# data[].attributes.body
The Justice Lens focuses on ensuring that decisions are fair, consistent and based on clear, defensible standards. In a public sector environment, this means supporting procurement, probity and integrity processes that are transparent, impartial and applied equitably to all parties.

In practice, the Justice Lens can be applied by ensuring all suppliers are assessed against the same evaluation criteria and that procurement decisions are based on merit and evidence rather than personal influence or bias. It also supports the consistent application of conflict of interest, confidentiality and disclosure requirements, helping to ensure that similar situations are treated in a comparable manner.

Importantly, fairness does not always mean identical treatment. Different circumstances may require different controls or responses depending on the level of risk involved. Applying the Justice Lens therefore involves making decisions that are proportionate, well-documented and aligned with established policies and governance frameworks.

By promoting transparency, procedural fairness and accountability, the Justice Lens helps strengthen trust in procurement and integrity processes, ensuring that public resources are managed responsibly and that decisions can withstand scrutiny.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Utilitarian Lens for a constuction building materials company

# data[].attributes.subject
The Utilitarian Lens for a constuction building materials company

# data[].attributes.body
For Holcim Australia, a contruction building materials company, a utilitarian lens on ethics means evaluating business operations and sustainability initiatives based on one core principle: maximizing the greatest overall good for the greatest number of stakeholders. In practice, this framework heavily relies on cost-benefit analysis to measure the morality of an action by its tangible outcomes - weighing economic viability against environmental and social impacts. Within this calculation, ensuring safety for everyone is treated as the company's ultimate ethical priority and core risk mitigation strategy, as any workplace injury represents a catastrophic human and operational cost that instantly erodes net utility. Ultimately, a project or policy is deemed ethical if its broad benefits - such as aggressive decarbonization and infrastructure development - outweigh its total costs, provided that absolute safety is never compromised.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Justice Lense @ a Children's Charity

# data[].attributes.subject
The Justice Lense @ a Children's Charity

# data[].attributes.body
Justice is about ensuring people receive what they are fairly entitled to. It focuses on equitable treatment, not identical treatment, and uses defensible standards such as need, merit, or vulnerability to guide decisions.

How this applies at Variety Victoria

Fair distribution of support: Use clear criteria, consistent assessment, and transparent reasoning when allocating grants, equipment, and programs.

Equity over equality: Prioritise children with greater or compounding disadvantage and provide extra support to families who face barriers in accessing services.

Address systemic disadvantage: Direct resources toward communities and children who experience structural inequities, such as rural families, Indigenous children, or those in out‑of‑home care.

Fair internal processes: Ensure recruitment, workload, and decision-making are transparent and consistent across staff and volunteers.

Inclusive engagement: Actively involve families and young people with lived experience, and make consultation accessible across cultures, abilities, and regions.

Accountability: Regularly review criteria, publish impact data, and explain how decisions are made to maintain trust and fairness.

# data[].attributes.body
The Common Goods Lens is appropriate to apply to a Medical Device company which supports public health, patient safety at scale, and the effective functioning of healthcare systems globally.

In practice, this means evaluating commercial strategies, product design decisions, and interactions with healthcare professionals to support the collective wellbeing of patients and clinical decision-making.

Further within Australia, before a medical device can be advertised, supplied or sold, it must meet the Therapeutic Goods Administration regulatory requirements. Medical device companies accept and follow these restrictions because they protect patient safety and ensure that healthcare professionals and patients can rely on products that have been assessed for quality and safety before being used. This is one example that demonstrates the prioritisation of public health and trust over speed to market and financial gain.

# data[].attributes.body
Caring for our customers is one of our corporate values and is most tangible in the personalised services offered to customers for superannuation and retirement decisions. While it is not uncommon for all companies to provide opportunities for individuals to meet with an adviser and discuss their super or retirement plans and needs, we can take the personalisation journey further by recognising that customers will want to receive their information or advice by different means (online tools, using their own personal or financial adviser etc) and enabling this choice, whilst providing support (if required) at every step of their journey. In addition, each tool or method available needs to fully enable the individual to tailor the solution (eg. decide on their super target or their retirement pension) in line with their lifestyle preferences, financial needs etc. This approach values the individual's needs/preferences and their retirement success over more rigid corporate approaches and gives fuller meaning to what superannuation is intended to achieve - which is to help every individual have a better, happier, more secure retirement, thus improving societal outcomes.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Rights Lens - in aged care operations

# data[].attributes.subject
The Rights Lens - in aged care operations

# data[].attributes.body
The Charter of Aged Care Rights defines 14 rights for everyone in aged care.  Operators support the provision of these rights to ensure a safe environment where everyone is treated with dignity and respect.  Whilst some rules and regulations can be prescriptive and broadly applied (with the Common Good lens), there also needs to be understanding when applying these to each individual to ensure their care is centred on their specific needs and tailored accordingly (with the Care Ethics lens).  In considering the right to ‘have my identify, culture and diversity valued and supported’ under the Charter - communication can be a barrier which may impact experiences and choices across all of their rights.  For example, information communicated to elderly residents, needs to be easy to understand and accommodate culturally diverse backgrounds.  Training carers to use different aids, like fact sheets in different languages, seeking assistance from interpreters or family members who understand their preferred language, audio recordings and picture prompts, can help clarify any confusion.  Whilst remembering to treat each person with respect despite their physical or cognitive ability, carers will sometimes be impatient or infantise their speech, especially for those with hearing issues, dementia or poor translation.  Such a simple oversight impacts their dignity and may reduce their confidence in making decisions, cause distress, and result in withdrawal from other residents/activities. So it is important to deploy regular training for all team members which focuses on the need for effective and inclusive communication.  By being patient, calm, and using active listening when engaging with residents and when misunderstanding arises, seeking alternate tools will enhance rapport, understanding and trust.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Virtue Lens - in a production environment

# data[].attributes.subject
The Virtue Lens - in a production environment

# data[].attributes.body
Ethical decisions and behaviours based in the Virtue Lens are an every day dilemma when relying on the characters of certain employees at all times in all circumstances. We can set rules and expectations, but this does not necessarily mean that individuals will adhere to said rules or remain aligned to management expectations in carrying out their duties over the course of any given day. For example; the wearing of hairnets in the production of food is an acceptable rule that everyone who is involved in production must comply. But is an unpopular request for some employees particularly the younger ones who inherently don't really like wearing them. Despite explaining the consequences of them not wearing a hairnet, (hair ending up in the product sold to a customer, then trust and reputation is affected which in a modern context can mean online complaints or social media vilification leading to loss of customers and therefore revenue), we know that following this rule for some can be intermittent. Also, managers are often slow to correct this issue increasing the overall risk profile. We rely on character traits such as courage and honesty to ensure that this rule is followed for the good of the company as well as to remain compliant with Health and Safety regulations. Because of this known fact and the company deploys regular training sessions with employees and line managers as well as spot inspections of the production area. We have also found that allowing individuals to express their free will (Rights lens) yet acknowledge that in this instance they must tolerate the wearing of the hairnet and also call upon the virtue of temperance in order to restrain their strong desire to act out and ignore the rule. It seems a small thing but it has become an issue in an affluent society where individuals are uncomfortable with being told to consistently do a thing that they really don't like. There are a number of Ethical Lens I could've drawn upon for this example. But individuals deciding for themselves to be the kind of person their fellow employees and managers can trust that they will have the courage to do the right thing at all times, makes them a valued workplace colleague and employee equally.

# data[].attributes.headline
Utilitarian Lens in TAFE and correctional centers.

# data[].attributes.subject
Utilitarian Lens in TAFE and correctional centers.

# data[].attributes.body
The utilitarian lens could be practically applied in our organisation, with its benefit being realised across multiple stakeholders that have similar, but not the same levels of required action related to staff conduct.

An example of this is where an employee working for the TAFE, but within a correctional setting has breached security or safety protocols.

The breach may not be severe enough for the TAFE employee’s organisation to warrant severe disciplinary action, but this may be warranted in the custodial setting.

In this example, if the employee was returned to the custodial site, this could impact on business reputation of the TAFE not being seen to appropriately manage staff and safety issues.

If the TAFE was to administer disciplinary action at the level of the custodial setting, the employee would most likely be terminated, this may show an inequitable process when compared to staff not working in a custodial setting.

A decision based on a utilitarian lens would enable both the security concerns with that staff member at the custodial setting to be addressed, most likely that staff member won’t be deployed to that site and relocated to a non-custodial setting.

This outcome protects both the  business reputation of the employer working within custodial settings, and the employee is not delt a higher level of disciplinary action than their non-custodial based colleagues.