Reference no: EM131109003

I need a reply/response to these four discussion board answers. Just read the discussion board answers, and respond to the information you read. Just three to five lines response each. Write the response under each discussion board answers.

PART 1 JOSE

First, I will admit I am a participant if I were to group myself into any five of Kellerman's follower's. I don't always voice the side I'm on when it comes to change or what leader I am in support of, however I do care enough to invest my time into making changes I believe in happen. I definitely do more then a bystander but just am not vocal about my support for any one specific person or idea.

I have a coworker who is more of an activist. Very loud and vocal about the leader he supports. I find he is this way about a lot of things in life. The most recent Presidential campaign, he was very outspoken about who he supported and why he'd be voting for that specific person. I envy his admiration and ability to stand-up for what he believes in, but sometimes it's quite annoying. I find sometimes these people will shove their ideas and reasoning down your throat to get you to join their cause. Not always the best way to come off.

PART 2

A leader can change the way the organization is run. Their job is to ensure the changes they want to enforce upon the organization happen correctly with followers/employees who have the same goal in mind. A leader cannot reach their goal without followers, even if it is only one. Therefore, a leader cannot develop a future. Followers need to motivated for the cause and empowered to continue fighting for future goals the leader has in mind. Leaders who have formed relationships and gained trust of their employees, will likely find they have followers for the future endeavors the leaders have set their minds to. The future is for reaching goals set forth, motivation and empowerment comes from ensuring the employees are willing to follow the leader to that future.

"According to SamiaRafeedie, a professor of occupational science and therapy at the University of Southern California and an occupational therapist, an engaged employee is a motivated one, and the foremost way to motivate one's employees is to empower them" (Babich, 2013). A manager can be a leader or it can also be an employer, or simply not a manager of the specific group of employees who need motivation. From personal experience, it is easier to feel motivated by my direct manager leading a group, then from a "leader" who's job title I'm unaware of attempting to have a group of followers.

Structural empowerment comes when the company is able to move forward due to having a workforce empowered by employees. Employees will follow a leader they trust. Nothing will get done without a leader leading the group of employees to a goal the leader has dreamed.

PART 3

Telecommuting is the ability to work from home. Telecommuting can either encourage or discourage employees, depending on their work ethic. Some employees prefer to work from home, eliminating the stress of the commute and eliminating the distractions of the workplace can seriously encourage some employees to get more work done. However, for some they feel they don't get as much done if working from home. They need their office space to feel motivated.

A flat organizational structure is a structure which provides doesn't offer much organizational or management. Usually thought of as a horizontal structure because everyone is considered to be on the same playing field. The structure doesn't create much motivation among employees because they realize there isn't much of a chance to move up. Although eliminating a need for management is nice, employee morale is usually low. Communication can become difficult, as well.

PART 4 RACHEL

1 - Isolate - The picture shows a flow of activity and then something standing in the way of continuation. An isolate is described as knowing and doing nothing with the ability to drag down a group or organization (Kellerman, 2007). While they complete their individual assignments, they are not involved with the rest of the company and that can have a negative impact on the flow of work. They are disconnected, which is what this shows by breaking the chain of events.

2 - Bystander - The picture shows a group of individuals who clearly see what is going on, but do nothing. That is exactly how a bystander is described, perfectly aware of what is going on, but just choose not to take the time or trouble to get involved (Kellerman, 2007). Like the isolates, they also have the ability to bring the company down (Kellerman, 2007).

3 - Participant - This picture shows a larger cohesive group intersecting with a smaller, differing group. The participant cares enough to invest some of their resources to try to make an impact (Kellerman, 2007). They are driven by their own passions, so when they support a leader they are valuable, but when they disapprove they act independently (Kellerman, 2007). This shows that they are involved when they want to be, but that they also have no problem doing their own thing which is depicted by the different colored pieces in the smaller circle.

4 - Activist - This picture illustrates someone getting others on board with them. An activist is described as being an eager, energetic, and engaged follower (Kellerman, 2007). Their passion can have a significant impact on a group (Kellerman, 2007). The picture shows the one with their hand in the air, with the others following so they are obviously positively impacted and agreeing with what the individual is saying.

At my previous two jobs I can think of people at both that I would consider a diehard follower. I wouldn't say to the extent of which Hitler and Goebbels is described, but they were deeply devoted to their leader (Kellerman, 2007). If the leader or manager had a plan or idea that was not received well by truly anyone, that person would still stand by them and agree and support it. Participants are probably the common of the types of followers. I can think of many from previous jobs where they are going to participate or help out because it is something that they see value in. They don't act simply because they are following their manager, but also because they want to (Kellerman, 2007).

Leaders need to be able to decipher what types of followers each person is. They can ask opinions in which ways people would like to be involved. Meeting with employees regularly will help to get those more involved that may try to stay under the radar. Letting everyone know that their contribution and ideas are valued will help to encourage those that might typically be isolate or bystander.

PART 5

To develop the future of an organization, employees need to be aware and stay focused on the mission and vision for the company. Leaders are responsible for leading others in the right direction to accomplish these. Empowering and motivating employees definitely fit into this role and there is a difference between the two. Empowerment has to do with the employee feeling as though they are effective and influential (Sarkissian). A worker is then motivated because of this empowerment. When a leader asks employees for their opinions, they are motivated because they feel they are part of making the big decisions (Babich, 2013).

Giving employees inspiration and empowerment is important whether it is coming from a leader or manager. Disempowered individuals are more likely to have a lower quality of work and leave a job, while highly engaged employees are 87% less likely to leave (Babich, 2013). The effect of having uninspired workers can be huge, so it is crucial for both managers and leaders to figure out what works for each employee because they are all different.

Structural empowerment is focused on the structures in the organization instead of the individual (Structural Empowerment). The leader's power grows through empowering others (Structural Empowerment). This is important to the leader because they are developing more motivated employees that the organization benefits from with increased productivity, which should always be the goal of the leader.

PART 6

Telecommuting an encourage employee satisfaction. People seem to be working more and more and struggle keeping a balance between home and work life. The ability to telecommute a few days a week brings many advantages. There is improved employee productivity, there aren't the distractions one might face when at work, when they sit down to work at home they can stay focused on the task at hand because they have dedicated this time to work (Boyd). The flexibility is also an advantage, especially with children, trying to meet other people's schedule in the household can be difficult with a regular 9-5 job. Also, some people prefer working in the morning and some at night, the flexibility offers them the ability to accommodate their internal clocks (Boyd).

Flat organizations can also encourage employee satisfaction. Flat organizations help to empower employees to take charge and feel responsible for a company's success (Griffin). A flat structure allows for more open communication and relies on having qualified, competent employees (Griffin). Today there are much more knowledge workers than in the past. These people are seeking positions where they can use their own ideas. A flat organization is not beneficial for every company, as a company grows more structure is needed, otherwise lines can get blurred and then people aren't aware of what their exact job is anymore.

PART 7 JULIETTE

Dilemma: Company A can either use Grow 2 with the possible result that it will give Ozland's population cancer, or A can choose not use it with the possible result that the population will starve. The theory I would recommend using the theological theory to make a decision as to whether to manufacture and sell Grow 2 crops in Ozland. It describes an ethical perspective that contends the rightness or wrongness of actions is based solely on the goodness or badness of their consequences (Terms in and Type of Ethical Theory, n.d.). We know that each choice has it benefits but the one has very extreme consequences, using Grow 2 then exposing the citizens to cancer inducing crops.

PART 8

As an employee, I would want Company A to consider the 3 rules of management for making ethical decisions (Chmielewski, 2004). One, the rule of private gain, would the company be the only side gaining from using Grow 2? No, the employees, shareholders, Company A, and the government would be gaining the ability the grow more food, make more money, and have consistent work.

Two, if everyone does this who would be hurt (Chmielewski, 2004)? If all the agricultural companies and farmers in World were using Grow 2 then we would all be cancer ridden and eventually die, there's a reason why it is banned in the US. "While agriculture has traditionally been tied to pesticide-related illnesses, 19 of 30 commonly used lawn pesticides and 28 of 40 commonly used school pesticides are linked to cancer" (Pesticide-Induced Diseases: Cancer, n.d.).

Three, weighing the benefit versus the burden (Chmielewski, 2004). There is no ethically sound reason the expose people or animals to cancerous crops. Company A should also consider the backlash and the damage to their reputation if the public were to find out that they used dangerous pesticides even when they were forewarned.

All that being said, I would not recommend Company A use Grow 2. I think that they should research and find another way to partner with the government to help feed their citizens that will not harm them in the long run.

PART 9 Mika Id-Deen

1. Company A's ethical Dilemma;

Company A can manufacture and sell Grow 2 in Ozland and make a high profit with the possible result that increase the risk of cancer to employees and customers as well as potential danger to others that contact with Grow 2 such as animals.

2. According to our reading; Terms in and types of ethical theory, under teleological theory, Company A should manufacture and sell the Grow 2 in Ozland to make a high profit for the company. Teleological theory focuses on judgement on resulting external goal or purpose. This theory considers consequences that comes with the decision making; however, the consequences do not play big part of the decision making process. Therefore, under Teleological theory, assigning Grow 2 would be the best approach for company A because this decision will bring a high profit to the company.

PART 10

1. 3 moral value/ ethical issues that want company A to consider in decision making

honesty- honest about consequences and benefits of Grow 2
what kind of message Company A want to send to the world/society (Badaracco)
is it only Company gain a high profit how about stakeholders? anybody loses? (Chmielewski)

2. what decision would you recommend:

I would recommend to use Consequentialist theory. Consequentialist theory focuses on the action determine its moral value. Is manufacturing Grow 2 worth dealing with the consequences that comes with? What is Company A will do when employees and customers develop cancer? Is it worth making a high profit over risking somebody's life including animals and creatures. Will Ozland protect Company A when people develop cancer because of the Grow 2?

Considering all the consequences, I would recommend Company A not to manufacture and sell Grow 2 in Ozland. There are too many risks to consider worth the high profit. I think Grow 2 might be able to bring a high profit to the company A at the beginning but I do not think it will last long. And knowing that Grow 2 will increase the risk of cancer and danger to creatures and animals, sending the message to world that company A do not care about anything, anybody but their profit. Company A should think about in other person's shoes. (Badaracco) Also think about is this the best move? best decision? Is there any alternate way of making a high profit?

I need a reply/response to these four discussion board answers. Just read the discussion board answers, and respond to the information you read. Just three to five lines response each. Write the response under each discussion board answers.

PART 1 JOSE

First, I will admit I am a participant if I were to group myself into any five of Kellerman's follower's. I don't always voice the side I'm on when it comes to change or what leader I am in support of, however I do care enough to invest my time into making changes I believe in happen. I definitely do more then a bystander but just am not vocal about my support for any one specific person or idea.

I have a coworker who is more of an activist. Very loud and vocal about the leader he supports. I find he is this way about a lot of things in life. The most recent Presidential campaign, he was very outspoken about who he supported and why he'd be voting for that specific person. I envy his admiration and ability to stand-up for what he believes in, but sometimes it's quite annoying. I find sometimes these people will shove their ideas and reasoning down your throat to get you to join their cause. Not always the best way to come off.

PART 2

A leader can change the way the organization is run. Their job is to ensure the changes they want to enforce upon the organization happen correctly with followers/employees who have the same goal in mind. A leader cannot reach their goal without followers, even if it is only one. Therefore, a leader cannot develop a future. Followers need to motivated for the cause and empowered to continue fighting for future goals the leader has in mind. Leaders who have formed relationships and gained trust of their employees, will likely find they have followers for the future endeavors the leaders have set their minds to. The future is for reaching goals set forth, motivation and empowerment comes from ensuring the employees are willing to follow the leader to that future.

"According to SamiaRafeedie, a professor of occupational science and therapy at the University of Southern California and an occupational therapist, an engaged employee is a motivated one, and the foremost way to motivate one's employees is to empower them" (Babich, 2013). A manager can be a leader or it can also be an employer, or simply not a manager of the specific group of employees who need motivation. From personal experience, it is easier to feel motivated by my direct manager leading a group, then from a "leader" who's job title I'm unaware of attempting to have a group of followers.

Structural empowerment comes when the company is able to move forward due to having a workforce empowered by employees. Employees will follow a leader they trust. Nothing will get done without a leader leading the group of employees to a goal the leader has dreamed.

PART 3

Telecommuting is the ability to work from home. Telecommuting can either encourage or discourage employees, depending on their work ethic. Some employees prefer to work from home, eliminating the stress of the commute and eliminating the distractions of the workplace can seriously encourage some employees to get more work done. However, for some they feel they don't get as much done if working from home. They need their office space to feel motivated.

A flat organizational structure is a structure which provides doesn't offer much organizational or management. Usually thought of as a horizontal structure because everyone is considered to be on the same playing field. The structure doesn't create much motivation among employees because they realize there isn't much of a chance to move up. Although eliminating a need for management is nice, employee morale is usually low. Communication can become difficult, as well.

PART 4 RACHEL

1 - Isolate - The picture shows a flow of activity and then something standing in the way of continuation. An isolate is described as knowing and doing nothing with the ability to drag down a group or organization (Kellerman, 2007). While they complete their individual assignments, they are not involved with the rest of the company and that can have a negative impact on the flow of work. They are disconnected, which is what this shows by breaking the chain of events.

2 - Bystander - The picture shows a group of individuals who clearly see what is going on, but do nothing. That is exactly how a bystander is described, perfectly aware of what is going on, but just choose not to take the time or trouble to get involved (Kellerman, 2007). Like the isolates, they also have the ability to bring the company down (Kellerman, 2007).

3 - Participant - This picture shows a larger cohesive group intersecting with a smaller, differing group. The participant cares enough to invest some of their resources to try to make an impact (Kellerman, 2007). They are driven by their own passions, so when they support a leader they are valuable, but when they disapprove they act independently (Kellerman, 2007). This shows that they are involved when they want to be, but that they also have no problem doing their own thing which is depicted by the different colored pieces in the smaller circle.

4 - Activist - This picture illustrates someone getting others on board with them. An activist is described as being an eager, energetic, and engaged follower (Kellerman, 2007). Their passion can have a significant impact on a group (Kellerman, 2007). The picture shows the one with their hand in the air, with the others following so they are obviously positively impacted and agreeing with what the individual is saying.

At my previous two jobs I can think of people at both that I would consider a diehard follower. I wouldn't say to the extent of which Hitler and Goebbels is described, but they were deeply devoted to their leader (Kellerman, 2007). If the leader or manager had a plan or idea that was not received well by truly anyone, that person would still stand by them and agree and support it. Participants are probably the common of the types of followers. I can think of many from previous jobs where they are going to participate or help out because it is something that they see value in. They don't act simply because they are following their manager, but also because they want to (Kellerman, 2007).

Leaders need to be able to decipher what types of followers each person is. They can ask opinions in which ways people would like to be involved. Meeting with employees regularly will help to get those more involved that may try to stay under the radar. Letting everyone know that their contribution and ideas are valued will help to encourage those that might typically be isolate or bystander.

PART 5

To develop the future of an organization, employees need to be aware and stay focused on the mission and vision for the company. Leaders are responsible for leading others in the right direction to accomplish these. Empowering and motivating employees definitely fit into this role and there is a difference between the two. Empowerment has to do with the employee feeling as though they are effective and influential (Sarkissian). A worker is then motivated because of this empowerment. When a leader asks employees for their opinions, they are motivated because they feel they are part of making the big decisions (Babich, 2013).

Giving employees inspiration and empowerment is important whether it is coming from a leader or manager. Disempowered individuals are more likely to have a lower quality of work and leave a job, while highly engaged employees are 87% less likely to leave (Babich, 2013). The effect of having uninspired workers can be huge, so it is crucial for both managers and leaders to figure out what works for each employee because they are all different.

Structural empowerment is focused on the structures in the organization instead of the individual (Structural Empowerment). The leader's power grows through empowering others (Structural Empowerment). This is important to the leader because they are developing more motivated employees that the organization benefits from with increased productivity, which should always be the goal of the leader.

PART 6

Telecommuting an encourage employee satisfaction. People seem to be working more and more and struggle keeping a balance between home and work life. The ability to telecommute a few days a week brings many advantages. There is improved employee productivity, there aren't the distractions one might face when at work, when they sit down to work at home they can stay focused on the task at hand because they have dedicated this time to work (Boyd). The flexibility is also an advantage, especially with children, trying to meet other people's schedule in the household can be difficult with a regular 9-5 job. Also, some people prefer working in the morning and some at night, the flexibility offers them the ability to accommodate their internal clocks (Boyd).

Flat organizations can also encourage employee satisfaction. Flat organizations help to empower employees to take charge and feel responsible for a company's success (Griffin). A flat structure allows for more open communication and relies on having qualified, competent employees (Griffin). Today there are much more knowledge workers than in the past. These people are seeking positions where they can use their own ideas. A flat organization is not beneficial for every company, as a company grows more structure is needed, otherwise lines can get blurred and then people aren't aware of what their exact job is anymore.

PART 7 JULIETTE

Dilemma: Company A can either use Grow 2 with the possible result that it will give Ozland's population cancer, or A can choose not use it with the possible result that the population will starve. The theory I would recommend using the theological theory to make a decision as to whether to manufacture and sell Grow 2 crops in Ozland. It describes an ethical perspective that contends the rightness or wrongness of actions is based solely on the goodness or badness of their consequences (Terms in and Type of Ethical Theory, n.d.). We know that each choice has it benefits but the one has very extreme consequences, using Grow 2 then exposing the citizens to cancer inducing crops.

References:

Terms in and Type of Ethical Theory. (n.d.). Retrieved June 21, 2016, from https://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cp28/ethterm.htm

PART 8

As an employee, I would want Company A to consider the 3 rules of management for making ethical decisions (Chmielewski, 2004). One, the rule of private gain, would the company be the only side gaining from using Grow 2? No, the employees, shareholders, Company A, and the government would be gaining the ability the grow more food, make more money, and have consistent work.

Two, if everyone does this who would be hurt (Chmielewski, 2004)? If all the agricultural companies and farmers in World were using Grow 2 then we would all be cancer ridden and eventually die, there's a reason why it is banned in the US. "While agriculture has traditionally been tied to pesticide-related illnesses, 19 of 30 commonly used lawn pesticides and 28 of 40 commonly used school pesticides are linked to cancer" (Pesticide-Induced Diseases: Cancer, n.d.).

Three, weighing the benefit versus the burden (Chmielewski, 2004). There is no ethically sound reason the expose people or animals to cancerous crops. Company A should also consider the backlash and the damage to their reputation if the public were to find out that they used dangerous pesticides even when they were forewarned.

All that being said, I would not recommend Company A use Grow 2. I think that they should research and find another way to partner with the government to help feed their citizens that will not harm them in the long run.

PART 9 Mika Id-Deen

1. Company A's ethical Dilemma;

Company A can manufacture and sell Grow 2 in Ozland and make a high profit with the possible result that increase the risk of cancer to employees and customers as well as potential danger to others that contact with Grow 2 such as animals.

2. According to our reading; Terms in and types of ethical theory, under teleological theory, Company A should manufacture and sell the Grow 2 in Ozland to make a high profit for the company. Teleological theory focuses on judgement on resulting external goal or purpose. This theory considers consequences that comes with the decision making; however, the consequences do not play big part of the decision making process. Therefore, under Teleological theory, assigning Grow 2 would be the best approach for company A because this decision will bring a high profit to the company.

PART 10

1. 3 moral value/ ethical issues that want company A to consider in decision making honesty- honest about consequences and benefits of Grow 2 what kind of message Company A want to send to the world/society (Badaracco) is it only Company gain a high profit how about stakeholders? anybody loses? (Chmielewski)

2. what decision would you recommend:

I would recommend to use Consequentialist theory. Consequentialist theory focuses on the action determine its moral value. Is manufacturing Grow 2 worth dealing with the consequences that comes with? What is Company A will do when employees and customers develop cancer? Is it worth making a high profit over risking somebody's life including animals and creatures. Will Ozland protect Company A when people develop cancer because of the Grow 2?

Considering all the consequences, I would recommend Company A not to manufacture and sell Grow 2 in Ozland. There are too many risks to consider worth the high profit. I think Grow 2 might be able to bring a high profit to the company A at the beginning but I do not think it will last long. And knowing that Grow 2 will increase the risk of cancer and danger to creatures and animals, sending the message to world that company A do not care about anything, anybody but their profit. Company A should think about in other person's shoes. (Badaracco) Also think about is this the best move? best decision? Is there any alternate way of making a high profit?