CulturalAntonio Marturanoand Linguistic Communication

LEADERSHIP AND ETHICS IN INTERCULTURAL ORGANISATIONS. THE RACE TO THE HUMAN GENOME

1 Antonio MARTURANO 1. Prof., PhD, Swiss School of Management, Rome, Italy Corresponding author: [email protected]

Introduction and values actually adopted in a particular society and which we are referring to without stating whether they are good or evil. Cannibalism, Leadership and ethics have a quite interconnected for example, is a normal practice among the life. Yet the crossing of those domains is often Korowai tribe of south-eastern Papua New misunderstood. In the following I will try to Guinea. By saying the Korowai people believe describe how ethics is impacting on leadership cannibalism is a good choice we are not endorsing in two different kinds of organizations working cannibalism: we are just recording that Korowai on the same business while having a different 1 people accept cannibalism as morally permissible . kind of organizational culture. I will start When I say that cannibalism is something wrong describing different levels of ethics, such a (for a series of reasons) I am moving from a distinction is important to understand the ethical descriptive level to a prescriptive level. By saying level we will be discussing in the following “Cannibalism is wrong” I am endorsing that paragraph. Then, I will describe the way in which cannibalism is something evil and, for that, I ask leadership is performed in these organisations if this should be a standard that the whole – using as case studies the race to the human humanity should endorse. genome by the Celera Genomics and the Public When we place ourselves on a personal Consortium – and embodied by their leaders. horizon – as for adopting a certain ethical rule Finally, I will conclude that flatter and involving myself and/or just another individual collaborative organisations are more likely to – we are talking about personal ethics. Such a survive in a business competition on the basis of level is quite personal and involves taking their moral sensibility. decisions which cannot pass other’s judgment as the resolution an individual choose involves a 1. Ethical Levels deep knowledge of the situation, a deep know­ ledge of the personality of all the few people Ethics is a complex discipline that lies on involved that reflect a deep understanding of different levels according to 1) the magnitude of “being in other’s shoes”. Decisions about life and individuals involved in the ethical deliberation death – such as euthanasia, abortion and similar and 2) whether we are referring to the common – fall in the range of this ethical level. While at ethical sentiment in a community or a set of the organizational level, ethical decisions standards (often apparently utopian) which an involve an increased greatness of individuals: individual or individuals believe to be the correct the depth of understanding needed for such value that should be adopted in an (ideal) deliberation is less than in the personal one, community. Regarding the latter we are talking but responsibility is higher. People failing in about a quite known difference in philosophical their ethical deliberation at this level can go literature between descriptive ethics (or morality) under scrutiny of other people and get sanctioned and prescriptive ethics (or ethics tout court). In more legally than morally. Examples of ethical the first case, we are talking about beliefs, norms deliberations are dilemmas on resource allocations,

34 volume 3 • issue 1 January / March 2013 • pp. 34-39 LEADERSHIP AND ETHICS IN INTERCULTURAL ORGANISATIONS. THE RACE TO THE HUMAN GENOME employment, and the similar. A good ethical “Preventive Medicine”. (Although the work on deliberation at this level implies what is good that programme began in the same year, the EU for that organization as a whole (stakeholders programme itself was actuated by the European and stockholders and all the individuals involved Parliament until 1990). The aim of the HGP was in an organization’s life). At the community to use technologies of to level, our horizon is the public welfare; ethical analyse the genetic structure of mankind; that is, deliberations involve, therefore, the importance to put systematically together genetic data of individuals transcending even national (which are the basic units defining forms and boundaries. Again, those individuals (sometimes functions of a human organism) and to speed up whole communities) that fail in their ethical cartographic and systematisation processes of deliberations are morally and often legally liable. genes. The main competitor in the race were the The referendary instrument is often used for US based private biotech company Celera public choices. At this level, a community is Genomics led by Craig Venter and the Public engaged in a particular choice by public discus­ Consortium, championed by the UK based sions through several media and the referendum Sanger Center, led by Nobel laureate Sir John are just the final formal moment through which Sulston. that choice is made. An example of this ethical While being an incumbent, Celera Genomic level is when different nations in Europe were offered a new method for quickly sequencing the asked to deliberate about adoption of nuclear Human Genome which, at that time, was plants in their country as a supply for power. proceeding very slowly and which, at the same times, radically changed the way in which the 2. Leadership and ethics Human Genome Project was conceptualised moving from a purely molecular biology project to a cross-disciplinary project involving computer Leadership involves ethical engagement on science and making the new field of several levels. Leadership is indeed an exercise a reality. Celera Genomics, indeed, introduced of ethical deliberation. Leaders have to listen to a new technique for genome sequencing called their followers, be able to collect all the relevant the “Shotgun method”. The Shotgun method is information, be able to deliver a particular a mathematical algorithm – that is, computer information to others (especially those who software. The Shotgun method involves randomly would not agree); to sum up, they need to excel sequencing tiny cloned sections of the genome, in decision making and delivering them. Their with no foreknowledge of where on a chromosome ethical horizon may be at both organizational the section originally came from. The partial and collective level, their responsibility over sequences obtained are then reassembled to a decisions is very high. There is a vast literature complete sequence by use of computers. The over the relationships between ethics and 2 advantage of this method is that it eliminates the leadership . need for time-consuming mapping, as a result of increased computer speeds to solve such 3. The race to the Human Genome complicated algorithms (Trivedi, 2000). In fact, Project other methods of sequencing, such as BAC to BAC sequencing need to create a crude physical The HGP was started in the mid-1980s in the map of the whole genome before sequencing USA as the project of constructing a “Genomic the DNA. In the BAC to BAC sequencing com­ Centre”. In 1988 the Human Genome Organisa­ puters become important in the final step of the tion (HUGO), an international scientific organisa­ protocol, when the sequences collected in the tion for promoting a worldwide collaboration so-called M13 libraries are fed into a computer on the HGP, was conceived. The first proposal program called PHRAP, that looks for common for studying the human genome within the sequences that join two fragments together European Union (EU) was the programme (Trivedi, 2000).

International Journal of Communication Research 35 Antonio Marturano

4. Ethical-Organizational Issues results of data sequencing and how this data of the Human Genome Project would be used by the academic community. The material transfer agreement stated that academic users would be able to download up to one According to Vicedo (1992), one of the main megabase per week from the Celera Genomics problems arising at the beginning of the HGP Web site, subject to a nonredistribution clause; if was ensuring the coordination of the different academics wanted to download more data, they tasks and the cooperation between all research would have to get a signature from a senior groups. She points out: “Some regulatory member of their institution guaranteeing that guidelines could be established to secure the the data would not be redistributed (Sulston smooth functioning of the project, but the and Ferry, 2002, p. 234). Members of the HGP scientists concerned hold different views on this community vigorously protested against this issue. J. Watson, for example, thinks that the agreement. Michael Ashburner, a former groups will develop rules to co-ordinate their reviewing editor for Science, led the protest. He efforts as the investigations proceed. Other explained that such a strategy would be researchers, such as Walter Gilbert (Harvard), problematic for the future of genetics, because, think that clear rules should provide all if the strategy employed by Celera Genomics participating members access to the results. was similarly adopted by other researchers in the Others suggest that the need for groups to field, “the data will fragment across many sites communicate to obtain mutual benefits will and today’s ease of searching will have gone, and make them co-operate.” Elke Jordan believes that gone forever. Science will be the MUCH poorer, the HGP’s goals will be unattainable unless it is and progress in this field will inevitably be “built on teamwork, networking and collabora­ delayed” (Ashburner quoted in Moody, 2004, tion.” In his opinion, “This makes sharing and p. 112). Others felt outraged that one of the co-operation an ethical imperative.” As Vicedo’s fundamental principles of scientific progress, the remarks suggest, cooperation was a fundamental publication and free access of data, should be concern since the beginning of the HGP. One undermined by the way Celera Genomics wished cause of concern arose due to the so-called to keep its data proprietary, so that the complete emerging patenting-and-publish system between database (including volumes of data on genetic researchers and backed by the pharmaceutical variability in humans and the genomes of animals and biotechnologies industries. This factor critical to biomedical research) could be available influenced the merging of scientific research for mining to any pharmaceutical company in with business interests. exchange for money. Very importantly, in This ethical problem is not directly related to Venter’s mind, “Celera would be the definitive the way biologists use the notion of information, source of genomic information in the world, in nonetheless, this problem is related to data banks much the same way that Microsoft had early on in which genetic results are stored3. The made its DOS operating system the standard for controversy between Celera and the public HGP personal computers” (Shreeve, 2004, p. 220). consortium would provide an example. Indeed, Sean Eddy of Washington University and Ewan according to HGP researcher : “The Birney of the European Bioinformatics Institute Human Genome Project and Celera were not claimed, “The genome community has established working toward a common goal, since only the a clear principle that published genome data former generated a public sequence. Like every­ must be deposited in the international databases, one else, Celera had free access to all our that bioinformatics is fuelled by this principle, assembled sequence. But Celera also asked us for and that Science therefore, threatens to set a a personal transfer of individual nematode precedent that undermines bioinformatics sequence reads. To comply[ would] have been a research” (quoted in Moody, 2004, p. 112). Many major distraction from our HGP work” (Sulston genome researchers agreed with Eddy and quoted in Koerner, 2003). The paper Celera Birney that Science had acted unethically by Genomics published in Science detailed the publishing the Celera Genomics paper, when

36 volume 3 • issue 1 January / March 2013 • pp. 34-39 LEADERSHIP AND ETHICS IN INTERCULTURAL ORGANISATIONS. THE RACE TO THE HUMAN GENOME

Celera Genomics had not entered its data in an worth noting – the gift-economy model respects international database. For genome researchers the expressive and speech rights of scientists. IP, who objected to the proprietary practices of thus, inhibits speech rights, and, also, that would Celera Genomics, the open-source regime offered seem to slow down the development of therapies a welcome alternative, one that, not only provided that would conduce to the common welfare. But, ready access to scientific data and to the research Cukier concludes, as the industry advances, methodology behind the data, but, also, one that there is a growing call among researchers to would highlight “the importance of sharing redefine the lines of intellectual property. Instead [materials,] data and research rights, and requiring of simply learning to live with the current system, a fair global access” (Taylor, 2007). they want to upend it. In addition to graduate After the successes of Celera Genomics, led by degrees, they are armed with moral arguments, Craig Venter, it could be argued that the actual evidence of economic efficiency, and a nascent patenting strategy seems focused now on spirit of solidarity, which is renewing the protecting the interest of the few corporations traditional ethos of cooperation, found in science working in this field. According to Sulston: “The and the academy. And the approach that is Human Genome Project and Celera were not gaining momentum comes from the neighboring working toward a common goal, since, only the industry of open-source information technology. former generated a public sequence. Like Its underlying principles are the communal everyone else, Celera had free access to all our development of technology, complete trans­ assembled sequence. But Celera also asked us for parency in the way it works, and the ability to a personal transfer of individual nematode use and make improvements that are shared sequence reads. To comply would have been a openly with others. Where proprietary software’s major distraction from our work” (Koerner, underlying source code is forbidden to be 2003). According to Cukier (2003), before the modified (and normally even inspected) by draft of the genome was completed (helped customers, open-source products encourage along, controversially, by the private sector users to develop it further on. The parallel in life company Celera Genomics), the Human Genome sciences are things like the HGP that represent a Analysis Group at the Sanger Institute in Britain even contacted the father of the free software “common good”, says Sulston (2002), co-recipient movement, Stallman (1994) to get advice. Soon, of the 2002 Nobel Prize. “Progress is best in open draft license agreements and implementation source”, he concludes (Cukier, 2003). plans were circulated, followed by a round of legal reviews. A “click-wrap contract” was drawn 5. Leadership lessons from the HGP up so that if a party improved a sequence by mixing the HGP’s public draft version with extra Celera Genomics eventually lost the race to sequence data, they would be obliged to release the Human Genome because of the governmental it. “Protecting the sequence from someone taking pressure to keep results fully free and available it, refining it and then licensing it in a way that for the whole scientific community. Venter’s locked everyone in, was the primary objective,” dream to make Celera the “Microsoft of the says Hubbard (Cukier, 2003). Allowing patents Genomics” vanished. Celera failed its mission in DNA is inconsistent with the old model of not because innovation problems. They failed to research in which one scientist is free to build on become leaders in the HGP because the organiza­ the work of another, because no one has any tional model Celera adopted did not match intellectual property (IP) rights in the earlier with the very mission of the Human Genome work that would preclude further development Project as a whole. The Celera Genomic was of the ideas in the work. But, assigning IP rights quite a secretive company (aimed at becoming in DNA or sequences effectively precludes the equivalent of Microsoft for genomics) with a scientists who do not belong to the organization, transactional style of leadership. Transactional hindering the patent from advancing with the leadership indeed focuses on the role of super­ work. There are a couple of ethical problems here vision, organization, and group performance;

International Journal of Communication Research 37 Antonio Marturano transactional leadership is a style of leadership in the race. The open source philosophy, as a in which the leader promotes compliance of his model for scientific enquiry, is fitting Merton’s followers through both rewards and punishments. four related norms of scientific practice; these Furthermore, it is characterised by an organisa­ norms, according to Merton, were guidelines for tional pyramidal hierarchy in which information the practice of scientific enquiry in order to is mono-directional flowing from top down, and ensure the growth of certified knowledge: control is centralised and the leader behaves in universalism, means that scientific truths are of a quite autocratic way. Leaders using the impersonal kinds, that is valid erga omnes, transactional approach are not looking to change independent from the scientist and the place of the future, they are looking to merely keep things discovery. Communitarism, means that science the same. These leaders pay attention to their is basically a social practice, based on past followers’ work in order to find faults and efforts influencing the future ones. Disinterest, deviations. This type of leadership was effective which is about a scientist’s commitment to in Celera’s case as they wished to carry the truth as his/her first motivation. Organised Human Genome Project out in a specific fashion. scepticism means the valuation of possible On the other hand, the Public Consortium, was truths by means of open debate, peer review, an opened and flat – not hierarchical – kind of and experimental replicability. According to organization very similar to a transformational the analysis of Rabinow, the most important leadership model. Indeed, transformational reward for a scientist is getting appreciation leadership enhances the motivation, morale, and from his community and professional prestige. performance of followers through a variety of According to Merton, the trick in the system mechanisms. These include connecting the stems from the fact that scientists, while working follower’s sense of identity and self to the project for their interest, are, on the other hand, reinforcing and the collective identity of the organization; collectively the public good (Rabinow, 1996: being a role model for followers that inspires p. 22). them and makes them interested; challenging The most appealing feature of the Open Source followers to take greater ownership for their philosophy – which makes that so close to work, and understanding the strengths and transformational leadership – for genetics and weaknesses of followers, so the leader can software research is the fact that it is possible to provide followers with tasks that enhance their create a research network based on the model, performance. In this kind of leadership, infor­ that the source code can be given and other mation flows in every direction and there is no researchers can fix and improve that software. centralised control over the research but rather Open Source projects also tend to have much a coordination between several parts4. stronger communities. The entire premise is one Very importantly, the Public Consortium by based on sharing and the enjoyment of creation adopting the open-source philosophy promised for the good of the community (Torvalds, 2001): to shift, according to Raymond, to a “gift ethical values – rooted into the fabric of scientific economy”, where status among peers is achieved progress – and not performance was the key for by giving away things that are useful to the organizational success. community. Social aspects of science work in a similar way; activities such as publishing papers, References Open Source Niotech: Can a Non- giving talks, and sharing results help scientists 1. proprietaryCukier, K. Approach(2003), to Intellectual Property Work in to obtain status among scientific peers. Science, the Life Sciences in this sense, is a sort of gift economy of ideas; in “The Acumen Journal of Life the open-source model, thus, gets to the basic Sciences”, 1(3). Good Citizenship or Good Business? of the old and originary way (or imaginary) 2. Editorial (2004), in “Nature”, 36(10), 1025Attacking Venter Capitalism of scientific research. Open source philosophy, 3. Koerner, B. (2003), in in other words, provided a standardization, “Wired Magazine”, 6(6), Accessed from http:// along the Human Genome Project, of an organisa­ www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.06/view. tional vision which was the real key for success html?pg¼3, 17/09/2007.

38 volume 3 • issue 1 January / March 2013 • pp. 34-39 LEADERSHIP AND ETHICS IN INTERCULTURAL ORGANISATIONS. THE RACE TO THE HUMAN GENOME

Digital Code of Life: How 4. BioinformaticsMoody, G. is(2004), Revolutionizing Science, Medicine, and Last cannibals Business Endnotes 1. See Ben Fordham (21 May 2006), . , Wiley, Hoboken,Making NJ. PCR: A Story of NineMsn. Archived from the original on 2006-08-21. 5. BiotechnologyRabinow, P. (1996), Retrieved 2006-10-25 , Chicago,The Genome Chicago War: University How Craig Press. Venter 2. For a discussion see J. Ciulla, “The state of leadershipBusiness 6. TriedShreeve, to Capture J. (2004), the Code of Life and Save the World Ethics:ethics andA European the work Review that lies before us”, , , 14/4, 2005, pp. 323–335. Alfred Knopf, New YorkWhy Software Should Not Have 3. RecentlyNature an editorial in the very authoritative 7. OwnersStallman, R. (1994), journal (2004, p. 1025) has shown how the . Accessed from http://www.gnu.org./ problem of genetic data accessibility is related to philosophy/whyfree.htmlHeritage of 03/04/2003. Humanity [information;] “Increasingly, it is easiest to make 8. Sulston, J. (2002), in “Le Monde genetic materials available in the form of Diplomatique”. December, 2002, Accessed from information, but even this imposes significant http://mondediplo.com/2002/12/15genome challenges, as high-dimensional biology generates 15/02/2004. The Common Thread: very large files. We currently insist that sequences 9. ASulston, Story J.of andScience, Ferry, Politics, G. (2002), Ethics, and the Human be deposited in databases such as GenBank and Genome EMBL and, at least for expression data, in the , Joseph HenryResearch Press, Sharing, Washington, Ethics and DC. Public microarray databases GEO and ArrayExpress 10. BenefitTaylor, P.L. (2007), according to MIAME criteria. But it is time to in “Nature Biotechnology”,What Makes Hackers 25, 398–401. Tick? a.k.a. develop community standards for newkinds of 11. Linus’sTorvalds, Law L. (2001), large datasets, and we would welcome suggestions in Himanen, P., “The Hacker Ethic and about how to proceed with array CGH, methylation, the Spirit of the Information Age”, London, Vintage, ChIP on chip and other epigenomic datasets.” pp. XIII–XVIII. Sequencing the Genome 4. For a discussion about the difference between 12. Trivedi, B. (2000), in “Genome Transformational and Transactional leadership and News Network”, June 2; http://gnn.tigr.org/ the ethical role inLeadership this dichotomy see James articles/06_00/sequence_primer.shtml, (accessed MacGregor Burns, Leadership , andHarper Performance Collins, 1978 04/04/2003). The Human Genome Project: Towards and Bernard Bass, , N.Y. 13. anVicedo, Analysis M. (1992), of the Empirical, Ethical and Conceptual Free Press, 1985. Issues Involved in “Biology and Philosophy”, 7, 255‑277.

International Journal of Communication Research 39