One Monday morning, the director gathered her team. An internal investigation confirmed instances of harassment involving a middle manager. Management reacted swiftly: reporting procedure followed, confidentiality guaranteed, investigation conducted, sanction decided. Everything complied with internal rules and the law. On paper, the case was closed.
However, in practice, the reality is different. Trust has not been restored. Meetings are poorly attended, tensions persist, and two key individuals are considering leaving the organization. “We followed every step of the protocol, so why is the team still paralyzed?” the director wondered.
This paradox is common. Compliance protects the organization and establishes essential safeguards. However, it is not enough to restore cooperation or ease working relationships after a sensitive situation. To go further, complementary approaches can support leadership: reflective ethics and the ethics of care.
Reinforcing Layers
Rather than opposing these approaches, the aim is to combine them:
- Procedural ethics: it guarantees the fundamentals – respect for rules, consent, confidentiality, due process. It aligns the organization with its obligations (e.g., GDPR, anti-corruption codes).
- Reflective ethics: it opens a space for discussion on concrete dilemmas, the “ethically important moments” that procedures do not cover, such as the emotional impact of an investigation on uninvolved colleagues (Guillemin and Gillam, 2004).
- Ethics of care: it offers a relational and democratic framework, based on attention to needs, responsibility, competence, responsiveness, and solidarity (Tronto, 1993, 2013, 2016). “Good care” is not imposed; it is co-constructed with the individuals concerned.
In our example, management begins by securing the process by applying internal procedures and protecting the confidentiality of those involved. It then undertakes a reflective approach to acknowledge the tensions that persist despite the sanction and to understand the situation’s effect on the entire team. Finally, through a care approach, the team collectively constructs concrete actions to restore a healthy working environment, strengthen trust, and regain constructive momentum.
It is this progressive articulation – secure, understand, repair – that gives the framework its full strength. However, for an organization to adopt it coherently and measurably, it is useful to have a clear method.
A Progressive Method, Built with Teams
This method is not a top-down imposed plan. It relies on the leadership’s ability to create a safe framework, then to support teams in identifying their own needs and in co-constructing solutions. The role of management is to support, facilitate, and ensure that collectively made commitments are implemented. This involves
1. Acknowledge harm and secure
Formulate a clear announcement of known facts, uncertainties, immediate safeguarding measures, protected reporting channels, data and witness protection. You act on the four basic principles: non-maleficence, autonomy, beneficence, justice (Beauchamp and Childress, 2001).
2. Listen without causing harm
Voluntary listening circles, based on adapted confidentiality rules and facilitated by trained and independent individuals, allow for a focus on needs rather than solely on evidence. They address “ethically important moments” and not just extreme cases (Guillemin and Gillam, 2004).
3. Co-diagnose needs
Mapping helps to understand needs for security, recognition, reparation, work adjustments, mediations, reassignments, as well as measures concerning external stakeholders. In a co-diagnosis, facilitation and validation are carried out with the individuals concerned so that the diagnosis reflects their reality. This avoids the paternalism identified as a risk of care (Tronto, 2013).
4. Act and report
This involves a short, internal public action plan with clear responsibilities and realistic deadlines, accompanied by success criteria. Feedback meetings focused on the relevance of the measures and how they are experienced help to concretize progress, not just validate their formal existence.
5. Loop, learn, adjust
The situation evolves. Plan for monthly, then quarterly iterations. Document learnings, including failures. The aim is to establish cyclical care, not a one-off (Tronto, 2016).
By following these five steps, an organization can manage a sensitive situation while sustainably strengthening its culture of integrity. However, for this process to succeed, external support is often necessary, ensuring listening, facilitation, and realism in implementation.
How Ethicor Supports your Teams
At Ethicor, we act as facilitators. Our role is not to impose ready-made solutions, but to create the conditions for teams to express their needs, co-construct concrete recommendations, and collectively commit to their implementation. This support provides leadership with a solid foundation to support its teams and ensure that commitments are met. We offer
Rapid diagnosis: interviews, document analysis, and interpretation of power and gender dynamics to identify visible and invisible blockages.
Team support: co-construction of a tailored pathway, with listening workshops, targeted mediations, and collective reflection spaces to restore a safe and constructive working environment.
Leadership support: coaching for management to articulate compliance and care, develop clear communication, and respond to the needs expressed by teams.
Actionable recommendations: we formulate concrete and realistic measures, validated with your teams and managers. They are designed to be implemented within 90 days, with clear monitoring criteria.
Monitoring and adjustment: regular checkpoints (30, 60, 90 days) to evaluate effects, correct what is not working, and sustainably embed changes.
References
Beauchamp, T. L., and Childress, J. F. 2001. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Fricker, M. 2007. Epistemic Injustice. Oxford University Press.
Gilligan, C. 1982. In a Different Voice. Harvard University Press.
Guillemin, M., and Gillam, L. 2004. Ethics, reflexivity, and “ethically important moments.” Qualitative Inquiry.
Tronto, J. C. 1993. Moral Boundaries. Routledge.
Tronto, J. C. 2013. Caring Democracy. NYU Press.
Tronto, J. C. 2016. Contributions on care as a dialogical process.
