Week 4 - Is Affirmative Action Ethical

“Equality is not a concept. It's not something we should be striving for. It's a necessity. Equality is like gravity. We need it to stand on this earth as men and women, and the misogyny that is in every culture is not a true part of the human condition. It is life out of balance, and that imbalance is sucking something out of the soul of every man and woman who's confronted with it. We need equality. Kinda now.”

                                                ― Joss Whedon

Week four is now in the books. This was the most interesting of subjects so far; not sure if it is because these issues of race and ageism are so entirely relevant today, or just because there is a plethora of information out there to research on the subjects and become more acquainted with them on my path of learning to become an excellent leader.

This week, we were to explore if we feel that affirmative action is ethical and what points of contention and support surround it. From first blush, I do not feel that affirmative action is ethical; it is “…the practice of giving special consideration to minorities…in hiring and school placement…” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1365) which in and of itself is the practice of discrimination in my mind.

At the end of the day, “…we should treat all people the same unless there is some general and relevant difference between then that justifies a difference in treatment” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1175). In today’s society, although there are many people that do feel race and sex should be determining factors in their decision making process, I do not personally believe in the benefit of favoring once oppressed groups in our societal history simply because they are considered “…members of a systematically victimized group” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1385).

I believe that the best interest of us all is to stop making race and sex an issues amongst us and that “any policy that deliberately or inadvertently treats employees differently based solely…” on any one specific factor can result in an unintended “…form of discrimination” (Thompson, Val, 2015). As I found in researching our paper this week, leaders have an obligation to strive to find the most deserving employees whom represent a diversification of culture, backgrounds, ages, races, and interest to help further and meet our strategic goals. If I am pressured into systematically grading people with more points so to speak because of their age, race, sex, or cultural background, I am then also systematically considering a form of reverse discrimination because I am not weighing the same characteristics of those whom do not meet the identical criteria. Case and point, by following affirmative action, I am unintentionally hurting “…those who have done no wrong” (Lafollette, 2007).

Although there are many that will contend that “affirmative action is a plausible form of compensation…” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1401), I still feel that “people should be judged by what they do now, not what their grandparents did” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1401). This is primarily why I would in some cases contend that “…affirmative action is morally inappropriate” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1401). By default, it prevents me from making subjective decisions based upon current and relevant information.

As emerging leaders, we are bound to learn to embrace not only different perspectives, work ethics, work styles, and methods of communication, but also extremely varied perceptions as to how we make our decisions and what criteria our decisions are based upon. At the end of the day, “…we should treat all people the same unless there is some general and relevant difference between then that justifies a difference in treatment” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1175).

Please don’t misunderstand my overly simplified perspective on this; just because I do not see color, I do know that millions of Americans do not see things the same way. While watching the news this week, President Obama was interviewed on NPR and stated that he felt that “… race relations have improved dramatically in his lifetime” (Maron, 2015) but that “…more work still needs to be done” (Maron, 2015). Just because we have now had our first African American President in office doesn’t mean that racism is dead and gone, I do get that. However, if we want to make continued progress towards eliminating race as a major contender in our lifetimes, we have to remove those barriers, such as using affirmative action to change our future “…abilities, interests, desires and life prospects” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1453) in which all form our opinions and decision making skills regarding “…racism, sexism, and affirmative action” (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1453). If we continue to feed the beast, we cannot expect racism to simply shrivel up and go away.

I do however believe that affirmative action from a perspective of leadership is an essential learning opportunity; it reminds us to promote equality and opportunity for all, not just some, as well as requires us “…to think more carefully…” about whom we hire and admit, but more importantly, gives us pause to evaluate why (Lafollette, 2007, p. 1527). As a society, we should be more concerned with learning to promote the equality of opportunities everyone, not specific groups of particular races, backgrounds or ethnicities. As utopian as it may seem, I do believe that diversification gives us the best chances of coming forward with the best mix of talent; we should learn to rethink how we think, and not need an actual law to encourage us to do so on our own. Therefore, I feel that affirmative action is unethical becasue it is forcing me to ignore and explore the facts all in the same light to ensure the best decisión is made in the honor of everyone involved.

Until we blog again!

References

Lafollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

Thompson, Val. (2015). Age Discrimination & Sick Policies. Retrieved June 27, 2015, from smallbusiness.chron.com: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/age-discrimination-sick-policies-61301.html

Week 3 - Finding Balance...The Harder They Fall...

"Balance has much less to do with what's going on around us, than it does with what is going on within us".

- Edie Melson

We are just ending week three of the semester, and this week feels more comfortable than the prior two. We were off to a rocky start with three of us on our team very focused and committed to our team assignments due this week; however, we have one late attendee in which was uninvolved and uninterested in joining up or responding to inquires until late Thursday night due to work issues. 

These are the kind of things that although we anticipate happening, none the less, are not comfortable, even when planning for unforeseen events as much as we can. Either way, our work came together well and was submitted on time. Hopefully the team dynamics will continue to improve and grow in the coming weeks and assignments.

This week, one of our most interesting articles, at least in my mind, was from Kramer discussing the various ways the greatest of leaders can still fall victim to making terrible lapses in judgment. My biggest take away that which tied directly back to previous weeks was the concerns leaders must embrace and encourage…diversity in thinking. 

As I mentioned in my discussion posting for this module, thinking eclectically and diversely, as well as undertaking others perspectives for advisement and consideration throughout the decision making process, can only help us as emerging leaders know that there is not one perfect solution that fits everyone every time.  While great leaders “…repeatedly demonstrate the intelligence, resourcefulness, and drive to go the distance” (Kramer, 2009, p. 58) as well as consistently prove their abilities to overcome “…whatever obstacles they encounter along the way” (Kramer, 2009, p. 58), they are human and can “…demonstrate uncharacteristic lapses ion professional judgment or personal conduct (Kramer, 2009, p. 58). 

As our article demonstrated through several examples, it is not unheard of for us to have “…stints of miscalculation or recklessness” (Kramer, 2009, p. 60). Based upon our collective articles this week, it would seem that even as great as we are, and despite all of our hard work and finely tuned relationships we have with others, we do this entirely unknowingly and unintentionally as we maintain focus on “…the pursuit of power that often changes people in profound ways” (Kramer, 2009, p. 60).

For example, one of our assignments this week was to identify two distinctly different leaders, in which one acted reckless and one acted responsible. I selected Dennis Kozlowski, former CEO of Tyco, and Sir Richard Branson, CEO of Virgin Group. In my preliminary research, (Josephson Institute of Ethics, 2014)

Had Kozlowski remained humble and more in touch with his people and reality, instead of “…living in a CEO-type bubble” (Freifeld, 2013) and that he admitted to having a “…strong sense of entitlement…” (Freifeld, 2013) in which caused him to steal “…a lot of money” (Freifeld, 2013), he may have avoided numerous felony charges and jail for over six years after being found guilty of helping himself and his friends to over $100 million dollars in compensation.

On the flip side, Sir Richard Branson is seen by most as an outstanding leader "...for his great achievements in business and philanthropic contributions" (Richard Branson Leadership Principles). Branson is known for his inspirational leadership, as well as some of his unusual manners in which he promotes “…breaking down breaking down barriers in your business' corporate hierarchy… to keep employees comfortable and open to sharing ideas” (Feloni, 2014). Specific characteristics, not only his entrepreneurial spirit, but also his leadership consistency “…has shown an ability to think proactively and remained focused on the big picture…” (Capitalist Creations, 2014).

I have personally seen women treated differently on their rise to success over men; I personally have been a victim of it almost every day. My replacement does not understand the business, nor does he have the ability to complete many of the basic functions and elements of my job, yet other men in power enjoy his company, and even when he blatantly makes companywide noticed mistakes, he is not held accountable for his lapse in understanding or responsibilities. I can remember times when I was brought into a superior’s office because I had a typo in an email where I used “then” instead of the word “than” and how I reflected our department poorly because of my lacking communication skills and grammar. I also recognize that while I reported to men whom were decades older, the generation gap allowed them to believe that women should be seen and not heard, much like children.

Now that I have moved onward and upward from those times and that department, I still encounter treatment that other women I am sure contend with…if you are an educated, goal oriented and independent woman in the workforce, you are considered to be acting like a b#tch. This message only compounds itself, when the same men would look upon other men with the same actions, demeanor and leadership as “strong” and “one of the guys”. Is it ethical, not by some of the definitions we uncovered this semester thus far, but it may be found in culture that women have a certain place, and leadership and power is not part of their particular plan. I personally was never on the “mommy track” but I am also not sure that I would have given up a family, had that been in the cards for us, just to move onward and upward in any company either. For me it comes back to balance and happiness.

As I also researched and reported this week, we need to have things that ground us and encourage practices and behaviors that help us achieve the level of great leadership. Understanding, digesting and listening to what our critics are commenting about our behavior or decision making process can allow us time to not only reflect on what is appropriate, even under the best of intended circumstances, but also snap us back into reality and prevent further disillusionment (Kramer, 2009, p. 64).  If we tie this back to ethical thinking, the more disillusioned we are, the greater our tendency to make selfish decisions based on our own internal priorities and not what is in the best interest or deemed morally right or acceptable by our people. By nurturing their humility, openly admitting our shortcomings, “keeping your life simple” and displaying a “…high degree of self-awareness” and proportion (Kramer, 2009, p. 64), successful leaders are able to psychologically combat behavioral habits that may help “…them stay grounded” (Kramer, 2009, p. 64). I think balance, particularly in our society today, is the cancer that eats at our ability to make rational decisions that are in the best interest of anyone but us. If we could find more rational balance and tolerance, we may find that there are a plethora of decisions before us that could be answered in a myriad of ways.

Until we blog again!

References

Capitalist Creations. (2014). Culture of Capitalisim. Retrieved from Capitalistcreations.com: http://capitalistcreations.com/richard-branson-you-need-to-be-bold-to-make-billions/

Feloni, R. (2014, October 17). Richard Branson's 10 rules for being a great leader. Retrieved from Businessinsider.com: http://www.businessinsider.com/richard-bransons-leadership-rules-2014-10

Freifeld, K. (2013, December 03). Ex-Tyco CEO Dennis Kozlowski Granted Parole From Prison. Retrieved from Huffingtonpost.com: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/03/convicted-ex-tyco-ceo-kozlowski_n_4380263.html

Josephson Institute of Ethics. (2014, April 1). Making Ethical Decisions: A 7-Step Path. Retrieved from ucsd.edu: http://blink.ucsd.edu/finance/accountability/ethics/path.html

Kramer, R. M. (2009). The Harder They Fall. Harvard Business Review, 58-66.

Richard Branson Leadership Principles. (n.d.). Retrieved from Freshyoungmillionaire.com: http://www.freshyoungmillionaire.com/richard-branson-leadership-principles/

Week 2 - Theories of Ethics

"Tragedy, for me, is not a conflict between right and wrong, but between two different kinds of right."

                                                                                                                            -Peter Shaffer

Well we are done with week 2 and I have to say I am often more confused about ethics then I think before the class started. This week we researched and discussed two theories, consequentialism and deontology. While I find that most of what both theories had to offer was helpful, I think that sometimes I wish understanding and applying ethics was as simple as just pick a theory and run with it. I really have felt quite frustrated and so confused in trying to make heads and tails of both of these theories. I don't know if it's because I don't truly grasp both of the concepts or that I just don't really entirely agree with either of them.

For example, consequentialist “…are more concerned with the results of people’s choices…” (LaFollette, 2007, p. 863), their desire to preserve control over what evil should be allowed and what evil should be ignored is more relevant to our decision making process (LaFollette, 2007, p. 863). From a deontologist perspective, the thought and decision making process centers around specific justifications surrounding pertinent issues at hand.

In both of the theories presented, we can see that for some people valid arguments could be made for either side...in certain situations or conditions. I personally struggled with the deontology theory; I think because it seems entirely inflexible. Sometimes there is not an option in life where you get to select the answer that is the purest of pure and brings only sunshine and rainbows. As I mentioned in my research paper this week, if we go back to the train problem we find that if there is truly no alternative other than killing one child, killing one old man, or killing five children, then deontology doesn't appear to be a feasible philosophy. Under deontology, intentionally killing anyone and for any reason is deemed morally unfathomable. Likewise, that would mean in a time of war or even in a situation requiring self defense.

Not that we were asked to pick sides of which theory we favor, but I think that the reality that I most likely live in, well at least most of the time, requires that hard decisions often times do not have a "perfect" answer or solution. When I think of it from a leadership perspective, difficult decisions in many ways tend to leave an unhappy party or dissatisfied person that feels you should have chosen or decided differently. I would have to think that more times than not, consequentialism would deem more appropriate in more situations. I would have to then favor this theories approach due the fact that it allows for a more rational and realistic approach to leadership decision making and accounts for more various challenges and personal perspectives of all of those involved in the situation, rather than favoring someone’s unwritten rule and subjective thinking that could tend to cloud judgment.

I also like the idea that consequentialism allows for different degrees of justification and flexibility in finding the most right decision for the greatest amount of people involved in a situation. I also appreciated that the theory or spirit of consequentialism allows for the appearance of rational thinking. If we go back to the death penalty case study, As I found in my research, the “…deontological obligation with respect to human life is neither an obligation not to kill nor an obligation not to intend to kill; rather, it is an obligation not to murder, that is, to kill in execution of an intention to kill” (Alexander, Larry; Moore, Michael, 2012) in which we would then find that the death penalty under all circumstances could be argued to be unethical. The death penalty in nature is the explicit killing of someone with the intent to in fact kill them. Again, one must ask if this way of thinking is entirely rational, can be applied in all situations, and does this thinking actually make the world a better place for all of us (Alexander, Larry; Moore, Michael, 2012).

Overall I think it was an incredible week of discussions and provocative thinking; there doesn't appear to be a clear cut or one size fits all magic potion that we can use in order to always follow specific rules when making ethical decisions. I think that this semester will continue to uncover many topics that will lend themselves to not displaying a true always rule that can be applied in every situation. Leadership requires flexibility and a very thorough decision making process. Just as each situation presents unique challenges and will vary in opportunities, so will our alternatives and reasoning behind the decisions that come about. Although the theories tend to work more so in a quasi reality then in real life, neither theory allows for a clear cut understanding or definition of what should or is seems right or wrong.

Neither theory seems to outline what is morally good or bad, nor does either give a list of ways in which we should weight each decision or potential outcome or consequence. However, the foundation in getting us to consider steps and analyze all relevant information as well as all of the various and even remotely plausible implications is almost as important as the decision we have to make.

Until we blog again!

References

Alexander, Larry; Moore, Michael. (2012, December 12). Deontological Ethics. Retrieved June 12, 2015, from plato.stanford.edu: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/

LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

Week 1 - The Buck Starts and Stops With You

“Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.”

― C.S. Lewis

Well, we are back to stomp and grind of a new semester; week one and I am already overwhelmed of getting back to the swing of things. I have to constantly remind myself…it is all about balance…work, school, what is left for a life…getting focused back on my physical and mental health…but wow what a week it has been. This class, although I know it will be VERY challenging for me has already shown how much thought and discussion is going to take place and I can’t wait to keep deep diving on many of our topics so far!

For example, this week we have already discussed and worked on cases like our Train Dilemma. I thought I was doing fine until it asked me if I would sacrifice my own child to save 5 others…but ultimately, if my thought process eliminated and proved there truly was no other viable alternatives, I thought it may be easier to digest the sacrifice of one for the good of the many.

As I posted in our discussion forum this week, in order for us “to make better choices, we must become aware of our options and the relevant background information…” (LaFollette, 2007, p. 85). As emerging leaders, we now know that the more we practice, the more information we will be able to obtain and will be able to make better decisions to act upon in a more prudent and analytical manner that can assist us in preventing us from blindly pursuing our own agendas (LaFollette, 2007, p. 85).

We also discovered that “…a person's ability to deal with moral issues is not formed all at once…there are stages of growth…, the ability to think morally also develops in stages” (Andre & Velasquez, 2014). We have to critically think and take pause to consider all options, other than our own immediate gratification or agendas, which is why thinking more abstractly and about multiple alternatives is required to ensure we minimize bias during our decision making process.

When it comes to the belief regarding the systematic failure of today’s leaders and how B-Schools are the ultimate producers of this dysfunction, we also learned that there are several examples and benchmarks that can be identified in preparing future leaders to embrace and promote a holistic approach to business problems and ethical dilemmas.

I can remember when I first registered for college many years ago, I had to take art, philosophy, sociology, psychology, blah blah blah…and when I asked why I HAD to take these to get my degree, I was told that it was to help me develop into becoming a well-rounded contributor to society and a more worldly person. As we found in our article this week, there is still the school of thought that believes the same way today, some twenty years later (Podolny, 2009, p. 63). 

Additionally, I recall that when I was completing my undergrad work, in order to apply to certain master level programs, I actually had to have worked within my profession for a certain number of hours in order to apply and be considered for specific graduate level degree seeking programs. At first I thought this was crazy, but I can see the logic; how on earth can someone master something if they have yet to hold a professional job for a minimal reasonable amount of time. I also encountered program applications that stated I had to have graduated and worked professionally within my area for a minimum of 2 years in order for my application to be considered…even though I previously had over 15 years of relevant experience prior to graduating with my undergrad work.

That being said, our article specifically notes that part of the economic crisis we have encountered is largely because of “…the inattention to ethics and values-based leadership in business schools” (Podolny, 2009, p. 63), “…the disciplinary silos in which business schools teach management” (Podolny, 2009, p. 63), and the lack of accountability on the school and faculty of the business schools that “…haven’t done enough to equip students to make good judgments…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 63).

To counterbalance some of the widespread problems “…afflicting management education…that people…believe…are harmful to society…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 63) include asking deans and faculty how they can help students uncover what they can and want to do “…to change the world for the better…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 65) and provide them with “…the skills, tools and values to bring that bout in a responsible manner” (Podolny, 2009, p. 65).

Moreover, because MBA’s are seen as those whom “…occupy positions with enormous responsibility that have a huge impact to society…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 66), dealing with a lack of trust and a schools that are not embracing or reinforcing what society values as far as teaching “…principles, ethics, and attention to detail…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 66) as the cornerstone and foundation of leadership (Podolny, 2009, p. 66), we are only perpetuating generations of MBA’s that are unable to change “…student’ mind-sets…” and help them uncover both the “…hard and soft disciplines…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 66) that will allow students “…a more holistic understanding of business problems and their solutions” (Podolny, 2009, p. 66).

Benchmarks that will allow us to show that we are shaping future MBA’s in a better direction would include monumental changes of epic proportions at this point. For example, as our article suggests, it would require B-Schools to introduce curriculum that reflects components of what society currently values regarding ethics. It would also look to embark coursework with “teaching teams” where more than one expert can participate and share collaborative ideas in one subject area to avoid silo teaching (Podolny, 2009, p. 66). Changes should also “encourage qualitative research” that requires the growth of eclectic backgrounds from faculty experts (Podolny, 2009, p. 67), as well as stopping incentives that encourage academia to compete for rankings and stifle advertising communications in which potential applicants can earn more money by earning a degree from them versus other institutions (Podolny, 2009, p. 67).   The last ultra-aggressive solution suggested setting up a governing body to monitor and police MBA’s for infractions and violations to the code of conduct that could end up punishing the MBA up to and including the revocation of their degree should the committee see fit of those graduates whom “…break the code” (Podolny, 2009, p. 67).

In conclusion, I am all for positive and insightful change. Although I may not agree with every aspect of the article, I do agree that unless B-Schools “…reinvent themselves…” (Podolny, 2009, p. 67), they are certainly not going to be able to change the perception of MBA’s and their roles in forming our corporations or the societal impacts they have been held accountable for in the eyes of our author.

Until we blog again!

References

Andre, C., & Velasquez, M. (2014). Can Ethics be Taught? Retrieved June 02, 2015, from Santa Clara University: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v1n1/taught.html

LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

Podolny, J. (2009). The Buck Stops (and Starts) at Business School. Harvard Business Review, 63-67.