In almost every working environment we are faced with office politics. It seems to find a way of involving us and usually not by choice. The key to coping with these circumstances without crossing any ethical boundaries is to first and foremost decide what is of importance to you- the short term chance of promotion or the long term value of your professional development, which can take a life time to build but can serve as inspiration for life times to come.

Some people think that they should avoid office politics all together, but statistics have shown that those who understand and use these politics are more likely to succeed than those who dismiss it all together.

As Andrew DuBrin once said “to ignore office politics is to ignore those underlining forces that account for the differences in success between equally talented people”.

There are two different types of office politics, good and bad. Which ever one you choose to participate in is solely up to you. First you must distinguish between the two.

Bad politics can consist of:

* Withholding or delaying information that may be needed
* Deliberately holding meetings or making decisions without all parties necessary
* Arranging scenarios that make others look bad or set them up for failure
* Discrediting the efforts of others or taking credit when it is not deserved
* Not delivering on promises made or denying the legitimate requests of others for your benefit
* Giving false support or advice in order to serve your own agenda
* Complaining, criticizing, wasting time on gossiping or harassing others

Good politics can consist of:

* Going out of your way to insure the success of others even when it serves no purpose or benefit to you
* Building trust, the key to building trust is through consistency and understanding
* Your peers feeling comfortable to come to you with their questions and or issues
* Creating a lighter environment in times of stress
* Seeing things through to the end, not abandoning people mid way

To show leadership you must first of all understand office politics as well as the times to participate in it. In the CMC

1. Pinpoint what you want and why
2. Identify who controls what you need
3. Find out who can get you what you need
4. Figure out what you need to do what you want
5. Go for it with determination and resolve
6. Watch out for the harmful politics of others as you go (ethical)
7. Protect yourself along the way

Circumstances we face in life can take away everything we have worked hard to acquire; everything except our name, for it is the essence of who we are. The only way we can lose this is if we make the conscious decision and are willing to give it up.

So in the end you must ask yourself, is a promotion worth your name?

In addition to his numerous speaking, management consulting, and international engagements, Fred remains highly active in providing individuals with ongoing one-on-one Coaching for professional development in areas from goal setting to execution. Visit this site to read more about this topic.

Article Source

Tags: political, ethics, public, business, training

“In the past a leader was a boss. Today’s leaders must be partners with their people… they no longer can lead solely based on positional power.”

Ken Blanchard

Who is accountable in Washington? As the Foley scandal spiraled out of control, government leaders took cover. Former Representative Mark Foley escaped congressional punishment by resigning in the middle of the scandal. House Speaker Dennis Hastert proclaims that he did not do anything wrong; however, Hastert publicly stated he accepts full responsibility. Many in Congress worried about the political fallout. Internal polling had shown that House Republicans could suffer massive loses if Hastert doesn’t resign. The results were much worse.

On election day, voters led a massive revolt against the incumbents. This created one of the largest congressional shift since 1994. Exit polls showed that voters were more concerned about ethics than any other subject. Four Republicans resigned from the House this year due to ethical issues. Currently, American politicians suffer credibility problems. An USA Today/Gallup Poll of 1,009 adults found that only 15 percent of the people gave U.S. senators high or very high marks for honesty and ethical standards. The U.S. representatives didn’t do any better at 14 percent.

As each party tries to either take advantage of a “hot button” issue or perform damage control, followers grow increasingly cynical about government leadership. Both party expects each congressperson to follow the party line. Sometimes this blind obedience leads to going against one’s principles. Obviously, this is done with transactional relationships with peers. On the other hand, ethics guru Cuilla maintains that coercion is not true leadership. She argues that ethics is at the heart of good leadership.

If one evaluates these statements, the question becomes, how can any good leader blindly follow any group or party? What is the price of surrendering one’s core values? A true leader stands up for his principles even though it may be forced to go against his social network. Therefore, politicians need to foster more value-based leadership.

References:

Ciulla, J.B. (1998). Ethics: The Heart of Leadership. Westport, CT: Praeger.

FoxNews.com (2006). Hastert sys he did nothing wrong in foley page scandal. Received on October 13, 2006, from this site.

Koch, W. (December 12, 2006). Poll: Washington scandals eating away public trust. USA Today.

Margasak, L. (October 8, 2006). One thing’s for sure in Foley investigation. Associated Press.

© 2006 by Daryl D. Green

Daryl D. Green, who is an international strategist, has over 17 years of managing government contracts. He is considered one of the savviest strategists of his generation. With more than 100 articles published globally, Mr. Green has been noted and quoted by USA Today and Associated Press.

Want more insight on the public sector? Get a copy of More than a Conqueror: Achieving Personal Fulfillment in Government Service here. For more information, please visit this site

Article Source

Tags: ethics, political, policy, public, politics

I walked outside to my car and saw a disturbing sight. Someone had keyed the entire passenger side. It had to get fixed. Fortunately, I was covered.

Of course they always hit the best looking side. And they didn’t key my hood, which needed the most touch-up. Some of you are saying, “Hey stupid. Why don’t you claim the hood as part of the damage? Your insurance wouldn’t know the difference.”

Simple. That would be a lie…

It was just prior to Christmas when I ordered a $500 correspondence course with an expiring $50 coupon for a total of $450. It arrived, but on the final week of the year, it goes on sale for $250. I could have returned the course, reordered it under the sale price, and saved $200—but I didn’t.

Was it because I was doing well and didn’t face money challenges? NO. Just the opposite.

You’re thinking I must really be a sap. I got no money coming in on one end, and I’m throwing it away on the other. Just how gullible is your editor?

Hey I don’t like overpaying for anything, but if something was worth the price, then I’ll make an effort to get it. And in this case, the course was worth more than $500. The information alone was worth more than five thousand dollars.

(It’s funny, but when people buy a five thousand dollar item—they treat it like a five thousand dollar item. If they get the exact item for free, it usually collects dust.)

Which leads to the volatile topic of personal integrity…

Do you lie on your income taxes? Do you plagiarize? Do you cheat on your partner? Do you break your word? Do you falsify information? And even more acceptable—do you try to get even?

I’m sure none of you are of this caliber, but let’s assume the rest of the world made these common practices. They believe it’s no big deal to tell a lie because it’s really harmless and besides, everyone gets away with it. Or maybe they’ve been burned by someone who got away with it, so why not join them and do the same to others?

For one thing—this eviscerates the Golden Rule of doing unto others, as you’d have them do unto you:

You don’t want to be a victim of cheating, so why would you become a participant? You don’t want to be taken advantage of, so why join some plot to abuse your talents? You want to reap the good, so why sow to the bad?

And for another thing—what goes around, comes around:

Some call it karma. Others call it sin. Whatever it’s called in your circle—it seems to haunt you later in life. It bites you in the ass and leaves painful marks.

If you want to be treated right, you should treat others right first. If you gossip about others, others will gossip about you. If you profit from the expense of others, others are forming a line to take a shot at you.

But you reason, “You don’t understand. You haven’t been through what I’ve been through. I’ve kept my word – my end of the deal – and I got burned. I’ve got to teach them a lesson!”

Hey, save it. You’ll waste too much time trying to collect what you’re due. It’s usually more profitable to forgive and move on. You won’t become its slave and you’ll sleep better at night.

Here’s what I mean…

My mentor’s books are illegally published in different languages. When he appeared in one of those countries for a keynote, they treated him like a famous rock star. He got the royal treatment and spin-off deals because he didn’t waste time collecting what he was owed. He leveraged his loss of income to make even more money without lifting a finger.

That’s the same power we’ve been granted. We have the power to choose our actions. Do we pursue our wrongdoers, or forgive them?

Tough choices we must make…

Is your editor applying for sainthood? No, not even. This is the same stuff he struggles with.

I was in Chicago for a company launch. My group leader offered his group a discount to join him. I was at the lobby when I met up with him.

The lady from Atlanta was shocked she had to pay full price for her group. She whined to our leader about the discount. To avoid a scene, he joked about it and quickly gave in.

I was next in line. Would I pay full price or would he offer me the same discount? No dice: I paid full.

Now you’re probably surmising: “You’re not a Super Saint—but a Super Sap.”

I disagree. Because it goes far deeper than just dollars and cents. Allow me to explain…

I sought no favor with my leader. He’s well off and doesn’t need the money. He was probably testing me to see if I would whine also. If I got anything from the incident, I think I won his respect. And that can stretch a very long way.

How about you?

Have you won people’s respect? Do they see you as an Institute of Integrity? Do you have a reputation that’s beyond reproach?

Advertise your answers in your daily walk and until we meet again, you have my best wishes.

About the Author:

Tommy Yan helps business owners and entrepreneurs make more money through direct response marketing. He publishes Tommy’s Tease weekly e-zine to inspire people to succeed in business and personal growth. Get your free subscription today at this site.

If you’re a speaker, trainer, coach, or a consultant—the major challenge you face is connecting with your audience. You talk, shout, or recite your message while they are dreaming about dinner. Their eyes are glossy, their minds’ elsewhere, and their bodies ready to bolt. You don’t have a lot of time, so you’ve got to grab their attention fast. Or else, you’ll die wrestling against audience resistance. But it doesn’t have to be this way..

Article Source

Tags:ethnics, moral, essay, philosophical, political

Men cease to interest us when we find their limitations. The sin is limitations. As soon as you once come up to a man’s limitations, it is all over with him.

Emerson

Today most average Americans are reluctant to discuss politics. Some are disgusted with politics in general. Unfortunately, this disgust is not without merit. American politics are rooted in American political culture that promotes that government ought to work in accordance with a higher standard of right and wrong. It believes that the political system ought to operate in accordance with popular sovereignty.

It concept is a value that relates to the belief that the only legitimate basis of political authority is the consent of the govern. However, the American political system stands different. Nelson, author of Why Americans hate Politics and Politicians, acknowledged that politics and politicians are imperfect; Americans are growing weary and taking actions. Antiopolitics constitutional amendments are surfacing in a hope of providing term limits of members of Congress and a proposal to require a balanced budget.

Unfortunately, Americans are now cynical of political figures as it relates to personal values. Postmodern influences have create an atmosphere of untrust of traditional institutions. Kouzer and Posner, authors of Credibility, admit that three-fourths of employees view top executives do pretty much what they want no matter what people think. They argue that the increase in cynicism in the workplace is due the decline of credibility among executives. This cynicism is quickly found in the political arena. As each party tries to either take advantage of this “hot button” issue or do damage control, followers grow increasingly cynical about government leadership.

Nelson, a political guru, argued that American cynicism have evolved for many reasons. The government has been caught in various lies and half-truths, including Vietnam War, Watergate, and Iran-Contra Deal. Some argue that the political office is so time consuming that only people who are willing to become a full-time politician can do it. However, Americans have never really been pro-politics or pro-politicians. With the incoming of new politicians to Congress this year, many individuals wonder if US politicians can regain public trust. Only time will tell.

References:

CNN (2005). Reid: White House owes an explanation. Received on October 31, 2005 from website.

Ciulla, J.B. (1998). Ethics: The Heart of Leadership. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Draft, R. (1995). Organization Theory & Design. Congress gets low ratings on ethics, honesty.

Harris, J. (April 12, 2005). In recent scandals, a rethinking of capital’s conventional wisdom. Washington Post.

Heuser, B. (2005). The Ethics of Social Cohesion. Peabody Journal of Education. 80(4), pp.8-15.
Kern, C. (2003). Creating and Sustaining an Ethical Workplace Culture, Pepperdine University.
King, S. (2006). The Moral Manager. Public Integrity. 8(2), pp.113-133.
Lester, W. (2005). Associated Press. Congress gets low ratings on ethics, honesty.

Nelson, M. (1994). Why Americans hate Politics and Politicians. Virginia Quarterly Review. 70(4), p.636, 18p.

Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations. Delhi, India: Pearson Education, Inc.
© 2006 by Daryl D. Green

Daryl D. Green has published over 100 articles in the field of decision-making (personal and organizational), leadership, and organizational behavior. Mr. Green is also the author of four books, including More than a Conqueror: Achieving Personal Fulfillment in Government Service. Do you want to improve your life? Do you want to make better decisions? If you answer “”yes,”" then go to the ‘master decision-making’ website

Article Source

Tags: ethical, theory, public, political, politics

Whenever there is an election many politicians will insist upon minimum-wage laws to help the poor people so they can make an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work. This makes sense on the surface and people who are employed at minimum wage would certainly like to make more money and if they vote they will most likely vote for a politician who insists on minimum-wage law increases.

Unfortunately, many people do not understand that by increasing the minimum wage law we actually decrease the number of people employed by small businesses. Small businesses on average employee 75% of the workforce in America and if they lay off people because minimum wage is more now, then in fact fewer people will work and therefore economic downturn times will come to the region which has minimum-wage laws.

Of course if someone loses their job rather than making minimum wage that is an individual disaster for their personal economics, checkbooks and bank accounts. It is too bad we do not educate the citizenry that minimum wages actually hurts America and our economic vitality. Free markets will have to pay the prevailing wage if they are to have their businesses remain viable.

If a business fails to pay what their employees are worth those employees will go work somewhere else in the business will not be able to function. Free markets and free enterprise are the basic leveling fields for labor economics and this should be considered before anyone goes and raises the minimum wage law simply to get more votes to get elected. Please consider this in 2006.

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

Article Source

Tags: political, public relations, laws, wage, politician

The real question is: Why are press releases so bad? The answer: Despite their name, bad “press” releases are not written for the “press.” What? How can this be? And what can be done about?

First, let’s clear up a misconception: Press releases do not represent the sum total of public relations any more than a four-seam fastball represents the totality of baseball. Press releases are merely one tool in PR. However, like fastballs that miss the strike zone, they are grossly misused so often that it’s easy to see why many want to euthanize them rather than deal with the underlying conditions that make them horrible.

Here are three reasons why press releases are so bad:

1. Too many are not written for journalists. The writing process for even a simple product press release often involves a committee. And the release reads like it. Worse, the committee writes for itself – and not for journalists. With unintentional and self-defeating good works, members keep adding words, acronyms, concepts and catch phrases to satisfy their internal political considerations. It’s nearly impossible for such a group to write in a way that improves the understanding of journalists, who have only seconds to devote to their release before determining if it is worthy of coverage.

2. Too many of those who determine the content aren’t communicators. The professional qualifications of those who edit press releases are often impressive: lawyers, human resource professionals, accountants, engineers. But most of these professionals have no experience parsing English to entice journalists. Instead, they lengthen phrases and sentences, obfuscate meaning, seriously reducing media pick-up of good stories.

3. Press releases are often not press releases, but political manifestos. A committee writing a press release unintentionally complicates it. But many organizations intentionally issue manifestos that appear to be press releases but are no such thing. These organizations can be quite happy about it, even if journalists consider their work poor excuses for press releases. These manifestos, blogged, burped and “texted” across the ever-expanding ether of electronic communications are not news at all. They are opinion. They may be worthy opinion (or not), depending upon factors that have nothing to do with the judgment process journalists use to sort, sift and identify “news.” Unfortunately, however, the organizations issuing these manifestos hope journalists lump them into the same category as “real” press releases. This never happens, and only poisons the well for those with legitimate news.

So what can be done about the horrible state of press releases, which, despite all the talk, are a bedrock tool of public relations? Here are three solutions:

1. Remember who we’re writing for. Sometimes, a release written by committee is unavoidable. But a good process with a strong team captain can make sure that the press release is something that its intended audience (journalists) will actually read, and that its content is something journalists will use (news).

2. Involve communicators in the communicating. The views of professionals involved in the news behind a press release are essential. But lawyers, accountants and engineers shouldn’t drive the writing and editing of press releases any more than patients should guide the knife during their surgeries.

3. Learn to separate news and opinion for better results. Just because you have an opinion doesn’t mean it’s news. News belongs in press releases; opinions can appear in many, many places, from blogs to opinion articles and statements and interviews. But stamping the words “press release” on a document that has little resemblance to what most journalists consider “news” only worsens the situation for the organization issuing this kind of document — and the rest of us who have real news to share.

Are these the only problems with press releases? Are these the only solutions? Hardly. But I offer them as a start in what should be a vigorous debate among PR professionals and those they work with about the proper use of press releases.

Press releases aren’t going away any more than the four-seam fastball is going to disappear from the repertoire of hard-throwing major league pitchers. That’s all the more reason why we should focus on the underlying problems of bad press releases, so that we can make sure that more of them hit the strike zone the first time they’re pitched.

Paul Furiga is president of WordWrite Communications LLC, a Pittsburgh-based public relations agency that harnesses the timeless power of storytelling to share its clients’ great untold stories. He is the former editor of the Pittsburgh Business Times, and has also covered Congress, the White House, edited magazines and written for publications ranging from Congressional Quarterly to Frequent Flyer magazine.

Article Source.

Tags: political, public relations, press release, publicity, pr