This is the final blog of MSLD 634 and its purpose is to share
with you the three most significant takeaways from this class. Quite honestly
there were so many, but sticking to just the top three will likely help make
them more memorable.
The Relationship Between Power Motivation / Moral Development
/ Success
Week three provided one
of those ‘aha’ moments for me. Part of that week’s lesson was to explain a
leader’s recklessness and most of my attention on that topic was focused on the
reading assignment The Harder They Fall,
by Roderick Kramer. The article focuses on leaders who rise to the top and
suffer lapses in moral judgment that lead to their derailment. If we have been
around in length of time on this earth and paid attention to the business
environment around us, we have likely seen first-hand some of the types of
examples referenced in Kramer (2003).
Kramer connects (2003) the
pursuit of power with shedding personality traits developed during our moral
development to get to the top “I have found that there is something about the
pursuit of power that often changes people in profound ways. Indeed, to get to
the apex of their profession, individuals are often forced to jettison certain
attitudes and behaviors-the same attitudes they need for survival once they get
to the top.” (p. 60). Kramer making this distinction of pursuing power and
shedding personality traits sparked my query on former lessons on power motive.
“A strong need for power is desirable, but a manager’s effectiveness also
depends on how this needs finds expression. The empirical research indicates
that a socialized power orientation is more likely to result in effective
leadership than a personalized power orientation (Boyatzis, as cited by Yukl,
2013, p. 142). Could it be that the people that typically shed needed personality
traits at all costs to get to the top have more of a personalized power
orientation? Likely so in my opinion. Takeaway #1.
Nanoethics, Complexity Science & Intentional Change
Theory
Week five provided a second ‘aha’ moment when idea that
nanotechnology and the ethical development of this technology were being
connected together at the hip through the 21st Century
Nanotechnology Research and Development at and the National Nanotechnology
Initiative (NNI). While the effort to ensure any new products or methods
advance as a result of nanotechnology has ethical utility, the effort will have
haphazard results without also incorporating concepts of complexity science and
Intentional Change Theory (ICT). The key points are:
Nanotechnology is
“fraught with uncertainty”
Proper Diagnosis of
Problems is Critical to Success
Pulling it all
Together with ICT
Combining nanotechnology and nanoethics in a meaningful and
lasting way, without the framework that ICT provides, will be a real challenge.
Throw into the mix the need for the understanding of some of the concepts of
complexity science and the NNI could face failure sooner than later. Van Oosten
(2006) provided some insight into how ICT can be applied to change the culture
of an organization, which is likely needed if the NNI is going to find success
on a consistent and lasting basis.
Treatment of the Least of Us (Animals) and My Own Level of
Morality
Okay, so the last takeaway is really two in one. One of the topics
in week six (treatment of animals) touch my heart deeply. Week seven followed
up with the different levels of morality which made me even more committed to
doing whatever I can as a citizen and consumer to stop the horrible treatment
animals endure in some animal farms. Examining my own level of morality tied
directly back into the treatment of animals, so it made sense to keep the two
together.
LaFollette (2007) really drove home the idea that animals that
feel pain should have moral status (p. 228) and after watching the video The Ethics of What We Eat (Singer,
2009), what is cooked in this house will only be ‘free range’ or ‘wild-caught’
animals. In addition, less meat and more vegetables is in the plan. The
combination of week six and seven helped me become more aware that I could and
should do more, and that indeed my level of morality was not where it should
be. Of the three levels of morality (minimal, moderate, and demanding), my
comfort level is should be above moderate but below demanding. With my new diet
rules in place, becoming more morally aware of my surroundings, and following
the principles of ICT, my action plan to improve the suffering of those around
me is well underway.
Covert Racism
Okay…just one more important takeaway and really the most
significant in terms of alleviating the suffering of fellow human brothers and
sisters. LaFollette (2007) and Lotto (2016) illustrated very vividly how
slavery abolished almost 150 years ago continues to plague the nation built on
the principles of liberty and freedom. How could we (Caucasian people) be so
insensitive to the fact that we have benefited by keeping other people down?
During week eight, an African American colleague and I went to lunch together.
Some direct questions were asked on how he felt about the current state of
racism in this country is. His responses did not surprise me. His passion and
emotion did.
The scars of racism run deep and until we become empathetic to the
victims of it, it will continue to be a problem. The Tea Party movement is possibly
emblematic of the scars that still exist “In February of 2014 there were
forty-eight members of the Tea Party caucus in the House of Representatives,
all of whom were Republicans. Thirty-three, more than two thirds, were from
states that were part of the Confederacy or in which slavery was legal at the
time of the Civil War. The rest are from southwest, Midwest, or western
mountain states that had not yet been granted statehood by the end of the war.”
(Lotto, 2016). Could be a coincidence. My intuition tells me that there is a
connection.
Summary
The relationship between
power, morality and success, the treatment of animals and my own level of
morality, and covert racism are my big takeaways from MLSD 634. An action plan
to keep them in the forefront to alleviate the suffering of others is being
implemented so that my own morality will continue to not only grow, but to
influence others to do the same is being completed as this blog comes to an
end. Think about your morality and what you can do to alleviate the suffering
of others. Individually we can make a difference. Collectively we can change
the world.
References:
LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishing.
Lotto, D. (2016). The
south has risen again: Thoughts on the tea party and the recent rise of
right-wing racism. The Journal of Psychohistory, 43(3), 156.
Sollie, P. (2007). Ethics,
technology development and uncertainty: An outline for any future ethics of
technology. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 5(4),
293-306. doi:10.1108/14779960710846155
Van Oosten, E. B.
(2006). Intentional change theory at the organizational level: A case
study. Journal of Management Development, 25(7), 707-717.
doi:10.1108/02621710610678508
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. Boston MA:
Pearson.
No comments:
Post a Comment