Parable of Sadhu

by Bowen H McCoy

The Parable

A real incident narrated in the travelogue by Bowen H McCoy, MD of

Morgan Stanley Co. Inc. and President of Morgan Stanley Realty Inc., on
the Nepal hike as part of a six-month sabbatical program of his Co.

Characters

Bowen H McCoy

His friend Stephen, an anthropologist who shed light on the cultural

patterns of the villages they passed through

New Zealand back packers

Porters, Sherpas and their Sardar

Two Swiss Couples

Japanese hiking club

An almost naked & barefoot Sadhu in hypothermia

Scenario:

Starting from hut at 14,500 ft last village 2 day hike below.

High Altitude pass over crest (18000 feet) towards Muklinath

Wettest spring in 20 yrs Hip deep powder and ice

Fear of physical incompetence Altitude sickness, physical stress.

Left base camp before day break to prevent sun melting

ice steps

First to leave base camp (14,500 ft) NZ backpackers

Next team Bowen, Stephen & party

Swiss

Last team Japanese still in base camp

Incident: At 15,500 ft

New Zealander came to them with a bare body of a Sadhu,

asked the author to take care of him and left You have
porters and Sherpa guides

Bowen checked pulse and laid sadhu on the rocks

Stephen & Swiss clothed sadhu and made him warm

Sadhu very much alive but cannot walk

Japanese team leaving base camp with a horse

Bowen left with porters concerned with withstanding

heights to come :

one step misplaced 3000 ft fall,

prior episode of altitude sickness

Swiss team too left

Stephen and his actions

Stephens action
1. Stayed back
2.

Asked Japanese to use their horse to transport to base

camp refused and gave food and drink

3.

Asked porters Sardar to transport the sadhu refused

a.

His porters & Sherpas have low reserve strength to manage

trip and back

b.

Pressurized Stephen not to delay longer

4.

Sherpas carried Sadhu down to 15000 ft, left him after

showing hut and path.

5.

Sadhu last seen throwing stone at Japanese teams

dog

Stephens Arguments
How do you feel about contributing to the death of a fellow man?

Feels
They had not done the right thing by leaving the Sadhu in that condition
They had handled the problem in a typical effluent Westerners style
The fundamental problem was not addressed
The sadhu may have died

Alleges
That each one had just passed the buck to the other and then left
Willingness to help was till such time that it was not inconvenient to them
No one was willing to assume ultimate responsibility for the sadhu

I wonder what Sherpas would have done if sadhu was a well dressed
Nepali / westerner / Asian / woman.

Violation of the Categorical Imperative Universal laws

Bowens defense

Refutes the allegations of Mr. Stephen - rationalizing

Argues that all of them had done their bit to help the Sadhu

Sadhu had no right to disrupt others life with his actions.

Everyone had their own well-being to worry about

Sherpa guides were unwilling to jeopardize more people for the lone
Sadhu

There were self-imposed limits of responsibility in the situation

Concludes that THEY COULD NOT HAVE CHANGED

THEIR ENTIRE PLAN WITHOUT THINKING OF THE
IMPLICATIONS

Conclusions

Reasonable people often disagree

In organizational context, it is essential that managers

agree on a process for dealing with dilemmas

Managers must come up with answers to problems based

on what they see and allow to influence their decision
making processes

In complex organizational situations, individuals require and

deserves the support of the group

In absence of such support, they do not know how to act

Conclusionscontd

Organisations that do not have a heritage of mutually

accepted, shared values tend to be unhinged during stress

An effective manager cannot run away from risk - he/she

has to confront and deal with risk

The agreed on guidelines and set of values within the

organisation would aid managers to deal with risk

People who are in touch with their own core beliefs and the
beliefs of others are more comfortable living on the cutting
edge

Taking a tough line or a decisive stand in a muddle of

ambiguity is the only ethical thing to do

Factors in Moral Failure

super- ordinate goal

Lack of explicit attention to shared values

Less than full regard toward Sadhu as an equal

Tendency to pass the buck, when responsibility

interfered with achievement of urgent & risk-laden
objectives

Organizational Decision Making

What is the choice

Excellence

or Ethics?

Competitiveness

or Conscience?

Three symptoms of Ethical Hazard

Fixation
Rationalization
Detachment

Fixation

It represents difference between VIRTUE (of

determination. Courage, perseverence & tenacity) and
addiction, dependency
Fixation lies in:
- Intensity of narrow goal focus
- Urgency of pursuit of short term goals
- Thoughtlessness, even recklessness, of seeking
objectives whose implications are underexamined

Mesmerising effect of goals

It distorts judgement at critical moments- unbalanced

pursuit of purpose unless disciplined by clear values

Teleopathy - unbalanced pursuit of purpose

Ethics is practical response to Teleopathy

Rationalisation

Two types :
1. Loyalty
2. Legality

Detachment - a kind of callousness

(separation of head and heart)

Competitiveness & goal seeking eventually drive out

compassion & generosity making more serious
compromises easier as time goes on

Organizational Decision Making

Avoiding the Hazard

From

Fixation to Perspective

From

Rationalization to Frankness

From

Detachment to Engagement