This week and last week, our textbook focused on the issues
that arise within public service.
Unfortunately, we do not live in a perfect world, and problems are bound
to arise, which we are reminded of in the news on a daily basis. Over the past eight weeks, classmates in my
ethics course have been posting about current events that focus on ethical issues,
and it has been interesting to read about the different topics that people have
found. I know I said this last week, but
it could not be more apparent: ethical issues and ethical dilemmas are everywhere if you
keep an eye out for them. It really is
no wonder that many organizations implement annual or even quarterly ethics
trainings for their employees. While
many people may shrug the training off as “common sense,” the numerous headlines
that are generated on a daily basis make me think otherwise. I read an article this week called “Audit
Finds Provo Police Need More Ethics Training,” and in this article it was
determined that at least two hours a year of annual ethics training should be
incorporated for the officers (Reavy, 2011). Personally,
I think that ethics training is beneficial because not only does it address
areas of concern that people may struggle with, but it also opens the floor
for a dialogue between coworkers. If
people have justified their actions in their minds to the point where they do
not feel like what they are doing is wrong, then this creates a real
issue. Without conversations to address “right
versus wrong” behaviors, that line can become blurred. I definitely believe that ethics training
should be incorporated for all organizations and businesses, and if possible, I
think that the training should be conducted in a face-to-face setting as
opposed to an online setting. In the
military, we receive both types of ethics training, but I know that I, personally,
get much more out of an interactive training than I do with an online training.
This week in our textbook, Bowman and West (2015) discussed
how transparency within the government has both pros and cons. Looking at pay confidentiality, specifically,
this area has raised concerns over whether being transparent about financial
matters or if confidentiality is best for everyone involved. Like almost everything else in life, the key
is to find the proper balance between the two.
In keeping with the issues theme of the week, I watched a
TEDTalk by Philip Zimbardo, who was the mastermind behind the
Stanford Prison Experiment. This
specific talk discussed good and evil, and more specifically, the psychology
behind it. Typically, I would post the video in my blog so that you could watch it for yourself right here, but honestly, this
one had some highly graphic pictures in it that were taken by U.S. military
members, so I am hesitant to do so. If
you really want to watch it, here is the link, but be forewarned that there are
some extremely graphic pictures in it: http://www.ted.com/talks/philip_zimbardo_on_the_psychology_of_evil. A portion of his talk focused on the
wrongdoings of people within the military at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq. As a military spouse and an “army
civilian” I found this to be extremely disturbing that people would behave this
way! He mentioned that not all people
are bad, and of course there are “bad apples” in any group; however, the
pictures that the military members took were absolutely horrific. What makes people do such terrible things to
other human beings? Zimbardo (2008) claimed
that it was the situation that created the bad apples, which I believe to be
true. Having worked around the military,
I fully believe that our military members are good people in general. Zimbardo (2008) also discussed Milgram’s Shock
Experiment, and how people would act evil in order to comply with rules of
authority. While people like to think
that they know how they would behave when faced with a trying situation, it is
tough to know for sure until they are actually in a situation that demands
their response.
Zimbardo (2008) discussed the
power associated with anonymity, and he found that when people change their
appearance, such as wearing a mask or changing in a way that makes the person
unrecognizable, then they were significantly more likely to torture or even
kill than someone who did not change their appearance. He
concluded his talk by saying that while some situations conjure up evil acts,
those same situations can also conjure up heroic acts, as well. Zimbardo (2008) discussed inaction as an evil
behavior because knowing that something “bad” is happening and not taking a
stance to correct it is evil, not heroic.
In order to act heroically, a person must act when others are too afraid
to stand up and do what is right.
Think about an instance where you have had to make a choice
whether to take a stand against something or just sit back quietly because that
was the easier option of the two. Which
did you end up doing?
Thank you for
visiting my blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment