Can Employees Really Be Trusted Philosophy Essay
What are sensing mechanisms, and why are they important? / A sensing mechanism is simply the technique you use to stay on-top of any and all activities taking place in your establishment or place of business. There is a wide variety of choices when it comes to sensing mechanisms. Some leaders choose the old fashion way of simply having an issue, complaints or suggestion box in an area where all employees have the same access, while others prefer to use a more common approach such as having a hotline or even open discussions, but as stated by Jennings (2012) "the most important sensing mechanism comes from this advice: get out of your office" (p.291). If you, as the CEO, CFO, or even one of the top executives, do not ever walk around, and make yourself known to your organization, why or how can you even expect for your employees, (who may only know you by name) expect for them to open-up and tell you anything at all about the on-goings in the organization, you are supposed to be running or in charge of. Top executives really need a secure way to keep track of what is going on behind closed doors in their establishment, because as stated by Vries, Jehn & Terwel (2012) "many organizations offer their employees the opportunity to voice their opinions about work-related issues because of the positive consequences associated with offering such an opportunity, however, little attention has been given to the possibility that offering voice may have negative effects as well" (p.221). The negative effects are just as important as the positive ones, and with the shape our world is in today, many people are skeptical about offering –up any type of information, because of the things which and could happen to them later on down the road, which may end up being either positive or negative for them. Lots of times people know something, but are literally to scared to open up, or tell anyone about it, so the situation simply lingers on and on, then and if information is given up to these so-called bosses, sometimes they do nothing with it because they already knew and are somewhat involved themselves, because as stated by Vries, Jehn & Terwel (2012) "why would managers provide employees with an opportunity to voice opinions if they do not intend to actually regard their input" (p.222). Oh yes, they will regard their input, and fire them, they will be out that door quicker than ???. Even though some things will never be brought to light, and some things will constantly keep being swept under the rug, it is of the utmost importance that some sort of sensing mechanism is available in your business or organization for yourself to keep track of, and for your employees to use, just do not have your employees walking around ready to burst with valuable information, and no way, or nothing to do with it, let them state their case, because as stated by Vries, Jehn & Terwel (2012) "managers should only give voice opportunity when they are able to convince their employees that they have the intention to regard their input and are also able to show how they used this input" (p.228). Oh, but only if you know what to do with the information after you get it. But sensing mechanisms are simply important to us, and our organizations because we simply cannot be everywhere all at the same time, and it really pays to know what’s going on in your business or organization from your employees’ point of view.
What is the humble firm, and how does it encourage ethical behavior? / The humble firm is one that trust their management staff and as stated by Jennings (2012) "meetings in the humble firm have lively discussions, not tense ones" (p. 291). That in itself keep the lines of communication within your business open. If you have staff and employees whom are scared to open up and tell you of a problem, or even something they see going-on, or wrong, you need to backtrack and see why this problem in occurring within your business or organization. Some things ought to always be kept private such as your employees records and any type of personal information, but as stated by Jennings (2012) "in a humble firm, the e-mail thoughts are the ones stated publicly, discussed and evaluated" (p.291). Now that is not to say that certain issues don’t still come up, or happen in a humble form, but when they do, they are better dealt with for the simple fact that they are more open and honest with their staff. As for encouraging ethical behavior, I would have to answer YES, because humble firms are concerned about what is right for everyone concerned, not just themselves, because as stated by Schepers, Falk, Ruyter, Jong, & Hammerschmidt (2012) "the strict elicitation and monitoring of standards thus provides guidance when the unstructured context of a service encounter fails to do so" (p.7). If a firm starts out one-way, and continues down that same path of success, without rearing left or right, they should be able to remain on that same path, even if at times, problems do rear their ugly heads, and as stated by Lambrechts et al. (2011) "humble inquiry, which encompasses both an attitude and a behavior of the helper, embodies "accessing your ignorance" and becoming open to what may be learned from each other in the actual situation through observing, genuine open empathic questioning, careful listening, self-inquiry, not judging but suspending judgment, and shifting helping roles as necessary" (Schein, 1996, 1999, 2009a) (2011) (p.132). When an employee enters a business or organization, while learning the ropes, they are also finding out more about the business or organization, and by the end of the 1st month, an employee can sense weather this particular business or organization is a good fit for them, and also how much or not they will be able to get away with. When an employee learns the ropes in the organization, if they choose to remain and stay dedicated, that’s all good, but if they choose to leave because they feel your organization is not a good fit for them, well that’s all the better for you, and will probably save your organization a whole lot of heartache in the long run.
Describe what leads the types of behaviors at Lehman and other companies that eventually collapsed? / Cheating, Lying, Cover-Ups, Passing the Buck, No Trust in Their Employees Word need I say more. As far as Lehman and other companies are concerned, they got exactly what they deserved, because as stated by Calderón-Cuadrado, Álvarez-Arce, Rodríguez-Tejedo & Salvatierra (2009) "as companies are well aware, perfect control does not exist (Merchant,1985). therefore, we must suppose that, in spite of the implementation of reasonable control systems, some level of unethical behavior persists" (Kaptein,2002) (p.199). An organizations ethical value, have a lot to do with the way they do their day-today business, and treat their employees also. As stated by Jennings (2012) "Mr. lee was fired" (p.290). Mr. Lee was the head of accounting at Lehman, and tried his best to send memos to the CFO, & the Chief Risk Officer, informing them of the discrepancies on the firms balance sheet, and they said his memos were "pretty ugly", and fired him, now why did they fire him is the question, it could only be two logical reasons, ¹he had caught on to what they were doing, and they did not want their deceptive practices to come to light, and ²they did not want to be found out at the time. That is certainly no way to run a business, but straight into the ground. There seemed to be no trust within the organization, and if there was, it was only aimed at those who were involved in the dis-honest practices which were certainly going on behind closed doors…so they thought. As for myself, and as stated by Lambrechts, F. J., Bouwen, R., Grieten, S., Huybrechts, J. P., & Schein, E. H. (2011) " In his recent book Helping (Schein, 2009a), Schein introduces the notion of "humble inquiry" as the key process activity in building and maintaining the helping relationship" (p.132). Isn’t that all Mr. Lee was doing while bringing this discrepancy to light, well we all see where, and how far that got him. As stated by Fassin & Gosselin(2011) "whereas lying or withholding the truth can be interpreted as an intent to deceive, and therefore unethical behavior from a utilitarian point of view, the lie can be motivated to avoid greater harm. (p.178). If they had read, and knew how to use this particular statement to their advantage, maybe they would have had some way to fix this mess they created without having to disintegrate the whole organization, but with all the lying, cheating and cover-ups….maybe not, and just maybe what happened to them taught them a valuable lesson, along with everyone else who was involved. As stated by As stated by Calderón-Cuadrado et al. (2009) "the American Bar Association (2003) recommended the creation of an open-door policy for reporting corporate fraud, and it appears that employees accept these channels, as evidenced by the KPMG ( 2005–2006 ) survey. Employees were asked to whom they would ‘‘feel comfortable’’ reporting misconduct if they suspected or became aware of it" (p.200). Just maybe if this rule had been in place at that time, it would have maybe saved a lot of people from this type of deception, but then again, since it was the big-wigs doing the majority of the cheating…….maybe not.
Why can’t managers simply rely on their ethic hotlines? / Well as we all know everyone does not always tell the truth, and depending on what type of information a manager is seeking, the person giving the information could always lie, and use that information which they are giving to their own advantage, and as stated by Calderón-Cuadrado et al. (2009) "fifty-three percent felt comfortable reporting misconduct to ethics hotlines compared with only 18% who said that they distrust ethics lines" (p.200). It that what we have come to today, no one wants to speak-up, or just turn our heads and act like we don’t know or see what’s really going on. I can say that life today is so much different, that it was years ago, when if someone saw something wrong going on they would actually speak-up, but today, people are so fearful, that they just seem to let anything go on, sometimes even in their own backyards, right under their noses, THAT is why individuals today just figure anything goes, and they can do exactly as they please with no repercussions what-so-ever. We also have those in charge who are just too busy to listen when being told something, because they choose not to hear it in the first place, and as stated by Lambrechts et al. (2011) "people shouldn’t interrupt each other; they should listen to each other and so on……..when you interrupt somebody, you cut off information" (2011) (p.133). But I guess if you do not wish to hear that information in the first place, cutting someone off is nothing to them, but if they would simply take the time to listen at least sometimes, they would probably get some valuable information, and as stated by Fassin & Gosselin (2011) "the greatest happiness principle: the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people affected by the action, or the least harm" (p. 177). We as a people just have to remember that when we are in a place of authority, it simply is not all about us.