Moral compass helps you stay on course as a lawyer

Combining robust technical skills with a stronger moral compass can allow lawyers to make a more powerful impact on business and the community, writes Anthony Howard.

Business people tend to focus on the technical aspects of their work and, in particular strategy, operations and stakeholder management. They rarely spend much time on the moral dimension, on the assumption that they know right from wrong. Lawyers I have met or interviewed, however, often reflect on the interplay between technical and moral dimensions. They talk about the complexity of integrating what is permissible with what is proper. And they comment on the challenge of helping clients, who often have no clear idea about what is permissible, let alone what is proper.

“A lawyer has an obligation to advise a client what is proper, while being clear to them about their legal obligations,” a UK-based partner of a global law firm told me. He cited a simple example of advising a client that the proper thing to do was to disclose they had made a mistake, while explaining they were under no legal obligation to do so. In a world that is ever more focused on what is permissible – what is legally right – it is too easy to lose focus on what is proper. This difficulty is compounded in societies where traditional moral norms have lost favour and traditional moral guides, such as churches and the community, have lost their authority.

Iron-clad values
How can someone know what is proper in the midst of competing, and sometimes conflicting, views and values? And how do they continue to stay true to a set of values in the relentless pace at which most firms work? Having set one’s compass by ‘true north’, how do we ensure the compass does not drift off course? Whereas we learn what is permissible from clearly defined (albeit evolving) codes and canons, rules and regulations, we tend to learn what is proper from the example of others.

One way I observe this is by asking leaders how they have resolved moral dilemmas. The answer provides insight about their moral awareness, moral reasoning and who has influenced their moral framework. One (small) group of people claim they do not experience moral dilemmas. Further questioning reveals they are either morally blind or moral giants, standing at opposite ends of a moral continuum. Another group of people rely on industry and organisational codes of practice to resolve moral dilemmas. They depend on external influences to shape their decision-making. A third group of people turn to their own sense of right and wrong, guided by a moral compass that they continually test, refine and recalibrate. This inner force is much more compelling than the external force of law or compliance.

But there is also another group – a very large group. They can be found among colleagues and clients, in boardrooms and offices. These are good people who are just not sure how to act, and decide how to act based on the way others act. The chairman of a listed company told me how a professional services firm of which he was a partner had a council of “wise elders” available to staff. He explained they were often engaged in deep conversation with colleagues who were seeking clarity about what was proper, who wanted to refine their moral awareness.

Environmental influences
How have you developed your moral compass? Many people talk about the influence of their family and early environment. Major General Andy Salmon, former commander of the British Marines, told me that when he was quite young he saw his father stand up for the poor and underprivileged. This commitment to justice influenced General Salmon’s decision to join the army. A partner at a global law firm framed his commitment to justice in terms of fairness for those who had less power or access, and were marginalised in some way. He explained this concern had been there from a young age and, like many other members of the legal profession, had influenced his career choice.

But justice is more than a legal concept. Plato spoke about justice as one of the four cardinal virtues, along with courage, temperance (or self-mastery) and wisdom. He believed cultivating the virtues was the key to living a good life, or what we could call a ‘flourishing’ life. Virtues are acquired through repeated practice until they become habitual. Practising patience, for example, when we feel harried and rushed, helps us become a more patient person. And then one day we find we are a patient person. Similarly, practising the little things we find hard and difficult and where we feel exposed – such as politely speaking out when ours is a very different point of view, or not ignoring the person who needs help – builds the habit of courage. And then one day we do something quite courageous.

Wise words
The law profession navigates the complexity and ambiguity between the legal and the moral, the permissible and the proper. As such it has both a technical and a moral dimension. Hence success as a lawyer depends on building both technical and moral competence. We live in a society that tends to place greater emphasis, and reward, on technical competence. But the people who make a significant impact in the world are those who combine technical and moral competence.

One way of building moral competence is to look to timeless human values found in the writings of Plato and Aristotle, and to the example of the wise men and women who put greater emphasis on what is proper than what is permissible.

Anthony Howard is the founder and chief executive officer of The Confidere Group. A philosopher, researcher and writer who has made leadership his business, his paper It’s Time for Moral Leadership received international attention with its call for leaders to do what is proper, not just what is permissible, and provided a process for developing a moral compass.
www.confideregroup.com