A Code of Digital Ethics: laying the foundation for digital ethics in a science and technology company

Abstract

The rapid and dynamic nature of digital transformation challenges companies that wish to develop and deploy novel digital technologies. Like other actors faced with this transformation, companies need to find robust ways to ethically guide their innovations and business decisions. Digital ethics has recently featured in a plethora of both practical corporate guidelines and compilations of high-level principles, but there remains a gap concerning the development of sound ethical guidance in specific business contexts. As a multinational science and technology company faced with a broad range of digital ventures and associated ethical challenges, Merck KGaA has laid the foundations for bridging this gap by developing a Code of Digital Ethics (CoDE) tailored for this context. Following a comprehensive analysis of existing digital ethics guidelines, we used a reconstructive social research approach to identify 20 relevant principles and derive a code designed as a multi-purpose tool. Versatility was prioritised by defining non-prescriptive guidelines that are open to different perspectives and thus well-suited for operationalisation for varied business purposes. We also chose a clear nested structure that highlights the relationships between five core and fifteen subsidiary principles as well as the different levels of reference—data and algorithmic systems—to which they apply. The CoDE will serve Merck KGaA and its new Digital Ethics Advisory Panel to guide ethical reflection, evaluation and decision-making across the full spectrum of digital developments encountered and undertaken by the company whilst also offering an opportunity to increase transparency for external partners, and thus trust.

The Business Paradox: Exploring the interaction between the Business Clock and the Sustainable Development Goals through an ethical, sustainable and well-being prism

“…Es por eso que se requieren códigos de ética para las empresas que desarrollan tecnología. (90,91) La tecnología plantea desafíos éticos que deben abordarse para formar a las personas de manera integral, no solo en conocimientos y rapidez virtual, sino también en valores éticos arraigados. (92) Los avances tecnológicos y la innovación, con un sólido apoyo gerencial, pueden beneficiar a todos con un mejor rendimiento organizacional, (93) incluso abordando los desafíos de la inteligencia artificial y los riesgos financieros.…”

Corporate Digital Responsibility

“…Corporations can either develop a specific set of values and norms for their idiosyncratic situation (e.g., Becker et al 2022) or try and identify any specific ethical theory to base their CDR efforts on. Some of the systems of moral norms discussed earlier -such as, for example, information ethics (Floridi 1999;Siponen 2004) or cyberethics (Spinello 2000) -can serve as a foundation for these efforts.…”

“…Correspondingly, CDR regimes that are solely based on implementing legal requirements or basic social expectations are less likely to yield any potential to differentiate an organization from its competitors in a meaningful fashion (Lobschat et al 2021). One noticeable aspect across the emergent literature though is that some sources refrain from specifically identifying any norms or values in Gotterbarn et al 1997;Mumford 1995) or organizations can define specific codes of conduct (e.g., Becker et al 2022). Alternatively, guidance regarding desirable behaviors could be embedded into software artifacts that scaffold employee behaviors (e.g., Hadasch et al 2013;Morana et al 2019) or are taken into account by users when they plan their behaviors (Mueller et al 2016).…”

An ethical code for collecting, using and transferring sensitive health data: outcomes of a modified Policy Delphi process in Singapore

“…Many guidance documents and ethical frameworks for health data governance have been published internationally [ 12 – 17 ]. Notable examples include the Framework for Responsible Sharing of Genomic and Health-related Data developed by the Global Alliance for Genomic and Health aimed at the governance of genomic and related data, A Code of Digital Ethics [ 18 ], the Systemic Oversight Model for health data [ 19 , 20 ] and the Health Data Governance Principles developed by a collective of global organisations and contributors.…”

“…The research programme is broadly governed under the systemic oversight model [ 20 ], which promotes principles of AFIRRM (adaptivity, flexibility, inclusiveness, reflexivity, responsiveness and monitoring) in the collection, use, linkage, storage and sharing of health data at an operational level. Adopting an approach outlined in Becker et al [ 18 ], our study drew on AFIRRM’s broad governing principles to codify the SHAPES values-based framework into ethical guidance with stakeholders in a modified Policy Delphi process.…”