This journal explores some of the issues a manager may face around employees' personalities and emotions in the workplace. Think of yourself as a manager in this journal.
This link is historical, and shows you what it was like for McDonald's when they opened in Moscow, a very different cultural environment to North America. http://archives.cbc.ca/on_this_day/01/31/12844/
Instructions
Thinking of this example of McDonald's, or any other situation, answer the following questions: in your journal post, approximately one paragraph for each question.
Is asking people to pretend specific job-related emotions unethical if it conflicts with their basic personality or cultural experience?
Three clarifications:
- I have assumed that asking means to expect or demand.
- I will evaluate the company dilemma, not the people dilemma deciding if they accept the demand.
- It is a dilemma for me to answer an ethical dilemma in one paragraph; I am sorry.
As any ethical problem, a dilemma appears. It exists four basic theories that they help trying to solve any dilemma related with ethical concerns; in brief, they are:
1. Mill’s Utilitarism. It states that the best choice in an ethical dilemma is that which produces the maximum benefit for the greatest number of people (considering the number of people affected, the intensity and duration of the paint to be avoided). According to this theory, the company is not in an unethical behaviour for asking people to pretend specific job-related emotions.
2. Kant’s formalism. It states that every individual has a fundamental duty to act in a correct ethical manner. This theory belief that each person’s conscience imposes an absolute categorical imperative on that person to follow those courses of action which would be acceptable as universal principles for everyone to follow. According to this theory, the company (people under this theory) is breaking the acceptable principle of not to lie; as conclusion, the company is in an unethical behaviour for asking people to pretend specific job-related emotions.
3. Locke’s rights ethics. This theory states that every individual has rights simply by virtue of his or her existence. The right to life and the right to the maximum possible individual liberty and human dignity are fundamental, and every individual rights must be recognized by others, who have a duty not to infringe on those rights. According to this theory, the company is infringing the right of the people; as conclusion, the company is in an unethical behaviour for asking people to pretend specific job-related emotions.
4. Aristotle’s virtue ethics. This theory states that the goodness of the act, object, or person depended on the function or goal concerned. According to this theory, the company must have an appropriate goal to justify the act and classify it as ethical. The application of this theory conduct at a very depth discussion. For example, the company could argue that doing that, the company will retain customer and it could continue operating, given employment and benefit to many people. In other side, someone could argue that the benefit is mainly for the shareholders or owners. As conclusion, this theory does not provide a specific answer.
In regarding the four theories, we could conclude that the company is in an unethical behaviour for asking people to pretend specific job-related emotions.
Is exporting standardized emotional “rule books” to alien cultures unethical?
For the business point of view looks a mistake. We know that different cultures understand and react in different way to emotions. To export emotions imply a huge risk.
According to the first question and discussion, demand to simulate emotions (the employees in the foreign region should simulated them because under assumption the emotions are not for this region) is unethical.
This exercise is called PIMS - Pluses, Minuses and Interestings.
Imagine you are a manager of a commission sales department of a furniture store. Describe the PIMS for each of the following types of employees in your department.
JOE - high mach, type A KAI - mod Mach, type A SEM - low mach,type B
Pluses/Minuses/Interesting Pluses/Minuses/Interesting Pluses/Minuses/Interesting
Post your Pims to the forum so others in your group can see you thoughts - decide on your top three pluses, top three minuses and top three interesting points about each person, and have one team member post a summary.
The basic idea behind the method is to find positive, negative and interesting points of an idea. With the information that we have, we could infer some potential behaviors, pros and cont for these three employees, but certainly they are inferences or potential outcomes; we know that we need deeper information for a more assertive analysis.
|
Joe |
||
|
Plus |
Minus |
Interest |
|
It could boost the sales of the department because of his tendency to quantity and his strongly orientation to results. |
Could decrease the margin of the department if he has not some boundaries in the sale process due to his lower interest in quality. |
There is a potential complement between Joe and Sem to boost sales. |
|
Easy to predict his behavior phase on new challenges. |
It could have not enough patience dealing with complex customers. |
There is a huge potential value for the company regarding his performance and pragmatism. |
|
High competitiveness and pragmatism. |
His high competitiveness and Machiavellian characteristics could potentially damage the relationship between employees. |
It will be interesting to develop his lower skills for increasing his long term performance at the company and to have a better integration with other team members. |
|
Kai |
||
|
Plus |
Minus |
Interest |
|
It could be worthy in the training of new employees because of his middle point between type. |
The tendency to quantity instead of quality could decrease the margin of the company if he is not supervised. |
There is potential synergy with both Joe and Sem. |
|
It could be less risky for the company to develop Kai’s potential, for several points of view, because of his middle point between the different employees (highly oriented to results but maintaining good relationship with people). |
His more balanced style (in relationship with the other employees) could represent a disadvantage in a very competitive industry. |
It could be interesting to develop his lower skills for increasing his long term performance at the company. |
|
It could have an important performance due to his competitiveness. |
His high competitiveness could potentially hurt the relationship between employees. |
It will be interesting to develop his lower skills for increasing his long term performance at the company and to have a better integration with other team members. |
|
Sem |
||
|
Plus |
Minus |
Interest |
|
He could be more creative in the research of new opportunities in the selling process. |
It could expend a lot of time for doing the same work, or to spend time without a high possibility of a successful outcome. |
There is a potential complement between Joe and Sem to boost sales. |
|
Potential for quicker growth in the organization. |
It could have a lower performance in the sale process in comparison with other employees. |
He has a potential as employee in the long term increasing his responsibilities. |
|
It could better deal with complex customers for his tendency to agree and persuade people. |
It could not have enough competitiveness and pragmatism for a sales position. |
It will be interesting to develop his lower skills for increasing short term performance at the company. |
As conclusion, at the current state and only for the company point of view, Joe style looks better for the sale position; Sem style looks interesting at long term developing his skills in a position with more responsibilities; and Kai style looks in-between of Joe and Sem with a huge potential for any position according to his evolution. It looks that the company has an interesting labor force. Nevertheless, the development of different strategies could help to better integrate and complement these employees for the benefit of the company and they personal professional development.
Thanks,
Additionally, if the method is implemented in group, all positive, negative and interesting effects could be listed in one table and summarized again.
Very positive score shows that the idea could be implemented and very negative score that it should be abandoned.
19/05/11
