Over the course of the last nine weeks, I've picked up a certain amount of practical knowledge, and a good deal of perspective. To consider three lessons I've taken away from the course, I can certainly attest that I was reintroduced to some ideas from college philosophy classes I hadn't revisited in several years, primarily to include the discussions of consequentialism and deontology which I believe I first heard about when discussing the likes of Mill and Kant. Indeed, to consciously examine issues from within those different frameworks as well as the overall idea of pragmatism can generate some thoughts on why some people believe what they do. Second, I took away that the very nature of ethics demands critical thinking and a certain mental flexibility, for in the ethical dilemmas we studied there were often no correct answers but several right answers that present themselves based on the moral lens applied to the situation...While greater society and in some cases universal notions of humanity will lean strongly towards ideas of not killing or stealing in general circumstances, but each situation ultimately needs to be acted upon by the agents involved to the best of their abilities. Third, and tied in to the first two ideas, though we may have different ethical lenses and value systems formed by our various paths in life, more often than not it can be argued there are situations by necessity, special skills, or otherwise in which people must take some kind of action via moral obligation. This might be captured most succinctly by the thoughts of many a great leader that points towards the idea of "duty".
Indeed, the course did provide a range of perspective through readings that at times demanded thorough examination for understanding, as well as the wide range of thoughts and experiences that every student brought to the course. Having to stop and apply these perspectives to an examination of my own "built-in" value system was helpful towards me achieving better understanding of why I think the way I do, and why people may disagree. I do have to admit that while the content seems worth the time, the means of delivery in the context of my daily life proved at times to be a challenge. The remote nature of online learning lends itself to requiring a lot of writing assignments, and balanced against a full time job and daily life, there were occasions when some of the shorter write ups or forum prompts felt more than adequate to drive home the necessary points of the lesson.
Having said that, I think the overall course was accomplished as best as possible given the circumstances of instruction, and though some of the topics could at times go in several different directions, I understand the point of the text in exploring different situations where ethics can be applied. While the issues themselves, be they affirmative action, racism, animal treatment, or otherwise, may not have a direct relationship at the superficial level, all share the general notion of people thinking through the full spectrum of implications for their actions (or lack thereof), and in most cases these examples were ones where students could make a connection in some form, big or small. So long as the required writing pieces can be continually refined for relevance and motivating engagement from the students, I expect the course will continue to fulfill the core objective of enhancing ethical foundations that can be applied to any endeavor for a lifetime.
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Sunday, December 14, 2014
A634.8.3.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
With the increased attention being given to mass shooting events in recent years, there has inevitably been multiple visitations to the question of whether or not increased levels of gun control are required. Much of the debate has centered around either the relative availability of guns in the United States, or the quality of mental health diagnostics and care as many of the recent perpetrators have been found to have a history of mental health related issues.
Hugh LaFollette, in his text The Practice of Ethics, highlights several of the formal and informal arguments for and against gun control in contemporary society. Depending upon which data set is examined, one could well thing that more guns leads to more violence, or it might even lead to less. Overall though, he did bring up points to consider on the questions of managing risks versus desires, and brought up argument for and against the nature of gun ownership as a "right" and an aspect of citizenship. Tied to this as well is the question of enforcement...even if guns were banned to a greater degree, there could be additional costs to law enforcement with different levels of effect similar to the experience of Prohibition in the United States (LaFollette, 2007).
Regarding my own opinion, I certainly don't think that an outright ban on weapons is a feasible nor desirable solution. Indeed, for all the comparisons of the United States to Europe with regards to gun ownership relative to the level of violent crime (usually indicating fewer guns leads to fewer crimes), I point to the example of Switzerland as an exception to the typical argument. It is not uncommon to see rifles being carried openly in public by people participating in shooting sports, and depending on the statistics cited, the country ranks third or fourth in number of guns per capita yet has a firearms death rate about one-seventh of the rate of the United States (Nelson, 2013). This isn't to say the country, known for a tradition of their conscripted military forces keeping weapons at home, isn't experiencing its own qualms in recent history. Besides the frequent utilization in suicides, there was one significant shooting attack at the parliament in 2001 (Bachmann, 2012), and another shooting attack at a factory in Lurcene (Nelson, 2013). But there is not overwhelming support for gun control at this time...in February 2011, nearly 57 percent of voters were against weapons storage in armories versus the traditional home system (Nelson, 2013).
Of course, we have to recognize that there is good cause to consider how guns come into the hands of private citizens. The shooting incidents in Newtown, Aurora, Virginia Tech, and Santa Barbara are reminders that there are still gaps in the system, and answers are slow to come. Those such as Richard Martinez, father of one of the Santa Barbara victims, believed that his son died because of the actions of politicians and the NRA, and framed the gun control debate as not one of gun rights, but of the right to live (Stout, 2014). In the months following, California took further action and signed a law allowing relatives to request a court order to remove weapons from the possession of individuals they believe may pose a threat, which gun right advocates believe is an infringement on civil liberties and constitutes denial of due process (Wood, 2014). Those who want gun control have a perfectly valid point in preventing these tragedies from happening again.
This leads to my holistic thought on the situation...we seem to have identified a trend where the people who commit these crimes have some kind of malicious intent with early indicators, or more recently, they're individuals with mental health issues that go untreated or somehow get possession of weapons. The solution, I believe, will lie in a combination of more uniform background checks to ensure individuals are of sound mind and demeanor to be entrusted by society with a weapon, but more importantly I believe there needs to be an education piece. People need to be able to recognize any warning signs of individuals who may lash out at those around them, and have a good idea of immediate action steps to take. I also believe more needs to be done to encourage people afflicted with mental health issues to receive help, although granted, such matters tend to be very personal and require the buy-in of the person involved. Overall, I still believe in the freedom to bear arms, but admittedly, there will be a challenge in plugging the different possible holes in the system of checks and balances, and in bringing the country onto the same page with respect to both gun laws and gun culture.
Resources
Bachmann, H. (2012, December 20). The Swiss Difference: A Gun Culture That Works. In Time. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Nelson, S. S. (2013, March 19). What's Worked, And What Hasn't, In Gun-Loving Switzerland. In National Public Radio. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Stout, D. (2014, May 26). Gun-Control Debate Heats Up Following California Shooting. In Time. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Wood, D. (2014, October 1). Santa Barbara aftermath: how California is breaking new ground on gun control. In Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Hugh LaFollette, in his text The Practice of Ethics, highlights several of the formal and informal arguments for and against gun control in contemporary society. Depending upon which data set is examined, one could well thing that more guns leads to more violence, or it might even lead to less. Overall though, he did bring up points to consider on the questions of managing risks versus desires, and brought up argument for and against the nature of gun ownership as a "right" and an aspect of citizenship. Tied to this as well is the question of enforcement...even if guns were banned to a greater degree, there could be additional costs to law enforcement with different levels of effect similar to the experience of Prohibition in the United States (LaFollette, 2007).
Regarding my own opinion, I certainly don't think that an outright ban on weapons is a feasible nor desirable solution. Indeed, for all the comparisons of the United States to Europe with regards to gun ownership relative to the level of violent crime (usually indicating fewer guns leads to fewer crimes), I point to the example of Switzerland as an exception to the typical argument. It is not uncommon to see rifles being carried openly in public by people participating in shooting sports, and depending on the statistics cited, the country ranks third or fourth in number of guns per capita yet has a firearms death rate about one-seventh of the rate of the United States (Nelson, 2013). This isn't to say the country, known for a tradition of their conscripted military forces keeping weapons at home, isn't experiencing its own qualms in recent history. Besides the frequent utilization in suicides, there was one significant shooting attack at the parliament in 2001 (Bachmann, 2012), and another shooting attack at a factory in Lurcene (Nelson, 2013). But there is not overwhelming support for gun control at this time...in February 2011, nearly 57 percent of voters were against weapons storage in armories versus the traditional home system (Nelson, 2013).
Of course, we have to recognize that there is good cause to consider how guns come into the hands of private citizens. The shooting incidents in Newtown, Aurora, Virginia Tech, and Santa Barbara are reminders that there are still gaps in the system, and answers are slow to come. Those such as Richard Martinez, father of one of the Santa Barbara victims, believed that his son died because of the actions of politicians and the NRA, and framed the gun control debate as not one of gun rights, but of the right to live (Stout, 2014). In the months following, California took further action and signed a law allowing relatives to request a court order to remove weapons from the possession of individuals they believe may pose a threat, which gun right advocates believe is an infringement on civil liberties and constitutes denial of due process (Wood, 2014). Those who want gun control have a perfectly valid point in preventing these tragedies from happening again.
This leads to my holistic thought on the situation...we seem to have identified a trend where the people who commit these crimes have some kind of malicious intent with early indicators, or more recently, they're individuals with mental health issues that go untreated or somehow get possession of weapons. The solution, I believe, will lie in a combination of more uniform background checks to ensure individuals are of sound mind and demeanor to be entrusted by society with a weapon, but more importantly I believe there needs to be an education piece. People need to be able to recognize any warning signs of individuals who may lash out at those around them, and have a good idea of immediate action steps to take. I also believe more needs to be done to encourage people afflicted with mental health issues to receive help, although granted, such matters tend to be very personal and require the buy-in of the person involved. Overall, I still believe in the freedom to bear arms, but admittedly, there will be a challenge in plugging the different possible holes in the system of checks and balances, and in bringing the country onto the same page with respect to both gun laws and gun culture.
Resources
Bachmann, H. (2012, December 20). The Swiss Difference: A Gun Culture That Works. In Time. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Nelson, S. S. (2013, March 19). What's Worked, And What Hasn't, In Gun-Loving Switzerland. In National Public Radio. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Stout, D. (2014, May 26). Gun-Control Debate Heats Up Following California Shooting. In Time. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Wood, D. (2014, October 1). Santa Barbara aftermath: how California is breaking new ground on gun control. In Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved December 14, 2014.
Sunday, December 7, 2014
A634.7.4.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
The videos presented this week by Dr. Bruce Weinstein and Chuck Gallagher provided a useful reminder of the impacts of the actions of individuals on organizations and the people within them, as well as potentially the individual in question and their family units. After watching the videos, I can think of a handful of times where what the presenters discussed made itself apparent in my own organization.
To reiterate what I'm sure I've said in this class and others, the Air Force's primary statement of ethical conduct is publicly captured in the core values of Integrity First, Service Before Self, and Excellence in All We Do (U.S. Air Force, n.d.). This value set applies to all personnel, be it a junior enlisted fresh out of basic, or a general with over 30 years of service. How these values are portrayed may vary from circumstance to circumstance, but for the most part it is portrayed by our conduct on and off duty, at work and at home.
To use the presentations as a guide, I can say I've seen examples of behavior that would fit well within Dr. Weinstein's and Mr. Gallagher's ideas of ethical and unethical conduct. Weinstein, for instance, touched upon the idea of constructive criticism, and this is an every day occurrence for our organization. Most everywhere I've gone, particularly in my current role as a relatively young officer, I very regularly receive some measure of feedback from my superiors of what I've done well on, and where I need to improve. Usually this is given very objectively and in a reasonably private setting, and is usually capped off with a reminder that I'm making progress. I've only had one leadership experience where the supervision in question tended to "editorialize," but by and large our leadership culture is very good about doing building up our people's confidence and skill sets in an ethical manner. The fact that this is the norm also facilitates Weinstein's note about ethical behavior being beneficial for everyone's morale and productivity, and it is to the organization's benefit to be ethical.
Unfortunately, thinking about Gallagher's description of the slippery slope, I can also very readily see areas where as an organization we regularly find ourselves entertaining an ethical grey area. Every year without fail, we have to deal with the challenge of our budget...not so much in not having enough money, but spending it to justify maintaining our level of unit funding. Although this shouldn't be the case technically, a culture has been formed over the years where the rule of thumb dictates that not only does any leftover money get redistributed to other needs, but those units that don't spend all of their funding are liable to find themselves with less money during the next fiscal year. Frugality goes unrewarded, and while we might find ourselves able to fund last minute business trips, it is not uncommon to find ourselves with a bunch of fancy office supplies, display monitors, and new furniture that we didn't really need. Although "everyone does it," it is still unsettling that this still occurs when the service is being faced with massive cuts and there is increased emphasis on fiscal responsibility. The Air Force has, unfortunately, been no stranger to spending scandals in the past, and one can only wonder about the fine line that it seems to regularly ride upon.
To use the presentations as a guide, I can say I've seen examples of behavior that would fit well within Dr. Weinstein's and Mr. Gallagher's ideas of ethical and unethical conduct. Weinstein, for instance, touched upon the idea of constructive criticism, and this is an every day occurrence for our organization. Most everywhere I've gone, particularly in my current role as a relatively young officer, I very regularly receive some measure of feedback from my superiors of what I've done well on, and where I need to improve. Usually this is given very objectively and in a reasonably private setting, and is usually capped off with a reminder that I'm making progress. I've only had one leadership experience where the supervision in question tended to "editorialize," but by and large our leadership culture is very good about doing building up our people's confidence and skill sets in an ethical manner. The fact that this is the norm also facilitates Weinstein's note about ethical behavior being beneficial for everyone's morale and productivity, and it is to the organization's benefit to be ethical.
Unfortunately, thinking about Gallagher's description of the slippery slope, I can also very readily see areas where as an organization we regularly find ourselves entertaining an ethical grey area. Every year without fail, we have to deal with the challenge of our budget...not so much in not having enough money, but spending it to justify maintaining our level of unit funding. Although this shouldn't be the case technically, a culture has been formed over the years where the rule of thumb dictates that not only does any leftover money get redistributed to other needs, but those units that don't spend all of their funding are liable to find themselves with less money during the next fiscal year. Frugality goes unrewarded, and while we might find ourselves able to fund last minute business trips, it is not uncommon to find ourselves with a bunch of fancy office supplies, display monitors, and new furniture that we didn't really need. Although "everyone does it," it is still unsettling that this still occurs when the service is being faced with massive cuts and there is increased emphasis on fiscal responsibility. The Air Force has, unfortunately, been no stranger to spending scandals in the past, and one can only wonder about the fine line that it seems to regularly ride upon.
Additional Resources
US Air Force, Our Values (n.d.). In U.S. Air Force. Retrieved December 7, 2014, from http://www.airforce.com/learn-about/our-values/
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
A634.6.3.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
If one consider's virtue as being closest to Aristotle's idea as presented in Hugh LaFollette's The Practice of Ethics, then to live a virtuous life is simply living in such a way as to live the best life possible (LaFollette, 2007). For Benjamin Franklin, his overall concept of a virtuous life was captured in his 13 Virtues, which we are told include temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, chastity, and humility (PBS, n.d.).
For further personal reflection, I will take a closer look at three virtues and how to better include them in my daily life, specifically the virtues of resolution, industry, and cleanliness. Resolution is defined as "...performing what you ought," and to "perform without fail what you resolve." Industry is to always be "...employed in something useful" and not wasting actions. Finally, cleanliness is simply "tolerate no uncleanness in body, clothes, or habitation." (PBS, n.d.)
With regard to resolution, I personally define this as a combination of doing what is expected of you, and completing not only these tasks but also any task that you set out to accomplish. Although the ideal would be for everyone to finish everything, and finish it well, the fact is that intents go unfulfilled and tasks fall by the wayside by way of sheer business, entropy or otherwise. I myself, while I more often than not complete my work and school tasks by a fairly large margin, do find myself with lingering tasks in my personal life. Household projects don't get tended to as often or as promptly as I would like, photos go for weeks without being uploaded and usually never get touch up, and although I have several personal writing projects that I've begun to pen I've only actually completed two in the last several years. To better meet the challenge of resolution, now that I've identified my own shortcomings, I can make it a point (and ideally will resolve to this) that I pause to schedule the time for my various resolutions and ultimately see them through.
Industry is another issue that I expect to be highly common in the modern, wired era of 24 hour news cycles, blogs, and near constant stimuli via on-demand entertainment, social media, and the generally easy availability of time-wasters. Although this is only for maybe a few minutes at a time, assuming an individual hasn't dedicated an entire half hour to an hour for a television program, those handful of minutes eventually add up to a great deal of time that could have been allocated towards other ventures. I myself am guilty as well of idling away time at home and at work reading short articles or reading up on information not immediately related to what I'm doing, and although in the grand scheme it may not seem so much, the fact is the time is still gone. Time is a finite, one use resource, and I would do well to be more conscious of how much bang I get for my investment.
Finally, very much tied to the previous two virtues is the virtue of cleanliness. Cleanliness is admittedly a very personal standard, as everyone has what they consider an acceptable level. Some individuals I know cannot stand even a piece of paper that is out of place, while others have their belongings scattered every which way or have their empty drink containers piled on the counter top. I admittedly move back and forth between the extremes depending on my level of business and whether or not I'm expecting visitor's, but I know my work space and home environment more often fits the stereotype of the absent minded professor that, although they themselves are not untidy in appearance or thinking, they tend to have a higher tolerance for books and papers piled high on every horizontal surface.
The key to any of these virtues and bringing them to practical application in my daily life is to first and foremost identify it as a goal or necessity, and perhaps take to heart Aristotle's idea of the virtues in question as being part of the path to the best life possible. From the initial application, I also believe that to see any enduring effect that the virtues would have to become consistent lifestyle habits. Although living by these and the other virtues prescribed by Frankly is not an impossible task, it is certainly an interesting challenge for these modern times that demands more of our time and energy in spite of advances in attempting to save the same.
Resources
LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell.
For further personal reflection, I will take a closer look at three virtues and how to better include them in my daily life, specifically the virtues of resolution, industry, and cleanliness. Resolution is defined as "...performing what you ought," and to "perform without fail what you resolve." Industry is to always be "...employed in something useful" and not wasting actions. Finally, cleanliness is simply "tolerate no uncleanness in body, clothes, or habitation." (PBS, n.d.)
With regard to resolution, I personally define this as a combination of doing what is expected of you, and completing not only these tasks but also any task that you set out to accomplish. Although the ideal would be for everyone to finish everything, and finish it well, the fact is that intents go unfulfilled and tasks fall by the wayside by way of sheer business, entropy or otherwise. I myself, while I more often than not complete my work and school tasks by a fairly large margin, do find myself with lingering tasks in my personal life. Household projects don't get tended to as often or as promptly as I would like, photos go for weeks without being uploaded and usually never get touch up, and although I have several personal writing projects that I've begun to pen I've only actually completed two in the last several years. To better meet the challenge of resolution, now that I've identified my own shortcomings, I can make it a point (and ideally will resolve to this) that I pause to schedule the time for my various resolutions and ultimately see them through.
Industry is another issue that I expect to be highly common in the modern, wired era of 24 hour news cycles, blogs, and near constant stimuli via on-demand entertainment, social media, and the generally easy availability of time-wasters. Although this is only for maybe a few minutes at a time, assuming an individual hasn't dedicated an entire half hour to an hour for a television program, those handful of minutes eventually add up to a great deal of time that could have been allocated towards other ventures. I myself am guilty as well of idling away time at home and at work reading short articles or reading up on information not immediately related to what I'm doing, and although in the grand scheme it may not seem so much, the fact is the time is still gone. Time is a finite, one use resource, and I would do well to be more conscious of how much bang I get for my investment.
Finally, very much tied to the previous two virtues is the virtue of cleanliness. Cleanliness is admittedly a very personal standard, as everyone has what they consider an acceptable level. Some individuals I know cannot stand even a piece of paper that is out of place, while others have their belongings scattered every which way or have their empty drink containers piled on the counter top. I admittedly move back and forth between the extremes depending on my level of business and whether or not I'm expecting visitor's, but I know my work space and home environment more often fits the stereotype of the absent minded professor that, although they themselves are not untidy in appearance or thinking, they tend to have a higher tolerance for books and papers piled high on every horizontal surface.
The key to any of these virtues and bringing them to practical application in my daily life is to first and foremost identify it as a goal or necessity, and perhaps take to heart Aristotle's idea of the virtues in question as being part of the path to the best life possible. From the initial application, I also believe that to see any enduring effect that the virtues would have to become consistent lifestyle habits. Although living by these and the other virtues prescribed by Frankly is not an impossible task, it is certainly an interesting challenge for these modern times that demands more of our time and energy in spite of advances in attempting to save the same.
Resources
LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
A634.5.4.RB_SienkiewiczRaymo
As is the case with many professions and fields of human endeavor in contemporary times, even the seemingly cutthroat arena of marketing has been under greater scrutiny for ethical conduct. To answer the question of whether or not ethical guidelines make a difference, although it might not be a conscious discussion in daily activities, the heavy consequences for marketers caught in the midst of unethical conduct as well as the notion of an organization's reputation as being one of its "...greatest intangible assets" (Ferell), suggests that if guidelines haven't already made a difference, they certainly should matter. Even years ago, there were ethical concerns surrounding how advertisers handled marketing to children, with some stating that intensive advertising created a widespread of materialistic values among children that risked leaving them feeling deficient if they can't keep up with new products (Clay, 2000)
With the contemporary ethos of ethical business, it falls upon marketers to remain true to their objective in conducting fruitful business, but they also need to balance this out with taking the high road. As suggested in the El Sayed and El Ghazaly article, there are organizations that primarily seek to make a quick buck. However, an organization can commit itself towards integrating an ethical culture in order to achieve their end goals while striving to do only good. This would happen best by upholding as heroes those who achieve the most through righteous means, while giving cautionary tales of those who met their downfall by trying to cut corners. Leadership would have to set the example for up and comers, and recognize those who best exemplify the ethical values of the organization (Ferell). In short, a victory in good conscience can't simply be an objective, but must become a way of life woven into the very fabric of the organization's identity.
Tied into the discussion of marketing ethics is the question of consumer data collection. Whether or not this practice is acceptable is still an emerging debate. For the United States, it is known that companies collect data on consumers through tracking social media posts, online purchases, and search habits. There have, however, been instances where companies have embarrassed themselves in applying the information gathered, as in the case where Target sent coupons for baby products to a teenager after analyzing her shopping patterns, leading to her parents finding out she was expecting (Martin, 2014). Admittedly, speaking from personal perspective, people do accept a modicum of invasiveness to have their free services, but this doesn't happen globally. Speaking from personal experience, a close friend of mine related to me that in the process of continuing to create and expand the content for a major apparel company's web site, while Americans didn't balk at the idea of accepting location tracking, they had to work on a solution for the European market as people there apparently don't consent as readily towards sharing their location through web services. Like many questions of acceptable behavior, the answer comes down to the practice being only ethical as far as a given society is willing to permit it.
If placed in the position of managing marketing efforts, I might start at the initial onset by asking what constitutes acceptable behavior not only within the given culture of the organization and its respective industry, but more importantly by the ethical context of our customers or our target audience. It isn't up to us to arbitrarily decide Perhaps the simplest way to deal with this though might be a rule of thumb I've heard by a couple different names, to include the New York Times test or the Washington Post test. Simply put, if we were to do something and it made the front page headlines nationwide, would we feel shame, embarrassment, or otherwise like we were "caught" doing something? If the answer is no or if we would feel proud, then great...if not, then there needs to be immediate course corrections made. Admittedly, there is a potential challenge in that with today's technology driven communications and marketing landscape, there is the chance that unexplored ethical concerns could present themselves within the new mediums of communication or in the initial churn of defining what's acceptable...if virtual reality ever becomes a regular thing, will the regular rules of real society still apply, or will people be permitted to roam as they please? I believe then that management efforts will come down to regularly checking with the organization to ensure we are on course and can sleep soundly at night with our decisions.
Resources
Clay, R. A. (2000, September). Advertising to children: Is it ethical? [Electronic version]. Monitor on Psychology, 31(8), 52.
Ferrell, L. (n.d.). Marketing Ethics. In Cengage. Retrieved November 21, 2014, from http://college.cengage.com/business/modules/marktngethics.pdf
Martin, E. (2014, March 27). The Ethics of Big Data. In Forbes. Retrieved November 22, 2014, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/emc/2014/03/27/the-ethics-of-big-data/
With the contemporary ethos of ethical business, it falls upon marketers to remain true to their objective in conducting fruitful business, but they also need to balance this out with taking the high road. As suggested in the El Sayed and El Ghazaly article, there are organizations that primarily seek to make a quick buck. However, an organization can commit itself towards integrating an ethical culture in order to achieve their end goals while striving to do only good. This would happen best by upholding as heroes those who achieve the most through righteous means, while giving cautionary tales of those who met their downfall by trying to cut corners. Leadership would have to set the example for up and comers, and recognize those who best exemplify the ethical values of the organization (Ferell). In short, a victory in good conscience can't simply be an objective, but must become a way of life woven into the very fabric of the organization's identity.
Tied into the discussion of marketing ethics is the question of consumer data collection. Whether or not this practice is acceptable is still an emerging debate. For the United States, it is known that companies collect data on consumers through tracking social media posts, online purchases, and search habits. There have, however, been instances where companies have embarrassed themselves in applying the information gathered, as in the case where Target sent coupons for baby products to a teenager after analyzing her shopping patterns, leading to her parents finding out she was expecting (Martin, 2014). Admittedly, speaking from personal perspective, people do accept a modicum of invasiveness to have their free services, but this doesn't happen globally. Speaking from personal experience, a close friend of mine related to me that in the process of continuing to create and expand the content for a major apparel company's web site, while Americans didn't balk at the idea of accepting location tracking, they had to work on a solution for the European market as people there apparently don't consent as readily towards sharing their location through web services. Like many questions of acceptable behavior, the answer comes down to the practice being only ethical as far as a given society is willing to permit it.
If placed in the position of managing marketing efforts, I might start at the initial onset by asking what constitutes acceptable behavior not only within the given culture of the organization and its respective industry, but more importantly by the ethical context of our customers or our target audience. It isn't up to us to arbitrarily decide Perhaps the simplest way to deal with this though might be a rule of thumb I've heard by a couple different names, to include the New York Times test or the Washington Post test. Simply put, if we were to do something and it made the front page headlines nationwide, would we feel shame, embarrassment, or otherwise like we were "caught" doing something? If the answer is no or if we would feel proud, then great...if not, then there needs to be immediate course corrections made. Admittedly, there is a potential challenge in that with today's technology driven communications and marketing landscape, there is the chance that unexplored ethical concerns could present themselves within the new mediums of communication or in the initial churn of defining what's acceptable...if virtual reality ever becomes a regular thing, will the regular rules of real society still apply, or will people be permitted to roam as they please? I believe then that management efforts will come down to regularly checking with the organization to ensure we are on course and can sleep soundly at night with our decisions.
Resources
Clay, R. A. (2000, September). Advertising to children: Is it ethical? [Electronic version]. Monitor on Psychology, 31(8), 52.
Ferrell, L. (n.d.). Marketing Ethics. In Cengage. Retrieved November 21, 2014, from http://college.cengage.com/business/modules/marktngethics.pdf
Martin, E. (2014, March 27). The Ethics of Big Data. In Forbes. Retrieved November 22, 2014, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/emc/2014/03/27/the-ethics-of-big-data/
Sunday, November 16, 2014
A634.4.4.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
In discussing the broader issue of racism, Hugh LaFollette discusses the more specific issue of affirmative action in his text The Practice of Ethics. Affirmative action, in brief, is the practice of giving special consideration to minorities and women, generally with regards to hiring processes and admission to colleges and universities. Although some programs were considered by the US Supreme Court as legally permissible in 2003, many Americans reject the practice (LaFollette, 2007). Interestingly enough, a 2014 Supreme Court decision upheld a Michigan constitutional amendment that prohibited the use of affirmative action at the state's public universities and colleges (Liptak, 2014).
Whether or not affirmative action is ethical, however, depends on one's viewpoint. There are certainly those who would be inclined to run with the argument that it is needed. LaFollette, for this half of the argument, poses the arguments of mitigating veiled or indirect racism, or ensuring equality of opportunity (LaFollette, 2007). Santa Clara University, in a comprehensive piece on affirmative action from their applied ethics center, writes that those favoring such programs appeal to distributive and compensatory justice, further asserting that whereas discrimination in the past was done out of ignorance or malice, preferential treatment programs have the aims of creating equal opportunity, and promoting equality. Further, they wrote that some arguable benefits include creating a cadre of professionals more responsive to needs of minorities, as well as cultivating benefits from the diversity of perspectives in the workplace and academia (Andre et al, n.d.)
As noted though, there are arguments against affirmative action. For discussion purposes, LaFollette presents several issues including perceptions of reverse discrimination in promoting others simply on account of race, doing harm to those that have done no wrong, potentially bringing up those who aren't necessarily the most qualified, and possibly even bringing further stigma upon minorities (LaFollette, 2007). The Santa Clara write up adds in that preferential treatment potentially ignores the claim of need in a situation, grants benefits to select groups regardless of whether or not individuals experienced discrimination, can encourage dependency in some cases, and related to the earlier note of stigma, can devalue the achievements of individuals that are members of a benefited group (Andre et al, n.d.).
Regarding my personal opinion of affirmative action, I can certainly see the argument of both sides from both an academic and experiential standpoint, as I am a member of both a majority and minority group as a bi-racial individual (which in itself can be classified as a minority group). Although I may myself have benefited from checking the box on university applications and the like, I personally do not believe in ascribing value to a person's performance and qualifications simply because of their racial, ethnic, or cultural background. Perhaps from deontological standpoint, one can make the argument of correcting the wrongs of society after the fact. However, from that same perspective, I still believe that though there is positive intent, affirmative action is still an act of discrimination, and and any benefit gained could potentially be seen as something of a "hand out" rather than something earned or an affirmation of a person's achievements. Further, from a consequentialist standpoint, I would argue there is greater harm in the intentional pursuit of affirmative action, for rather than forming an objective system or allowing an existing objective system to evaluate individuals on merit, affirmative action actively takes away a benefit or desired object from one person and gives it to another. Rather than having a single beneficiary as an end result of the system, there would then be one beneficiary and one person who was arbitrarily deprived to pay for another's benefit.
Sources
Andre, C., Velasquez, M., & Mazur, T. (n.d.). Affirmative action: Twenty-five Years of Controversy. In Santa Clara University Markkula Center of Applied Ethics. Retrieved November 15, 2014, from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v5n2/affirmative.html
LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell
Liptak, A. (2014, April 23). Court Backs Michigan on Affirmative Action [Electronic version]. The New York Times, p. A1.
Whether or not affirmative action is ethical, however, depends on one's viewpoint. There are certainly those who would be inclined to run with the argument that it is needed. LaFollette, for this half of the argument, poses the arguments of mitigating veiled or indirect racism, or ensuring equality of opportunity (LaFollette, 2007). Santa Clara University, in a comprehensive piece on affirmative action from their applied ethics center, writes that those favoring such programs appeal to distributive and compensatory justice, further asserting that whereas discrimination in the past was done out of ignorance or malice, preferential treatment programs have the aims of creating equal opportunity, and promoting equality. Further, they wrote that some arguable benefits include creating a cadre of professionals more responsive to needs of minorities, as well as cultivating benefits from the diversity of perspectives in the workplace and academia (Andre et al, n.d.)
As noted though, there are arguments against affirmative action. For discussion purposes, LaFollette presents several issues including perceptions of reverse discrimination in promoting others simply on account of race, doing harm to those that have done no wrong, potentially bringing up those who aren't necessarily the most qualified, and possibly even bringing further stigma upon minorities (LaFollette, 2007). The Santa Clara write up adds in that preferential treatment potentially ignores the claim of need in a situation, grants benefits to select groups regardless of whether or not individuals experienced discrimination, can encourage dependency in some cases, and related to the earlier note of stigma, can devalue the achievements of individuals that are members of a benefited group (Andre et al, n.d.).
Regarding my personal opinion of affirmative action, I can certainly see the argument of both sides from both an academic and experiential standpoint, as I am a member of both a majority and minority group as a bi-racial individual (which in itself can be classified as a minority group). Although I may myself have benefited from checking the box on university applications and the like, I personally do not believe in ascribing value to a person's performance and qualifications simply because of their racial, ethnic, or cultural background. Perhaps from deontological standpoint, one can make the argument of correcting the wrongs of society after the fact. However, from that same perspective, I still believe that though there is positive intent, affirmative action is still an act of discrimination, and and any benefit gained could potentially be seen as something of a "hand out" rather than something earned or an affirmation of a person's achievements. Further, from a consequentialist standpoint, I would argue there is greater harm in the intentional pursuit of affirmative action, for rather than forming an objective system or allowing an existing objective system to evaluate individuals on merit, affirmative action actively takes away a benefit or desired object from one person and gives it to another. Rather than having a single beneficiary as an end result of the system, there would then be one beneficiary and one person who was arbitrarily deprived to pay for another's benefit.
Sources
Andre, C., Velasquez, M., & Mazur, T. (n.d.). Affirmative action: Twenty-five Years of Controversy. In Santa Clara University Markkula Center of Applied Ethics. Retrieved November 15, 2014, from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v5n2/affirmative.html
LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell
Liptak, A. (2014, April 23). Court Backs Michigan on Affirmative Action [Electronic version]. The New York Times, p. A1.
Saturday, November 8, 2014
A634.3.5.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond
Completing a read of Kramer's article, The Harder They Fall, the first thing that comes to mind when considering the thought of dilemmas in work, society, and life is the overall notion of the "work-life" balance that many people seem to struggle with, to the point that the subject finds its ways into news stories and is even a point touched upon during military performance reviews. Even a matter of days ago, Forbes published an article centered around four tips on how to manage workloads so as not to displace one's personal life (Nuth, 2014).
Kramer, in conducting his study that formed some of the basis of his article, had noted several characteristics of those who get in trouble, some of which include getting caught up in some of the high-life that comes with success, not maintaining humility, or losing their sense of self-awareness (Kramer, 2003). Much of his vignettes also seemed to highlight well his idea of good people getting caught up in their rise to power and becoming reckless, or even taking an "at any cost" approach to being the winner of a given situation. I thought Kramer had an especially good point in his analysis of there being a "winner take all" market...many people are gunning for the same slice of the American Dream or high achievement, and although there are genuinely great people, much emphasis is placed upon the coveted positive of "number one" given to whoever edges out all others in some manner or another (Kramer, 2003). This drive to succeed, it seems, not only drives people to achieve the end goal of being on top, but as Kramer shared in another vignette of a woman leaving her family, cause people to potentially make extreme sacrifices of their family in order to "keep up".
It is indeed unfortunate that even years after the publication of Kramer's article, a dilemma continues between individuals and their work. An October article from Time's website highlighted a recent study that found 70% of worker suffer from work-family tension (Fondas, 2014). Society seems to have a way of amplifying expectations for productivity in spite of attempts to save working hours and manpower, thus leaving no relief in sight for the individual as progress moves forward. Although it is good that the problem has been recognized, the fact that it has become a part of the national conversation indicates that it has become very deeply seated. There is truly an ongoing push and pull between the individual and the major influencers of their life, to include work, family, and meeting other aspirations of higher education and service to their communities. Effective function without excess sacrifice to any single aspect requires a strong measure of time management, discipline, and as highlighted by Kramer, not sacrificing oneself and their values for the sake of the power game.
Kramer, in conducting his study that formed some of the basis of his article, had noted several characteristics of those who get in trouble, some of which include getting caught up in some of the high-life that comes with success, not maintaining humility, or losing their sense of self-awareness (Kramer, 2003). Much of his vignettes also seemed to highlight well his idea of good people getting caught up in their rise to power and becoming reckless, or even taking an "at any cost" approach to being the winner of a given situation. I thought Kramer had an especially good point in his analysis of there being a "winner take all" market...many people are gunning for the same slice of the American Dream or high achievement, and although there are genuinely great people, much emphasis is placed upon the coveted positive of "number one" given to whoever edges out all others in some manner or another (Kramer, 2003). This drive to succeed, it seems, not only drives people to achieve the end goal of being on top, but as Kramer shared in another vignette of a woman leaving her family, cause people to potentially make extreme sacrifices of their family in order to "keep up".
It is indeed unfortunate that even years after the publication of Kramer's article, a dilemma continues between individuals and their work. An October article from Time's website highlighted a recent study that found 70% of worker suffer from work-family tension (Fondas, 2014). Society seems to have a way of amplifying expectations for productivity in spite of attempts to save working hours and manpower, thus leaving no relief in sight for the individual as progress moves forward. Although it is good that the problem has been recognized, the fact that it has become a part of the national conversation indicates that it has become very deeply seated. There is truly an ongoing push and pull between the individual and the major influencers of their life, to include work, family, and meeting other aspirations of higher education and service to their communities. Effective function without excess sacrifice to any single aspect requires a strong measure of time management, discipline, and as highlighted by Kramer, not sacrificing oneself and their values for the sake of the power game.
Fondas, N. (2014, October 11). Work-Life Balance is Having a Moment - But for the Wrong Reasons. In Time. Retrieved November 6, 2014.
Kramer, R. M. (2003). The Harder They Fall. (cover story). Harvard Business Review, 81(10), 58-66.
Kramer, R. M. (2003). The Harder They Fall. (cover story). Harvard Business Review, 81(10), 58-66.
Nuth, A. (2014, November 4). 4 Work-Life Balance Tips. In Forbes. Retrieved November 6, 2014.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)