“Dilemmas that require an ethical explanation are quite common at work. Both employers and employees have to face dilemmas in an organization. Conflicts are bound to arise when an organization has people who are diverse in nationality, age, education, race, religion, sex, socioeconomic status and employment experience. The most common ethical dilemmas at work include power, authority, confidentiality, honesty and loyalty. While resolving these dilemmas, both the employer and the employee have a different perspective.

Employers are often found to be stubborn. According to them, their actions are in the best interests of the organization and are according to the legal code of conduct in the company. Employers never tend to disclose the reasons that lie behind their behaviors. However, they need to develop the skills and experience required for tackling ethical dilemmas. They should assess the situation while taking a neutral stand. Analysis would be proper if they are able to locate the root cause of the conflict. Decisions should be taken after consultation with the affected parties. The consequences of the decision should be analyzed and explained to the management.

The perspective of the employees in an organization is always in a dilemma. The employee does not even know how to work since organization beliefs and values are often kept confidential and are not revealed to the employees. However, it is the responsibility of employers to clearly describe the goals, objectives of the organization to the employee if they are expecting to create a harmonious and acceptable working environment. Employees should be trained to resolve conflicts.

Check Out More Articles :

Student Cheating & Moral Dilemma – Cheap Quick Easy Dinner Recipes here.

Recipes For Making Hot Chocolate Mixes – Holiday Gift Food Baskets, click this link to read more about this topic.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, workplace, list, problems

In Justice Gomery’s final report, he observed that “only a handful of government officials failed to live up to (ethical) standards in the Sponsorship program”. Most of us in business or government have faced situations where our personal principles have come under attack yet, unlike that handful, we successfully resisted temptation. Further, some of us may have faced personal risk standing up for our convictions, taking responsibility, and holding ourselves accountable for our actions.

But is there a point where we might start to bend or even break as they did?

A 2005 global study of over 1100 managers and executives, commissioned by the American Management Association, (with which Canadian Management Centre is affiliated), identified the top three factors most likely to cause business people to compromise ethical standards. All three impact most of us from time to time, so it would be an unusual person who would not have experienced temptation. The factors, in order, are:

1. Pressure to meet unrealistic business objectives/deadlines

2. Desire to further one’s career

3. Desire to protect one’s livelihood

So here is a theory. Model the dynamics that put pressure on people’s ethics and you have an early warning of possible problems.

Dynamic A is Pressure. Sometimes the pressure to compromise comes at a person externally on vectors such as:

• Urgent timing, “I don’t care what the policy book says, I need your decision now.”

• Entrenched opposition that can be avoided, “HR won’t find out till it is too late”

• Superiors or colleagues, “If you don’t do this, we’ll all pay a price”

• Critical impact, “National unity is at stake here”

• Competitor’s tactics, “Competition gives them money under the table. We have no choice.”

Any single one of these, let alone a combination, can isolate a person on ethical grounds.

Dynamic B is Personal Benefit. Even scrupulous people generally look at choices through a lens of self-interest that includes:

• Financial gain

• Financial risk

• Reputation

• Career and stature

• Power and influence

The greater the personal upside or downside associated with a decision, the more internal pressure will build to compromise on honesty and ethics.

When you buy a house from a vendor with hundreds of thousands of dollars and their personal life plan at stake, who is represented by a commissioned salesperson, you know it is wise to get a home inspection done. Buying a used car? Take it to a mechanic you trust first. Interviewing a job applicant who is currently out-of-work? Check references.

These are commonplace, small town, daily examples of a recognized need for safeguards against unethical behaviour by ordinary people when pressure and self-interest intersect. We understand the need to watch out at that level. But when we learn that “a handful” of the participants in multi-million dollar transactions in the colossally critical and legacy-charged national unity debate behaved badly, we have the right to be dismayed but not surprised.

Millions of dollars spent on the Gomery Inquiry has yielded recommendations the country is glad to see. In the clear absence of a sense of personal accountability, the only solution is a body of constraints. But there is a danger now that associated bureaucracy will inflict cumbersome and stultifying rules and procedures on transactions in the matrix’s green low risk boxes. These transactions have neither materiality nor external pressure nor sufficient personal benefit to the buyer or seller to pose much of a risk.

As an
example of unnecessary procedure, in one recent situation, Canadian Management Centre was presented with a complicated federal government RFP that would have required us to invest days of preparation and would require the government people days of due diligence — all for a $6000 contract. We declined to pursue the RFP. There was no pressure and only incidental benefit, not enough justification to warrant the trouble of proving our qualifications beyond the shadow of a doubt

With over 40 years experience; Canadian Management Centre has earned the reputation as a trusted partner in worldwide professional development and management education that improves the immediate performance and long-term results of over 12,000 Canadians every year.

Continue here for more information.

Article Source

Tags: business, ethics, dilemmas, decisions

“Human nature is of dominance or to feel superior over others. If not, he surrenders to the forces where he can feel secure and find peace. Through out the history of mankind there have been wars, conquests, dominance, and freedom struggle. So, have we come to a threshold point? The answer is No.

We are going to be the same in nature no matter what. Even if the technology changes, the way we communicate changes, even if the whole world is given proper education, deep within we are same as we were 1000 years ago.

There will be unanswered questions, there will be cults, there will be saints and there will be peace and as well wars, there will be good and bad, there will be creation and destruction and we need to understand that we cannot change that.

When an Individual (soul) becomes liberated and becomes independent personally, financially, spiritually and his span of influence or control increases he becomes a master. The imprisoned soul is that of the slave.

What does all that narrow down to? Well, every self help book talks about value, Integrity and positive attitude. Say, if a man covets other mans wife it is lack of Integrity and value. If he takes away something of value form someone without his concern then it is called steeling or theft. Is it not?

“Ask and you shall receive it” that’s Integrity is it not? That’s why it’s written in the bible.

When there is difference of value or lack of Integrity there will be conflicts, problems, issues, conquests and wars.

Integrity is nothing but to be integrated. I.e. to be considerate, considering all factors, all people and decide the best decision. Integrity requires assertiveness, communication skills and above all a good heart.

The ability to take loosing as part of wining is one quality which will make you a winner for sure.

Say your employee or your subordinate fails to keep his promise of delivering his work as per schedule. Is it a lack of Integrity? It may be and may not be. “Do on to others as you do on to you!”
Can you deliver the same on time? If your answer is No, then stop complaining.

Cooperate means co-operate i.e. operate together.

In the business world many companies treat there employees very badly. In many sales and as well production departments they used to say “work like a dog and in end of the day you become god”. This is certainly lack of Integrity and value.

“Be a saint to choose peace and be a warrior to attain freedom“that’s Integrity.

“That which changes with time cannot be considered eternal and is not the ultimate reality because the ultimate reality is neither temporary nor does it change with time and it is indestructible. This is the conclusion that seers of truth has arrived after having deliberated on both the aspects,
Know that all pervading is indestructible. The all pervading consciousness and the imperishable soul can therefore never be destroyed. Thus it is only the external body that the imperishable, indestructible and immeasurable soul inhabits, that is destroyed, hence get up and fight, O descendent of Bharata.”

- Bhagvad Gita

Barath Surendran is a budding Entrepreneur and gives career Guidance in his blog. Also runs a small Direct Marketing business and few Internet sites.

Article Source

Tags: ethics, problems, dilemmas, moral, live

“Not a day goes by that we aren’t involved in some type of conversation about current corporate shenanigans. The media are consumed by corporate wrongdoings and dinner party conversation eventually turns to who’s the latest to be investigated. While many conversations revolve around ethics and morality in the business world, I suggest there’s another perspective – spirituality, rather, the lack of spirituality. And the current crisis not only concerns corporate executives, but those who coach them as well-there needs to be a focus on integrity and authenticity at both ends of the coaching equation.

SPIRITUALITY, NOT MORALS OR ETHICS.

For me, it’s all about spirituality. The commotion about what’s happening in the corporate arena is about “”spirituality”", not about ethics or morality. Why? Morality is often connected with issues of right and wrong and eventually is based on social traditions or consensus that vary from culture to culture. At the end of the day, morality becomes subjective and judgmental and separates one from another.

In addition, ethics is a code of values that translates “”morality”" into daily living, i.e., doing and being. It “”defines”" right and wrong, how we relate to others, how we conduct business and how one behaves in general, most often leading to judgments, win-lose, right-wrong, mind games and ego-based stuff.

Spirituality is non-judgmental and non-separating. Spirituality is unchanging, so there’s no debate, right-wrong, me vs. you, what spirituality is and isn’t. At the end of the day, we all know what it means to live from the place of our soul and hearts. For those who come from a spiritual place, there are no labels and definitions and spirituality is a way of being that is common to all of humanity, needs no descriptions, definitions, etc.

So, at the end of the day, the “”moral”" is not spiritual and for much the same reason, neither is the “”ethical.”"

The spiritual is that which allows me to be non-judgmental, and to serve as a witness, observer and watcher. The spiritual is not “”mind”", is not “”information”" is not “”knowledge”", not quantifiable DOs and DON’Ts . It is way, way beyond that. So, while the “”moralist”" and the “”ethicist”" spends countless hours and enormous energy “”debating”" the rights and wrongs of the corporate world, in their heads, intellectual stuff, one who practices spirituality just notices, e.g., “”That’s interesting.”" “”Hmmm, is that so?”" without any ethical or moral judgment, i.e., right-wrong, good-bad.

EGO AND MIND; WHO’S RIGHT, WHO’S WRONG

With a ground in spirituality one is not engaged in endless ego-based and mind-based “”discussions”" about corporate morality and ethics (read: “”I need to be right; so you are wrong.”" “”I win the argument so you lose.”" “”My labels and categories and information are right, so your labels, and categories and information are incorrect.”" I, I, I – ego, judgmental and comparative mind.

Genuine spirituality does not judge, plain and simple. True spirituality comes from one’s inner Self, one’s essence, with an integrity, honesty, sincerity and self-responsibility that drives one’s thoughts and actions. Such spirituality manifests patterns and behaviors that are common in all of life. Spirituality is an essential essence of human nature, a nature which is all to often clouded, diminished and distorted during the course of our upbringing.

So, what often happens is that we grow up less aware of our in-depth spiritual understanding of events, and operate more from an outer-world-driven subjective and judgmental “”moralist”" or “”ethicist”" mindset based on information and mental models that are stored in our brains over the course of time. The essence of who we really are, our True Self, becomes muddied as we grow up, and “”my ethics and morals”" are then developed based on mental models, beliefs and thoughts that emanate from our parents, schools, churches, synagogues, television, advertising, friends, Reality TV etc.

The downside is that I come to believe that MY mental models, MY beliefs and assumptions and images of the world, MY ethics and My morals are Truth (my Truth and thus, the Truth for everyone else as well).

One who is grounded in genuine spiritual understanding is not engaged in such ego-based stuff.

WHY WE ARGUE INSTEAD OF OBSERVE

Because so many of us identify with our ego minds, i.e., I AM what I know; I AM my information; I AM my mind; I AM my knowledge and, of course, I AM right, one often has trouble accepting and entertaining someone else’s perspective. Consciously or subconsciously, one feels forced to view another’s “”perspective”" more as a “”position”", one point on a continuum, or one end of a polarity, which then forces oneself to be engaged in a “”right-wrong”", ego-mind, conflict, because one identifies not with one’s inner core or essence where there is no polarity, but with one’s outer personality and ego-mind which need labels, categories and right-wrong analogs to give one one’s (false) sense of self and identity.

Spirituality, on the other hand, surfaces as simply witnessing another’s perspective and generates no need or desire to “”fight the good fight”", to be right. No ego; no mental drama. Just reading, listening, watching, and moving on, noticing, observing, witnessing with a “”beginner’s mind.”"

CORPORATE STATE OF AFFAIRS AND LESSONS

So, grounded in spirituality, one witnesses and observes what is happening in today’s corporate environment from an interesting perspective. Spirituality allows one to know and understand that when the Universe wants someone to learn a lesson, be it one person, a family, a team, a corporation, and one refuses, then the Universe will deliver a rather hard “”slap on the face”" as a wake-up call. For the individual, this often occurs in the form of a divorce, an accident, death, loss of a job, bankruptcy, etc.

For the corporation, it can mean total demise. Practicing spirituality, a “”spiritual observer”" sees what is happening in the corporate world and rather than excoriate the CEO, CFO, etc., based on ego-driven mental models and beliefs about good-bad, right wrong, asks a larger question: What’s the lesson/learning here for me (not for you, not for “”them,”" but FOR ME)?

Thus a spiritual perspective can tutor the executive, and those who coach the executive, in the following ways:

1. Spirituality is an inherent need of human nature. And with a single focus on spirituality comes healing (mental, physical, emotional, spiritual and creative). Without a focus on spirituality, we become spectators, bystanders who feel good about pointing fingers, judging others, analyzing others, prescribing for others, but not being self-responsibility for the betterment of people. This “”feel-good-type-conversation”" or perspective permeates the talk shows, Internet chats, water-cooler conversations and dinner gatherings. We hear lots of talk about “”them.”" We allow little or no time for an honest evaluation of “”me”" (as it’s too scary, too sensitive …). There’s lots of talk about the corporate folk, but few take the self-responsibility to “”show up”" in integrity and be honest and sincere in our dealings with people in our office, at our own home, at play, right here, right now.

2. On a macro level, in this country, to say the least, systems are breaking down. Education, health, environment, and corporate. No surprise. Coming from a perspective of spirituality, for me, this is as it should be. Shocked but not surprised. Why?

Folks have not gotten it on a micro level – as individuals seeped in a culture of excess, greed, toys, materialism, self-medication and the need to acquire – creating a culture of greed, corruption, dishonesty. Often, when we don’t “”get it”" on an individual level, the Universe gives us a larger slap on the face, on a larger level. Thus, the demise of larger systems – currently, the corporate arena.

3. It’s crucial to ask the question, “”How am I comporting myself on a daily basis?”" Again, lots of “”discussion,”" mind stuff, information, but how many of us “”walk the talk”" when it comes to acting with honesty, sincerity and self-responsibility at work – right here and right now, in the past hour, the past day, the past week?

4. It’s crucial to ask, “”Am I showing up and acting with honesty, sincerity and integrity, according to my inner essence, my True Self, in alignment with my inner core values right here, right now in my workplace environment?

5. The tug on our collective (corporate/business) sleeves urges us to reconsider what we value, to evaluate how so, so much of our life, our faux joy, our faux happiness, our well-being, our health, our identity, our self-image (who we take our self to be), and our ego is tied up in money, wealth, the “”packaging”", and the externals. “”Why do I have such an inextricable attachment to money, that I can be close to ruin (mentally, physically, emotionally, spiritually and creatively) because of money and what it represent?”".

6. Finally, it’s crucial to ask one’s self some tough question, when it comes to how many of us, self-righteously, pontificate about the current corporate state of affairs. “”Am I being hypocritical, a phony, fraudulent, inauthentic, insincere, dishonest in my own everyday affairs?”" For example, consider the following situations, without judgment, and then ask, “”How can I tug on my own sleeve about my integrity and authenticity?”" “”How am I doing in my own everyday life with respect to coming from my essence, my spiritual side, my inner source and core values when I relate to others?”"

Consider:

Scenario 1: Lunchtime during a busy day. It’s 1:30. I go shopping and am running late. I cut into the checkout line, pay the cashier, not listening to her greeting, and dismissing her, bump into folks on the way to the parking lot, drive out cutting someone off, run a red light and make a right turn at the sign that says “”no right turn between 1:00 and 3:00 pm”" so that I can get back to my office and engage in a conversation about the “”morals and ethics”" of corporate America.

Scenario 2: Friday evening. Out to have drinks with some of the team. Spend lots of time being sarcastic to, and verbally abusing, some of the younger teammates (with what I call my “”wit”" and fine sense of humor in a “”just for the fun of it”" or “”only kidding”" context) so I can appear smart and witty, while criticizing some of the staff behind their back, with the excuse that I’m just letting off steam after a hard week of work while, at the same time, presenting my “”noble, moral and ethical”" opinions about how to clean up corporate America.

Scenario 3: Wednesday morning 6:00 am. I’m at the gym with a buddy and rather than work out, we spend forty-five minutes watching the “”babes”" in their aerobics class and making lewd, sexist comments interspersed in our conversation about what’s “”wrong”" with corporate America.

Scenario 4: Tuesday night after dinner I watch TV and some cable talk shows, which I “”steal”" through a “”black box”", resting and relaxing while watching a program on how CEOs are stealing from their companies.

Scenario 5: Friday lunch – I drive to lunch, make suggestive comments to the waitress, gorge myself with too much food, have one Vodka too many and speed back to work, endangering my self and others, so I can have a few minutes to get on the Internet and read how corporate folks are being irresponsible.

Scenario 6: Wednesday morning. I wake up late and am angry and take it out on my spouse and children, feeling every bit a victim, and behaving downright mean and nasty, while I think how the CEO being interviewed on TV this morning should be more “”humane.”"

The point? It’s not about “”them.”" It’s about me. At the end of the day, as a spiritual witness, observer, watcher, I am aware that if I take care of my spiritual self, and the next person does the same, and the next, the cataclysms that we witness will no longer rule the day. It all starts with tough questions and starts with me, right here, right now.

Spending precious time and psychic energy in moral and ethical conversations about “”them”" won’t do it.

So, for me, this is the $10 (spiritual) question. How am I allowing my soul to manifest right here, right now? How am I regarding my fellow employee, colleague, spouse, child, neighbor, stranger, right here, right now, this minute, today?

What’s driving my do-ings and be-ings? My soul? Or my ego-driven self-images and limiting beliefs that are often tied to the past (resulting in anger, resentment, abuse, frustration, control, defensiveness, blaming, greed, pride, jealousy, argument…) or the future (fear, worry, tension, stress and anxiety)?

How much of this day, so far, have I spent analyzing, judging, and criticizing the actions, thoughts, beliefs and deeds of others (i.e., corporate folks, and others), as compared to looking inward to grow my own soul and manifest right action, right thought, and right understanding–right here, right now?

So, the challenge is for me to watch, observe and witness my self in every moment, be present and in the now, and tug on my own sleeve, rather than play at being judge and jury, being concerned with what’s happening in the corporate arena (which allows me, at the end of the day, to be no more than a spectator trying to believe that I am effecting change).

Either “”I”" walk the talk, or I don’t. It’s about me, not “”them.”"

As Gandhi said, “”If you want to see change, be the change.”" Corporate and business change begins with each of us, the executive and the executive and coach, – right here, right now. This is what spirituality is really, really, really all about.

(c) 2007, Peter G. Vajda, Ph.D. and SpiritHeart. All rights in all media reserved.

You may reprint this article as long as the article is printed in its entirety, including the author’s information.

—ABOUT THE AUTHOR—

Peter G. Vajda, Ph.D, C.P.C. is a founding partner of SpiritHeart, an Atlanta-based company that supports conscious living through coaching, counseling and facilitating. With a practice based on the dynamic intersection of mind, body, emotion and spirit – that is, Essential Well BE-ing – Peter’s approach focuses on personal, business, relational and spiritual coaching. He is a professional speaker and published author. For more information visit this him here.

Ethics in advertising is a serious subject. First and foremost, advertisers must sell the product or service that they represent. On the other hand, however, advertising agents and companies must also be truthful and ethical in their portrayals and not deceive their consumers. These two demands create a tension that is heightened for controversial products or audience demographics, such as tobacco, alcohol, condoms, pharmaceutics, and children.

Tobacco, a legal but lethal product, creates an especially tricky dilemma for advertisers. Likewise, alcohol forms controversial campaigns for many agencies. Some companies handle the dilemma by refusing to do ad work for either group or by offering free services to health or cause-related groups like Mothers against Drunk Driving. However, sticky situations cannot be avoided by simply shunning the industry. What if the makers of a certain cigarette brand also manufacture cat food, which the agency has been asked to represent?

Condoms are another source of tough choices in the world of advertising. Many television channels refuse to show condom commercials. Product demonstration is critical in advertisements for condoms and some agencies evade the ethical issue of premarital sex by only displaying people with wedding bands. This choice introduces another moral question because the main market for condoms is non-married people. The Creative Director of Trojan Condoms captures this issue by asking “do you show the real truth and take the consequences?”

Pharmaceutical products also generate more ethical issues. Advertisements for new medicines are helpful because they inform consumers of up and coming treatments and solutions for medical problems. However, pharmaceutical companies only promote their biggest money makers. This choice fails to provide patients with alternative solutions, which can often times be more effective and cheaper. Downplaying harmful side-effects is another grey area in advertising medicine.

In terms of audience dilemmas, children form the most contentious demographic. Is product branding at an early age a correct moral decision? What does it mean to see kids today requesting cell phones and toys by brand name rather than wanting to hang out with their friends or play outside? What products are considered proper to market to children? In commercials aimed at kids, what types of behaviors should be modeled?

As you can tell, the world of advertising contains many grey areas of ethical choices. By choosing to actively evaluate situations such as these, advertising agents can strengthen their moral compass. This helps advertisers to make the best decisions, both for the company they advertise for and society in general.

If you are interested in learning more, this business website can help.

Joseph Devine

Article Source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, issues, cases, business

“This is a very old story. A man owned a fruit stand on a busy street. He was born totally blind. He loved his fruit stand and all of his customers. Every morning his son drove him to his fruit stand and every evening his son picked him up after the stand closed. The fruit stand was very successful. One day his son read in the news paper about an operation that could cure his father’s blindness. He read the article to his father and told his father that he had more than enough money for the operation. His father agreed.

After the surgery the doctor asked him what was the first thing he wanted to see when the bandages were removed. The man said, my son and my fruit stand. The doctor and his son went down to his fruit stand on the busy street. The doctor began removing the bandages slowly. The man was so excited to see his son’s face and then the fruit stand. He was so filled with joy.

After enjoying his son and the fruit stand for a while. The man noticed there was another fruit stand about fifty yards to the right and fifty yards to the left of his fruit stand. He then looked across the street and saw three more fruit stands.

Every day he kept an eye on all the other fruit stands and soon he was out of business. The moral of the story is mind your own expectations. Every minute you mind other peoples expectations, that is a minute you take off of your own expectations.

All of your possibilities are located in your own personal expectations. What matter most is how you see yourself? How you see yourself is how you will take care of yourself. How you take care of yourself is how you will mind your own expectations. Take care of how you see yourself. How may I serve humanity with humility? What can I do?

Mike Marino, Jr. aka “In Person,” is the co-author of two books and a Distinguished Toastmaster who helps people fall in love with learning. He speaks and writes on the love of Knowledge is the root of all good!. To book Mike for your next association meeting, conference or corporate event. All presentations are available in PowerPoint or Keynote.

Life if full of ethical dilemmas, and many of the decisions we make in life contradict themselves. I’ve realised as I’ve got older, not to be worried about these contradictions. It would be lovely to live a totally consistent life, but I’ve met very few people who manage to attain these dizzy heights.

One of the major ethical dilemmas I face is over how green I am. I try to be green. I believe it’s important to be green. However, I have also realised a lot of the more environmentally friendly options are far more expensive, and I simply don’t have much money. Obviously, there are things that don’t cost money, and are things everyone should be doing – for example, recycling, turning off lights, not leaving electrical equipment on standby, and using the car minimally. Unfortunately, a lot of the other options are expensive.

Some of the greenest people I’ve met are people with money; people who can afford to build their own eco-homes, install solar paneling, and source their own water. These are also the people who can afford to shop locally at Farmers Markets, buy ecological products, and buy expensive recycled products. I buy such items when I have the money. However, the reality is by the end of the month, I don’t have any option other than to buy value items from major supermarkets.

Necessity makes for one of life’s biggest contradictions. It forces difficult decisions and moral uncertainty. Necessity also forces compromise and making the best out of the circumstances offered. I don’t want to make a decision which harms the planet, but I also have to live my life.

Renewing my car insurance last week gave me exactly this dilemma. I spent many hours at the computer looking at different companies, trying to work out which was the cheapest and greenest. I knew I needed to pay by direct debit as I didn’t have enough money in my account for the full lump sum, so this again, through necessity, narrowed down my options.

Finally, I opted for the package that was the greenest for what I could afford. From my research, I knew this wasn’t the best environmentally friendly option, but it was better than some of the others. Compromise eventually gave me the best option.

I find the same is true with electricity suppliers. I was forced to swap from a company who solely ran green power because I couldn’t afford the bills. Again, I compromised by using a green policy from one of the major suppliers. However, having said this, energy saving light bulbs have now decreased in cost enough to be affordable to all. Things are improving.

Green options are coming down in price, and this is fantastic. I’m luckier than most. I can just about afford the lower end of these services. However, until we get to the point where environmentally friendly products are the cheapest on offer, we will not be able to move to a greener society.

Search insurance companies over a variety of criteria with confused.com’s car insurance comparison services. Visit this site to continue reading.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, business, example, moral

In a recent survey, teens reported, by a stunning margin (81%) that they felt “significant pressure” to succeed or achieve – no matter the cost. What’s more – those same teens expect the pressure to get worse as they enter the workforce.

This is evidenced by the competitive nature of schools even in the elementary age. Colleges are tapping into the gifted and talented students beginning their recruitment strategy as early as nine years old. What happened to child’s play?

“The International Baccalaureate Diploma Program” is an internationally recognized rigorous, two-year pre-university program. In addition to being required to complete college-level courses and exams, IB students are also required to engage in community service, individual research, and inquiry into the nature of knowledge. Students who successfully complete the requirements are awarded an IB Diploma. It is highly competitive and highly valued among many students.

Not that highly competitive programs are bad – they’re not. But, where do young people get taught proper ethical values? Here they are striving to get ahead preparing them for their future. It is highly pressurized and it starts early. Perhaps they are learning, without the wisdom of age, the illusion of success without a sound ethical foundation.

No wonder the media appears slammed with stories about the consequences of ethics and ethical lapses. The media captures attention in almost every venue – from broadcast to internet to print. Once the illusion of success is accepted as reality, then making ethical choices becomes difficult for some. Whether we hear about Enron, HP, or Martha Stewart – one thing we know is that the choices we make can have a profound impact on the consequences we live.

These issues not only affect adults, but also teens. Recently a “Teen Ethics Poll” was released by JA Worldwide™ (Junior Achievement) and Deloitte & Touche USA LLP (Deloitte). The results were featured on the Junior Achievement web site (http://www.ja.org/about/about_newsitem.asp?StoryID=376) dated December 6, 2006 and support the concept that unethical decisions start at an early age.

“The notion that large numbers of students feel somewhat unprepared to make ethical decisions, coupled with the fact that they feel pressure to succeed at all costs, is a troubling combination,” said David Miller Ph.D., Executive Director of the Yale Center for Faith and Culture and Assistant Professor (Adjunct) of Business Ethics.

Published survey results showed that 69% of teens admitted to lying, 34% to illegally downloading music, and 22% to cheating on tests. One of the most interesting statistics in the survey and perhaps one of the most telling is that more than a quarter (29 percent) of all teens surveyed stated that they are currently only “somewhat” or “not at all” prepared to make ethical decisions.

Quoting from the news release, “We have to take it seriously when students who are under so much stress tell us they think it’s not going to get any better, especially if they don’t feel prepared to make the right calls,” said Ainar D. Aijala, Jr., vice chairman and deputy chief executive officer of Deloitte Consulting LLP and chairman of the board of JA Worldwide.

In presentations I made over ten years ago to students in the same age group as the Junior Achievement study, the students reported extreme pressure to achieve and a willingness to compromise their integrity and ethical choices. Many said, in their own unique way, that they would take their chances on negative consequences from unethical choices.

Their reality was – immediate gratification – outweighed the potential consequences of their choices. Immediate gratification is common with infants and young children. As they grow it is expected that they learn the value of delayed gratification. What has happened that they are not growing out of the immediate gratification stage? Where are they learning this behavior?

Two of the students reported to me in the 1996 presentation series that look, stature, and the illusion of success was critical in the eyes of their peers. In fact, one stated that, “You do what ever it takes to get ahead. If I can get ahead now, then I’ll have a greater chance in the business world later.” When asked if that meant compromising his integrity – his response was “Success trumps all – What ever it takes.”

The challenge for our young people today is once you take that first bite, once you engage in unethical behavior, it’s hard to undo the consequences. If we expect our future leaders of tomorrow to function in a more ethical manner than the current business leaders of today, then we must take the initiative to train decision making in an environment of integrity and ethics. We must demonstrate and teach that success typically does not arise out of immediate gratification.

How do we stem the tide of pressure beyond ethics? Ethical behavior, like most behavior, is learned. If we can teach success beyond ethics (what apparently we are doing now per our young people) – then we can, likewise, teach “Ethical Success.”

While there is no single solution to the problem, we can take some simple steps to effect positive change. One thing is certain, there is a need for focused ethical training and awareness.

How we can help!

Ø JA Worldwide and Deloitte are collaborating on a multi-faceted educational program, which can be delivered as early as the fourth grade, to help students learn to make ethical decisions and alleviate the pressure to behave unethically. The “Excellence through Ethics” program includes classroom lessons that teach the value of ethical behavior, a $5,000 college scholarship essay contest which requires high school seniors to demonstrate their ability to apply ethical decision-making to real-life situations, expansion to the U.S. of an existing Global Ethics Challenge, and implementation grants for U.S. Junior Achievement offices which use the program.
Ø The Choices Foundation (a non-profit organization) provides a forum through which ethical behavior is taught to high school and college students during their formative years. Perhaps, if a young person is exposed to real life effects of ethics choices, he or she will have a frame of reference as to the real consequences that can follow. To sponsor a presentation to a College or University, contact Chuck Gallagher at here.

Over the years, through many speaking engagements with young people, I have found that young people thirst for reasons to do the right thing. Yet, society places a premium on success at all costs, which fosters an environment for inevitable ethical delimmas. It’s time we take responsibility as adults to reverse the trends supported by this current study. We can take action today.

For information on the Choices Foundation (a non-profit organization) and the presentations on ethics given by Chuck Gallagher visit his site.

On a crisp October day in 1995, Chuck Gallagher took 23 physical steps… opened a door… and began a new experience that was life-changing. This series of articles explores that experience and the success that followed… while involving the reader in ways that could be life-altering for them. Gallagher captures the heart of the audience in an honest way that deals with human emotion. For information on Chuck’s keynotes and workshops go to this site.

Article Source

Tags: ethics, problems, dilemmas, moral, live

Have you ever met a well-dressed Buzz Word Blitzing Professional Parasite Practitioner? Well they are everywhere, they say all the right things and then you wonder if you can trust the slick well dressed person and their substantially high rates.

Recently in an article someone had pointed this out to me and a very good article indeed and in my business career let me tell you I have met tons of both Professional Parasites and also amateurs who had integrity and indeed were extremely professional and great to do business with. My favorite type of person to do business with is the true man of honor and character who dresses like a regular guy, calls an ace an ace and a spade a spade.

He knows something inside that he is honorable and capable, sometimes he might use a swear word now and again. BS walks with him. He does what he says he will do and does not care what others might say about him personally, or perhaps does but generally never says a word about it. He despises professional parasites, but never to their face, cordial completely unless they cross him. I guess he the guy with the regular hat and all the land and cattle. Not the 10-gallon Stetson, with extras on it and a line of malarkey a mile long.

If you are ever in the presence of an amateur who runs their business like a professional you will know that hand shake and their word means something. And every time you are screwed over by a professional parasite, you will know it too. Consider all this in 2006.

“Lance Winslow” – Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance. Lance is an online writer in retirement.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, define, real life, business

Greed and a lack of an internal moral compass produced our current economic meltdown – incredible numbers of people so focused on making astronomical profits that ethics went right out the window. Corporate executives have a fiduciary responsibility to their stockholders and investors that they completely ignored. Now, the American taxpayers are bailing out industries that had our funds in trust.

It Gets Started When We Take Ethical Shortcuts

The interesting thing is that it’s easy to point fingers at the people in the news to complain about how they committed theft and ignore our own ethical shortcuts. This past week I got some insight into how difficult it is to set our own ethical limit.

My Ideal Is When Both Client and I Win

I had the great good fortune recently to participate in training with a major small business consulting firm. I was excited about being there because the trainers said the things I wanted to hear about doing what’s best for both the client and their company. Everybody wins. I love it!

Even though I tend to be idealistic in how I approach caring for a client, I too have failed at times to live 100% according to my values. Sometimes personal survival temporarily overrode what I felt was right because I “needed” to keep my job. So this past week was good because I got to see other viewpoints that softened my rigid standards a bit.

Sincere Statements Can Mean Different Things to Different Speakers

But in the end, one executive’s story showing how he cared about what was in the client’s best interest, back when he was a field consultant, really stuck with me — because it showed me how far apart we could be in our viewpoints while both of us sincerely say the same words.

“Joe” told the story of a client who hired his company to identify the problems his daughter was having taking over his business. Within thirty minutes, “Joe” had identified the problem but knew the job would close the minute he told the client what he found so he had to find ways to delay telling the client that his daughter was gay and the company’s very macho employees would not work with her. After three weeks of billing, he finally decided that it was unfair to the client to bill any more. He needed to tell the client that she preferred an “alternative lifestyle” and his employees took issue with that. Once he finally made it clear that they wouldn’t work for a gay woman, the job was over.

When the Value We Provide Is Less Than We Charge, We’re Stealing

My initial self-righteous position was that he took advantage of that client just to get his billing numbers – and bonuses – up. But as I thought about it, I realized that even I would have had to bill for some number of hours, doubtless several days while I looked for ways to turn the situation around. Once I was convinced that nothing I could do would enable her to run the company, I would be obligated to inform the client, even though the job would “crash.” To drag it out is the same in my mind as stealing. The client or customer is paying for value – value equal to or greater than what we are charging. When we can no longer provide that amount of value, we are now robbing him.

The Ethical Dilemma We Face Is Knowing Where the Cut-off Is

The difficulty lies in identifying where that point is. This is the ethical dilemma that most of us in sales and marketing, in consulting, and in business management face. It’s the first step onto a slide that eventually leads to Enrons, Worldcoms, sub-prime mortgage collapses, and all of the other self-serving business decisions that produced our current worldwide financial crisis.

Tips to Avoid Going Too Far

So how do we know where we need to stop billing a client — or selling a customer — on our solution if we are to avoid becoming a thief?

- Follow the Golden Rule – “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

- Follow the two rules that Richard Maybury gave in Whatever Happened to Justice

1) Do all you have agreed to do, and

2) Do not encroach on other persons or their property.

- Ask yourself, how would I feel if I was the client paying for this advice?

1. Your advice or products and services need to provide benefits equal to or greater than the price you are charging.

2. Do no harm – even when your advice is desperately needed, if your client can’t make payroll after paying your invoice, something is wrong with that picture.

Ethical dilemmas are challenging because there is no black and white answer. Ethics hold you to a higher standard than human laws. But it is a standard that requires you to decide. In my example of “Joe” above, only he knows if his billing was legal theft because only he has all the facts that went into determining what value he provided his client. Life is full of grays and very few black and white choices. Maybe that is why customers treasure relationships they can trust. The simplest standard to be sure you are giving the value your customer or client is paying for is, “How would I feel if the positions were reversed?”

Would you like to reprint this article? You may as long as you include this blurb in its entirety: John R. Aberle is a consultant, coach, and speaker on sales and marketing, teaching a transformational style of selling that makes it fun and mutually rewarding for the customer as well as the salesperson. By helping customers buy, you develop long-term customer relationships, minimize sales rep turnover, and make profitable sales. This style of selling fits naturally into the social networking approach to marketing.

Article source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, problems, behaviour, conduct

Whether or not a military force (or paramilitary force) is properly equipped to handle crisis situations in an ethical manner is a question that is truly worthy of consideration. Before asking oneself this question, however, it is imperative that leaders are certain that their organizations are grounded upon a solid, impermeable ethical foundation. Ethical conduct simply cannot be expected within an organization that is under pressure if it is not expected when the organization is simply involved in daily, commonplace operations.

Police services and the military have enormous powers conferred upon them by the state. Each has the ability to restrict or remove individual liberty and both have the overwhelming and unenviable right to use lethal force where necessary. These powers are, in large measure, the basis for citizens’ demanding that our organizations are founded on strong ethics, principles and values.

In the vast majority of cases, especially in days gone by, the military’s focus has been other than domestic. When they are dispatched to any operational situation anywhere in the world, including here in Canada, they very often become very involved in the domestic life of that country’s citizens, however.

As time passes and one views the tasking being given to Canada’s military, one can see more and more that the role is that of peacekeeper rather than warrior. This reality brings our military and our police even closer in terms of roles, responsibilities, values, principles and ethics.

Some of the Challenges

There are some realities within the culture of paramilitary organizations that may cause significant interference with effective communications both internally and externally. It is incumbent upon the leaders of these organizations to recognize, accept and properly counteract any negative aspects of their organizational culture.

It is not sufficient that a leader possess impeccable values. The leader must demonstrate these principles in daily interactions with others, and the leader must communicate these values to all employees regularly, consistently and unashamedly. There must be a very clear understanding by each and every member of the organization that ethics, values and principles are simply non-negotiable.

All too frequently, when an individual is discovered to have been involved in unacceptable behaviour, the ‘bad apple’ theory is held up as the answer. A ‘bad apple’ grows and develops in an environment that either condones or ignores the early warning signs, or in some cases tacitly approves of the indicative behaviour.

The difficulty with the ‘act and react’ approach is that it is often seen by the junior ranks as, at best a witch-hunt or at worst a hollow inquisition with obvious ulterior motives. Occasionally, some view the curative measures that are imposed as knee-jerk reactions to isolated incidents. As a result, there are virtually no long terms benefits realized. Occasionally, such actions can actually have significantly negative consequences.

This is not to minimize the general and specific deterrence of swift, impartial action by the administration. It is imperative, however, that the organization be alive to any and all signs of larger, more insidious issues and take proactive measures when and where appropriate.

To fully understand how misconduct can take place, and more importantly, how it is sometimes viewed by the transgressor’s peers, it is vitally important to take a close and critical look at the organizational culture in which the misconduct occurred. This examination can take several forms but the most fruitful may be a bottom-up, holistic approach.

Defining the Organizational Culture

Military and paramilitary organizations have, over many years, developed a culture they can truly call their own. Moreover, units within these organizations develop subcultures that must also be recognized. This is especially true of specialist or ‘elite’ units.

A good starting point for the analysis of any organization in terms of values, principles and ethics can and possibly should begin at the front lines. This analysis can help to identify the symptoms of any irregularities within the culture.

The Cultural Evolution

Activities and behaviours within a particular organizational culture sometimes indicate values and standards that differ widely from those outside that culture. This is not peculiar to police or the military. Almost every single organization in every conceivable sector has it own, individual culture.

Organizations that tend to have their own ‘language’; their own specific identity; their own atypical rules; are more susceptible to developing a culture that is some distance from the culture of mainstream society. The members of the organization often believe that their world is too different, too complex and too onerous for anyone outside the organization to begin to understand. This belief is the likely foundation of peculiar cultural values.

Until quite recently, police services were very definitely apart from society. Although they are sworn to serve and protect society, this sworn duty was most often performed in the manner decided upon behind closed doors by the police services themselves.

With the advent of Community Policing, Community Policing Advisory Committees, Community Satisfaction Surveys and other similar Law Enforcement efforts, any mystique that may have existed is being stripped away. Police officers are being seen more and more as human beings with all the human frailties everyone else in the community may possess. In short, the public is now more willing to believe that their police officers are capable of committing not only acts if misconduct, but also criminal acts.

There is no shortage of Internet sites that exist to report on police misconduct. In one particularly poignant example, it is alleged that an off-duty police officer had had a physical altercation with a member of the public in a bar. The account of the fight included the civilian suffering convulsions, being attacked with a pool cue and having one of his eyes dangling on his cheek as a result of the beating. As it turned out, there was an altercation but it in no way resembled the account offered on the Internet. The altercation could in no way be described as a beating and the civilian did not suffer convulsions and did not have an injury to his eye even remotely resembling that described.

Anyone reading the original account would have been left with the disturbing impression that the police officer had been involved in a vicious, prolonged beating of an innocent civilian. Given the millions of people who regularly surf the Internet, there is a very real likelihood that there are many people who may have read the account and believed it.

The result of this new pressure on the police is that the public may be more prone to believing that the police are capable of heinous acts. When one considers the impact and frequency of the Rodney King video that played and replayed on television sets across North America, it should not be surprising that the public has changed it opinion of the probability of the police involving themselves in criminal acts. Disturbing photographs of military behaviour in Somalia have brough similar pressure on our armed forces.

These realities raise the bar in terms of the public’s expectations of police officers and members of the military. If the public is now more prone to believing it is probable, or at the very least possible that police or military personnel can be involved in these types of loathsome behaviours, it is incumbent upon police and military leaders to create and/or maintain ethical, highly principled organizations that are open to significant scrutiny by the pubic. Transparency has become vitally important.

When the behaviours move too far along the acceptable-unacceptable continuum, the organization may begin to experience considerable toxicity.

In looking at some particularly heinous examples of this phenomena, this evolution to can more appropriately be described as devolution. Every time an unacceptable behaviour is permitted, ignored or condoned, it becomes the new standard for a second, slightly more unacceptable behaviour. This second behaviour sets a standard for a third, and so on…

In the Rampart Division of the Los Angeles Police Department, incidents of serious assaults, robberies and even murders occurred; allegedly at the hands of sworn police officers. These unbelievable acts were the direct result of the devolution of the culture having been allowed to grow totally out of control. The illegal acts in Rampart are, thankfully, atypical of the vast majority of police departments in North America. They remain, nonetheless, examples of what can and does occur if the cultural devolution is not monitored and corrected. They are examples of what can occur if the leadership is inattentive; not listening to the heartbeat of their organization; not in touch; not listening to the cries for help from their various constituents.

The Code of Silence and The Thin Blue Line

There is a fervent belief, by some, that the police are all a part of the last bastion between good and evil. There is a view held by some that they must stand shoulder to shoulder regardless of the situation; that all are members of the ‘Thin Blue Line’. This mindset can frequently foster other, more serious problems within a police organization.

One of the first questions that must be asked is not simply whether or not there is a ‘Code of Silence’ prevalent within the unit or organization; for the answer to that is simple – Yes there is.

The breadth and depth of the ‘Code of Silence’ are the more important dimensions to define. The answers to these questions are frequently the bellwethers of problematic beliefs or values within the culture of that organization.

The Code of Silence drops like a curtain whenever it appears that one or more members of the organization may have crossed that vaporous line between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.

Time after time, when an internal affairs department or an outside agency begins to investigate allegations of wrongdoing within a particular police organization, memories become vague, vision becomes blurred and details become illusive.

Within the culture, there is an unwritten rule that officers do not inform on one another. This is, in part because of the belief that they must protect one another and also that only another cop understands what they go through on a daily basis; that many of these investigations are the result of individuals not knowing the harsh realities of policing; that they must stick together.

Cops dislike dirty cops. This is a strongly held belief inside and outside police organizations. The line between somewhat soiled and dirty is very difficult to define, however. Unfortunately, some wrongdoings are condoned, or at least ignored, while others are not. The two lists vary considerably, depending on who is composing the lists. The difficulty, of course, is the subjectivity and occasional self-interest that sometimes seeps into such assessments.

Once the ‘Code of Silence’ question has been investigated, there are other, more particular questions that the administrator must pose:

ž What behaviours have become acceptable within the culture that would not be acceptable outside it?
ž How prevalent are these behaviours?
ž Are these behaviours a ‘right of passage’ into a particular unit?
ž Are these behaviours an indication of the ‘Three Musketeers’ mentality?
ž Are these behaviours being condoned or simply ignored?

The answers to these questions will provide some self-evident guidance to police leaders as to the depth and breadth of the issue within their organization.

Noble Cause Corruption

Often times, the noble ideals that motivate men and women to enlist in a police service are the very same qualities that motivate them to behave inappropriately. These men and women do not act as they do out of some evil intent. They do so with the noblest intent. Tragically, these situations often have terribly unhappy consequences.

We in Canada have had numerous examples of this reality; especially since DNA technology has arisen as a tool in the detection of crime. As we now can see, there have been numerous examples of wrongful convictions, based upon the investigations by hard-working, tireless, honest, dedicated police officers.

One need only look at Donald Marshall, David Milgaard or Guy Paul Morin to see how tragedy has befallen these three men, and others, as a result of a steadfast belief in their guilt by a host of people within the Criminal Justice System during their investigation, detention and prosecution.

In the village of Queensville, Ontario, 8 year-old Christine Jessop disappeared. Some time later, her partially clothed and violated body was discovered. It became absolutely imperative that the person who perpetrated this heinous crime be found and brought to justice. In due course, Guy Paul Morin was arrested and charged with her murder. After a series of trials, he was imprisoned for the crime.

As history and science now tell us, Guy Paul did not do it!

As a result of DNA testing, Guy Paul Morin was acquitted after having spent years in prison. The fact of the matter is that he did not commit the crime for which he was incarcerated; yet those involved in the investigation of the crime were utterly convinced of his guilt.

Investigators, investigative supervisors, forensic scientists, crown attorneys and others held this zealous belief in his guilt. It was only after an exhaustive public inquiry that all of the details of this tragedy were fully explored and finally understood.

In almost every case, these wrongful convictions can be attributed, at least in part to ‘Noble Cause Corruption’. It is, in short, a phenomenon that can best be described as the ‘Ends Justifies the Means’.

This is not a phenomenon that exists only in policing. It can and does exist in any organization that values operational goals and/or tasks as indicators of success. There may be, and very likely are examples of Noble Cause Corruption within the military as well.

Police and military personnel are very task oriented. If they are given a specific goal, they will do what is necessary to meet or exceed that goal. If the goal is poorly defined, the efforts toward its attainment may go awry.

In the Guy Paul Morin situation, and many others very much like it, the goal was simple: Catch the bad guy! The missing aspect to the goal appears to have been the words ‘properly, impartially and justly’.

Because of significant pressure from the public, the media and the administration, it became imperative that the individual responsible for this atrocity be identified, arrested and prosecuted quickly. Unfortunately, it was the wrong person.

Similar tragedies can and do occur far too frequently for similar reasons. In a rush to judgement, investigators and others can develop tunnel vision, impairing their ability to objectively pursue appropriate suspects.

There are other aspects to the organizational culture of policing and the military that bear examination and understanding.

In these types of organizations, the need to belong is powerful. In combat or crisis situations, this is an important and vital characteristic. The reliance of one upon another or one upon the unit can and does preserve life. Perhaps part of the difficulty with this mindset results from the values of the warrior permeating peacekeeping operations.

In these types of organizations, an individual who rejects as unacceptable some piece of the organizational culture runs the risk of at best, being ostracized and at worst, becoming a target of the culture itself. There are examples of such happenings in many organizations across North America. In far too many cases, the Musketeer Mentality demands that everyone stand as one and dare not stand alone.

The Role of Associations

Another situation that has emerged somewhat recently is the militant position assumed by associations. In some cases, associations have minimized their mandate as champions of professionalism and have, for reasons known only to them, assumed the mandate of weakening the strength or impact of the leader of the service. In some cases, it has been reported that association leadership has investigated methods used by other militant unions/associations in other jurisdictions. One such report indicated that advice and counsel was received from the association that represented officers of the Los Angeles Police Department. Given the Rampart situation, this is a frightening thought.

This strategy can have significant negative impacts upon the effectiveness of the police service’s executive. At the very least, this diversion can have a very negative impact on the tactical operations of the service or the strategic planning efforts of the organization.

As much as organizations and their leaders may try to appeal to the self-actualization aspirations of their employees, various groups appear to operate at a much more basic level, from time to time.

When perusing a variety of police association and/or union literature, one frequently sees articles and points of view that speak to job security, personal security or other related topics. If an individual’s priorities involve self-preservation and/or job security, it is hardly surprising that the loftier goals of the organization fail to make the ‘A List’. When a group is engrossed in thoughts of self-preservation, it is not surprising that ethics, values or principles do not receive their undivided attention.

This reality simply underscores the need for leaders to be very clear and unwavering in their communications with employees. The underlying need for personal reassurance frequently interferes with messages being sent from the head. Meaningful and effectual communication ceases to exist.

Organizational Accountability and Supervision

In organizations that ‘grow their own’ supervisors, managers and administrators, there can be a leaning toward indifference of some misconduct. This inevitably results from having ‘been there, done that’. The graduation from front line through supervisor to administrator sometimes fails to take this reality into consideration.

There is a need for a level of experience in senior police ranks that can only be attained by having moved up through the organization. But along with that experience may occasionally come some unhealthy beliefs and inclination toward wilful blindness.

As individuals embark upon their ascent of the chain of command, they undoubtedly carry with them varying amounts of sympathy, empathy and indulgence. This level of unresponsiveness may vary, depending on their particular career path.

When these characteristics begin to muddy the waters of appropriate supervision, accountability and authority, however, they may begin to sow the seeds of future organizational difficulties. It is also blatantly unfair to each and every member of the organization. When a supervisor, manager or executive entertains the notion that ‘boys will be boys’ or something akin to that, it is time for serious self-examination. Serious, thoughtful, well-planned and well-designed supervisory training is a tool that must be employed to help minimize the impacts of some of this inappropriate baggage.

The Executive

By the time an individual is at the executive level of an organization, there is a significant gap between their post and the front lines of the organization. This gap frequently causes the leader to steer his or her course using old, outdated charts. This necessitates having a process in place whereby the leader can frequently and regularly ‘take the pulse’ of the organization’s front line service delivery personnel.

Frequently, those who lead organizations possess marvellous ethical qualities. All too frequently, however, their expectations of the organization are based upon their own personal values and beliefs, which are not shouted from the rooftops.

It is imperative that leaders proclaim their ethical expectations of every member of the organization in a loud, clear voice. A leader cannot simply expect that those who follow do so with the same ethical fervour as they do. In fairness to everyone in the organization, the leader’s values must be clearly communicated to all, so that those within the organization behave with the full knowledge of the likely impact and consequences of their actions – good and bad.

In any organization, the impact of the leader should never be underestimated; and there are many eyes that are watching. Actions speak far louder than words. ‘Walking the Talk’ is the only possible option.

A Foundation for Times of Conflict

Whether or not a military force (or paramilitary force) is properly equipped to handle crisis situations in an ethical manner is, without a doubt, a critical consideration.

For military leaders to have confidence in the ethical nature of their units, it is crucial that the leader instils and demonstrates day-to-day personal, organizational and operational ethics in a consistent and demonstrable fashion.

The methods whereby individuals are directed, evaluated, recognized and rewarded must take into consideration the need for clear goals and objectives, honest and forthright evaluations against well-known and measurable standards, supervisory and management accountability and frequent but sincere recognition and reward.

When sculpting such an organization, the leader must plan each move within the framework of the organizational culture that prevails. Appropriate measures must be in place to anticipate, recognize and properly deal with various challenging aspects of the culture. The leader must be ready, willing and able to operate in a manner that is open to intense scrutiny. Nothing less can be contemplated.

It is only when the organization possesses an impermeable ethical foundation that the leader can hope to deliver on the promise of a highly ethical service during times of crisis.

Bob Fitches is a consultant to small and large organizations. He has worked in these fields for a number of years and offers executives and others insights and advice on building and maintaining ethically strong, values-based organizations. As well as having a successful consultancy, Bob is also a Life/Personal/Executive Coach and a much sought-after public speaker.

Article Source

Tags: ethics, issues, legal, corporate, dilemmas

An ethical dilemma is when an incident arises that causes you to question how you should react based on your beliefs and deciding how to choose between right and wrong.

Sometimes, an ethical dilemma might be easily solved once you have had a bit of time to think about it but in other cases, it might not be as easy.

Perhaps you have been put into a bad position where you need to make a decision that will most likely have consequences regardless of what you decide.

An example of an ethical dilemma is when a salesperson is guaranteed to make a big sale if they offer a kickback (ie. an illegal payment) to someone.

If they agree to the kickback, they get the sale but risk getting caught and getting into big trouble.

If they don’t agree to the kickback, they don’t get the sale and might end up looking bad in the eyes of their employer.

Also, should they even tell their employer about the situation or should they simply make a decision and live with the consequences?

Clearly, this is an ethical dilemma and although it’s easy to say you would do the right thing, when you are actually in such a position and are feeling pressure to act, you might not always be able to think as clearly as you would otherwise like to think you would.

Depending on the situation, how you react to an ethical dilemma might differ but at the end of the day, here are some things to keep in mind:

* Use common sense. If it’s clearly wrong or illegal, you know the consequences of doing something that could cost you dearly.
* Don’t let your self-interest get in the way and allow it to cloud your judgment. A short-term gain could be a long-term pain if you make the wrong decision and get caught.
* Don’t assume that your employer will back you up if you do something wrong and get caught. Referring to the above example of the kickback, don’t assume that if you decide to pay the kickback that this is what your employer would approve of. If you acted alone and get caught, don’t expect your employer to defend you because they may distance themselves from you to avoid further embarrassment or legal trouble.
* Don’t risk your credibility. It can take many good deeds to build credibility but only one seemingly simple indiscretion for it to vanish.

Depending on the specific situation, when an ethical dilemma arises, use common sense and think things through clearly before making a decision you may later regret. Not every decision is cut and dry and sometimes the grey area – the area that is somewhere between right and wrong – may not be as clear as you’d like.

Where possible, try to speak with your manager or someone else you trust when in doubt especially if the decision you have to make affects the company. Don’t assume your employer will tolerate you doing something wrong even if it benefits them.

Remember to treat others as you’d expect to be treated and don’t do anything wrong in anticipation of a short-term gain that could end up costing you in the long-term.

Carl Mueller is an Internet entrepreneur and professional recruiter who wants to help you find your dream career.

Article Source

It happened again, just the other day. Someone called, ready to order a product from me–and I talked her out of it. Does that sound crazy to you? Maybe it is, but I think it is a good business practice, and it is the honest and ethical thing to do in some circumstances.

In this case, the product she called about wasn’t right for her. I would rather not make that sale than have a customer who is unhappy with her choice to buy from me. Will she return and buy something else someday? Maybe. And if she does, she knows that I will be looking out for her best interests–not just to make the sale.

Although I don’t want to give the impression that this happens all the time, it has happened before. Sometimes I recommend an alternative product or service, such as suggesting that a class might be more beneficial than a consultation. Other times, simply offering honest answers and information helps the customer decide whether or not a purchase is right for them. I won’t refuse to sell to a customer, but I will always be honest with them.

What reputation do you want to have–that of the person who will sell anything to anyone, or the person who will make an honest effort to best meet the needs of your customers (even if that sometimes means not making the sale today)?

Copyright Cathy Stucker. As the IdeaLady, Cathy Stucker helps authors, entrepreneurs and professionals attract customers and make themselves famous. Get resources such as free articles, online courses, marketing tips and more at Cathy’s Web site

Article Source

Here’s a true story I’d like to share about doing the right thing—even when her job was at stake.

Her name is M. and she is an attorney who manages the legal department of an insurance company. As my coaching client I supported her through a really challenging ethical dilemma with her boss. She had finished giving her annual performance evaluations to her small team, two of whom received the highest marks. Their annual salary increments were based on these ratings.

M’s boss meanwhile was on a new track regarding performance evaluations. He felt that the trend in recent years was to for managers to be too generous. He wanted stricter accountability in certain areas and this meant lower ratings in general.

So he called her into his office one day and told her that he disagreed with one of the two highest ratings she had given. He wanted her to lower her evaluation for this individual.

M. genuinely respected her boss but felt that he was mistaken in this case. She really believed that the person to whom she had given the excellent rating deserved it. She thought it would be unfair and potentially very damaging to his morale and commitment to the job if his evaluation was lowered. So what to do?

M. had impressed me from the beginning of our coaching engagement with her deep connection to her spiritual values and how she tried to use them as guides in her work. She was nearing retirement age and was working on a Master’s degree in pastoral counseling, something she looked forward to doing at her church when her lawyer-ing days were over.

So after informing her boss that she didn’t want to change the evaluation rating of her direct report and why, he continued to pressure her to do just that. They had several conversations that didn’t create a win-win resolution.

We discussed her feelings, thoughts and options in a couple of coaching sessions. M. felt very strongly about her position and even concluded that, if push came to shove, she was willing to risk her job rather than back down on the issue. In fact, during one of our sessions, she was convinced her boss would fire her.
Fortunately for her, she was in a financial position where she could take an early retirement.

Would she have taken the same strong position on her value of fairness and honesty if she was at an earlier stage of her career? What if she had a young family to support—how would that have affected her willingness to compromise with her boss? Let’s face it, circumstances do play a role in how far we are willing to go to do the right thing. I guess everyone’s conscience operates differently, so there really isn’t any one “right” moral course of action in so many of the situations we face. We take everything into account—our values, our feelings, our needs, the needs of others who rely on us –and then we make the best ethical or moral decision we can. And that’s not always easy!

In a coaching session, we worked through the steps listed in the “Tips” section below. M. decided to stick to her guns and to let the chips fall where they may. Doing so had an interesting effect on her boss. He stopped trying to persuade her to lower the evaluation. Instead, he took full responsibility for his decision by lowering the evaluation himself and telling the employee that it was his decision. He prepared M. for what he was going to do and she had time to think it over before the three of them met together. She decided that, even though she disagreed with what he was doing, she could live with it as long as the employee knew where she stood.

During the meeting her boss took the high road and made it completely clear that the lowering of the evaluation was totally his choice and he gave M. the opportunity to state her position. The consequence of this was that her relationship with the employee remained solid and M. felt good about herself for taking a stand on one of her core values. Her respect for her boss increased because of the way he handled the situation in the end. The employee wasn’t happy, but his feelings were balanced out some by the show of integrity from both superiors, she found out later.

Notice how M.’s taking the moral high road influenced both her boss and her direct report to do the same. Instead of initiating a nasty grievance process or resigning, her employee dealt with his setback in-house rather than going outside for help or leaving.

This story strongly illustrates the ripple effect of putting trust and integrity principles into practice at a high level. When one person does this, it seems to turn on a light for others, and that’s really beautiful to behold. It’s so easy to take our cues from others, after all we’re social animals. But then someone comes along who takes their cues from somewhere else, from a place deep inside and we call that special place by so many different names. So when a courageous person does this, then we are all reminded that we have that place inside too, and we start to dare to live from there once again. I want to encourage you to be that courageous person.

If you are struggling with an ethical dilemma at work, and aren’t sure how to move forward, email or call me, and I’ll be glad to discuss the situation with you.

Tips for Doing the Right Thing When Facing a Tough Ethical Choice:

* Take your time. Before making a tough ethical decision at work, take the time to identify the core value you feel is in danger of being compromised in the situation.

* What are your needs? Once you identify your core value at play, clarify your needs in the situation. For instance, M. needed to act with fairness and honesty, to maintain her direct report’s high morale and commitment, and to continue her good working relationship with him.

* Look for the third alternative. What are your options for getting these needs met? This can be tricky, because if strong emotions come into play, which they often do, it’s human nature to narrow down our options to one or two courses of action, usually the ones at either extreme such as giving in or getting out. There may be a third alternative you just can’t see yet for meeting your integrity needs. In M’s case, the third alternative presented itself after she drew her line in the sand. I’ve seen that happen a lot. When you take a strong stand, the other person stops trying to change your thinking and changes their own instead.

* Wait and see. Sometimes, if possible, doing nothing is the best response to pressure to do something that feels unethical or against your conscience. The person applying the pressure just stops after a while, often because they regained their emotional balance.

Joe DiSabatino helps leaders and organizations reach their goals by creating high-trust work environments. For more support and information about the importance of trust and integrity in business, visit this site

Article Source

Globalization and technology developed at a rattling rate make our lives more comfortable but we are stranded in a tighter area in our daily lives, on the contrary. Future might be ahead that is worse than Georger Orwell’s “Big Brother”. This time private companies trace us more than the government does, ranging from GSM operators to web search engines, credit card data and survey forms.

In the era of marketing, advertising and consumpiton, it does not matter so much to get data collected about us. The heart of the mattter for the companies is what they could do with those data, how they could increase their sales and forecast future.

Data mining is a method became very popular in 1990s, which aims to reach optimum efficiency in planning and organization thru collecting data from gigantic databases and determining specific trends, allowing to forecast future. Having used artificial intelligence, this method is based on analysing “significant” data and trends by computers, which takes many years for an ordinary man to collect those data. In the beginning such significant data seem “irrelevant”, but following computer analysis, it could appear as “relevant” by comparing two parameters. For example, according a survey run in a supermarket chain, families buying nappies tend to buy beer as well. So, a promotion campaign is held with the concept of “Party Time for the Families with Kids”.

Why is it so important to connect medicine and insurance, public and private sector, automobile demand graphics with avocado and banana curves? Before answering this question, it would be better to check how such a thing could be possible.

The key concept of data mining is to purge specific data series by sorting and comparing among gigantic databases. Despite “Merge and Purge” and “Database Enrichment” methods remained out of fashion as compared to “data mining”, data could be really transformed into valuable information and automized easily.

It is not easy to set up such huge databases. Many legal and illegal companies and people appeared to collect databases, especially e-mails currently. Metromail is one of the largest companies collecting mail addresses, currently collecting and selling e-mails, established in 1948, hiring 3000 people with a sales turnover of over USD 281 million. It “hunts” data researching from different resources ranging from state records to surveys, which also include income, householding, marital status, age groups and even the team supported. So Metromail is the no 1 company as required specific name-address info. On the other hand, it has a gigantic database continously developing with data about almost every house in the USA . In addition to such legal companies, there are also pirate ones producing data for pirate CDs.

Cookies innocently embedded in our computers, security cameras tracing us on the streets, retina scanners at airports, mobile phone call centers recording what we said for us, machines recording what we wrote and tools registering our actions…It is a world that do not care about us, but our data.

There is a new possible future ahead in case there is not a social consciousness formed to pass the overseas laws protecting invidual privacy. That future is “profitable” for companies, “secure” for states but “nightmarish” for us, ordinary people.

Emre Kizilkaya is a journalist. He writes articles for a communication technologies magazine, Tele.com.tr.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, examples, issue, theories, dilemmas

It’s not just for business anymore. Our next Enron or WorldCom could come from within government. The fact government sets many of the ethical standards for business means they must have a high standard themselves. It appears those standards are slipping.

The Ethics Resource Center’s National Government Ethics Survey (NGES) shows that nearly two thirds (63%) of local government employees said they observed at least one type of misconduct during the reported year. Local government also had the highest rate of workers who witnessed misconduct but did not report it. The combined rate of state and federal workers who stated they had witnessed ethics violations was 57%. The 2007 study did not show improvement over the previous study. This should sound alarms for both government and business. Visit the web site of the Ethics Resource Center to download the the entire survey.

The greatest issues were at the local level, so here’s some grassroots, common sense knowledge for you that today’s society seems to be overlooking at great expense. Our society is losing its grasp on good old-fashioned values. And like society, business follows suit. Gone are the days where a man’s handshake was his promise, his word his commitment. But not gone forever. If you want to learn some methods to pump values back into your organization, and gain confidence back from your customers, you’ll want to stress these conditions during all training. Reinforce and remind them on a regular basis:

* The flow of information from top management
* Top management’s ability to keep promises and commitments
* The flow of information from supervisors to employees
* A supervisor’s ability to keep promises and commitments
* Increase confidence that coworkers will keep promises and commitments
* Use transparent means to reward employees, nothing unquestionable

There is an upward trend of pressure to compromise standards, where situations invite wrongdoing and/or employees’ personal values conflict with the values espoused at work. This increasing pressure builds like the wave of a tsunami until it reaches critical mass. Self interest, lying, abusive behavior and internet abuse top the list for misconduct in the workplace within government.

Businesses run the risk of loosing customer and employee trust that is essential for businesses to maintain. Government agencies strongly risk loosing the confidence and trust of the public. In both sectors, eroded trust hinders organizational effectiveness.

Download your free eBook copy of The Soldier’s Method: Leadership Tactics for Business by visiting this site – Wesley Ford is known as That Value Guy. He is a leadership, retention and technology expert, professional speaker and consultant who helps develop your leadership skills while getting employees to retain you.

Article Source

Tags: dilemma, dilemmas, ethical, examples, work

A very common dilemma, which most managers experience at one time or another in their career, occurs when they get a call from someone representing another company’s HR department, or perhaps a hiring manager, who is calling to ask for a reference about one of our old employees or work colleagues. It is very likely that our company policy states that we can only confirm to the caller the name of the past employee, their former title and their dates of employment, and nothing more, or refer the caller to the HR department so that they can confirm the same information (Trevino and Nelson, 2005, p. 75).

After complying with the company policy by only providing this information, it isn’t uncommon for the caller to ask if we couldn’t pleas provide a little bit more information about the individual which would help them make their decision on whether or not to hire the individual. This may seem harmless, especially if we happen to know the worker was excellent and indeed you feel you could provide a good reference. Or, we may be tempted to raise the “”red flag”" and warn them to avoid the mistake and the headache that you dealt with! However, it is important to remember that “”whenever you identify yourself as an employee of your company, people can infer that you are speaking on behalf of it, which is why..”" (p.75) you must remember that whatever you tell the individual you are actually not speaking for yourself, but the company. “”Most companies prohibit their personnel from officially supplying this type of information because of lawsuits that have resulted from employer-supplied recommendations (p. 75).

The same is true when the ex-employee asks you personally if you can provide a recommendation. If you use corporate letterhead or refer to your position in the company, then you are also representing the company and it can be interpreted that you are speaking on behalf of the company. While you may want to provide the favor, you should decline, unless you have permission from your employer. If you provide a reference as an individual and not as a representative of the company, then you must not use your title, company letterhead, your business card, or anything else that would refer to your working relationship within the company (p. 75).

Another dilemma we may face as managers is whether or not to blow the whistle on an individual within our organizations. This becomes an ethical dilemma since we must decide whether or not we are ethically bound to report information which have regarding unethical behavior of others within the company or do nothing, which may seem safer from our personal perspective. However, it is important to remember that as managers, once we have received any information regarding any unethical behavior within the organization; it is our ethical and corporate responsibility to make an effort to notify others within the corporation who may be able to take appropriate action (p. 79). If we do not, then we become partly responsible for any damages since we had information but did not act.

Several years ago, while leading a sales team, I was notified by one of our sales representatives that another of our representatives had on several occasions drank excessively dinners we sponsored for our clients. He stated that he did not want to cause problems for the individual; he felt that he had to let me know that while drinking the other representative said and did things that were not appropriate and reflected poorly on the company. Once I received the call, I found myself in a dilemma. I in fact had witnessed the other representative become loud when he drank at our business meetings. While I personally did not feel he was drinking more than others in the team, I know that if I did not do something, that I may be risking relationships with our customers, the good faith of our company, or even worse, the safety of one of my employees and or others who may be at danger because of excessive drinking. I notified our local HR representative and notified her of the situation and asked her for advice. With her support and the support of our employee assistance program we were able to address the situation in a way that was confidential to the individual concerned and in a way that protected the company and the individual.

References:

Trevino, L., and Nelson, K., (2005). Corporate social responsibility and managerial ethics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Since founding Magnify Leadership and Development, James has developed, facilitated and coached programs including; Change Leadership, Coaching, Communication Skills, Sustaining Learning, Interviewing Skills, Leadership, Territory Management for dozens of leading global organizations; including, Advantis Research and Consulting, IMS, CMOE, Pfizer, Sinclair, Disetronic Medical Systems, StratX, ASTD, Coventry Health Care, Wilson Learning, and many others. James is bilingual and can facilitate and coach in both English and Spanish.

Prior to founding Magnify Leadership and Development, James headed Pfizer’s Learning and Development for all of Europe, Canada, Africa and the Middle East where he was instrumental in the development of a global management curriculum and other training initiatives to enhance organizational effectiveness for over 30,00 employees.

Visit James website to learn how we can you with your leadership and communication development needs.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, business, issues

“How does an organization resolve ethical dilemmas and conflicts among employees and employers? This is the most fundamental problem that every management has when the company has diverse set of employees.

Belief is the most appropriate factor that determines whether an issue or a dilemma can be resolved or not. Employment and employees should have an inter-dependent relationship that is driven by belief in each other. While employees should believe that the decisions taken by the employer would be in their best interest, employers should believe that employee’s work ethics are only for the development of the organization.

While resolving an ethical dilemma, one should be able to look into the background of the situation including the entire context of the issue, its origin and individuals involved in the conflict. Also one needs to look for any other information that went missing and is important to solve the problem. This should be followed by an estimate about the actual problem and the ethical issues attached to the conflict. Assessment of the problem should also include company values that have been violated.

The next step is to make a detailed list of possible solution. While listing the solutions, one should also be able to list out all the positive and negative outcomes of each solution.

This should be followed by eliminating solutions that are either not appropriate or can be harmful for the organizational structure. Solution for the problem should be in the best interests of the both the participating parties, while upholding the values and ethics of the company. A complete evaluation of every solution is a must.

Check Out More Articles :

Cheap Quick Easy Dinner Recipes – What Is An Important Ethical Issues Nurses Face On The Floor,

Dating Effects Of Single Parenting – Teenage Parenting Facts & Information

Article Source

Tags: ethical, dilemmas, workplace, list, problems

“I hope that is a rhetorical question,” Cheryl replied. “You know the answer. ” Cheryl had just invested in three cups of coffee while her mentoring partner described an agonizing issue at the office. As Michelle’s mentor for almost two years, she had witnessed her protégé’s impressive climb up the career ladder. Michelle began as a manager in a national fast food chain and worked her way to supervisor while still in college. Just after graduating, she was offered a corporate position in the franchising department. At age twenty-six, Michelle had reached a position of considerable influence, including an especially prestigious role on the franchise-approval committee.

Here’s how that committee operates: In order to secure the right to own and operate one of the company’s restaurants, prospective franchisees must win the approval of representatives from finance, real estate, and operations. Each member has veto power over the applicant’s fate. As the operational link, Michele held significant responsibility and this assignment was a real jewel in her career crown. But it now held the potential for stopping her career in its tracks. Thus, Michelle had called her mentor for this midnight, Waffle House rendezvous.

“So let me make sure I’ve got this straight. Your boss sent word to you—he didn’t talk to you directly, he just had his assistant tell you? Is that right?” Cheryl was as incredulous over the boss’s cowardice as she was his blatant bigotry.

Michelle nodded. “Of course he wasn’t going to tell me directly. He is a corporate officer. He needs to maintain deniability.”

Cheryl could understand why he wanted to keep some distance from the message. He had ordered Michelle to veto the application of a franchise candidate named Sadid Patel. “Yep, that’s exactly right. Mr. Senior Vice President had his assistant order me to veto him, because he feels we have too many foreigners in the system as it is,”"Michelle summarized.

“Any chance that finance or real estate will do the dirty work before you have to meet with him?” Cheryl was fishing here, hoping to find a way Michelle could sidestep the conflict.

“Not a chance. His finances are impeccable and he has picked a prime site to build on. Besides, they’ve both already signed off on him.” Michelle continued to stare at the wall just behind Cheryl’s seat, as if the answer might be written somewhere within the wallpaper. “There’s no way around it. Tomorrow at 10:30, I can either perform a reprehensible act or I can see my career come to slithering stagnation at the age of twenty-six.”

Michelle picked up her napkin and wiped at a small water spot on the table. Maybe just this once I can compromise a principle, she thought. Just this one time. Finally making direct eye contact, she quietly added, “You’ve always told me that I have to pick my battles.”

Cheryl returned the eye contact and firmly replied, “And you know this is one you’ve got to pick, Michelle.”

****** ****** ****** ******

It was eight o’clock the next evening. Cheryl and Michelle were occupying the same seats in the same coffee shop. “”Well, let it out,” Cheryl said. “You have that distant look on your face. What did you decide to do?”

“The only thing I could do,”" Cheryl replied. “I couldn’t be a part of any racist act.” Michelle took a deep breath and slowly let it out. “So, I approved Mr. Patel. He has his franchise.” Michelle leaned back in her seat, continued stirring the coffee but never drinking from the cup.

“Good for you. I know it was tough, but you did the right thing.” Cheryl was relieved to know that Michelle had valued integrity and character over developing a plastic career. But, Michelle was looking even more distraught than she did last night. Cheryl figured the VP must have come down hard. She decided to reassure Michelle that her career was not over. “Hey kid,”" she said with a kind smile. “There are other companies.”

“Oh, no, that’s not it. I’m not worried about my job anymore.” Michelle allowed a slight smile to interrupt her malaise. “Before meeting with Patel, I had a short meeting with my boss. I let him know that if I ever even sensed him blocking my career, I would make a beeline to the president and maybe even the Justice Department. He got my message loud and clear. He won’t be an issue.”

“Well, now. I’ll bet that knocked him on his keister.” Cheryl was impressed with Michelle’s preemptive strike. “”But why are you upset? You should be ecstatic. It was an incredible day!”

“I’m not so sure about that, Cheryl.” Michelle paused to press a napkin to her glistening eyes. “I really don’t think I did the right thing.”

Cheryl was stunned. “How can you possibly say that? How could you possibly doubt your actions?”

Michelle spoke slowly and with an intensity Cheryl had never before heard from her. “Because Mr. Patel is, without question, the most unqualified person I have ever interviewed for a franchise approval. He has no understanding of customer service, looks down his nose at foodservice workers, and had no concept of quality standards.” Michelle leaned forward, “Cheryl, I approved a compete incompetent as a franchisee of the very company that entrusted me to select its business partners. I violated that trust.”

Michelle paused and then quietly added: “Now, where is the integrity in that?

Ken Tanner operates an Atlanta-based consulting firm specializing in employee retention and teambuilding. Ken is the author of three books: Recruiting Excellence, Retaining Employees, and the newly-published major release from Thomas Nelson Publishers, Never Order Barbecue in Maine, a lifetime career guide. Ken’s next book, to be published by Preager in 2007, will be The Entrepreneur’s Guide to Teambuilding. Ken invites you to visit his website

Article Source