Two Theories of Ethics: Consequentialism & Deontology

October 23, 2018

Consequentialism.

Consequentialists say that people are “morally obligated” to act in ways that produce the best outcome for others.  LaFollette in his book, uses the examples of choosing a job or a major in college, with the best outcome in mind for the one making the decision.  Those examples could be called prudence.  Prudence is different from overall Consequentialism in that prudence refers only to what is best for an individual making those choices.  Consequentialism considers the interest of all who are affected by a decision.  This is a huge undertaking.  Further, Consequentialism requires three steps to be taken in a moral decision.  A. Which consequences are morally relevant? B. How much weight should we give to those consequences? & C. A set of rules or guidelines in how to use these factors in moral reasoning.  So far, this sounds great.  There are problems of course.

First, one cannot possibly know all the consequences that a moral decision or non-decision can have on others (and how many others at that).  Many consequences are “hidden”.  They are not known to the person making the decision.  A good example of this is found in the movie, “It’s a Wonderful Life”.  James Stewart played the lead character, George Bailey, who ran into some financial trouble and potential scandal.  He “wished that he had never been born”, and his guardian angel granted him that wish to show him the “consequences” of that decision.  George is subsequently dumbfounded and confused about the condition of this “alternate reality”.  Apparently, George was such a good person in his real life, that his actions (most of them moral and correct) had a widespread but hidden consequence for a great number of people.  I can’t think of a better example to illustrate the hidden consequences that our moral decisions create.  It is also part of why Consequentialism is such a huge undertaking.  The two other problems that Consequentialism has, is that it lacks a moral foundation in its code, and it has a branch of its theory called Utilitarianism.  A Utilitarian would think it is perfectly okay to kidnap a healthy person off the streets, kill him, harvest his organs, and save 5 other people (LaFollette, 2007).  What?  That is an extreme example of Utilitarianism, but it illustrates the two main problems that I have with Consequentialism.

Deontology.

Deontology contends that there are strict moral codes and limits as to what we can do to other human beings.  They would be shocked as I was, with the example of the utilitarian kidnap scenario.  Deontology appears to abide by the golden rule; do unto others as you would have them do unto you.  That is an abbreviated definition of the golden rule, but the point is made.  Deontologists often clash with Consequentialists even in circumstances when they agree on the choice being made.  They disagree in the reasoning that led them to the same conclusion.  For instance, If I made a promise to take a co-worker to get his car out of the repair shop.  The correct decision is to fulfill that promise.  A consequentialist would say that I should keep my promise only because failing to do so, may lead to some bad outcome for my co-worker.  A deontologist states that I should keep my promise because it is the morally correct thing to do.  Both theories arrived at the “correct” solution, but for very different reasons.

One of the advantages of deontology is that it reflects the moral code that most of us were brought up with in our homes and in our churches. The other advantage is that consequentialism, taken to extreme, becomes very unappealing.  Immanuel Kant was one of the great thinkers in Deontology that was quoted extensively in LaFollette’s book.  Kant says, “People ought to be moral, period – no matter what their desires or interests, or beliefs” (LaFollette, 2007. p. 34).  I agree with him on that point.  Where I disagree with Kant, is when he asserts that people should be moral at all times, and implies that we are born with that trait and knowingly deviate away from it.  Deontologists also have two diverging points of view.  They can either give something some moral weight when determining the consequences of their decisions, or they must simply state that consequences do not matter and a strict moral code must be followed always.  A good example of that, would be Jim Carrey’s movie, “Liar Liar”.  In this movie, his son makes a birthday wish that his dad (Carrey) could not lie for 24 hours.  The results are hilarious.  Part of the reason the movie is so funny is because it strips away everything – down to the white lies that people tell daily.  Are white lies immoral?   The answer is that sometimes they are.

Conclusion.

I find myself more in line with the deontology point of view on ethics.  One reason is because they utilize a moral code and incorporate the golden rule.  Another reason is because they don’t totally discount the weight of moral decisions that consequentialists give to everything.  However, unlike the pure consequentialist, they don’t have to make a decision based upon external consequences to others.  They can consider it, but they are not forced into any such decision.  I think it is prudent to give weight to moral decisions and to look at the resulting consequences, if possible.  As stated in our examples, we cannot always know what the consequences are of one of our decisions.  Some of them remain hidden.  That is why some people, such as myself, seek wisdom and hidden knowledge.  It becomes a habit as well as a life-long pursuit.  Good luck to all in your search.

Respectfully,

John Hescott

References:

LaFollette, Hugh. (2007) The Practice of Ethics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing

John Hescott (2017-2018)

The Train Dilemma – Reflection Blog  MSLD 634

 

October 17, 2018

 

Scenario 1:  A train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the switch person.  By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track where one child is standing.  Will you throw the switch?

 

This appears to be a “no-win” situation regardless of the choice made.  Simple logic would tell someone to sacrifice one, so that others could live.  Therefore, throwing the switch sacrifices one to save the other five.  An example of this reasoning happened during WWII.  Winston Churchill’s intelligence agency had broken the German codes from their enigma machine.  Churchill knew that if the Germans kept bombing the airfields, aerospace factories, and military harbors, that England would certainly lose the war.  Churchill cleverly provoked Hitler into changing his bombing targets by a spectacular bombing raid of Berlin (like Doolittle’s raid on Tokyo later in the war).  Hitler was enraged and ordered the British cities to burn.  With the code broken, Churchill knew of an impending attack.  He considered the codes so valuable that he ordered no air raid warnings to be sounded, no aircraft flying to meet the attack, and no black-out procedures for the targeted cities which included Coventry.  The attack came as what the Germans believed to be a complete surprise.  17,000 British citizens lost their lives on that first air raid.  Was this a moral ethical decision?  Certainly, keeping the secret of breaking the enigma codes was vital.  It probably helped win the war and saved hundreds of thousands of lives.  Was the enough justification for the decision he made?

 

I believe that in an instance of the train dilemma, I would throw the switch.  Is that the right decision?  Who knows?  In today’s world, I may end up getting charged with murder regardless of what decision I made.  There are also the after-effects of guilt to deal with, for having to make such a horrible decision.

 

Scenario 1A: Same scenario except:  You are standing next to an elderly man.  If you push him in front of the train it will stop the train and all the children will be saved.  Will you push him? 

 

The ethical dilemma posed is tricky because it is an “old man”.  Does that justify killing him to save the 5 children?  Again, logic may say so, but what would Jesus do?  Let’s not be funny and say that he would stop the train himself.  Would Jesus push the old man in front of the train to save the 5 children?  What about sacrificing oneself instead of the old man?  That would be a higher calling of spiritual morality.  I should say that most people wouldn’t do it.  I am reminded of the movie, “Message in a Bottle”, where the lead character played by Kevin Costner must decide whether to try and save a drowning woman, after saving her son and husband.  The odds of saving the woman were slim and no one could have faulted him for not trying.  In the end, he did and saved neither himself or the woman. 

 

In the end, a conscious decision may not even be made.  The self-preservation instinct in human beings is strong.  What would God’s judgement be upon a person if he made no choice and let the tragedy happen?  It would be difficult for me to justify any decision made.  Therefore, it is possible that I could “freeze” in the situation, not knowing what to do, and the 5 children would die.  The only consolation for me would be that I didn’t have to kill someone (outside of war) to save other lives.  That wouldn’t make the result any happier or better.  I guess I would have to honestly answer that I don’t know what I would do.  Any action or inaction on my part would probably be on some sort of “auto-pilot”.  One also has to be careful not to step on the slippery slope.  For if killing in this one instance is okay, where is the new line drawn?  There is the question that was brought up in the first scenario.  Could I as the responsible person be charged with murder of: 5 children, an old man, or one child?  I don’t know the answer to that question either.  It all depends on how the situation was perceived by others and what they thought what the right thing to do.  This also plays into the self-preservation mode that human beings have.  Would I like to be incarcerated or executed for any decision that I made in this situation?  Probably not.  Therefore, what should one do?  My answer is:  I don’t know.

 

Scenario 1B:  Same scenario except:  The one child on the side track is your child.  Will you throw the switch to save the five children?

 

In this scenario, the outcome is also a no-win situation, but I, like most people, would instinctively save my child.  Is that, morally right?  How many people would willingly sacrifice their child to save others?  I am betting not too many.  Abraham, in the Old Testament, was willing to sacrifice his son Isaac on an altar because God told him too.  Evidently, that story demonstrates the moral, ethical dilemma most people would have when faced with a choice of sacrificing one of their children.  Further, I believe that most people would not have the time nor the inclination to think out the “rational” solution.  The decision making logic of this scenario, is less clear and harder to prove when faced with one’s own child at risk.  I believe that I would save my child and it wouldn’t be a drawn-out decision.  I may freeze when faced with the unpalatable choice in the scenario above, but I don’t believe I would freeze in this one.

 

Regarding the train dilemma, I know that different cultures would react differently to ethical decisions.  Orientals may not make the same choices as Europeans, who would not make the same choices as Americans.  The factors surrounding the decisions are based on moral upbringing in the family and/or religion, ethical & moral education, specific crisis related training, and the culture that one hails from.  None of these answers have moral absolutes tied to them.  As with many choices in life, there is black, white, and varying shades of gray.  It is up to everyone to decide what shade they decide to participate in.

 

References:

 

Retrieved from: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-11486219

 

Stevenson, William. (1976) A Man Called Intrepid. New York: Sky Horse Publishing

 

Movie: “Message in a Bottle” starring Kevin Costner (1999)

 

Old Testament, Genesis (Unknown)

 

John Hescott (2017-2018)

Becoming a Resonant Leader

March 8, 2017

This blog is supposed to state a personal vision for myself, list at least three learning goals and milestones for each action, and key people who will help me achieve these goals.  Full disclosure to the professor.  You will not be enlightened by any of my writings here.  Between being goal oriented, with a secondary tendency towards direction oriented, I have achieved nearly all my objectives to gain retirement.  What will retirement bring me?  It will bring me time and financial freedom.  I am so close to that goal, that I don’t need to do extensive introspective exercises that are more useful for a person in their late twenties or early thirties.  That is not me.  Therefore, I will state that I did the exercises at the end of chapter 6, “Becoming a Resonant Leader”, but the output will probably disappoint.  It is not disappointing to me because I have fought hard to reach my goals.  I will briefly describe my struggle here, but to the point, my goals are nearly all achieved.

I have been destroyed financially in total three different times in my life.  I have persevered.  My assets are probably just over a million $.  That is not a lot of money, but compared to where I was at just 16 years ago, it is.  I have almost no debt.  The main exception is a house that I just recently purchased in Corpus Christi, TX.  I plan on paying that house off in total in about 5 years.  I have money in the bank, money invested, and multiple income properties.  I am ready for a worry-free financial retirement.

I have worked hard at my military and civilian education.  With my graduate degree, I will have attained the level of education that I aspire to.  I do not feel the need or want to continue.  I have completed 33 military schools and/or training courses.  So, that puts to bed any aspirations of higher learning beyond this degree.

What about a career?  As stated, after nearly 34 years in the military (which includes 5 years and 5 separate combat deployments), I am ready for retirement.  I am interested in getting a civilian position (federal civil service) at the Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD).  Why?  Because I can then buy my active duty years in the Army, combine them with my years as a U.S. Customs Inspector, and be vested in a position with 28 years’ seniority.  It will not take away from my reserve retirement and will give me the option of only working for two years before I could retire with a 30-year retirement from the federal civil service.

So, it appears that I have it all worked out.  Right?  Well, another reason I am in a hurry for retirement, is that the genetics in my family don’t work out so well.  The men tend to die at or before 60 years of age.  I will be 58 this summer and do not wish to work until the day I die and never get to enjoy retirement.  That happened to my dad.  I don’t want it to happen to me.  So, what is left?

With my degree finished this Fall, I will have completed all my military and civilian educational goals.  I will have locked in my military retirement.  The only two “goals” left are gaining civilian employment at CCAD, and whether that employment consists of a supervisory position. I understand that there may be some challenges to adjusting to retirement, but I think that I have thought about them deeply enough to where it won’t affect me.  I plan on living financially free, accomplishing my bucket list, and living in love and contentment.  That is the plan.  It is a simple plan.  It is a plan that can all be accomplished in the next three years.  I simply do not wish to set goals beyond this.  My ultimate goal is retirement.  Once I have retired, then I could reflect upon a personal ICT plan if necessary.  Right now, I don’t see it.

In the immediate future, I plan on spending 6 months out of the year in my home in Michigan, and then 6 months at my home in Texas.  Both homes are on the water.  I have boats that are in both places.  I want to enjoy the things that I have worked for, travel, and work on hobbies that I want to get better at. These hobbies include playing the guitar, fishing, hunting, and real estate investing.  I have plenty of things that will consume my time, energy, and cognitive talents.

Respectfully,

John D. Hescott

Reference:

Boyatzis, Richard., McKee, Annie., & Johnston, Frances. (2008) “Becoming a Resonant

            Leader”. Boston: Harvard Business School Press

Personal Balance Sheet

March 2, 2017

This reflection blog will be an introspective and honest evaluation of my personal strengths and weaknesses.  After completing the exercises compiled by Boyatzis, McKee, and Johnston, I wrote down the results for the purposes of putting it into this blog.

Strengths.

What are my strengths as a person and as a leader?  I have several traits that are very good for leadership.  They are: communication, process improvement, and emotional intelligence (EI).  Written and oral communication are essential for success as a leader.  Combined with a blend of EI, this allows a leader to communicate up, down, or laterally throughout an organization.  Written reports can be useful, but they lack the ability to connect with people, such as one can during face to face meetings.  Written communication can also have emotional content added by the reader that is not useful in the transmission of ideas or concepts.

Finally, my strength at process improvement has been a life-long development of tactical and strategic thinking.  I do not relish delving into statistical variations, scientific management, or math based quality control.  However, I can do those things and am very aware of the logic and math behind the concepts.  Therefore, it frees me up to put my process improvement suggestions into plain and simple English.  I try to use the KISS principle (keep it simple stupid!) in all my writings.  I try not to over-write for the purposes of making myself sound educated.  Instead, I am more interested in taking complex ideas or concepts and simplifying them into words where more people will understand them.

Potential Strengths.

My potential strengths are: facilitation, public speaking, and leadership.  I have had some training in public speaking.  With an ability to connect with the audience with a resonating message, public speaking could be a big strength for me to develop.  Coaching and facilitation are potential skills that need further development.  They are potential strengths for me.  I found my coaching session with an employee from the Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD) to be very useful.  It highlighted the potential good that could happen if I were to concentrate on developing this skill, and can utilize the skill frequently.  Finally, I believe that my leadership abilities should be listed as a potential strength due to the nature of the assignments that I have had over the past 15-20 years.  I believe the potential to be a good leader is there.  I have the education, professional background and most of the skills necessary to excel as a leader.  However, the Army does not put the overwhelming majority of their Warrant Officers in leadership positions.  Therefore, Warrant Officers are not only neglected in their leadership development within the system, but are also automatically written off by both senior non-commissioned officers (NCOs) and senior commissioned officers.  It is a catch-22 that quite often turns out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy due to the neglect of leadership skill sets.  I have been aware of that neglect during my career and have taken steps to break the typical mold that Warrant Officers are assigned.

Enduring Dispositions I do not want to change.

My personality trait that I do not want to change is my ability to survive and thrive.  I have a competitive nature and even when things go against me, I keep working until I have gained an advantage.  I have turned many situations around during my life and will continue to do so.  It is in my nature.  If I would have had a good, coach or mentor in my younger years, I do believe that I would have benefited and been a lot better off, a lot sooner, in many aspects of my personal and professional career.

Weaknesses.

Everyone has weaknesses.  Can one admit to weakness and still be a good leader on the score-sheet?  Of course.  How many times have we heard that recognizing a problem is the first step towards resolving it?  My weaknesses as I see them are: controlling my emotions/body language, digging through detailed reports greater than 10-15 pages, researching source material, women, and selling anything.

           

I wear my emotions for all to see.  When I am happy, others know it.  When I am angry or frustrated, others know that too.  In a business setting, I need to learn to dial my outward exhibiting of emotions down.  I need to be able to have more of a neutral approach, especially when things are not going well.  Many times, I find myself shunning reading long reports, or searching for source material in Army regulations.  It could be as simple of a cure to know the shortcut to finding source/reference material, or reading a shorter summary of the material contained in a long report.

I have a weakness for women.  Female direct reports could be a problem for me.  This would be not because there is a danger of me acting inappropriately by statements, or dating them, but by me going easier on them than I would a male in the same position.  One example that comes to mind is this.  I received a bad report on mismanagement of an airfield in Afghanistan.  I flew to the base ready to give the operations officer and crew a good tongue-lashing and retraining.  I was met at the airfield by a good-looking female officer.  She was stunningly good looking, very personable, and…..the operations officer.  Nice.  Needless to say, her charm worked on me and she convinced me that the pilot report was inaccurate.  I flew back to my base and reported to my supervisor that it was all “fixed”.  Things did appear to get better and there were no more bad reports, but I did feel as if I had had the wool pulled over my eyes.  That is the best example of my weakness.

Finally, I have a weakness for selling anything.  It is hard for me to even sell my own property.  I always want them to be in “perfect” shape so that the buyers will be happy with it.  This quest for perfection leads to inadequate selling of goods.  I am a savvy buyer, but I need to be able to sell in my real estate ventures.

My enduring dispositions that could be a hindrance but will not change.

As stated in the above paragraphs, my enduring disposition is a weakness for women.  That is not an entirely bad thing because I have been able to connect with women that are in positions of power and have accomplished a lot.  I can communicate with them effectively.  I must carefully monitor the situation when I am put in charge of them.  That will be my biggest test.

My over-competitiveness and my wearing of emotions on my sleeve are weaknesses that are ingrained within me.  I will probably never be a good poker player because a good poker player would be able to “read” me like a book.  My emotions will not serve me well if they cannot be controlled in appropriate settings.  That part of my weakness I do believe can be corralled and channeled better, but the competitive spirit and all the accompanying positive and negative emotions that go with it are probably here to stay.

Conclusion.

This has been a good exercise in summarizing what I believe are the good and bad traits that I have as a human being.  I don’t believe that my weaknesses are “show-stoppers”, nor do I kid myself that many others possess the strengths that I listed here.  As our training has stated, the key to intentional change is to know where one would like to be in life.  Visualizing our ideal self is important.  For me, I now have the road-map to guide me to my ideal self.

Respectfully,

John H2O

References:

Boyatzis, Richard., McKee, Annie. (2005). “Resonant Leadership’, Boston: Harvard Business

            School Press

McKee, Annie., Boyatzis, Richard., Johnston, Frances. (2008) Becoming a Resonant Leader.

            Boston: Harvard Business Press

Appreciating Your Real Self

February 24, 2017

Appreciating Your “Real Self”

This reflection blog is an output from exercises listed at the end of Chapter 5 (McKee, Boyatzis & Johnston, 2008).  This was a useful and beneficial look at my life through the guided questions and discussions in those exercises.

Lifeline.

I have stated previously that it is hard to write about oneself.  It took the directed exercises for me to look at various aspects of what I have become in 57 years.  Introspection has always been a strength for me, but with direct questions to answer about oneself, it is virtually impossible to avoid unpleasant memories or periods of time.  The self-identity of who I am jumped out at me from the very start.  My identity is composed of being a warrior, an athlete, an intellectual, a father, brother, and a husband.  These are not necessarily in order of importance, but they comprise the main characteristics of who I am.

The warrior training started early in life as a wrestler in high school.  It continued its progression when I started training in martial arts, and then became a member of the U.S. military.  That aspect of my real-self is undeniable.  I model myself after the Samurai warriors.  They were the most skilled and accomplished of warriors, but they had other surprising interests as well.  They were into learning/wisdom, poetry, art, music, and writing.  In all, they were my definition of some of the most well-rounded warriors throughout the world.

As an athlete, I was always good in sports even if my physical traits were not conducive to them beyond high school sports.  I continued those efforts by accumulating perfect scores on the Army Physical Fitness Tests, and by attending a school to become a Master Fitness Trainer.  My intellectual pursuits have stemmed from a love of history and reading from an early age.  That also developed well with earning my baccalaureate degree, pursing my graduate degree, and reading nearly a thousand books. 

My greatest disruptions have occurred as a brother, husband, and father.  Interestingly, my Chinese horoscope is that of the boar.  The Chinese use a twelve-year cycle, defined by year, to assign their horoscope signs.  My sign reads “Chivalrous and noble.  Your friends will be life-long, but your personal relationships will be rocky”.  Great.  I like the first part of this, but then it appears to describe the serious valleys that I have encountered in life.  They generally revolved around rocky relationships, which ended up bleeding over into my professional and financial spheres as well.  Fortunately, it appears as if I have settled in and resolved the turmoil in my personal relationships over the past few years.  I have better relations with my children, my spouse, and my family members.  I can honestly say that most of the problems were external, (I did my share of contributions as well!), but my response to a lot of them demonstrated a lack of emotional intelligence (EI).  Fortunately, I have recently learned that EI can be learned!  Good.  I will continue to improve those aspects of my life.

Social Identities.

This one was tough for me to resolve in my mind.  I have had many different affiliations and associations with my church and professional organizations.  However, at this point in my life, I am not interested in participating in them.  Why?  I could state that my life between work and multiple graduate courses per semester makes me too busy to participate.  Is that it or is there another reason?  I have been a 4^th Degree member of the Knights of Columbus, a member of the American Army Aviation Association (Quad A), a Eucharistic minister in the Catholic Church, a member of the professional pilots’ association, and a member of a township council.  I am not actively participating in any of these organizations right now.  Again, why?  I guess that I feel that I don’t need them and wish to be “left alone”.  In my church, I was into every aspect of it at various points in time.  Now, I just want to go to church, worship in private, and do not want to get involved.  It is more peaceful for me to do that.  I may gravitate back towards some involvement of certain things, like the Knights of Columbus, but that will come later when I feel that I have more time to give of myself to others.  It doesn’t mean that I am not charitable, pay tithes, or neglect those in need.  Those are different things entirely.  It is just that I am not as interested in my social network right now.  Is that a bad thing?  I don’t know.  I guess others who do not walk in my shoes could make that call easier than I can.

Strengths.

My strengths as a person and a professional are communication, process improvement, and strategic thinking.  I am sure that there are more strengths that could be listed as sub-categories to these, but they are what came to mind when doing the exercises.

My ability to communicate has improved over the years.  As my EI has developed, my ability to navigate through personal minefields has improved.  I no longer let others provoke me into rash words or actions.  In street terms, I am more easy-going and patient than I was in my earlier years.  Professionally, better communication has also kept me from being a victim of political games that are played in all large organizations.  I now come across as a straight shooter, who is not interested in playing games.  The professional game players tend to become bored with me and move onto other targets.

Process improvement came naturally to me as a student in high school.  It was nurtured by my work in the private market, by my undergraduate degree, and by my training in the military.  My graduate degree is enhancing my arsenal of tools for process improvement.  One of the things that I like to say to people is this: “A process improvement is NOT personality driven.  It is finding the optimum way of accomplishing a task.  That process, if correct, should survive me leaving or any other leader leaving their position.  The process should continue”. 

My love of strategic thinking began when I got started reading about military history in junior high school.  It was supplemented by love of playing chess, which I also learned in junior high school.  That process has been nurtured in my life by my undergraduate degree and my military training.  This aspect of my life has not been achieved when it comes to a leadership position in a large organization.  That was part of the outputs of the previous chapters.  With retirement looming in front of me, I have reconciled myself to the fact that this goal will probably not be achieved and that I should find peace within myself over that reality.

Roles.

My current professional role is as the Aviation Safety Officer for the Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD).  I also fulfill a role as an instructor pilot and as a “platform instructor”.  A platform instructor is one who attended the Total Army Instructor Course, and is now certified to teach any subject to anyone in the military.  That is my current role.  It is an important role, but it lacks “command authority”.  Any process improvements that are connected to safety must be done with persuasion and networking within the organization.

My personal roles are now as a father of grown children, a husband, a grandfather, an uncle, and a sibling.  My roles in these areas need further development.  No one has a blueprint for life and how to conduct themselves in every circumstance.  If they did, they could patent it and be rich!  Most of what I have learned about the need for good EI and communication has come from the school of “hard knocks”.  I don’t feel regret about my life in general.  Like anyone else, do I wish I could have done things differently for various situations in my life?  Certainly.  I can say that my process improvement in all my personal relationships and roles has progressed.  It has been an ongoing effort that began in earnest several years earlier.

My last role as a Christian and a member of my church will remain about the same for the rest of my life.  I am a believer in life after death, God, and an accounting of what we have or have not accomplished during our life when we die.  My goal is to ensure that I am ready for that final accounting.

Conclusion.

In summary, I have done many things in life.  I have worn many hats and played many roles.  Some of them have been good and some of them have been bad.  As I continue my journey through life, I will give attention to the weak areas that I identified within myself.  I will work on my own “process improvements” for those weak areas.  I have also learned not to ignore the strengths that I possess.  They can be developed further and can overlap into other associated areas.  A long and difficult transition period for me lasted nearly 20 years!  After enduring that transition, I have become a better person overall.  I am happier than I have ever been before.  I am better off financially and feel that I have better personal relationships now than ever before.  The one relationship that I have with God will continue to be a life-long improvement process!

Respectfully,

John H2O

Reference:

McKee, Annie., Boyatzis, Richard., Johnston, Frances. (2008) Becoming a Resonant Leader.

            Boston: Harvard Business Press

Intentional Change Theory at the Team Level

February 12, 2017

Using the concepts within ICT focused on the team level, reflect on why the Olympic US Women’s Soccer team won so often and the US Dream Team basketball men’s team did so poorly in 2000 and 2004?  (Note:  Basketball team won gold medal in 2000 Olympics)

Per ICT for groups, it is important to set clear goals at the beginning of putting the team together.  The US women’s soccer team progressed in its development as a team because they had the clear vision and goal of being the best in the world.  “We believe that a group’s shared vision of what they want to be and do as a group is the driver of intentional change”

(Kleio Akrivou, Richard. E. Boyatzis, Poppy L. McLeod, 2006).  While the women’s soccer team clearly had that goal in mind, it was not present in the 2004 Men’s Olympic Basketball Team.  (Note:  The Men’s Olympic Basketball Team won the gold medal in the 2000 Olympics and is therefore excluded from this team analysis.)

Coach Mike Krzyzewski said the following of the 2004 men’s basketball team.  “I, too, had watched as the United States had lost its competitive edge in international basketball.  This is not to place blame on those involved with the 2004 Olympic basketball team, a team that was comprised of some of the most talented players and some of the most knowledgeable coaches in the game.  In my perspective, the system failed them.  The team was sent into competition ill-prepared.  It was not a lack of talent or basketball know-how; it was simply a lack of proper time and competition.” It was easy to point fingers and blame this guy or that guy for the way he acted or didn’t act in 2004, but Jerry (Colangelo) and I both believed that it was our current system that was flawed, not the players.  This system was no longer conducive to winning.” (Krzyzewski, 2008) This made sense, but there were other opinions cited that list some deficiencies of the team that prevented them from following the team development per the ICT models.

Every “star” in the NBA isn’t equally productive.  As noted at Wired.com, players who score in abundance tend to be considered “stars.” But wins in the NBA – again, as noted at Wired.com — are primarily about shooting efficiency, gaining possession of the ball (i.e. grabbing defensive rebounds and steals), and keeping possession of the ball (i.e. grabbing offensive rebounds and avoiding turnovers).  Just chucking the ball at the basket might help a player increase his scoring totals (and consequently his salary and fan base); but if the shooting isn’t very efficient, then that scoring doesn’t really help a team win.

It also didn’t help that in 2004, many of the “stars” were just rookies in the NBA.  Other stars decided to pass on the Olympics and that narrowed the choices of who the coaches could select to the team.  Additionally, there were personalities on the team that had been rivals or enemies prior to getting named to the team.  “Strong negative emotions at the group level is seen as hindering the group task, or the formation of a shared identity” (Kleio Akrivou, Richard. E. Boyatzis, Poppy L. McLeod, 2006).  An example of this would be when Isaiah Thomas was not selected to the 1992 “Dream Team”.  This had no bearing on the level of his play (which at the time was the best in the NBA at the point guard position) but rather on the emotional and personal conflicts that Thomas had with other members of the team.

Both the men’s basketball team and the women’s soccer team had to go through the stages of team development.  They are change, stability, and continuity.  The women’s soccer team negotiated all three of these phases and continued the achievement of their shared goal.  The men’s basketball team was unsuccessful at handling the initial change (team formation) and never really stabilized as they should have.  That made continuity extremely difficult.  In a team game, such basketball, it is not always guaranteed that the best individual players when put together on a team will perform as the best team.  Chemistry is involved.  A less skilled player could make an impact if he could bring together the various phases of the game FOR his teammates.  It is often the best accolade an athlete can get when they are cited as someone who “makes everyone around them better”.  Team USA in 2004 lacked such a player.  Other teams that appeared to be less skilled than the US team, developed their ICT as a team and played better together. 

The bottom line is that the women’s soccer team had hope, an image of a desired outcome, and a solid core identity, whereas the men’s basketball team in 2004 did not.

References:

Kleio Akrivou, Richard. E. Boyatzis, Poppy L. McLeod, (2006) "The evolving group: towards a prescriptive theory of intentional group development", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 Iss: 7, pp.689 – 706

Boyatzis, Richard. & McKee, Annie. (2005) Resonant Leadership, Boston: Harvard Business School Press

Richard E. Boyatzis, (2006) "An overview of intentional change from a complexity perspective", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 Iss: 7, pp.607 – 623

Retrieved from: Wired.com, 2008

Tipping Points of Emotional Intelligence

February 1, 2017

URL:  https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4574314487193895552#editor/target=post;postID=2072331423877906257

Boyatzis ties emotional intelligence competencies as predictors of success.  He also states that negative emotions are much stronger in human beings that positive emotions.  Therefore, the statement that flows around in the Army (pardon the language, but I do want to be correct) is: “It only takes ‘One – Aw Shit, to wipe out a thousand atta boys’”.  Boyatzis research tends to prove this.  Maybe as a function of aging, it is why older people seem more negative and cynical.  They have been beaten down by life’s pressures and burdens.

Boyatzis also describes his positive applicable emotions (PAE) and its opposite of negative applicable emotions (NAE).  It reminds me of the Yin/Yang discussed in great length in Obolensky’s excellent book, Complex Adaptive Leadership 2^nd Edition.  One cannot exist without the other.  However, as noted above, Boyatzis encourages the emphasis on the positive to offset the more powerful negative.  In his video, he also compared his model to others such Barbara Fredrickson, who encourages a three to one ratio in professional and personal lives.  In fact, Boyatzis studies of marriage states that a 5 – 1 ratio is needed to sustain a happy marriage.  Interesting.

In his research, Boyatzis attempted to test the following: (1) demonstrated EI and cognitive

competencies would predict financial performance of leaders in the company; and (2) a tipping point analysis would reveal a better prediction of financial performance than other ways of estimating the impact of the competencies.  Clusters of 4 groups of competencies were tested.  They were: Self-Motivation Cluster, Self-Regulation Cluster, People Management Cluster, and Cognitive Cluster.

The results of Boyatzis study was:

“Two competencies were significantly correlated with the financial performance measure of Account Revenue: Facilitates Learning and Values Learning.

Ten competencies were significantly correlated with Account Gross Margin: Taking a

Risky Stand, Planning, Self-confidence, Leadership, Coaching, Facilitates Learning, Systems Thinking, Empathy, Adaptability, and Values Learning” (Boyatzis, 2006)

The financial results for a large organization were measured in order to determine the effect of EI competencies upon financial performance.  The result was with the clusters described above:

“In particular, the competencies that resulted in greater account revenue and/or account gross margin were, organized within their clusters:

(1) Self-motivation cluster: Planning, Achievement Orientation, Self-confidence;

(2) Self-regulation cluster: Taking a Risky Stand, Self-control, Adaptability, Conscientiousness,

      Values Learning;

(3) People management cluster: Networking, Leadership, Coaching, Empathy, Facilitates

      Learning; and

(4) Cognitive cluster: Systems Thinking” (Boyatzis, 2006)

Boyatzis also wrote about the limitations to his study.  They were the small sample size selected and the uneven distribution of financial measurements.  However, he concluded that the study is useful in that it adds to the empirical evidence accumulating about how EI can positively affect selection, development, retention, and motivation of leaders for the future.

It is interesting that in this leadership class, I was asked by a classmate if I had insight into how to determine EI in potential candidates for hire.  I offered back to her that although my experience was not with the human resources realm, that my intuition told me that if interviewers and screeners were well-versed in EI, then they may be able to recognize the traits during an interview and weight EI ahead of cognitive or technical skills.

Boyatzis and Dr. Goleman have both conducted studies that show that EI factors in more than 2 to 1 as a predictor of success as a leader within an organization.  This two to one ratio is over EI’s counterparts in the makeup of a candidate, cognitive skills and technical skills.  This is interesting due to the ability of EI to be learned even late in life and how it can round out the skills of an otherwise qualified candidate.  Coaching EI and focusing on EI rather than strictly academic achievements or technical knowledge should be the wave of the future for organizations.

In CCAD, I was hired to fill a “temporary” vacancy.  I did not want to be a temporary fill after I had been on the job and discovered that it was a good fit for me.  I had a relatively short timeframe to demonstrate that I could have a positive impact upon the organization.  I decided that I needed to emotionally connect with the pilots and the crew chiefs of CCAD’s Flight Test Section.

How was I going to do this?  The level of difficulty was raised because these were extremely skilled, veteran pilots and crew chiefs.  Their ability to sniff out bull-crap or insincerity was going to be of the highest degree.  Our higher Headquarters (HQ) decreed that we would have a Safety Stand-Down Day.  During a Safety Stand-Down Day, safety training and issues are discussed by the entire assembly of personnel.  In addition, no flight activities or normal activities can take place during this day.

I had my forum, but I was going to need to make this day a success.  First, unannounced to everyone, I purchased 12 dozen doughnuts and coffee for everyone in attendance to the Safety Day.  I meticulously prepared the classes and decided on a forum that would not administer “death by Power Point” to the attendees.  I had sign-in sheets, a large TV screen, a recorder, and all the professional tools available for this day.  How could I make the emotional connection to everyone?

Part of our training consisted of weather recovery procedures for pilots.  When caught in Inadvertent Meteorological Conditions (IMC), the pilots are supposed to follow very specific steps that include gaining altitude for safety, declaring an emergency, and executing a recovery to & landing at an airport with good weather.  I chose to share a story with everyone about how I screwed up when confronted with that very situation.  This was also in correlation to the Safety Officer keeping information in confidence and acting as a teacher or a guide.  I talked about how I was training a student at Fort Rucker under Night Vision Devices (NVDs), and was attempting to go to the Northern training area from the South.  I ran into bad weather and lost visibility with the ground.  I was flying at approximately 1000 feet above the ground.  What did I do?  I violated every procedure that I taught routinely, and started to descend to see if I could pick out my visual references (mainly the ground) again.  I descended to about 500’ above the ground when I picked up my references and turned Southbound and flew out of the bad weather.  My maneuver had been dangerous because there were towers in that area of operations that measure 750’ above the ground.  I could have hit one of those towers and never knew what happened until it was too late.  I admitted my error to everyone and vowed that I had learned from it, it would never happen again, and for these aircrews never to do what I did.

I had done it!  It worked.  The room went silent and all eyes were upon me as I recounted this harrowing experience.  They could feel my remorse at my mistake and the casualness of how I put my student’s life at risk, by making the wrong decision as his instructor pilot!  Once the emotional moment passed, a good 30 minute after discussion started as others opened-up to speak about hazards and their experiences with the relevant safety topic.  I had connected.  I gained the respect of everyone in attendance that day.  It was especially gratifying to have the senior pilots have their defenses broken down and they welcomed me into their “group”.  For the Safety Stand-Down Day, I wouldn’t have done it any different.  I do wish I had another chance to make a better decision on my training flight during that potentially fateful day in the Fort Rucker AO.

Respectfully,

John Hescott

References:

Boyatzis, Richard E. (2006), “USING TIPPING POINTS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES TO PREDICT FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF LEADERS” Psicothema. ISSN EDICIÓN EN PAPEL: 0214-9915. 2006. Vol. 18, Suplem.1, pp. 124-131

The Positive PEA and Negative NEA (YouTube - 10:14) (Links to an external site.)

Obolensky, Nick. (2016) “Complex Adaptive Leadership 2^nd Edition”. New York: Routledge

Barbara Fredrickson: Positive Emotions Open our Mind (YouTube - 08:37) (Links to an external site.)

Barbara Fredrickson: The Positivity Ratio (YouTube - 08:43) (Links to an external site.)