Adaora Onaga
Sometimes, institutional adverts promoting organisational values leave me wondering whether we have confused the appearance of a value with its deeper meaning. Take respect, for example. It is a core value in many organisations and universities. Yet it is often presented simply in terms of such behaviours as being polite in meetings, using appropriate titles, greeting colleagues courteously, maintaining a pleasant tone in emails, avoiding rude language, obeying the supervisor, etc. These are undoubtedly valuable behaviours. They can demonstrate respect; however, they are primarily matters of social conduct and, despite all appearances, could conceal disrespect. In other words, the examples above belong largely to the realm of etiquette. Respect as an ethical principle goes much deeper.
The ethical principle of respect involves recognizing the inherent dignity of every person. It disposes us to listen genuinely to differing viewpoints, treat people fairly regardless of status, resist manipulation and exploitation, give credit where it is due, make decisions that respect the rights and well-being of others, and create conditions in which individuals and communities can flourish. The distinction may appear subtle, but its implications are profound.
Let us see if this scenario makes it clearer. Imagine attending a formal dinner with your supervisor and several distinguished guests. You suddenly become uncertain about which fork to use, which glass belongs to you, and where exactly the napkin should go. Throughout the meal, you carefully observe what everyone else is doing and manage to avoid any obvious mistakes. At the end of the evening, you might feel a sense of relief. You did the right thing, at the right time, and in the right way. Does that phrasing not sound remarkably similar to how we often describe ethical behaviour? Yet most of us would agree that using the wrong wine glass may reveal a lapse in etiquette, but not a lapse in character. And therein lies an important distinction.
Both ethics and etiquette address human conduct, and particularly within rule-based approaches to ethics, there can be a tendency to focus heavily on compliance with external norms, protocols, and expectations. Ethical behaviour can begin to look like a matter of following the correct procedure. But ethics, properly understood, is much deeper than social correctness. Ethics concerns the formation of character and the cultivation of virtues, which are stable habits that shape our thoughts, desires, decisions, and actions toward what is genuinely good. Therefore, good ethical conduct may be expressed through good manners, but it cannot be reduced to them. After all, a person may be articulate, charming, impeccably dressed, and exceptionally well-mannered while simultaneously being the most unethical individual in the room.
Etiquette can polish behaviour. Ethics forms character. Etiquette tells us how to behave so that others feel comfortable around us. Ethics asks whether our actions are just, honest, responsible, and directed toward the good. Consider an unanswered email. If a colleague forgets to respond because they are busy completing the work requested, the issue may be one of poor email etiquette. If the same email is deliberately ignored to frustrate a colleague’s work or undermine a project, the issue becomes an ethical one. The outward action is identical: an unanswered email. Yet ethical evaluation requires us to consider intention, circumstances, and the object of the action, not merely visible behaviour.
The distinction between visible behaviour and foundational factors is reminiscent of the contrast that Stephen Covey drew between the “personality ethic” and the “character ethic” in the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. The personality ethic focuses on image, charm, social skills, and public presentation. It is largely concerned with how we appear to others. The character ethic, by contrast, focuses on deeply rooted habits and principles that guide conduct regardless of who is watching. Good manners may create a positive impression, but character determines whether that impression is genuine. If we prioritize etiquette over ethics, we risk creating a culture of polite compliance, a place where everyone uses the correct titles, follows protocol meticulously, and speaks with impeccable courtesy, while academic dishonesty, unfair treatment, or structural injustices remain unchallenged because raising concerns would be considered impolite.
At the same time, disregarding etiquette in the name of ethics creates a different problem. Standing for truth does not require rudeness. Defending principles does not demand hostility. Challenging a decision need not involve humiliating colleagues or dismissing opposing views. Ethical universities understand that ethics and etiquette are partners rather than rivals. Both ensure that, for example, politeness is more than a showy performance or ‘eye-service’ as we say in Nigeria. Politeness should stem from a deep respect for persons regardless of status, position, or age.
As a university community, we should constantly remember that good manners matter but can never substitute for good character. If our job as a university is well done, the campus will be a place to develop ethically upright ladies and gentlemen with the social graces to handle themselves impeccably in any circumstance. What are your reflections on the distinction between ethics and etiquette? Have you encountered real-life situations in which the two were confused or blurred? I welcome your thoughts in the comments section below.