Banaji, M., Bazerman, M., & Chugh, D. (2003). How (un)ethical are you? Harvard Business
Review, 81(12), 56–64.
Decision making can have unintended, unethical consequences, particularly from four sources, prejudice, bias, conflict of interest, and overclaiming credit. To address these unethical consequences, individuals must move away from a belief in their own objectivity to intentional strategies to combat these concerns. Organizations and their managers can begin this work by collecting data from individuals to better understand the landscape; a specific example is to privately take the Implicit Association Test as individuals to understand what biases exist. Tuning into and changing the working environment to highlight successes of diverse employees (i.e. are employees of a certain category the ones who are regularly recognized) or create space that is more collaborative and less hierarchical. Broader decision making to move from a mental short list of candidates for a training or promotion to a full list of all those qualified, since intuition is often biased.
This article was a helpful reminder to take an active role in my own personal development surrounding bias as well as the agency I have in a work environment to shape an organization’s bias or preferences. While the strategies listed are good for us all to remember, they also left me feeling wanting; these suggestions are not enough. Yes, organizations and their managers should use data to inform decision making and adjust work environments for inclusion and comfortability, but they should also look at how their missions, in addition to their processes, contribute to or challenge any “ism” or supremacist culture. This is a tall order, but a necessary one.
LO4: apply communication-centered scholarship to strengthen communication effectiveness.
LO5: critically analyze messages.
Comments