On saying no (or yes) to problem clients, Part 2

I had more to say about “problem clients,” so here’s Part 2. (Part 1 is here.)

There’s one common justification I hear for taking a “problem client.”

(By “problem client,” I refer to those clients who pose some form of ethical discomfort for firm employees. How you define a “problem client” depends, obviously, on who you are and what sort of principles you hold. A Russian oligarch would be a “problem client” for many people in the world, but not if you lived in Russia.)

But back to that justification:

If not us, then it would just be someone else.

True! But…this quip irritates the hell out of me. It suggests that our code of ethics as organizations are relative. Basically, if one of my peers is willing to do something, I should be able to do it as well. The lack of a moral center makes me uncomfortable.

But such is the lure of a fee! We’re not talking about pro bono work after all. We could reframe the above quip to make it more direct and accurate:

If we don’t take the money, then it would just be someone else.

That’s not entirely fair, though. No one ever puts it that way. In fact, sometimes there’s unspoken reasoning between the clauses of this if/then statement. To wit:

If not us

(the superior professional services firm that can provide high-quality work and possibly make a difference by working with this [private prison developer / autocratic regime / multinational monopoly]!),

then it would just be someone else

(a lesser professional services firm that would provide poor work and stands less of a chance making a difference than we would).

That feels crummy to me, but it’s a subtle argument that people make.

And what’s so crummy about it is this argument doesn’t seem made in good faith. Outside the multiverse, there’s no way to compare the performance of “us” vs. “them.” Two firms can’t deliver the same completed project for the same client. Everything will always be apples and oranges, which is what makes this argument so shitty.

I need more than this argument. At least, I need the money argument. If that’s what it’s about, then that’s not great—but at least we’re being straightforward with each other.