacher, researcher, and writer in psychology and education, his own capacity to address COVID is limited; also, as an individual in the second half of his eighth decade, he is more vulnerable to the life-threatening aspects of the disease than most of his colleagues and most other citizens. That said, Howard is redoubling his efforts to carry out his own work in as excellent, engaging, and ethical a way as possible And whenever he feels that he can be helpful to anyone who comes across his path—by mail, over the phone, or in the course of carrying out their challenging responsibilities —he makes an extra effort to serve, and serve well.

---

Howard Gardner is the long-time senior director of The Good Project. Shelby Clark and Kirsten McHugh are project managers at Harvard Project Zero.