The Train Dilemma: When no Choice is a Good One!

A634.1.5.RB

Decision making is an important process in our everyday lives. Typically, these decisions are centered around what to wear for school/work, what to eat for lunch or dinner, or even which route to take because of high traffic areas. Fortunately for us, we can make such decisions without investing much thought. There are, on the other hand, decisions that create an ethical dilemma, in which the outcome has varying degrees or consequences for all. In these complex situations, our values and morals guide our decision-making process as the pros and cons are weighed. “By acknowledging edging that this consequence is a reason, we show that we are committed to the claim that consequences of our actions are morally relevant” (LaFollette, 2007).

Below are three scenarios that are designed to create an ethical dilemma. For this week’s assignment, we are to: Consider the following ethical dilemma and create a reflection blog regarding what you would do when having to make a choice in each train scenario. Justify your position and create a synopsis of your position and the implications. 

Train Dilemma  

Scenario One: A train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the switch person. By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track where one child is standing. Will you throw the switch? (Source: Thomas Anderson, Case Western Reserve University)

Being placed in any situation in which lives are in jeopardy, one is forced to weigh many factors. These factors involve our morals and values. In doing so, understanding that tragedy is inevitable, I would strongly lean towards trying to prevent or mitigate the amount of tragedy by deciding to save more lives at the expense of one. Aside from the emotional cost of sacrificing another human being (especially a child), the decision to save many more is relatively easier.

Scenario Two: (Same scenario except) You are standing next to an elderly man. If you push him in front of the train it will stop the train and all the children will be saved. Will you push him?

Absolutely! Although my natural inclination is to preserve life, again, knowing that tragedy is inevitable, more lives would be preserved by the loss of a few (or one in this case). I believe there may be another alternative to this scenario that includes sacrificing myself to stop the train. Obviously, the children’s lives are in jeopardy, nowhere in this scenario is the elderly man’s life in jeopardy until I determined his life is deemed “tradeable.” It would be difficult for anyone to claim that “no matter what,” they would save others at their own expense (life). In fact, these situations are rare, but they do exist.

Scenario Three: (Same scenario except) The one child on the side track is your child. Will you throw the switch to save the five children?

I feel confident saying that any parent’s purpose in life is to ensure the safety and well-being of their children. Thus, trading the live of your own child to save others (non-family) may be contrary to our very own preservation. In this case, I would not sacrifice my own child to save the other children. Reflecting on this decision, I believe it comes down to being able to live with such a decision and know that the “best” decision was made. I also acknowledge that this perspective is my own and may look different from other points of view. Nevertheless, I believe that any one whom ensure the safety of their child would feel the same regardless of other perspectives.

Summary

As a former military leader (and even now), I expected and did my best to prepare for difficult and complex situations causing ethical dilemmas. Though one can rarely prepare for all unthinkable scenarios, understanding my own values and morals made my decision-making more responsive and centered around the greater good. “To make better choices, we must become aware of our options and the relevant background information; we should identify the consequences of our actions for others, for ourselves, and for the people we will become” (LaFollette, 2007).

Reference

LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Kindle Edition.

Transformational Strategies

A635.8.3.RB

How do you relate and make sense of the approaches taken by Jim "Mattress Mack" McIngvale and Stanley McChrystal compared to the information presented in your textbook? Use the below figures: Figure 15.4 Relative Strength of Corporate Cultures and Figure 15.5 The Strategy-Culture Matrix in your response.

In a typical organizational life-cycle, there may have been one or several events (crisis) where the organization was forced to undergo significant changes to its culture and/or business practices in order to survive. Brown (2011) identifies this as organizational transformation and defines it as a “drastic, abrupt change to total structures, managerial processes, and corporate cultures.” He continues by stating that, “It requires a redesign of everything in the organization, including the norms and the culture, the very soul of the organization. Nothing is sacred, and there are few, if any, guidelines” (p. 399). This week, we reviewed two interesting videos that involved two very different types of organizations that required such drastic changes.

The first video involves Jim McIngvale and his Gallery furniture store, which has been in business for over thirty year. In 2008, during the economic downturn, the significant decrease of new homes built in the Houston area went down from 60,000 to 15,000, severely limiting his core clients. Furthermore, the following year the furniture store burnt down, adding another hardship. Needless to say, in order for the business to survive, major changes needed to occur. With an established business, Jim’s organization would fall into the Strong Culture in the Relative Strength of Corporate Culture as noted in Brown’s (2011) Figure 15.4 and in quadrant 1 (Manage the Change) in the Strategy-Culture Matrix, Figure 15.4.

Understanding that the business practices were outdated, Jim implemented training initiatives that involved increasing technological literacy so that employees could better engage customers by following up via emails; thus, increasing sales. The practice of “prospecting” was reinforced with coaching and constant feedback. Furthermore, Jim established a recognition program (ringing the bell), to include incentive pay, for achieving desired behavior(s).

The second video was of Retired General Stanley McChrystal’s experience of transforming how military organizations performed before and after the 9/11 attack. Most importantly, McChrystal highlighted the necessary transformational leadership within himself in order to meet the requirements of a dynamic environment. Ideally, many military leaders prefer to lead their organizations by being able to communicate and interact face-to-face. This typically builds trust and ensure clear communication and intent. However, as a result of the 9/11 attacks, McChrystal found himself and his organization spread throughout the globe and mainly relied on technology such as video conferencing, phone, and emails to communicate with his unit leaders. McChrystal (2011) stated, “ I've got to use everything I can, not just for communication, but for leadership.”

Another important point that McChrystal makes is how one of his commander officer built him back up and breathed life back in him after a humiliating and fail operation while that the National Training Center.

They put a big screen up, and they take you through everything: "and then you didn't do this, and you didn't do this, etc." I walked out feeling as low as a snake's belly in a wagon rut. And I saw my battalion commander, because I had let him down. And I went up to apologize to him, and he said, "Stanley, I thought you did great." And in one sentence, he lifted me, put me back on my feet, and taught me that leaders can let you fail and yet not let you be a failure.

Another import aspect that added to the complexity was the generational difference of those he was leading. “Probably the biggest change was understanding that the generational difference, the ages, had changed so much.” McChrystal continues, “And it reminded me that we're operating a force that must have shared purpose and shared consciousness, and yet he has different experiences, in many cases a different vocabulary, a completely different skill set in terms of digital media than I do and many of the other senior leaders.”

Organizational transformation posses many challenges that add complexity to an already dynamic situation. Leaders must constantly assess not only the situation, but their own capabilities as well. Both of the above example clear indicates that transformative leadership a constant process of learning and influencing others with creative solutions. In order to lead effectively in today’s fluid environment, leaders cannot rely on traditional methods or solutions for complex challenges.

References

Brown, D. (2011). Experiential Approach to Organization Development. Pearson Education. Kindle Edition.

McChrystal, S. (March 2011). Listen, Lean… then Lead. Ted. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/stanley_mcchrystal/transcript?language=en#t-632000.