Week 8

Ah, ethics. One of my favorite classes in undergrad was my Medical Ethics class, there were some heated debates there, but so exciting! Now, while I agree that practice can change a person I think the reason for the action influences it more. Giving to the poor is well and good and certainly signifies a good person, but if someone then thinks that they are better than other because of that action they’ve lost all good from it.

I definitely see the issue with Burns’ idea of good leadership and Hitler is a great example of the flaw, kudos to Northouse for mentioning it. Who can argue that Hitler was not a strong leader? Who took a country that was floundering thanks to WWI and the Great Depression and he turned it into a powerhouse. An evil powerhouse, but a powerhouse. Exceptional leadership. You can argue that he was ethically egoism, but Hitler in his mind was altruistic.

Hmm, which leaders do better, those who put themselves first or their employees? I would hope that those who do more for others do better. I would think that the works would naturally work hard and thus the leader would go further too. But I have a feeling that most CEOs in the power companies today got there but stepping on some people and only looking out for themselves.

I like the mention of white lies, the fact that even those there were good intentions it can fracture the relationship. I think this is an issue with so many, but at work you must be honest with people. Don’t skate around the truth. No half truths!

Joe’s most ethical choice would be the first one, although the second one is really close to me; definitely NOT the third choice. Egoism plays a role depending on whether it’s more important for the company to stay in business or for Joe to have a strong name. What’s it going to be Joe? I think his best option is the first one, there’s got to be something that he’s doing wrong, time for him to step down.

Management at PPI definitely has a high level of morals, their actions support this and there’s proof that it works. They have a duty based approach. They feel it is their duty to provide workers with the best environment possible. While their lawyers have a slight point, if they’re good lawyers than they can point out that the audits were optional and entirely beneficial  to the company and the workers. Being proactive is better than plugging your ears and saying “La la la, I can’t hear you.”

That PLIS quiz was kind of crazy, though I guess lately I’ve just had really trustworthy bosses. Or maybe I’m just too trusting.