A Reflection of Our Learning

A634.9.4.RB

Reflect on the three key lessons you take away from the course. Reflect on your perceived value of this course.

Going into the Leadership Ethics & Corporate Social Responsibility course I felt I have a good understanding of what ethics and morality entailed. Throughout the course however, I learned that I fell into the “blind spot” category as the text author reveals. LaFollette (2007) states that, “We all have restricted moral vision; many of us have vast moral blind spots. Most of us are ignorant of historical, political, economic, sociological, and psychological logical insights that can inform moral action” (p. 93). While I had some awareness of many of these factors, I came to the realizations that I was only scratching the surface in my understanding.

There were many interesting and enlightening discussions on ethical and moral concepts. The three take-aways that I valued most was 1) consequentialism & deontology 2) generational factors, and 3) everyday morality.

Consequentialism & Deontology

I found consequentialism and deontology to be a very interesting topic as both significantly impact the way people reason and make decisions. As a leader, I am fully aware that people do not always share the same frame of mind and/or perspective. In fact, as people evaluate and analyze situational factors to solve basic and complex issues, understanding how these two ethical theories shape our decision making is vital. Whereas consequentialism states that we are morally obligated to act in a manner that results the overall best consequences, deontology holds that we should act in accordance with moral rules or rights that are partially independent of consequences (LaFollette, 2007).

Why this is important is because it allows us to have a better understanding of someone’s (even ourselves) reasoning of ethical or moral issues. Thus, if someone else arrives at a decision that differs from our own, this does not necessary mean that they are wrong and you are right (and vice versa). Instead, this conclusion should spark a discussion of the situation and factors in order to shed light on the differences in reasoning. According to LaFollette (2007), “Knowing someone's theoretical commitments does not tell us which actions she thinks are right or wrong. It tells us only how she reasons about moral issues although, as we shall see, that tells us a lot” (p. 362).

Generational Factors

Friction among generations is hardly a new revelation. In fact, generations sharing the same society and workplace is as common as difference cars sharing the same road. Yet this topic is important because each generation hold different values and behavior patterns that are associated with that generations experiences; the key for leaders is to understand the wants and needs of these generations in order to create a cohesive workforce culture (Deyoe and Fox, 2012).

For leaders (or anyone for that matter), it would be easy to overlook or dismiss an older person’s thoughts or ideas as being outdated or irrelevant. Likewise, to conclude that a millennial’s behavior as irresponsible or to casual.  Thus, the challenge for leaders is to be able to negotiate their way through these generational gaps and unite the qualities each one brings to the workplace and create productive and cohesive work culture. One can only do this is they are aware of these challenges and are willing to look beyond the surface of the potential friction.

Everyday Morality

Thinking, behaving, and living morally should be an important aspect for everyone. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. What is important about everyday morality is that we have a large controlling investment in the end result we actively work at it to improve the benefits of our lives and those around us. LaFollette (2007) provides five factors that strengthen moral behavior:

• knowledge of the morally relevant facts;

• knowledge of the effects of our actions;

• having a vivid moral imagination;

• caring about others;

• interpreting others' behavior (p. 3082).

It is easy to see how these factors contribute to greater self-awareness and potentially greater understanding of others. As leaders, it is more likely than not that we deal with and collaborate with others daily; many times, in different and dynamic situations. It is essential that leaders understand how their behaviors affect others and most importantly, how and when to adjust their leadership style to get the most out of their people. Leaders must be flexible, insightful, and be accountable. Keeping the above five factors in mind is a great start.

References

Deyoe, R. H., & Fox, T. L. (2012). Identifying strategies to minimize workplace conflict due to generational differences. Journal of Behavioral Studies, 5, 1-17.

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. [Kindle edition]. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.

Gun Control: What is the Answer?

A634.8.3.RB

Do citizens have a right to bear arms? Answer the question in your reflection blog. State your opinion and follow up your position with supporting documentation. Next, present the opposing side to your stance. Use external sources to enhance your claims.

The question of whether U.S. citizens have the right to bear arms is easy to answer. For this, I point to the United States Constitution, Bill of Right, Amendment II, which states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” What is not so ease to answer are the conditions and/or limitations of this right.

Gun control has long been a polarizing topic. In fact, organizations such as the National Rifle Association (NRA) which exists to preserve gun owner rights and pro-gun control organizations like The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence which seeks great gun control, continuously jockey to influence voters and law makers alike. For many Americans, because of the high emotional impact of violent events such as Columbine high school shooting, the Sandy Hook elementary shooting, or even the shooting of politician Gabrielle Gifford in Tucson, AZ; they feel compelled to support some form of gun control. Indeed, LaFollette (2007) notes that there are alternative to this topic that include three scales of gun control: 1) the degree (if at all) to which guns should be abolished 2) the restrictions (if any) on those guns available to private citizens and/or 3) the combination of the first two (p. 2766).

Some believe that significant gun control is not only needed, but vital to public safety by limiting the instruments that are used to carry out violent and mass killings. In fact, according to ProCon.org (2016), “Firearms were the 12th leading cause of all deaths, representing 1.3% of total deaths topping liver disease, hypertension, and Parkinson’s disease, as well as deaths from fires, drowning, and machinery accidents” (par. 5). So, if guns are taken out of the equation, the belief is that there will be less deaths as a result of guns.

Another popular pro-gun control position is that there is no law-abiding need for high-capacity magazines for any gun. Especially since mass shootings between 1982 and 2012 involving guns indicated that, 50% of these violent events involved a high-capacity magazine gun and that when such magazines are used, the death rate rose 63% and the injury rate went up 156% (ProCon.org, 2016).

The right for a citizen to bear arms is provided and guaranteed. Having to ability to possess a gun (hand gun/long gun) for self-defense, hunting, or overall protection is deeply rooted in American history. This is one of the reasons why the creators of the US Constitution made it a point to 1) establish this right and 2) prevent the government from infringing on this right. It goes without saying that the conditions that existed when this right was created have long since evolved.

In the wake of high profile mass shooting as noted above, Americans have been forced to re-examine the right to bear arms and how much (if any) limitations should be imposed. Because of instant access to violent acts involving guns, the general conception is that guns are the main cause of such carnage. In fact, often many news outlets constantly publish figures that involve gun violence that can be somewhat misleading. According to Jacob Davidson (2015):

People should also be aware that most gun-related deaths are suicides, not murders. There are twice as many suicides in the U.S. by guns as there are homicides and I think most people find that very surprising. Over and over again one reads that 30,000 people have been killed with guns, but what’s not said is that 20,000 of them took their own lives (para. 4).

While the loss of any life as a result of violence (to include suicide) is unfortunate and unacceptable, I believe the focus needs to be directed at the factors of the crime/violence as much (or even more) than just the tools that were used to carry out the crime. By and large, the majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens. Yet, those with criminal backgrounds or mentally unstable have been known to acquire guns legally and illegally. Thus, in order to address this issue, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System was created in 1998 to identify those unfit to purchase guns from a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL). Headed by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), this system checks a person’s background such as: criminal history, mental issues, dishonorable discharge from the military, immigration status, any type of warrants, and know drug use (Kohrman and Mascia, 2015). This background check, however, is not required for private gun sales.

I believe that some form of gun control is necessary to identify and prevent those with criminal histories, mental defects, and those under investigations or indictment. While owning a gun is a right, so is the right to public safety. Thus, if a person has shown or is showing that they are not fit to possess a tool such as a gun, then they should have their right to own a gun either temporary or permanently revoked by a judge and not necessarily a politician. Furthermore, I do believe that in order to extend this identification and prevent, background checks should be extended to private gun sales. A system should be established for private citizens to run a timely background check for anyone wishing to purchase their guns. I would be important to not be used in a manner that creates a registry, tracks who is selling or buying what guns, affordable, and easily accessible. If the point is to ensure the suitability of a gun owners status, then a simple background system should assist in keeping guns out of certain people’s hands.

Another important aspect of gun control is the enforcement of existing laws. While introducing new gun control laws to prevent certain grades of guns from entering the civilian population may be warranted and requires greater discussion. However, laws should promote great vetting oppose to outright stopping interested gun owners. In other word, swimming with the current oppose to against it may be more affective. Another angle to approach better gun safety and handling is improving or increasing gun safety courses. Training and education is an important ingredient to responsible gun ownership.

There is no doubt that guns have played a part in violent events, yet they have also prevented events from become more severe. The true issues from my point of view involves the humane being on the other end of the gun. The gun is the tool, people with the intent to hurt or kill others will accomplish their plan whether with single gun or a bomb. Take for example the Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in 1995. This event orchestrated by Timothy McVeigh killed 168 men, women, and children without the use of one gun.

Many times, people will fly under the radar of law enforcement (such a McVeigh), but infringing on Constitutional rights because of a possibility is inconsistent with American values. More effort and resources should be available to enforce existing gun laws, improve gun training and education, and create background system available to private citizens wishing to sell their guns to other law-abiding citizens.

Resources

 Davidson, J. (2015, December). A Criminologist’s Case Against Gun Control. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/4100408/a-criminologists-case-against-gun-control/

Kohrman, M. and Mascia, J. (2017, March 14). Everything You Need to Know About Federal Background Checks. The Trace. Retrieved from https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/background-checks-nics-guns-dylann-roof-charleston-church-shooting/

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. [Kindle edition]. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.

ProCon.org. (2016). Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted? Retrieved from http://gun-control.procon.org/

United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment II.

Ethics and Behaviors

A634.7.4.RB

Watch the two videos from business ethics speakers and discuss how your organization portrays its values. Share any examples where behaviors were portrayed positively by your leaders or an instance where someone was unethical in your work environment.

Organizational values are an important element to establishing desired behaviors and expectations. Values are traits or qualities that are considered worthwhile; they represent priorities and held driving forces for behavior(s) (Heathfield, 2016). These behaviors ultimately contribute to the organization’s culture and brand. Thus, it is no wonder that many organizational leaders apply significant time and energy towards identifying and promoting their organizational values.

There have been many high-profile companies that have demonstrated that establishing organizational values is one thing and living up to them is an entirely different thing. Take Enron for example or even the recent Volkswagen emission scandal. According to Patrick Lencioni (2016), “If you’re not willing to accept the pain real values incur, don’t bother going to the trouble of formulating a values statement. You’ll be better off without one” (para, 6). Indeed, it almost seems pointless to create a measuring stick and through it out the window as soon as the work begins.

A values based organization I had the honor and pleasure to a part of was the U.S. Army. The military culture is hierarchal in nature and places a premium on initiative and leadership. In fact, the 7 Army values include: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage (Army.mil, n.d.). These values served as an expectation for all, regardless of position or rank. Furthermore, as service members, we were expected to live by these values on and off duty.

In the profession of arms, leaders were highly encouraged to seek personal and professional development opportunity beyond unit level leadership professional development events. In fact, I have had supervisors that actively supported me in such cases. For example, as a military police officer, I took every opportunity to advance my knowledge and skills by attending civilian law enforcement training and certification courses. In the majority of these cases, I came out of my own pocket because the military has its own training and certification courses. Nevertheless, I had two very influential supervisors that supported my personal and professional development by authorizing me to either take leave from work or do so in a permissive TDY (temporary duty) status, which had to do mainly with administrative and accountability purposes.

These two supervisors backed the organizational values with action by allowing me to take time off work to participate in law enforcement related training. While this training and certification had little direct benefit to the organization, they were highly encouraged to support the initiative to grow. Instead of seeing this a way to take time off, which some may consider unethical. These two supervisors viewed the specialized training as a way to support the organization’s and Army’s vision of having better trained and well-round leaders throughout the ranks.

This had a major impact on me in that, I too, went out of my way as a supervisor to promote designated and uninterrupted time for schooling or external training for those seeking their own personal and professional development. I even went so far as to identify certain weeks that were less hectic according to our training calendar or known scheduled events. This sent a strong signal that continued growth was a priority and that organizational leaders would go out of their way to supply the action necessary to live up to the organizational values.

Indeed, recognizing others desires to improve and grow is an ethical quality not many others value. It is important for organizational leaders to only see the short-term benefit of having an employee at work than view the long-term benefit of supporting growth and demonstrating compassion for the employee’s efforts and provide actionable support. Doing so has the potential to make for a more capable, better trained, and happier workforce.

References

Army.mil (n.d.). Army Values. Retrieved from https://www.army.mil/values/

Heathfield, S. (2016, November 07). Build an Organization Based on Values. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.thebalance.com/build-an-organization-based-on-values-1919185

Lencioni, P. (2002, July). Make Your Values Mean Something. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2002/07/make-your-values-mean-something