While some moral imperatives may be universally significant, many principles are defined by the systemic culture. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) Systems that embrace moral ideals can increase the frequency of positive behaviors by establishing appropriate procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) To ensure appropriate organizational motivations, the legitimacy of the authority and culture should be continuously evaluated in the context of objective assessments. (Kilmann, Saxton, & Serpa, 1986) Effective policies are adopted when the ideology of an organization is founded on valid perceptions regarding the nature of the environment rather than illegitimate distortions of reality.
Although concepts like justice and fairness may be independent of organizational values, other principles are often established to maintain the continuity of systemic arrangements. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) The culture of an organization is a representation of the essential values embraced by the hierarchical authorities. (Zimbardo, 2007) Values are the abstract motivations that guide and justify the attitudes and behaviors of an individual. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) A positive organizational culture promotes behaviors that serve the purpose of the institution. (Kilmann et al., 1986)
Systems are power structures that implement procedures in order to promote the achievement of authority motivations. (Zimbardo, 2007) An institution establishes specific procedures to generate particular situations and behaviors that are consistent with the general objectives of the organizational culture. (Zimbardo, 2007) The definitive policies of an organization include behavioral prescriptions that describe the nature of appropriate relationships within the system. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) In almost all institutions, the moral judgment of individual behaviors is relative to these systemic priorities. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011)
An organization may ensure the universal application of essential principles by emphasizing the individuality of each person. (Zimbardo, 2007) By acknowledging the intrinsic value of all subjects, the institution inhibits dehumanization through labels and stereotypes. (Zimbardo, 2007) Additionally, recognizing each person’s unique identity may prevent many moral transgressions that are enabled by de-individuation. (Zimbardo, 2007) By encouraging personal accountability, systems may elicit behaviors that are consistent with moral standards. (Zimbardo, 2007) To prevent deviations from the expectations of the organization, no person should be allowed to diffuse or defer responsibility for their actions. (Zimbardo, 2007)
An organization may promote moral and ethical standards by prioritizing the validity of authority and policy over any other ideal. Systemic principles should be founded on authentic assessments in order to create appropriate procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) The legitimacy of the authority should be continuously measured by the degree to which the organizational priorities are consistent with objective evaluations. (Kilmann et al., 1986) A moral system should be open to continuous criticism to enable the identification of invalid motivations. (Zimbardo, 2007) By preventing the imposition of a single set of perceptions, an organization may avoid culture founded on subjective distortions of reality. (Zimbardo, 2007)
While the collective arrangement may be maintained by universal priorities of security and stability, the dominant culture defines many behavior expectations within the system. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) The culture is founded on an ideology that is created by the authorities to justify the operations of the institution. (Zimbardo, 2007) In order to maintain effective policies, an organizational culture must be able to adapt to shifting conditions. (Kilmann et al., 1986) The validity of institutional procedures is increased by continuous evaluations of progress in the context of objective measures. (Kilmann et al., 1986)
References
Kilmann, R. H., Saxton, M. J., & Serpa, R. (1986) Issues in understanding and changing culture. California Management Review. 28(2), 87-94.
Vauclair, C., & Fischer, R. (2011) Do cultural values predict individuals’ moral attitudes? A cross-cultural multilevel approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 645-657. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.794
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
Showing posts with label systems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label systems. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Friday, December 14, 2012
Evil of Omission
Virtue requires positive action in addition to the abstinence from evil deeds. (Zimbardo, 2007) Omission is a form of evil when it causes persistent unjustified harm. (Staub, 1999) Implicit support of a behavior is communicated by the failure to intervene. (Zimbardo, 2007) It is morally imperative that each person evaluate the motivations and consequences of the behaviors of others in addition to their own. If an individual causes or intends to cause suffering for another, any conscious person has an ethical responsibility to take action.
The social context of an event is established by the attitudes and actions of people. (Zimbardo, 2007) Evil always occurs within the context of a situation that, in many cases, may passively allow or actively encourage this type of behavior. (Formosa, 2007) Although supporting circumstances are not necessary for the performance of evil deeds, specific conditions increase the probability that certain behaviors will occur. (Formosa, 2007) Often, organizations develop cultures and institutions that are not intrinsically evil, but they may establish preconditions that increase the potential for abuses. (Staub, 1999) The assessment of systems is an important preventative measure for preventing situations that promote evil deeds. An ethical person must act in order to make some change to conditions that contribute to inhumane events.
Although the behavior of an individual may result in great suffering for other people, malevolence is rarely a person’s primary motivation. (Formosa, 2007) The self concept of most perpetrators of inhumanity and abuse is not defined by an intrinsic sense of evil. (Formosa, 2007) Rather, the perspective of many of these people is founded on perceptions that justify their actions. (Formosa, 2007) Most perpetrators present or perceive their actions as a means of achieving some beneficial result. (Staub, 1999)
A distorted belief system may promote harmful actions in service to presumption of intrinsic value. (Staub, 1999) By passively allowing the promotion of any ideology, a person completely submits to the values of the system. Blind acceptance and obedience enable active agents to promote any particular agenda. Ideological beliefs represent systemic principles that justify the means necessary to accomplish essential objectives. (Zimbardo, 2007) The moral action, in the context of a systemic culture, is to continuously question and challenge the foundation of prevalent perceptions. Although submission to some authority is an essential feature of all organizations, criticism and opposition are important checks that prevent the establishment of systemic policies and procedures that enable inhumane actions. (Staub, 1999)
References
Formosa, P. (2007). Understanding evil acts. Human Studies, 30(2), 57-77. doi: 10.1007/s10746-007-9052-y
Staub, E. (1999). The roots of evil: Social conditions, culture, personality, and basic human needs. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 179-192.
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
The social context of an event is established by the attitudes and actions of people. (Zimbardo, 2007) Evil always occurs within the context of a situation that, in many cases, may passively allow or actively encourage this type of behavior. (Formosa, 2007) Although supporting circumstances are not necessary for the performance of evil deeds, specific conditions increase the probability that certain behaviors will occur. (Formosa, 2007) Often, organizations develop cultures and institutions that are not intrinsically evil, but they may establish preconditions that increase the potential for abuses. (Staub, 1999) The assessment of systems is an important preventative measure for preventing situations that promote evil deeds. An ethical person must act in order to make some change to conditions that contribute to inhumane events.
Although the behavior of an individual may result in great suffering for other people, malevolence is rarely a person’s primary motivation. (Formosa, 2007) The self concept of most perpetrators of inhumanity and abuse is not defined by an intrinsic sense of evil. (Formosa, 2007) Rather, the perspective of many of these people is founded on perceptions that justify their actions. (Formosa, 2007) Most perpetrators present or perceive their actions as a means of achieving some beneficial result. (Staub, 1999)
A distorted belief system may promote harmful actions in service to presumption of intrinsic value. (Staub, 1999) By passively allowing the promotion of any ideology, a person completely submits to the values of the system. Blind acceptance and obedience enable active agents to promote any particular agenda. Ideological beliefs represent systemic principles that justify the means necessary to accomplish essential objectives. (Zimbardo, 2007) The moral action, in the context of a systemic culture, is to continuously question and challenge the foundation of prevalent perceptions. Although submission to some authority is an essential feature of all organizations, criticism and opposition are important checks that prevent the establishment of systemic policies and procedures that enable inhumane actions. (Staub, 1999)
References
Formosa, P. (2007). Understanding evil acts. Human Studies, 30(2), 57-77. doi: 10.1007/s10746-007-9052-y
Staub, E. (1999). The roots of evil: Social conditions, culture, personality, and basic human needs. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 179-192.
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
Friday, December 7, 2012
Relational Attributions
While the self concept of an individual may lead them to believe that their behavior would conform to personal principles regardless of the situation, the Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrates the control of context on behavioral responses. The state of affairs is often the result of a dynamic interaction between people and circumstances. (Zimbardo, 2007) Without direct experience in a set of conditions, it may be difficult to make accurate predictions regarding the actions of an individual person.
In order to interpret events, people create causal attributions that establish perceptions of significance and meaning. (Eberly, Holley, Johnson, & Mitchell, 2011) The perceptions regarding causal origins influence subsequent behaviors and cognitions. (Eberly et al., 2011) This explanation typically includes an internal or external locus of control. (Eberly et al., 2011) Dispositional attributions emphasize the significance of personal qualities in the cause of a behavior. (Zimbardo, 2007) In contrast, situational descriptions recognize the contribution of circumstance in the generation of individual actions. (Zimbardo, 2007)
However, the distinction between personal and circumstantial controls is not always clear when behaviors are embedded within an organizational structure. (Eberly et al., 2011) Systems of power translate an ideology into specific operating procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) Organizational authorities construct a hierarchy of dominance by establishing systemic conditions. (Zimbardo, 2007) In this context, relational attributions explain an event as resulting from the dynamics of interactions. (Eberly et al., 2011) The foundation of this type of causal origin is not reducible to either individual alone. (Eberly et al., 2011) Rather, the relationship between individuals determines the nature of results. (Eberly et al., 2011) An organization designs relational properties to produce specific patterns of behavior in order to construct and maintain systems of power.
Valid generalizations may predict behavioral responses when the conditions are sufficiently similar in different scenarios. Given the nearly unanimous conformity of all individuals to the various categories in the Stanford Prison Experiment, one may assume with some degree of certainty that most people would behave similarly when placed in this context. Although there may be a variety of expressions, the results of this analysis indicate that the majority of individuals internalize the normative expectations of their role within an organization. This internalization represents the assumption of a defined identity. (Zimbardo, 2007) The categories of prisoner, guard, administrator and researcher include specific behavior prescriptions that are imposed on people in order to maintain the functionality of an organization. While a person may intend on protesting against the features and dynamics of a system, the hierarchical power structure includes methods of normalization that promote conformity and compliance.
References
Eberly, M. B., Holley, E. C., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2011) Beyond internal and external: A dyadic theory of relational attributions. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 731-753. doi: 10.5465/amr.2009.0371
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
In order to interpret events, people create causal attributions that establish perceptions of significance and meaning. (Eberly, Holley, Johnson, & Mitchell, 2011) The perceptions regarding causal origins influence subsequent behaviors and cognitions. (Eberly et al., 2011) This explanation typically includes an internal or external locus of control. (Eberly et al., 2011) Dispositional attributions emphasize the significance of personal qualities in the cause of a behavior. (Zimbardo, 2007) In contrast, situational descriptions recognize the contribution of circumstance in the generation of individual actions. (Zimbardo, 2007)
However, the distinction between personal and circumstantial controls is not always clear when behaviors are embedded within an organizational structure. (Eberly et al., 2011) Systems of power translate an ideology into specific operating procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) Organizational authorities construct a hierarchy of dominance by establishing systemic conditions. (Zimbardo, 2007) In this context, relational attributions explain an event as resulting from the dynamics of interactions. (Eberly et al., 2011) The foundation of this type of causal origin is not reducible to either individual alone. (Eberly et al., 2011) Rather, the relationship between individuals determines the nature of results. (Eberly et al., 2011) An organization designs relational properties to produce specific patterns of behavior in order to construct and maintain systems of power.
Valid generalizations may predict behavioral responses when the conditions are sufficiently similar in different scenarios. Given the nearly unanimous conformity of all individuals to the various categories in the Stanford Prison Experiment, one may assume with some degree of certainty that most people would behave similarly when placed in this context. Although there may be a variety of expressions, the results of this analysis indicate that the majority of individuals internalize the normative expectations of their role within an organization. This internalization represents the assumption of a defined identity. (Zimbardo, 2007) The categories of prisoner, guard, administrator and researcher include specific behavior prescriptions that are imposed on people in order to maintain the functionality of an organization. While a person may intend on protesting against the features and dynamics of a system, the hierarchical power structure includes methods of normalization that promote conformity and compliance.
References
Eberly, M. B., Holley, E. C., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2011) Beyond internal and external: A dyadic theory of relational attributions. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 731-753. doi: 10.5465/amr.2009.0371
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Acquisition of Behavior Patterns
The behavior of an individual represents the interaction between dispositional characteristics and situational conditions. (Zimbardo, 2007) However, the response patterns that predispose an individual to certain actions are formed during a history of personal experiences. (Mitchell, Houwer, & Lovibond, 2009) This history represents the collection of situations to which a person has been exposed throughout their lifetime. Situational forces shape the perspective from which stimuli are interpreted and responses are generated. (Skirbekk, 2010) These conditions are often controlled by systems that establish methods and expectations in order to maintain continuity. (Zimbardo, 2007) The systemic principles are often acquired by individuals under the control of the power structure. (Zimbardo, 2007) The Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrates the rapid socialization that results from immersion within a situational context.
Associative learning involves the subjective pairing of previously unrelated stimuli. (Mitchell et al., 2009) Perceptual relationships connect various sensations with unconditioned stimuli that are often biologically relevant. (Mitchell et al., 2009) This association of events is the foundation for mental representations that enable meaningful interpretations of experience. (Mitchell et al., 2009) Through this conditioning process, the behavior patterns of an individual are developed. (Mitchell et al., 2009) The constructed perceptual perspective predisposes a person to certain responses when presented with specific stimuli.
Dispositional characteristics are the distinct behavior patterns exhibited by an individual. (Zimbardo, 2007) If the relationship between stimulus and response is a manifestation of a subjective perspective, then the composition of perceptual constructions is the essential foundation of this type of individuality. Since these phenomenological conceptions are formed in the relation between biologically significant features and the psychological experience of various situations, dispositional characteristics consist primarily in genetic values that control the development of physiological mechanisms. While this inherited identity contributes to the behavior patterns of a person, the majority of individual response differentiations result from a unique personal history of exposure to various environmental characters.
Situational elements interact with the existing properties of an individual to generate a specific action. (Zimbardo, 2007) The nature of a behavioral response is founded on the perceptual interpretation of the sensory experience. Present circumstances are interpreted from the perspective of previously constructed relational propositions. (Mitchell et al., 2009) These propositions are continuously developed in the context of new environmental information. (Mitchell et al., 2009) Through the control of subjective associations, situational forces shape the perceptions that control behavior patterns.
The situational conditions are often established by systems of power that translate an ideology into operating procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) A cultural ideology is continuous collection of perceptions that composes a normative concept of reality. (Skirbekk, 2010) These cultural concepts are the foundations of central convictions and conventions. (Skirbekk, 2010) The social expectations and polices are internalized by individuals who acquire the values of the organization. (Zimbardo, 2007) People are socialized to behave in a manner that is consistent with the systemic prescriptions. (Skirbekk, 2010) Though cultural learning learning, the conditions of the power structure become the foundation for the interpretive perspective of an individual. Zimbardo’s experiment illustrates to what extent this internalization can occur very quickly. Each participant rapidly acquired the characteristics that were consistent with the expectations of the operating system.
References
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
Mitchell, C. J., Houwer, J. D., & Lovibond, P. F. (2009). The propositional nature of human associative learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 183-246. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X09000855.
Skirbekk, S. N. (2010) Ideologies, myths, belief systems: Tools for analyzing cultures. Comparative Civilizations Review, 63, 7-18.
Associative learning involves the subjective pairing of previously unrelated stimuli. (Mitchell et al., 2009) Perceptual relationships connect various sensations with unconditioned stimuli that are often biologically relevant. (Mitchell et al., 2009) This association of events is the foundation for mental representations that enable meaningful interpretations of experience. (Mitchell et al., 2009) Through this conditioning process, the behavior patterns of an individual are developed. (Mitchell et al., 2009) The constructed perceptual perspective predisposes a person to certain responses when presented with specific stimuli.
Dispositional characteristics are the distinct behavior patterns exhibited by an individual. (Zimbardo, 2007) If the relationship between stimulus and response is a manifestation of a subjective perspective, then the composition of perceptual constructions is the essential foundation of this type of individuality. Since these phenomenological conceptions are formed in the relation between biologically significant features and the psychological experience of various situations, dispositional characteristics consist primarily in genetic values that control the development of physiological mechanisms. While this inherited identity contributes to the behavior patterns of a person, the majority of individual response differentiations result from a unique personal history of exposure to various environmental characters.
Situational elements interact with the existing properties of an individual to generate a specific action. (Zimbardo, 2007) The nature of a behavioral response is founded on the perceptual interpretation of the sensory experience. Present circumstances are interpreted from the perspective of previously constructed relational propositions. (Mitchell et al., 2009) These propositions are continuously developed in the context of new environmental information. (Mitchell et al., 2009) Through the control of subjective associations, situational forces shape the perceptions that control behavior patterns.
The situational conditions are often established by systems of power that translate an ideology into operating procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) A cultural ideology is continuous collection of perceptions that composes a normative concept of reality. (Skirbekk, 2010) These cultural concepts are the foundations of central convictions and conventions. (Skirbekk, 2010) The social expectations and polices are internalized by individuals who acquire the values of the organization. (Zimbardo, 2007) People are socialized to behave in a manner that is consistent with the systemic prescriptions. (Skirbekk, 2010) Though cultural learning learning, the conditions of the power structure become the foundation for the interpretive perspective of an individual. Zimbardo’s experiment illustrates to what extent this internalization can occur very quickly. Each participant rapidly acquired the characteristics that were consistent with the expectations of the operating system.
References
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
Mitchell, C. J., Houwer, J. D., & Lovibond, P. F. (2009). The propositional nature of human associative learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 183-246. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X09000855.
Skirbekk, S. N. (2010) Ideologies, myths, belief systems: Tools for analyzing cultures. Comparative Civilizations Review, 63, 7-18.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)