Is Marketing Evil?

This reflection blog is prepared with my thoughts and analysis of Dr. Ferrell’s article, “Marketing Ethics”.  The general topics to be addressed will be bolded below.  One last requirement before we dive into this:  The reader must enjoy reading the content. 

 

Guidelines.

“Overbilling clients, deceptive sales methods, fraud, antitrust, and price fixing are all marketing ethics risks” (Ferrell).  I think that Dr. Ferrell is lumping quite a few areas simply upon the marketing aspect of an organization, but for the purposes of this discussion, we accept her premise.  Would ethical guidelines and training make an organization behave ethically?  I don’t think that ethical guidelines make as much a difference to marketers as the public would want to believe.  Ethics within an organization are going to start with individuals and the slowly percolate upward into the organizational culture.  However, if rewards are freely given for performance and not “doing the right thing”, then the risk of unethical behavior will increase. 

 

Balancing Success with Ethics.

Does an organization feel that it has to win at all cost?  Apparently many do.  “The rewards for meeting performance goals and the corporate culture, especially for coworkers and managers, have been found to be the most important drivers of ethical decision making” (Ferrell).  Winning the Super Bowl is a financial bonanza for the winning team.  Based upon that, there is a cutthroat culture within the NFL.  Every single NFL team has been fined, lost draft picks, or suffered personnel suspensions based upon violating NFL rules.  The old adage, “If you are not cheating, you are not trying”, seems to apply here and is what makes balancing the need to win with ethical behavior a difficult thing to accomplish.  If an ethical, but poor performing marketing manager is admonished for his performance, while his unethical colleague gets praise for being a high performer, what is the message that is being sent out by leadership?

 

Tracking.

I was disappointed that Dr. Ferrell’s article did not address tracking the buying habits of consumers without their knowledge or consent.  It is a simple right or wrong answer and it is definitely wrong.  Let me share with you an example of how deeply technology has been used to undermine our privacy, and how marketers are using it to their own ends.

 

My example will be broken into two parts.  The first part is easy to understand, while the second appears to have no easy answer.  I was overseas and sent an email to my wife discussing how we needed to upgrade from a gasoline-powered motor home to a diesel-powered motor home.  Immediately, she was inundated with ads regarding deals on motor homes, every time she signed into the internet.  While the filters for my overseas location were stronger, I too began to get ads regarding diesel motor homes.  All of this happened without running a single search with an online platform.  Of course, one will say that personal information is sold on the internet.  Okay.  But, reading and acting upon someone’s email?  Is that ethical?

 

The second part is even more troubling.  My wife and I had a conversation in our house without being online or on the phone.  We talked about what it would be like to buy a fabulous house in a country like Belize (Central America), where a $500,000+ home could be purchased for well under $100,000.  We both started getting ads for great real estate deals in Belize.  Again, this was before any online research had been performed.  Now, I ask the reader, how did that happen?  I don’t want to go out on a tangent and give my theories about it, but simply to say that tracking of consumer information is wrong and it violates our 4^th Amendment rights as U.S. Citizens.

 

Leadership Plans.

Communication is key.  Placing ethical leaders in key positions is another way to have oversight on an operation and in doing so, preventing unethical behavior.  Dr. Ferrell cited Jeff Immelt as a leader who gets it.  According to Mr. Immelt:  “One thing that keeps me up at night is that among the 300,000-plus GE employees worldwide, there are a handful who choose to ignore our code of ethics.  I would be naïve to assume a few bad apples don’t exist in our midst” (Ferrell).  

 

Dr. Ferrell cited Jeff Immelt’s words to hold his company up as an example of good ethical conduct and intent.  Is that a joke?  Jeff should probably look in the mirror to find unethical behavior.  How about making huge money off of trade deals with Iran, while Iran was busy killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq?  Is that ethical Jeff?  Or, because GE was one of former president Obama’s favored companies, GE made billions and paid no federal corporate tax?  Is that ethical?  Do good intentions outweigh an organization’s actions?  The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.  Personally, I don’t buy GE products anymore.  They have veered away from being an American company to a global company.  Good for them.  People ought to know where a company’s loyalty is before they spend their hard-earned dollars on their products.  If they know where a company stands and still choose to buy their products, then good for them.

 

Conclusion.

I would like to conclude this foray into marketing ethics by saying that in our instant gratification society, it appears to be easier and more likely for people to choose the easy wrong versus the hard right.  What does that mean?  It means that human nature plays a big part in the ethical conduct of organizations.  If one feels that taking shortcuts is easier, more profitable, more rewarding, and there is little chance of being caught, they will do so.  Not everyone would do so, but a good number of people would.  Unpopular oversight can help as can extensive corporate investment in ethical training.  I compare ethical training to safety training.  Everyone recites the proper words regarding safety, but without constant reinforcement, the urge to do the right and safe thing diminishes.  It is the same with ethical behavior in an organization.

 

V/r

 

John D. Hescott

 

Reference:

 

Ferrell, Linda (Unknown) “Marketing Ethics”

Is Affirmative Action Ethical?

Is Affirmative Action Ethical?

As one who has been discriminated against, I find strawman arguments and tenuous reasoning are used to support LaFollette’s (The Practice of Ethics) view that affirmative action is ethical.  There are so many points of disagreement in his book that I can hardly list them all without writing a major thesis on it.  I will give it a shot point by point.  In fact, this sort of touted high-level reasoning is one of the main reasons that I have a healthy skepticism of intellectuals who possess a liberal point of view.   I find that they cherry pick their data while ignoring evidence that may go against their assumptions.

While arguing about discrimination, LaFollette argues about “Blacks have been subjected to systemic discrimination over centuries; whites have not been” (LaFollette, p. 72).  Untrue.  There were over 5 million whites captured and taken into subsequent slavery by Muslims.  In Russia alone, the vast number of white slaves (nearly all Slavic peoples) taken by invading Muslim armies led to the English word for “slave”.  This slave trade was centered on the Crimean khanate which was part of the Ottoman empire.  “Described by Christians as the ‘heathen giant who feeds on our blood,’ the khanate is estimated to have enslaved and sold ‘like sheep’ some three million Slavs – Poles, Lithuanians, Russians, and Ukrainians – between 1450 and 1783” (Ibrahim, 2018 p. 280).  That doesn’t even account for the remaining number of Western Europeans that were also taken into slavery.  A few things need to be pondered about these facts.  First and foremost, all races on our planet have been conquered and/or enslaved by other peoples, so to single out American blacks as a unique experience is selective reasoning.  Second, the timeline in which the enslavement of white Europeans took place, lasted far longer than the number of years that slavery existed as an institution in North America.  Finally, the very same Muslims who were enslaving white people of Europe also enslaved millions of Africans as well.  In fact, the Muslims were the main clearinghouse (sellers) of slaves to the Americas.

LaFollette than touches upon the white privilege that has become popular with the political left. “The rich can harm the poor in a way and to a degree that the poor cannot harm the rich” (LaFollette, P. 72).  The issue at hand is racism and not economic status.  Plenty of whites are hurt by rich people and/or organizations and can do nothing about it.  I am not even going to cite a reference to say that this point is wrong.  I will give an example from my family history that gives lie to the statement by LaFollette that this is a racial issue.  It also debunks the ridiculous white privilege theory.  My great-grandfather owned a business in Flint, Michigan before the great depression.  It was in a busy commercial district.  It was a general store, had a restaurant in the back, and had gas pumps in front of the establishment.  When the great depression hit, my great-grandfather had less than a year to pay off the business loan.  During one of the bank runs during the depression, the bank called in his note and he was unable to pay the balance of the loan and he lost his business to the bank.  The banking laws have been changed since then and it is illegal to call in loans that are being paid on time.  I want LaFollette to explain how white privilege or some sort of hidden financial advantage of being white protected my great-grandfather.  My family never recovered financially, and we grew up on the borderline between middle class and poor.  Are there instances of wealthy families passing wealth, assets, and opportunities to their children?  Certainly.  Would a black family that is wealthy do the same?  They can and they do.

There is no such thing as white privilege.  One may think so if one is black and buys into the victimology mindset that is constantly peddled to young blacks by the American left.  It is to their advantage that blacks remain at the bottom of society's totem pole.  It ensures a sizable number of blacks voting Democratic to fix their status.  It will never happen that way.  The only way for blacks to shake off the victimology stigma is to desert the described “Democratic Plantation” and start embracing freedom and equality.  Why do blacks from the Caribbean seem to do well in our society?  It is because they are embracing the freedom opportunity that this country offers without the baggage of the victimology mindset.  With true freedom, unencumbered by meddling government and left-wing race provocateurs, comes greater personal responsibility for blacks.  Suddenly, they have to learn how to swim or drown.  It has been 45 years since President Nixon signed affirmative action.  There have been some positive gains, but overall the positives do not outweigh the negatives. “Today, the statistics on black and white inequality are so unchanging that they can be recited by rote: The black unemployment rate holds steady at double the white unemployment rate; the median net worth for black households is about 7 percent of white households; annual per capita income for blacks is 62 cents for every dollar of per capita income for whites” (Slate. February 10, 2014).  While I rarely agree with anything the Slate writers publish, this is a similar comparison to a Consequentialist and a Deontologist coming to the same conclusion about an ethical action but using different reasoning to arrive at their positions.  The Slate author is saying that affirmative action isn’t working, but for different reasons that I think.[1]  Slate is using the racist argument saying that affirmative action isn’t resolving that, and therefore it doesn’t work.  I take the position of the golden rule; “two wrongs do not make a right”.  Better deserving candidates for jobs or schools are denied simply because they were born of the wrong race.

I am 1/8 Native American.  My great-grandfather on my father’s mother’s side of the family was a Frenchman from Quebec that married a full-blooded Native American.  Subsequently they migrated into United States in the 1880s.  I was researching my family history while I was in high school.  I had dreams of getting “free” education and a leg up in the job market by claiming minority status.  My father told me that I was not going to do so……ever!  He told me that I was going to make it in life based upon my character and my abilities, not upon family ancestry.  Taking my father’s guidance, I always claimed Caucasian on job applications.  I have been the victim of reverse discrimination multiple times during my life as a result of this choice.  Is that right?  My life may have taken a quite different path than what it has.  Maybe I would have ended up in an awesome job and become quite wealthy.  I have struggled to progress from growing up poor to a place where I can be considered upper middle class or “member of the UMC” as Bob Seger sang about.  With all of that, I am happy that I chose the route that I took and haven’t had to have others wonder whether I was deserving of my accomplishments, or whether I achieved them due to a protected status.

Respectfully,

John Hescott

References:

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

Slate.  (February 10, 2012). “The Massive Liberal Failure on Race Action”  Retrieved from:
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/history/features/2014/the_liberal_failure_on_race/affirmative_action_it_s_time_for_liberals_to_admit_it_isn_t_working.html#cx

Ibrahim, Raymond. (2018) Sword and Scimitar. New York: Da Capo Press, Hachette Book Group

---

[1] Interestingly enough, (and possibly ironically!) after I wrote my comment that I didn’t agree with Slate much and that I didn’t agree with the arguments presented in their article, I found the following comment at the end of their article.  “I find the tone of this series to be deeply annoying – ‘privileged white liberal discovers black people and realizes history doesn't fit a tidy narrative!’   A lot of liberal white folks don't live in a suburban bubble, and don't need the lesson, thanks” (LaFollette Progressive).

Reflections on Kramer's Article "The Harder They Fall"

October 30, 2018

In his excellent article, Kramer discusses the phenomenon of people who ascend to the pinnacles of their profession and subsequently fall from grace.  These people appear to have it all; money, job, prestige, and power.  Why do they lose it?  Could they have avoided those mistakes?  Kramer provides some good interesting strategies that could be pursued to prevent such dramatic falls from grace.  I will discuss three such examples of a fall from grace that occurred in society, at work, and in my personal life.

Societal Example

Kevin was an outstanding Catholic Priest.  He was 29 years old, tall, athletic, and very good looking.  Kevin was something more.  He was an extremely spiritual and holy individual.  The goodness of his soul seemed to emulate from around him like some barely visible energy field.  Kevin had made it through high school, college, and the Catholic Seminary in great order.  Where ever he was in life, he excelled and wowed people with his charisma.

I got to know Kevin better during a weekend spiritual retreat sponsored by St. Patrick’s Church in Brighton, MI.  Kevin was the associate pastor of St. Patrick.  During the weekend, we reflected on our lives, meditated, played sports, conducted group inquiries into philosophy, and sang songs.  It was a tremendous experience that is still with me 20 years later.

One day, during a summer-time Mass in 1998, Kevin prepared to give his homily.  A homily is usually a collection of the Priest’s thoughts & reflections on the Bible readings of the day, and how they could best be applied in our everyday life.  The congregation was prepared to hear Kevin’s thoughts.  Kevin always gave relevant and powerful homilies.  Kevin opened by stating the following: “I am leaving the Priesthood to get married to xxx, and nothing can change my mind about this.”  He further explained that he would not have joined the Priesthood if he had not been convinced that the Bishops of Rome would reverse their position on Priests taking wives.  It was a shocking announcement.  There was anger.  There was a sense of betrayal.  There was a sense of abandonment.  My reaction was sadness.  I was saddened that our Parish was about to lose this great Priest because the Church could not allow married Priests within their ranks.  (They do!)  I know a Catholic Priest in Corpus Christi that is married.  He was a married Protestant Minister and he converted to Catholicism and the Priesthood.  How unfair is that? 

The point here is, Kevin’s behavior towards women changed from when he was an aspiring Priest to another perspective after he was ordained into the Priesthood.  I am not saying that his choice was wrong.  However, just as some of Kramer’s examples changed their behavior once they attained a goal, this example is similar.  Just like the Kramer examples, Kevin suffered a huge fall from grace due to his actions.

Professional Example

Most of us know people who have done “everything”.  There isn’t an experience that they haven’t had or something that they haven’t done in their lives.  If they can convincingly articulate their experiences (real or imagined!), they can move up in the ranks of an organization.  We had one such guy where I currently work at.  He was known for always “having been there and done that”.  Behind his back, he was derided as a “legend in his own mind”.  This person, we will call him “Rick”, moved up rapidly.  His behavior also changed as he moved up. 

He was no longer respectful of people.  At company gatherings, he was loud, obnoxious, and usually drunk.  People began to lose respect for him.  As the director of a key area in the organization, he was tolerated by people.  That all changed when it was revealed that due to his direct actions, his directorate lost the organization millions of dollars over the past several years.  Rick was then publicly humiliated by being removed from his directorship and demoted.  Rick could have avoided this if he had paid attention to a few simple rules.  Social graces, moderate drinking, and a humble profile would have served him well.  In addition, although he moved up the ladder by appearing to know everything, that very trait got him into trouble with his directorate.  Rick did not like to ever receive advice or information.  He always thought that he knew more than anyone else, so he did not ever have to consider an alternative viewpoint or course of action.  I took no pleasure in seeing Rick fail.  However, reading Kramer’s article reminded me of that situation.  This was a time where Rick’s “know-it-all” attitude should have been jettisoned and replaced with a humble inquiring mindset.  He made it to the top but proceeded to fail.

Personal Example

My last example comes from a tale of two brothers (cousins of mine).  The younger brother appeared to have life mastered, while the older brother struggled.  Whereas the older brother struggled in his personal and professional life, the younger brother appeared to have an easy path in his personal and professional life.  The younger brother was educated, articulate, and good looking.  He was also personable, athletic, and tall.  On the surface, he appeared to have it all.

The younger brother attained a wealthy status.  He owned multiple homes, had boats, cars, motorcycles, money in the bank, and investments.  He was married to a beautiful woman and they had three kids together (since grown and out of the house).  The younger brother appeared to have it all, then fell from grace.  The traits that brought him to the top were abandoned.  He was described as perpetually angry, bitter, and critical of everyone around him.  His brothers and sisters stopped associating with him.  His kids stopped coming around except when they were expected to.  He was fired from his job.  Finally, he discovered that his wife, unhappy for over 20 years, had started seeing someone else.  He had received the wake-up call of his life! 

Meanwhile older brother finally got settled in life and appeared to have caught up to his younger brother.  The older brother was different in that he was not bitter, angry, or critical of others.  Instead, he appeared to have learned some valuable lessons in life and was now very pleasant to be around.  The older brother received a call from his younger brother in which the younger brother made a serious attempt to make amends for his actions over the course of their lives.  Of course, the older brother accepted his overture and they both forgave each other and promised to do better in the future.  But, what went wrong with the younger brother?

I can’t say for sure what went wrong.  I can only speculate since I heard the story second-hand.  However, sometimes when a certain level of success is attained, such as surpassing what one’s parents did in life, a pent-up bitterness at the unfairness of it all explodes.  I believe this happened to my cousin.  He appeared to have all the attributes of a successful person, but his strengths that he relied on during his ascent to the top, he abandoned.  Not only that, he abandoned his religion as well.  Contributing to the mess was probably a lack of emotional intelligence (EI) development, during his climb to the top.  (He and his wife are attempting to make their marriage work and are involved in counseling.  He has also revived his interest in the Catholic church.)  I hope that all turns out well for him.  The one thing that Kramer did not cover in his article, was a fall from grace that included a subsequent rebound after learning the lessons of what caused the fall.

Respectfully,

John Hescott

References:

Kramer, R. M. (2003). The Harder They Fall (Links to an external site.) . (cover story). Harvard Business Review, 81(10), 58-66.

Hescott, John. (2017-2018).

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