Learning by Example

Sheldon Weinstein recently passed away at age 84.  He was a chartered life underwriter (CLU) by profession, and a husband, father, grandfather, and intensely interested, if understated, family patriarch.  Sheldon was my great uncle, and an important influence in my adult life. I write about him here because he was also a great supporter of my interest in business ethics, and specifically of the Hill Center. As I reflect upon my many conversations with him, some interesting and relevant themes emerge.

 

As an insurance agent, Sheldon took tremendously seriously his obligation to act in his clients’ best interest.  While the term “insurance agent” denotes agency of the insurance company, Sheldon regarded himself as a professional, an underwriter obliged to act in his clients’ interest first and foremost. He discharged his professional obligation through extensive, ongoing product research and with great attention to each client’s situation.  He sold only products in which he strongly believed, to clients whom, he concluded, would benefit from them. He was slow to reach that conclusion and quick to recuse himself when he did not. Commercially, Sheldon was not a ball of fire. That wasn’t important to him. He was, without fail, a deeply honorable businessman, which was intensely important to him.

 

At Sheldon’s suggestion, I included in my doctoral research the Code of Ethics of The American Society of Chartered Life Underwriters (now known, I believe, as the Society of Financial Services Professionals). My writing led us to some very interesting discussions about what constitutes a profession, and what that designation means in terms of responsibilities.   I shall spare my readers here a potentially agonizing summary, suffice it to say that my work benefited greatly from Sheldon’s insights.

 

While he was entirely supportive, Sheldon did not approve of all aspects of my work. Most notably, he was highly critical of Hill Center’s focus not on ethical compliance, but on performance-oriented aspects of social responsibility.   His oft-repeated criticism took at least one of two forms. First, he felt that where corporate malfeasance is concerned, there can never be too many watchdogs. Beyond violating the law, greed and bad faith enraged him, and he thought that there could be no higher calling than to try to curb the worst instincts of fellow businesspeople. I still agree with him that compliance is critically important, but in founding the Hill Center, we did not see a unique contribution to be made in that arena. Regulatory agencies and mechanisms are imperfect, but they do exist.  Indeed, excellent resources exist for businesses and associations interested in creating codes, processes, practices, and cultures that discourage unethical or unsavory conduct.

 

Second, Sheldon argued that I was misguided in my desire to celebrate and promote excellent business conduct. He was not a fan, for instance, of the Hill Center’s Ethical Leaders in Action Series, highlighting businesses that have successfully achieved business gains by investing in stakeholder relationships. When I discussed the series with him, he responded with a question: “Why give people a parade for doing what should simply be expected of them?” That summed up his view.  

 

Reasonable people may disagree (especially when they are both named Weinstein). But, I argued, this isn’t merely a matter of catching more flies with honey than with vinegar. (Besides, we all know you can catch the most flies with, um, horse droppings.)   Developing and implementing strategies that are both commercially successful and socially responsible is a challenging, if rewarding, undertaking. The Ethical Leaders in Action series is designed to share real-world examples of how strong stakeholder relationships can produce excellent business results.  More generally, the Hill Center’s resources are dedicated to helping more businesses achieve those kinds of outcomes.

 

At bottom, we agreed that good conduct does pay off, financially as well as personally. Sheldon’s clients trusted him absolutely, because he earned that trust throughout his career. Trust promotes loyalty and referrals, which in turn reduce the effort and cost of sales. Trust-based relationships form the basis for addressing problems that arise in ways that minimize damage, and for capitalizing on positive opportunities in ways that maximize shared benefits.   He may have dismissed this as common sense, but few things are less common or more valuable than an unerring commitment to act in a trustworthy manner. 

 

I miss Uncle Shel, but I appreciate having learned from his advice as well as from his example.