Ethics:

What is Ethics?
Ethics is the branch of study dealing with what is the proper course of action for man. It answers the question, "What do I do?" It is the study of right and wrong in human endeavors. At a more fundamental level, it is the method by which we categorize our values and pursue them.

Why is Ethics important?

Ethics is a requirement for human life. It is our means of deciding a course of action. Without it, our actions would be random and aimless. There would be no way to work towards a goal because there would be no way to pick between a limitless number of goals. Even with an ethical standard, we may be unable to pursue our goals with the possibility of success. To the degree which a rational ethical standard is taken, we are able to correctly organize our goals and actions to accomplish our most important values. Any flaw in our ethics will reduce our ability to be successful in our endeavors.

What are the key elements of a proper Ethics?

A proper foundation of ethics requires a standard of value to which all goals and actions can be compared to. This standard is our own lives, and the happiness which makes them livable. This is our ultimate standard of value, the goal in which an ethical man must always aim. It is arrived at by an examination of man's nature, and recognizing his peculiar needs. A system of ethics must further consist of not only emergency situations, but the day to day choices we make constantly. It must include our relations to others, and recognize their importance not only to our physical survival, but to our well-being and happiness. It must recognize that our lives are an end in themselves, and that sacrifice is not only not necessary, but destructive.

What are applied ethics?

Applied ethics are the practice of ethics, in particular the philosophy of language that aims to guide the moral judgment governing the decisions we make in all areas of our lives. Applied ethics presupposes language because it depends on dialogue to attain this objective.

Applied ethics are an educational practice: It aims to accelerate the awareness process and to accompany the exercise of judgment, because moral judgment cannot be learned; it must be cultivated. Applied ethics are a political practice: It seeks to establish optimum conditions for exercising moral judgment. Applied ethics are a political practice because it is concerned with the common good. Applied ethics are a philosophical practice: It aims to develop systematic, creative criticism based on meditation on human excellence.

Naturally this threefold perspective on applied ethics implies the introduction of a detailed program to promote values and ethics in the public service. However, far from seeking a kind of emulation by mimicry, implementation of such a program assumes an honest dialogue. The report is clear on this question: honest dialogue is the basis of the democratization of structures and the ethical management of public funds. Basically, it is a matter of encountering the good by deploying a democratic conscience shared through dialogue. In the end, it is the development of conscience, of course, but also of the ability to judge that constitutes the primary task of the OPSVE. However, in considering this mission, we cannot assume that everyone, every public service employee, shares the same degree of understanding and ethical judgement. Thus our action must include a training component designed to strengthen public service employee' capacity for ethical judgment. The OPSVE believes that the only way to reach this objective is to use training to foster a dual awareness of each individual's personal values and of the values conveyed by the government and, more broadly, by democratic tradition.

What are values and ethics?

Values and ethics represent what most of us put into practice through our actions every day. They describe the way we strive to work with our fellow employees, our partners and our clients. They explain the spirit that enables us to do our jobs. Our values, what seems desirable to us, what is important to us, what we esteem and seek to achieve, are thus reflected in what we do every day. As individuals, our values have been formed by our culture in the broad sense; for example, the values we have from our family, our education or our cultural experiences. As public servants, our values are moulded by the traditions of our democratic government system. That is why it is important to understand that values and ethics provide a framework for decision-making and leadership. This understanding is even more important insofar as we believe, following the Tait Report, that a code of ethics and the accompanying rules are not the only components likely to promote values and ethics in the public service. The report A Strong Foundation stated this point as follows: An ethics regime, as we define it, is not a single initiative but rather a comprehensive series of initiatives, mutually supporting and complementing one another. This statement reflects the OPSVE's position, but it especially indicates the lines of thought to be followed in reflecting on values and ethics in the Canadian public service: no rule alone can encourage citizens or public service employees to develop the conciliatory spirit that will enable them to act responsibly, honestly and fairly. A code alone is not enough to promote values and ethical standards in the Canadian public service. There must be continuing dialogue, so that it will be possible to incorporate values and ethics into all decisions and all acts made in our workplace, the federal public service. Our main challenge is thus to combine the two approaches: the one based on values, and the other based on rules.

Teamwork:
What is Teamwork?
Teamwork is defined in Webster's New World Dictionary as "a joint action by a group of people, in which each person subordinates his or her individual interests and opinions to the unity and efficiency of the group." This does not mean that the individual is no longer important; however, it does mean that effective and efficient teamwork goes beyond individual accomplishments. The most effective teamwork is produced when all the individuals involved harmonize their contributions and work towards a common goal.

Characteristics of Effective Teams.

The following are eight characteristics of effective teams the were identified by Larson and LaFasto in their book titled Teamwork: What Must Go Right/What Can Go Wrong (Sage Publications 1989). 1.
The team must have a clear goal.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Avoid fuzzy, motherhood statements. Team goals should call for a specific performance objective, expressed so concisely that everyone knows when the objective has been met. The team must have a results-driven structure. The team should be allowed to operate in a manner that produces results. It is often best to allow the team to develop the structure. The team must have competent team members. In the education setting this can be take to mean that the problem given to the team should be one that the members can tackle given their level of knowledge. The team must have unified commitment. This doesn't mean that team members must agree on everything. It means that all individuals must be directing their efforts towards the goal. If an individual's efforts is going purely towards personal goals, then the team will confront this and resolve the problem. The team must have a collaborative climate. It is a climate of trust produced by honest, open, consistent and respectful behavior. With this climate teams perform well...without it, they fail. The team must have high standards that are understood by all. Team members must know what is expected of them individually and collectively. Vague statements such as "positive attitude" and "demonstrated effort" are not good enough. The team must receive external support and encouragement. Encouragement and praise works just as well in motivating teams as it does with individuals. The team must have principled leadership. Teams usually need someone to lead the effort. Team members must know that the team leader has the position because they have good leadership skills and are working for the good of the team. The team members will be less supportive if they feel that the team leader is putting him/herself above the team, achieving personal recognition or otherwise benefiting from the position."

Importance of Teamwork at Work :

Delegation:

A team that works well together understands the strengths and weaknesses of each team member. One of the benefits of strong teamwork in the workplace is that team leaders and members become proficient at dividing up tasks so they are done by the most qualified people. Without strong teamwork, it can be difficult for managers and executives to determine which staff members can best accomplish job tasks.
Efficiency:

Work groups and teams develop systems that allow them to complete tasks efficiently and quickly. When a task is handed to a well-trained and efficient team, the team's work pace assures that the task will be completed quickly and accurately. This allows the company to take on more work and generate more revenue without having to add more staff. This becomes helpful when efficient teams from different departments work together. Each team is well aware of its own abilities and the groups can work together effectively as opposed to disjointed groups of employees who may not be familiar with how to work together.
Ideas:

Teams in the workplace often meet to discuss how to solve company issues. When a team works well together, it allows staff members to feel more comfortable in offering suggestions. Team members become accustomed to processing brainstorming information, and the company benefits from the variety of suggestions that come from effective teams.
Support:

There are challenges each day in any workplace, and a strong team environment can act as a support mechanism for staff members. Work group members can help each other improve their performance and work together toward improving their professional development. Team members also come to rely on each other and trust each other. These bonds can be important when the team faces a particularly difficult challenge or if the group is forced to deal with the loss of a team member while still trying to maintain productivity.

What Makes a Successful Team :

Building a productive team begins with three key elements: communication, cooperation, and resource allocation. To be successful, a first element of an effective team is good communication. By communicating well, a group of distinct individuals can function like spokes in a wheel. That means everyone knows what their responsibilities are and what the teams goals are. Problems within the team that develop can be resolved amongst all subordinates associated with them. Hence, good communication is a necessary tool to ensure success. Cooperation is a second essential factor to building a successful team. If there is friction between team members, productivity can be seriously impaired. Hence, it is not favorable to have each worker to perform work just for the sake of his or her personal interests. Team

members who compete with one-another at a level beyond friendly competition can adversely affect the teams functionality. The total production of a proficient team is greater than the sum of all its parts. This is why team cooperation is extremely important.

Allocation of resources plays as a third vital element in creating a team that is productive. Apparently, a successful team begins with proficient team members. Such individuals must be assigned duties where their strengths can work to provide optimal output. At the same time, team members can do a variety of task as a means of improving their weaknesses. This involves testing each member and assessing their strengths and weaknesses and assigning them roles accordingly. In addition to these three elements, any prosperous team has the following: 1. A clearly defined purpose There is a reason why this team was created. Its purpose serves as its mission and consists of the teams identity, its main goals, and what it wants to achieve in addition to their goals. 2. Behavioral norms Each person must know certain things expected of him or her as rules of behavior, methods of making decisions, team support and interaction between members, and meeting ground rules. Trust is also necessary as all members must have faith in each other to do as they say they will, maintain confidences, give support where needed, and remain consistent in their behavior.

3. Success indicators Any team must know what types of outcome it wants to generate, signs that indicate it is successful, how it evaluates its progress, and its reward system for meeting its goals. 4. Roles and responsibilities Teams can make decisions effectively by establishing typical roles, whos in charge of the decision-making process, who manages what type of decisions, and knowing their level of authority of decision making. Although there are differences in roles, levels of experience, and perspectives, the team functions as a

partnership. All contributions made are respected and true consensus is attained when appropriate.
5.

Rules of Operation Knowing how meetings will be conducted by the team is determined by factors as: how often meetings are held, how long will they run, who facilitates them, what kind of agendas are desired, how the agendas will be created, types of meeting notes, to whom and when the notes are distributed, how the members communicate once the meeting is over, and all other details about managing meetings.

In addition to operating efficiently, the team endlessly works to improve their efforts. They comprehend the importance of ongoing improvements and how this helps support the overall objectives of the organization. By continuous augmentation, the team can drive their performance to higher levels. Finally, process orientation is essential to a teams success. This means having proficient planning techniques, problem-solving tools, agendas, periodic meetings, as well as ways to improve their own methods of organization and efficient production.

Motivation:
Definition:
Motivation is defined as the process that initiates, guides and maintains goal-oriented behaviors. Motivation is what causes us to act, whether it is getting a glass of water to reduce thirst or reading a book to gain knowledge. It involves the biological, emotional, social and cognitive forces that activate behavior. In everyday usage, the term motivation is frequently used to describe why a person does something. For example, you might say that a student is so motivated to get into aclinical psychologyprogram that she spends every night studying. Psychologists have proposed a number of differenttheories of motivation, including drive theory, instinct theory and humanistic theory.

Components of Motivation
There are three major components to motivation: activation, persistence and intensity. Activation involves the decision to initiate a behavior, such as enrolling in a psychology class. Persistence is the continued effort toward a goal even though obstacles may exist, such as taking more psychology courses in order to earn a degree although it requires a significant investment of time, energy and resources. Finally, intensity can be seen in the concentration and vigor that goes into pursuing a goal. For example, one student might coast by without much effort, while another student will study regularly, participate in discussions and take advantage of research opportunities outside of class.

Extrinsic Vs. Intrinsic Motivation

Different types of motivation are frequently described as being either extrinsic or intrinsic.Extrinsic motivations are those that arise from outside of the individual and often involve rewards such as trophies, money, social recognition or praise. Intrinsic motivations are those that arise from within the individual, such as doing a complicated crossword puzzle purely for the personal gratification of solving a problem.

Classifying Needs
People seem to have different wants. This is fortunate, because in markets this creates the very desirable situation where, because you value stuff that I have but you don't, and I value stuff that you have that I don't, we can trade in such a way that we are both happier as a result. But it also means we need to try to get a handle on the whole variety of needs and who has them in order to begin to understand how to design organizations that maximize productivity. Part of what a theory of motivation tries to do is explain and predict who has which wants. This turns out to be exceedingly difficult.

Many theories posit a hierarchy of needs, in which the needs at the bottom are the most urgent and need to be satisfied before attention can be paid to the others.

Maslow
Maslow's hierarchy of need categories is the most famous example: self-actualization esteem belongingness safety physiological Specific examples of these types are given below, in both the work and home context. (Some of the instances, like "education" are actually satisfiers of the need.)
Need Home Job

selfeducation, religion, hobbies, actualizatio personal growth n esteem belongingness safety physiological

training, advancement, growth, creativity recognition, high status, responsibilities teams, depts, coworkers, clients, supervisors, subordinates work safety, job security, health insurance Heat, air, base salary

approval of family, friends, community family, friends, clubs freedom from war, poison, violence food water sex

According to Maslow, lower needs take priority. They must be fulfilled before the others are activated. There is some basic common sense here -- it's pointless to worry about whether a given color looks good on you when you are dying of starvation, or being threatened with your life. There are some basic things that take precedence over all else. Or at least logically should, if people were rational. But is that a safe assumption? According to the theory, if you are hungry and have inadequate shelter, you won't go to church. Can't do the higher things until you have the lower things. But the poor tend to be more religious than the rich. Both within a given culture, and across nations. So the theory makes the wrong prediction here. Or take education: how often do you hear "I can't go to class today, I haven't had sex in three days!"? Do all physiological needs including sex have to be satisfied before "higher" needs? (Besides, wouldn't the authors of the Kama Sutra argue that sex was a kind of self-expression

more like art than a physiological need? that would put it in the self-actualization box). Again, the theory doesn't seem to predict correctly. Cultural critique: Does Maslow's classification really reflect the order in which needs are satisfied, or is it more about classifying needs from a kind of "tastefulness" perspective, with lofty goals like personal growth and creativity at the top, and "base" instincts like sex and hunger at the bottom? And is self-actualization actually a fundamental need? Or just something that can be done if you have the leisure time?

Alderfer's ERG theory

Alderfer classifies needs into three categories, also ordered hierarchically:

growth needs (development of competence and realization of potential) relatedness needs (satisfactory relations with others) existence needs (physical well-being)

This is very similar to Maslow -- can be seen as just collapsing into three tiers. But maybe a bit more rational. For example, in Alderfer's model, sex does not need to be in the bottom category as it is in Maslow's model, since it is not crucial to (the individual's) existence. (Remember, this about individual motivation, not species' survival.) So by moving sex, this theory does not predict that people have to have sex before they can think about going to school, like Maslow's theory does. Alderfer believed that as you start satisfying higher needs, they become more intense (e.g., the power you get the more you want power), like an addiction. Do any of these theories have anything useful to say for managing businesses? Well, if true, they suggest that

Not everyone is motivated by the same things. It depends where you are in the hierarchy (think of it as a kind of personal development scale) The needs hierarchy probably mirrors the organizational hierarchy to a certain extent: top managers are more likely to motivated by self-actualization/growth needs than existence needs. (but try telling Bill Clinton that top executives are not motivated by sex and cheeseburgers...)

Acquired Needs Theory (mcclellan)

Some needs are acquired as a result of life experiences

need for achievement, accomplish something difficult. as kids encouraged to do things for themselves. need for affiliation, form close personal relationships. as kids rewarded for making friends. need for power, control others. as kids, able to get what they want through controlling others.

Again similar to maslow and alderfer.

These needs can be measured using the TAT (thematic apperception test), which is a projection-style test based on interpreting stories that people tell about a set of pictures.

Cognitive Evaluation Theory

This theory suggests that there are actually two motivation systems: intrinsic and extrinsic that correspond to two kinds of motivators:

intrinsic motivators: Achievement, responsibility and competence. motivators that come from the actual performance of the task or job -- the intrinsic interest of the work. extrinsic: pay, promotion, feedback, working conditions -- things that come from a person's environment, controlled by others.

One or the other of these may be a more powerful motivator for a given individual. Intrinsically motivated individuals perform for their own achievement and satisfaction. If they come to believe that they are doing some job because of the pay or the working conditions or some other extrinsic reason, they begin to lose motivation. The belief is that the presence of powerful extrinsic motivators can actually reduce a person's intrinsic motivation, particularly if the extrinsic motivators are perceived by the person to be controlled by people. In other words, a boss who is always dangling this reward or that stick will turn off the intrinsically motivated people. Note that the intrinsic motivators tend to be higher on the Maslow hierarchy.

Two Factor theory (Herzberg)

According to Herzberg, two kinds of factors affect motivation, and they do it in different ways:

hygiene factors. These are factors whose absence motivates, but whose presence
has no perceived effect. They are things that when you take them away, people become dissatisfied and act to get them back. A very good example is heroin to a heroin addict. Long term addicts do not shoot up to get high; they shoot up to stop being sick -- to get normal. Other examples include decent working conditions, security, pay, benefits (like health insurance), company policies, interpersonal relationships. In general, these are extrinsic items low in the Maslow/Alderfer hierarchy. motivators. These are factors whose presence motivates. Their absence does not cause any particular dissatisfaction, it just fails to motivate. Examples are all the things at the top of the Maslow hierarchy, and the intrinsic motivators.

So hygiene factors determine dissatisfaction, and motivators determine satisfaction. The two scales are independent, and you can be high on both. If you think back to the class discussion on power, we talked about a baseline point on the well-being scale. Power involved a threat to reduce your well-being, causing

dissatisfaction. Hence, power basically works by threatening to withhold hygiene factors. Influence was said to fundamentally be about promising improvements in well-being -- when you are influenced to do something, it is because you want to, not because you were threatened. Influence basically works by offering to provide motivators (in Herzberg's terms).

Equity Theory
Suppose employee A gets a 20% raise and employee B gets a 10% raise. Will both be motivated as a result? Will A be twice as motivated? Will be B be negatively motivated? Equity theory says that it is not the actual reward that motivates, but the perception, and the perception is based not on the reward in isolation, but in comparison with the efforts that went into getting it, and the rewards and efforts of others. If everyone got a 5% raise, B is likely to feel quite pleased with her raise, even if she worked harder than everyone else. But if A got an even higher raise, B perceives that she worked just as hard as A, she will be unhappy. In other words, people's motivation results from a ratio of ratios: a person compares the ratio of reward to effort with the comparable ratio of reward to effort that they think others are getting. Of course, in terms of actually predicting how a person will react to a given motivator, this will get pretty complicated: 1. People do not have complete information about how others are rewarded. So they are going on perceptions, rumors, inferences. 2. Some people are more sensitive to equity issues than others 3. Some people are willing to ignore short-term inequities as long as they expect things to work out in the long-term.

Perception: