Why ethics fails in practice

And why Ethics in Action is a necessary response to ethical failure and poor practice

Across organisations, sectors and professions, ethics is rarely absent in theory.

Most institutions have values statements, codes of conduct, safeguarding policies and equality commitments. Leaders can articulate what ethical practice should look like and staff are often well‑intentioned.

Yet ethical failure and poor practice persist.

They appear in decisions that prioritise reputation over responsibility, compliance over care, speed over impact. They surface when harm is acknowledged privately but avoided publicly, when concerns are “managed” rather than addressed and when accountability is diluted to protect systems rather than people.

This pattern does not exist because ethical principles are unclear.
It exists because ethical practice is hardest precisely when conditions are most pressured.

It exists because of the small, unethical, everyday behaviours we allow to go unchallenged.

The dehumanising language, the inappropriate comments, the bullying half disguised as banter, the unfounded claims, blame and accusations. The disregard of marginalised voices, the avoidance of accountability, the closed-door decisions which justify gatekeeping and exclusion as 'logistical necessities', the impossible deadlines for public consultations and the deliberate reframing of harm caused as 'unavoidable'.

Reflecting on my experiences

Over the last twenty years, I have worked with professionals, leaders and organisations across education, governance, community development, quality assurance, social impact and organisational development.

Throughout this work, one observation has remained consistent.

Most ethical failures do not occur because people lack values.

Most organisations have policies, procedures and governance structures.

Most professionals want to do the right thing.

Most leaders care deeply about the people and communities they serve.

Yet time and again, public inquiries, governance reviews and organisational failures reveal similar patterns.

Not failures of intention.

Failures of application.

Failures that emerge when systems, cultures and decision-making processes make it difficult to consistently translate values into practice.

These challenges are rarely unique to one sector. They appear across public services, charities, education, healthcare, community organisations and business.

In our upcoming DRose Insight Report, Ethical Leadership in Practice, we identify six recurring challenges that continue to undermine ethical decision-making and organisational effectiveness.

1. Detached Decision-Making

Decisions become increasingly removed from the lived experiences of the people most affected by them.

Policies and strategies may be developed with good intentions, but without sufficient understanding of how they will be experienced in practice.

2. Fragmented Accountability

Responsibility becomes spread across systems, departments or structures, making it difficult to identify ownership, respond to concerns and learn from mistakes.

Single individuals are blamed and removed but the systems in which poor practice thrived are not scrutinised or reviewed adequately.

3. Poor Stakeholder Representation

Important voices are absent from decision-making processes, increasing the risk of blind spots, unintended consequences and ineffective solutions.

Where some representation does exist it rarely connects directly with power and decision making structures.

4. Lack of Scrutiny and Reflection

Pressure, competing priorities and organisational culture can limit opportunities for critical reflection, challenge and continuous learning.

Fear of 'getting it wrong' leads to inaction and recycled poor practices.

5. Compliance Promoted as Ethics

Organisations become focused on meeting minimum requirements rather than considering the broader impact, fairness and effectiveness of decisions.

Delivering ethical and equity-focused outcomes requires higher standards and sustainable commitments beyond simple compliance.

6. Absence of Support for Leaders

Many professionals are expected to navigate complex, high-impact decisions without structured opportunities for reflection, challenge or peer support.

Isolated leaders are more susceptible to fatigue, burnout and performance failures.

These challenges are not theoretical.

They influence how decisions are made every day.

They affect governance, leadership, service delivery, organisational culture and ultimately the outcomes experienced by individuals and communities.

Complete our single-question survey to share which of these challenges is having the biggest impact on your organisation currently - click the link to access the survey - Six Challenges of Ethical Practice.

Register for our Ethics in Action launch Event - 26th August - to learn more about the 'Six Challenges' and how we will be supporting leaders to deliver ethical impact.

Ethics fails under pressure, not ignorance

Ethical principles are most easily upheld when there is time, clarity and psychological safety. They are far more likely to fail when leaders and practitioners are navigating:

• Risk and scrutiny

• Funding or contractual pressure

• Competing priorities

• Political or organisational instability

• Fear of conflict, complaint or reputational damage

In these moments, ethical decision‑making is often reframed as:

• Impractical,

• Unrealistic or

• Something to return to later

Accountability becomes procedural rather than moral. Equity is treated as an aspiration rather than a responsibility. Poor practice is rationalised as unavoidable.

This dynamic has been repeatedly evidenced in UK public inquiries.

In the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust inquiry, leadership failure was not driven by a lack of ethical codes. The organisation had policies, standards and stated commitments to patient care. Ethical failure emerged instead from a culture where performance targets, cost control and reputational management were prioritised over patient dignity and safety. Staff concerns were ignored or discouraged and ethical judgement was overridden by pressure to meet external expectations.

Similarly, the Grenfell Tower Inquiry exposed how ethical responsibilities were systematically displaced. Decisions about safety, materials and resident engagement were shaped by cost, regulatory minimalism and organisational fragmentation. Ethical principles such as accountability, representation and care were present on paper, but not meaningfully practised in decision‑making processes.

These are not failures of knowing what is right.
They are failures of ethical judgement under pressure.

Poor practice thrives where reflection is absent

One of the most consistent patterns across ethical failures is the absence of reflective practice at leadership and organisational level.

Many professional environments are structured around:

• Delivery

• Compliance

• Performance indicators

• Risk mitigation

Very few create protected space for people to pause and examine the ethical implications of decisions as they are being made.

Without reflection:

• Habits replace judgement

• Justifications replace accountability

• Systems are prioritised over lived impact

This was starkly illustrated in the Post Office Horizon scandal, where wrongful convictions and severe personal harm persisted over many years. The issue was not a lack of procedural rules. It was the absence of ethical reflection, challenge and accountability within leadership structures that allowed flawed assumptions to go unexamined and human impact to be minimised.

Poor practice became normalised, not because individuals set out to cause harm, but because ethical questioning was systematically suppressed.

Ethical frameworks alone cannot prevent this. Ethics must be actively practised, revisited and tested against reality.

Ethics requires judgement, not just compliance

Ethical practice cannot be reduced to policy adherence or procedural correctness.

It requires judgement, particularly when:

• Values conflict

• Options are limited

• Every available choice carries risk or harm

Judgement is not instinctive. It must be developed, supported and exercised deliberately.

This is especially true in work involving:

• Social impact and community engagement

• Education, care and safeguarding

• Equality, inclusion and representation

• Leadership within complex systems

In many organisations, ethical responsibility is outsourced to documents, committees or compliance processes. When something goes wrong, attention turns to whether procedures were followed, rather than whether decisions were ethically sound.

This creates a dangerous gap: people are technically compliant, yet ethically adrift.

Why Ethics in Action exists

Ethics in Action was created in direct response to this gap between ethical principle and ethical practice.

It is not designed to teach people what ethics is.
It exists to support people with how ethics is enacted in real conditions.

Ethics in Action is a reflective practice subscription for people who:

• Hold responsibility

• Influence decisions

• Want to act with integrity even when it is difficult

It provides:

• Space to pause and reflect on real ethical tensions

• Practical tools to support ethical judgement

• Facilitated conversations focused on accountability

At £9 per month, it is intentionally accessible. Ethical practice should not be reserved for senior leaders, legal teams or those with institutional power. It is a responsibility shared across roles and levels.

Ethics in Action supports the kind of ethical infrastructure that many organisations lack: Ongoing reflection, supported judgement and collective accountability.

Ethics as an ongoing responsibility

Ethical practice is not about perfection or certainty. It is about responsibility, reflection and the willingness to learn and repair.

Ethics fails when it is treated as static, abstract or complete.
It is sustained when it is practised, questioned and revisited.

Public inquiries repeatedly show us that ethical failure is rarely sudden. It is incremental, normalised and justified over time.

Ethics in Action exists to interrupt that drift.

If leadership and organisational practice are to regain trust, ethics must move beyond principle and into action, consistently, thoughtfully and accountably.

To join our Ethics in Action Community, visit the webpage or register to attend the online launch event on Wednesday 26th August 2026 - Ethics in Action Launch

References for the Article

[1] Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry (Francis Inquiry)
Francis, R. (2013). Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry.
UK Department of Health.
→ Key findings on leadership failure, organisational culture, prioritisation of targets over care, and suppression of staff concerns.

[2] The Grenfell Tower Inquiry – Phase 1 & Phase 2 Reports
Grenfell Tower Inquiry (2019–2024). Report of the Public Inquiry into the Fire at Grenfell Tower.
→ Evidence of systemic ethical failure, accountability gaps, resident marginalisation, and organisational decision‑making driven by cost and risk management rather than safety and care.

[3] Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry (ongoing; Interim Report 2023).
→ Findings on leadership culture, ethical blindness, lack of challenge, and the normalisation of poor practice despite mounting evidence of harm.

[4] Institute of Business Ethics (IBE)
Institute of Business Ethics (2020). Does Business Ethics Pay? and related leadership ethics briefings.
→ Research on ethical culture, leadership responsibility, and the limitations of compliance‑only approaches.

[5] Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD)
CIPD (2025). Ethical Practice and the Role of people professionals.
→ Evidence linking ethical leadership, reflective practice and organisational trust.

[6] UK Corporate Governance Code (Financial Reporting Council)
Financial Reporting Council (2018, updated 2024). UK Corporate Governance Code.
→ Emphasises culture, integrity, accountability and the role of leadership judgement beyond procedural compliance.

[7] Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)
EHRC guidance on organisational accountability, equality duties and systemic discrimination.
→ Supports analysis of ethical drift, representation, and equity as ongoing responsibilities.