write a essay
Lingyun017
21878.Wk3.Self.Perspective.Reflexivity.WPJ1.pptx21878 Organisational Dialogue
Week 3: The self, perspectives (to help “make sense of the world”) and reflexivity
Dr. Walter Jarvis
18 December, 2020
1
Agenda: Getting to “better conversations” – via questions about self, perspectives and reflexivity
Start with a simple question
Opens up some relevant but largely forgotten/ignored history and evidence
Update that history with a short clip (from an award winning performance)
How does the earlier question help us begin to understand this performance for “better” conversational beliefs?
Enabling new questions re understanding for better conversations:
Ideas of The Self (as Persons)
Perspectives/views
(Critical) Reflexivity (self/other awareness)
Collective Implications for “better” conversations
So, before we get started with the simple question let’s revisit the 6 beliefs for “better conversations” (from Jim Knight, 2015)
18 December, 2020
2
The Better Conversations Beliefs (Jim Knight, 2015) are aligned with public trust oriented values and principles in Managing, Leading & Stewardship (MLS)
I see conversation partners as MORAL equals
I want to hear what others have to say
I believe people should have a lot of autonomy (freedom of choice) I don’t (pre) judge others (prejudice, bias, habits of thought)
Conversation should be back and forth
Conversation should be Iife-giving – ie, actively supporting conditions conducive to flourishing lives/opposing conditions which undermine those prospects.
So, now to the simple question …
18 December, 2020
3
3
A simple question to illustrate what will be needed to get to “better” conversations: Is Business Good for Society?
The answer today is a widely (but not universally) held assumption that business is good for society … however,
This is a relatively new attitude that emerged in the 17th and 18th centuries
We will consider some historical & contemporary evidence
Which will help to pose different questions for “better” conversations
4
18 December, 2020
Asking that question opens three Domains of Analysis/perspectives (Riemer, Simon, & Romance 2014)
Values: The good life and ethical & moral principles
Facts: Scientific analysis (ie, “values free” objectivity – as in a laboratory)
Judgment: Wise choices
5
18 December, 2020
Ancient Philosophy: Socrates & Plato (Muller, 2003)
For Socrates (469-499) in Plato’s Republic the ideal form of government is aristocracy:
A just-government ruled by the philosopher (lover of wisdom) kings who emphasize virtue
Second best is timocracy:
Rule by the spirited warrior class, emphasizing honour.
Third best is oligarchy:
Rule by the wealthy merchants, emphasizing the accumulation of wealth.
BUT, Oligarchy is unstable as it widens the gap between the rich and the poor culminating in mass revolt by the underclass leading to democracy and eventually to tyranny.
The least best forms are democracy:
Or rule by the masses emphasizing freedom
And tyranny:
Emphasizing the ruler’s retention of power by any means
BTW ( & not in Plato’s “Republic”) ,
plutocracy is rule by the very rich. Can you think of contemporary examples?
Neoliberalism protects capitalism from democracy (read Quinn Slobodian, The Gloablists, Harvard University Press 2017) … interesting?
6
18 December, 2020
Ancient Philosophy: Aristotle (Muller, 2003)
Aristotle was also distrusting of the merchant.
The active pursuit of wealth through trade, was regarded as morally hazardous –
“the citizens should not live a vulgar… or a merchant’s way of life”, he wrote, “for this sort of way of life is ignoble and contrary to virtue”.
Athenian bankers, merchants and moneylenders were denied citizenship
7
18 December, 2020
Church Attitudes: Early
Suspicious and even hostile towards merchants and trade.
Jesus reportedly
drove out “all who sold and bought in the temple”
“overturned the tables of the moneychangers”
In his Sermon on the Mount he preached,
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also”, “You cannot serve God and mammon”
(Mathew 21:12-13, King James Version)
8
18 December, 2020
Church Attitudes: Late Middle Ages (Muller, 2003)
A more urban economy arose with the development of cities and new financial instruments.
Scholastic theologians headed by St. Thomas Aquinas reconsidered the Church position (appropriating pagan with Christian dogma) in Summa Theologica (written around 1265; published 1485):
Private property was held to be legitimate:
The basis for the family and social order
Economic activity was necessary for a family head:
To support their dependents appropriate to the standards of their estate.
Efforts to improve ones position within the social order beyond that naturally ordained:
Run counter to the virtues of humility and meekness
Are directly linked to the cardinal sins of lust and greed.
9
18 December, 2020
Usury (Muller 2010)
Charging interest for a loan
Particularly high interest
Different from investment where the financer shares the risk
Regarded as sinful by
Christianity in much of Medieval Europe
Islam in many parts of the world today as sinful
Jewish people can practice usury with non-Jews
In midlevel Europe Jewish people were relied upon for finance
But also lead to the condemnation of Jewish people as sinful usurers
10
18 December, 2020
European Enlightenment: 17-18th Centuries Following massive loss of lives over centuries through nationalistic and religious wars ”the governed” began to challenge the authority of Popes, the Church, Kings and Emperors Mandeville (1670-1733)
The Fable of the Bees, or Private Vices, Public Benefits
Initially describes development of a beehive from poverty to prosperity.
Instead of accepting and appreciating their new circumstances
The bees take a traditional moralistic position
They depreciate the pride, vanity and luxury as moral vices that have corrupted the community.
Elimination of these vices leads to a restoration of virtue
But it is accompanied by primitive conditions, simplicity and poverty
The bees then recognise that the ‘vices’ were crucial conditions of their former prosperity.
11
18 December, 2020
European Enlightenment: 17-18th Centuries Challenging authority of Church, Crown and State Mandeville (1670-1733)
12
“Thus Vice nurs’d Ingenuity,
Which joined with Time and Industry,
Had carry’d Life’s conveniences,
It’s real Pleasures, Comforts, Ease,
To such a Height, the very Poor
Liv’d better than the Rich before”
(Mandeville 1806, p. 6).
18 December, 2020
European Enlightenment: 17-18th Centuries Challenging authority of Church, Crown and State Adam Smith (1723-1790)
13
“…he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention… By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it” (Adam Smith 1776, p. 260).
18 December, 2020
But note: Smith was first a moral philosopher at Glasglow University – his Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) as foundational to Wealth of Nations (1776) where this “invisible hand” is mentioned only once in 1200 pages. Why then is the “invisible hand” is so entrenched in neoliberalism? Really? Ask again – why?
European Enlightenment: 17-18th Centuries Challenging authority of Church, Crown and State Marx (1818-1883)
Capitalism is inherently a system that exploits the masses of workers
Concentrates wealth in the hands of a few capitalists
Community or state (gov’t) must act to protect workers from exploitation and abuse.
14
18 December, 2020
Growth in Prosperity World Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita between 1500 and 1998
15
18 December, 2020
Growing Social Inequality: CEO:Worker Wage Gap (in Wall St. Journal)
16
18 December, 2020
2007/8 - : kboom! Global Financial Crisis (GFC)
but wait … there’s more …
Growing Inequality: 1% vs. 99% - before and since GFC (Oxfam International 2016)
17
18 December, 2020
What might this history look like (close up) in a contemporary organisation? Let’s take a famous/infamous example …
A clip from a famous (infamous?) performance
Won the Pulitzer Prize for drama 1984; most recently performed in the West End London, Nov 2017 – Feb 2018! (ie, it is considered contemporary commentary on organizational life in Anglo cultures).
Please watch, listen and prepare to discuss the “conversational beliefs” underpinning this scene.
There is frequent profane language – characteristic of many such environments. Scene lasts for 7 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4PE2hSqVnk
18 December, 2020
18
The Movie (1992) and the Play (2018 -) continue … why? Attitudes, values, beliefs …
18 December, 2020
19
How do the attitudes, values & beliefs underpinning this scene in Glengarry Glen Ross compare with those from “Better Conversational Beliefs” (Jim Knight, 2015)? Please consider and discuss.
I see conversation partners as MORAL equals
How does the view of ”success” influence the conversations in Glengarry, Glen Ross ? What words would you use to describe them?
I want to hear what others have to say
I believe people should have a lot of autonomy (freedom of choice)
I don’t (pre) judge others (prejudice, bias, habits of thought)
Conversation should be back and forth
Conversation should be Iife-giving – ie, actively supporting conditions conducive to flourishing lives/opposing conditions which undermine those prospects.
We’re now ready to open three new ideas for having “better” conversations …
18 December, 2020
20
20
IDEA #1: Ideas of The Self - not “individuals”, but instead seeing Persons/Personhood
Recognition of human dignity of person’s self – an unconditional, Categorical (moral) Imperative – Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
Human Dignity is the moral premise for the UN’s 1947 Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
Human dignity is the governing principle of many constitutions (eg Fed Republic of Germany, 1949) – Article 1.
Respect for dignity of each person’s self = recognition of what is uniquely human, a person’s capacity for autonomy, freedom to choose their direction in life and the means to realise that direction.
Dignity is therefore the absence of imposed arbitrary decisions, humiliation, intimidation, coercion, harassment.
It is treating persons as moral equals in relations (ie, irrespective of positional hierarchy).
via deeply personal experience in 21937 Managing, Leading and Stewardship
18 December, 2020
21
IDEA #2: Perspectives / views of “how we make sense of the world”
Ways we see/make sense of the world – depends on context and upbringing, culture
Reflected in beliefs, attitudes, values and habits, for example:
How we see ourselves – over time, through our lifetime.
How we see Others – do we see individuals as persons (previous slide), does that view change with collectives?
How we view human work, what constitutes “success”, organizational purpose, role of business in society, roles of management, democracy in workplaces? Remember the same questions from last week with the conveyor belt of chocolates in “I love Lucy”?
18 December, 2020
22
IDEA #3: (Critical) Reflexivity (self/other awareness)
Reflexivity is generally understood as self-awareness of bias and prejudice.
We are concerned with reflexivity in relations – ie, awareness of moral (relational) bias and prejudice not only within ourselves and toward others but as reflected in relationships and conversations.
Overcoming typical transactional/instrumental reasoning (ie, solely focused on “getting the job done”)
Ability to listen to and understand “moral logic” (in ourselves, in the conversations)
Fostering open engagements which welcome conversations about culture (what people think and see, how they feel, and how they act).
See Barge (2004) for more on strategies fostering reflexivity in conversations.
Online for week 3.
18 December, 2020
23
Implications for us in 21878 Org Dialogue
When viewed historically attitudes to moral issues regarding authority, organisations and human work have changed and continue to change considerably.
Tensions are often sourced from deeper awareness of cultural and moral norms - think about differences in attitudes, values and habits to human work, “success”, treatment of differences.
Because of these tensions and the public role of this university in this subject - and MLS - we view conversations as grounded in a set of humanistic beliefs – seeing self and others as persons, recognizing different perspectives and self-aware reflexivity as hallmarks for “better conversations”.
These are themes to be developed through the rest of the semester.
We trust you will be taking these themes seriously and personally – they will help shape your roles and your future standing within communities.
18 December, 2020
24
Thank you.
18 December, 2020
25
Component Main Focus Main Question Foundation
Ethical Values What ought to be? Philosophy
Empirical Phenomena What is? Science
Prudential Judgment What can be? Policy
Component Main Focus Main Question Foundation
Ethical Values What ought to be? Philosophy
Empirical Phenomena What is? Science
Prudential Judgment What can be? Policy
