As a Vice President of Learning and Innovation for a nonprofit training organization, I work with departmental directors to produce programs and develop courses for industrial safety and skills. The organization I work for is a nonprofit training delivery resource for workers in the petrochemical and oil and gas refining industry. We provide training development and delivery services for refinery "owners" and contractor "members." Although not experts in the specific techniques and skills, we bill ourselves as experts in training delivery. As with many nonprofit organizations (NPO), ethical concerns and perceptions of ethical challenges should be anticipated during our program and course development.

As a nonprofit that acts as a training provider between the refinery owners and the contracting members, public trust is paramount to our mission and business model. Without the trust of both sides, the owners, and the members, we would not continue to exist. This makes dealing with ethical issues quickly, effectively, and in a manner that is deemed correct by the members and owners a paramount concern for the future health not just of our organization but the safety and health of the employees in the industry. Additionally, "trust is essential to NPOs because, for the most part, they are engaged in delivery of public or quasi-public goods yet without the oversight and built-in accountability mechanisms usually required in government" (Frederickson and Ghere, 2013, p. 267). Having an effective, internal strategy for addressing ethical concerns must be a focus for continued success of our organization. As Kearns writes "in the absence of clear, analytical framework for identifying (and even forecasting) accountability issues and controversies, nonprofit professionals are hindered in their efforts to respond effectively to stakeholder expectations and mandates" (Kearns, 1994, p. 186). As our organization occupies this space between two companies and is organized as a nonprofit organization, it is vital that a strategy for dealing with ethical issues is created and followed when developing programs to maintain that public trust that is so key to their existence.
There are several ethical issues that could come up in the creation of programs that we develop. One of the first revolves around the confusion our members have over the cost and pricing of our products. A second ethical challenge that could come up is that we develop and produce training courses and programs primarily in English even though over 25% of our trainee's speak English as a second language. By investigating just one of these and creating a strategy for dealing with it, that strategy can be applied to the other potential ethical issues to help ensure that our organization acts ethically no matter the ethical dilemma.
The primary issue is the ethical concern regarding the perceived pricing model we follow when creating programs for our members and owners. The pricing model that allows us to remain in business is to develop training courses for members for free and charge the members for that service with each employee that comes to their eLearning lab for training delivery. Program design and delivery to include eLearning, follow on reinforcement training, hands-on training, follow up training, career development, all starts with that initial course and its delivery via this model. We are the owner and distributor of the material for the contractor member and refinery owner, but we also create the training hand-in-hand and for the specific use of the members and owners. Instead of charging companies at the beginning, during the development of the product, we charge members on each delivery instance. In some cases, we will provide volume discounts for large contractors that will lower the price for delivery of each training instance. This discounting is not well publicized and could cause our members to believe that we are fixing prices or providing preferential treatment, although this is a model that is followed throughout the safety council community. As Kearns states in Frederickson and Ghere (2013), nonprofit organizations "must develop revenue strategies as a part of their annual business plan to ensure that they will have resources sufficient to support their mission," (p. 267). Our organization is facing headwinds in this business in the form of private organizations willing to provide similar training for free to increase their customer base and open the door for them to sell other opportunities.
To counter this threat, our organisation applies levels of security and integrity to the delivery process that these competitors cannot. When learners show up for training by registering at our front desk, they must present a valid picture ID that is checked against the picture we have on file for that learner. Before entering the eLearning lab, learners are again asked to provide their registration forms and proof of ID. Finally, throughout their training and just prior to getting their certificates of completion the learner's picture is constantly compared and checked by our roving learning proctors. If at any time these proctors detect a person has covertly infiltrated the training for someone else, they terminate that training instance and ask the suspected impostor to re-register and restart the process of ID check-in or to leave. Our organization successfully hinders approximately one impostor a week using this method of ID checking. This level of integrity is our greatest asset to their training delivery product and the competitive advantage they hold over other organizations who cannot offer this level of service.
Many contractors are confused about the nonprofit status of the organizations, and the pricing models used, especially if they do not qualify for a volume discount. The uptick in competition could lead to members being focused more and more on pricing which could lead to perceived ethical challenges and undermine public trust. For many in this industry, nonprofit translates to "cheap" or "free." As Kearns writes in Frederickson and Ghere (2013) "when seeking income or other essential resources, NPOs must "sell" or legitimize themselves in the eyes of the public, usually in competition with other NPOs that are vying for the same finite resources" (p. 267). Since there is the challenge that many members could tend to believe that our organization is fixing prices and maintaining high price points at the expense of the contractor members, and as public trust is so critical to our survival, the ethical challenge that our organization faces is continuing to price their programs at a level where they can remain in business, continue to deliver training with the same level of integrity, and compete with competitors who price similar training for significantly less while not losing the trust of their members. The perception of unethical dealings could remain over our business due to these challenges. In what ways can our organization's leaders ensure that they aren’t price-gouging their members while pricing their product at a point where they can remain in business?
As Caffarella and Daffron (2013) write, "ethical frameworks are useful in initially thinking through ethical dilemmas when program planners are confronted with such dilemma's they also need strategies they can move through what can be, as noted earlier, messy and emotionally charged situations" (p. 43). Although Kearns (1994) proposes a framework for NPOs in his text that focuses on implicit and explicit external controls against reactive and proactive internal responses, a simpler strategy for dealing with any potential ethical challenges can be found in the text of Brockett and Hiemstra (2005) when they write “perhaps the best way to promote ethical practice is to work toward creating an open climate where potential ethical concerns are addressed upfront, in a non-confrontational way" (p. 6). This idea of letting sunlight into the decision-making process is an ideal way to allow members a level of trust that our organization is working to keep their member's employees safe without undermining our ability to make a profit. Secondly, providing an open climate in showing the integrity behind the system that we have produced for delivery, the layers of ID checks, will provide a differentiator to guard against the threat brought on by organizations trying to undercut their deliverable. Finally, a part of this strategy should be the application of the ethical problem against our mission statement. Applying the ethical challenge to the mission statement can act as a handrail for us to help guide our decision-making processes, even in terms of pricing. When this potential ethical issue that revolves around the member's perception of high pricing is applied against the mission statement, improving the quality and integrity of the workforce, both the integrity of the ID verification process as well and providing a higher quality product by hiring and employing better, more professional, program developers, would fall within the mission statement's strictures.
“Creating an open climate where potential ethical concerns are addressed upfront,” (Brockett & Hiemstra, 2005, p. 6) when applied to the other two ethical challenges introduced in the second paragraph of this paper yields positive results as well. By showing that creating training in Spanish for every course we make would necessarily increase the cost of the training development and delivery to our contractor members, those members would understand why we cannot provide translations across the board for all training. Additionally, by explaining that providing training in Spanish undermines the organization's mission of creating a safer workplace since so many of the safety signs, standards, procedures, and policies in refineries and other places of work are in English, the test of checking the ethical concern against the mission yields revelatory information to help guide the decision making process.
We are working in a unique field that prizes highly skilled and safe labor resources and occupies a unique segment of the U.S.'s industrial safety training and learning community. With the advent of virtual reality (VR) to safely simulate real-world dangers in training, the introduction of training on demand through text alerts via cell phones, and the ability to stream all training to individuals where they are, rather than bringing them to a common place, NPOs are living through great times, but maintaining the public trust remains a key to their success. By applying the two simple two-step strategy proposed in this paper, opening up decision making to the company, the members, and all other concerned parties, and ensuring that all decisions follow our mission statement, we can ensure that they are doing what they can to keep the public trust they have earned over the past thirty years.
References
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (2005). Promoting ethical practice in adult education. American Association for Adult and Continuing Education, 16(3-4), 4-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/104515950501600301
Caffarella, R. S., & Daffron, S. R. (2013). Planning Programs for Adult Learners; a Practical Guide. Jossey-Bass.
Frederickson, H. G., & Ghere, R. K. (2013) Ethics in Public Management. Routledge.
Houston Area Safety Council. (2020). Vision and mission statement. https://www.hasc.com/about-hasc/vision-mission/
Kearns, K. (1994). The strategic management of accountability in nonprofit organizations: an analytical framework. Public Administration Review, 54(2), 185-192. https://doi.org/10.2307/976528