Case Study

orangepink

Week10Organisationaljusticetheethicofgoodfaithandembeddingahealthandsafetyculture.ppt

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Case Study

Week 10

This week we:

Reflect on the ethic of Kaitiakitanga

Apply four constructs of organisational justice to Anytown Art Gallery’s experience of change

Identify relationship between good faith bargaining and the ethic of trust an honesty when negotiating

Examine the case study- Embedding a New Health and Safety Culture within an Indian National Gas Transmission company & The Pike River mining disaster

The Ethic of Kaitiakitanga

Kaitiakitanga means guardianship and protection of the environment, based on the wisdom of the Māori world view.
Spiller, Pio, Erakovic, & Henare (2011:226) define “Wisdom values; through an ethic of kaitiakitanga (stewardship) aroha Love, care, compassion; hau Promote, and maintain vitality hapai; Uplift others kotahitanga ;Create alliance; unity, connectedness manaaki; Respect, kindness matauranga; Knowledge, understanding, skill mohio; Realize, recognize pono; Honesty, truthfulness tawhito; Expert, authority tika; Just, right, correct, appropriate behavior whakapapa; Genealogy, honoring of ancestors, recognition of the human connectedness to all of creation whanaungatanga; Relationship”.

Ethics organisational justice and change

Te Reo Maori justice and change Stories form the front line Teaching in the 1970’s
Ethical dilemmas
Distributive Justice
Procedural Justice
Relational justice
Interpersonal justice
Informational justice
Interest based negotiation
Employment Relations Act 2000

What is an ethical dilemma ?

Uncomfortable decision making process where some options are going to cause loss

Conflict of moral choices in which obeying one would result in transgressing another.

A choice of options in decision making where one or more is to the detriment of self or others

Moral decision making where creating and claiming options creates paradox where neither options are positive for all parties

What were the ethical dilemmas faced by the 8yr old boy who took $5.00 from his father’s car to buy his three school friends some lollies but saw a homeless man outside the shop and decided to give the $5 to him rather than buy lollies for his friends?

What are the ethical dilemmas faced by a manager when bullying and harassment are confidentially reported to them in the workplace?

What are ethical dilemmas faced by a manager embedding health and safety in the workplace?

Bullying in the workplace

Workplace bullying is: repeated and unreasonable behaviour directed towards a worker or a group of workers that can lead to physical or psychological harm. – Repeated behaviour is persistent (occurs more th
Workplace bullying is not: one-off or occasional instances of forgetfulness, rudeness or tactlessness – setting high performance standards – constructive feedback and legitimate advice or peer review – a manager requiring reasonable verbal or written work instructions to be carried out – warning or disciplining workers in line with the business or undertaking’s code of conduct – a single incident of unreasonable behaviour – reasonable management actions delivered in a reasonable way – differences in opinion or personality clashes that do not escalate into bullying, harassment or violence.

See https://worksafe.govt.nz/topic-and-industry/bullying/bullying-at-work-advice-for-workers/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwhvf6BRCkARIsAGl1GGg-hciux7A6DZERoMEFlrd6aypBRBAc_MSoUYMG4ErOxlMxVb7RItcaAp6rEALw_wcB

Wk 1 -How sound are the underlying theories, methods and ideas on change, that managers and consultants adhere to?

Wk2 -Why is it necessary to consider complex contexts and cross-cultural dimensions in organisations during change?

Wk 3 -Why and how do employees’ experiences of participation influence their perceptions and response to change, the effectiveness of organisational change and the success of the change?

Wk 4 -How, do we make sense of change and how do we respond to organisational change across the dimensions of cognition, affect and behaviour?

Wk 5-Why is it important to include perspectives of those people (stakeholders) who might be affected by the decision in the process of planning design and implementation of change?

Wk 6-How can a third-party change agent draw on a range of processes to facilitate collaborative change and embed a collaborative culture? The heatnetwork case

Wk 7 To What Extent Is Culture Change Possible Through Coaching and Mentoring?

Wk 8 What are the leadership and negotiation factors contributing to organisational change success or failure?

Wk 9 How organisational change has been embedded into organisations through Interest Based Negotiation (IBN) Case study Air New Zealand

Wk 10 Ethics justice and change: Good faith bargaining, trust and honest communication, constructs of justice embedding a new health and safety culture

Imagine you are the head curator at Anytown Art Gallery ,

Rate the constructs as we ask the questions about:

Distributive Justice: Fairness of outcome

Procedural Justice: The experience of processes

Interpersonal: The way you were treated by the person with authority

Informational Justice: good faith communication

Adapted from: Colquitt, J. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386-400.

Why is fairness so important to people?

Instrumental reasons – It helps us obtain favourable outcomes. e.g. Bigger budget from the change, promotion
Relational reasons – It signals our importance to others and affects our status and identity. e.g. Being consulted made me feel valued, as did being given a promotion.
Moral reasons – We believe we have a right to be treated fairly, including when we are in organisational settings. e.g. I deserved the promotion (Folger & Skarlicki, 2008)

Organisational justice and change

When change takes place, how fair are perceived:

Outcomes – and for whom?

Procedures?

Information given – timeliness,

fullness, accuracy?

Ways in which it was communicated?d?

Tangible

Economic
Instrumental
Concrete/material
Extrinsic

Pay, benefits, cars, offices, etc

Intangible

Socio-emotional
Relational
Psychological
Intrinsic

Consultation, participation autonomy, empowerment, in-crowd, trust

Tyler & Lind, 1992, Soenen et al., 2017
Lester & Kickul, 2001

Distributive Justice

Procedural justice

Perceptions of fairness are enhanced when there is:

no favouritism
people participate
there is openness
explanations are given…

(Content is related to informational justice.

Style is related to interpersonal justice.)

Kaltiainen et al., 2017

Procedural justice rules
Leventhal, 1980

Consistent
Unbiased
Accurate information
Correctable
Representative of all groups
Ethical

Perceptions of fairness are enhanced when:

People are treated with politeness, dignity and respect.
Sufficient time is given to them.
They can ask questions - and get answers.
This occurs when people are treated with courtesy, dignity and respect. It is mostly done on a 1-1 level but can be seen is smaller and larger groups too.
When people are made redundant how sincerely and sensitively are the decisions communicated to staff?

Interpersonal Justice

Perceptions of fairness are enhanced when information is:

Full
Accurate
Timely

, “We were sort of kept in the dark like mushrooms.”

“I was told nothing. My work unit was told nothing.”

Bryant, 2006, p. 252

Informational Justice

Distributive Justice

The following items refer to the change outcome. To what extent:

Was the outcome fair for YOU?

Was the outcome fair for OTHERS?

Was management justified in making this change?

Score /15

Rate from 1= to a small extent, very unfair… 5 = to a great extent, very fair

Procedural Justice

The following items refer to the procedures used to arrive at your (outcome). To what extent:

Have you been able to express your views and feelings during those procedures?

Have you had influence over the outcomes of change arrived at by those procedures?

Have those procedures been applied consistently?

Have those procedures been free of bias?

Have those procedures been based on accurate information?

Have you been able to appeal the outcome of the change arrived at by those procedures?

Have those procedures upheld ethical and moral standards?

Rate from 1= to a small extent, very unfair… 5 = to a great extent, very fair score /35

Interpersonal Justice

Has he/she treated you in a polite manner?

Has he/she treated you with dignity?

Has he/she treated you with respect?

Has he/she refrained form improper remarks or comments?

Has he/she listened to your views?

Score /25

Rate from 1= to a small extent, very unfair… 5 = to a great extent, very fair

Informational Justice

The following items refer to the authority figure who enacted the change procedures. To what extent:

Has he/she been open and honest in his/her communication with you?

Has he/she explained the procedures thoroughly?

Were his/her explanations regarding the procedures reasonable?

Has he/she communicated details in a timely manner?

Has he/she seemed to tailor his/her communications to individuals’ specific needs?

Rate from 1= to a small extent, very unfair… 5 = to a great extent, very fair

Add your score & discuss

What was the score /100 for your view of the Head Curators experience ?
Which constructs were fair /unfair?
How could the process have been managed to ensure greater fairness?
What areas required the most attention?

Comparing IBN v competitive distributive Bargaining Process
(Fisher, Ury & Patton, 1999)

TRADITIONAL BARGAINING

Stated experience competitively

Identify Issues

Develop Positions

Develop Proposals

Meet to Negotiate

Argue and Justify

Demolish their Proposals

Compromise Power

Settle on Win/Lose

INTEREST BASED Negotiation Experience shared collaboratively
Identify Issues
Identify Interests
Develop Interest Statements
Meet to Discuss Interests
Identify Common Interests
Develop Options
Evaluate Options
Decide Based on SMART goals Agree or Settle on Mutual Gains
Agree to the best most satisfying option that meets the needs of stakeholders

Legislating to build mutual trust and confidence in the Employment Relationship

Good faith behaviour

Open communication

Fair processes for change

Early problem soling

Free fast fair mediation provided by the state MBIE

Supporting collective bargaining

An ongoing relationship is more than a contract of service

Employment Relations Act 2000 Objectives

(s3) object thus:

“(a) to build productive relationships through the promotion of mutual trust and confidence in all aspects of the employment environment and of the employment relationship –

(i) by recognising that employment relationships must be built on good faith behaviour; and

(ii) by acknowledging and addressing the inherent inequality of bargaining power in employment relations; and

(iii) By protecting the integrity of individual choice; and

(iv) By promoting mediation as the primary problem-solving mechanism; and

(v) By reducing the need for judicial intervention, and

(b) to promote observance in New Zealand of the principles underlying International Labour Organisation Convention 87 on Freedom of Association, and Convention 98 on the Right to Organise and Bargaining Collective.” (Section 3, ERA 2000).

Must not mislead

Good faith employment relations

(s4) Parties to employment relationship to deal with each

other in good faith

(1) The parties to an employment relationship specified in subsection (2)—

(a) must deal with each other in good faith; and

(b) without limiting paragraph (a), must not, whether directly or indirectly, do anything—

to mislead or deceive each other or(ii) that is likely to mislead or deceive each other.

Wide scope Part 1 s4

(1A) The duty of good faith in subsection (1)—

(a) is wider in scope than the implied mutual obligations of

trust and confidence; and

(b) requires the parties to an employment relationship to be

active and constructive in establishing and maintaining

a productive employment relationship in which the parties

are, among other things, responsive and communicative;

Transparency = Open communication Part1 Section 4 (1A)

(i) access to information, relevant to the continuation

of the employees’ employment, about the

decision; and

(ii) an opportunity to comment on the information to

their employer before the decision is made.

(1B) Subsection (1A)(c) does not require an employer to provide access to confidential information if there is good reason to maintain the confidentiality of the information (e.g protect employer commercial position)

Individual agreement s 65

Agreement must be in writing
Describe the work to be performed
Indication of where the employee is to perform work
An indication of times to work
Arrangements relating to times
Wages and salary payable to employee
Plain language explanation of the problem resolution services available including reference to the 90 day period within which a personal grievance must be raised.

Good Faith Duty applies

bargaining for a collective agreement or for a variation of a collective

agreement

any matter arising under or in relation to a collective agreement

while the agreement is in force

bargaining for an individual employment agreement or for a

variation of an individual employment agreement

any matter arising under or in relation to an individual employment

agreement while the agreement is in force

consultation (whether or not under a collective agreement) between

an employer and its employees, including any union representing

the employees, about the employees’ collective employment interests,

Including the effect on employees of changes to the employer’s

business

Contracting out & redundancy

d) a proposal by an employer that might impact on the

employer’s employees, including a proposal to contract

out work otherwise done by the employees or to sell or

transfer all or part of the employer’s business:

(e) making employees redundant:

(f) access to a workplace by a representative of a union:

(g) communications or contacts between a union and an

employer relating to any secret ballots held for the purposes

of bargaining for a collective agreement.

Penalty for certain breaches

4A Penalty for certain breaches of duty of good faith

A party to an employment relationship who fails to comply

with the duty of good faith in section 4(1) is liable to a penalty

under this Act if—

(a) the failure was deliberate, serious, and sustained; or

(b) the failure was intended to undermine—

(i) bargaining for an individual employment agreement

or a collective agreement; or

(ii) an individual employment agreement or a collective

agreement; or

(iii) an employment relationship.

Embedding health and safety culture national Gas transmission company

Five-year process
bureaucratic mindset
guidelines, and formats were confined to mere documents
new change invited resistance from leadership
lack of openness, trust, sharing, two-way communication, and participative leadership
Score the change against the justice and change constructs

Health and Safety – the Risk of Silence

silencing can be perpetuated by what Mathiesen (2004) calls absorption of attitudes and actions- dominant interests continue to be served
system placement of individuals and groups whereby people are –by their place in the organisation as well as wider stakeholder system – subdued into obeying in a bureaucratic system, the individual is exposed to layered pressure to conform over a long period of time
professionalisation of individuals and groups. Individuals and groups who otherwise might have represented dissenting attitudes and a potential for action are drawn into professional associations that are traditionally conservative and rarely take a critical stance
Legislation and masking- Politicians, lawyers as stakeholders play a significant disciplinary role in establishing and maintaining silencing

From:

A disaster waiting to happen: Silently silencing stakeholders at the Pike River Coal Mine in Journal of Industrial Relations (Lamm, Lips-Wiersma (2018))

Learnings from Pike river

The system as a whole complex system of business stakeholders government trade unions and professionals
It is difficult to attribute blame
The problem goes beyond the employer employee relationship
Questions need to be asked about who was silenced?
Diminished voices of the community were a problem
Demonstrates the multiple systems, levels and layering of interests of a range of groups and stakeholders who may be silent when there are health and safety risks- those layers require analysis and consultation to ascertain the Health and safety culture