In thinking about working for ethically complicated organizations, as our world becomes increasingly complex, it becomes harder to separate morally good from bad, especially when conventional definitions of success come into the equation.
Last quarter, I took a class on the topic of how to have conversations with people you disagree with, and for one of the lectures, we played a game of “Agree vs. Disagree,” where the instructor prompted “controversial” questions for the students to answer. One of the questions was about working for ethically complicated organizations, such as Boeing and Palantir. For many students, they were on the “Disagree” side, meaning that they were against working for such organizations. A few stayed on the “Agree” side. When it came time to explain why we had chosen our sides, the topics of ethics, morals, and doing good for the world came up. For many people, doing good for the world meant not adding any more bad to it, while for others, the definition of good for the world was providing for their family- by any means necessary. This gave me a greater perspective on what motivates others, and that answering this question of “would I work for an ethically complicated organization” is more complicated than it seems.
In this age where AI and tech are becoming more prevalent and increasingly integrated with our everyday lives, more security and privacy issues are arising- giving rise to more ethical complications for many long-standing companies such as Facebook. The article, “Working for Ethically Complicated Organizations” covers many cases of this. Catholics working at a pharmaceutical company that is manufacturing birth control, or believing in animal rights while working for L’Oreal- many personal beliefs come into play when it comes to making the decision of where to work. While the work itself may not align perfectly with your own values, it is important to contextualize the broader impact. For example, while many people may be against birth control, there are also many whose lives are immensely better because of it.
This tension highlights the nuance in evaluating moral choices in professional life. A person may believe that their presence in an organization could help steer it toward better practices, while another may feel that even indirect involvement perpetuates harm. Neither perspective is necessarily right or wrong- it comes down to how individuals weigh competing responsibilities: to themselves, their families, their communities, and to humanity at large.
The world is a complex place, and it is difficult to come by something that isn’t ethically complicated. Choosing where to work often forces us to recognize the impossibility of moral purity and instead focus on navigating shades of gray. What matters most, I believe, is engaging in the reflection itself: asking whether our choices align with our values, being honest about the compromises we are willing to make, and striving to reduce harm while maximizing good where we can. Ultimately, this is not a question with a clean answer- it is a lifelong negotiation with our own conscience, shaped by context, opportunity, and the ever-changing ethical landscape of the world.
