Corporate Governance refers the way in which the corporation governs itself. Governance includes the way the company reports earnings, pays Directors, etc… Recognizing that improper governance can have huge consequences for employees and shareholders, the government requires corporations to follow Corporate Governance laws and guidelines that are designed to reduce the risk of fraud, and financial ruins such as those that caused the demise of corporations like Enron, WorldCom and Global Crossing.

Solid Corporate Governance that protects investors and employees from accounting fraud, conflict of interest, etc., can be seen as a part of any company that is acting socially responsible. Because a CSR company is acting in a way above and beyond what is required of it by law to protect stakeholders in the company, solid Corporate Governance of a CSR oriented company could be viewed as a way in which the company can ensure that the interests of many directly related and dependent on the company can be protected, including; employees, customers, the communities that depend on tax revenues and employment, etc… Solid Corporate Governance can be seen as an essential first step of any CSR oriented company. Without it, it risks conflict of interest of its board members, CEO, uncertain financial and accounting practices and other risks which could have devastating negative impacts on all stakeholders. For example, Enron’s collapse due to failure of Corporate Governance to prevent fraud and deceit hurt thousands of employees, the community of Houston, where most employees lived, the tax revenues that supported public works, the effect on families and couples who lost retirement savings, health insurance coverage, etc… In fact, before Enron’s accounting fraud became known, many would have considered Enron a solid socially responsible citizen because of its much recognized funding of museums, hospitals and many other organizations in the community where they operated (p. 163). However, all the communities would have been better off in the long run, if Enron had never contributed a dime to these social responsible activities, but had rather provided solid Corporate Governance over its internal operations. If Enron had done this, thousands would not have lost jobs, communities would have maintained higher tax revenues, retirements would have been more secured for thousands, health insurance would have been secured by many more, returns would have been higher for investors and shareholders, etc…

Corporate Governance should be seen as a top priority of any company seeking to be a good corporate citizen. More good can be done by a company ensuring solid corporate governance, than other activates usually seen as important for Socially Conscious organizations. Furthermore, more pressure should be exerted on organizations to establish good social governance than should be exerted on companies to sponsor other socially responsible activities and stakeholders in communities, the press, the government, etc., should also recognize and applaud companies who may put more effort on Corporate Governance although they may lack other social activities. Governance should be seen ad rewarded as the top priority.

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: business, work, economic, ethics, public

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

Maybury also quotes one of the most brilliant and infamous books in history: The Prince, by Niccolo Machiavelli. Maybury points out that it is oftentimes misquoted, but never seen for what it really is – the truth “about the inherent nature and behavior of government that few are willing to face.”

This is the way it has been throughout the 10,000 years of human history. So why are we shocked every time a leader, a politician or a man of the cloth, lets us down? Fifty years ago, good guys wore white cowboy hats and bad guys wore black cowboy hats. It seemed to be a simpler time with simpler choices. But today, life has gotten more complex and that complexity is reflected in our current leadership. Integrity, honesty and ethics have become a fuzzy line between what you see and what you actually get.

Maybury goes on – “One of my favorite chapters in The Prince is number 15, in which Machiavelli lists the characteristics generally thought to be desirable in a political leader: generosity, compassion, faithfulness, courage, purity, flexibility, religiousness, and others. He explains that the leader must fake these virtues but cannot actually have them, because they would ruin him.”

So the next time you think a particular politician is there to save you, remember, it’s just show business.

Yet, not everyone is so easily corrupted. Just give some people the choice between leadership with perks, and leadership with both perks and power and watch what happens. Some put in these roles thrive, while others become corrupted. But, make no mistake about it, certain professions are made up of the hubristic and corrupt, and there is nothing we can do about it. When people let their lower animalistic nature run wild, there is no more control. As I said before, when one scandal dies down, be prepared for the next. It’s the nature of politics.

But how does this affect leadership in general? At the political level it is one thing, at the corporate level, another. How would you handle a scandalous problem as an executive? Here are three suggestions to help get you back on track and save face.

1) Admit Your Mistakes (as Honestly and as Truthfully as You Can).

Being on the board of directors for K2 Design years ago was thrilling, but it was also a tough lesson in revealing to the public the right information at the right time. Yet at times, being unable to share it right away can leave one with a sense of frustration, especially when the news is groundbreaking and positive. But what happens when the news is negative and shareholders equity is at stake?

Speaking too soon can destroy a company and ruin shareholders trust. So pick your battles, and in most cases, take the blame and resign. Unfortunately, someone has to clean up your mess, and getting out of the way will expedite the process.

On the other hand, telling the whole truth up front and attempting to make things right may be what the doctor ordered to reestablishing your credibility as well as your company’s. Who knows, you might even be forgiven. Turnaround specialists are masters at telling the truth, taking action and getting corporate profitability back on track. Take a page from their handbook and follow it.

Don’t bury the truth. That serves no one but you. Schedule that press conference and come clean…today. Jack Welch, when he was at GE, mastered the delivery of bad news while balancing future potential. Study the masters.

2) Make Real Effort to Change Your Behavior

On the road to regaining trust, try actually changing your behavior. Just look at how many celebrities sign up for rehab. It is so effective that courtroom judges grant leniency when someone admits they have a problem with substance abuse and voluntarily checks themselves in. Changing your dysfunctional activities goes a very long way to regaining trust. Time may reveal duplicity on your part, but consider your immediate actions. They are the ones that show up in the history books.

Want to have an impact? Take a good look as to why you got into hot water in the first place. Are you greedy? Do you feel you’re above everyone around you? Are you duplicitous by nature, assuming that everyone is the same? Is your behavior something that requires you to sneak around? If so, try not to wait until the public discovers your faux pas during the evening news. Get help now. If the press has reason to put you under a microscope, your reaction early on will be the one you are judged by.

And do us all a favor, don’t fake it. Show up and do the work. You’re not fooling anyone but yourself.

One thing that seems to be missing from our society these days is a sense of shame. You may not know this, but there is right and wrong behavior.

And last but not least…

3) Time May Be Your Only Ally

In a relationship, time will make things fester, but in the corporate world where trust has been destroyed and investors’ actions are hinging on the next press conference, time is the only sure-fire strategy that will help put the events behind you.

Former Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton were able to put their pasts behind them because their legacy far outweighed their transgressions. Give it time. Eventually you’ll look like the comeback kid. Who knows, maybe even a certain New York Governor will be able to return to some sort of public office someday.

Unfortunately, time may be all you have. Here are just a few samplings of companies that have successfully and unsuccessfully put the past behind them:

Volkswagen took over 25 years for global consumers to forget that their biggest spokesperson was Adolph Hitler. They made a huge comeback in the 60′s by introducing the VW Beetle to the Hippy Generation.

In Bhopal, India, during the early morning of December 3, 1984, a Union Carbide subsidiary pesticide plant explosion released 40 tons of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas into the air. The resulting deaths numbered over 3,000, but testimonies later on from doctors who provided medical assistance during the tragedy claim that over 15,000 was the real number.

Today, Union Carbide (now owned by Dow), is attempting to put the past behind them with a feel-good ad campaign. They introduce us to an element missing from the organic chemistry chart: Hu. It stands for the Human element and we are bombarded with eco-friendly scenes of people — the driving force behind everything.

The Union Carbide website explains away their past by placing the blame on every possibility except Union Carbide. Lawyer-speak is inauthentic and stands out like a sore thumb on their site. Some things should never be forgotten. It’s all a little creepy when you remember the past and the events of Bhopal.

Ironically Union Carbide is owned by Dow, the makers of Agent Orange.

Bear Sterns was showing signs of over extension a year ago. Who were they protecting? Not shareholders, who entrusted them with their money that’s for sure.

In these turbulent times learn to be honorable and incorruptible. Then stand by your management style. Make changes to yourself and to your organization not because it affects the bottom line, but because it is the right thing to do.

Your staff will follow you anywhere so long as you have integrity, fairness and a vision. Without your people, you wouldn’t be a leader. One can’t exist without the other. But, avoid Machiavelli’s suggestion that you should fake these qualities – who wants to follow an executive who’s faking it? And believe me, people know.

Thanks again for reading,

Brad Szollose

May I recommend?:

Richard Maybury’s newsletter – The Early Warning Report, check the site

This is a one of a kind newsletter that focuses on geopolitics, history and investment advice. I also recommend his books, especially these 5 in his Uncle Eric series: Whatever Happened To Penny Candy?, The Money Mystery, Whatever Happened To Justice, Ancient Rome: How It Affects You Today, and The Thousand Year War in The Mideast: How It Affects You Today.

For Richard Maybury’s books go to this link

Maybury has the unique distinction of being the ONLY newsletter with a 98% renewal rate. My wife and I enjoy reading it. His books and newsletter will help you understand how the United States got to where it is today financially, politically and morally.

Sign up for Maybury’s work now before you vote in the next election and before your nest egg is gone.

Former Dot Com IPO Boomer Brad Szollose, is an award winning leadership strategist, author and professional speaker who shows executives and entrepreneurs how to operate in the Information Age.

For more info, click here

Article Source

Tags: ethical, issues, legal, politics, public

We all welcomed the campaign to address poverty in Africa and Tony Blair’s commitment to it. When it was launched, the emphasis was on reducing debt and increasing aid from the rich Western nations. The priorities stated were to tackle disease, especially aids, and to generate economic activity.

At the time Blair retired, after 10 years as prime minister, progress in terms of contributions from the West had been extremely disappointing. The debt issue has been addressed in only 25% of the countries where relief is needed, and the aid contribution (separate from debt relief) from the rich Western nations to African countries has actually fallen.

Today, much more is being done by China, while India is becoming increasingly involved. A key factor is that, unlike Western finance, the aid from China comes without strings. Because the Chinese are happy enough with the trade which flows from their involvement, they make little effort to impose their culture on the recipient countries.

Self-Defeating Conditions

Apart from its inadequate volume, aid from the Europe and the USA has limited impact because of the conditions imposed with grants; notable by the USA and the UK. An obvious absurdity is the ‘no abortion’ condition imposed by the Bush administration on grants to tackle aids. (Fortunately, this condition is not applied to some of the grants from the USA non government sector – for example, the Gates Foundation.)

A second restriction, more generally applied – especially by the UK – is the insistence on privatisation. The failure, in terms of value for money for the public, of Thatcher, Major and Blair governments’ private finance initiatives (PFIs) does not appear to have dampened the enthusiasm for applying them to other countries.

In some African countries this has resulted in people becoming worse off than before the aid was granted. An obvious example is an increase in the cost of water as a result of privatisation. As with most privatisation, what appeared to be a short-term benefit has been more than wiped out by longer-term disadvantage.

What Must Change?

So the first change must be to remove the privatisation requirement. It is recognised, of course, that private firms which have succeeded in developing countries have valuable expertise. However, this should be used in the context of public control; control on behalf of indigenous people by leaders democratically elected to represent them. Although it has to be accepted that private firms exist to act in their own interests, as their obligations to shareholders require, they must recognise that their interests are not the priority with grant-aided projects. The most they should expect is a reasonable, commercially calculated, return.

Second, steps must be taken to ensure that a much smaller proportion of aid is devoured by consultants in the donor countries. These consultants are often involved in negotiating the grants: some are paid more for a week’s work than an African’s annual income. And, too often, the focus is on the trade benefits to the donor nations, rather than on the needs of the recipients.

Unless radical, and urgent, changes are made, the West will continue to lose influence in Africa. Europe and the USA will not be able to compete with China and India, or other emerging powers such as Venezuela, if they persists with trading agreements and arrangements which favour the rich nations.

A New Strategy

In terms of strategy, the most urgent change is to shift the emphasis to job creation; integrated with education and training. For the longer-term, literacy and social and political education is as necessary as training in the skills required by the jobs directly related to the projects. Too often the requirement (in the conditions imposed with the grants) to complete projects in a specified period ignores the issue of permanent benefit.

The key to bringing about real improvement for the poor is to ensure that investment is used to release the resources that the countries already have. The most important resource is the expertise that people have acquired from their life experiences. Millions of Africans have to be entrepreneurs to make enough money merely to survive: many who fail in this respect are no longer of this world.

Those who are still with us have gained valuable knowledge about the obstacles to success in their environments – and have devised strategies to overcome them. It is the habit of the West to seek to impose its own structures, rather than support the recipient countries’ own organisations. A typical example was when Blair set up his African Commission, instead of supporting an African initiative: the recently formed New Partnership for Africa’s Development.

Another valuable resource is, of course, the fund of knowledge accumulated by businesses which have figured out how to succeed in difficult trading circumstances. In being able to turn a profit, such enterprises have acquired valuable insights into the varying operation of markets in different countries.

Although private companies are entitled to a reasonable return for their contributions to projects, they must recognise that the projects are not run for their benefit. Thee needs of the recipients are paramount but, as the Chinese have recognised, benefits flow without the imposition of strict conditions.

In other words the focus must be on the longer-term benefits which can occur only with the involvement, on an equal basis, of the people themselves. Providing the approach is to integrate education and training with economic development, this can lead to the evolution of processes for democratic participation.

Ending Waste and Corruption

These changes would make a major contribution to ending waste and corruption. Although these are usually highlighted as problems in developing countries, they apply at least as much to agents operating on behalf of the donors. In how many cases have individuals and businesses from the donor countries become more prosperous as a result of their involvement, but have left the recipient countries poorer?

Paul Wolfowitz, the leader of the World Bank who is no longer with us, identified tackling corruption as his priority. His demise resulted from focusing on corruption in the developing world, while ignoring it closer, much closer, to home. From his words and actions, it could be concluded that he believed that the same standards should not be applied to the rich in the West as to the poor in developing countries.

The assumption in the West that the main, or in some circles entire, problem is with the developing countries is not sustainable. This is not to argue that they do not have problems of corruption, but to quote John Christenson (The Guardian 30/5/07):

‘For each dollar of aid that goes into Africa, at least

Five dollars flows out under the table.’

Keith Wymer

July 2007

Company politics has seen its evil days, but the day when close-knit groups resented each other in general and all ambitious newcomers in particular is drawing to a close. Most people are recognizing that such intramural skirmishing for prestige and influence did the groups no good while greatly impairing the productivity of the company.

“Company” in this context is a generic term that applies to any working situation. It does not matter whether it is private industry, government agency, educational institution or some other kind of organized work situation.

When people get along together, production rises; when they do not, it falls. Politics-good or bad-is inescapable. If people are not talking about their work at the drinking fountain, during a coffee break, or at lunch, they just do not care, and that is bad.

Company politics is here to stay. To close your ears to it is not to remove yourself from politics but from the company. How else are you going to know what is going on? And if you do not know what is going on in the company, how are you to know where you are going?

If you follow three simple rules, playing good company politics will be easy, informative and rewarding.

(1). Say something interesting or constructive about your work.

(2). Say something good about your boss, supervisor, or company policy-with sincerity.

(3). Keep on doing a good job.

If you cannot do those three things after a month or two on the job, if your work is so dull and the company so uninteresting, you are in the wrong job. Start looking for a different one now!

Private life and work are both parts of you as a whole human being. They cannot be completely separate incarnations. You are probably spending your most productive hours in each day at work-five days a week! Friendships do count in the business world.

Bad politics is based on greed, selfishness, power-seeking, and often prejudice. More often than not, the leaders are insisting that some outside influence is the cause of all their problems. They are unwilling to admit that their own actions might be at fault.

I once worked in an office where the goal seemed to be finding something nasty to say about the boss. It was almost a “can you top this” kind of daily conversational game.

The two most vocal individuals had worked for the longest time in the department. They must have been getting some kind of emotional payback from their actions in order to justify working for such an individual. Possibly: “You have the title but I am better than you in every way!”

Actually company politics is not the name for it, for the company will suffer irreparable damage in the long run. It is personal or factional, or clique politics, played for the advancement of the few, and let the company go hang, as it frequently does. Yet it cannot be ignored.

If bad office politics is to be counteracted intelligently, it must be recognized for what it is, from the lowest man subjected to its pressures to the president of the firm. If one is in no position to combat it, then one must know what it is all about for his own protection.

Personal success is not to be found where partisanship and bias have more influence than merit. Always remember that recognizing the talents and achievements of your staff and co-workers is a valuable asset. If you fail to give credit where and when it is deserved, there should be no complaints when the same thing is done to you.

Hard work and attention to detail does not automatically bring a promotion. Your skill working with others is an essential ingredient. It is almost tragic to overlook the constructive side of office politics. If you do not know what is going on around you, no one is going to know you are around.

Sign up for a free Becoming-Your-Best Newsletter here – The newsletter features lifestyle changes for optimum health, living life in abundance, feeling and looking great, changing your mind to change your world and other resources for self improvement.

Article Source

Tags: corporate, ethics, politics, public, training

Candidates from both sides have been squaring off to persuade voters to mark the ballot in their favor. Each candidate believes his or hers is the only way to run our country.

In some ways, the process is characteristic of what happens in our workplaces and within our families, with feuding among people who believe they have the corner on what should be truth.

Office politics can be particularly harsh, derisive and painful. Small groups gather in the breakroom or behind closed office doors to gossip about colleagues. Often the talk is based on assumptions about how their office world should operate.

They assume that CEOs don’t care for their employees, that managers don’t consider as important what employees believe need attention. And employees themselves often view each other with suspicion. As gossip grows, the workplace can become an unhealthy environment.

A friend recently related how difficult it is to work in her office. Among her colleagues is an individual who finds fault with and is suspicious of other co-workers. She takes new employees under her wing to perpetuate the gossip chain. And every time she thinks someone is not doing what she thinks they should be doing, she calls the corporate office.

“The tension when she’s in the office can be cut with a knife,” my friend told me. “She looks for any infraction she believes has been committed and is like the office tattle-tale.”

Judgments begin to fester, dispersed among everyone due to a lack of trust and belief someone is getting something they do not deserve. Soon the infection spreads.

Recently I read some wisdom written by Rabbi Yisrael Salanter, in the 18th century. He said, “We should worry about our own spiritual lacks and our neighbor’s material lacks. But usually we do it the other way around. We worry about our neighbor’s spiritual lacks and our own material lacks.”

In essence, he is saying we should look within ourselves first to see where we lack in our work ethic, morality and spirituality. Instead of trying to tear them down or put up roadblocks to their success, we need to consider what our co-workers need from us to support them in carrying out their responsibilities,

More often than not, gossip is merely a half truth because the whole story is not known by the gossip mongers.

This kind of workplace behavior is a carry-over of the herd behavior commonly seen among adolescents. Someone gossips about another, and rumor spreads to the others in the clique without regard to the parameters of the truth. Assumptions and misconceptions form the base of the gossip.

How do we respond to the unkindness of gossip? Now, that’s where true strength of character emerges. It comes in the form of our ability to respond without retaliation when someone does something wrong.

There is a Talmudic saying, “He who takes vengeance or bears a grudge acts like someone who, having cut one hand while handling a knife, avenges himself by stabbing the other hand.”

Consider these steps suggested by seminar speaker Sara Rigler:

1) Judge the person favorably;

2) Do not speak negative, true speech about the person;

3) Do not hate the person in your heart;

4) Do not carry a grudge and do not take revenge;

5) Only confront the person privately, but only (when) you can do it (by) making the person feel like s/he was helped rather than criticized;

6) View what happened as a message to examine your own deeds.

I suspect this is easier said than done. What it does require, however, is the ability to go within ourselves and recognize that seeing deficiencies in others often is the same deficiency we need to work on ourselves. It also requires that we consider the correct response to what we envision others are doing that we believe is inappropriate.

For example, say someone leaves work early. His or her colleagues don’t know why. The result can be a false judgement.

What is the correct response? Be careful. Your response could trigger the assumption of wrongdoing when, in fact, the person may have left to attend a meeting, or attend to a work-related crisis they are not at liberty to discuss. It could be a pre-approved absence.

I remember sitting in the waiting room of my obstetrician for almost 45 minutes. Several others had been there longer than I had been and began complaining about the wait.

I refrained from complaining, since I knew that when both of my children were born during the noon hour, the obstetrician was in the delivery room attending to their births. I never complained about how long I had to wait, knowing someone else was getting the attention they needed.

Competition, both political and in the workplace, often brings out the worst in people. Harsh words are uttered, judgments made, and half-truths are manipulated to become gossip that tears down another, serving only to make the teller feel superior.

However, as the Talmudic admonition implies, our response to such behavior must rise about vengeance, carrying a grudge, or repayment with added judgments.

Lao-tzu said, “One who understands others has knowledge; one who understands himself has wisdom. Mastering others requires force; mastering the self needs strength.”

(c) All rights reserved Maralene Strom Jan-08

Maralene Strom is a speaker and author who teaches on topics dealing with grief and recovery;Issues of living life 50 & Beyond; Caregiving in extended care facilities, home care, and special needs; Communicating with Empathy & Compassion and Business Management Issues. Her website features some of the topics she speaks on with information to connect with her for tele-classes, workshops or speaking to groups, conferences, etc.—- let her help you discover your life’s meaning as you journey now and into your future.
Article Source

Tags: corporate, ethics, politics, public, training

Well I would say to them, then do not buy their products then if you do not like it. Vote with your dollar, go somewhere else. Buy online, buy from a co-op, buy from a small businessperson or grow it, build it and make it yourself? Free-markets also mean that you the customer are free to buy from whomever you choose. You do not have to stand in line for potatoes. Sheesh?

Is it true that sometimes companies falter in the compromises they make to keep their shareholders happy and customers too? Sure it is, nothing good in life is easy. As a founder of a Franchising Company, I can tell you that it is not the World’s easiest job. Yes, imagine if you ran a public company, which was a franchise system. Now you have another layer of people to keep happy.

You have to do what is best for shareholder, franchisee, law, customer and your own on-going vitality as a Franchisor. That is 5-mouths to feed and everyone must eat at the table or the lawyers and regulators come running to destroy it all.

1.) Shareholders

2.) Customers of Franchisees

3.) Franchisees

4.) Franchising Company

5.) Potential Investors of Franchise Outlets

If you cannot handle playing at that level then of course you end up going from a John Nash Utopia Concern to an “everyone loses except the lawyers” scenario. Of course the Government Regulators have never been in business, they don’t get it and the consumers know that they can get more by lying to regulators, just like the minority shareholder can launch a class action lawsuit.

It is becoming a lot like making a law you cannot spank your kid if they misbehave, soon the kids know this and gain control. This is one big problem with taking the power away in the classrooms and now they are giant babysitting facilities, where the kids are running the asylum? We must be careful in America not to over regulate our corporations or we will cause them great harm and in the end we all lose. I hope this article will propel thought in 2007.

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

Article Source

Tags: balancing, corporation, public, ethics, conduct

* Variations of that ever popular lie: “The check’s in the mail” is being used with greater regularity. With that, there is an accompanying trickle down effect as one unfulfilled payment promise leads to another at the victim vendor and another at the next.
* More pressure is being placed on sales people to misrepresent the facts (the legal definition of fraud) to get the business.
* Corners are being cut and some are over promising and under delivering with both our external and internal customers.

It seems that more people are willing to compromise their integrity for the sake of the quick fix while using tough times as an excuse. Is it valid? Or are they digging themselves an even deeper hole? In this environment we will all be regularly tempted or urged to compromise our integrity. As you are tested, remember… Never has an effective leader ever said… “When the going gets tough, the tough waiver on their commitments.” Damage Control

The solution is so simple, yet too often lost on otherwise intelligent people. For those who have already fallen into the trap, here is my simple four step plan…

1. If you can’t “do what you say”, STOP saying it!

2. Buck up and tell the truth.

3. Admit that you were wrong and make a promise that you can keep.

4. Then keep it like your reputation depends on it.

Your Tough Time Opportunity At things get tougher and as fewer people and fewer companies keep their promises, there is an opportunity for you to gain the rewards offered by taking the high road. As the high road increasingly becomes the road less traveled, consider the rewards available for taking this route. Our integrity is NOT measured by what we do when life is good. Its about how we behave when no one is looking and when keeping your promises becomes more challenging.

A reputation takes a lifetime to build and can be destroyed in an instant.

The next time you’re tempted by short term gains to act contrary to your words, ask yourself…

* Is that short term gain really worth the risk? Is it ever?
* Am I really digging myself a deeper hole?
* Might I take this opportunity to differentiate and distinguish myself by taking the high road?

Tom Lemanski is the President and founder of Vista Development, a boutique strategic development firm serving metro Chicago, IL. Tom has served as business catalyst and executive coach in over thirty different product and service industries. Visit the website

Article Source

Tags: ethical, challenge, business, workplace, public

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

We need the abatement of Senatorial insincerity and we need to make sure that our elected representatives do not treat us as fools. Remember they are our elected representatives and actually they work for us. If you see your local senator in your district changing his mind or has been wishy-washy on issues or if you catch them in an outright lie then it is your duty as an American to support a more noble candidate.

If there is no more noble candidate running and it is a division between a choice of the lesser evils then you might consider running for office because that is the right thing to do and sometimes it takes sacrifice to keep our great Republic supercharged.

The United States of America is the greatest nation ever created history of mankind and it is that way because people cared enough to do something about the problems that they see. It is definitely a problem when we have senators who are insincere and tell us what we want to hear rather than the truth. If we cannot trust are all government we cannot trust ourselves because we own it. Consider all this in 2006.

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

Article Source

Tags:ethics, politics, public, cunfucian, islamic