Thursday, May 31, 2012

Organizational Cultures- Are you in a toxic work environment?

Culture typically includes the totality of socially transmitted behaviors, beliefs, attitudes, human thoughts and creations. It affects every aspect of our lives -- the way we look at things, the way we act and react and how we express our feelings.
Culture also has a pervasive impact on business practices and organizational behaviors. Harrison and Huntington (2000) have provided compelling evidence that national cultures and values shape human progress and influence economic prosperity. For example, Asian values of personal relationships and family ties served East and Southeast Asia well for over three decades but hindered their economic development in the last few years.

In spite of the pervasive influence of national culture, within each nation exist different types of organizational cultures, because the personality and philosophy of the founder/leader may also shape the culture of each corporation. According to Reh (2002), "It is the leader's job to provide the vision for the group. A good executive must have a dream and the ability to get the company to support that dream. But it is not enough to merely have the dream. The leader must also provide the framework by which the people in that organization can help achieve the dream. This is called company culture" (p.1).

Generally,  organizational culture refers to the prevailing implicit values, attitudes and ways of doing things in a company. It often reflects the personality, philosophy and the ethnic-cultural background of the founder or the leader. Corporate culture dictates how the company is run and how people are promoted. Leaders and managers need to understand how different types of corporate cultures may either facilitate or inhibit organizational efforts to improve performance and increase productivity. They also need to have the necessary competency to foster corporate cultural change. Cameron and Quinn (1998) pointed out the importance of transforming organizational culture in order to adapt to changing times. They have developed an assessment instrument to identify four types of cultures, namely, market culture, advocacy culture, clan culture, and hierarchy culture.
Toxic organizational cultures
The following organizational  cultures are described as toxic because they are dysfunctioning in terms of relationships and adjustment to changing times. They undermine the social/spiritual capital, poison the work climate and contribute to organizational decline.

(1) Authoritarian-hierarchical culture - The big boss alone makes all the major decisions behind closed doors. Even when the decisions are harmful to the company, no one dares to challenge the boss. The standard mode of operand um is command and control, with no regard to the well being of employees or the future of the company. In this kind of culture, employees are to be controlled, manipulated and occasionally pacified like little children. Workers are motivated by fear rather than love for the company or passion for the work. They are expected to do what they are told without questioning. The main criterion for promotion is loyalty to the boss, rather than competence and commitment. As a result, star performers who dare to question some of the administration's decisions are sidelined or let go, while those who obey the boss blindly and who are willing be hatchet men get the nod for promotion.

Hierarchies are not necessarily bad in and of themselves. Some sort of hierarchy in terms of decision-making and responsibility is always inevitable. However, when hierarchies are used to control and abuse workers, problems inevitably occur. Hierarchies without accountability tend to have a corrupting influence on ambitious, autocratic leaders. When the boss is dysfunctional and has the power to impose his selfish, irrational decisions on others, the entire company suffers.

(2) Competing-conflictive culture - There is always some sort of power struggle going on. Leaders are plotting against each other and stabbing each other on the back. Different units and even different individuals within a unit are undercutting, backstabbing each other to gain some competitive advantage. There is a lack of trust and cooperation. People often hide important information from each other and even sabotage each other's efforts to ensure that only they will come up on top.

There is no regard for the larger picture and the overall goal of the company. It is everyman for himself. Both management and workers are obsessed with their own survival and self-interests. As a consequence, the organization is fragmented and there is a lot of waste of valuable resources because of duplications and sabotage. Such intense competition within the company creates a climate of divisiveness, conflict and mistrust. A house divided cannot long survive in a highly competitive globe economy.

(3) Laissez faire culture - There is a vacuum at the top, either because the leader is incompetent and ignorant, or because he is too preoccupied with his personal affairs to pay much attention to the company. Consequently, there is an absence of directions, standards and expectations. When there is an absence of effective leadership, each department, in fact, each individual does whatever they want. The leadership void will also tempt ambitious individuals to seize power to benefit themselves. Chaos and confusion are the order of the day. No one has a clear sense where the company is going. Often, employees receive conflicting directions and signals. Often, decisions are made in the morning only to be nullified in the afternoon. Given the lack of direction, oversight and accountability all across-the-board, productivity declines. In this kind of culture, the company either disintegrates or becomes an easy target for a hostile takeover.

(4) Dishonest-corrupt culture - In this culture, greed is good and money is God. There is little regard for ethics or the law. Such attitudes permeate the whole company from the top down to individual workers. Bribery, cheating, and fraudulent practices are widespread. Creative accounting and misleading profit reports are a matter of routine. Denial, rationalization and reputation management enable them carry on their unethical and often illegal activities until they are caught red-handed or exposed by correcting forces of the market. When management are blinded by greed and ambition, their judgment becomes distorted and their decisions become seriously flawed; as a result, they often cross the line without being aware of it. Enron serves as a good example.

(5) Rigid-traditional culture - There is a strong resistance to any kind of change. The leadership clings to out-dated methods and traditions, unwilling to adapt to the changes in the market place. They live in past glory and any change poses a threat to their deeply entrenched values and their sense of security. Workers are discouraged or even reprimanded for suggesting innovative ideas. Their accounting, marketing and delivery systems are no longer competitive with the fast-paced technology-driven market place. Their products and services have not responded to changing market demands. Their mantra is "We have always done things this way." As a result, the world passes them by and eventually they are left with an empty shell of the former self.

The above five types of toxic cultures are not mutually exclusive. For an example, an organization may be both authoritarian and traditional. Similarly, an  organization can be both authoritarian and corrupt. When a company suffers from a multiple of diseases, drastic operations are needed to save it from demise. Unfortunately, not many managers are competent in the diagnosis and treatment of toxic  organizational cultures.

Harrison, L. E., & Huntington, S. P. (Eds.) (2000). Culture matters:Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (1998). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Base on the competing values framework. Baltimore, MD: Addison-Wesley Publications. How values shape human progress. New York: Basic Books.


Reh, F. J. (2002). Lessons learned from Enron: Say "No" to "Yes-men".

Monday, May 7, 2012

Can ethical behavior really exist in business?


"I challenge anybody to show me an example of bias in Fox News Channel."
- Rupert Murdoch


The decision making and behavior of an organization is guided by set principles known as a code of ethics. A code of ethics is used as a guideline for members of an organization to insure ethical choices within an organization. Most credible employees insist on professional integrity and rely on a code of ethics for the organization’s principles and standards of practice. This paper will outline what a code of ethics of an American corporation is, the business practices of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, and what happens when corporations control multimedia news broadcasting as well as provide examples of questionable ethical decisions within the journalism profession.

Corporate Ethical Behavior and Code of Ethics
Ethical behavior is more than simply following the law of the land. In business ethics, a code of ethics formally defines what those ethics are. “Business ethics and the codes that formally define it always include elements that go beyond strict legality; they demand adherence to a higher standard” (USLegal.com). For instance, it is unethical to lie, but only illegal in some circumstances of the law.

Corporate social responsibility originated in the 1960’s because of increased public interest and criticism in consumerism and the effects on the environment. There was a rise in speculation and mistrust after the Enron and World.com corporate scandals. Legislation passed in 2002; The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), which requires corporations to publish their code of ethics to ensure those who trade in stock, must publish their code of ethics along with changes to those codes when updated. Small businesses are not required to publish their code of ethics because they do not have a public trade option. Corporate code of ethics was designed to win investor confidence as well.

A corporate ethic code applies to all members of an organization. Actions will be judged by the professionalism of those who engage in activities to the best of their knowledge. According to Murdoch’s News Corporation code of ethics, “Who must follow these Standards? All directors, officers and employees of News Corporation companies must act according to the principles set forth in these Standards. We also expect everyone working on our behalf, including consultants, agents, suppliers and business partners, to adhere to our ethical standards. We may never ask a third party to perform any act that would violate these Standards” (Newscorp.com).

The other issues that are covered in the News Corporation Code of Ethics:
Trust in the workplace- Equal Opportunity, non-discrimination, harassing, health and safety, accommodations for those with disabilities, drug free work-place, data privacy, crisis management, and on site security.
Trust in employees and a commitment to stockholders- Integrity and transparency of conduct. Areas covered are brides and kickbacks, self dealing, Truthful statements to the Company, misleading others, avoiding conflict of interest, gifts entertainment and hospitality, associations with other companies, improper benefit, safe guarding reputation and property, and safe guarding company information.

Trust in the Free Market and commitment to the public- Truthful and complete financial information, maintaining credibility, responsibility of senior executives, inside trading, and fair competition and Anti-trust.
The Integrity of the Law and commitment to the Global Community- Good citizenship, corporate social responsibilities, avoiding corruption and bribery, and engaging in political activities and lobbying.

News Corporation expects that every employee, at every level, to conduct him or herself with integrity. These Standards are in place to identify prospective integrity issues, and gives regulation on dealing with potential problems. The News Corporation has implanted a very detailed Code of Ethics for all employees. When the corporation is one that owns a large amount of the media in the western world, how can a code of ethics for a corporation combined with the code of ethics of journalism, still stay within the boundaries of both?

Journalism Code of Ethics

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition, "Ethics" is defined as "The rules or standards governing the conduct of the members of a profession." From the same dictionary, "Journalism" is defined as "The style of writing characteristic in newspapers and magazines, consisting of the direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation" ( Houghton Mifflin, 1982). When these two definitions are combined, the rules of conduct for journalists are to present the facts without favoritism and to abide by the Fair Use Act The "Freedom and Innovation Revitalizing United States Entrepreneurship Act of 2007" (Fair Use Act) was a proposed United States copyright law that would have amended Title 17 of the U.S. Code. including portions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). (Wikipedia). The bill was intended to establish and encourage innovative new technology and the improve library safeguarding efforts and to protect consumers in fair use rights. It also released companies from being responsible financially as well as liable for copy right infringement.

When a corporation’s main commitment is to their stockholders, many would argue it is very difficult to adhere to any code of ethics of a corporation and be an ethics multi-media journalist corporation at the same time. Journalism is very competitive. There is a need to be the first on the scene, report a story before a competitor, and have ground breaking news daily if not every hour. Unfortunately with those elements at play, accuracy and objectivity are not going to be priorities. News outlets often sacrifice ethics to be the first to break a story.  As in the case of Fox News reporting the 2008 presidential election, G.W. Bush had won the election before he actually had done so. Even though the information was inaccurate and there was no clear winner, some of the other news outlets followed suit and reported he had won even though they had projected Gore as the winner.  This is one of the first incidents that implicated Fox News had not followed the code of conduct used by journalists. They were biased in their reporting and many believe changed history forever.

When discussing what constitutes a good journalist it is important to understand what journalists do. The definition of a journalist is “a person engaged in journalism; especially a writer or editor for a news medium or a writer who aims at a mass medium” (Merriam-Webster.com). Today in a high tech world everyone is a reporter or news broadcaster. Not only are there multimedia corporations, reporters, broadcasters and radio personalities, but anyone with a smart phone can easily upload any incident to Youtube.com or other social media websites. The First Amendment in the Constitution gave all Americans the right to express free speech and how that right is used is the key to ethical decision when reporting newsworthy stories.

Business ethics and journalism combined with Corporatism doesn’t appear to exist in recent times. Journalists are often confronted with ethical decision making when presenting information. Major news outlets like Fox News often do not verify their sources as in the Bush election in 2008. Without verifying news events for accuracy and consistency ethics of journalism are violated. In the case of falsely announcing the 2008 Bush election, ultimately the consequences were merely a public apology from Fox Networks CEO.

Critics of Murdoch and his media empire including Fox News, claim the network is biased, leaning far right politically. Murdoch and the executives at Fox News adamantly deny charges of biased journalism, insisting the new room reporters provide neutral reporting and do not favor either side of the political spectrum.

One of the aspects of the Fair Use Act is unbiased reporting. If a reporter is presenting one side of an issue, then he must balance the story with the other perspective and to allow the public to make the decision on how they feel without persuasion from news commentators. According to the Fair Use Act, it would be unethical to get the scoop on a story just to keep a rival news outlet from getting it.

Another point of ethics in journalism is the principle of compassion for victims or subjects featured in news stories and articles. An example of unethical news reporting by Fox News from their critics happened during the Terri Schiavo case. Terri Schiavo was a young woman who had been kept alive by life support after a massive heart attack. Often consideration for family members is set aside to be the first to break the story. Another controversy with Fox News over violation of ethics came during the Terri Schiavo case. Several Fox News commentators, Sean Hannity, Brit Hume, Bill O’Reilly, Neil Cavuto, and John Gibson all expressed passionately for Miss Schiavo’s feeding tube be reinserted and life support to remain in place. Media Matters for America, a watchdog group criticized Fox commentators for siding with the family, referring to the incident as “Terri’s Fight” (S.S.M. 2005). Media Matters documented Fox News as well as other cable news outlets, showed support to keep Ms Schiavo hooked to a feeding machine and later to keep her on life support, When referring to an incident in this manner, it is clearly biased reporting, to draw sympathy from their viewers, especially before the court case was determined on whether or not Terri Schiavo would want to stay on life support and live an vegetative existence.

Those that defend Fox News say that the liberal media is running amuck, therefore Fox News lend its self to balancing the trend by how the news is presented. According to the network, they are filling a void with conservative programming and commentary. A former Fox News personality, Eric Burns, in an interview, explained this line of thought by suggesting that Fox News "probably gives voice to more conservatives than the other networks, but not at the expense of liberals" (Wikipedia).

A third example of unethical reporting came from Carl Cameron, a chief political correspondent of Fox News. According to Cameron, three falsified news articles were authored in 2004 that contained quotes that were unfairly attributed to John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate who lost the election to G.W. Bush, the Republican candidate. Fox news later admitted the quotes they attributed to Kerry were not true. They later retracted the story. A public apology to their readers and John Kerry claiming it was printed in jest and blamed fatigue and bad judgment as the causes (Foxnews.com).

Conclusion
In conclusion, good business ethics in corporation news reporting is vital. Honest news reporting relies on integrity and principles. The impact of false information or news that is not verified as fact is sometimes not only unethical but illegal. The News Corporation and its affiliates like Fox News bombard mass information through many types of communication mediums to millions of people all over the world.

Unbiased news portraying both sides of a story has become a thing of the past. Both conservative and liberal media has now shifted and the Fair Use Act is rarely considered in cable news network reporting. How news is reported can effect how we perceive national and international events. When news reporting could affect our national security, even more care should be taken to ensure the information is correct. Often times, media corporations order certain twists when explaining issues in certain countries, while neglecting severe problems in others that could affect those of us living in this country. Priorities are often made excluding vital stories, but then again, as small as the world has become, it’s impossible to keep up with everything that is happening in the world. The decision to cut or run a story is decided by corporate executives that are not going to report against their interests.

When a news corporation makes the decision to run a story, usually its politics, philosophy, or religion that drives peoples emotions. These same topics are also the topics behind unethical bias. Fox News has proven through countless documented incidents the stockholders and CEO have been accused of unethical business practices when reporting the news.

Rupert Murdoch has sat in front of English and American statesmen on more than one occasion, each time to plead he was either unaware of those beneath him or apologized for misrepresentation. Even after all of the hearings pertaining to his and News Corps unethical practices, News Corp still continues to report the news how they see fit.
References
Boatright, J. R. (2009). Ethics and the conduct of business. (6th ed.). Upper Saddler River, New Jersey: Prentiss Hall.

Details About Employees Featured in 'Outfoxed'. (2004, July 13). Foxnews.com. Retrieved May 6, 2012, from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125437,00.html

Fair Use Act. (n.d.). Wikipedia.org. Retrieved May 6, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAIR_USE_Act

Houghton Mifflin (1982). The American Heritage Dictionary: Second College Edition. (2nd ed.). Wilmington, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin.

Journalist. (n.d.). Merriam Webster Onine Dictionary. Retrieved May 6, 2012, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalist

M, S. S. (2005, March 26). John Gibson's and Fox News' description of Schiavo case: "Terri's Fight". Mediamatters.org. Retrieved May 6, 2012, from http://mediamatters.org/research/200503290002
Standards of Business Conduct. (n.d.).http://www.newscorp.com/PDF/StdBusinessConduct_2011.pdf. Retrieved May 4, 2012, from http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/code-of-ethics/