Case Studies
INTEGRITY: IS IT EVER ETHICAL TO AVOID TELLING THE WHOLE TRUTH?
by Neal Kunde
Perry Bigelow is a home builder in the Chicago area. His company, Bigelow Homes, builds energy efficient houses and backs up its work with a $200 per year guarantee. In a competitive market like construction, there are daily temptations to avoid telling clients "the whole truth" about their homes. In an interview with Métier magazine, Bigelow talked about this tension.
Métier: How do you react to situations where not telling the whole truth plays to your advantage?
PB: I do that all the time. I know that’s not what you expected to hear. But Jesus did it all the time. This isn’t nearly the problem in business that it is in personal issues. We need to be lovingly truthful. That’s the balance Jesus used in so many situations. It’s all a part of treating the person with the dignity and respect that they deserve as a part of God’s creation.
Most people who want homes built are ignorant about much of the process and the product. We produce and market superior products. People know that, and they have confidence in that. I have to treat them the way I would want to be treated. And in business, there are some things I don’t want to know. It’s sometimes tough to know when that applies, but I have to think about then it’s against the person’s best interest for me to divulge everything.
Now if they ask a specific question and I think the answer wouldn’t be helpful, I tell them that we’d both be better off if they didn’t ask. And it’s amazing how many times a person will back off. But in the end, I have to give that person the dignity of choosing. If they still want to know, I’ll talk openly and honestly, even if neither one of us is happy with the results of the conversation.
In some instances, we have a responsibility to provide full disclosure on the product even when our customers don’t ask a specific question. For example, we’re currently involved in a situation where a gas line is buried next to our development. We need to tell any potential homeowners that they will be living next to that gas line. And that’s not because it’s hazardous. If it was, I couldn’t build next to it. But a person has a right to make a decision on that kind of a thing. Again, if I was a customer, I would want to know that.
Métier: Does that approach put you in a position where you justify the withholding of information on the basis of your perception of what’s good for the customer?
PB: We have tension in our own company on this issue. We know, for example, that a real good salesperson can strongly influence a person’s decision to buy a house. But if you’re not careful, you can take away the legitimacy of the homeowner’s decision by how well you sell them on the house. One sales philosophy in our business says that since it is a good thing for people to own homes, you are doing them a favor if you do anything that causes them to purchase a house when they otherwise couldn’t. From a purely utilitarian standpoint, it’s hard to argue against that.
But from a biblical standpoint, God has given people the dignity of choice, just as he gave Adam and Eve the dignity of choice. I don’t think that a Christian can legitimately manipulate people into decisions they wouldn’t make on their own. We have to be careful. It’s easy to take our conversation beyond the point of information and exert our will on people in such a way that they make a decision that they wouldn’t have made on their own.
Jesus never did that. Jesus never forced a person to follow him or ask for forgiveness. Still, he evaded questions, especially when those questions were meant to trick him.
Métier: So a Chrisitan can be as cunning?
PB: Christians should be wise. There’s a subtle difference. And a lot of it has to do with motivation. I know a man who purposely structured a deal so that the bank didn’t get what it thought it got and it couldn’t get out from under the deal. It was left with a loan and it didn’t have the collateral that it thought it had to support the loan. This man was motivated by profit, and he even took pride in how he manipulated the deal to achieve gain.
Instead, I prefer to use Daniel and Joseph as examples. They weren’t so much cunning as they were wise. Probably the two greatest believing bureaucrats of all time, they were both second in charge of the kingdoms in which they were involved. Ultimately, when I’m tempted to short-circuit the truth, as they were, I think of them. It’s really a question of faith. Who do I really answer to?
Métier: In conclusion, can you give examples of how resisting the pressure to withhold information has turned short-term loss into long-term gain?
PB: Sure. Many people can relate to the employment interviewing process. We give extensive interviews and get to know the person very thoroughly. And we describe both the advantages and disadvantages of working for our company. At times, it would be nice if we didn’t show people the tough things they’re going to have to deal with on the job. But by doing this, we’ve gained an incredible amount of respect from people we’ve interviewed. If they eventually work for us, they come in knowing that honesty and openness is the modus operandi here.
In The Lions Den, Marketplace Métier, Summer 1993, page 5
Print
Email
