A634.9.4.RB_SchreterPaul

         After spending some time reflecting on this course, there are three lessons that I have been able to take away. These three lessons have stuck out at me for one reason or another and I believe they provide great value for my future. These three lessons include the ideas of making management a profession, poor actions/decisions are likely to be habitual, and finally the idea of egoism.

         Doctors, lawyers, and military members all take an oath before starting their respective profession; managers do not. Perhaps it is time for managers to take an oath. It is said that “professionalizing management would greatly curb misconduct, because moral behavior is an integral part of professionals’ identity—a self-image most want strongly to preserve” (Khurana & Nohria, 2008). While I may not be in any position to professionalize management, it is something that I can implement within my own organization. The United States Air Force already does this by having all noncommissioned officers take an oath prior to putting on the rank. Organizations that make such an oath a big deal helps guide the leaders it creates into making the right moral decisions.

         The next lesson that I learned was that a lot of the ways people behave is purely habitual. It is said that “habits – including our traits, abilities, and character – carry the marks of our environment. That is the sense in which our habits are social. They also embody our previous choices, including our choices to strengthen or alter our habits” (LaFollette, 2007). In other words, a racist may not be racist because they choose to be evil, they may be racist because of how they were raised or the environments to which they’ve encountered.

         Finally, the last lesson I learned was the idea of egoism. It is said that “the psychological egoist claims it shows that everyone always seeks to promote her own interested” (LaFollette, 2007). In other words, Mother Theresa helped people because it promoted her own interests. Had she been running a multi-billion dollar company she probably would have been miserable; whereas helping the poor and sick made her feel good inside. This for me has me rethink why I do what I do and I’ve been able to come to the conclusion that I’m an incredibly selfish person! I’m intrinsically motivated to help people and helping people makes me feel good inside; if it didn’t make me feel good, I probably wouldn’t be doing it!

         This week I’ve discussed the idea of making management a profession, that poor decisions made are often times habitual, and finally that even the kindest of actions can be generated out of personal self-satisfaction. The first lesson opened up the possibility of implementing my own oath that members of the organization take, the second lesson allows me to see people with a fresh set of eyes and become more empathetic, and finally the last lesson changes how I view things and what motivates people. This has been an interesting course and while valuable lessons have been learned, I’m glad that it’s finally done!

References

Khurana, R., & Nohria, N. (2008). It’s Time to Make Management a True Profession. Retrieved from Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2008/10/its-time-to-make-management-a-true-profession/ar/1

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

A634.8.3.RB_SchreterPaul

            Should guns be legal? That’s the question that’s being asked in this week’s blog. There are many proponents that fight for the legalization and ‘right’ to own guns; others believe the world without guns will become a better one. I will be going over arguments that support gun ownership, arguments that are against gun ownership, and finally a view on my personal opinion of the matter.

            America is well known for its gun-toting citizens and culture (DAILYMAIL.COM REPORTER, 2015). Many of its citizens believe in the right to bear arms and to have the ability to protect oneself. In this week's discussion board topic we also discussed the idea of punishment and preventing crime, where Wilson claimed that one of the reasons why crime occurs isn’t due to the “severity of punishments, but about their certainty” (LaFollette, 2007). An argument that many pro-gun proponents support is that gun-owning communities will have less crime because the certainty of punishment is greater. It is said that “most criminals want to minimize their risks when committing a crime. If they know that someone in a house is armed, they will be less likely to enter that house” (LaFollette, 2007). These are compelling arguments indeed, but if they were true, why haven’t other countries adopted similar minds of thought?

            Other countries in the world have decided not to allow guns for it’s private citizens; the United Kingdom and Japan being two of them. While those supporting guns believe that gun ownership will reduce crimes, statistics have thus far proven them wrong. Data shows that there are more deaths per 100,000 citizens relating to an assault by firearm in the United States, compared to all means of assault in the United Kingdom and Japan combined (LEACH-KEMON, 2015). The data shows that there are less gun-related crimes in countries without laws that support gun ownership towards its private citizens. It’s the countries that don’t allow firearms, which have the lowest crime rates in comparison to other similar countries.

            When I originally grew up and lived in America, I had the same views that many gun owners believed. While I never owned a gun myself, I had the viewpoint that the country as a whole was safer because many good guys owned guns. However, after living in the United Kingdom for over four years, my views have almost flipped. Not based on any sort of fact or statistical analysis, I genuinely do feel safer walking down the streets at night and in the early mornings. There isn’t much you can do in terms of self-protection against a gun, but with the removal of such weapon, life just feels better!

            So this week I discussed a little bit about the views on why guns should be legalized, statistics on why guns shouldn’t be legalized, and finally a little bit about my personal viewpoint on the matter. I’ve lived in a country where guns were legalized and I’m currently living in a country where guns aren’t legal. Out of the two, I can genuinely say that I prefer the country that hasn’t legalized guns; overall it just feels safer.

References

DAILYMAIL.COM REPORTER. (2015). Gun-toting demonstrators surround Texas mosque shouting 'Stop the Islamization of America!' to protest accepting Syrian refugees. Retrieved from Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3329552/Gun-toting-demonstrators-surround-Florida-mosque-shouting-Stop-Islamization-America-protest-accepting-Syrian-refugees.html

LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden, MA: WileyBlackwell.

LEACH-KEMON, K. (2015). Visualizing gun deaths: Comparing the U.S. to rest of the world. Retrieved from Humanosphere: http://www.humanosphere.org/science/2015/10/visualizing-gun-deaths-comparing-u-s-rest-world/

A634.7.4.RB_SchreterPaul

            Like with many organizations, there are specific values that the United States Air Force expects from its members. The video this week discussed some of the core values that most organizations expect, which the Air Force is no different (in fact it could be argued that these values are even more important in the military sector than civilian). The two values I’ll be looking at are not sharing confidential information and not touching co-workers inappropriately.

            One of the ethical values that Chuck Gallagher shared was the idea of keeping confidential information confidential. The way he brought this up was by saying “we sit down on our social media, or wherever it happens to be, and we begin sharing or discriminating information, and it might be very easy” (Gallagher, 2013). This, of course, is completely unethical as company secrets might get into the wrong hands. The Air Force expects its members to “ensure no discredit to the Air Force or compromise of operational security when using personal and government information systems or social media” (Department of the Air Force, 2015). Many members, leaders included, have violated this value by posting pictures on social media of their times on deployment. While seemingly innocent by themselves, enemies are able to gather these photos and collect sensitive information like base perimeter details, checkpoint information, or perhaps relative locations of one area to another (for example the sleeping quarters to the chow hall).

            The other ethical value Chuck Gallagher brought up was the idea of not creating a hostile work environment. He mentioned that “it’s unethical to go up to someone who’s a coworker and inappropriately touch them” (Gallagher, 2013). This in itself should be completely obvious as being unethical. The Air Force talks about this by stating all members should “actively support and enforce the Air Force’s ‘zero tolerance’ policy for discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. Every Airman deserves to work in an environment of dignity and respect” (Department of the Air Force, 2015). There have been many cases of sexual harassment in the military and not only has it brought discredit to the Air Force, but when members don’t feel safe because of the people they work with, something’s wrong.

            This week I looked at two different ethical values that Chuck Gallagher has shared with his audience. In both cases I explained scenarios that have actually happened where the actions of certain individuals not only compromises the security of forward deployed locations but actions that create an unhealthy work environment, which is not only discrediting to the individual but to the Air Force as a whole.

References

Department of the Air Force. (2015). The Airman Handbook.

Gallagher, C. (2013). Straight Talk about Ethics! Retrieved from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUJ00vNGCPE