Is This Ethical?
A businessman told me once to "Sell 'em what they want; give 'em what they need.
" So, here's my question: Is that ethical? Are you being honest with your customers if you allow them to believe they're getting one thing, when in fact you're giving them something else? Is this a semantical or a qualitative difference? I'm not sure I know the answer, to be honest; and that's probably because I didn't ask him what he meant.
But, in retrospect, I think it depends entirely on whether or not you intend to mislead the other person.
For example, is it ethical if you give your customers the impression that your price includes certain goods and services, when you know in your heart that it doesn't? Is that your problem, or theirs? If your aim is to create some kind of "bait and switch," where you agree to do one thing, but camouflage what you actually do to the extent that no one can tell the difference, then, yes, I think that's unethical; and I would not do that.
However, if you and your customer both agree on the problem and the solution, and each of you uses and understands the differences in the terminology then I have no problem with that.
You say "Toe-may-to" and I say "to-mah-to.
" The word facade comes to mind.
The word can mean a misrepresentation of something.
Think of the ramshackle buildings that were constructed in the towns of the Old West.
The front was called the facade.
Though made from wood, they were erected so that would appear to be as prominent as the proud buildings in cities such as New York.
But, all you had to do was look at the side of the building, and it became clear right away that it was nothing more than a small barn with a big face on the front.
If you were selling real estate in the 1880s and didn't allow prospective buyers to see anything but the front of the building, then it would be unethical to allow them to think that that building was anything other than what it appeared to be.
But, if both you and the purchaser knew that the front was a facade, then there would be no misunderstanding or deception, whether the side of it was seen or not.
It concerns me that the lack of ethics is so common in the world today, that it's more or less an open secret that few actually tell the truth.
" So, here's my question: Is that ethical? Are you being honest with your customers if you allow them to believe they're getting one thing, when in fact you're giving them something else? Is this a semantical or a qualitative difference? I'm not sure I know the answer, to be honest; and that's probably because I didn't ask him what he meant.
But, in retrospect, I think it depends entirely on whether or not you intend to mislead the other person.
For example, is it ethical if you give your customers the impression that your price includes certain goods and services, when you know in your heart that it doesn't? Is that your problem, or theirs? If your aim is to create some kind of "bait and switch," where you agree to do one thing, but camouflage what you actually do to the extent that no one can tell the difference, then, yes, I think that's unethical; and I would not do that.
However, if you and your customer both agree on the problem and the solution, and each of you uses and understands the differences in the terminology then I have no problem with that.
You say "Toe-may-to" and I say "to-mah-to.
" The word facade comes to mind.
The word can mean a misrepresentation of something.
Think of the ramshackle buildings that were constructed in the towns of the Old West.
The front was called the facade.
Though made from wood, they were erected so that would appear to be as prominent as the proud buildings in cities such as New York.
But, all you had to do was look at the side of the building, and it became clear right away that it was nothing more than a small barn with a big face on the front.
If you were selling real estate in the 1880s and didn't allow prospective buyers to see anything but the front of the building, then it would be unethical to allow them to think that that building was anything other than what it appeared to be.
But, if both you and the purchaser knew that the front was a facade, then there would be no misunderstanding or deception, whether the side of it was seen or not.
It concerns me that the lack of ethics is so common in the world today, that it's more or less an open secret that few actually tell the truth.
Source...