Morality

The Morality of Birth Control pin points several key reasons as to why birth control should be accepted and embraced into the lives of people around the world.

Sanger effectively makes her opinion of birth control clear through the use of many classical argumentation tactics. She does not make any concessions to the opposing side what so ever and justifies only her beliefs with valid research presenting concise information.She initially captures the audience with stating that not only should this issue be presented to scientists and theologians but also to the general public, making the people feel important in this situation. Her thesis is that birth control consists of morality because on the whole it benefits the entire human race as well as people individually. She also exposes the hypocrisy within the church on how giving women freedom will lower their morality even though the act of restricting their rights is one of immorality to begin with.She claims that women have knowledge of their bodies and that they can make decisions for themselves, not all being immoral. One point is that birth control allows for choice, inevitably improving the world in all aspects.

Concrete examples for her argument are also provided in stating that the right to control the population is an award due to the fact that our world is corrupt with war, disease, and famine, and we should not force people to be born into this.This specific reason is one of morality because Sanger is only considering the unborn that would have to endure the harsh realities found within our world. Not obtaining total control over the population would do nothing but contribute to the downfall of the human race. In my opinion, it is obvious that Sanger has studied thoroughly on this case and has refuted the opposing views with loads of evidence provided. As a reader, she has convinced me of accepting birth control as a glorious contribution to society.

Introduction

Is youth crime a moral panic or a moral crisis, many people will have different views however what view does the media haveThe media tend to represent youth crime as a moral panic within society to create a stir and gain the public’s attention. I will be addressing how the media show this representation by analysing certain headlines and cases, which caused such controversy involving youth crime. Since the existence of youth crime the media use this particular offence as a catalyst of creating a moral panic within the community. I will look at the words they used and how they layout the news to create this moral panic and how exaggerated a story can become with help from the media.

Moral panic can be defined as the intensity of a feeling expressed in the population about a certain issue that appears to threaten the social order of society (Jones 1999). Youth crime can be defined as “Juvenile delinquency” this refers to children generally under the age of 18 years old who behaves in a way, which is against the law. Majority of legal systems recommend specific actions for dealing with these youths, e.g. young offender’s institutes or detention centres. In the United Kingdom youth crime is generally summarised as young teenagers involved in anti-social behaviour and knife or gun crime. Youth crime has risen drastically in the past years. One major moral panic that occurred from youth crime was the Jamie Bulger case is 1993 which caused a massive uproar in society which resulted in the Criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994, therefore supporting the idea moral panic can be healthy for the society.

What is moral panic?

A moral panic refers to the reaction of the public based on a belief that a group poses danger to the society; they distinguish this particular group as a huge threat to their social values and culture (Encyclopaedia 2011). Stanley Cohen created the term moral panic in 1972 for recounting the media coverage of Mods and Rockers in the UK during the 1960s. Cohen describes moral panic as a “condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests” (Cohen 1973:9). He also states that those who create the moral panic due to having a fear of an threat to prevailing social or cultural values are referred to as “moral entrepreneurs”, where as those who are seen as a threat to the social order are defined as “folk devils” (Cohen 1973:16). Moral panics are seen as incidents that involve arguments and social tension and therefore disagreement is difficult because the problem is represented as taboo (Kuzma 2005). The media are representatives of “moral indignation”, although they are not fully engaged with the controversy, reporting the fact is enough to produce concern, anxiety and panic (Cohen 1973:9). Goode and Ben-Yehuda, voiced theories that moral panic consists of five characteristics. The first one they recognised is the concern that the behaviour of the group e.g. youth crime is most likely to have a negative impact on society. The second characteristic is that if the hostility towards “youths” increases, they will eventually become “folk devils” therefore creating a division (Cohen 1973:16). The third is a form of consensus although concern is not nationwide; there should be global acceptance that the youths pose a threat to society. The fourth characteristic is formed up of disproportionality and the action taken is disproportionate to the actual threat posed by the accused group. The final and fifth characteristic is volatility; moral panics are highly volatile and tend to disappear as quickly due to a lack of public interest or other rising news reports (Goode and Ben-Yehuda 1994:57).

Media representation of youth and youth crime

Different types of media representations include radio, newspaper, magazines, websites and news channels they are all exclusively involved in spreading and broadcasting news directly to the public. How they represent the news is specifically up to them however they have a drastic impact on how the public view it as well as they are the main influence on people’s emotions and opinions. Furedi explains that moral panics tend to begin “at times when society has not been able to adapt to dramatic changes” and such changes lead to those becoming concerned and to express their fear over what they see as a “loss of control” (Furedi 1994:3) The media tend to concentrate on representing youth crime in both a negative and positive way, they show hatred and anger towards the youths who commit the crimes as well as sympathy and condolences on the youths who are victims of youth crime therefore this sways a person’s opinion due to the contexts of the news. An example of this is the case of Stephen Lawrence in 1993; the Daily Mail newspaper issued a cover branding all five suspects as “murderers”, challenging them to sue the newspaper for libel if they were wrong. The headline read “Murderers” and accuses these men of killing, it quoted “If we are wrong, let them sue us” (The daily Mail 1997). The paper’s front page provoked a wide range of different reactions. Many members of the public applauded it for stepping in where the law had deliberately failed; others were alarmed at such an obvious case of “trial by media” and responded by asking what if the five suspects had been black, not whiteMedia representations of youth concentrate mainly on violent crimes and report particular examples of juvenile offenders. The media see it as their duty to remind the public that behind the headlines there is a large number of youths offending in the criminal justice system. When they represent youth crime the media concentrate on how they come across to the public and their main duty is to make the offender apologies and to express remorse for their actions.

Media representation on Moral Panic

The way the media represent moral panic has to be done in a precise way as what they show has to impact people’s views and opinions drastically. Newspapers tend to start with a catchy headline to grab attention and to cause controversy. An example of this is the headline the Daily Mail issued on the murder of teenager Ben Kinsella, they quoted “T.V stars brother stabbed to death as he begged for help”, instantly people are drawn to this by the words T.V star and begged for help and are immediately overcome with compassion and interest. Another example is the Evening standard website headed their article with the title “guilty: Animals who killed Ben Kinsella”, anyone who reads this instantly have the image that these youths are animals and killers and have immediately made up their opinion on the youths involved in the murder. It’s questioned what these headlines have in common, and what relevance and significance do they create for individuals. Its been said that they are all illustrations of an ‘episode, condition, person or group of persons’ that have, been ‘defined as a threat to societal values and interests’ the term Cohen established as ‘The Moral Panic’ (Cohen 1972: 9).

Conclusion

The main motions of these created moral panics (e.g. Jamie Bulger case) are provided by the media when submitting their representations, they express moral panic as anger rather than fear, these particular panics generally have a variety of outcomes e.g. justice or disappointment. It can be seen that the moral panic the media create can benefit the public in a positive way helping society wake up and create change, as shown from the Ben Kinsella’s murder many members of the public used his story to build youth crime charities preventing knife crime and helping stop young teenagers turning to crime. When examined many moral panics follow Goode and Ben-Yehuda’s five characteristics of how they are showed although they also stated a additional two characteristics with Cohen that state these two developments inform the individual that society is in the control of a moral panic and the creation of ‘folk devils’ and a ‘disaster mentality’ (Cohen 1972:140 in Goode & Ben-Yehuda 1994: 28). This comes with help from the media and they are the main influence in helping spread this moral panic without the media not many members of society can become involved with the creation of a moral panic. This is shown in the Stephan Lawrence case this terrible act was characterised modern British society ignoring the fact figures have shown such murders are extremely rare. Although it was not that this particular murder was a ‘symbol of nineties Britain’ but the media’s reaction to it (Bradley 1994: 1).

Bibliography
Bradley, Ann (1994) ‘A Morality Play For Our Times’ (Living Marxism issue 63).
Cohen, S. (1973). Folk Devils and Moral Panics. St Albans: Paladin.
Furedi, Frank (1994) ‘A Plague of Moral Panics’ (Living Marxism issue 73)
Goode, Erich and Ben-Yehuda, Nachman- Moral Panics: Social Construction of Deviance: Oxford Wiley-Blackwell publishers (1994).
Hough, Mike and Roberts, Julian. “Youth crime and youth justice”: the policy press (2003).
Jones, M, and E. Jones. (1999). Mass Media. London: Macmillan Press.
Kuzma, Cindy. “Rights and Liberties: Sex, Lies, and Moral Panics” (2005).
The Daily Mail- “murderers” (14 February 1997).
The Daily Mail “T.V stars brother stabbed as he begged for help” (June 30, 2008).

EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 10, No. 2 (2005) Organizational Storytelling, Ethics and Morality: How Stories Frame Limits of Behavior in Organizations By: Michael S. Poulton Abstract In this article it is argued that codes of conduct may be a starting point in examining the ethics of a business organization, but a deeper understanding of the ethics and morality of a firm may be found in the stories that circulate from employee to employee and, more specifically, from one generation of employees to another.The search for the basis of a firm’s stance on how employees should implicitly respond to both external and internal conflicts should begin with determining the “genesis” story of the firm, the primary organizational metaphor that is derived from that narrative, and how both the master narrative and metaphor frame employees’ organizational self-perception and their responses and subsequent actions in dealing with internal and external conflict. Stories are food for the ‘epistemic’ hunger of our species.

This metaphor is, however, obviously incompatible with the notion of ‘perfect ful? llment. Just as we cannot be ever satis? ed with a single meal, or even multiples ones, even if they are absolute gourmet delights, but have to keep eating at regular intervals all our lives, so we cannot ever be ful? lled by binges of narrative activity. (Rukmini Bhaya Nair in Narrative Gravity) This paper will integrate theories of organizational storytelling and its role in forming a ? rm’s morals and ethics, how an organizational “genesis” narrative and subsequent organizational metaphor develop, and then how these two frame the organization’s ethic and moral responses to ambiguous situations.I. Ethics in the business context Ethics can be approached from a variety of directions: descriptive ethics –non-judgmental explanation of the ethical framework of societies or large institutions in a society; normative ethics – presents a speci? c view or approach to ethics which aims to set a standard of behavior for a group or society; and applied ethics – an o? shoot of normative ethics that tries to develop ethical standards for speci? c areas of human endeavor like biomedical ethics, scienti? c ethics, academic ethics and business ethics (Buchholz and Rosenthal, 1998).Business ethics, as used in this text, pertains to human interactions when sourcing, producing and marketing goods and services for pro? t, and include the relationships between business management and their employees, the ? rm and its primary stakeholders, the business and its relationships to the community, government and society in general. In the broadest sense, ethics is a society’s ongoing examination and pursuit of actions and practices that best promote the enrichment of peoples’ lives- both materially and spiritually.

It is a society’s quest for de? ing and understanding what constitutes “the good life” or “the good [that] has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” (Aristotle, 350BC), and creating the conditions necessary for potentially all individuals to achieve it (Buchholz and Rosenthal, p. 2). Ethics is a societal discussion of what ought to be considered for overall human well-being, including the broader concepts of fairness, justice and injustice, what rights and responsibilities are operable under certain situations, and what virtues a society admires and wants to emphasize.Ethics takes an over-view, investigating the state toward which the society should be progressing economically, politically, socially and morally. As business is a purely social construct, it, too, must be engaged in a society’s ethics debate. Economist Milton Freidman is not incorrect in suggesting that the responsibility of business is to produce goods and services people are willing to pay for and, in the process, create wealth for its owners.However, as an integral, legally sanctioned constituent of the society in which it operates, business, like every other member of society, should be a participant in ethics; that is, how business might or might not participate in establishing larger social objectives which promote a ful? lling life.

For business not to participate in this discussion and eventual realization of a society’s goals is to subject itself to increased regulation and legal constraint. Regulation is merely society’s way of saying that it does not approve of the way business s operating or, that by operating the way it, is business is ignoring what the society as set as objectives and goals for itself. Unlike ethics, morality re? ects what we are currently practicing, not ethically investigating and conceptualizing where we should be. In other words, morality more pertains to our everyday experience – our “local world” as Kleinman puts it. “Experience is moral…

. because it the medium of engagement in everyday life in which things are at stake and in which ordinary people are deeply engaged as stake-holders who have important things to lose, to gain, and to preserve (Kleinman, 2000, p. 62). In business organizations, people are concerned with their status in the organization, what their work means, job security and the angst the threat of job loss can generate, de? nitions of their worth, relations with subordinates and superiors, coping with aggression and/ http://ejbo. jyu. fi/ 4 EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 10, No.

2 (2005) or humiliation, responding pressures to perform, and the subjugation of one’s non-working morality to the demands of the organization; and each of these has a moral component.Thus, business “ethics,” then, should not be confused with business “morality. ” Morality is the sum total of a particular society’s or organization’s current perceived traditions, beliefs, values, attitudes and norms that have been cultivated over time, institutionalized in religious doctrine, laws, regulations and codes of conduct which explicitly or implicitly suggest how an individual should behave in situations as they are encountered daily. Ethics may well include a discussion of moral trends, but, again, morality de? nes primarily where we are.The use of formal, codes of conduct and carefully constructed principles of corporate “ethics” which explicitly de? ne corporate morality in its policies regarding speci? c, concrete situations such as payments to suppliers, contract bidding, con? ict of interest, external relations, corporate governance and so on, is widespread among large business organizations today. The larger and more complex the business and the greater the number and types of internal and external stakeholders, the more complex and comprehensive is its code of conduct. In the very complex, litigious, and highly regulated world in which we live, it is no wonder.

Codes of conduct are widely used to inform employees and other stakeholders about the ? rm’s recognition of regulatory obligations, to communicate corporate policies that have evolved over time, and/or to iterate the formal relationships between the ? rm and its employees. For example, United Technologies’ (UTC) Code of Ethics is an extensive statement of its Corporate Principles and Standards of Conduct that addresses the ? rm’s relations with suppliers, customers, employees, shareholders, various communities worldwide, competitor relations, and its employees’ responsibilities.Each of these main categories is, in turn, divided into speci? c topics. Under conduct toward employees, there are subtopics of adherence to equal opportunity, workplace environment, drug and alcohol abuse at work, the privacy of employees, communications policies (including use of e-mail), training, and compensation and bene? ts. In total there are thirty-? ve subsections in the UTC Code of Ethics. Additionally, the company has created a network of Business Practices/Compliance O? cers to explain elements of the Code and to advise employees who may have a speci? question (United Technologies). Obviously, UTC takes its Code very seriously.

Where UTC’s Code attempts to be legally comprehensive, a smaller ? rm’s codes or statement of business ethics may be quite simple and address only broad values that frame the ? rm’s response to moral issues. Speci? c rules and regulations may be stated more explicitly in corporate charters and human resource publications, but the “ethics” of the ? rm may be stated less formally. For the mid-sized ? rm, the code may be a simpler statement of “Immutable Values,” such as: 1) Always service the customer ? st – the hierarchy of service, growth, cost and pro? t. 2) Business designed to make pro? t. 3) Always have a strategy 4) Strive to be better before bigger 5) Strong work environment exists 6) Ownership and Accountability is pushed down and clearly understood. 7) Always share the improvements. (quoted by permission) and toward customers, its “Service Values” are: We do what we say.

Integrity What we do, we do well. Quality 5 We are no more that we say we are. Honesty We say we are not more that we deliver. Modesty We abhor mediocrity because we deserve better.Courage (quoted by permission) These values, then, form a structure within which ethical issues might be addressed. Given the rather terse way these principles are outlined, we can assume there is a more implicit set of rules or values the ? rm employees daily. For example, we do not know what the “hierarchy” mentioned in the ? rst line of “Immutable Values” really is.

We can assume they mean service is the highest and that pro? t the lowest, meaning that pro? t will ? ow from providing consistently good service to customers, although the next line gives pro? t some additional emphasis.Likewise, the “courage” to not be mediocre must have some implied meaning for the ? rm. It is not a connection one would normally make. Yet, despite carefully or, in some cases, not so professionally crafted codes, we may in fact discover more about a ? rm’s ethical and moral environment by listening to the narratives of employees and management. Where the formal code may address unambiguous moral circumstances, there are always situations which require an interpretation of rules and may rely more on personal ethics than those formally discussed at the corporate policy level (Buchholz and Rosenthal, p 177).How do individuals learn how to respond to those “gray” areas of organizational behavior? What does an employee do if the Code does not address a particular circumstance? Perhaps, as suggested in this paper, the answer lies in the stories about solutions to ethical conundrums or morally bounded situations which have occurred within the organization and which, when taken as a whole, eventually frame the ethical limits of employee responses in the future. In other words, codes of conduct represent what the ? m espouses what individuals should do normatively, while stories may transmit to others what individuals in the ? rm actually did do – successfully or not – at any given period of time.

One could argue that stories are merely tales of a response to a particular situation at a particular time in the ? rm’s history, representing the existing morality of the ? rm “at that time. ” However, there are some values in a ? rm which become, over time, truly “immutable” as the stories are told repeatedly.There are moral responses for any business that do not change drastically over time as discussed below. II. Stories in Organizations The narrative is a way for us to make sense of our experiences to ourselves and relate those experiences to others. Generally speaking, a narrative is merely the recounting of a series of events in a particular place in which actors (ourselves, included) move through or cause a series of chronological events – a fabula (Bal, 1997).A story is a structured narrative related in a particular way, that is, the sequence of the events may not be perfectly chronological, the recounting may use non-verbal signs, descriptions of place, actors, or reactions may use a variety of tropes, and the voice of the narrator may well be a participant or observer of the fabula or simply a conveyor of the story itself.

The purpose of a “good” story is to make the common themes new and fresh by using a range of poetic techniques (Shklovski, 1965; Tomashevsky, 1965).A story is a narrative that conveys a thought, a moral or virtue, a consequence in a way that forces us to look at a common message in a new way, allowing us the opportunity of not being repetitive or mundane conversationalists, that is, “story-tellers tell particular stories in order to illustrate general truths which they expect their recipients to infer; storyhttp://ejbo. jyu. fi/ EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 10, No. 2 (2005) tellers prefer to imply rather than baldly state the general truth they are illustrating” (Nair, 2003).Oral stories can take many forms – “terse stories” (Boje, p.

115) like “You know the story, don’t you? ”(implying the listener already knows the story and has full command of the storyline and its meaning), the joke (punch line de? ned), anecdotes (crystallized, unadorned tales), narratives of great length and told with dramatic zeal (epics, sagas, myths), carefully constructed “stories” with public relations intent, and simple recounting of events. Unlike written texts, an orally recited story can be and probably will be told in myriad ways.In all cases, however, there is a moral/general truth motivating the telling. Storytelling is a powerful tool in organizational learning as well in that they communicate implicit organizational values (Schein, 1984; Randall and Martin, 2003), “legitimise [sic] types of behavior” or relate events or actions of individuals that exhibit that behavior ( Johnson and Scholes, 1999), control the behavior of others in an organization (Wilkins, 1983;) by the use of stories themselves or the words used to tell the tale (Czarniawska-Joerges and Joerges, 1988), play a signi? ant role in organizational change and are basic to the process of organizational socialization (Brown, 1985) and change (Denning, 2001) and are in integral to the storage and retrieval of organizational memory (Walsh and Ungson, 1991). An organization might be even viewed as a “collective storytelling system in which the performance of stories is a key part of members’ sense making “(Boje, 1991). But perhaps most importantly, “the power of stories and narrative derives from the story’s ability to create a framework that our mind can understand” (Brown, 2005).Weick suggests that sensemaking in an organizational setting consists of creating a meaningful present through a “combination of a past moment + connection + present moment of experience” and that “frames are past moments of socialization and cues are present moments of experience” (Weick, 1995).

To create meaning for ourselves we look to the past for generalized circumstances we have either witnessed or learned about and connect them with present experiential events, and by doing so provide ourselves with some sense of what it all means.As Weick also points out, stories are part of an organizations total “vocabulary” of sensemaking (Weick, p 111). Stories can be about frames or past socialization events, past connections made, and the cues which were extent at the time the story took place. In fact, the format of a fabula is similar to Weick’s formula above. Every story has a beginning+ middle+ end, which is in turn a kind of life dialectic of steady state + disruptive predicament + solution (new steady state). It is not a single event that makes a story, but rather a sequence of connected events. The very “sequence is the source of sense” Weick, p.

28). In a story from my working life in agribusiness, there was one about a silo that was both storing federally owned grain and privately owned grain for an export silo on the Gulf of Mexico. The manager was asked to ship a trainload of grain to the export silo immediately due to the unexpected arrival of a ship. Not having enough of his own privately owned stock, he shipped federally receipted grain on a Friday, hoping to replace it on Monday. As fate would have it, the federal inspector arrived on Monday to verify the federal stocks, which were unfortunately on their way south.The manager, it was always noted, had ? ve to ten years in Leavenworth to think about his error. The moral of the story to young silo managers was clear and is still clear today – manipulating Federal receipts is dangerous.

The point here is that each event by itself carries no real meaning; but the sequence of events and the ending steady state meant a lot to a new managerial trainee. By hearing the story 6 and putting ourselves in the role of the main character, we could envision what the consequences of our actions would be should we do the same thing.Thus, it is the stories about those employees who responded morally and were applauded or about those who exceeded the ethical and moral limits of the ? rm and su? ered the consequences which will begin to frame the organizational morality. At the same time, stories allow us to learn by vicariously living experiences of others through story. Throughout our lives, much of what we learn we do so through stories that they provide a opportunity to “organize lived and listened-to experiences” (Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 2000, p. 108;) in ways that provide new or enhanced understanding and meaning (Prusak, 2005).In fact, it is interesting to consider Vittorio Gallese’s theory of embodied simulation and its implications for understanding the power of storytelling, that is, if simulation is “an automatic, unconscious, and pre-re? exive functional mechanism” of the brain that “generates representational content,” it could, therefore, “…play a major role in our epistemic approach to the world” (Gallese, 2004).

Similar experiments using disgust as the basic emotion have determined that “there is a common mechanism for understanding the emotion in others and feeling the same emotions in ourselves. (Wicker, Keysers, Plailly, Royet, Gallese and Rizzolatti, 2003) Further experimentation may conclude that when individuals listen to stories (which generally includes visual cues by the teller) and “relive” someone else’s humiliation embarrassment over an admonishment, fear of losing one’s job or respect, joy at attaining success and so on, they may well be simulating those same feelings and responses on a neurological level. This could create as powerful a meaning or be as signi? cant a learning tool as experiencing the events of the story oneself. It is beyond the scope of this paper to delve nto the current theory of embodied simulation, but further studies may well suggest that much of the meaning of story may well be in “shared body states” (Gallese, 2004). If this is true on an individual level, it may well add to the understanding of organizational memory as “not just an individual-level phenomenon, but [one that] can apply to a supraindividual collectivity as well through a process of sharing” (Walsh and Ungson, p. 68) with storytelling only one of several methods of sharing and retaining organizational experiences as memory (Walsh and Ungson, p. 4).

Stories people tell evolve over time as external conditions and their own sensemaking needs change. After all, it is well known that Charles Perrault’s original 17th century Little Red Riding Hood (“Le petit chaperon rouge” -1697) was a precautionary tale for young girls concerning the dangers of getting into bed too quickly with unsavory, but determined, sweet-talking “wolves. ” In Grimms’s “Rotkappchen” version (in Kinderund Hausmarchen, 1812) it becomes a tale of resurrection with the live grandmother being cut out of the wolf ’s stomach by the huntsman.Today, it is more a tale of courage, revenge, and the triumph of good (Riding Hood and the since added Woodsman/Huntsman) over evil (the Wolf ) and may completely spare children the gory details about slitting open the wolf. In the modern tale the wolf is merely drowned in a well. Some versions have even paci? ed it further by having the huntsman make the wolf “spit up” grandma, knocking the wolf out, and carrying him o? deep into the woods where he will not hurt anyone again. The point here is that stories develop depending on how the morality they were initially meant to convey itself changes.

After all, stories are constructs. They are seldom concrete representations of reality. Stories are what individuals interpret as experiential reality as it is ? ltered through their psyches. As http://ejbo. jyu. fi/ EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 10, No.

2 (2005) their realities change, so do stories. Organizational stories are no di? erent (Weick, p. 128). As one aspect of an organization’s overall culture, stories begin and evolve over time as the organization develops through its lifecycle (Schein, p. 13) and as their ecologies change.If stories are a signi? cant aspect of organizational memory in that they create a basis for relating how organizational problems were handled in the past (Boje, p. 106, Walsh and Ungson, p.

61), those stories also must be ? exible in order to handle new and perhaps even more destabilizing circumstances. At the same, time, organizations will witness the emergence of new stories as individuals comprehend, summarize and create a meaningful wholes out of the bits and pieces of organizational information that come their way (Daft and Wiginton, 1979) and become part of an organizations memory banks.Walsh and Ungson note three functions of organizational memory (1) an ‘informational role” by which organization collect and retain facts and problem-solving in the past which are then used to expedite future problems, (2) a “control function” to reduce the time necessary to implement a newly arrived at decision, and (3) a “political role” in that information and its control provide a source of power by which the actions of others can be in? uenced (Walsh and Ungson, p. 73). Storytelling plays an important role in the ? st of these three uses in that it may well be a primary method for collecting, transmitting and retaining information about past decisionmaking. But the question still arises, within what context do all of these bits and pieces become framed into a coherent whole so that speci? c solutions to internally or externally instigated problems can be approached by all members of the organization ethically and morally, using a uni? ed model? III. Genesis narratives as ethical frames A metaphor may be used to de? e an organization in that the metaphor becomes a “experiential gestalt” ( Lako? and Johnson, 1980), but the organization’s use of a metaphor to describe itself is something more.

The metaphor is derived from the genesis narrative as a way of simplify a complex of events that make up the story. The metaphor and the causal narrative behind it become the basis for how individuals in organizations frame their perception of who they are, what the organization is, and how it responds to con? ct or chaos. The genesis narrative is the wellspring for understanding the new cues which employees glean form incidental narratives heard everyday. The genesis narrative is a frame for interpreting cues to add meaning to the purpose of the organization, relations within the organization, and individual location in the organization. From a social science perspective, Somers and Gibson list four types of narratives: (1) “Ontological narratives” or those which individuals use to de? e themselves, (2) “Public narratives” or those used by organizations to de? ne themselves and act as frames for ontological narratives, (3) “Conceptual narratives,” or those narratives used by social scientist to establish a “vocabulary” by means of which major issues of society can be understood, and (4) meta- narratives or master narratives which are those all encompassing narratives of the environment in which we live such as narratives of social and economic progress and are general perceived as general truths (Somers and Gibson, 1994).Here a meta-narrative can become so powerful that it may shape our theories of history, economics, and social research despite the fact that the narrative may not coincide with the truth. It is our search for “the answer,” the great “Why? ” of systems and civilizations.

For nearly 80 years, the meta-narra7 tive of the battle between capitalism versus communism as the great ideological con? ict of the last century shaped our views of politics, history, theories of economics (Marxism and market capitalism) and even good and evil.The idea of a master narrative concept for history, for example, seems to falling out of favor (Fulford, 1999), but the term is still used in many other ? elds and may be useful here is discussing the genesis story. In this paper, a “genesis narrative” is the overriding, overarching story of an organization. I am reluctant to use the terms epic or myth – both terms conjure up something magical, ethereal, and god-like. That is, an epic is highly involved, complex narrative of discovery full of chance meetings with exotic, fanciful characters and “myth frequently involves fantastical elements (e. . man-eating ogres) subject neither to the constraints of logic nor empirical falsi? ablity” (Pondy, 1983).

Despite the desire of some to infuse organizational stories with mythical properties, the reality is that organizations are made up of ordinary people, albeit some with a more circumspect sense of leadership. It is normal for people to use metaphor or simile in narratives about “heroic” acts of past and, occasionally, present leaders, but storytellers are merely reconstructing events that involved the actions of quite regular people.True, storytellers may well exaggerate a founder’s or ground breaking hero’s “bravery,” tenacity, vision, “heroism,” honesty or borderline dishonesty in attaining organizational goals by “being victorious” over the “enemy” and “battling” regulators (my apologies to Lako? for using such metaphors), but certainly they cannot attain the mythical qualities of Achilles, Odysseus, Cuchulainn, or Gilgamesh – even over time. A business boardroom is no pantheon. In my ? rst ? m, we were amazed at the story we were told about how the founders heroically moved tons of wheat in horse-drawn wagons from Ukraine to Europe to “combat” the hunger due to prolonged drought – but we also realized that the reason for the decision was to earn a pro? t from grain starved European mills. Yet, this master narrative de? ned our purpose as young, opportunistic traders and eventually, by telling the story over and over, we convinced ourselves that we were made of the same stu? and were supposed to spend our time looking for prospects to accomplish the same feat – and the same pro? . We were living an embedded narrative that transcended our realities.

For us, the genesis narrative of the ? rm relieved us from having to ask the question “Why? ” Like our genesis story, we saw a world where commodities moved freely due to market forces, not governmental intervention. We could provide commodities where they were lacking by drawing from areas of surplus. We where the force behind the market’s relentless march toward equilibrium – and we were awarded a pro? t for doing so. Our genesis story, moving grain to alleviate a shortage, crystallized into our metaphor – the “? w. ” It seemed to us that commodities indeed did “? ow” like a global river, emanating from a ? ood of a glut, streaming into areas of least resistance. We learned we were an instrumental part of the ? ow. Genesis narratives can become so ingrained in individuals in the organization that the narrative becomes the primary way individuals organize their perceptions about the organizational component of their lives.

Much like Schein’s organizational culture, the genesis narrative is similar in that it is deeply embedded in they way individuals conceptualize the organization in which they ? d themselves. In fact, this narrative can be seen as the foundation of an organization’s culture; and where the narrative is particularly prevalent in organizational memory, the organization’s culture is strong and more easily characterized. People do not consciously conjure up the genesis story (although some try and spend millions doing so), it is simply there because it http://ejbo. jyu. fi/ EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 10, No. 2 (2005) is told and retold so many times that individuals “relive” those aspects of the organization’s memory.

In reality, it may become one of Boje’s “terse stories” in the form of a single metaphor that is able to conjure up the entire narrative. But more than that, the genesis narrative can become so implicit that it dictates behavior – a kind of “this is what we are, so this is the way we should act” – the moral basis for ? rm and employee actions. The narrative becomes a template for our responses to both internal and external con? icts, a basis for day-to-day motivation, the organization’s raison d’etre.Most young people will recall Steve Jobs’ and Steve Wozniak’s Apple Computer genesis story that began in the Fall of 1976 in the Jobs’ family garage when the two amazingly talented young men (21 and 26 respectively) founded the Apple Computer Co. with the introduction of the ? rst Apple I personal computer. The values their story exempli? es were those of innovation, creativity, experimentation, and a conviction in the belief that personal computers would truly change lives. We also know its downfall in the face of extreme and new leadership.

According to Jobs, “What ruined Apple wasn’t growth. What ruined Apple was values.John Sculley ruined Apple and he ruined it by bringing a set of values to the top of Apple which were corrupt and corrupted some of the top people who were there, drove out some of the ones who were not corruptible, and brought in more corrupt ones and paid themselves collectively tens of millions of dollars and cared more about their own glory and wealth than they did about what built Apple in the ? rst place-which was making great computers for people to use” ( Jobs, 1995). Interestingly enough, HP was also owes its 1939 origins to a California garage, where Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard built the company’s ? st product – an audio oscillator. The same readers may be less familiar with a private ? rm like Coca Cola, born in Atlanta, Georgia, on May 8, 1886 when Dr. John Stith Pemberton, a local pharmacist, produced a mildly narcotic, caramel colored syrup, took a sample down the street to Jacobs’ Pharmacy where it was mixed with carbonated water. It seems to have been a hit from the beginning.

But what the ? rm has become truly famous for, merchandising, was begun by the man Pemberton sold out to, Asa Candler, in 1889.Chandler was a dedicated and vigorous marketer and promoter, relentlessly pushing the product from the beginning via advertising, coupons, and o? ering promotional materials all imprinted with the product’s increasingly recognizable trademark. The symbol we know today was merely Pemberton’s original bookkeeper’s hand written rendition of what he thought would be a great name for the new carbonated drink (Coke website). The symbol has become ubiquitous. It exempli? es what the American market capitalist system has become to many – the ability to sell two cents worth of caramel coloring, sugar and carbonated water for a quarter.These two genesis stories have provided their ? rms with a de? nition of how they see themselves and provide their employees with an organizational gestalt in terms of their brands – Coca Cola and Apple computers – which have become metaphors themselves. Apple Computer seems to see itself as was an innovator of playful, user friendly technology, as true creators helping others create.

“Almost all of them [people working on the Mac] were musicians. A lot of them were poets on the side. They went into computers because it was so compelling. It was fresh and new. It was a new medium of expression for their creative talents.The feelings and the passion that people put into it were completely indistinguishable from a poet or a painter. Many of the people were introspective, inward people who expressed how they felt 8 about other people or the rest of humanity in general into their work, work that other people would use.

People put a lot of love into these products, and a lot of expression of their appreciation came to these things” ( Jobs). Thus, Apple’s ethics were clear. Their vision was a world where people would have easy-to-use technology to create whatever they wished. It was only later when this vision of itself transitioned into a technology marketing ? m did the company itself change as did the meaning of its genesis story and organizational metaphor for a time. Apple appears to be in the process of revitalizing the older narrative, coming out with new, innovative products like the iPod and iPhoto which support user-friendly consumer creativity. Coca Cola, on the other hand, has become a metaphor itself for universal brand name marketing and brand recognition. Chandler’s original ethic of having Coca Cola consumed by millions in every state of the Union has expanded to have Coca Cola become a global symbol of American brand marketing.

Coca Cola is what its logo as metaphor implies and is a continuation of the ? rm’s genesis narrative. Like any other story, a genesis story evolves over time. The energies and feats of founders are exaggerated and less savory aspects of their personalities are downplayed, successful problem solving methodologies become inculcated into organizational memory, failed solutions are minimized or forgotten, and new cues and events are “recorded” and relived via each new telling. What remains, however, is the genesis story itself as both master narrative and organizational metaphor. As Schein notes, “Culture is perpetually changing . . .

But this ongoing evolutionary process does not change those things that are so thoroughly learned that they come to be a stable element of the group’s life”(Schein, 1984).Genesis stories can be both positive and negative for an organization’s development. On one hand, again similar to Schein’s concept of organizational culture, they can be useful in training new employees as they begin a process of socialization, coping with disruptive external and internal con? icts, creating a sense of collegiality, or perpetuating and reinforcing the values and norms of the organization (Schein, p. 2 ). On the other hand, genesis stories that do not evolve over time can become formidable barriers to change and growth as ? rms become locked in their own stories and cannot envision themselves being anything else or responding the environment in any other way. Witness the litany of ? rms that have disappeared because of their inability to change their narrative in face of changing business and societal demands. In these cases, the genesis story became a cataclysmic anchor.

This, of course, is material for another article.One must be concerned, of course, when ? ms create genesis stories disingenuously, sustained or even “re-energized” to reinforce the metaphor and corporate coherence, and where internal marketing communications “recreate” the ? rm for control or manipulative purposes. However, forcing organizational change by creating a genesis story and metaphor that are not in tune with the embedded culture of an existing ? rm or are arti? cially messaging the facts to develop a story about a start up to force uniform, compliant behavior where none exists can only lead to employee confusion and resentment. Corporate fantasies” (Gabriel, 2000) or o? cial stories are not the same stories told around the lunch table, during after hours social sessions or at those times when employees discuss personal anxieties or question themselves, their actions or those of the corporation. Genesis stories are just that – stories. The more they are told and retold by members of an organization – and not just its management public relations department – the more embedded the ethics and the morality of the ? rm become.

Milgram’s Study of Obedience

The name Stanley Milgram is eponymous with the study of obedience. In his controversial 1970s study of the human behaviour, Milgram (1974) discovered that when under direction from a member of authority, study participants could be instructed to inflict a 450 volt electric shock on another individual..

In one study, Milgram (1974) assigned participants to the role of ‘teacher’ or ‘learner’. Unbeknown to the participants, they would only ever be assigned to the role of teacher. As the teacher, participants were told that they were to investigate the effects of punishment on learning. The teacher administered a learning task to the learner who was based in a different room, and the learner indicated their response through buttons that lit up answer lights on the teacher’s side of the wall. When the learners provided incorrect answers, the participants were instructed by the experimenter to administer the learner an electric shock. Again, unbeknown to the participant teachers, the shocks were not actually administered and the learners were acting confederates. The teacher was also instructed to increase the voltage of the electric shock with each wrong answer provided. As the voltage reached 150 volts, the learner would scream cries of protest, which could be heard by the teacher participant through the wall. At 300 volts, the learner refused to answer the question, and at 330 volts they made no response at all to the shock, suggestive of lack of consciousness. Whenever the participant faltered or showed signs of resistance to administering the shock, they would be prompted to continue by the experimenter. The experiment only ended when the teacher refused to administer the shock in response to instruction after four prompts, or after the maximum shock had been given. In 65% of cases, the participants administered the maximum shock of 450 volts, a shock that was marked on the severity as “XXX”, following the description “Danger: Severe Shock” at 375 volts.

Milgram’s (1974) demonstration of the unsettling capabilities of human behaviour presents many questions as to why so many people had not stopped administering the shocks when they knew that the learner was in significant distress. Was it that these individuals would have acted this way whatever the circumstanceWere they examples of the malevolent side of human natureOr were there many contributing factors about the circumstance that led these individuals to behave in such a way contrary to all expectations of human benefianceThis essay will aim to address these questions through the work of Milgram and his contemporaries.

Situational Influence

The findings of an earlier study by Milgram (1963) provided evidence that the individuals administering the shocks were not acting out of their own desire for cruelty, but instead were acting in conflict with their wanted or expected behaviour. Milgram (1963) found that administering shocks caused the participants to experience “extreme nervous tension”, demonstrated by sweating, trembling, stuttering, and even nervous laughter.

Burger (2009) proposes that despite the many attempts to interpret the results of Milgram’s (1974) experiment, the main point of is the importance of situational forces in influencing an individual’s behaviour. Additionally suggesting that this is something underestimated by most individuals. This was highlighted by the opinions of Yale students and psychiatrists who were unanimous in their belief that virtually no one would continue the experiment to the point of maximal shock (Milgram, 1974).

Burger (2009) suggests a compelling reason as to Milgram’s participants were so ready to administer potentially lethal shocks under the instruction of the experimenter; that of the power of authority. The experiment provides a seminal example of the phenomenon of obedience, where individuals conform (often against their will) to an authority figure (Martin & Hewstone, 2009). This obedience to authority in the abandonment of alliance to morality (Elms, 1995) is something that has not only been demonstrated in research studies, observed from the abhorrent crimes committed by those under the rule of Hitler in Nazi Germany (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004), to the behaviours of suicidal religious cults. Whilst Milgram’s (1974) experimenter had both legitimacy and expertise (Morelli, 1983) with affiliation to the university, the experiment, and to science (Burger, 2009), other obedience has been shown to occur in the absence of this (Blass, 1999), therefore suggesting other situational influences at play.

The importance of the experimenter’s expertise may have been of crucial significance in Milgram’s (1974) research, in that the scenario was not one that any of the participants had experienced before. Burger (2009) proposes that in the absence of any other sources of information, the participants turn to the reassurance of the experimenter who does not seem perturbed by the cries from the learner and insists on the continuation of the experiment. In this case, it may be suggested that the participants defer to the expertise of the experimenter, believing that they will instruct the most appropriate action. As purported by Milgram (1974), this has powerful implications for the determining effect of the situation on the action of individuals.

Kolowsky et al. (2001) suggest two types of authority; that derived from soft influences which results from factors within the influencing agent (eg. Credibility and expertise) and that derived from external social structures (such as hierarchy) known as harsh sources. It may be concluded that Milgram’s experimenter portrayed both of these, perhaps explaining why the situation induced such high levels of obedience.

Burger (2009) also suggests that the levels of obedience of the participants in Milgram’s (1974) experiment may be attributed to the gradual increase in demands of the experimenter. He suggests that the 15-volt increments created a task that gradually increased in demand being put on the participants. Initially participants would provide shocks to the learner causing only a slight discomfort, however, by the end of the experiment, the participants were agreeing to give shocks that were labelled ‘Severe’. Freedman and Fraser (1966) demonstrated the power of the so called ‘foot-in-the-door’ effect, showing that individuals that first complied with a small, minimally invasive request were more likely to comply with a larger related request. The authors proposed that the situation inflicted a change upon the participants’ self-perception, where upon agreeing to the first request they ascribe the traits reflecting their previous actions (ie. I am someone that complies with such requests) which then influences their subsequent actions. Burger (2009) suggests that the desire for personal consistency may be a factor with such incremental voltage increase, where refusing the 195 volt shock would be difficult having just pressed the 180 volt switch.

The Milgram (1974) experiment also raises the question of the role of responsibility in obedience. Under authority, it may have been that the individuals were able to go ahead with the behaviour due to a diminished for their actions. Bandura (1999) suggests that this occurs as when not perceiving themselves as the agents of their actions, individuals are therefore spared their self-condemning reactions.

It appears, therefore, that given a different situation, many of the participants in Milgram’s (1974) experiment may have acted differently. Questions are raised as to whether they would have committed the same act without a diminished responsibility, or if the experimenter had initially asked them to give the learner the highest voltage shock.

Zimbardo (1972) illustrates the importance of the situation on the influence of human behaviour in his ‘Stanford Prison Experiment’. Randomly assigned to be prisoners or guards, participants in Zimbardo’s (1972) experiment took on their roles with extremity and haste. With relevance to the behaviour elicited by Milgram in his experiments, the behaviour of the guards is of particular interest. Once given the power-laden role (Zimbardo, 1972), and faced with prisoner rebellion, the guards used physical and psychological tactics to confuse, intimidate, and harass the prisoners. Whilst not obeying any particular authority except for the demands of the experiment, these ‘guards’ had become blinded by the situation, illustrating how situational confines can dramatically alter behavioural norms. By day 5 of the experiment, prisoners were withdrawn and behaving in pathological ways. None of the people involved in the experiment called a halt to the experiment, which had, by day 6, become of very questionable morality. In Zimbardo’s (1972) experiment, the guards, selected for being representative of the average middle class American, with above average intelligence and emotional stability (Haney, Banks & Zimbardo, 1973), displayed anti-social and pathological behaviour, a phenomenon later described by Zimbardo as ‘The Lucifer Effect’ (Zimbardo, 2007). This was something that Haney et al. (1973) suggested occurred as a result of the pathology of the situation rather than the nature of those that entered it.

With the nature of the situation suggested as such a powerful influence over human obedience, the work of Burger (2009) helps to investigate the factors underlying the phenomenon of such morally deviant behaviour. Burger (2009) replicated the work of Milgram (1974), with the aim of further investigating the situational factors underlying the high levels of obedience to the experimenter in such a scenario. Due to ethical constraints, Burger’s (2009) participants were only allowed to continue to the 150 volt shock, at which point the learner confederate would protest greatly and make reference to a heart condition. The experiment ended either if the participant refused to continue, or when they read the next question out to the learner. The study included an added condition in which participants saw a previous participant (who was a confederate) refuse to administer any shocks over 90 volts. The results of Burger’s (2009) study showed that in the same situation some 40 years later, individuals still succumb to the situational factors and obey the experimenter’s instructions. Interestingly, Burger (2009) also found that despite seeing another teacher decline to administer any further shocks, and receive no negative consequences, participants took over the shock administration and continued the experiment. He took this as evidence of the power of the situation, where even a small normative influence was not enough use as an inference of how to behave in the situation.

Burger’s (2009) research, does however, rely on the assumption that those administering 150 volt shocks would have continued to administer shocks up to the maximum voltage. There may have been individuals that would have stopped after this point that would not have been considered as doing so in the results of the study, which may lead to a false interpretation of individuals’ obedience. Despite this, review articles have suggested it to be a convincing alternative end point (Packer, 2008; Miller, 2009). Another issue raised by Miller (2009) regarding Burger’s (2009) replication of Milgram’s (1974) study, is the screening out of those participants that might experience high degrees of emotion or distress. The effects of this on the results are two-fold. Initially, the experiment therefore is less likely to show any of the adverse emotional effects of conflict which was a particularly powerful finding from Milgram (1974) (Miller, 2009). Additionally, it may be that those participants that would have experienced more emotion and distress were those that would have stopped administering the shocks before 150 volts. It has been suggested that in his quest to provide an ethical replication of Milgram (1974), Burger (2009) may have failed to replicate the experiment at all (Miller, 2009).

Much of the research from Milgram and his contemporaries points to the powerful influences of the situation on behaviour, and this is supported by further evidence from Burger’s (2009) replication of the Milgram (1974) experiment. Whilst those with high empathetic concern (as assessed by a personality questionnaire) expressed a greater reluctance to continue administering shocks compared to those with low scores for this trait, they did not refuse to continue at any earlier point. This shows that even individuals that one would consider less likely to commit such actions were influenced by the situational power. It was found, however, that those with a high desire for control were more likely to disobey the experimenter and act on their own feelings, terminating the shocks at an earlier stage than those with less of a desire for control. This was not found in the situation where the other confederate teacher declined to administer any shocks however. This shows that there is some modulation of behaviour as a result of personality, but suggests that the specific influences of personality interact greatly with the situation and context.

Conclusion
Evidence suggests that the behaviour of obedience is strongly determined by a variety of situational factors, and that the power of these can be so great that individuals will obey an authority figure even regardless of the consequences. Factors of diminished responsibility, credibility and expertise of the experimenter, social hierarchy, and gradual increases in demands have all been shown to increase the likelihood of obedience. These have even been shown to supersede the power of someone disobeying the authority (as in the case of Burger 2009).

The power of situational influence on obedience in society has huge implications. Obedience to an authority can be hugely detrimental as demonstrated by Milgram (1973). These situations appear to most often occur when the authority figure is attributed misplaced expertise and status. For example, obedience to an aeroplane pilot who is in error can have catastrophic consequences (Tarnow, 1999), and dictatorships have resulted in obedience that has led to the suffering of millions throughout history. Obedience does have its role in the functioning of society however, and as an alternative to disobedience, is portrayed as a positive trait from an early age. Most organisations require the obedience to authority as a norm, with an inefficient operation if this was not the case (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004). However, again, obedience relies on the authority figure having the morals and interest of society in consideration, as even in the scenario of business, personnel managers have been shown to discriminate against employees on the basis of race when instructed by an authority figure (Brief et al., 1995).

The belief that it is not so much the man, but the situation which determines how he will act (Milgram, 1974) carries a strong onus for creating an authority and situation which promotes what is perceived as ‘good’ behaviour. It suggests that whilst people may have their own beliefs and morals, these can be easily acted against in certain circumstances. This may explain civilised society’s pursuit for rules, regulations and the attributing of individual responsibility. It has disastrous implications however, for a society ruled under the wrong hands.

References

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities.Personality and social psychology review, 3(3), 193-209.

Blass, T. (1999). The Milgram Paradigm After 35 Years: Some Things We Now Know About Obedience to Authority1. Journal of applied social psychology,29(5), 955-978.

Brief, A. P., Buttram, R. T., Elliott, J. D., Reizenstein, R. M., & McCline, R. L. (1995). Releasing the beast: A study of compliance with orders to use race as a selection criterion. Journal of Social Issues, 51(3), 177-193.

Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today?.American Psychologist, 64(1), 1.

Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social in?uence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.

Elms, A. C. (1995). Obedience in retrospect. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 21–31.

Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of personality and social psychology, 4(2), 195.

Haney, C., Banks, C. & Zimbardo, P (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69-97.

Martin & Hewstone (2009). In Bickman, Leonard, and Rog, (Eds.) (2009). The Sage handbook of applied social research methods. SAGE Publications, Incorporated.

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371.

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.

Miller, A. G. (2009). Reflections on” Replicating Milgram”(Burger, 2009). American Psychologist, 64(1), 20-27.

Morelli, M. F. (1983). Milgram’s dilemma of obedience. Metaphilosophy, 14(3?4), 183-189.

Tarnow, E. (1999). In Blass, T. (Ed.). (1999). Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm. Psychology Press.

Zimbardo, P. G. (1972). The psychology of imprisonment. Society, 9, 4-8.

Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). The Lucifer Effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York: Random House.

Reciprocity means “empathy and forgiveness” (Hunter 2017:316). So in the Confucian custom, you would look out for others rather than yourself; you would take the other person’s need first. In either case, it is about the needs and wants of humans. The constructive way – the golden rule – will underscore what sort of individual we are.

In any case, the issue for each individual is different. For instance, on the off chance that I am a greedy individual I need more from others. This would be the issue presented by the golden rule, or know as a positive way. The negative formulation demands us to” not impose on others what you yourself do not want or what you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others” (Bonevac 1955:15.23; 5.11; 12.2).

The general principles of conduct are an inherent piece of Li and its importance, and Confucius underlines that moral initiatives will dependably exceed historical knowledge. Great behavior and acting in a way that is guided by fairness and morals are qualities of a refined man.

Moreover, a suitable disposition is a fundamental piece of the role of the gentleman, including adoration for one’s seniors, and regard for rituals and cultural traditions passed on through several generations. Li, or ritual, is one of the central ideas presented. Here, moral initiatives exceed historical knowledge. At the end of the day, practicing what we may call good behavior and acting in a good and reasonable are viewed as characteristics for a honorable man.

A person who shows ren embodies the idea of what a gentleman should be and asks others to attempt toward it. The idea of ren has been deciphered in various ways. Every interpretation consist of similar thoughts: every individual can have ren, and ren demonstrates to itself when a temperate individual treats others with humanness. One could express that inside the Confucian viewpoint, ren will be ren:”exemplifying the virtue of humaneness necessitates that one become a morally developed individual” (Hunter 2017:316).

Master Kong, generally called “Confucius,” was keen on the advancement of character. The principle to that was the concept of reciprocity, “never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself” (Bonevac 1955:15.23; 5.11; 12.2). Regardless that this statement is normative, it conflicts with “same size for all” normative rule, in that it doesn’t pronounce that you should treat others as they want to be treated.

Every individual needs to be treated in different ways, “this honors the normative code of the person by setting it above society” (Hunter 2017:315). For instance, one individual may advocate for sex inside marriage while another for polyamory, or various sexual relationships. Who is right? Typically ethical laws regarding sex are controlled by society for its own ends; the utilization of Master Kong’s standard would deliver diverse outcomes for various people and distinctive connections, independent of the values of others or society.

Question 1

The first characteristic of African philosophy is that it requires us to be reasonable when thinking about and discussing matters of importance. His point is here is that in as much as one is willing to give clear, logical and defensible arguments, there should as well be a demonstration of willingness to listen to others. One does not have to be passive in accepting the views or questions of others which they ask from their preoccupations.

The second characteristic is that the African philosophy of education requires us to demonstrate moral maturity. His views are that it expects one to develop a sense of responsibility towards the community by acquiring virtues of honesty, faithfulness, duty and empathy and the well-being of others. He also emphasizes that African philosophy of education demonstrate the potential to promote justice, courage and truthfulness in the individuals. In other words, an African philosophy of education is aiming to contribute to the transformation of serious educational conversations in Africa. This is would be done through empowering the communities ‘participation in their educational development that could be achieved through whatever intellectual skills they pose to eliminate African problems.

The third characteristic of an African philosophy of education requires us to be willing to deliberate with others on matters of importance, such as be in dialogue with others and so on. This involves giving your views and be willing to listening to what others have to say, for this allows the voice of the people of the minorities or marginalized to be heard rather than for them to remain muted on issues affecting them. He clarifies it that a legitimate dialogue can occur when the views expressed gives room for objections and critiques no matter their level with a purpose to reach a common agreement.

Question 2

Education is believed to play a vital role in individuals as well as in society as a whole. Parents send their children to school with the hope that that they will be better people. In this assignment, the purpose of education in the context of contemporary southern Africa will be explored.

Each sector is established with a purpose and the education sector is not an exception. There are many expectations that are documented in the forms of policies. As Wirendu (2004) in Waghid’s article argues that education should be able to make one knowledgeable and be able to make better decisions. I support his view since education needs to make people aware of what is happening around them and globally too. This has to begin by them knowing how to read and write, then the individuals will be able to explore on their own to get more information themselves.

Education should liberate the mind from ignorance which overclouds the mind. It should liberate the people from the superstition which blind the vision of the truth. Not overruling waghid’s point on the existence or of spiritualism, many Africans were taken for granted by the westerns and they fall prey to colonialism.

The South African constitution emphasizes that the critical to transform society. It declared education as a human right for the good of the public. Considering the injustice done in southern Africa during the colonial era, I believe education needs to transform the people’s mind from colonized mentality to decolonized mind. Supporting the views of The South African Schools Act (SASA, 1996) stated that the national system needs to redress past injustices in educational provision and provide the platform to redress past injustices in the educational provision.

These are such as developing each person’s talents and capabilities, the transformation of the social order, combating racism, sexism, and unfair discrimination, providing for diversity, the advancement of the human right culture and developing responsibility among school communities.

The purpose of education to produce people with morals and character. Martin Luther Jr. (1947) stated that the most dangerous criminal may be the man gifted with reason, but with no morals. I am supporting his point because education needs to shape people character and morals, not losing their identity in society. However, the type of education received today, shape the children to imitate the western cultures and in the process misplacing their identities.

The question to ask is the education being taught in Africa compatible with their way of living? Whose culture is emphasized most? Supporting Waghid (2004:59) he pointed out that “an educated person has acquired virtues of honesty, faithfulness, duty, and empathy for the well being of the community”. However, all the characters in the above statement are acquired, but the fact remains that, the citizens are shaped to fit in a different community which results in disunity and migration.

The purpose of education is to produce critical thinkers. Education needs to challenge one to be able to challenge and analyze facts. However, with the experiences, the implementation does not allow enough time for the learners to think at the early stage. Educators are given the syllabi and the time frame in which they should finish. Therefore, the educators plan to finish the syllabi so that they will not be penalized, learners end up turned into receivers only.

This can be proven by the results of external examinations. A lot of citizens are grade ten and twelve failures because they are not trained to analyze and critically think during classroom instruction. Supporting Martin Luther King Jr. (1947), views that stated that the function of education, therefore, is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically.

The purpose of education is to prepare citizens to be employable and innovative who are able to improve economic results. The curriculum needs to address the job market available in society. However, poverty plays a role in many not attending high institution such as low economic status. To some extent, some citizens chose to be uneducated due to laziness to learn. For those that finished till high institutions, not all the graduates are employable. This is because of the job market requires only a few people or the employable standards are high in the industry. The question purpose of education is for citizens to be employable, why there is still a high rate of unemployment among the graduates? Is education serving its purpose?

In conclusion, I believe that there are many purposes of education not stated in this assignment. I have discovered that for education to serve its purpose there are a lot of works to be done yet. There many challenges which need to take us back to review the kind of education we get and how it serve our society.

Question 3

The description of the philosophy that seems to lie behind the practices at my school. At Urban primary school, there is more than one philosophy that seems to be behind the practices. These are perennials, essentialism, and progressivism. However, essentialism is more dominant. Learners are in a displaced way, the way the teacher does it it must be done that way. Learners walk in lines from the assemblies to their classes. There is no room for the learners’ views.
Furthermore, in the teachers’ conduct, the management is running the school in an autocratic way. It is their way otherwise, the one who gives objection will be labeled as a bad person.

References

1. Dr. Martin L.Jr (1947) Morehouse College Paper. The Maroon Tiger
2. The Republic of South Africa. (1996). Constitution of the Republic of South Africa: Pretoria: Government Printer.
3. Waghid.Y. (2004). Department of Educational Policy Studies. The University of Stellenbosch. South Africa. yw@sun.ac.za (pp;56-64)

The purpose of this paper is to argue for and against an organization adopting an ethical approach. This essay will look into the two sides of the argument in depth using relevant theories, examples and case studies. The first part of this essay will look into why an organization adopting an ethical approach to management could ultimately benefit the firm. On the other hand, the essay will look at the case against a firm adopting an ethical approach to management. The essay will then conclude by suggesting that it would be important for organizations to act ethically to a certain extent.

One definition suggests that ‘ethics are the moral principles that should underpin decision-making. A decision made on ethics might reject the most profitable solution In favor of one of greater benefit to society as well as the firm’ (Marabous, 2003). The key words used in definition are ‘moral principles’, so this definition suggests that acting ethically means acting in a moral way. In essence, an ethical approach to management Is generally acting right to benefit the community and the environment not solely concentrating on maximizing profits.

It Is also important to define what exactly acting morally is, one good definition suggested that morality is the notion of what is good and bad (McIntyre, 1998). Argument For In arguing for an organization adopting an ethical approach, the benefits that an organization would gain from this behavior Is that it could be used as a USPS (unique selling point). This is evident in a variety of organizations today, for instance, the Body Shop. Body shop sells products that are kind to the environment, and also boast the fact that they are 100% against animal testing.

A key point is that, not only does the many strive to Improve the communities In less developed countries, but it publicizes these actions In order to get support from possible consumers. This strategy appeals to customers a great deal, which implies there are plenty of consumers who choose not to buy products that have been tested on animals so choose to buy products only from the Body Shop. Similarly there are consumers that may not have such strong opinions against animal testing but buy products from the body shop because it seem like the right thing to ad.

These ethical approaches to management has seen Body Shop’s profits rise over the years, and are now one of the arrest cosmetic retailers in the country as a result. As well as advertising the fact that they are against animal testing. The Body Shop also promotes community trade. Active self esteem, defending of human rights, and the protection of our planet. Organizations will also gain significant public relations advantages from ethical behavior. There are examples of organizations that have not acted ethically, and as a result have received very negative publicity.

One key example would be Nestle. A study in the British Medial Journal said that manufacturers of powdered milk, such as Nestle were breaking international codes by selling their products to West African countries. The Studies were carried out in two West African countries Togo and Burning Fast. Findings from the study showed that Nestle had been Issuing free powdered milk to mothers in these West African countries, officials from Nestle had convinced mothers that powdered milk was actually better for their children than 1 OFF needed to find money in order to purchase this milk.

Of course money was not always available so drastic measures were taken, such as over diluting the little dowered milk they had available, or diluting the powdered milk with water that was not very clean. As a result of this children’s health in the region was poor due to lack of nutrition and consumption of contaminated water. The result of this study severely affected the reputation of Nestle. Pressure groups and other activists urged consumers to boycott products from the firm because of the way they had acted in Africa. As a result of this poor publicity Nestle had operating profits fall significantly.

This case study is a prime example of how not acting ethically could seriously image the reputation of the firm, so another advantage of adopting an ethical approach to management is that this sort of situation could be avoided. Another major advantage of an ethical approach to management is that an organization could get more out of their workforce. Employees can expect to respond positively to working for an organization that they trust to be acting morally correct. Employees may feel proud to work for a firm that they know is abiding by ethical and moral guidelines.

This would also help motivate the workforce and boost their confidence. As a result this could in turn lead to higher productivity from the workforce and ultimately lead to higher operating profits. A positive ethical approach to management could add to the competition for employment at such a firm. An ethical approach to management would also result in a lower labor turnover, because less employees would be leaving the organization if they felt they were being treated right, subsequently all of these reasons would lead to lower costs for an organization I. . Training and paying redundancies. A survey conducted in 2003 even showed that about 75% of The Body Shop’s employees felt ‘proud’ to be working for the organization. According to Banyan (1996) the success of the final solution depends on the capacity of managerial techniques to denude individuals of their dignity and deprive them of their humanity. Argument Against One of the main disadvantages that come with an ethical approach to management are the costs involved when managing ethically. A key example would be the exploitation of cheap labor.

Sport manufacturing giant Nikkei has been accused of exploiting cheap labor in Asian markets. A report in Vietnam in 1997 showed that Nikkei had been mistreating women that worked in the factories producing shoes. The women were being paid about $1. 0 per day which was well below minimum wage in America. It was reported that the workforce was even punished for using verbal communication and were only allowed one toilet break during their period of work. From an ethical point of view this is the opposite of how a firm should act, and thus Nikkei received bad publicity for their actions.

Although from Nine’s point of view exploiting cheap labor in these Asian markets meant extremely high profits per unit produced, because shoes produced were being sold at around $150. Since the bad publicity and attempted boycotting from pressure groups, Nikkei vowed to act in a ore ethical manner, so paid worker significantly higher wages and also improved working conditions, although this did reduce the amount of bad publicity they were receiving it also meant that Nikkei so their costs soar.

Although the company still makes a healthy profit, a more ethical approach to management has meant they are the argument that not all organizations will see a loss in profit for acting more ethically. It will largely depend on what type of organization is in question, for example Marks and Spencer sell organic chocolate and promote the fact that there is air trade between farmers. Although Marks and Spencer do have to pay farmers fairly, they can also charge a premium on their products to maintain profit levels.

This way the firm can hit two birds with one stone, because they get positive publicity and a good consumer base, and are able to maintain profit levels. Another Disadvantage of a more ethical approach to management is that it could conflict with existing policies within the organization. A possible restructuring of the organization may need to be done; internal divisions may be created within the business. This of ours is a problem is the workforce is not used to change or does not want change in general. This could lead to lack of motivation of workers which in turn would lead to lower levels of productivity.

A company could possibly also experience problems in sending a message in an organization which is decentralized. Even though the workforce may be in favor of a more ethical approach to management it would be extremely difficult to implement it, and additional training of the workforce may be required for maximum efficiency. Conclusion Having argued on both sides of the organization approach, it suffices to state that, it s important for firms or organizations to adopt an ethical approach to management as the advantages clearly outweigh the disadvantages.