MSLD 634 Module 7 - Egois: Psychological and Moral

Egoism: Psychological and Moral

           

            Ethical egoism is the claim that people should always act to promote their own self-interests. Psychological egoism, covering morality and self-interest claims that everyone always seeks to promote self-interest, independent in which field you work, ranked position or if it is related to personal causes. It defends the idea that one engagement in moral behavior is the best way to advance his own interest. Although it gives a brief notion that is a selfish way of thinking, it holds some moral truths in it, as neglecting the motives and consequences, the roots of one’s action, the real and perceived interests, and the frequency of when it happens (LaFollette, 2019).

            I rather apply relativism in the subject of egoism. One’s motives and consequence of his acts shouldn’t be put aside. I also understand there are limits to whether someone neglect herself in favor of others and do not realize that the only way to give to others is when our own wellbeing is taken care off. For instance, if someone volunteer in a remote place, where diseases are spread around, the is no basic condition of life, and food provision is a scarce, for how long this philanthropical action will last and which real impact will bring. Even if the motives are genuine, eventually, there will be a point that we need to be egoist to give back to the world, otherwise there won’t be something to give.

            One problem of egoism, in the organization field, is when ego gets in the way of the decision-making process. Ego is defined as a person's sense of self-esteem or self-importance. An ego that is never satisfied and always craves more never appreciates the moment and is never grateful for the present (Miller, 2017). I believe ego blinds one thinking, and when it comes to decision making it impact on the effectiveness of the results. A perfect illustration is observed on the TV series Suits, where the character Louis Litt, because of his ego, constantly makes poor decisions, leading to him to lose trust of his coworkers and making him stagnate.

            Naïve is to ignore that one is completely absent of ego. The problem is not the existence of egos, but in whether one lets it get in the way of decision making, especially large egos, as stated my Miller (2017). A large ego is threatened by anything or anyone who could possibly damage their notions of self-worth. This leads one to act constantly on the defensive mode, being necessary some ego checks to avoid being trapped on this pitfall.

            Although I believe benefits is a form of incentive, I do not believe that leaders should get it by the decision they made. It should get contractual benefit, independent of results, if its intention is to use benefit as a motivational tool. When results are involved, I believe the entire team should get benefits, as a leader does not act alone in the workplace. A leader without a follower, is not a leader per se. A perfect example that happens in my organization is that high ranked leader gets bonuses in all profitable years, while the workforce and the leadership at the bottom of the ladder, is due to company’s discretion. My question is, who implemented the decisions? A decision without implementation is simple a talk, if no one walks it.

            When it comes to rewards and ethics, I do not believe a leader should be rewarded to promote ethical behaviors. It gives the idea that being ethical is going beyond, while being ethical is the basics of one’s employment, a non-negotiable requirement. A reward to leader, in the wake of ethics, in my opinion, is an unethical decision on itself.

References

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

Miller, R. (2017, February 7). Unwelcome egos in the workplace. Retrieved from timesunion.com/tuplus-business/article/Unwelcome-egos-in-the-workplace-10916035.php

MSLD 634 Module 1 - The Train Dilemma: When no Choice is a Good One!

The Train Dilemma: When no Choice is a Good One!

When someone asks us why we made a decision or why we support some position, we offer, or should be prepared to offer, reasons for our actions, decisions, or conclusions. To make better choices, we must become aware of our options and the relevant background information; we should identify the consequences of our actions for others, for ourselves, and for the people we will become. (LaFollette, 2007).

Better choices do not mean good ones. In fact, sometimes no choice is the best choice we can have. The Trains Dilemma exemplifies this statement:

A train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing.

1.      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?

2.      You are the switch person. By throwing the switch you can put the train on a sidetrack where one child is standing. The one child on the side track is your child. Will you throw the switch to save the five children?

3.      You are outside the train, 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?

Asked what I would do in each scenario could lead to an unrealistic answer, as my decision would not be rational. The dilemma implies that stopping the train was not a possibility, which made me assume that I would lack time to think about alternatives and the consequences. I would be led probably by emotions or impulse.

On the first scenario, probably I would thrown the switch as a reflection. The presumed immediate consequence is that I would kill the one child on the side. In a long-term perspective, I would feel devasted for killing one child, and guilty for killing the one who was playing on the supposed safe place. But the fact I saved five could bring me comfort.

On the second scenario, I probably would just close my eyes, because emotion would overcome impulse. The consequence is that I would feel devasted, but I am not sure I would feel guilty. My child was not on the way of the train, not playing on an unsafe place, and I don’t believe the number of kids would make me feel guilt, although I don’t think I could ever recover from the consequences of my inaction.

On the third scenario, I could behave by impulse or emotion. With no time enough to think I don’t believe I would see the old man and per his age and the fact he had a long life comparing with the promising future of the kids, but by the fact I would hit a fragile person. The fragility could hit my emotions, but the reflection could kick in first.

What is not stated or clear also need to be taken in consideration when we think about the consequences of our decisions. In the scenarios perhaps wouldn’t make a difference on the decision itself, but in a situation not under pressure, going around the circle (Nosich, 2012) of critical thinking could impact greatly on the consequences.

For instance, I don’t know if the five kids by looking at the train coming would jump to one of the sides and coincidently be the same side the train ended up. Or perhaps the kid on the side would run far away when looking at the train? What about the kid on the side jumping by impulse on the trail in an act of bravery? If I was outside close to the old man, I had the alternative to jump in front of the train instead of pushing the old man. If I was the switch person I would need to take in consideration what would happen with the train, and the possible passengers, if I decided to throw the switch bottom. Could I cause an even worse accident? There are several variables which is hidden behind the scenarios and proportionally a bunch of unknow consequences. There could be countless implications.

The main learning outcome from this dilemma for me is timing. As LaFollete (2007) says, if we are not under pressure to make potentially momentous decision, we will be better equipped to make good decisions when we must act.

References

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

MSLD 632 Module 9 - Role of Emotion in Decision-making

Role of Emotion in Decision Making

            Decision making process is often faced by a factual and rational process (Shiv, 2011), where the cognitive undeniable human trait is neglected. Shiv brings the emotion factor of the human cognitive ability to reality when it comes to decision making, specifically on the confidence aspect of the process.            

            Emotion is present in decision making on the consumer (buyer, student, cadet, follower and so forth) perspective as it is in the provider (seller, professor, sergeant, business leader and so on) perspective. No matter for how long the subject was neglected, neither how it still is condemned by some researchers, entrepreneurs, traders and the long list of the fact-only-based rational defendants, it is crucial that emotion is invoked in the decision-making process for persuasion and confidence purpose (Shiv, 2011). Hence, in order to have anything like a complete theory of human rationality, we have to understand what role emotion plays in it (Simon, 1983).

Reflecting on my own experiences related to emotions and confidence, and can recall two situations, one in which I was extremely confident of the outcome, and a situation in which I was less confident of the outcome.

High Confidence Experience

            Ten years ago, I decided to shift my career from the hospitality field to aviation, and I faced a challenge in this decision-making process. The general manager of the hotel I was working in that moment, when I asked my resignation, disapproved my decision. He mentioned that I have been promoted twice in the period of six months, and the last promotion happened one month before my resignation. It was a new position in that branch, and a prosper one, which could open several doors for me in the company and in the field in general. I was quality inspector, responsible also for customer satisfaction, service recovery, preparing the hotel for internal and external audits, and analysis of the rooted issues with proposal of solution to headquarters.

When he approached me with his disapproval arguments I have had already challenged myself with the same arguments. I was leaving this position to be a flight attendant.  I got information from people in the aviation field, I did my researches on where my new career, and challenged my medium and long goals as a professional, and apart from all this, I really wanted the shifting. I wanted to have different perspectives from different background, I wanted to impact on more people’s lives in a daily basis, I had my personal dreams also of travelling and learning new languages. In the meeting with him, on the day I received the invitation of a domestic airline to join the company, he tried to convince me of his reasons, and I ended up convincing him.

I had my factual arguments, which made him doubt of his (at least looked like by his facial expressions), but when I put my emotion on the arguments, and all my personal reasons also, he had no arguments left and wished me good luck. I believe that what made the shift on his mentality was the passion and the confidence I had in my speech on that meeting. there were some information cascades influencing his decision on that point and I made a conscious decision, and I knew what I was risking, what I would perhaps miss, and knew the possibilities waiting for me. I was fully confident at that point and my attitude reflected as so.

Low Confidence Experience

            Last week I was buying and selling used furniture and house décor. As I mentioned before in discussions and blog posts, I am a horrible negotiator when it comes to monetary value. I am not comfortable at bargaining, and I am not even too attached to money, so I easily influence by persuasive “traders”. Selling my couches, I advertised based on the second market prices, their conditions and design. I ignored the utility factor and how much I would spend to get another sofa set. The price I accepted on the offer was lower that I believe today that could be. I was not just showing insecurity on the sale, but I mentioned that I was not sure on the decision of selling, although I had accepted the deal already on the price. As soon as I trembled, I got a call from the buyer, setting up the time to pick up the couches, and as insecure I was, just accepted and went with the flow of the negotiation set by the buyer.

            On the same week, as a buyer, I was in doubt of my purchase on the second-hand home décor. Clearly in doubt, the seller pushed me on the time argument, stating she had an appointment and didn’t have much time for my indecision. I spend 10 minutes looking at it, and finally bought them, still doubting while driving back home. 

Learning Outcomes

            There are several learning outcomes of these two experiences, but on the subject matter, my main learning point is that when someone lack confidence, the other party on the negotiation process can use it as an opportunity to “win” the deal. I believe the same applies when trying to sell an idea, to influence a follower, and in any other situation where confidence plays a crucial role. Emotions reflect in confidence, and confidence is one of the defining point of the a successful outcome.

References

Shiv, B. (2011). Brain Research at Stanford: Decision Making. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRKfl4owWKc&feature=youtu.be, on March 09^th, 2019.

Simon. H. (1983). Reason in Human Affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press

MSLD 632 Module 5 - How Protected are Your Protected Values?

How Protected are Your Protected Values?

           

In Hoch (2001), the authors open chapter 14 saying how important are values and how they play a direct role in decision making. Values are criteria for evaluating states of affairs, that are explicitly and reflectively endorsed by the holder, and they are our best judgments of the goodness of outcomes, although I personally do not agree they are as reflective as the authors initially state, an opinion I will explain along this post.

The issue with values happens when people try to guard them against inconsistencies, by creating protected values (PV), which while providing a way for people to avoid making harmful trade-offs, makes it impossible to satisfy across all situations. Protected values mean that they will never be traded off for another gain, but what the authors prove through scientific researches is that even these values can fade in certain contexts, which means, they are not as protected as claimed.

Dealing with values is not an easy task, since it brings beliefs based in background, culture (dominant values of the society), and often comes from childhood (Taylor, 2012). The effect of dominant cultural values and how people hold onto them while making even small decisions, is shown by Iyengar (2011). The complexity of PVs carries consequently complex, but possible, solutions. The process of decision-making is particularly difficult when it involves emotional and ethical values or when it puts values in conflict, although conflicting values can be used as a strategy to dribble the negative restricting influence of PVs (Hoch, 2001).

It is important to know when and why values and decisions may be inconsistent, to find effective solutions. Going through the source of theses inconsistencies, the authors in Hoch (2001) mention that a range of studies has shown people are inconsistent in identifying their preferences, even across seemingly minor changes in the way the questions are asked. This point brings me back to a speech given by Barry Schwartz (2005), when the professor raises the paradox of choice, how our preferences, the simultaneous options available and our values have been shaped along the years, in parallel with the minor changes of how the questions are being asked, which is a relevant point brought by Iyengar (2012) as well.

Inconsistencies in preference do not occur randomly, but rather are sensitive to and shaped by the context of the decision. Many studies have shown that the context of decisions robustly and consistently affects preference. Among the contexts that affect the application of values are (Hoch, 2001):

1.      Sequential versus simultaneous (if options are presented one at a time, decision makers may be more likely to trade off values than if they see all options simultaneously).

2.      Buying versus selling (people are more focused on values when they are asked to give up or sell something than if they are buying or obtaining it. Selling (giving up) is more driven by emotions such as guilt and responsibility, reflecting general ethical values.

3.      Pricing versus rating (decision makers also tend to weigh values more heavily when they are rating options rather than pricing them).

The reason why people abandon their values also is related to the construction (or lack of it), leaving just an appearance to be strongly held. I believe values are formed usually without consent of the holder, and not constructed by him/her. I can see in this personal analysis the passive way that values are brought to our lives as social beings. This nature carries the fact that rarely values are put to test. In contraction of my analysis, the authors in Hoch (2001) state that values are like concepts, which are constructed from knowledge and experience as well. The authors highlight that if values are seen as constructed, we can ask whether they are constructed well, just as we can ask whether concepts are formed well. Constructed or formed, this passive nature of values leaves a gap on its strong foundation and consequently on its consistency and accuracy. If PVs are unreflective in this way, then they should be put into simple challenges, as questioning, analysis while conflicting the consequences inside the same context, and proposing counterexamples, strategies that have been tested to be effective in researches.

Reflecting on three of my major values, based on my beliefs (analysis of values formation), and considering the pros and cons (applying the challenging strategy) of each belief, and their consequence (as a conflicting strategy), I came to the following conclusion, in no specific order:

     

Value 1: Truth

      * Belief 1: Is always the right thing to do, to hold on to.

- Pros: shows trustworthy character, building trust among others, and bringing a feeling of accountability and accomplishment in following by principles formed in childhood and followed by my religious beliefs.

- Cons: in decisions involving finances, especially in intense trading markets, lye or omission, could be used as a playing card in negotiation.

            * Belief 2: Do not leave gap for contradictions

- Pros: Peace in moving on after mistakes are made, confidence in dealing with the negative impacts of poor decisions.

- Cons: being blamed and judged for poor decisions, intensifying the feeling of failure.

            * Belief 3: Strengthens confidence in decision making

- Pros: in doubting negotiations, it gives the confidence of using the truth as a trade resource, by knowing that whatever the consequence of the negotiation, it will come in my benefit.

- Cons: losing all types of opportunities (financial, career, personal, social) which could be enhanced if lying even if slightly.

            * Potential consequence

I have witnessed already all the cons mentioned, and that is why I hold into this value while making decision. I have discussed this PV in a previous task of this course, and ironically, I have been faced with several situations right afterwards, which I planned to lie to take financial advantage. Hoch (2001) mentions that money is a common factor of PVs inconsistency. Every time I played a negotiation in my mind using the “power” of lies, I remembered about what I mentioned in that task. Just by thinking of it, and perhaps using it at first unconsciously, it shows how not so protected this value is for me.

Value 2: Loyalty

* Belief 1: Shows the depth of my principles

- Pros: clarity of who I am and what I am based onto.

- Cons: If not followed, brings irreversible consequences, especially in personal relationship.

            * Belief 2: Brings only peaceful consequences

- Pros: avoid distraction while completing important task, in leisure times, it allows to live it fully, since my mind is in peace, deduct one possible subject in my overthinking brain/mind.

- Cons: does not allow to live new opportunities, when the current in in question.

            * Belief 3: Keeps positive reputation and protection of positive image

- Pros: long term professional deals and lasting personal relationships

are more probable.

- Cons: over focus on reputation and image, possibly distracting from other important values.

            * Potential consequence

If loyalty is fully on hold, I believe it brings more positive consequences. I use it subconsciously as trade coin for my relationships. I can remember a time, in my teens, that I was used to firmly say I would never cheat on someone, and caught myself doing it when I was a “convenient” environment, and in an “inconvenient” relationship. As a teen I was so full of certainty and when I realized I have broken this value, I also realized that values are abandoned according to convenience, unless they are tested. After abandoning it, I still went back to my values, and brought the truth to the table. There were consequences, but afterwards I was simply in peace, and I did not repeat my mistake, because after tested I just confirmed it must be a highly protected value. Nowadays, I believe it is the main foundation of my marriage and my valuable friendships.

Value 3: Perfection/ Mastery

* Belief 1: Excel is a win-win attitude (present and future)

- Pros: creation of a habit in exceling, outstanding in the crowd, creation of career opportunities

- Cons: makes it difficult to define priorities, when overwhelmed in tasks.

            * Belief 2: expose your strong beliefs

- Pros: exposing trustworthy character (as in other values), being looked for when people need a task accomplished.

- Cons: if I fail, it bring disappointment on people (especially myself), questioning my value as a whole.

            * Belief 3: no matter the current reality, mastering shows who I am

- Pros: more than a value or a belief, it becomes a label.

- Cons: self-expectations, to the overwhelming point.

            * Potential consequence

Currently I am questioning this value, mainly because the way I am facing my studies. I always gave my 1000% on every task given to me and taken by me (especially with studies and career). I am dealing with different decisions and passing through a shift in focus in my personal life, which is jeopardizing this value. I strongly believe I need to balance my life, and stop being so harsh on myself, because it hurts me in the long-run, but when I see the results of my work (not just in my master, but in my job) it makes me feel frustrated for the poor-quality of a delivered task in hand. And to my surprise I did not find a balance either. But I am looking for solutions, sparing more time for my studies, dedicating myself more in this given time, and controlling other personal time frames.

Before this exercise, I was already aware of how unprotected my pseudo-protected values were. This exercise assisted me on going through them one-by-one and re-evaluating if they are values that should be protected or not in negotiations. Although is a consequence in process, I believe it was of a great value to better understand myself, increasing my self-awareness, which I believe is the key for success.

References

Hoch, S., Gunther, R., Kunreuther, H. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. New York, NY: Wiley.

Iyengar, S. (2011). How to make choosing easier. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_choosing_what_to_choose#t-8329, on January 25^th, 2019.

Iyengar, S. (2012). The art of choosing. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_on_the_art_of_choosing#t-84862, on September 17th, 2018.

Schwartz, B. (2005). The paradox of choice. Retrieved from  https://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice#t-45566, on February 5^th 2019.

Taylor, J. (2012). Personal Growth: Your values, your life. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-prime/201205/personal-growth-your-values-your-life, on February 7^th, 2019.

MSLD 632 Module 2 - How to Make Choosing Easier

How to Make Choosing Easier

Psycho-economist and author of The Art of Choosing, Sheena Iyengar, through her research at Columbia Business School, shows one common issue people often face while making choices: the choice overload. She stated that nowadays, this became a common disturbance on the decision-making process.

For that problem, Sheena Iyengar propose four potential solutions:

1.      Cut, getting rid of the extraneous alternatives;

2.      Concretize, making the choice more real;

3.      Categorize, with less choices and more categories;

4.      Increase gradually the complexity, to keep the chooser engaged.

Summarizing, and defining the four techniques/ methodologies in one word, I would say “simplify”. The simpler it is, with less alternatives, quantitative and qualitative speaking, the easier and more probable it is a potential chooser to choose, according to the research.

These techniques, in my perspective, can be applied in every choice to make, not only as a consumer or customer, but also in daily personal and professional choices.

Cut and My Personal Implications

Hoch (2001) mentions experiments suggest that if there is too much stimulation, decision makers may try to simplify their behavior and thus choose less variety, or exhibit less creativity and openness to new ideas

This week I was listening to a podcast with Brian Tracy, speaking about building confidence and time management, and he mentioned that lack of focus or distraction is the main barrier to achieve success. I personally believe that information technology heavily affects the choices I make towards my personal success, due to the several choices I can make with an electronic in my hand. Every communication channel in a mobile phone, tablet or computer, nowadays, offer hundreds to thousands of links to click.

For an instance, I choose to distract while having my coffee in the morning, watching videos online (informative comedy), looking at my personal email, replying to my close friends and family, playing an easy game (sudoku, solitaire) and so forth. While doing so, I often realized that I spent more time that I planned to do so, just distracting before starting my day. Knowing that, last year I canceled all my social media accounts. It helped me to get less distracted and decreasing my procrastination, however I am still in the process of avoid distraction and alternatives that will not help me on achieving my personal and professional goals. The next step I made was deleting all game, news and video apps from my mobile phone, and in case I want to access something specific I do so through the website.

I believe these are potential practical solutions to cut extraneous alternatives, however I also defend the idea that cutting alternatives involves the little and often neglected choices one makes daily, as checking a device first thing in the morning for example or choosing to occupy your mind while having breakfast.

Concretize and My Professional Implications

Making my choices more real would imply in focusing my attention and work in one thing at a time, and automatically improving the quality of the results. For example, when people ask me what I want to do with my master’s degree, or what is my professional goal, I reply that I have short, medium and long terms goals. My short goals are working as a leadership trainer in a commercial airline for employees in the front line, my medium term in participating in researches and assisting coaches to get more experience to achieve my long term goal, which is being a Leadership Coach for Leaders. Because I aim the top of the stairs, I struggle to feel my short-term goal real, and I do not spend time working on it.

I know it is a step to achieve the long-term plans, but because I do not see it concrete, I cannot feel it. A possible solution would be doing researches and making a structure plan to enable me to climb the first step, and gradually achieve goal by goal, which brings me to the fourth methodology shown by Sheena, when trying to avoid complexity.

My own potential solution

Stop procrastinating and looking for distraction, I believe is a powerful way to increase my ability to make decisions. Even knowing the benefits of the two current I have, I realized they regress my learning and development process.

References

Hoch, S., Gunther, R., Kunreuther, H. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. New York, NY: Wiley.

Iyvengar, S. (2011). How to make choosing easier. https://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_choosing_what_to_choose. Retrieved on January 19^t, 2019.

Tracy, B. https://play.google.com/music/m/D6mdy5xirse3nhcmgoabujegz2y?t=Brian_Tracy_on_Building_Confidence_-_SUCCESS_Talks