Grappling with the Gray

Grappling with the Gray #141: Educational vs. personal integrity?

Mon, 06 Apr 2026 04:00:00 -0500

Will the common good prove the death of common sense?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Mark Brown, CSP, Deb Coviello, and • Kirsten Yurich join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic.

Last year, world civilization teacher Sarah Inama at Idaho’s Lewis and Clark Middle School resigned rather than comply with orders to remove from her classroom a poster deemed inappropriate by administrators, who said the poster violated the school’s “content neutral” policy, which prohibits any speech or messaging that might reflect personal opinions, religious beliefs, or political ideologies.

The sign read, “Everyone Is Welcome Here,” and it showed hands of different colors. That was it. The district’s chief academic officer Marcus Myers clarified that, “The political environment ebbs and flows, and what might be controversial now might not have been controversial three, six, nine months ago.”

Ms. Inama received an outpouring of support from the community, but it wasn’t enough to change the district’s mind. In her resignation letter, she wrote:

“I cannot align myself nor be complicit with the exclusionary views and decisions of the administration. It is deeply troubling that the people running this district and school have allowed a welcoming and inclusive message for my students to be considered controversial, political, and, worst of all, an opinion.

“I hope for the sake of the students in your district that you can remember the core values of public education. To serve all citizens, foster an inclusive and safe learning environment, and protect your staff and students from discriminatory behavior.”

Does the school administration have a point? If so, what is it? And is it better for a teacher like Sarah Inama to make a statement by publicly resigning or to remain in her job to serve her students while trying to change the system from within?

Meet this week’s panel:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Mark Brown is a world champion international speaker, executive coach and, most important, devoted husband of Andrea.

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #140: Deconstructing the big picture?

Mon, 30 Mar 2026 04:00:00 -0500

Should "what do I deserve" ever take a back seat to "what can I give"?

That's the question that drives the discussion when Lori Halverson, Allen Hauge, and Jeff Koziatek join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is the topic we’ll be discussing:

An employee posted the following on Reddit:

I lost a schedule bid at work recently to an employee with far less seniority. The reason given to me was, “He is a single father, and that schedule works better with his son’s school schedule.”

Not to be insensitive, but so what? My time is not less valuable because I have no kids. I get the logic, but I could not give a care about his schedule or his problems. I have done my time, and I earned that bid, plain and simple.

I have filed a grievance with HR. The crux of it is that I was discriminated against for not having kids, in an attempt to get the schedule I bid on. A few coworkers have mentioned off the cuff that I should let it go because he’s a single father. They’ve said I “don’t get it because I don’t have any kids.”

Responses on Reddit were mixed. On the one hand, seniority should carry privilege. On the other hand, shouldn’t actual needs trump personal preferences?

What’s the ethical approach to this kind of dilemma, and what can leaders do to navigate these kinds of conflicts?

Meet this week’s panel:

Lori Halverson is an executive coach, speaker, and Vistage chair, helping CEOs and top executives look forward to Mondays and flourish through positive intelligence.

Allen Hauge is a master chair with Vistage International, Inc. He works with CEOs to devise strategies for success in business and in life.

Jeff Koziatek is an executive coach and keynote speaker, helping professionals to navigate change, sharpen focus, avoid burnout, and make a difference. He is also one of St. Louis Business Monthly's 100 St. Louisans you should know.

Grappling with the Gray #139: Pilot vs. Passenger?

Wed, 04 Mar 2026 04:00:00 -0600

Can we use "the greater good" as an excuse to exempt ourselves from personal responsibility?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Sam Ardery, Shannon Lee, and David Marlow join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

An Alaska Airlines customer reported buying a first class ticket from Costa Rica to Seattle, an 8-hour international flight. Upon arriving at the gate, they were informed that they were being bumped down to economy class to make way for two pilots who were traveling to make a connecting flight.

After the customer had paid for first class, the airline not only took away the seat but also the passenger’s breakfast, then failed to offer even a drink or a special snack. The anticipated luxury flight turned into a cramped, hungry ordeal.

Apparently, a pilot shortage has compelled airlines to offer pilots the perk of first class travel when they “deadhead” to make connecting flights. But does that justify refusing passengers the seats they’ve paid for to solve their own logistics and personnel problems? And if it does, do the airlines have a responsibility to do more to offset the passenger’s inconvenience?

Meet this week’s panel:

Sam Ardery is a national mediator, trial lawyer, consultant, speaker, and author. He teaches negotiation at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and is author of Positively Conflicted: Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World.

Shannon Lee is a CEO coaching chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc. She works with organizations and executive teams to improve execution by defining, measuring, and standardizing the leadership behaviors required for businesses to perform well.

David Marlow, aka the Ikigai Guy and the Versatile Guru, is a coach, speaker, and author who helps people live into their purpose and helps companies bring their purpose to their products and their people.

Grappling with the Gray #138: Is too much attention obscuring who we are?

Wed, 25 Feb 2026 04:00:00 -0600

Are we overdue for reexamining the benefits of modesty?

That's the question that drives the conversation when JC Glick, Brian Reisman, and • Sue Tinnish, PhD join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A study published in the journal Human Brain Mapping suggests a variety of benefits that accompany modest behavior. These include better acceptance of constructive criticism and superior regulation of emotions. Modest people tend to be less self-centered and less emotionally vulnerable to rejection.

Researchers found that people who are intellectually humble have less need to be right all the time, which makes them better at examining evidence and evaluating which argument is strongest.

Although the study did not address traditional modesty as relates to dress, the discarding of social mores had arguably contributed to the hyper-sexualization of modern society, leading to distorted perceptions, harmful stereotypes, and objectification, especially among women and girls.

Social media has accelerated the cultural trend toward self-adulation, and common perceptions defining success in terms of fame, wealth, and power add fuel to the fire.

Have we created a mindset that makes us more insecure, more dogmatic, and more resistant to the notion of personal growth? Is it true that we have to play the game to gain the recognition we need to compete? If so, is our desire for success increasing toxicity in our families, our communities, and our workplaces? If so, what can we do about it?

Meet this week’s panel:

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as CEO of the Commit Foundation, an organization that helps high-performance veterans find their next adventure.

Brian Reisman is a software engineer and tech maven. He is also a professional speaker who works with leaders to promote a culture of trust and trustworthiness in work and life.

Sue Tinnish is an executive coach, employing a unique blend of soft skills and technical knowledge, as well as a Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Grappling with the Gray #137: Can we escape the cult of partisanship?

Wed, 11 Feb 2026 04:00:00 -0600

Has political ideology crossed the line into cult mentality?

That's the question that drives the conversation when special guest Daniella Mestyanek Young joins me for this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

After the September 10 assassination of Charlie Kirk, reports filled the headlines of tweets and posts celebrating his murder. One teacher in Pennsylvania allegedly shared a post on social media calling Kirk a "racist, xenophobic, transphobic, islamophobic, sexist, white nationalist mouthpiece."

Days later, a Brazilian comedian wrote that Kirk had "died too late" and said that he "was the reason for a Nazi demonstration where they marched in tribute to him. Good riddance!"

These and similar comments were widely condemned, especially by conservative Republicans.

Three months later, President Donald Trump responded to the murder of Rob Reiner, calling him “deranged,” “very bad for our country,” and suggesting that his death was "reportedly due to the anger he caused others" by his "raging obsession" with Trump. Far more Democrats than Republicans took exception to his words.

Is this an example of cult mentality in American politics? Donald Trump was not the first to employ extremist rhetoric, but he has certainly accelerated its normalization. If we can’t agree on the need for civil discourse, how can we possibly work together to maintain a functioning society?

How does cult mentality encourage and justify this kind of behavior, as well as the double standards that make it acceptable in the minds of each side even as they condemn it from the other? And what can we do about it?

Meet this episode’s special guest:

Daniella Mestyanek Young is a US army combat veteran, Harvard scholar, TEDx speaker, and bestselling author. Her new book, The Culting of America, examines how cult tactics have quietly infiltrated American life, especially politics, and why they are so effective at keeping followers in line even when leaders disregard their own principles and values.

Grappling with the Gray #136: Jumping to conclusions without a net?

Wed, 28 Jan 2026 05:00:00 -0600

Have you ever been the victim of mistaken identity?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Kelly Paxton - Pink Collar Crime Expert, Annette Taylor, and Tamsen Webster, MA, MBA join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A recent post recounted the following story: A delivery driver was exiting an upscale Boston hotel, when the driver of a Porsche mistook him for the valet, tossed him his keys, and said, “Keep it close, I’ll only be 10 or 15 minutes!”

The delivery guy calmly caught the keys, took the car for a short joy ride, then left it in the middle of the intersection with the door wide open and the engine running.

Comments on the post celebrated the story, and several readers shared stories of their own.

In a similar situation, one mis-occupationed valet parked the car in a tow-away zone. In another case, the purported valet simply drove off, reasoning that “if you gave me your keys, now it’s my ride.”

Are any of these responses justified? How much license do we have when obnoxious individuals literally invite us to put them in their place?

We do love vigilante stories. It’s such fun to root for mavericks who restore justice when the system fails. But are we making things worse for ourselves and for society by fighting fire with fire?

Meet the panel:

Kelly Paxton is a Certified Fraud Examiner, former Private Investigator, Professional Speaker, Podcast Host, and author of Embezzlement: How to Prevent, Detect and Investigate Pink-Collar Crime.

Annette Taylor is a researcher of evolutionary psychology and biology. Her website, Cavedweller Club, offers guidance and insights on how we can better understand the way our own hardwiring influences unconscious bias and decision making.

Tamsen Webster is a keynote speaker, message strategist, and “Idea Whisperer.” She uses her proprietary Red Thread method to help audiences, organizations, and individuals build and tell their stories to promote real, transformative change.

#ethics #culture #accountability #mindset

Grappling with the Gray #135: Waging lawfare to defend warfare?

Wed, 31 Dec 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Is exaggeration just another synonym for lying?

That the question that drives the conversation when Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, CPA, JC Glick, and ☘️Mark O'Brien join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Speaking truth to power is one of the foundational principles of any society built on ethics and the rule of law.

Senator Mark Kelly claims that’s what he was doing when he joined five other lawmakers urging service members to refuse illegal orders from their superiors, alluding to military strikes against cartel drug runners. Writing for National Review, Andrew McCarthy argues convincingly that, while Senator Kelly is not guilty of sedition (of which he has been accused), his message was ill-advised and wrongheaded.

Without getting into the weeds of legal definitions, we might frame the issue as politicizing the military vs. weaponizing the justice system. Senator Kelly’s message threatens to disrupt military efficiency by undermining the chain of command, while charges of criminality seemingly overstate objections to the propriety of the message.

If we insist on exaggerating or otherwise misrepresenting both justification for our positions and claims against our ideological opponents, do we not make it impossible to honestly debate the issues and work toward reasoned resolutions? How have we ended up in a place where rhetoric is more valued than substance? And what can we do about it?

Meet the panel:

Jennifer Elder is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as CEO of the Commit Foundation, an organization that helps high-performance veterans find their next adventure.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Grappling with the Gray #134: Does social status obligate social good?

Thu, 18 Dec 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Does celebrity impose a higher standard of social responsibility?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Christopher Bauer, Diane Helbig, and Peter Winick join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

In recent weeks, two stories from the wide world of sports have made the headlines.

In one, the FBI announced it had conducted a "massive, nationwide takedown" of two separate and illegal poker and sports-betting schemes with ties to Mafia families. The schemes reportedly spanned years and involved illicit gains from wire fraud, money laundering, extortion and gambling.

More recently, Boston College senior Shane Hanafin was the only player to stand as the band played the alma mater after the last game of the season. He then remained on the football field for an hour. Despite a disappointing 1-10 record for the year, Shane felt compelled to linger as a demonstration of his gratitude for the opportunity to play. Fans and social media viewers alike found the story touching and inspiring.

Star players make a fortune playing their games and endorsing products. Some of them leverage their sports careers to go into politics or acting. Young children of all ages look up to them as role models.

So here’s the question: Does their notoriety impose upon them an obligation to hold themselves to a high standard of personal integrity?

When they engage in scandalous behavior, are they more guilty than the average citizen? If we’ve come to expect little in moral discipline from our elected officials, is it reasonable for us to expect anything more from celebrity athletes?

Meet the panel:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #133: Are lottery players getting played?

Wed, 03 Dec 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Can the greater good become an excuse for doing bad?

That's the question that drives the conversation when ☘️Mark O'Brien, S. Scott Mason, and • Kirsten Yurich join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic.

Revenue from state lotteries goes to support a host of social causes, including education, environment, and veterans, among others. However, Fortune Magazine reported last year that:

“The average adult living in the poorest 1 percent of zip codes spends almost 5 percent (or $600 annually) of their income on lottery tickets, per the analysis. . . . Those living in the wealthiest 1 percent of zip codes spend only $150 on tickets, amounting to 0.15 percent of their paycheck.”

Writing for National Review, Ben Connolly argues that the lottery is essentially a tax on the poor, observing that:

“If you eliminated serial ticket buyers, and states only took money from people who bought a lottery ticket once a year on their birthday, state lotteries probably wouldn’t even cover their costs.”

He goes on to argue that:

“Gambling is a vice. It is not a social good. It is not an individual good. One of the roles of the conservative in society is to frown upon vices, to enforce social stigma against those activities that harm both the individual and society. Whether or not you believe that adults should be free to make their own choices about their money, including choosing to waste it on sports betting or lotteries, every conservative [and even libertarian] should agree that states shouldn’t be profiting from a vice.”

We recognize that drug addiction undermines the health of our society. Is gambling addiction different? Should gambling be outlawed, or at least controlled, like drugs? And if not, does it then matter if government profits from it?

Meet the panel:

Jennifer Elder is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #132: White House (East Wing) Down?

Wed, 26 Nov 2025 07:00:00 -0600

How many of the issues we fight about are worth fighting about?

That’s the question that drives the conversation when Krista Crawford, Ph.D., MBA, SPHR, Josh Green, and Jolanta Pomiotlo join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

In a recent article, Politico quoted former First Lady Betty Ford as saying that if the White House West Wing is the “mind” of the nation, then the East Wing — the traditional power center for first ladies — is the “heart.”

The implication seems to be that Donald Trump’s tearing down of the East Wing to build a new ballroom is an assault on history.

The president argues that the tents currently used for big events are unsightly, expensive, and cause damage to the White House lawn. Critics condemn the project as a “symbolic blow” to the East Wing’s legacy as a place where women made history.

In 1948, Harry Truman was widely criticized for constructing the now-famous balcony. Truman explained that the awnings that shaded the White House facade were unsightly, and that the balconies would pay for themselves in a few years through reduced electricity consumption. (He also had the entire interior of the building gutted and rebuilt.)

Before that, Thomas Jefferson was castigated for installing eastern and western colonnades, which were later replaced by Teddy Roosevelt.

Are these past and present cases comparable? Is the president’s failure to navigate the standard public review process an act of imperial disregard for the law of merely cutting through red tape?

In short, is this issue just the latest partisan bickering blown out of proportion, or is it really a subject worthy of debate?

Meet the panel:

Krista Crawford is a human resource consultant, adjunct instructor at Virginia Tech and Champlain College, and Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Josh Green is a keynote speaker and TEDx speaker. He advises leaders in business strategy, business growth, and leadership development.

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

#ethics #leadership #integrity #accountability #culture

Grappling with the Gray #131: Giving away the keys to the kingdom?

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Why are we so enthusiastically embracing our own dumbness?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Deb Coviello, Stewart Wiggins, and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel for another episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

You look over the report written by a team of your employees and smile inwardly. It’s professionally formatted, with table of contents, meaningful-sounding headlines, and compelling bullet points.

But as you begin reading through it, your internal smile fades. You quickly recognize it was AI generated, with no human contribution whatsoever. As polished as it looks on the surface, when "you dig deeper,” as one workplace expert put it, “it lacks real substance and meaning, and may not make any sense at all."

Now you need to expend time and effort calling in the team, explaining why their work is unsatisfactory, and give them clearer guidelines for getting the job done… or simply do it yourself.

There’s a new word to describe this: Workslop, defined by HBR as AI generated work content that masquerades as good work, but lacks the substance to meaningfully advance a given task.

Of 1,150 U.S.-based full-time employees across industries, 40% report have received workslop in the last month. HBR estimates for an organization of 10,000 workers, this results in over $9 million per year in lost productivity.

Why is this happening? Is it inevitable that every new tool accelerates our collective laziness and irresponsibility, or is something else going on? And what can we do about it?

Meet the panel:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Stewart Wiggins joins us from Paris. He is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

Grappling with the Gray #130: From Socrates to Charlie Kirk?

Wed, 12 Nov 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Do sides matter any more?

That's the question that will drive the discussion when Kimberly Davis, Naya Lekht, PhD, and ☘️Mark O'Brien join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Writing last week in the Wall Street Journal, Cal State University political science Professor Kevin Wallsten cited a national survey he conducted last year. Asked about “using violence to stop a speech” promoting a “personally offensive” position, 80% percent of Americans responded “never acceptable.” The percentage of republicans was only marginally more than democrats.

However, generational responses tell a different story. Here’s the breakdown of respondents who refused to condone using violence to suppress speech under any circumstances:

Boomers – 93%
Gen X – 86%
Millennials – 71%
Gen Z – 58%

This has nothing to do with hate speech, merely free speech. Watching clips of Charlie Kirk’s campus debates, it’s hard to find an example of him belittling or insulting those who challenged him. He rallied an impressive library of facts and offered coherent arguments to make his points. There were few who could hold their own with him in debate, and the college crowds often responded with applause.

It’s hard not to draw comparisons with Socrates, condemned to drink poison for the crime of forcing people to confront the inconsistencies of their own views. With more than 4 out of 10 young people believing that violence is an acceptable response to disagreement, how do we prevent society from disintegrating into chaos, both nationally and internationally? How do you engage others in discourse when they’ve already concluded that you’re not only wrong, but dangerously evil?

Meet the panel:

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Naya Lekht is a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, promoting synergy between self-awareness and the world which we observe.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Grappling with the Gray #129: The ethics of gerrymandering?

Wed, 05 Nov 2025 07:00:00 -0600

Does bad behavior ever justify bad behavior?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Natalie Renee Parker and N. Wyman Winbush II, Captain USNR-Retired, MBA join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Congressional gerrymandering has been going on in America for over a century. Originally, it was used to marginalize black voters by lumping them into homogenous districts, thereby diluting their political influence state- and country-wide. Lately, it’s become a weapon of Republicans against Democrats, and Democrats against Republicans.

After Texas Republicans began implementing their plan to gain five seats in congress by redrawing district lines, California Governor Gavin Newsom declared he would respond by doing the same thing in his state. Which raises the age-old question: do two wrongs make a right?

In fact, Texas could make (and has made) exactly the same claim. Massachusetts has had 5 Republican governors out of the last seven, yet the state doesn’t have one single Republican representative. 40 percent of New Englanders historically vote Republican, yet they have virtually no representation in the House.

Arguing “they started it” is hardly a strategy to affect meaningful change. The 2019 Supreme Court decision not to interfere in state redistricting may have been the right choice with respect to legal principle, but it left the door open to the kind of political range war we’re witnessing now.

With the existence of various software systems to guide honest map-drawing, it’s a matter of will rather than way. If leaders continue playing one identity group against the other to protect their own power, how is democracy supposed to function? And what can We the People do about it?

Meet the panel:

Natalie Renee Parker is a senior Executive Leadership Coach and consultant, Helping companies increase their impact by creating healthy cultures and unleashing the power of people.

Wyman Winbush, aka the Wisdom Broker, is a retired US Navy captain, a Professional Speaker-Trainer, and Multi-Disciplined Problem Solver, helping leaders become better leaders and high-performance-minded individuals to exceed their expectations.

Grappling with the Gray #128: You can't hide your Lyin' I's?

Wed, 17 Sep 2025 04:00:00 -0500

“Have you ever pretended to hold more progressive views than you truly endorse to succeed socially or academically?”

That’s the question posed by The Hill, which drives the conversation as Ida Tetlock, Stan B. Walters, and Annie Yatch join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

In confidential interviews with 1,452 undergraduate students at Northwestern University and the University of Michigan, 88 percent of respondents answered yes.

The pressure to conform can be nearly irresistible. For good reason many are concerned by reports that all 87 members of NPR’s executive board are registered democrats and that democrats outnumber republicans among Yale faculty by 28 to 1.

Truth cannot survive in an echo chamber. It thrives on constructive disagreement and spirited debate. That’s why it would be equally disturbing if republicans outnumbered democrats by a similar margin.

But there may be a deeper concern than journalistic or academic integrity. According to The Hill, “73 percent of students reported mistrust in conversations about these values with close friends. Nearly half said they routinely conceal beliefs in intimate relationships for fear of ideological fallout.”

In other words, we’re witnessing a culture in which young people are afraid to be honest in their closest relationships, which implies that they are likely mistrustful of those whom they most depend on for emotional and psychological well-being.

Should we be sounding the alarm over a system that is setting up young people for ever-escalating dysfunction? If not, why not? If so, what can we do about it?

Meet the panel:

Ida Tetlock serves clients as a professional organizer, life manager, and advocate. She is also a student of Thanatology and death doula candidate.

Stan Walters, aka The Lie Guy, teaches government agencies, military units, and law enforcement to uncover the truth, deliver justice, and make critical decisions in high-stakes situations.

Annie Yatch is founder and CEO of Northstar Leadership, helping corporate professionals convert instinctual behaviors into empathy-driven leadership.

Grappling with the Gray #127: Know thyself -- and everyone else?

Wed, 10 Sep 2025 04:00:00 -0500

Are we over-generalizing about identity groups?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Sean Flaherty, Sarah Kalmeta, and Bronson Taylor join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Six years ago, Starbucks introduced a new model: mobile-only pickup stores targeting Gen Z’s taste for frictionless experience. Last week, CEO Brian Niccol declared the experiment a failure, announcing that all these stores would be shuttered or converted by the end of next year.

So what happened? Did Starbucks do market research? Was their study flawed? Has Gen Z changed their preferences in the last half-decade? Or is it simply impractical to generalize the preferences of an entire generation?

Even had the research been correct, since Starbucks built its empire on the warmth and human connection of a corner coffee house, were they destined to fail by attempting to change who they are?

On the one hand, businesses that don’t adapt can quickly fail, like Blockbuster and Eastman Kodak. On the other hand, trying to adapt to every shifting trend may well lead to inauthenticity and mediocrity.

Is this the symptom of a culture in which we try to be everything to everyone? Is it a reflection of the erosion of core values that used to be universal? How can we balance agility with brand integrity, and what are the risks straying too far in either direction?

Meet the panel:

Sean Flaherty is CEO of Advanced Leadership Concepts, serving executive teams by unlocking the science of leadership with powerful tools that transform and inspire.

Sarah Kalmeta, aka Sarah the Pivoter, is a speaker, author and relentless truthseeker. She is founder of Pivot Point International, a high performance consulting company.

Bronson Taylor is a student at Oregon State University, majoring in Education with a math focus, and possibly the first Gen Z guest on this program.

Grappling with the Gray #126: Whose best friend?

Wed, 27 Aug 2025 04:00:00 -0500

Can empathy be taken too far? If so, where's the line?

These are the questions that drive the conversation when Jennifer Elder, Jeff Ikler, and Tomer Yogev join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

On Memorial Day, Delta Flight 694 from Detroit to Los Angeles diverted to Minneapolis to provide emergency medical care… not for a passenger, but for a passenger’s pet dog.

An airline spokesman told Newsweek that, "The safety of our customers and people comes before everything else at Delta. That's why flight 694 diverted to ensure a cabin pet that became ill received proper care."

The emergency landing delayed 181 passengers from reaching their destination by two-and-a-half-hours.

There’s no question that the life of a human being justifies inconveniencing even a few hundred paying passengers. But does the same calculus apply to animals? Would the airline have made the same call had the pet been a hamster, a lizard, or a canary?

Pet owners may agree that “dogs are people, too.” But does that make it so? Is there a danger that, by projecting too much humanity onto animals, we undermine the sanctity of human life as a foundational principle of civil society?

For years, the Great Apes Project has lobbied to accord full human rights to gorillas, orangutans, and chimpanzees. Is this a noble effort or an ideological perversion? Does it naturally follow that one of its most prominent advocates, former Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer, has also been cited as one of the most vocal supporters of euthanasia?

Is it insensitive to value the convenience of a planeful of people above the life of a beloved pet, or is it recognizing a more existential moral boundary?

Meet the panel:

Jennifer H. Elder, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Jeff Ikler is a certified executive career coach. He is the director of Quetico Executive Career and Personal Leadership Coaching, co-host of the Getting Unstuck – Cultivating Curiosity podcast, and author of the weekly Substack, "Walking in the Woods."

Tomer Yogev, is an executive coach and Co-Creator of the Big Joy Theory, a transformative movement that begins with each person stepping into their own light, despite the shadows and storms.

Grappling with the Gray #125: Customer service unicorn?

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 04:00:00 -0500

When we know the solution, why does it continue to elude us?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Paul Edwards, 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D., and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is out topic:

My colleague Tim Richardson posted about his trip to a big box store, where he forgot to unload a case of beverages from his cart into the car.

He was 40 miles away when he realized his mistake. He called the store and explained what happened. The response was predictable.

“I’m sorry… there’s nothing we can do.”

On his third call, he reached the store manager—Donna. She asked what he bought, where he had parked, and what he was wearing. Then she explained:

“If I get that info, 100% of the time I can find the item on our security footage.” An hour, she called Tim back:

“We found the person who took your item,” she said. “It’s been returned.”

How had Donna managed that?

She called the customer and thanked them for helping another customer find their missing item. She said: “I know how busy life can get, and I’m sure you haven’t had a chance to return the item yet—when you do, we’ll make sure it’s returned to the rightful owner.” She thanked them again for looking out for others.

With this approach, Donna said, the merchandise almost always gets returned the same day.

It doesn’t sound so hard. So why do frontline employees so often hide behind processes rather than take initiative? Why do we naturally default to suspicion and confrontation rather than give the benefit of the doubt? And what can we do to promote this type of response which typically leads to better outcomes, greater customer satisfaction, and a healthier society?

Meet the panel:

Paul Edwards used to drive large military vehicles through the deserts of the Middle East, armed with an assault rifle. Today, his occupation of ghostwriting requires him to ask questions first, and shoot later.”

Melissa Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

#ethics

#leadership

#culture

#accountability

#mindset

Grappling with the Gray #124: Do white lies lead to gray truth?

Mon, 04 Aug 2025 04:00:00 -0500

Is a little deception ever a good thing?

That's the question that drives the conversation when 🎙️William C. Attaway, ☘️Mark O'Brien, and • Sue Tinnish, PhD join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

On June 20, President Trump told the world he would decide "within the next two weeks" whether to strike Iran. Two days later, B-2 stealth bombers dropped 30-ton bombs in an effort to cripple Iran’s nuclear program.

"It was a head fake," a Trump adviser told Axios. "He knew the media couldn't resist amplifying it. He knew the Iranians might think he was bluffing. Well, everyone was wrong."

"The president wanted to buy time," another adviser said. "He knew what he wanted to do. And he knows he can't look eager for war. So all the folks in MAGA urging restraint gave him some space." At the same time, Trump remained open to aborting the mission if a diplomatic window emerged.

For purposes of this discussion, let’s assume that eliminating Iran’s nuclear capability was a wise and defensible decision. But what about the President’s use of deception and disinformation to do it?

If a leader can benefit his people (in this case, possibly saving many lives) through misdirection, does that justify doing so. Or could the long term loss to future credibility outweigh the short term benefits? If he lies about this, will people not wonder what else he is lying about?

Meet the panel:

William Attaway is an executive coach, speaker and podcaster, helping 7 & 8 figure entrepreneurs, C-suite leaders, & agency owners achieve clear-minded focus, calm control, & confidence.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Sue Tinnish is an executive coach, employing a unique blend of soft skills and technical knowledge, as well as a Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Grappling with the Gray #123: When the sun is out, does the moon-shine?

Mon, 07 Jul 2025 04:00:00 -0500

How far can we stretch truth in advertising?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Christopher Bauer, PhD, CSP, CFS, Nancy J. Capistran, PCC, CPC, and S. Scott Mason join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our ethics challenge:

In Paducah, Kentucky, neighbors called police reporting a 9-year-old who set up a roadside stand in front of his house. He held up a sign advertising not lemonade by “Ice Cold Beer.”

Officers arrived to find young Colton Ray proudly handing out frosty mugs of root beer, grinning like a kid who just discovered capitalism.

“I just wanted people to stop and buy some root beer,” Colton explained. “And boy, did they!”

Local officers applauded the creativity, and sales reportedly tripled after the incident.

Colton told reporters he’s considering a lemonade spin-off next, under the banner: “Locally Sourced Moonshine.” His parents are both proud and slightly terrified.

This story appeared recently in the Paducah Insider, a news satire and parody publication modeled after the Onion and the Babylon Bee. But what if the story had been true?

Was the ad for cold beer deceptive, or did it merely omit enough information and allow people to draw their own conclusions? When we intentionally blur the lines governing truth in advertising, is that just good business, or does it cross the lines into misrepresentation? What other insights might we find in the apocryphal story of young Colton Ray?

Meet the panel:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Nancy Capistran is an executive coach, CEO strategic advisor, internationally published author, and Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

Grappling with the Gray #122: Every which way -- but lose?

Mon, 30 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0500

How can we explain toxic trends in opposite directions?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Kimberly Davis, Jennifer Hyland, and Peter Winick join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

In this week’s headlines, Inc.com highlighted a viral April 12 post that described the Robert W. Baird investment bank as “The Epitome of a Sweatshop.” In response, the Wall Street Journal reported bosses bullying into working 110-hour weeks, ignoring the firm’s no-work-on-Saturday policy, and sending emails at 3:30 am to check that employees were still online.

As far back as 2017, Inc.com columnist Jacob Morgan ranked Baird third on his list of companies with the lowest-scoring employee experience. The WSJ reported that such practices in the industry routinely contribute to serious health problems and have even been linked to employee deaths. Ironically, but not surprisingly, bosses at Baird frequently complain about low productivity.

The same news feed included an article in Forbes describing the rise of “snow-plow” managers who refuse to delegate, thereby contributing to their own stress, isolation, and burnout while disempowering and demoralizing employees.

It seems bizarre to witness the simultaneous rise of two such antithetical trends. What they do have in common, however, is bosses pursuing practices that so clearly run counter to their own best interests as well as those of the company.

How can we explain the rise of such disparate lose-lose behaviors? And what can be done to put a stop to them?

Meet the panel:

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of Brave Leadership, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Jennifer Hyland serves as Deputy Chief Constable with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. She is an advisor and mentor dedicated to a future built on a foundation of principled leadership.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

#ethics
#leadership
#culture
#accountability
#mindset

Grappling with the Gray #121: Race to the bottom?

Wed, 14 May 2025 04:00:00 -0500

What happens when employees perceive a scalpel as an axe?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Tom Gegax joins me to Grapple with the Gray and Kirsten Yurich sits in as cohost.

Here is our topic:

Employee performance, especially in large companies, is likely to follow the bell curve. A few superstars, a lot of solid performers, and a few underperformers. Amazon has developed an innovative way of dealing with the third group: it’s called the Pivot Program.

Employees who do not meet management performance expectations are given three options:

1) Leave with a severance package.
2) Accept entry into the Pivot program to help them “improve” and remain at Amazon.
3) If they fail to convince their manager that they have “improved,” then they can appeal.

At each stage the worker is offered a progressively lower severance payment in return for a release of claims and promise not to sue.

The consensus on Reddit is that the Pivot program is designed to coerce employees to quit while fabricating evidence to defend firing them if they don’t. It is described as humiliating for employees who go through it and toxic for employees who fear they might have to. The claim is that employees rarely, or never, pass the program.

Certainly, companies need to have some process for dealing with employees who are not meeting expectations. Is Amazon’s model intrinsically flawed, or are underperforming employees merely bitter? In general, how can leaders preserve employee dignity while maintaining performance standards?

On this special episode, I'm joined by Tom Gegax, former CEO of Tires Plus, Chairman of Gramercy Fund--a socially responsible venture capital fund--and focus of the film ‘Confessions of a CEO’: Blowing the Whistle on Corporate America,’ which features Robert Kennedy Jr., Deepak Chopra, and Blue Zones founder Dan Buettner.

Described as a pioneer, a renaissance man, and a real life Forest Gump, Tom narrates his personal transformation from a toxic CEO to a visionary leader advocating for healthier company culture and more responsible leadership in business and government. His campaign for personal responsibility and corporate accountability made him irresistible to me, and I feel privileged to have him as a guest.

As you will hear, Tom has vocal chord damage from radiation treatment for cancer. But his message is too important to let that get in the way.

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #120: Back in the U.S.S.R.?

Wed, 23 Apr 2025 04:00:00 -0500

How much does the government need to know to do its job?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Krista Crawford, Ph.D., MBA, SPHR, Sarah Kalmeta, and Jolanta Pomiotlo join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

And here is our topic:

Paul Whelan, a 55-year-old retired U.S. Marine, was freed from Russia last summer after being imprisoned on false espionage charges for more than five years. After the first year of his detention, his employer cut his job and his insurance coverage. When he finally arrived home, Mr. Whelan found that he did not qualify for unemployment because he had not worked in Michigan recently.

A member of Congress had to contact Michigan's secretary of state just for Mr. Whelan to get a driver's license and identification. And being convicted of a crime in Russia, even a crime the U.S. government declared was bogus, hindered his getting a Global Entry card because he was arrested and imprisoned overseas. Apparently, Customs and Border Patrol didn’t have access to the pictures of the president meeting him at Andrews Air Force Base when he came back.

Strangest of all, when Mr. Whelan tried to get full Medicaid coverage through the state he received a letter back saying that he didn't qualify because he wasn't a U.S. citizen. And his story is not unique.

NPR seemed to miss the irony when they aired this story on March 27, scarcely two minutes before a story questioning why the Department of Government Efficiency needs access to citizens’ private data and personal information.

Ostensibly, DOGE is charged with scouring government records for signs of waste, fraud and abuse… not to mention inefficiency. Might Paul Whelan reasonably argue that protecting our data is no more urgent than ensuring that government agencies make better use of that data to serve U.S. citizens?

There’s always going to be tension between protecting personal freedoms and providing for the general welfare. Is it possible to balance one against the other without descending into partisan politics?

Meet this week’s panel:

Krista Crawford is a human resource consultant, adjunct instructor at Virginia Tech and Champlain College, and Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Sarah Kalmeta, aka Sarah the Pivoter, is a speaker, author and relentless truthseeker. She is founder of Pivot Point International, a high performance consulting company.

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

#ethics
#culture
#accountability
#leadership
#politics

Grappling with the Gray #119: Pointing fingers in all directions?

Wed, 02 Apr 2025 04:00:00 -0500

When the problem is always someone else's fault, is there any hope of finding a solution?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™, Diane Helbig, and ☘️Mark O'Brien join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A recent headline in Politico declared: “Republicans have hated universities for years. Anti-war protests gave them a reason to punish them.”

We can debate the merit of conservative criticisms of American universities. But headlines like this one do nothing to advance civil discourse or productive debate by suggesting those criticisms have no basis.

In 2015, video maker Ami Horowitz collected 50 signatures in an hour on Yale campus calling for the repeal of the First Amendment… which includes, ironically, the right to petition. This was not long after a Yale administrator was fired for daring to suggest that students should be trusted to choose appropriate Halloween costumes without faculty supervision.

The following year, University of Chicago Dean John Ellison wrote in letter to students:

"Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called trigger warnings, we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial and we do not condone the creation of intellectual safe spaces where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own."

Unfortunately, his has been a nearly lone voice in the wilderness. Especially since October 7, a horrifying rise in antisemitic rhetoric and violence has made university campus spaces anything but safe for Jewish students.

Even if one disapproves of responses by the Trump administration, casting Republicans as perpetrators while ignoring legitimate, systemic problems will only intensify polarization and extremism.

How do we explain increasing unwillingness to confront issues honestly? And what can we do about it?

Meet this week’s panel:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

#ethics
#culture
#accountability
#leadership
#education
#media

Grappling with the Gray #118: Conscious bias?

Wed, 26 Mar 2025 04:00:00 -0500

Which is worse: conscious bias or unconscious bias?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Paul Glover, 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D., and Annette Taylor join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

On March 10th, Washington Post columnist and Associate Editor Ruth Marcus resigned after four decades with the paper. She accused Chief Executive and Publisher Will Lewis of killing her column criticizing owner Jeff Bezos' announcement that the opinion section will henceforth only publish views consistent with the values of individual liberties and free markets.

For years, conservatives have condemned large metropolitan newspapers for liberal bias. But those objections were against political ideology creeping into hard news stories, and also for misrepresentation of facts in support of opinion. Not for the opinions themselves.

The original intent of the op-ed page was to present alternative views to those of a paper’s own editorial perspective, thereby promoting integrity of thought and advancing spirited debate.

This new policy of Jeff Bezos appears to be yet another example of backlash and reactionaryism, objecting so fiercely that objectors become the object of their own objections.

In 2017, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran an editorial responding to claims of bias by declaring, “Yes, we are biased, and that’s the way it should be.” I responded in a letter that opinion and bias are two entirely different things. I received a two-line reply stating, essentially, “No, we’re right and you’re wrong.”

So, is there a difference between opinion and bias? Do newspapers have an obligation to present opposing viewpoints? And who should set editorial policy: the owner, the publisher, the editor-in-chief, or an editorial board?

Meet this week’s panel:

Paul Glover is the No B.S. Leadership Coach - Guiding Leaders on Their Journey to Their Mountaintop. He is a TEDx speaker and author of Work Quake: Making the Seismic Shift to a "Knowledge Economy"

Melissa Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Annette Taylor is a researcher of evolutionary psychology and biology. Her website, Cavedweller Club, offers guidance and insights on how we can better understand the way our own hardwiring influences unconscious bias and decision making.

#ethics
#leadership
#culture
#accountability
#mindset

Grappling with the Gray #117: Don't ask, don't answer?

Wed, 19 Mar 2025 04:00:00 -0500

How can we explain society simultaneously becoming insensitive and hypersensitive?

That's the question that drives the conversation when
Mark Brown, CSP, Kimberly Davis, and Kirsten Yurich join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic

A recent article in National Review by Kayla Bartsch laments how the concept of RSVP has died an ignominious death among her fellow Gen Z-ers.

She writes: “Whereas stories of old emphasized the importance of honesty and integrity — of the sanctity of giving one’s word — these old-fashioned virtues of gentility are largely lost on my digital generation when it comes to RSVPs.”

The truth is, responding to invitations should be easier than ever. Even if the younger set relates to email the way Boomers think of quill and parchment, platforms like Evite and Paperless Post have been superseded by a snazzy app called Partiful. But that doesn’t seem to help.

My only quibble with Ms. Bartsch is that I don’t believe this is exclusively a Gen-Z problem or that it’s limited to invitations. Ghosting has become normative behavior in both the social and business worlds. If I have nothing to gain by communicating with you, you simply cease to exist.

Ironically, amidst a culture that has become hyper-fixated on microaggressions, pronouns, and myriad sensitivities to other people’s feelings, how do we explain the lack of basic civility that makes it okay to ignore our fellow human beings, even the ones who care enough to invite us to share their lives?

Meet this week’s panel:

Mark Brown is an executive speaking coach, helping top international leaders to elevate their performance, influence and impact. He is a world champion international speaker, and devoted husband of Andrea.

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #116: What's in your wallet?

Wed, 26 Feb 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Is justice served if you talk your way out of court?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Christopher Bauer, PhD, CSP, CFS, Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, CPA, and Jeff Koziatek join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Jewish folklore tells of a poor man who finds a billfold with $700 in it. At his synagogue, he reads on the notice board that a wealthy congregant has lost his billfold and is offering a $100 reward for it. He spots the owner and gives him the billfold.

The rich man counts the money and says, “I see you already took your reward.”

The poor man answers, “I don’t understand.”

“This billfold had $800 in it when I lost it. Now it’s a hundred short.”

They begin arguing, and eventually come before the rabbi.

Both congregants state their case. The rich man concludes by saying, “Rabbi, I trust you believe me.”

The rabbi answers, “Of course.” The rich man smiles. The poor man is crushed.

Then the rabbi hands the billfold to the poor man.

“What are you doing?!” cries the rich man.

The rabbi answers, “You are, of course, an honest man, and you say the billfold you lost had $800 in it. Therefore, I’m sure it did. But if the man who found this billfold is a liar and a thief, he wouldn’t have returned it at all. That means he also is telling the truth. In that case, this billfold must belong to somebody else. If that man steps forward, he’ll get the money. Until then, it belongs to the man who found it.”

“But what about my money?” the rich man asks.

“Well, we’ll just have to wait until somebody finds a billfold with $800 in it…”

What are we to make of the rabbi’s ruling?

Meet this week’s panel:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Jennifer Elder is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Jeff Koziatek is a certified speaker and peak performance coach, helping professionals to navigate change, sharpen focus, avoid burnout, and make a difference. He is also one of St. Louis Business Monthly's 100 St. Louisans you should know.

Grappling with the Gray #115: Under the radar?

Wed, 19 Feb 2025 04:00:00 -0600

Are we engineering our way toward disaster?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Catherine Fitzgerald, Stewart Wiggins, and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

The tragic air crash of January 29 over Washington, DC, followed two days later by a second crash over Philadelphia, has left us all feeling both heartbroken and decidedly less safe.

According to the Associated Press, National Transportation Safety Board member Todd Inman expressed frustration that accidents like these occur, noting that the board has made “several hundred” recommendations to improve aviation that have not been acted upon.

Understaffing may have contributed to the disaster. The FAA has long struggled with a shortage of air traffic controllers. Responding to reports that the helicopter was flying 100 feet higher than regulations allow, President Donald Trump declared that diversity initiatives have left air traffic control understaffed and underqualified, thereby compromising air safety.

According to some reports, airlines have indeed lowered standards to meet a pilot shortage. Others argue that the shortage of applicants has nothing to do with DEI. Either way, there does seem to be a looming crisis concerning air travel safety.

And it’s not only pilots. Police, firefighting, healthcare work, and teaching are all facing potential staffing shortages. Reasons include poor pay, unsafe working conditions, and unreasonable demands on the job.

The problem seems obvious, and the potential consequences seem clear. So what are we doing about it? Is it possible that DEI is a contributing factor? Even if it is, is the topic so polarizing that it interferes with our addressing other root causes that won’t be dealt with because of political acrimony?

Meet this week’s panel:

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Executive Coaching. She works with founders and their leaders as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

Stewart Wiggins joins us from Paris. He is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

Grappling with the Gray #114: Too hot to handle?

Wed, 05 Feb 2025 04:00:00 -0600

When we know what the problem is and we know how to fix it, why isn't it getting fixed?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Sam Ardery, ☘️Mark O'Brien, and Kelly Paxton - Pink Collar Crime Expert join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

The horror of California wildfires has seized attention all across the country. Over 40,000 acres burned, over 12,000 homes and buildings destroyed, two dozen deaths, families displaced, and lives shattered.

Adding to the tragedy is how many of the homes lost were uninsured. The combination of over-valued real estate in high risk areas and government imposed premium caps compelled many insurance carriers to cancel homeowner policies, in some cases just a week before the fires ravaged the county.

Those seeking to cast blame have pointed to systemic water and forestry mismanagement, as well as Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass approving $18 million in cuts to the fire department budget.

What seems not to have been a factor was the government’s policy of diverting water to protect endangered fish. The reports of dumping water into the ocean when it could have been used for agriculture sparked considerable debate earlier this year. But this apparently contributed in no way to the current crisis, despite the claims of Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Kamala Harris reportedly condemned insurance companies for refusing to honor current policies, a claim that seems equally unfounded.

The first order of business is fighting the fires, protecting those in danger, and supporting the victims in rebuilding their lives. After that, however, the question becomes how to prevent future tragedies. Considering how these fires are becoming more and more frequent, why have the root causes not been better addressed? Just as bad, what are we to make of well-intentioned policies that make matters worse?

What drives leaders to ignore the real issues while disseminating misinformation? And what should we be doing about it?

Meet this week’s panel:

Sam Ardery is a national mediator, trial lawyer, consultant, speaker, and author. He teaches negotiation at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and is author of Positively Conflicted: Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Kelly Paxton is a Certified Fraud Examiner, former Private Investigator, Professional Speaker, Podcast Host, and author of Embezzlement: How to Prevent, Detect and Investigate Pink-Collar Crime.

Grappling with the Gray #113: Who controls the present controls the past?

Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:00:00 -0600

It’s been said that history is written by the winners.
Today, however, history is more likely to be written by ideologues.

This is the issue that drives the discussion when 🟦 Jeff Ikler, S. Scott Mason, and • Sue Tinnish, PhD join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

On one extreme, self-styled patriots seek to whitewash the human elements of heroic figures by censoring faults and flaws. On the other extreme, historical revisionists cast heroes as villains and villains as heroes. Instructors also have to contend with the severely limited time they have to teach the highlights of history to students who struggle to appreciate its relevance to their lives.

One popular biography of Ulysses S. Grant provides depth and texture to a little-studied president. But the work glosses over Grant’s drinking problem and his culpability for the Whiskey Ring scandal rather than confronting these head on.

Then there’s the 1619 Project, which makes the spurious claim that the United States was founded primarily to perpetuate the institution of slavery. Trumpeted by the New York Times, it was scorchingly repudiated by an expose in the Atlantic, which questioned whether the architects of the project were merely incompetent or willfully misrepresentative. And yet it is still taught in many schools.

Granted that history is not fully knowable and subject to multifarious interpretations, what steps can and should we take to provide the most comprehensive and balanced accounts possible to preserve the integrity of our collective past? And how does our willingness to rewrite the past affect other aspects of our lives?

Meet this week’s panel:

Jeff Ikler is a certified executive career coach. He is director of Quetico Executive Career and Personal Leadership Coaching and co-host of the podcast Getting Unstuck – Educators Leading Change

Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

Sue Tinnish is an executive coach, employing a unique blend of soft skills and technical knowledge, as well as a Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Grappling with the Gray #112: Social media round-up?

Wed, 11 Dec 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Is the long arm of the law too long or not long enough?

That's the question that drives the conversation when the ethics panel convenes with Krista Crawford, Ph.D., MBA, SPHR, Diane Helbig, and Peter Winick to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Last week, Australia made world headlines by passing legislation to ban social media use for children under 16 years old. Many support the intent of the law, which seeks to protect children from the various ills associated with online use, including cyberbullying, invasion of privacy, depression, and addictive behavior.

However, the new law raises a slew of ethical questions. To what degree can platform providers ensure who is or isn’t using their platform? Much of the burden of enforcement will inevitably fall on parents, who may be struggling on many fronts with the stresses of raising teenagers. Would they be subject to prosecution for allowing their own children access?

Is this different from prohibition, or past laws against using marijuana? Libertarians might advocate for removing all such laws, including heroin and prostitution? Does the government have the right to make these kinds of decisions for the people?

Is it ultimately beneficial to pass laws that may be unenforceable? On the one hand, it may drive usage underground and limit it from becoming normalized. On the other hand, doesn’t passing laws likely to be violated undermine general respect for the law?

There’s a certain dark irony in China rigidly limiting access of children to social media and, in particular, TikTok, while providing access to the rest of the world. Do we have to become like China to protect ourselves from China? Or do we simply give in to the inevitable and hope for the best?

Meet this week’s panel:

Krista Crawford is a human resource consultant, adjunct instructor at Virginia Tech and Champlain College, and Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc.

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #111: Hand over your credentials?

Wed, 04 Dec 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Have the critics of Cancel Culture turned on their own?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™, 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D., and Jolanta Pomiotlo join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

FOX NFL Sunday’s special in honor of Veteran’s Day unleashed a firestorm of controversy when New York Giants legend and Fox commentator Michael Strahan failed to put his hand on his heart during the National Anthem–although he was standing respectfully throughout.

The son of a 23-year army veteran, Mr. Strahan later explained that he was “caught up in the moment… looking at all these young sailors standing there at attention before the National Anthem played, and I’m thinking to myself how incredible [it is] to be that young.” Friends from all corners have defended him as a patriot.

Nevertheless, in the days that followed, Mr. Strahan has been accused of being unpatriotic, shameful, a disgrace, and hating America, with many have called for him to be fired from his job.

From the time the Pledge of Allegiance was introduced in 1892, etiquette required you to raise your right hand, flip your palm down, and point it toward the flag in a gesture not unlike the Nazi salute.

With the rise of fascism in Europe, the U.S. Flag Code of 1942 dispensed with the salute and substituted placing the hand over the heart. Almost as an afterthought, the Code included placing that hand over the heart for the National Anthem as well. However, common practice seems more concerned with standing respectfully and less concerned with where you place your hands.

In September, 2007, President Barack Obama was accused of not putting his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. Fact-checkers rushed to his defense: apparently, he did have his hand over his heart for the Pledge, then lowered it during the National Anthem.

If that was an acceptable answer for the president, why not for Michael Strahan? Have we become hypersensitive since Colin Kaepernick first took a knee rather than standing? Or is this just another case of cancel culture gone amok?

Meet this week’s panel:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Melissa Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

Grappling with the Gray #110: Institutionalizing lip service?

Wed, 20 Nov 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Is having the right words enough, or could it be part of the problem?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Sarah Kalmeta, 🟦 Mark O'Brien, and Kirsten Yurich join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

For those of us will be grateful when elections are over regardless of who has won or lost, here are a few recent non-partisan headlines.

From Inc.com: Science Says People With High Emotional Intelligence Use This Sentence to Instantly Turn a Painful Argument Into a Productive Conversation

From Your Tango: The Secret Word That Makes Men Commit Almost Instantly, According To A Relationship Expert

From CNBC: Use this perfect 3-word response when someone hurts your feelings

What motivates these kinds of stories? Are they teaching us to employ neuro-linguistic programming to improve the quality of our lives, or are they merely teaching us how to manipulate others?

Do they intend to help us develop our awareness and sensitivity toward other people, or are they quick-fixes so that we don’t have to expend the effort it takes to become genuinely sensitive?

Or maybe they’re nothing more than click-bait.

Sometimes, we need someone to hold our hand and walk us through the step by step until we can do it on our own. Other times, hand-holding becomes a crutch that discourages us from taking responsibility for our own actions and decisions.

Are these types of articles a necessary remediation for a society that has become increasingly needed, or are they contributing to an increasingly shallow and irresponsible culture? And if they are, what’s a better approach?

Meet this week’s panel:

Sarah Kalmeta, aka Sarah the Pivoter, is a speaker, author and relentless truthseeker. She is founder of Pivot Point International, a high performance consulting company.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #109: Committing to which ethic?

Wed, 06 Nov 2024 04:00:00 -0600

When both sides are wrong, who's right?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Amii Barnard-Bahn, JD, PCC, CCEP, Kimberly Davis, and Mary Beth Molloy join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A recent article in Newsweek reported that 83 percent of Gen Z frontline workers are feeling overwhelmed and burnt out, with a third of those considering quitting their jobs.

Earlier this month, however, Forbes, Inc.com, and Euro News all ran stories about employers firing their Gen Z employees. The reasons include lack of motivation, poor communication skills, and lack of commitment to the job.

For their part, younger workers want to feel a sense of purpose at work and want to have a life outside of work.

All of which creates a kind of standoff. As much as we actively promote work-life balance, it appears that many employers from the older generation don’t really appreciate employees who demand it. On the other hand, if our culture is intended to be a meritocracy, why should employers invest in workers who justify their own lack of work ethic because they claim to feel unfulfilled in their jobs?

An ethical culture is built on principled compromise, communication, commitment, and reasonable expectations. Can older employers and younger employees find a way to meet in the middle, or is this a case where the unstoppable force has met the immovable object?

Meet this week’s panel:

Amii Barnard-Bahn is a C-suite Coach & Consultant, specializing in Ethical Workplace Culture and Leadership.

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Mary Beth Molloy is a Certified Executive Coach. She is President of MBM Elevate, CEO Group Chair of Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and national board member of Per Scholas, a nonprofit that provides no-cost technical training to individuals often excluded from tech careers.

Grappling with the Gray #108: All together now?

Wed, 30 Oct 2024 04:00:00 -0500

It seemed like a good idea at the time. But why?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Catherine Fitzgerald, Steven Smith, and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

One of the underlying principles of ethics is that trust forms the foundation of successful relationships and healthy communities. This simple idea explains why team building exercises have become so popular among HR departments. What it doesn’t explain is why these exercises are so hated among employees.

Unfortunately, some of these activities seem designed to sow discord rather than unity. One reported exercise instructed each member to take a swig of soda then spit it into another member’s mouth. Strangely enough, some employees refused to participate.

Another activity required each person to go around the room and tell everyone else what they didn’t like about them. One participant described the result as cascades of tears and mutual loathing.

And just this past August, an employee was left behind by coworkers hiking in the Colorado mountains and spent the night exposed to high winds and freezing rain before rescue teams found him the next morning.

We all get wacky ideas from time to time, but how do we explain the lack of a vetting process, competent decision-making, and executive accountability that all have to coalesce to produce these kinds of horror stories? And how do we go about fixing a problem that’s so obvious that it shouldn’t be a problem in the first place?

Meet this week’s panel:

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Executive Coaching. She works with founders and their leaders as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

Steve Smith is president of Great Castle Partners, Inc, group chair for Vistage Worldwide Inc, and business builder of cloud based, supply chain solutions for distribution and specialty retail industries

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

#ethics #culture #accountability #leadership #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #107: Tortured reasoning?

Wed, 09 Oct 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Do two wrongs make a right? How about one-and-a-half wrongs?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Mark Herschberg, Sven Lauch, and Stewart Wiggins join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Late last year, a senior German policeman was convicted of threatening a suspect with torture to extract information about the whereabouts of an abducted boy. Wolfgang Daschner received a warning instead of jail time, in addition to a fine of about $18,000.

Although many Germans sided with Daschner for choosing the lesser of two evils, the presiding judge, Barbel Stock, said that, "Respect for human rights is a foundation of our constitutional state ... Information cannot be forced from someone even if one is seeking to avert danger."

Amnesty International welcomed the verdict, saying it upheld an absolute ban on the use of torture, and Germany's police union said the ruling was understandable. The case has particular resonance in Germany, where the Gestapo and the Stasi routinely trampled on detainees' rights during the Third Reich and under Soviet style government.

Daschner's defense was partly based on his view at the time that the abducted boy might still have been alive, and that the suspect had to be made to talk to find the victim. Tragically, the suspect had already murdered the boy, although he did lead police to the body. The police's interrogation tactics, once they came to light, threatened to derail the trial, although ultimately, the defendant was sentenced to life in prison.

Whether torture is excusable to exact information that might save lives has been a particularly hot topic of debate since 9/11. But what are the ethical angles involved in the threat of torture?

Meet this week’s panel:

Mark Herschberg is Chief Technology Officer and Chief Product Officer of Zereo.ai. He is a professional speaker and creator of Brain Bump, a free app that helps consumers of non-fiction content better access and retain what they learn.

Sven Lauch comes to us from Plymouth, England. He is Director of Eyes Up Training Limited, which offers a holistic approach to implementing organizational change with emphasis on developing transferable skills that anyone can learn.

Stewart Wiggins joins us from Paris. He is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

#ethics #culture #values #greatergood #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #106: In the jungle, the mighty jungle?

Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:00:00 -0500

What price do we pay for convenience?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Christopher Bauer, PhD, CSP, CFS, Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, CPA, and Paul Glover join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Is Amazon taking over the world? It certainly seems that way, especially after Jeff Bezos bought his half a billion dollar sailing yacht.

I have no problem with people making money honestly and spending it as they wish. But the stories coming out of Amazon are deeply disturbing. Working conditions have been questioned and high turnover is reportedly part of the business plan. Policies make it easy for the customer but prove onerous for retailers, who end up with razor slim profit margins and are seemingly with no option but to comply if they want to compete in the marketplace.

Presumably, these assertions have merit, since the company has been sued by the FTC for antitrust violations and stands accused of bullying partners and vendors.

There are a number of alternatives to online shopping, such as Etsy, bookshop.com, Uncommongoods, and Shopify, as well as online ordering from Costco, Walmart, and Target.

But Amazon is so darn easy and convenient. That’s why I keep using it.

So I’m calling myself out. If I find Amazon’s business conduct odious, do I have any good excuse for using it? Or am I just being lazy?

Meet this week’s panel:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Jennifer Elder is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Paul Glover is the No B.S. Leadership Coach - Guiding Leaders on Their Journey to Their Mountaintop. He is a TEDx speaker and author of Work Quake: Making the Seismic Shift to a "Knowledge Economy"

Grappling with the Gray #105: Ground Control to Major Tom?

Wed, 18 Sep 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Is it still funny when the joke's on you?

That's the question that drives the conversation when John E. McGlothlin, 🟦 Mark O'Brien, and Annette Taylor join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

And many thanks to my friend Melissa Hughes for suggesting the topic. Here it is:

In 2005, a British reality TV program chose four finalists from a group of 25 applicants to become the world’s first space-tourists. They were flown to a training site in Russia, underwent rigorous training, and were about to embark on a 5-day journey into orbit.

At least that’s what they thought. In fact, the Russian training camp was a decommissioned military base near Suffolk, England. The entire project was a charade, and one of the four participants, as well as the pilots and the training crew, were actors and part of the conspiracy.

After five days in “space” – where they were provided with ludicrous explanations for the lack of zero gravity, performed nonsensical experiments, and gazed at earth through the observation window – the adventure culminated with a spacewalk. Instead of stepping out into the void, they stepped out into a film studio in front of a live audience.

Clearly, the “passengers” were embarrassed at being the butt of an elaborate practical joke. It may have eased their humiliation that they were paid 25,000 British pounds for their participation. But does that excuse this kind of deception? Is it different from many psychology experiments, which depend on deception to gain insights into human psychology?

Much of reality TV celebrates deception, betrayal, bullying, and winning at any cost. What is the effect on us as individuals and members of society? Are these kinds of entertainment contributing to us becoming more cynical, self-absorbed, and disconnected from one another?

If so, what is their attraction, and what can we do about their impact on our culture?

Meet this week’s panel:

John E. McGlothlin is a captain in the Army Judge Advocate General's Corps and D.C. army reserve, as well as an adjunct professor of business and ethics at the University of Maryland Global Campus.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Annette Taylor is a researcher of evolutionary psychology and biology. Her website, Cavedweller Club, offers guidance and insights on how we can better understand the way our own hardwiring influences unconscious bias and decision making.

#ethics

#culture

#humor

#mindset

#grappling

Grappling with the Gray #104: Back to the bronze age?

Wed, 11 Sep 2024 00:00:00 -0500

What happens when technical performance clashes with technical problems?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Sam Ardery, JC Glick, and S. Scott Mason join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Imagine that you’ve just completed your skating, diving, or gymnastic event to win Olympic Bronze. You are elated to have earned the right to stand on the podium and receive your medal. Minutes later, you discover that, because of a scoring error, the athlete who had ranked fifth actually came in ahead of you to take third.

Would you argue that once the results have been announced, the decision is irrevocable, or would you graciously return the medal that you hadn’t actually earned in the first place?

This, of course, is exactly what happened in the recent Olympic games, when judges misscored U.S. gymnast Jordan Chiles and awarded the bronze to Romania’s Ana Bǎrbosu then, moments later, stripped the medal from Ms. Barbosu and gave it to Ms. Chiles… until the next day, when the judges reversed themselves again, instructing Ms. Chiles to return her medal because she had failed to submit her review request within the 60-second filing period, missing the window by four seconds.

Days after the debacle, the International Gymnastics Federation President finally addressed the issue, blaming the controversy on the lack of technology used in the judging process… a non-apology apology which satisfied virtually no one.

Judges are human beings, so judging errors can happen, painful as they are. But it’s often what we do after we make mistakes that matters most, and how we plan ahead to minimize mistakes when they happen.

Is a 60-second window for filing an inquiry reasonable – especially considering that every athlete except the one who goes last is given four minutes? Does it matter that the judges accepted the inquiry when–because it was late–they shouldn’t have accepted it at all? Should there even be a limit when a judging error deprives a deserving athlete of a medal? And once the error has been made, should the feelings of the undeserving athlete who was told she had won figure into the resolution?

Both Chiles and Barbosu asked to share the bronze medal. Is that the right decision, or should actual performance scoring be the only criterion?

Meet the panelists:

Sam Ardery is a national mediator, trial lawyer, consultant, speaker, and author. He teaches negotiation at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and is author of Positively Conflicted: Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World.

Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as CEO of the Commit Foundation, an organization that helps high-performance veterans find their next adventure.

#ethics

#accountability

#culture

#values

#olympics

Grappling with the Gray #103: Trust taken too far?

Wed, 04 Sep 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Is it ever beneficial to intentionally send the wrong message?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Richard Bistrong, Ron Carucci, and 💜Heather R Younger, J.D., CSP® join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Earlier this summer, a CEO and tech entrepreneur named Rob Dance ignited a firestorm on Twitter with a post titled: "Things I'm sick of hearing from my employees."

His list included: Can I leave early today? I'll be in late this morning. My child is sick, can I rush off? I've got a doctor's appointment tomorrow, is that okay? I'm going to be late back from lunch, I've got some things to sort.

He concludes with this pithy, editorial remark:

I don’t care.

Not surprisingly, the post attracted a barrage of critics, decrying his insensitivity and calling him a variety of colorful names. To which he replied with a short question:

Did you finish reading the whole post?

Because he concludes with these comments:

"I hired you for a job and I fully TRUST you to get it done. I don't need you to account for every single hour. Times have changed, and the workplace is different these days. People are sick of being treated like children.

"All that should matter is that everyone is happy, and that the work gets done. My advice to companies: Treat your staff like adults. That’s it, that’s the big secret. Give them autonomy, respect that they have lives outside of work, don’t gaslight them into being grateful for not being fired every day. Output should always trump hours."

One of my mantras is that Trust is the T in ETHICS. But is it wise to trust that readers will make it to the end of a provocative post and not miss the twist at the end? Does this style come across as snarky or refreshingly candid? Is it worth the risk of being misunderstood to make a critical point?

And aside from style, is Rob Dance’s advice practical in a culture where so many employers complain about workers slacking off and shirking their responsibilities? And if it is, why does it seem to be so rare?

***

Richard Bistrong is CEO of Front-Line Anti-Bribery, LLC, assisting organizations with ethics, compliance, and anti-bribery challenges to help surface unknowns and shine a light on the real-world importance of operationalizing ethics & integrity.

Ron Carucci is owner and managing partner of Navelent, helping organizations articulate a strategy for success, translate that strategy into results, and develop exceptional leaders along the way.

Heather Younger is a Certified Speaking Professional and LinkedIn Learning instructor. She is also CEO and founder of Employee Fanatix, helping equip companies and organizations with the intelligence they need to improve the quality of work life for their employees.

#ethics
#leadership
#communication
#culture
#trust
#grappling

Grappling with the Gray #102: The beam in your I?

Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:00:00 -0500

How responsible am I for other people's irresponsible behavior?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Jeff Koziatek, • Sam Silverstein, CSP, CPAE, and Kirsten Yurich join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is this week's ethics challenge:

Your house is adjacent to the entrance of a primary school. Morning drop-offs and afternoon pickups are always a mess as cars jockey for position on the narrow street. Often, parents mount the curb as they back up in order to make their turns.

Occasionally, they bump into the four-inch post that supports your backyard fence. Sometimes, they hit it hard enough to dislodge or break it. You complain to the school and to the parents, but your objections aren’t taken seriously and the damage continues.

During summer break, you replace the wooden post with an iron ‘I’ beam and paint it brown to match the color of the fence. It’s not long into the next school year when you get a knock at your door.

An irate parent is demanding that you pay for the damage to their car from hitting your post. This parent won’t be the last. You point out that the parent was both breaking the law by mounting the curb and reckless for doing so at high enough speed to cause damage. Then you shut the door in their face.

This story, posted on Reddit, was celebrated by commenters. But was the homeowner’s response the right thing to do?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jeff Koziatek is a certified speaker and peak performance coach, helping professionals to navigate change, sharpen focus, avoid burnout, and make a difference. He is also one of St. Louis Business Monthly's 100 St. Louisans you should know.

Sam Silverstein is Founder of The Accountability Institute. He is an executive consultant on workplace culture, a Hall of Fame Keynote Speaker, and author of numerous books including “No More Excuses” and “The Accountability Advantage.”

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #101: Stalking the perfect employee?

Wed, 21 Aug 2024 04:00:00 -0500

When does character assessment become invasion of privacy?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™, Diane Helbig, and Raj Tut join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is this episode's ethics challenge:

A woman shows up at a company office to interview for an administrative position. Her resume is impressive, she is dressed professionally, and she enjoys a cordial and comfortable conversation with the interviewer.

As the interview seems to be winding down, she feels confident and encouraged, when out of the blue the interviewer says, “May I take a look in your purse?”

The candidate is caught completely off guard. When she asks why, the interviewer replies, “It’s the best indicator of a woman’s organizational character.”

More bewildered than before, the candidate hands over her purse. The interviewer looks quickly through it, hands it back, then thanks the candidate for coming in and shows her the door. A few days later, she receives an email that her application was not successful.

This case, which was posted online, generated considerable speculation as to the interviewer’s motive. What did they hope to learn? Why might the candidate have been rejected? And should she have handed over the purse when asked?

Other stories include the interviewer who gives candidates a wobbly chair to see if they would speak up and ask for a different one, or the interviewer who invites candidates out for a drink to see if he can get them drunk.

Assuming that the intent is to discover insights into a candidate’s character, are these kinds of tactics ethical, or are they deceptive? Even if they reveal what the interviewer hopes to discover, are they worth the cost in undermining trust and respect? And how should interviewees respond if they feel boundaries are being crossed by their prospective employers?

Meet the panelists:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Raj Tut is founder and CEO of Storyboard Living, creating communities that provide a safe, beautiful backdrop for life’s greatest moments.

Grappling with the Gray #100: Opting out of the Ten Commandments?

Wed, 14 Aug 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Thank you for your support in reaching episode 100 of Grappling with the Gray!

Celebrate with me as three of my stalwart recurring guests -- Kimberly Davis, 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D., and Peter Winick -- join the panel for this milestone.

Here is our topic:

This past June, a bill signed into law made Louisiana the only state requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in every classroom in public schools and colleges.

Not surprisingly, civil liberties groups planned lawsuits to block the law, arguing it would unconstitutionally breach protections against government-imposed religion, unfairly and illegally eroding the constitutional barrier between religion and government.

This is a dramatic reversal from 2003, when former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore was ousted from the bench after disobeying a federal judge’s order to remove a 5,000 pound granite monument of Ten Commandments display from the state court building.

Baton Rouge Attorney General Liz Murrill commented that, “The 10 Commandments are pretty simple, but they also are important to our country’s foundations.”

Research seems to back her up. Behaviorist Dan Ariely has reported that when students were asked to recount the 10 Commandments, they demonstrated less inclination to cheat, even though many of them couldn’t name more than two of the Commandments.

A similar question arises almost every December over whether Christmas should be a national holiday. Objectors claim that it is a religious observance unjustly imposed on non-Christians, while defenders argue it is part of our national heritage and part of the cultural fabric of our country.

The late Senator Joe Lieberman remarked that the Constitution promises freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Is it possible for us to acknowledge a cultural heritage built on religion while preserving the boundaries between church and state?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Melissa Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #99: The rules of lawlessness?

Wed, 07 Aug 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Can compliance demands undermine a healthy and ethical culture?

That's the question driving the conversation when 🟦 Carolyn Lebanowski, Toni McLelland MSc FRSA, and Colin D Smith join the ethics panel for a special transatlantic episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A recent post on Reddit recounts how an employee found themselves reprimanded by their manager for taking 45 minutes for break one day instead of 30 minutes. The employee recalled taking 31 minutes that day, because someone stopped them on their way back with a concern that took time to resolve.

It seems that the company punch clock rounded to the nearest 15 minute interval, thereby inaccurately recording the break time, but the manager refused to accept that explanation.

From that day forward, the employee would go on break exactly seven minutes after the cutoff time and return within seven minutes of the cutoff on the other end. For instance, punching out at 10:08 would get rounded up to 10:15, and punching in at 10:52 would get rounded back to 10:45. In this way, a 44 minute break would be recorded as exactly 30 minutes.

When a supervisor told the employee that it seemed they were gone longer than usual, the employee simply said, “Check the record.”

Novelist Robert A. Heinlein coined the term “white mutiny,” which means following the letter of the law so literally that you subvert the spirit of the law, Amelia Bedilia style. The contemporary term is malicious compliance.

When bosses or managers demand strict compliance to the point where they end up punishing employees because of inequities in their company system, are employees justified in exploiting loopholes in the system to their own advantage?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Carolyn Lebanowski is Strategic Leadership Partner with The Institute for Leadership and LifeLong Learning International advising spiritual nonprofit institutions.

Toni McLelland is Founder and Director of 1st Life Group. She is a Critical Friend & Business Mentor in Social Justice, Mobility & Impact leading sustainable change through DEIB & Compassion.

Colin Smith aka The Listener, works with leaders and professionals to improve the listening, thinking and relationships skills of individuals and teams.

GWTG Archive Episode #23: Secret identity?

Tue, 30 Jul 2024 04:00:00 -0500

When you do the wrong thing for the right reason, it is still the wrong thing?

Is it possible to apply the principle of fairness so even-handedly that it leads to unfair outcomes?

Since mercy is the suspension of justice, how do we avoid sacrificing a core value when we have to choose between them?

These are the questions that drive the discussion when Nick Gallo, Annette Simmons, and Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel for this archive episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is this episode's ethics challenge:

A St. Louis man who lived in Germany for three decades under a false identity was sentenced in federal court yesterday to time served and three years of supervised release.

After graduating high school in 1981, DeLeo Barner joined the military. In 1984, he was dismissed from the military for "missing a readiness alert."

Within three weeks of returning to the home of his youth, two of Barner's friends were shot dead on the streets of his neighborhood in St. Louis. Many others were either dead or in prison.

Wanting to rejoin the military and escape the violence of his neighborhood, Barner stole the identity of another St. Louis man and joined the army as Joel Sanders. He was stationed in Berlin for many years until receiving a medical discharge in 1988.

For three decades, he remained in Germany working for security firms there. He built a civilian life as Joel Sanders until 2018, when his ruse was discovered. At the time of his arrest, Barner had a German girlfriend and eight children, six of whom still reside in Berlin. He pled guilty to one count of fraud and was sentenced to time served, but the terms of his release prevent him from returning to his home in Germany and to his family, including his 13 year old daughter.

Granted that he had been actively engaged in the crime of fraud for three decades, should the law take into account specific conditions of essentially victimless crimes committed in the distant past, or does the integrity of the legal system require accountability from offenders regardless of collateral damage?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Nick Gallo, aka the Ethics Evangelist, is CEO of Compliance Line, as well as creator and host of The Ethics Experts podcast.

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

Annette Simmons is a speaker, trainer, consultant, and author of The Story Factor -- named one of the 100 Best Business Books of All Time.

GWTG Archive Episode #49: Two-timing the boss?

Wed, 24 Jul 2024 04:00:00 -0500

If you get your work done in half the time, is the other half of your time really yours?

That's the question that drives the discussion when Mark Brown, Deb Coviello, and Dr. Robyn Odegaard join the ethics panel for this archive episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

In May, 2023, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced that she would resign from her position amidst charges of chronic mismanagement and neglect of duty. Among other allegations, local reporters discovered that Ms. Gardner had been taking classes in a full time nursing program during a staffing crisis in her office.

In general, is it ethical to hold two full-time jobs at once? With advances in artificial intelligence, some workers claim that they can easily handle the demands of two, three, or four jobs without compromising their performance in any of them.

Is it proper for individual employees to make such an assessment themselves? Even if it’s true at any particular moment, are those employees likely to relinquish one of those jobs (and its paycheck) if their workload increases and they have to cut corners?

And even if they are getting all their work done competently, are they unethical for deceiving employers who don’t know about those second or third jobs? Or, if they are doing all the work they are being paid to do, is the remaining time in their day theirs to do with as they please? Is using unallotted time for another job any different from playing Candy Crush or surfing TikTok?

Meet the panel:

Mark Brown, CSP is a world champion speaker, an executive coach, and an artificial intelligence software advisor.

Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™ is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is known as the Mental MacGyver. She provides luxury level, high performance support and coaching to executives, founders, celebrities and athletes. She is also the creator and facilitator of the Quick Hits podcast.

#ethics #bestpractices #companyculture #integrity #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #98: Watching me watching you?

Wed, 10 Jul 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Should there be a presumption of privacy in public always, never, or sometimes?

That's the question driving the discussion when Mark Brown, CSP, Mark O'Brien, and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join me to Grapple with the Gray!

And here is our topic:

In the wake of October 7, Columbia University has taken center stage amidst concerns about campus anti-Semitism. After a May 31 open forum addressing student safety and campus culture, three college deans were suspended for exchanging dismissive texts during the program. These included vomit emojis in reference to an op-ed by a campus rabbi and the suggestion that Jewish groups were exploiting the issue to boost fundraising revenues.

Ironically, the dean who announced the suspensions was a fourth participant in the email exchanges for which the other three were suspended. He made no mention of his own involvement, but he did decry what he called an invasion of privacy by the unnamed individual who photographed the text messages from a row behind the deans.

Does he have a point? Does this constitute an invasion of privacy? The photographer claimed in an op-ed, published anonymously because of fear of reprisal, that they considered it a moral imperative to report and publicize these remarks.

What if the texts had been about private medical information? What if they had been about human trafficking? Those cases seem more black and white, and less gray. Or is the subject matter irrelevant since, perhaps, there is no presumption of privacy in a public place?

Meet the panel:

Mark Brown is a world champion international speaker, executive coach, artificial intelligence software advisor and, most important, devoted husband of his wife Andrea.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

#ethics #leadership #culture #accountability #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #97: Flying too high?

Wed, 03 Jul 2024 04:00:00 -0500

How do we weigh quantifiable costs against intangible benefits?

That's the question that drives the conversation when Catherine Fitzgerald, Sven Lauch, and Stewart Wiggins join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

A recent documentary about the Blue Angels profiles the extraordinary discipline required to fly fighter jets in formation a mere 12 - 18 inches apart from one another and perform a variety of other aerobatic stunts. The film portrays the dedication of the team and the eagerness of navy pilots to join their ranks to perform heart-stopping aerial stunts.

However, heart-stopping may be a bit too descriptive, as nearly ten percent of Blue Angel pilots have died on the job since the team formed in 1946, most of them due to human error. The flying team was the brainchild of Admiral Chester Nimitz, who hoped that flying exhibitions would boost Navy morale while gaining public and political support for a larger defense budget.

The airshows reportedly cost taxpayers $35 million dollars a year, consume massive amounts of fuel, seem to flout concerns about climate change, and produce deafening noise pollution. One columnist observed that the Blue Angel budget could feed all homeless veterans for over a month, and headlines occasionally appear about pilots protesting the danger of the maneuvers they are commanded to perform. Nevertheless, the performances remain tremendously popular.

The arguments for the shows and against the shows are both entirely defensible. How do we evaluate intangibles like public and service member morale against quantifiable objections concerning cost, safety, and environmental impact? If we want to be completely practical, we should do away with holiday parades, NASCAR, and the NFL, shouldn’t we? Or should we?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Business Advising. She works with founders and CEOs seeking to align their people, performance, and profits. as they navigate the choppy waters of scaling their thriving businesses.

Sven Lauch comes to us from Plymouth, England. He is Director of Eyes Up Training Limited, which offers a holistic approach to implementing organizational change with emphasis on developing transferable skills that anyone can learn.

Stewart Wiggins joins us from Paris. He is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Grappling with the Gray #96: Paycheck to paycheck?

Wed, 26 Jun 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Are the rich getting too much richer, and is there a limit to how much the poor will take?

That's the question that will drive the conversation when Mark O'Brien, Jolanta Pomiotlo, and Kirsten Yurich join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

According to a recent report, median pay packages for CEOs rose to $16.3 million through 2023, up 12.6%. Meanwhile, wages and benefits netted by private-sector workers rose 4.1%. At half the companies in this year’s survey, it would take the worker at the middle of the company’s pay scale almost 200 years to make what their CEO did.

According to some metrics, the average CEO is earning 600 times more than the average employee. Back in the 60s, the ratio was about 50 to 1.

Defenders of the steadily rising pay gap claim it is simple capitalism. CEOs responsible for company earnings are more in demand, therefore they command higher salaries. Others claim it is a symptom of crony capitalism: CEO board members vote one another higher salaries expecting reciprocity from their peers.

Whatever the true reason, the disparity strikes many non-CEOs as patently unfair. They don’t expect the same salaries, but they might reasonably expect a proportionate rate of increase. The resulting resentment likely affects employee satisfaction and, consequently, productivity; and it also erodes trust and confidence in the system, potentially contributing to systemic instability.

Is this a problem that needs to be addressed? If so, can it be addressed? If we rely on the government to enforce antitrust laws to guarantee fair practices, should the same apply with respect to salaries… or is there an intrinsic difference? How effective or consistent is government in ensuring an even playing field, and is there any alternative solution?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Jolanta Pomiolto is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

Kirsten Yurich is an Organizational Performance Management Consultant, Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and Adjunct Professor of Education at Felician University.

Grappling with the Gray #95: Out with the old, in with the new?

Wed, 19 Jun 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Are we neglecting old relationships in hope of profiting from new ones?

That's the question that drives the discussion when Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, CPA, Jim Ristuccia, and Jon Strickler join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Recently, I had enough of Charter Communications. My monthly fees kept going up, service got worse, and AT&T came around with faster service and a low rate locked in for 10 years. I signed up, then called Charter to cancel.

Immediately, they offered to upgrade my service, and slash my monthly fees. When I demurred, they offered me discounted cell phone service and their firstborn child. Okay, I made up that last part.

A few weeks later, I called the St. Louis Post-Dispatch to cancel my mother’s subscription after the price went up to $175/ month. Same story: Please stay and we’ll cut your fees by over 50%.

The service industry is famous for offering special deals to attract new customers. But what about their old customers? Shouldn’t loyalty count for something? And don’t these special offers indicate that customers are paying more than they should be?

Aren’t we better off living in a world where we cultivate loyalty rather than trying to seduce strangers to abandon long-standing relationships? Is this really the best way to do business, or would businesses do better in the long run working harder to retain the customers they have? And even if it is best for the bottom line, what is the social cost?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer Elder is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Jim Ristuccia is CEO Peer Advisory Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc., facilitating meaningful and impactful conversations to help leaders become the best version of themselves and grow their organizations.

Jon Strickler is Peer Leaders Group Chair with Vistage Worldwide, Inc. He is a West Point graduate and business consultant with operational experience at more than 40 companies across four continents, as well as a national champion mountain biker.

Grappling with the Gray #94: Have my cake and eat it, too?

Wed, 05 Jun 2024 04:00:00 -0500

At what cost can we expect others to take responsibility for our own well being?

That's the question that the ethics panel takes up when Giovanni Gallo, Nick Gallo, and Diane Helbig join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A woman posted online how she likes to bake more than she likes to eat. Although she typically shares her culinary creations with friends and family, on one occasion she asked and received permission to leave her leftovers in the common area of her apartment building with a note that anyone who wanted could help themselves.

Over time, this developed into an informal tradition. Occasionally, other tenants put out their treats as well.

And then it stopped. One day a neighbor knocked on the door and accused the baker of poisoning her son after she had to take the boy to the emergency room for an allergy attack because he ate a peanut butter brownie.

The baker agreed to help pay for the hospital trip and stopped putting out her baked goods. When one neighbor asked why she had stopped, the baker recounted the story without mentioning the name of the mother who had complained.

Subsequently , the mother returned. It seemed that the neighbors were upset with the mother and blamed her for stopping the availability of baked goods. She accused the baker of intentionally defaming her and said she would lodge a complaint with the landlord.

Was the baker wrong for putting out the baked goods in the first place, or for sharing the story with a neighbor who was able to figure out which other party was involved? In general, how far does a community have to go to accommodate individual needs rather than expecting individuals to assume a higher level of responsibility for themselves and their families?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Giovanni Gallo is an ethics enthusiast, compliance culturist, CTO and Co-CEO at Ethico, empowering leaders who care to manage risk, improve communication, reinforce culture, and establish ethical work environments.

Nick Gallo, aka the Ethics Evangelist and Captain Culture, is creator and host of The Ethics Experts podcast. He is Chief Servant and Co-CEO of Ethico, as well as brother of Giovanni Gallo.

Grappling with the Gray #93: Ain't that a-shaming?

Wed, 29 May 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Is our confusion between panic and panacea leading us into social chaos?

That's the question that underlines the conversation when Christopher Bauer, PhD, CSP, CFS, 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D., and Mary Beth Molloy join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Recently, Oprah Winfrey apologized for the part she played in promoting unhealthy and unrealistic diets.

She said one of her “biggest regrets," is bringing out 67 pounds of animal fat onto her TV show stage in 1998 to illustrate how much weight she had recently lost. Indeed, throughout her career the media has never tired of reporting on her weight going up and down.

On the one hand, multiple online health sites decry the harmful effects of “fat-shaming.” On the other hand, the CDC website highlights the need to “reverse the obesity epidemic” by encouraging community efforts to focus on supporting healthy eating and active living in a variety of settings.

What are some other examples of mixed messages being broadcast throughout our society? In general, are we becoming simultaneously hypersensitive and hypercritical, whitewashing unhealthy or unattractive behavior while catastrophizing where those behaviors are leading us?

If our culture perpetually waffles between underplaying and overreacting to the problems we need to address, how can leaders effectively promote positive change?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Melissa Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Mary Beth Molloy is a Certified Executive Coach. She is President of MBM Elevate, CEO Group Chair of Vistage Worldwide, Inc., and national board member of Per Scholas, a nonprofit that provides no-cost technical training to individuals often excluded from tech careers.

Grappling with the Gray #92: Meat me in the middle?

Wed, 22 May 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Do we prevent ourselves from getting anything by trying to get everything?

That's the question that underlies the discussion when Jeff Koziatek, 🟦 Mark O'Brien, and Annette Taylor join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our scenario:

On May 1st, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill prohibiting the production and sale of lab-grown meat. When I read the headline, I couldn’t help wondering why.

It seems that Bill Gates, a heavy investor in the industry, has publicly urged governments to enact legislation to shift toward 100% synthetic meat and eventually ban real meat. The Florida law represents a backlash against corporate and government overreach that attempts to limit personal choice and control private conduct.

The irony, or course, is that by outlawing synthetic meat altogether, the legislation does exactly what it is designed to prevent.

So who bears most of the blame here? Advocates for social engineering who seek to control behavior and limit choice, or the government for overreacting when it could just as easily have passed a bill guaranteeing free access to and availability of natural meat?

In general, how many movements either self-destruct or produce needless controversy by inciting conflict rather than seeking principled compromise? Why do so many leaders seem incapable of recognizing that gradual implementation of innovative ideas is a far more effective way of producing positive change?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jeff Koziatek is a certified speaker and peak performance coach, helping professionals to navigate change, sharpen focus, avoid burnout, and make a difference. He is also one of St. Louis Business Monthly's 100 St. Louisans you should know.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Annette Taylor is a researcher of evolutionary psychology and biology. Her website, Cavedweller Club, offers guidance and insights on how we can better understand the way our own hardwiring influences unconscious bias and decision making.

Grappling with the Gray #91: Who pays down the debt?

Wed, 15 May 2024 04:00:00 -0500

When do some people's problems become everybody's problems?

That's the question driving the conversation when 🟦 Jeff Ikler, Sarah Kalmeta, and S. Scott Mason join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

“With the stroke of his pen,” said Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, “Joe Biden is attempting to saddle working Missourians with a half trillion dollars in college debt."

On the one hand, college debt poses an enormous burden, especially for young people just entering the workforce. Freeing them from that weight will relieve tremendous stress and pressure as they try to establish themselves professionally.

On the other hand, many students chose to major in subjects that offer no clear career pathway. Is it not their fault, or their parents’ fault, or their educational institution’s fault that they now face economic hardship? In any event, why should that responsibility be transferred to taxpayers?

And what about those who have been dutifully paying back their loans for years? Why should they be excluded? NYU recently announced free medical school, but my recently graduated daughter in law didn’t qualify, which she thinks is horribly unfair.

My wife took out loans for her teachers certification and masters programs, which were eventually forgiven because of her choice of career. Are those who work in some form of public service more deserving of forgiveness than others?

Without getting into the weeds of presidential or congressional authority, can we reasonably defend the well-intentioned initiative of tuition forgiveness against claims that it unfairly and unequally shifts the burden from students onto the wider population?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jeff Ikler is Director of Quetico Executive Career and Personal Leadership Coaching, host of the podcast Getting Unstuck—Cultivating Curiosity, and co-host of the podcast Cultivating Resilience: A Whole Community Approach to Alleviating Trauma in Schools.

Sarah Kalmeta, aka Sarah the Pivoter, is a speaker, author and relentless truthseeker. She is founder of Pivot Point International, a high performance consulting company.

Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

#ethics
#education
#culture
#accountability
#grappling

Grappling with the Gray #90: Pearls before Swine?

Wed, 08 May 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Is doing the wrong thing ever the right thing?

That classic ethical question underscores the conversation when Kimberly Davis, Peter Winick, and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

True story:

An elderly Jewish man with late stage cancer was given only a few weeks to live by his doctors. His final wish was to spend his last days in Israel and be buried there, so he booked a flight and made arrangements for hospice care when he arrived.

A woman affiliated with the hospice organization volunteered to accompany him to the airport to ensure that he safely boarded his flight. However, when they arrived at the counter, the gate agent looked at the gentleman, immediately took note of his frail appearance, and declared that it was unsafe for him to fly, denying him permission to board the plane.

After several unsuccessful attempts to convince the agent to reconsider, the woman took off her string of pearls, handed them to the agent, and said they were his if he let the man board the flight, which he did. The woman did not ask for any compensation from the elderly passenger, who never even learned her last name. He boarded the plane and never heard from her again.

Was the woman a hero for sacrificing her precious necklace, or was she a criminal for bribing the gate agent? Was the gate agent being overly officious, or simply following protocol? Were the airline restrictions too strict, too ambiguous, or entirely reasonable to avoid a mid-air emergency?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

#ethics
#culture
#compassion
#perspective
#grappling

GWTG Archive Episode #46: What's good about it?

Wed, 01 May 2024 04:00:00 -0500

What happens when we sabotage our own efforts to promote values by sending contradictory messages?

That's the ethics challenge the panel takes up when Natalia Alvarez, Ph.D., JC Glick, and Lovelda Vincenzi join me to Grapple with the Gray.

A teacher at the private Girls’ Day School Trust in the UK was recently ordered to apologize and subsequently told her contract would not be renewed after her class of 11-year-old students protested that her comments were offensive.

Her crime: Addressing the class with the words, “Good Afternoon, Girls.” Apparently, the students complained that the teacher “misgendered” them, since not all of them identify as female.

The school website states the following:

“The Girls’ Day School Trust is the UK’s leading family of 25 independent girls’ schools including two academies. In all of our schools, academic excellence is a given – at the GDST we develop character beyond the curriculum.

“Ensuring our girls are confident and fearless, determined to show what they can do. Nothing holds our girls back – they’re encouraged to embrace every role and subject. This is the GDST Difference.”

Without getting into the topic of gender identity, is there something incongruous about a self-named girls day school referring to students as “girls” on its own website while disciplining a teacher for calling students “girls”? Is the school indulging a double standard that undermines its educational integrity, or is there some justification for the distinction?

If character development is an educational value, shouldn’t that involve addressing grievances in a non-confrontational and non-punitive way? Would the school serve its students better by modeling how to resolve differences of belief and opinion through civil discourse rather than combativeness?

Finally, how else might the school administration have addressed student complaints?

#ethics #education #culture #leadership #grappling

Archive episode #52: Do two lefts make a right?

Wed, 24 Apr 2024 04:00:00 -0500

This is one of my all time favorite conversations. Enjoy this episode from the archives!

Here is our topic:

About five years ago, I was driving home from Dallas, Texas, when I pulled up to a toll booth in Oklahoma. Being somewhat directionally challenged, I told the attendant that I was turning west, thereby exempting myself from the toll of $2.50. When I reached the turnoff, however, I realized that I needed to go east, but there was no way of getting back to correct my error without a complicated and time consuming detour.

That error remained on my mind, and it seemed proper to mail a check to the Oklahoma department of transportation. However, I only seemed to remember that I needed to correct the error when I was in no position to do anything about it.

Last week, I was once again driving back from Dallas. I told the toll booth attendant that on my last trip I had mistakenly said west when I meant east and that I wanted to pay double. She told me not to worry about it and waved me through.

Did the attendant have the authority to turn down my offer to pay for my previous mistake? Should I have insisted she take the extra fee? What if it would have cost her extra effort to process my payment? Should I still send a check to the Oklahoma department of transportation?

In general, what attitude should we adopt toward small, unintentional errors that might cost more to correct than the loss or damage we originally caused?

Meet this week's panelists:

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as an author and TEDx speaker.

Sarah Kalmeta aka Sara the Pivoter, is founder of Pivot Point, a career transition coach, author, and podcast host.

S. Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

#ethics #society #culture #mindset #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #89: When the chips are down?

Wed, 17 Apr 2024 04:00:00 -0500

When does fun and games become deceitful manipulation? That's the topic the ethics panel takes up when Paul Edwards, Catherine Fitzgerald, and Frank Zaccari join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

A husband and wife are sitting on the couch watching TV. The wife hears her phone chirp, then realizes she left it in the kitchen.

She goes to get the phone and checks to see who texted her. The message is from her husband: “Since you’re in the kitchen, please bring more chips and a beer when you come back.”

Has the husband acted ethically? What should the wife do?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Paul Edwards used to drive large military vehicles through the deserts of the Middle East, armed with an assault rifle. Today, his occupation of ghostwriting requires him to ask questions first, and shoot later.”

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Executive Coaching. She works with founders and their leaders as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

Frank Zaccari is a Business and Organizational Development Expert, keynote speaker, TV and podcast host, 4X Amazon bestselling author, and Air Force veteran.

Grappling with the Gray #88: What color is your collar?

Wed, 10 Apr 2024 04:00:00 -0500

White collar vs. blue collar criminals: Who deserves to serve more time?

That's the question the ethics panel takes up when JC Glick, 🔆 Anne Nevel, CAE, and Andre van Heerden join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our scenario:

Last week, Joseph Tyler was sentenced to eight years in state prison and ordered to pay $23,000 in restitution to older Coloradans that he defrauded in a tree-trimming scam after pleading guilty to 51 counts of theft targeting at risk victims, a class three felony, and to theft, a class five felony.

In other headlines, cryptocurrency CEO and billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried faces the possibility of 100 years in prison for fraud and embezzlement. According to claims, hundreds of thousands of investors suffered irreparable financial harm, which Bankman-Fried denies and for which he has expressed no remorse. Many compare him to Bernie Madoff, who received an effective life sentence for massive embezzlement and subsequently died in prison.

Meanwhile, reports of unenforced shoplifting laws fill the headlines in cities across the U.S. A state prosecutor in Florida reportedly has a history of downgrading or dropping charges in serious criminal cases, resulting in released offenders committing more egregious crimes. (She was recently suspended by Governor Ron DeSantis.)

In Chicago, a convicted felon awaiting trial for murder has been released with electronic surveillance, while a businessman with no criminal record has been held in solitary confinement for 18 months over a divorce dispute.

On the one hand, we want white collar criminals to be held accountable, not merely get a slap on the wrist. On the other hand, there seems to be a disproportionate response showing more leniency to violent offenders. Inevitably, any perception of inequity undermines respect for the law, sows distrust in our judicial system, and contributes to a less stable society.

How do we address the apparent inequities of justice in an effort to preserve or restore confidence in our systems?

Meet this week’s panelists:

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as CEO of the Commit Foundation, an organization that helps high-performance veterans find their next adventure.

Anne Nevel is the Vice President of Education for a trade association and enjoys connecting the right people to the right projects to promote successful collaboration and partnership.

Andre van Heerden is Director of The Power of Integrity Ltd, drawing on the perspectives of history and philosophy to show how leadership drives performance by determining corporate culture.

Grappling with the Gray #87: Untrusted and over-verified?

Wed, 03 Apr 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Which is worse: suspicion or gullibility? And do we actually have to choose?

Those are the questions that drive my conversation with the incomparable Cy Wakeman when she joins me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

In a recent op ed posted in The Hill, Disaster Avoidance Expert Gleb Tsipursky writes:

“In the brave new world of hybrid work, where the lines between office and home are blurred, employers are navigating uncharted waters. Some have resorted to a draconian approach, implementing surveillance measures to monitor their employees’ productivity.”

Mr. Tsipursky goes on to describe how corporations such as JP Morgan and Barclays Bank seem to be suffering from “productivity paranoia,” leading them to track employee emails and even keystrokes.

Is it working? According to Glassdoor, 41% of employees feel less productive while being closely monitored. And according to HBR, surveillance makes employees “substantially more likely to engage in various rule-breaking behaviors, such as taking unapproved breaks, disregarding instructions, damaging workplace property, and even stealing office equipment.”

Apparently, the lack of trust makes people less trustworthy. It seems reasonable that employers want to ensure that employees are actually doing their jobs. So how can bosses and managers implement a trust-but-verify protocol that promotes worker integrity while avoiding the creation of a toxic culture? And what lessons can we take from these observations to help us have healthier relationships both in the office and outside of work as well?

***

Cy Wakeman is a drama researcher, international leadership speaker, consultant, and founder of Reality-Based Leadership. She is the author of four books, including the NY Times Bestseller, The Reality-Based Rules of the Workplace: Know What Boosts Your Value, Kills Your Chances, and Will Make You Happier and, most recently, Life’s Messy, Live Happy. Described as “the secret weapon to restoring sanity to the workplace,” Cy was voted in the top 100 leadership professionals to follow on twitter for 7 years in a row. For the last three years, she has ranked #1 among the Global Gurus list of Top 30 Leadership Professionals across the globe.

Grappling with the Gray #86: On a wing and a song?

Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Passion is a good thing. Except, perhaps, when it's not. How can we tell where to draw the line?

That's the question the ethics panel takes up when Toni McLelland MSc FRSA, Cathleen O’Sullivan, and Colin D Smith join me for a special transatlantic episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

With Taylor Swift’s current Eras tour the most successful in history, it’s inevitable that many Swifties sometimes end up on the same flights headed for the same concerts. A recent viral TikTok video shows nearly the entire contingent of passengers, together with the flight attendants, joining in a sing-a-long at 40,000 feet.

A few passengers, however, appear less than enthusiastic. In the comments, reactions were predictably mixed:

One person wrote: “I feel bad for other passengers, especially those with sensory issues, claustrophobia, or anxiety disorders.”

Another said, “I would seriously cry if I was on that plane – this is my worst fear.” Some referred to the flight as “torture” or “their personal hell,” joking that they would escape through the emergency exit if the sing-along happened to them.

Here’s my personal favorite: “First I thought the plane was going down or something, then I realised they are just singing Taylor Swift and thought.. that's worse.”

Clearly, the large majority of passengers were enjoying themselves. Does that give them the right to inflict discomfort on the minority? Or should the few nay-sayers just grin and bear it since so many others are getting so much pleasure from it?

What about the flight attendants? Should they participate, try to shut it down, or simply remain neutral? And if it should be stopped, how should that be handled?

Meet the panelists:

Toni McLelland is Founder and Director of 1st Life Group. She is a Critical Friend & Business Mentor in Social Justice, Mobility & Impact leading sustainable change through DEIB & Compassion.

Cathleen O’Sullivan is a leadership coach and host of the Legendary Leaders podcast. She helps female leaders grow their careers, their mindset, their confidence and sense of self-worth while enabling them to live a more balanced life that offers more time, more health and more fun!

Colin Smith aka The Listener, works with leaders and professionals to improve the listening, thinking and relationships skills of individuals and teams.

Grappling with the Gray #85: Free falling forward?

Wed, 20 Mar 2024 04:00:00 -0500

Along with gun rights, border protection, and trans-athletes, one of our most contentious issues is Daylight Savings Time.

That's the issue the ethics panel takes up when Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, CPA, Diane Helbig, and 🟦 Mark O'Brien join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

It’s almost that time again. Get ready to set your clocks forward an hour. Or is it back an hour?

Some people love daylight savings time. Some people hate it. And some people don’t care, don’t see what the point is, or just don’t like the semi-annual ritual of changing the clocks.

In March, 1918, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Standard Time Act, putting daylight savings time into effect for the first time in the U.S. to save energy costs during WWI. In February 1942, President Franklin Roosevelt did the same thing.

When the 1973 oil embargo hit, President Richard Nixon signed year-round DST into law, hoping to ease the national gas crisis. The time change proved unpopular. According to NBC News, Eight Florida children died in traffic accidents that were linked to the time change, which was reversed in October 1974 by President Gerald Ford.

Two years ago, Senator Marco Rubio introduced the Sunshine Act in an effort to make DST permanent once again. And once again, there was great debate.

What are the ethical questions involved in changing the clocks, especially given that the 24 hour clock seems an arbitrary construct? Arguments that DST saves energy usage and saves lives on the highway are widely contested, and the benefits for agricultural work are similarly unclear, especially in our age of mechanization.

Is this all much ado about nothing, or is there really a compelling argument one way or the other? How do we approach the issue in a way that takes all views into account?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer Elder is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Grappling with the Gray #84: Changing lanes?

Wed, 13 Mar 2024 04:00:00 -0500

If life isn't fair, should we stop trying?

That question underlies this episode's topic as Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™, 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D., and John E. McGlothlin join the the ethics panel to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our challenge:

Since the topic of transgender rights has become widespread, the debate over biological men competing in women’s sports has become heated, to say the least. Lia Thomas, a 6’ 1” biological man who identifies as a woman, won an NCAA Division I national championship, after tying for fifth in a different meet against Riley Gaines, a biological woman who was the 2022 Southeastern Conference Women's Swimming and Diving Scholar-Athlete of the Year.

Presumably, the reason for the existence of men’s and women’s sports is because of the recognition that men on average have greater size, strength, and muscle mass that give them an advantage over women. Martina Navratilova and Serena Williams, arguably the two greatest women tennis players in history, have both stated that they would be unable to compete successfully against men.

So what is the rationale for continuing the separation of sexes in sports if biological men can choose to compete as women based on self-identification?

In a recent article in Forbes, Oregon State University women & gender studies professor Susan M. Shaw proposes that, instead of gender divisions, athletics might be divided according to weight, as boxing and wrestling already are.

Is this a practical solution? What about team sports like basketball and football, where different body types are suited to different positions on the same team? And isn’t sports by definition inherently unfair, since stronger, more coordinated players have an automatic advantage over others?

What about locker rooms? Many female swimmers have complained that the presence of biological men is deeply offensive and threatening while they change in and out of their sportswear. Do the same arguments that applies on the playing field apply equally in the changing room?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Melissa Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

John E. McGlothlin is a captain in the Army Judge Advocate General's Corps and D.C. army reserve, as well as an adjunct professor of business and ethics at the University of Maryland Global Campus.

#ethics #culture #gender #society #values #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #83: Out through the in-door?

Wed, 06 Mar 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Can ethical standards be too high?

That's the question the ethics panel takes up when Marcus Aurelius Anderson, David Marlow, and Jason Todd join me to Grapple with the Gray. Please join us live!

Here is our topic:

I was getting off a plane after a trip to the east coast, when a neighbor on the same flight offered me a ride home. I heard him call his son-in-law, whom he told to meet us at departures.

“Why are you having him come to departures?” I asked.

“There’s less traffic there,” he replied. “It’s easier to get in and out quickly.”

I immediately felt uncomfortable. Kantian ethics teaches us to project from the individual to the universal. What if everyone used the same trick to avoid traffic? By adding to the congestion at departures, we’d be making it harder for departing passengers to get to their flights.

I considered saying something, but he had already hung up the phone, he was doing me a favor, and I questioned whether he would take my objections to heart. However, reflecting that catastrophic ethical blindness often begins with tiny moral compromises, I regretted not speaking up.

We should set our ethical standards higher, both for ourselves and because when others see us cutting ethical corners, we give them license to take similar shortcuts, thereby contributing to the erosion of ethical sensitivity in our society.

So to what degree should we apply the same standards we set for ourselves to others? Should we speak up in defense of them? And if we do, how do we avoid sounding sanctimonious or, in this case, ungrateful?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Marcus Aurelius Anderson is a Leadership and Executive Catalyst, TEDx and International Keynote Speaker, Author of "The Gift of Adversity", Host of ACTA NON VERBA Podcast, winner of Arete Syndicate “Create a Positive Impact” award.

David Marlow, aka the Ikigai Guy and the Versatile Guru, is a coach, speaker, and author who helps people live into their purpose and helps companies bring their purpose to their products and their people.

Jason Todd is a serial entrepreneur who empowers others through insightful books, engaging talks, and over 500 podcast episodes. He partners with founders, guiding them to business growth, personal fulfillment, and a sustainable, successful future.

#ethics #values #culture #mindset #accountability #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #82: Guilty on all counts?

Wed, 28 Feb 2024 04:00:00 -0600

How far can we ethically stretch the letter of the law in an effort to fulfil the spirit of the law?

That's the question the panel takes up on this episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Last week, Jennifer Crumbley was found guilty on four counts of involuntary manslaughter for her role in her 15 year old son Ethan’s murder of four classmates in a November 2021 shooting. Ethan pled guilty in 2022 and received a life sentence with no chance of parole.

This was the first time manslaughter charges were ever brought against anyone other than the actual perpetrator. Prosecutor Karen McDonald devised a “novel legal theory,” stretching the conventional application of the law in a way that her own legal team warned her was a “huge risk.” She seems to have been motivated by the belief that if parents know they can be imprisoned for their children’s crimes, they will take more responsibility for their children to prevent horrific mass shootings from happening.

In contrast to some other states, like Texas, Michigan law does not distinguish between involuntary manslaughter and criminal negligence – the former being active and the latter being passive. Consequently, the prosecutor had to choose whether to bend the accepted understanding of the law or settle for pursuing a lesser charge carrying a much reduced sentence.

Does it set a dangerous precedent for a prosecutor to reinterpret the law to work around lawmakers’ failure to legislate proportionate responses that serves as an effective deterrent? Is it fair to Jennifer Crumbley to be made an example of when parents of worse shooters were given a pass or a slap on the wrist? And isn’t there something incongruous about convicting a parent for a child’s crime while simultaneously trying and convicting the child as an adult?

Finally, is it possible to differentiate between one kind of judicial activism that fills necessary holes in the system and another kind that reflects the personal bias of court officials and potentially undermines the integrity of the law?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Ed Brenegar is Founder and Chief of Circle of Impact, LLC, teaching people to think for themselves, to act on their own initiative and to become people of impact within their organizations, communities, and institutions.

Cris Parker once again joins us from Sydney, Australia. She is Head of The Ethics Alliance, a community of organizations across sectors that are connected through The Ethics Centre, providing ethics-based counseling, consulting and education programs.

Stewart Wiggins joins us from Paris. He is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Grappling with the Gray #81: Whose fault is our default?

Wed, 21 Feb 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Are we making ourselves more cynical? If so, what is the cost?

Those are the questions the ethics panel takes up on this episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our scenario:

The rapper known as Killer Mike walked out of the Grammy Awards in handcuffs earlier this week. Reportedly, he was charged with misdemeanor assault and released on zero bail.

The choice of LAPD to arrest him as he was leaving the award ceremony is curious. Did they use the knowledge of his attendance to make it easier to find him, or did they delay his arrest so he could enjoy his moment in the sun winning three Grammys?

The answer to that question may be less important than our motivation for asking it? Because the real story here might be the optics of Killer Mike’s arrest rather than the arrest itself.

As society becomes less ethical, we become less trustful of celebrities, leaders, and institutions. Recurring scandals, many of them egregious but many others overblown by the media, incline us to attribute nefarious motives to almost any story that makes headlines.

There’s no question that the perception of an unethical culture encourages people to act less ethically. But has our ethical default setting changed in recent times? Has it always been this challenging to internalize and act according to ethical principles, or does acting ethically demand a more herculean effort than it once did? And if current cultural norms are making it easy for us to defend and excuse unethical behavior, what can we do about it individually and collectively?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Mark Herschberg is Chief Technology Officer and Chief Product Officer of Zereo.ai. He is a professional speaker and creator of Brain Bump, a free app that helps consumers of non-fiction content better access and retain what they learn.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is known as the Mental MacGyver. She provides luxury level, high performance support and coaching to executives, founders, celebrities and athletes. She is also the creator and facilitator of the Quick Hits podcast.

K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

Grappling with the Gray #80: Repaying bad with good?

Wed, 14 Feb 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Bruce Wayne tells Rachel Dawes that revenge and justice can be the same. Rachel replies:

"No, they're never the same, Bruce. Justice is about harmony. Revenge is about you making yourself feel better."

Is there ever an exception? That's the question the ethics panel takes up on this episode of Grappling with the Gray.

The following is a quote from ABC news online:

Three days after a jury awarded her over $83 million for Donald Trump's repeated defamatory statements, columnist E. Jean Carroll vowed to use the money on "something Donald Trump hates."

"If it'll cause him pain for me to give money to certain things, that's my intent," Carroll told George Stephanopoulos on "Good Morning America," suggesting she would create a "fund for the women who have been sexually assaulted by Donald Trump."

Without discussing the case, the decision, or the former president, how are we to evaluate the ethics of using restitution money for the expressed purpose of inflicting pain on the accused, or of withholding aid to victims of other perpetrators?

Presumably, anyone would find it admirable that Ms. Carroll intends using the money to help women who are victims of sexual assault. But is she essentially weaponizing the money to further punish a defendant already punished by the decision itself and, by doing so, depriving women victimized by other attackers of support they might desperately need?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Tim Hawkes is managing director of Unlimited Potential Coaching Specialists in the UK and director of global operations. He is an international speaker and works with organizations to develop organizational culture.

Sarah Kalmeta, aka Sarah the Pivoter, is a speaker, author and relentless truthseeker. She is founder of Pivot Point International, a high performance consulting company.

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

Grappling with the Gray #79: Some victims are more equal than others?

Wed, 31 Jan 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Is doing something half-right better than not doing it at all?
Or can selectively excluding good not only negate but overpower the benefit of what's included?

That's the dilemma the ethics panel takes up when Christopher Bauer, Catherine Fitzgerald, and Scott Mason join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

The following is taken from the About page on the Hostage Aid Worldwide website:

“Hostage Aid is a non-profit NGO established by a group of former hostages from around the world, families of hostages and subject matter experts, all of whom, based on their different personal experiences as well as suffering, have banded together to fight for the release of hostages globally while aiming to prevent this inhumane act of hostage taking from occurring against other innocent people.”

Bravo! Who could argue with that? What follows next is from the same organization’s Global Hostage Report 2023:

“Year 2023 was the most drastically eventful year for hostages and unlawfully detained persons globally since 1979, the most significant event being the Hamas attack on Israel. On October 7, Hamas militants and other Palestinian militant factions abducted around 125 foreigners and dual nationals from more than 20 different countries, to the Gaza Strip.”

You may remember that the number of hostages taken by Hamas was over 240. So how did Hostage Aid arrive at their count of 125? By excluding Israeli captives, most of whom were civilians, many of whom were women, children, and the elderly.

Even if the leaders of Hostage Aid agree with South Africa’s assertion that the Hamas attack of October 7 was justified as an act of resistance, how are we to explain the thinking that allows an organization devoted to “to providing humanitarian relief and support to current and former hostages” to ignore the largest group of hostages currently being held against their will?

https://hostageaid.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Hostage-Aid-Global-Hostage-Report-2023-January-16-Update.pdf

Meet this week’s panelists:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Executive Coaching. She works with C-level leaders and their teams as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

Grappling with the Gray #78: In the Secretary's defense?

Wed, 31 Jan 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Does the appearance of chaos promote chaos?

That's the question the ethics panel takes up this episode of Grappling with the Gray.
Here is our topic:

The recent disappearance of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin from the White House chain of command sent tremors through Washington and the country.

On January 2, shortly after returning home from an apparently successful procedure, the secretary experienced unexpected pain and returned to the hospital.

Pentagon officials were informed the secretary has been hospitalized, and Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks, on vacation in Puerto Rico, was informed she would be assuming additional duties but was not informed of the secretary’s hospitalization.

Throughout this period, the National Security Council, Defense Department and State Department were formulating a response to a military threat from Houthi rebels in the Red Sea, which culminated in a retaliatory strike on Baghdad on January 4, the same day President Biden was informed that Secretary Austin was back in the hospital.

According to some experts, there was never a significant breakdown in the chain of command. Former White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta agrees, but adds that there is a need for a more formally defined policy to ensure clear communication. According to Mr. Panetta, the administration “dodged a bullet.”

Even if we assume no harm, no foul, does the appearance of disorganization create a sense of insecurity among the American people, embolden our enemies, and create the potential for self-fulfilling prophecy? Even when there are no immediate consequences, don’t avoidable blunders project a lack of competence that can accelerate the erosion of standards? Or are occasional errors inevitable and excusable, as long as they serve to shore up lapses in procedural policy?

Meet this week’s panelists:

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as an author and TEDx speaker.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #77: Not for public consumption?

Wed, 24 Jan 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Is there ever such a thing as too much transparency, too much disclosure, or too much open information?

That's the subject the ethics panel takes up when Sam Ardery and Jennifer Elder join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our ethics challenge:

As of January 1, a new Florida law requires city officials to report their assets, liabilities, sources of income and net worth, the same disclosures previously required of state legislators, county commissioners, school board members, sheriffs, and other constitutional officers.

In response, dozens of city officials have resigned, citing reasons ranging from health concerns to opposing the invasion of their privacy.

The law, however, is an application of the Sunshine Amendment, which begins by stating the principle that ‘A public office is a public trust.’

We can probably all agree that transparency is a good thing, but is there a line between how much disclosure is enough and how much is too much?

Presidential administrations have been accused of weaponizing the IRS to harass political opponents with trivial or fabricated offenses by exploiting public information. Moreover, does demanding disclosure to ensure trust communicate a mixed message that officials aren’t trustworthy?

Aren’t public figures entitled to some measure of privacy in their personal lives? A recent NY Times op ed met with widespread criticism for speculating about Taylor Swift’s sexuality. We’ve come to take it for granted that outrageous treatment in the tabloids is the price of fame, but is that fair to celebrities, and is it healthy for society?

Of course we want public officials to be accountable for their financial and professional conduct. But if they feel their privacy is being unduly invaded, will that not discourage otherwise viable candidates from electing to serve the common good?

How do we gauge the point at which notoriety or public service carries an implicit acceptance of diminished personal privacy?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sam Ardery is a national mediator, trial lawyer, consultant, speaker, and author. He teaches negotiation at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and is author of Positively Conflicted: Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World.

Jennifer H. Elder, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Grappling with the Gray #76: No one left to speak?

Wed, 17 Jan 2024 04:00:00 -0600

🥷You've learned about the horrors of Auschwitz.
🥷You've read about the atrocities of October 7.
🥷You've watched the recent rise of Anti-Semitism in the US and around the world.

You want to do something. But what can you do?
After all you're just one person.
And maybe you're not even Jewish.

That's why you don't want to miss my conversation with 🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D.

Melissa is my hero. She's a non-Jew who has been fighting a one-woman war against anti-Semitism. And she stepped onto the field of battle months before October 7 was a date to remember.

Melissa is an inspiration to all of us who think we can't make a difference. And she tells a cautionary tale about how doing the right thing often carries unexpected consequences.

But the consequences are much worse when we wait for someone else to stand up and speak out.

Please join us for a riveting session not only Grappling but also Wrestling with the Gray.

Grappling with the Gray #75: Should I stay or should I go?

Wed, 10 Jan 2024 04:00:00 -0600

Is saying "I'm sorry" sometimes not enough?
Should we say we're sorry when we're not?
What if we're not sorry when we should be?

These are some of the questions the ethics panel will take up this Wednesday at 5:00 pm ET when Mark Brown, CSP, Deb Coviello, and Kimberly Davis join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our topic?

Days after a highly charged appearance before a Congressional hearing, University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill resigned under pressure after she refused to condemn anti-Semitism and genocidal slogans as violations of her school’s rules of conduct, despite offering a public apology.

Curiously, the presidents of Harvard and MIT, who gave virtually identical testimony at the same hearing, have received overwhelming support from their boards and faculty. Meanwhile, wealthy alumni are withdrawing their support in droves.

It’s hard to imagine that the three presidents did not confer with one another prior to the hearing, since they all gave the same answers, almost verbatim. For President Magill, at least, that seems to have been inadequate preparation. How might she have better prepared herself for the hearing that went so awry?

And what are we to make of the radically divergent reactions among three similar university communities? Do the responses of MIT and Harvard appear to be really about core principles or more about territorial autonomy and political posturing?

In general, how should leaders respond when their comments or behavior creates unexpected controversy? When and how can leaders recover from mistakes and when are they fatal to future effective leadership?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Mark Brown, CSP is a world champion speaker, an executive coach, and an artificial intelligence software advisor.

Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™ Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Grappling with the Gray #74: The principle paradox?

Wed, 20 Dec 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Are some topic too hot to discuss? Not when we're Grappling with the Gray, they're not.

This is the challenge the ethics panel takes up when Jennifer Elder, Mark O'Brien, and Stewart Wiggins join me to confront the clash between professional responsibility and personal conviction.

Here is our topic:

In the infamous 1857 Dred Scott case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that a slave could not sue for freedom because slaves were not citizens but essentially property. Under the law, this was an entirely defensible position.

Chief Justice Roger B. Taney personally opposed slavery; he even freed slaves he himself inherited. But he also believed the law was clear and that, as a justice of the court, he had a legal and moral obligation to interpret the law as it was written, regardless of whether he agreed with it or not.

Legal historians have largely cast the decision as villainous. But is it not a recipe for anarchy when government officers act according to their conscience rather than according to the law?

In 2015, a Kentucky county clerk refused to issue a same sex marriage license claiming that it violated her religious values. In 2017, acting Attorney General Sally Yates refused to defend an executive order imposing a temporary ban on refugees from countries connected with terrorist activity. Some legal authorities argued that Ms. Yates did not provide adequate justification for her refusal, failing to demonstrate or even claim that the order was unconstitutional.

Not surprisingly, the same conservatives who applauded the Kentucky clerk for her act of conscience castigated Ms. Yates for hers; and the same liberals who cheered on Ms. Yates were outraged by the Kentucky clerk’s contempt for the law.

And for years, metropolitan mayors around the country have established sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce federal immigration laws.

We acknowledge the legitimacy of exempting conscientious objectors from fighting in war. Are public servants entitled to the same consideration? If so, how do we ensure that acting according to conscience does not contribute to a total breakdown of the rule of law?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer H. Elder, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

🟦 Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Stewart Wiggins is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

#ethics #culture #values #accounability #justice #grappling #yonasongoldson #rabbigoldson #therabbi #grapplingwiththegray

Grappling with the Gray #73: No such thing as a free lunch?

Wed, 13 Dec 2023 04:00:00 -0600

🥷How to we resolve the tension between outcome and intention?
🥷How much does it mean to mean well if what we mean never materializes?
🥷How much is enough if we know we can't do it all?

These are some of the questions the ethics panel will address when Rashmi Airan, Nick Gallo, and Laura Elizabeth Gray join me to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our scenario:

You schedule a business lunch with a colleague or prospect. After five minutes of talking business, the conversation drifts into personal chatting and schmoozing. You have a nice time but never get back to business.

Since you intended this to be a business meeting and did discuss some business, is there anything wrong with submitting the cost of lunch as a business expense? Would it make a difference if you spent half the time on business, or 75%, or 99%?

What about the ethics of doing business with companies that outsource to countries without child labor laws or guilty of human rights violations? What about buying products that aren’t ethically sourced?

If we demand 100% ethics from others, are we not effectively cutting ourselves off from doing business? How do we accommodate the need for realistic standards in choosing business partners without compromising our own ethical integrity?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Rashmi Airan is a keynote speaker and consultant determined to create organizational cultures focused on integrity, authenticity, and accountability.

Nick Gallo, aka the Ethics Evangelist, is CEO of Compliance Line, as well as creator and host of The Ethics Experts podcast.

Laura Gray is a Passionate People Connector, Columnist, Author, and Development Director of The ALS Association Northern Ohio Chapter.

Grappling with the Gray #72: Talking Turkey and Humble Pie?

Wed, 06 Dec 2023 04:00:00 -0600

When protestors respond to reasonable questions about their causes with, "Why does it matter?" isn't it long past time that we addressed the failings of our education system?

Tune in this Wednesday here on LinkedIn Live at 5:00 pm ET when Diane Helbig, Brian Kelly, and K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski join the ethics panel for another episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic:

Thanksgiving has become a complicated holiday: many seem to feel that either we whitewash offenses against Indigenous peoples or scrap Thanksgiving altogether.

But isn’t it a sign of maturity to express appreciation for the good while also acknowledging and taking responsibility for the bad? Isn’t it the job of education to teach young people the skills to navigate the complexities of history and moral dilemmas?

The recent viral spread of Osama bin Laden’s “Letter to America” has driven home what many critics of education have railed against for years. Carefully selected excerpts disseminated on TikTok have filled an information vacuum among young people who have been denied basic knowledge and critical reasoning skills to understand the context and significance of history’s worst terror attack against the United States.

Another popular video showed a young man soliciting signatures on a college campus to support the Hamas charter. Students eagerly agreed to sign. Thankfully, when they were told what the charter contained, they quickly recanted their support. But why did they not first ask to read what they were signing?

One young woman chanting from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, was asked: “Which river?” Her reply: “What difference does it make?”

It is encouraging how many contributors have withdrawn their financial support after the recent wave of anti-Semitic violence on many college campuses. But aside from being outraged, what practical steps can we take to address the culture of ignorance and superficiality that is spreading through our society?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Brian Kelly is the CEO and Founder at Human Factors Consulting, LLC. He is an optimistic rebel, committed to humanizing leadership, relationships and workplaces by creating the conditions for people to thrive so your business can, too.

K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

Grappling with the Gray #71: Stay in your aisle?

Wed, 29 Nov 2023 04:00:00 -0600

🥷Should we draw a line between business practices and political activism?
🥷Should we keep our personal views out of the boardroom and off the billboards?
🥷Is it proper to use a business platform to support a social agenda that is not universally held?

Tune into LinkedIn Live when the ethics panel convenes at a special time for a special transatlantic episode Grappling with the Gray.

On recent panels, we’ve discussed objective reporting vs. editorial activism in the newsroom and freedom of speech vs. irresponsible rhetoric on college campuses.

There’s a similar tension facing companies when they wade into the social and political arena. A variety of companies have come under fire for their choice of spokespeople, their support of public or international policy, and their partnership with celebrities who may hold controversial or polarizing views.

Without getting into the weeds about specific controversies, what is there to say about businesses taking positions on hot-button issues?

On the one hand, don’t those with power and influence have a responsibility to advocate for equality and justice? On the other hand, since so many issues are complex, nuanced, and highly emotional, should businesses just mind their own business and leave social change to others?

As a consumer, is it practical, realistic, or even proper to expect businesses to remain neutral on social issues? Since we can’t agree on everything, at what point should I seriously consider boycotting businesses because of their political or social stance, even when I’m inconveniencing myself by doing so?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Pascal Derrien is CEO of Migraine Ireland, a registered charity dedicated to empowering migraineurs by providing innovative services through education, information and outreach programs.

🟦 Carolyn Lebanowski Strategic Leadership Partner with The Institute for Leadership and LifeLong Learning International, as well as a columnist at BIZCATALYST 360.

Toni McLelland MSc FRSA is Founder and Director of 1st Life Group. She is a Critical Friend & Business Mentor in Social Justice, Mobility & Impact leading sustainable change through DEIB & Compassion.

Grappling with the Gray #70: The Final Frontier?

Wed, 22 Nov 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Should we look to the stars to solve our problems, or do we already have enough to deal with here on earth?

The ethics of space pioneering is the subject of my conversation with NASA program director Michael Ciannilli.

As children, virtually all of us are enamored with the idea of space flight. As we get older, however, we may lose our youthful enthusiasm as we contemplate the ethical questions space exploration raises.

Should we be spending millions of dollars collecting sand on Mars when we have so many problems here on earth? Should we be risking astronauts’ lives on glamorous missions, and now civilian lives as space tourism becomes more popular?

What about the dangers of space debris, of too many low earth orbit satellites, of infecting other planets with microorganisms? What about commercialization of space activities, the militarization of space, and the influence of partisan politics on the decision guiding our space programs?

Obviously, we don’t have time to tackle all these issues. But what systems are in place to address the ethics of space travel? And what are some fundamental values, principles, and mindsets that govern the decision-making of space exploration?

Meet this week's very special guest:

Michael Ciannilli is the Apollo, Challenger, Columbia Lessons Learned Program Manager at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, where he develops innovative events, media productions, and activities to powerfully enshrine the lessons of failure to influence future success. Prior to this role, Mike served as Test Project Engineer and systems engineer for the Space Shuttle Program. In 2003, he spent weeks searching in a helicopter over the skies of Texas finding and bringing home Columbia and her crew.

#ethics #spaceexploration #nasa #perspective #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #66: Enough blame to go around?

Wed, 15 Nov 2023 04:00:00 -0600

When everyone is guilty, is no one guilty?

That's what the ethics panel will be grappling with on this episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here's our scenario:

Ronald Opus attempted to commit suicide by jumping off the top floor of a ten story building. What he did not know was that construction workers had placed a net at the first floor level to catch falling debris, which would have saved the jumper’s life.

However, on his way down, a shotgun blast through an apartment window struck and killed Ronald Opus. Police discovered that an elderly man had been threatening his wife with the shotgun but missed her when he fired the weapon.

Further investigation uncovered that the husband routinely threatened his wife when he was angry, but that he always kept the gun unloaded. A witness was found who saw the couple’s son loading the shotgun several days earlier after an argument about the son being written out of the will.

The medical examiner struggled over whether the death should be legally ruled a suicide, a homicide, manslaughter, or accidental death. From an ethical perspective, who bears responsibility for the death of Ronald Opus?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Catherine Fitzgerald is a writer, speaker, certified coach, and founder of Brass Tacks With Heart executive coaching. She helps founders, owners, and C-Suite Executives and their teams to build businesses that fuel their lives, not consume them.

Dr. Jenna Ross is a doctor of performance psychology, a former Army National Guard Drill Sergeant, adjunct professor, mental health advocate, and podcast host.

Dr. Eric Zabiegalski is a technical and organization consultant, professor of HR management, and author of Unthink: All you have to do is Nothing.

#ethics #perspective #culture #values #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #69: Balancing act?

Wed, 08 Nov 2023 04:00:00 -0600

If we can't trust the media, how can we be informed?
If we aren't informed, how can we hold opinions?
If we can't hold opinions, how can we condemn evil and fight for good?

This is the quandary the ethics panel takes up on this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray.

When a hospital in Gaza exploded two weeks ago, headlines on CNN and the NY Times both parroted Palestinian claims that Israel was responsible. The BBC simply reported it as fact. All of them were wrong. But many still believe the accusation.

This kind of misinformation has been going on a long time. In October 1996, the celebrated columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote in Time Magazine:

“As fighting raged in the streets of the West Bank and Gaza late last month, Israel's opening of the now infamous Jerusalem tunnel was denounced from Turtle Bay to Timbuktu as a desecration of the Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem. It took nearly a week and fully 70 dead before the truth began to trickle out: the charge was a lie… an easily provable lie.”

Mr. Krauthammer continued:

“If NPR had covered the blood-libel-inspired massacre of the Jews of Munich in 1286, imagine what they might have written: ‘Leaders of the massacre claim that the Jews had killed Christian boys and used their blood for religious rituals.’ For balance, I suppose, NPR would have added, ‘The Jews deny this.’"

On the one hand, we shouldn’t expect – or even want – journalists to be overly clinical in their reporting. But when their personal biases clearly impair their objective reporting, they become tools of the wicked by lending legitimacy to villains and perpetrators and prolonging each crisis.

Assuming that journalists truly believe they are serving the public interest, why are they so prone to error and one-sided reporting? Why does it seem to be getting worse, and what can we do about it?

Meet this week’s panelists:

🔆 Anne Nevel, CAE is the Vice President of Education for a trade association and enjoys connecting the right people to the right projects to promote successful collaboration and partnership.

🟦 Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

Grappling with the Gray #68: Thinking for yourself?

Wed, 01 Nov 2023 04:00:00 -0500

What are we to think of people who literally can't think for themselves?

With only a few notable exceptions, the entire world has condemned the atrocities of October 7 perpetrated by Hamas terrorists on Israeli civilians. Citizens of Gaza, however, remain loyal to Hamas leaders, and those same acts violence seem widely endorsed and even celebrated.

Particularly disturbing is how Palestinian youth are indoctrinated into Jew-hatred. Early childhood television programming depicts Israelis as evil oppressors who deserve violent death, while camp activities and games include playacting attacks on Jews and paramilitary style exercises against Israelis.

If Palestinians are genuinely victims of brainwashing, how can they be held accountable for their actions and attitudes? If an entire society is convinced of the justice of destroying another people, what steps are possible toward achieving peace? And if peace is unachievable, what options does that other people have to defend itself?

Furthermore, it is not only Palestinians that have celebrated or approved terrorist acts by Hamas. On college campuses across the country, most notably Harvard University, anti-Israel rhetoric has raised alarms of resurgent anti-Semitism. But are these students not also victims of ideological indoctrination by their professors? Is there a difference between indoctrination and brainwashing?

Many conservatives claim that university is no longer a marketplace of ideas but a petri dish for the cultivation of groupthink. Does their claim have merit? If so, how do we as a society restore balance to the free exchange of ideas?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Michael Alcee is a clinical psychologist in private practice in Tarrytown, NY, a Mental Health Educator at Manhattan School of Music, and author of the book, Therapeutic Improvisation: How to stop winging it and own it as a therapist.

Michael Sherlock is a Sales & Leadership Communications Strategist and CEO of Shock Your Potential, a global professional development training company.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #67: Two sides to any story?

Wed, 25 Oct 2023 04:00:00 -0500

This panel discussion was recorded on October 18, Global Ethics Day. I had planned a different topic for discussion, but we really can’t avoid addressing the current crisis in the Mideast.

Here is our topic:

The plight of 2 million residents of Gaza has been desperate for decades. It may seem easy and convenient to blame Israel, but the reality of the situation is far more complicated. In 2005, after many years of conflict, Israel unilaterally withdrew from the territory and forcibly removed 10,000 of its own settlers.

Some observe that Gaza had the opportunity to become another Singapore or Dubai. Instead, Hamas leaders launched missile attacks on Israel and diverted humanitarian aid to build hi-tech terror tunnels, prompting Israel to retaliate against terrorist strongholds and blockade the enclave, resulting in collateral civilian casualties and suffering as well as widespread poverty. Now their leaders hide out in Qatar while telling their people not to evacuate before an approaching Israeli offensive.

Support for Israel around the world has been overwhelming. But that hasn’t stopped students at Harvard and universities across the country, together with protesters around the world, from speaking out in defense of Hamas and against Israel. Having studied the history of the region, it’s hard not to conclude that many of these are either willfully ignorant or blinded by ideology.

It’s also arguable that support for Palestinians around the world legitimizes and encourages acts of terror. The French government has even criminalized public support for Hamas.

Free speech is one of the cornerstones of a free society. But when opinion is built on misinformation, and when it might actually encourage violence, to what extent should free speech be tolerated and protected? Moreover, once governments outlaw speech where we agree it is necessary, what happens when those same governments outlaw speech we think should remain permitted?

Furthermore, when both sides have merit, but when that merit is profoundly lopsided in one direction, how do we acknowledge both sides without drifting into moral equivalence?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer H. Elder, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

John E. McGlothlin is a captain in the Army Judge Advocate General's Corps and D.C. army reserve, as well as an adjunct professor of business and ethics at the University of Maryland Global Campus.

Stewart Wiggins is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

https://www.ethicsninja.com/

#ethics #terror #israel #communication #freespeech #ethicsninja #yonasongoldson #rabbigoldson #therabbi #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #65: Finding favor in my eyes?

Wed, 18 Oct 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Can you be right and still be wrong?

That's the question I'll be discussing with my very special guest Cy Wakeman on this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our topic for today.

Real estate mogul Tim Gurner, one of Australia’s richest men, made headlines when he remarked that employees should stop feeling like they’re doing their boss a favor and consider themselves lucky to have a job. He later retracted his comments and apologized.

How are we to evaluate attitudes among both bosses and employees? On the one hand, employers complain about quiet quitting, a sense of entitlement, and a loss of work ethic among their employees. On the other hand, employees complain about a lack of respect from bosses, unreasonable demands and expectations, and an astonishingly high CEO-to-worker pay ratio.

Ethics clearly dictates that employees should put in honest effort to earn an honest wage, and that bosses should treat their employees with respect, set reasonable expectations, and not exploit their power by giving themselves stratospheric salaries and bonuses while worker salaries remain flat. Common sense would indicate that treating employees fairly and with dignity would earn loyalty and commitment, thereby driving greater productivity and employee satisfaction.

Was there any truth in Tim Gurner’s comments? If so, where did he go wrong? And in general, why are so many workplaces so toxic, and what can be done to detoxify them?

Cy Wakeman is a drama researcher, international leadership speaker, consultant, and founder of Reality-Based Leadership. She is the author of four books, including the NY Times Bestseller, The Reality-Based Rules of the Workplace: Know What Boosts Your Value, Kills Your Chances, and Will Make You Happier and, most recently, Life’s Messy, Live Happy. Described as “the secret weapon to restoring sanity to the workplace,” Cy was voted in the top 100 leadership professionals to follow on twitter for 7 years in a row. For the last three years, she has ranked #1 among the Global Gurus list of Top 30 Leadership Professionals across the globe. Cy, I heard you speak at the National Speakers Association Conference in 2022 and immediately reached out, and I’m thrilled that we finally made it work.

#ethics #communication #leadership #culture #grappling #yonasongoldson #rabbigoldson #cywakeman

GWTG Archive Episode #18: The Right to Entitlement?

Wed, 04 Oct 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Is it right to take what you're allowed to take even if you're not really entitled to it? That's the question before the ethics panel on this archive episode.

Here's the challenge:

You've just finished your medical residency. You've been hired by a respected hospital that wants you to start immediately. However, because of state regulations and bureaucratic red tape, your accreditation to practice medicine will be delayed and you won't be able to start working for two months.

You are eligible for unemployment. However, your parents paid for medical school so you have no student debt, and your spouse has a good-paying job so you face no financial pressure.

Do you file for unemployment?

Meet the panelists:

Jennifer Elder

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenniferhelder/

Catherine Fitzgerald

https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherine-a-fitzgerald/

Dr. Robyn Odegaard

https://www.linkedin.com/in/robynodegaard/

Grappling with the Gray #64: Is the lesser of two evils still evil?

Wed, 27 Sep 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Is the lesser of two evils still evil?

That's the topic the ethics panel takes up on this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our dilemma:

2024 is shaping up to be the third presidential election in a row where the majority of Americans oppose both candidates. A recent Economist/YouGov poll found 56% of voters don’t want former Donald Trump to run for re-election and 59% don’t want Joe Biden to, either. Yet odds are that’s exactly what we’re going to get.

Granted that there are no perfect candidates, and realistically we can’t expect to agree with any candidate on everything. But if I conclude that one candidate is unfit to serve, whether because of character or competence or both, is it ethical for me to vote for that candidate anyway solely because the opposing candidate is even worse?

One common refrain is that voting for a third party candidate is either a wasted vote or a vote for the opposition. But never in history has any vote with an electorate of more that 25,000 people been decided by one vote. Which means that my vote by itself will not make a difference in the outcome. If so, why should I not vote my conscience?

In his book Integrity, Yale Law Professor Stephen L. Carter writes: I look forward to the day when we as voters will say, “I agree with So-and-so on most of the issues, but I could never vote for somebody who would say this or do that in order to win.” Without discussing the merits or flaws of any specific candidate, why do so few Americans seem to accept Professor Carter’s ideal?

Meet this week’s panelists:

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as an author and TEDx speaker.

Sarah Kalmeta, aka Sarah the Pivoter, is a speaker, author and relentless truthseeker. She is founder of Pivot Point International, a high performance consulting company.

S. Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

Grappling with the Gray #63: Education without ideology?

Wed, 20 Sep 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Do we want to teach our children to think or do we want to teach them to think like us? And what happens when we don't think there's a difference?

That's the question the ethics panel takes up on this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here's our scenario:

Education has become one of the most contentious fields of battle of the culture wars, with the political right accusing the left of revisionism and indoctrination and the political left accusing the right of revisionism and censorship.

Professor Leslie M. Harris, a contributor to the 1619 Project, described in Politico how the New York Times grossly misrepresented her research, and how critics exploited the misinformation to discredit legitimate parts of the project.

The recent proposed Florida Curriculum on Black History contained one line out of 191 points stating that slaves sometimes learned skills that helped them. Representing one half of one percent of the total content, that single line was characterized as claiming that slaves benefited from slavery and was used to discredit the entire body of work. As a footnote, that line was included by a black member of the curriculum commission.

Florida legislation to restrict mention of sexual identity in classrooms grades three and below were defended by supporters as ensuring age-appropriate education while condemned by opponents as homophobic and transphobic. It was branded the “Don’t say gay” bill.

Also in Florida, despite state law requiring African American studies, the government rejected a national AP curriculum, arguing that it advocated such positions as slave reparations and abolishing prisons, as well as emphasizing intersectionality, feminism, and gender identity with an intent toward indoctrination.

In our polarized society, many of us eagerly accept accounts and reports from news outlets we choose based on our political leanings, which makes it difficult to base our opinions on complete or even accurate information. What steps can we take to restore integrity to our education system while respecting the sensitivities of both sides of the political spectrum and promoting a civil and informed national debate?

Meet the panel:

Jeff Ikler is the director of Quetico Executive Career and Personal Leadership Coaching, host of the podcast "Getting Unstuck–Cultivating Curiosity," and the co-host of the podcast "Cultivating Resilience--A Whole Community Approach to Alleviating Trauma in Schools."

Kim Pries is co-founder of Counselor Connection, LLC. He teaches Computer Programming, Mathematics, Engineering, and Biotechnology, and he thrives on professional problem solving.

Stewart Wiggins is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

#ethics #education #culture #perspective #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #62: Anything in a good cause?

Wed, 13 Sep 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Does anything go for a good cause? Do the ends justify the means?

These are the questions that arise on this episode of Grappling with the Gray when Kimberly Davis, Diane Helbig, and Annette Taylor join the ethics panel.

Here is our topic:

For years, I’ve been an avid fan of behavioral economics professor Dan Ariely. I’ve often referenced his work on ethics and morals in my articles and discussions.

However, he is now under fire, accused of falsifying his research for a paper about how to make people more honest, on which he collaborated with Harvard Business School Professor Francesca Gino. Professor Ariely insists that he did not manipulate the data in developing his thesis. Hartford Insurance, which provided the data, asserts that he did just that.

As the story unfolds, an investigative committee found Professor Gino guilty of misconduct. She has been placed on leave and faces the unprecedented possibility of being stripped of tenure. She has responded by launching a lawsuit against the three researchers who exposed her manipulated data, as well as against the Dean of HBS, all of whom now face paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, even if they are exonerated.

This sad story raises a variety of issues. Presumably, ethics scholars should demonstrate a higher standard of ethical behavior. So why does research indicate virtually no difference between ethicists and anyone else?

If researchers are accused of misconduct, shouldn’t they demonstrate the integrity of their research before their colleagues rather than resort to civil litigation? In general, haven’t lawsuits and legal expenses become a weapon to coerce legitimate claimants to keep silent?

Finally, should colleges reconsider the institution of tenure, considering how difficult it is to dislodge professors who are no longer worthy of their positions?

Perhaps most important of all, we’ve begun to expect these kinds of stories and scandals. Can a society survive when we lose trust in our institutions and in one another? And what can we do to reverse the trend?

#ethics #education #research #integrity #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #61: A life for a life?

Wed, 06 Sep 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Are we willing to confront the apparent inconsistencies of our own beliefs? If you don't think so, then this episode may not be for you.

Ethics requires us to ask ourselves difficult questions and consider answers that might make us uncomfortable.

Fortunately, I was able to find three guests who have the courage to do just that as the panel convenes to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is the scenario we’ll be discussing:

Two of the most contentious issues today are abortion rights and capital punishment. Abortion advocates are willing to take the life of unborn children to protect the well-being of the mother. Capital punishment advocates are willing to take the life of violent criminals to protect the well-being of society.

According to the Wall Street Journal, there is virtually no correlation between support for abortion rights and support for capital punishment, or vice versa. How can we understand two groups so deeply divided, with many endorsing the taking of life on the one hand while condemning it on the other?

A 2022 opinion piece in the Daily Iowan asserted that both pro-life and pro-capital punishment advocates suffer from a lack of empathy. Can this charge be defended more than the reverse?

One columnist in the Daily Beast argued that we should take into consideration the social and environmental causes that contribute to violent crime. Many argue that capital punishment is cruel and unusual, although one could argue back that incarceration among other violent criminals might be more so.

Is it hypocritical to hold these seemingly conflicting views on the sanctity of life? If so, does the hypocrisy flow in both directions?

Meet this week’s panelists:

🔆 Anne Nevel, CAE is the Vice President of Education for a trade association and enjoys connecting the right people to the right projects to promote successful collaboration and partnership.

🟦 Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, a B2B brand-management and marketing-communications firm — and host of The Anxious Voyage, a syndicated radio show about life’s trials and triumphs.

Annette Simmons is a speaker, trainer, consultant, and author of The Story Factor -- named one of the 100 Best Business Books of All Time.

#ethics #values #culture #politics #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #60: Unethical or just incompetent?

Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Air travel has gotten more challenging, and stories of lost luggage abound. But this one really stands out as an example of incompetence crossing the ethical line.

Here is our topic:

On July 17, Sandra Shuster and her 15 years old daughter, Ruby, boarded a United Airlines flight in Baltimore. They arrived in Denver to discover that Ruby’s lacrosse kit had not arrived with them. After twice being told by United representatives the kit would arrive the next day, Ms. Shuster was told it was still in Baltimore.

Except it wasn’t. The kit carried an Apple AirTag, which showed it at baggage reclaim in Chicago’s O’Hare airport. Despite repeated calls, Ms. Shuster was told that they couldn’t find the lost bag, that they weren’t allowed to call Chicago, and that she had the wrong tracking number… which was printed on a sticker attached to her boarding pass.

Over the next several days, representatives told her the AirTag must have been lost, the bag must have been stolen, they couldn’t be certain it was in Chicago, and that Ms. Shuster should file a claim for lost luggage. Meanwhile, Ruby had to borrow a kit for one game and had try-outs approaching the next week.

In the end, Sandra Shuster bought a ticket to Chicago to retrieve the bag herself. She informed United of her plans, and they told her to let them handle it. She took the flight anyway, sending a message to the O’Hare baggage office, which had the bag waiting for her when she arrived. Despite repeated assurances from multiple United staff that they had been searching for her bag and had contacted Chicago, the O’Hare office had never heard from them at all.

No one is perfect, and people make mistakes. But no one at United ever apologized to Sandra Shuster, and only after CNN contacted the airline did she get her flight miles refunded. She still lost a day of work and suffered hours of aggravation.

This kind of customer mistreatment is highly unethical. How could representatives have acted to resolve this issue effectively? What can business leaders do to create a culture in which employees are motivated to solve problems themselves when systems fail? And why have so few businesses actually taken steps to promote a healthier company culture?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Per Brogaard Berggreen helps leaders focus on digital and organizational change and transformation management while building sustainable environments through trust, respect, inclusion, and diversity.

Pascal Derrien is CEO of Migraine Ireland, a registered charity dedicated to empowering migraineurs by providing innovative services through education, information and outreach programs.

Toni McLelland MSc is Founder and Director of 1st Life Group. She is a Critical Friend & Business Mentor in Social Justice, Mobility & Impact leading sustainable change through DEIB & Compassion.

GWTG Archive Episode #7: Unsolicited Advice?

Wed, 23 Aug 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Welcome to Grappling with the Gray, a forum for promoting the development of an ethical mindset and ethical decision-making to help us clearly see both sides of complex issues and better navigate the moral challenges of everyday life.

This week's scenario:

You’re walking down the hallway of a corporate office building. The elevator door opens in front of you, and out of the elevator steps your next-door neighbor – a nice young lady with whom you’re very friendly.

“What are you doing here?” you ask.

She replies, “I'm so excited; I have a great job opportunity. I'm interviewing with a corporate law firm in this office right here, right now. How do I look?”

You look her over and think: “O-M-G. No one should walk into the bathroom looking like that! Did she look in the mirror before she left the house?”

How do you respond to her question?

Meet this week's panelists:

Cordelia Gaffar is the world’s best joy-monger, author of multiple books, Host of the Free to Be Show, and Co-Host of the Unlearning Labels Podcast.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/cordelia-...

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dhelbig/

April Shprintz is the Business Accelerator, creator of The Generosity Culture, author of Magic Blue Rocks, and host of the Pour into your Business podcast.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/aprilshpr...

Grappling with the Gray #59: In other words?

Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:00:00 -0500

🥷Is there anything that still goes without saying?
🥷What's the cost of saying what needs to be said?
🥷How can you speak to best ensure that your words will be heard?

These are the questions we will address with the Wonderful Wizard of Wise Words, WP bestselling author Sam Horn, in a special edition of Grappling with the Gray.

And here is the scenario we’ll be discussing:

According to FAA data, Airlines have seen reports of unruly passengers increase in past years, spiking to 6000 in 2021 and nearly 2,500 last year -- more than double than previous years. That might explain the following pre-flight announcement from an American Airlines pilot to his passengers:

“Remember, the flight attendants are here for your safety. After that they’re here to make your flight more enjoyable. They’re going to take care of you guys but you will listen to what they have to say because they represent my will in the cabin, and my will is what matters.”

“Be nice to each other. Be respectful to each other. I shouldn’t have to say that ... But I have to say it every single flight, because people don’t. And they’re selfish and rude, and we won’t have it.”

He told passengers to store their bags properly, avoid leaning or falling asleep on other people, and use headphones instead of playing audio out loud on speakers. He then concluded: “Middle seaters, I know it stinks to be in the middle ... You own both armrests. That is my gift to you. Welcome on board our flight.”

Some observers criticized the pilot as a patronizing scold. Others praised him for taking initiative and demonstrating leadership.

Even if we side with the pilot, could he have phrased his message differently to make it more easily and effectively received by passengers. What lessons can we learn and apply to our own communication in the workplace, in our families, and in our communities?

Sam Horn is Founder & CEO at The Intrigue Agency. She is a keynote speaker, bestselling author, book and presentation coach, media resource, and author of the new book Talking on Eggshells: Soft skills for hard conversations.

#ethics #language #wisdom #communication #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #58: Protecting the innocent?

Wed, 09 Aug 2023 04:00:00 -0500

It might be easier if everything was black and white. But that's not the world we live in. That's why we have to grapple with the gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Last week, actor Kevin Spacey was acquitted of all the sexual abuse charges that have dogged him for six years. During that time, his acting career collapsed, and many predict that, with his reputation in tatters, he will continue to struggle finding roles.

One of our foundational principles is guilty until proven innocent. But after so many high profile incidents of sexual abuse, it feels wrong to allow alleged predators to carry on with business as usual when, in the event they are eventually proven guilty, reaching a verdict often takes years, followed by years of appeals.

On the other hand, genuinely innocent individuals can have their lives destroyed by accusers who are vindictive, misguided, or simply mistaken. Often, we may never know the truth, as with the charges leveled by Anita Hill against Clarence Thomas. To make matters worse, the choosing of sides often appears to be motivated more from political affiliation than on the basis of evidence.

Trying a case in the court of public opinion led to the collapse of the 2006 charges against three Duke University Lacrosse players, largely because of overzealousness on the part of the prosecuting attorney. The players won damages for defamation, but they were never actually exonerated in the courtroom.

Is there a practical strategy for protecting and supporting victims without rushing to judgment? And if we simply have to accept the imperfections of the system, does erring on the side of caution favor the accuser or the accused?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Dr. Pauline Crawford is the conversation game changer. Her Corporate Heart Team works to empower women and men with a new understanding of fairness, respect for differences, and mutually beneficial business & life principles.

🟦 Melissa Hughes, Ph.D. is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Brian Kelly is the CEO and Founder at Human Factors Consulting, LLC. He is an optimistic rebel, committed to humanizing leadership, relationships and workplaces by creating the conditions for people to thrive so your business can, too.

#ethics #culture #society #rights #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #57: Lady in Waiting?

Wed, 02 Aug 2023 04:00:00 -0500

What happens when the implicit conditions of a relationship change?
What is the difference between a contract and a covenant?
What effect do pragmatism and expedience have on our core values?

These are some of the topics the ethics panel takes up on this episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our ethical dilemma:

A man posed this question to an ethicist:

"My wife is ill and lives in a nursing home. Is there anything wrong with me taking a mistress?"

There are any number of variables that might make this question more or less compelling:

Would it matter if the wife suffered from dementia or Alzheimer’s and no longer knew who her husband was? What if she were brain-dead and had no awareness at all?

Would it matter if the wife were likely to recover and return home in a matter of weeks or months? What if the wife willingly gave her consent?

What if the wife weren't ill at all but the couple agreed to have an open marriage? Is there anything intrinsically unethical or immoral about taking marriage vows and then agreeing to relax or discard the implicit conditions of those vows?

Finally, is there a social cost to redefining marriage in particular and relationships in general? Are there benefits that might offset those costs?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Mark Brown, CSP is a world champion speaker, an executive coach, and an artificial intelligence software advisor.

Laura Elizabeth Gray is a Passionate People Connector, Columnist, Author, and Development Director of The ALS Association Northern Ohio Chapter.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is known as the Mental MacGyver. She provides luxury level, high performance support and coaching to executives, founders, celebrities and athletes. She is also the creator and facilitator of the Quick Hits podcast.

#ethics #relationships #mindset #commitment #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #56: When Bulls Fly and Turkeys Run?

Wed, 26 Jul 2023 04:00:00 -0500

If we abandon tradition, how will we know our past?
If we cling to tradition, how will we embrace the future?

The tension between tradition and progressivism comes into focus when this week's ethics panel convenes to Grapple with the Gray.

Join us on LinkedIn Live this Wednesday at 5:00 pm ET when we take up this ethical dilemma:

Once again, the running of the bulls at Pamplona resulted in multiple injuries although, gratefully no deaths… this time. The recent coronation of King Charles raised renewed debate over the relevance of the monarchy, which seemingly perpetuates non-Democratic values but also brings in an extraordinary amount of tourist revenue. As we approach November, here in the US we look forward to the pardoning of the presidential turkey, a ritual I personally find inane.

On a larger scale, the war between traditional values and progressive sensitivities wages on the battleground of legislation, language, family, and identity.

Is it ethical to put lives in danger, whether others or our own, for a frivolous pursuit? Is there any benefit to preserving rituals that now seem at best irrelevant and at worst contrary to contemporary values? How do we calculate the benefit of preserving them against the cost of discarding them, and vice versa?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Christopher Bauer, PhD, CSP, CFS, is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Nick Gallo, aka the Ethics Evangelist, is CEO of Compliance Line, as well as creator and host of The Ethics Experts podcast.

#ethics #culture #mindset #society #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #55: Who gets the bill?

Wed, 19 Jul 2023 04:00:00 -0500

How do we navigate the ethics of uncertainty?
How sure do we have to be before we can rely on our own assumptions?
Is there ever a time when an honest mistake doesn't need to be rectified?

These are some of the questions we take up when the ethics panel convenes to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is this week's ethical dilemma:

You’re pacing back and forth outside your favorite restaurant and talking on your cell phone as you wait for your friend Terry, who’s meeting you for lunch. Terry shows up, reaches down to the sidewalk and comes up holding a $50 bill.

“Is this yours?” he asks.

You remember getting change for a hundred that morning and, still finishing up your phone conversation, you check your wallet. No fifty. “Yeah, that must be mine,” you say, thanking Terry as you take the bill and put it in your wallet.

After lunch, you go to your car, reach in your pocket for your keys, and come out with a $50 bill. You re-check your wallet – another $50 bill. You realize that you didn’t drop the fifty, you merely misplaced it. The one Terry picked up off the ground wasn’t yours at all.

Now what do you do? Does Terry have any more claim to the fifty bucks than you do? Is it unethical for you to keep it for yourself?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Janice Litvin works with leaders and teams to banish burnout in their organizations through keynote speeches, workshops and accountability groups. She is also author of the Banish Burnout Toolkit.

Dr. Eric Zabiegalski is a technical and organization consultant, professor of HR management, and author of Unthink: All you have to do is Nothing.

Frank Zaccari is a Business and Organizational Development Expert, keynote speaker, TV and podcast host, 4X Amazon bestselling author, and Air Force veteran.

Grappling with the Gray #54: Closed for Revocation?

Wed, 12 Jul 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Where's the line between exaggeration and misrepresentation?

Is promoting a good cause ever an excuse for ignoring collateral damage?

At what point does overzealousness undermine our credibility?

These are some of the questions the ethics panel takes up on this episode as we Grapple with the Gray.

Here's our scenario:

Last week, the panel discussed whether the NAACP’s recently issued travel advisory against Florida was an ethical form of protest, given their claim that the state “is openly hostile toward African Americans.”

There has been no shortage of boycotts in the headlines. Both Anheuser Busch and Target have seen dramatic decline in revenues as consumers protest their public endorsement of alternative lifestyles. The state of Israel has been the target of a boycott campaign for years based on the claimed mistreatment of Israeli Arabs. Chick-Fil-A has been boycotted for its traditional values, and is now being threatened with a boycott for hiring a VP of DEI.

The 1955 Birmingham bus boycott was one of the most successful campaigns for change in history. Many more recent protests, however, have been more ideological driven than idea driven, often misrepresenting their targets.

Doing business with an immoral company or entity poses a serious ethical challenge. But how immoral is too immoral? How do we avoid setting the bar unreasonably high, or being inconsistent with our boycotts? And how far do we have to go to inconvenience ourselves to avoid patronizing a company that may offend some of our values, but which we admire in other areas?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Paul Edwards used to drive large military vehicles through the deserts of the Middle East, armed with an assault rifle. Today, his occupation of ghostwriting requires him to ask questions first, and shoot later.”

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

Michael Sherlock is a Sales & Leadership Communications Strategist and CEO of Shock Your Potential, a global professional development training company.

Grappling with the Gray Archive Episode #4: Ethics at 40,000 feet?

Wed, 05 Jul 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Is it ever okay to withhold information and thereby allow others to reach the wrong conclusions?

That's the topic the ethics panel takes up in this archive episode of Grappling with the Gray.

This episode's ethical challenge:

Flying with children poses a variety of difficulties. Aside from the challenge of managing youthful squirreliness within the confines of a crowded passenger compartment, even booking the flight might not be simple. Airline policies change from time to time, and different companies have different rules.

Imagine this real-life scenario:

You’re traveling a across the Atlantic with your toddler. The airline you’re flying charges 10% of the ticket price to hold the child in your lap. However, that deal is only available for children under two. Your child is 26 months, just over the limit, for which the airline requires you to buy the child her own seat for 90% of the full ticket price.

You know the child will spend virtually the entire trip in your lap regardless, so you see paying for a seat as a waste of money. However, you don’t want to lie to the airline.

Your travel agent offers the following suggestion:

Buy the 10% ticket. Don’t offer any information about your child’s age. In all probability, the flight attendants will admit your family on the plane without question. If they ask your child’s age, answer truthfully. If they tell you there is an age limit, apologize for your error and offer to pay for the seat.

Meet this episode's panelists:

Mariah Edgington, BSN, RN Edgington is a retired critical care and emergency nurse, speaker, mindset coach, and author of the newly released book, Journey Well, You Are MORE Than Enough.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariahedgington/

Catherine Fitzgerald is owner of Catapult Leadership Group. After surviving her own harrowing leadership roles as CEO and mother of three boys, she dedicates herself to working with organizational leaders as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherine-a-fitzgerald/

Jeff Koziatek is a speaker, author, and juggler who coaches business leaders for peak performance, professional success, and personal freedom.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffkoziatek/

Grappling with the Gray #53: Sound Advisory?

Wed, 21 Jun 2023 04:00:00 -0500

At what point does principled protest become unprincipled parody? That's the topic the ethics panels takes up on this episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here's the scenario:

The NAACP recently issued a travel advisory declaring that people should avoid travel to Florida, claiming that the state “is openly hostile toward African Americans.” The advisory comes in response to Gov. Ron DeSantis’ [QUOTE] aggressive attempts to erase Black history and to restrict diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in Florida schools [UNQUOTE].

The National Review cited statistics showing that Florida ranks among the highest states in the nation for black home ownership, black employment, black business-ownership, and influx of new black residents, not to mention the highest rated education system in the country.

Moreover, three black tourism organizations criticized the advisory as harmful to the economic well-being of the African-American community. And some have pointed out as ironic that the NAACP’s Board of Directors chairman, Leon W. Russell, lives in Tampa. The advisory appears to be a reaction to legislation denying AP credit for a course on African American studies and restricting funding for DEI programs on college campuses.

Granting that the NAACP may have legitimate grievances, is a travel advisory an ethical response to the Florida legislation? Does travel in Florida really pose a clear and present danger to black tourists?

If not, is the advisory a legitimate form of protest, or does it make a mockery of warnings against travel to legitimately dangerous destinations like Venezuela, Iran, and Syria, the same way branding feminists and Trump supporters as Nazis makes a mockery of the Holocaust?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Executive Coaching. She works with C-level leaders and their teams as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

Stewart Wiggins is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

#ethics #politics #community #leadership #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #52: Do two lefts make a right?

Wed, 14 Jun 2023 04:00:00 -0500

About five years ago, I was driving home from Dallas, Texas, when I pulled up to a toll booth in Oklahoma. Being somewhat directionally challenged, I told the attendant that I was turning west, thereby exempting myself from the toll of $2.50. When I reached the turnoff, however, I realized that I needed to go east, but there was no way of getting back to correct my error without a complicated and time consuming detour.

That error remained on my mind, and it seemed proper to mail a check to the Oklahoma department of transportation. However, I only seemed to remember that I needed to correct the error when I was in no position to do anything about it.

Last week, I was once again driving back from Dallas. I told the toll booth attendant that on my last trip I had mistakenly said west when I meant east and that I wanted to pay double. She told me not to worry about it and waved me through.

Did the attendant have the authority to turn down my offer to pay for my previous mistake? Should I have insisted she take the extra fee? What if it would have cost her extra effort to process my payment? Should I still send a check to the Oklahoma department of transportation?

In general, what attitude should we adopt toward small, unintentional errors that might cost more to correct than the loss or damage we originally caused?

Meet this week's panelists:

JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger Lieutenant Colonel. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as an author and TEDx speaker.

Sarah Kalmeta aka Sara the Pivoter, is founder of Pivot Point, a career transition coach, author, and podcast host.

S. Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within.

#ethics #society #culture #mindset #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #51: Paying Your Dues?

Wed, 07 Jun 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Recently, Republican NY Congressman George Santos was indicted on 13 federal criminal charges, including wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and making false statements to the House. He may be better known for the many lies he allegedly told about his record leading into his successful election bid.

Prior to his indictment, Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia introduced a resolution to expel him from congress. Speaker Kevin McCarthy blocked the resolution, insisting that the Department of Justice investigation should precede any action. When Congressman Garcia subsequently renewed his resolution, Speaker McCarthy referred the case to the House Ethics Committee.

Without getting into the specifics of this case, should due process and the presumption of innocence apply to ethics violations the same way they do to legal violations?

It’s distressingly common for individuals to defend unethical behavior by claiming, “It’s not illegal?” Since ethics demand more from us than strict observance of the law, should we be able to bypass due process in the enforcement of ethical misconduct? And, if we do, how can we ensure that unethical players will not exploit ethics rules to target opponents out of political motives rather than the preservation of ethical standards?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

🟦 Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping companies add innovation to their mindsets and their operations to create discernible competitive advantage.

Brian Kelly is President and Human Connection Officer at Brian Kelly Leadership Coaching, helping inclusive, people-first leaders and their teams grow their leadership effectiveness, relationships and business performance.

#ethics #standards #culture #mindset #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #50: Disinterested Parties?

Wed, 31 May 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Recently, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been under fire for accepting lavish gifts from a wealthy friend. It’s worth noting that neither Moses nor the prophet Samuel ever asked to borrow a donkey on the slim chance that it might be perceived as leveraging their authority and prestige for personal gain.

That being said, even the esteemed Yale Law Professor Stephen L. Carter, writing for the Washington Post, found more smoke than fire in the allegations. He did, however, cite the Wall Street Journal’s Pulitzer Prize winning series that found some 2600 federal officials with investment holdings that posed serious conflicts of interest.

His deeper point is that focusing on isolated, high-profile ethics charges inclines us to overlook more systemic problems of considerably greater concern.

Scripture’s warning that bribery blinds the eyes of the wise finds support from both human psychology and common sense. How demanding should we the people be in expecting strict ethical standards from our elected and appointed officials? What steps can we take to influence more rigorous yet balanced guidelines and their even-handed implementation?

Finally, what standards should we set and tactics should we employ to avoid putting ourselves in situations that will skew our ethical judgment?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sam Ardery is a national mediator, trial lawyer, consultant, speaker, and author. He teaches negotiation at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and is author of Positively Conflicted: Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World.

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Annette Taylor is a researcher of evolutionary psychology and biology. Her website, Cavedweller Club, offers guidance and insights on how we can better understand the way our own hardwiring influences unconscious bias and decision making.

#ethics #politics #leadership #supremecourt #grappling

Grappling with the Gray 49: Two-Timing the Boss?

Wed, 24 May 2023 04:00:00 -0500

If you get your work done in half the time, is the other half of your time really yours?

Last week, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced that she would resign from her position amidst charges of chronic mismanagement and neglect of duty. Among other allegations, local reporters discovered that Ms. Gardner had been taking classes in a full time nursing program during a staffing crisis in her office.

In general, is it ethical to hold two full-time jobs at once? With advances in artificial intelligence, some workers claim that they can easily handle the demands of two, three, or four jobs without compromising their performance in any of them.

Is it proper for individual employees to make such an assessment themselves? Even if it’s true at any particular moment, are those employees likely to relinquish one of those jobs (and its paycheck) if their workload increases and they have to cut corners?

And even if they are getting all their work done competently, are they unethical for deceiving employers who don’t know about those second or third jobs? Or, if they are doing all the work they are being paid to do, is the remaining time in their day theirs to do with as they please? Is using unallotted time for another job any different from playing Candy Crush or surfing TikTok?

Tune in on LinkedIn Live at 5:00 pm ET this Wednesday when these guests join the ethics panel:

Mark Brown, CSP is a world champion speaker, an executive coach, and an artificial intelligence software advisor.

Deb Coviello The Drop In CEO™ is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is known as the Mental MacGyver. She provides luxury level, high performance support and coaching to executives, founders, celebrities and athletes. She is also the creator and facilitator of the Quick Hits podcast.

#ethics #bestpractices #companyculture #integrity #grappling

Grappling with the Gray #48: An Army of One?

Wed, 17 May 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Are we setting ourselves up for failure... or worse?

In the wake of Jack Teixeira allegedly leaking classified information damaging to American security and embarrassing to American prestige, columnist Rob Henderson wonders if the lower standards and increasing incentives for military recruits has contributed to a less committed class of soldiers.

It’s concerning, if not surprising, that patriotism and support for the military are in decline. Much worse, however, is the spirit of self-interest that may be motivating enlistment. Rather than focusing on the higher values of service and a sense of history, the military’s ever-increasing recruitment budget trumpets how you can serve yourself by acquiring skills and financial perks.

Several years ago, my own son applied for a special forces division of the IDF. He described the process as three days of crawling in the dirt. Four of the 15 applicants in his group dropped out in the first 3 hours. The rest lasted to the end. They weren’t all accepted, but they all demonstrated a willingness to do what needed to be done because it needed to be done.

As our generation becomes softer, do we need to relax standards to accommodate the current zeitgeist, or do we need to preserve standards to slow the relentless slide toward self-indulgent mediocrity? And what are the possible consequences of each?

Join me and the panelists at 5:00 pm ET Wednesday on LinkedIn Live for this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray:

Melissa Hughes, Ph.D. Hughes is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Dr. Jenna Ross, CMPC®, LAC. Jenna Ross is a doctor of performance psychology, a former Army National Guard Drill Sergeant, adjunct professor, mental health advocate, and podcast host.

Hon. Charles Williams is a retired rear admiral and former Assistant Secretary of the Navy, as well as a fellow of Hudson Institute, a research organization promoting American leadership for a secure, free, and prosperous future.

#ethics #culture #military #discipline #success

Grappling with the Gray #47: My Way or the Highway?

Wed, 10 May 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Whose side are the media on?

In what appears to be a coincidence, news anchors Tucker Carlson and Don Lemon were fired over the weekend by Fox News and CNN respectively, despite both having huge followings. The reasons are not entirely clear, but are presumed to be a response to questions about journalistic ethics and combative style, especially coming in the wake of the huge settlement negotiated by Fox after reports of knowingly falsifying the news.

Is this a reassuring sign that integrity and civility may be returning to news reporting, or is it more likely that networks feel the need to appear responsive to complaints about the behavior of their frontmen?

And if we can’t say for sure, how can we as individuals respond to media giants’ irresponsible practices in pursuit of ratings? Is the system hopelessly out of control, or is there some way we can help the pendulum swing back toward corporate responsibility? Should we expect substantive change, or will new players most likely take up the old roles again?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Leslie Flowers is a certified business consultant and coach and author of eight books, guiding clients with a hybrid program of timeless business principles, universal law, and achievement mastery for fifteen years.

Tresha Moreland, is an executive strategist and Principal Organizational and Leadership Consultant with HR-C Suite, LLC.

Dr. Eric Zabiegalski is a technical and organization consultant, professor of HR management, and author of Unthink: All you have to do is Nothing.

Join us on LinkedIn Live Wednesday at 5:00 pm ET.

#ethics #media #cablenews #foxnews #CNN

Grappling with the Gray #46: What's Good About It?

Wed, 03 May 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Grappling with the Gray #45: Protecting the Innocent?

Wed, 26 Apr 2023 06:00:00 -0500

A close friend shares with you her hurt and outrage. When the subject of the Holocaust came up in social studies class, a teacher told your friend’s teenage son that he should go back to Auschwitz.

The boy, who had previously been proud and open about his Jewish identity, has now abandoned all outward signs of being Jewish. Your friend reported the incident to both the principal and to the school board, but there is no indication that any action was taken against the teacher.

Although you are not Jewish yourself, or perhaps because you’re not Jewish, you feel duty-bound to speak out. You write an op-ed in the local paper outlining these events. You don’t mention any names, but you do mention the school district.

Instead of being grateful for your support, your friend is furious with you. There are very few Jews in the school district, and her son is now terrified of being singled out and possibly targeted by other students. Your friend says that you had no right to publish the article, and that you have compromised her son’s safety and well-being.

Were you wrong to publish the article?

In general, how do we evaluate situations where upholding our principles may cause collateral damage to others, especially children? If it’s wrong to speak up and wrong to stay silent, what other options do we have?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Christopher Bauer, PhD, CSP, CFS is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Catherine Fitzgerald is a writer, speaker, certified coach, and founder of Brass Tacks With Heart-executive coaching. She helps founders, owners, and C-Suite Executives and their teams to build businesses that fuel their lives, not consume them.

Grappling with the Gray #44: The World is not Enough?

Wed, 19 Apr 2023 04:00:00 -0500

"I can do what I want."

That's true. But what do I really want? And what should I really want?

Charity is a foundational value of civil society. The Bible mandates a tithe, which the sages interpret to mean between 10 and 20 percent of one’s income. The government gives tax breaks to encourage charitable donations; and wealthy philanthropists are known to give away billions of dollars.

But what if I’m donating 20 percent or more of my income to charity and I have plenty left over: Is there anything wrong ethically about having a fleet of exotic cars, a private yacht costing hundreds of millions, or spending 2 million dollars on a birthday party? What about space tourism, custom designer clothes, or owning multiple 20-room estates around the world?

Presumably, there’s nothing wrong with having nice things or taking vacations, but is there ever a limit? Is it defensible to argue that the luxury industry provides jobs, or is that a smokescreen -- especially in light of stories like the reported slave labor conditions where Fiji water is produced?

We don’t want the government controlling the choices we make, but when we live a life of excess just because we can afford it, does that undermine the principle of self-discipline and responsible stewardship of the planet that should be part of our system of core values?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer H. Elder, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Tim Hawkes is managing director of Unlimited Potential Coaching Specialists in the UK and director of global operations. He is an international speaker and works with organizations to develop organizational culture.

Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping companies add innovation to their mindsets and their operations to create discernible competitive advantage

Archive Episode #17: When truth isn't good enough?

Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:00:00 -0500

Should we expect objective truth in art, or does creative license allow ignoring facts in order to tell a more compelling story?

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Popular movies are often introduced with the message, “Based on true events,” implying a reasonably accurate depiction of reality. We take it for granted that there may be a bit of poetic license, but we probably expect that the basic facts of the story will be authentically represented.

But that’s not always the case.

The movie Remember the Titans is about Herman Boone, a black football coach in the deep south in the 1970s. In the movie, his team was the only racially integrated team in the conference. In reality, all the teams were integrated by then.

In the movie Cinderella Man, boxing champion James Braddock goes into the ring against Max Baer, who had killed another boxer in a previous fight. The movie portrays Baer as a vicious killer. In reality, he was horrified by his opponent's death and had to be convinced not to retire from boxing.

In the movie Argo, the final scene shows Iranian security officials chasing the American plane down the tarmac as it carries the American escapees to safety. The scene was a Hollywood fabrication.

What about historical fiction in general: does it bring history to life or does it blur the lines between fact and fiction?

It’s been said that you shouldn’t let the facts get in the way of a good story. What responsibility do storytellers have to be truthful? When do we cross the line from poetic license into the realm of fantasy or deception? What are the effects on society when the truth isn’t good enough to keep an audience engaged?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sarah Elkins is a communication and leadership coach, using the power of storytelling to connect, engage, and inspire.

Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping Companies Manage Their Brands, Solve Their Problems, and Simplify the Complex.

Matthew Rosenberg teaches communication, argumentation, and critical discourse at Oregon State University.

Archive Episode #13: Unsanctioned Intervention?

Wed, 05 Apr 2023 04:00:00 -0500

If no good deed goes unpunished, should we still risk doing the right thing?

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

True story:

Susan was working in the back office of a neighborhood clinic one morning. A patient arrived and was admitted for consultation. Susan heard raised voices, after which the patient reappeared and quickly left the clinic in a state of apparent grief or anger. Had there been some disagreement or misunderstanding? Susan assumed so but couldn’t know for sure.

Under normal circumstances, Susan probably wouldn’t have thought twice. But only a week earlier, a disgruntled client had left an office just down the street after a conflict, then returned with a gun and started shooting.

Susan didn’t want to take the chance that her inaction might put others (and herself) at risk. Perhaps with a simple check-in she might determine if there was any cause for genuine concern.

Because all visits were confidential, looking up the man’s identity would be a violation of privacy. Susan tried to reach her supervisor for permission to open the database, but her supervisor was unavailable.

Susan took the initiative. She looked up the man’s name and phone number, then gave him a call.

“Hello,” she said into the phone. “I’m calling to check in… you seemed upset when you left our office. Is there anything I can do to help?”

“Oh, no,” the man replied. “I was a little distressed, but I’m fine now. Thanks so much for calling.”

Subsequently, Susan found herself reprimanded by her supervisor.

Was she wrong to do what she did?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sonia Funk is a corporate wellness strategist and speaker, a nutritional therapist, and an award winning singer and songwriter.

S. Scott Mason , aka the Myth Slayer, is a Transformational Coach for Executives, Entrepreneurs & Other Leaders, podcast host, and keynote speaker.

Heather R Younger is a keynoter and consultant on employee engagement and DEI, a TEDx speaker, podcast host, and author of the new book, The Art of Caring Leadership.

Grappling with the Gray #43: For old times' sake?

Wed, 29 Mar 2023 04:00:00 -0500

How can we raise authentic concerns without being accused of political motivation or politically correctness?

That's our topic when the ethics panel convenes to Grapple with the Gray.

During his presidency, Ronald Reagan was often criticized for inaccuracies and misstatements. Sometime after he left the White House at age 77, it was revealed that he had been showing the first symptoms of Alzheimer's disease while still in office.

Last week, presidential hopeful Nikki Haley called for mental competency tests for candidates over 75, clearly targeting President Joe Biden’s expected re-election bid.

On the one hand, we want to encourage respect for both the wisdom and the challenges of the elderly. On the other hand, since impaired ability is a natural consequence of growing older, we want to protect the elderly and those around them from the potential dangers of diminishing function. This may include increased attention to issuing driver's licenses, operation of motorized wheelchairs, and addressing incapacity to perform their jobs.

How do we balance respect for the elderly against safety concerns while ensuring that they do not become victims of agism?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Karl Ahlrichs works with Healthcare issues and Risk Management in all forms, building high performing teams and applying "uncommon sense" to a high risk world.

Dave Bricker is a Speaker, Presentation Consultant, and sailing aficionado. He works with leaders and professionals to master the art of business storytelling—on the stage, on the page, or on the screen.

Jolanta Pomiotlo is Vice President of Information Technology for EXSIF Worldwide who manages innovative initiatives aimed at reducing operating costs, improving profit, and growing revenue.

GWTG Archive Episode #9: Invisible Customers?

Wed, 22 Mar 2023 04:00:00 -0500

When do you cross the line from marketing to manipulating?

When do you become complicit in other people's unethical behavior?

How far do you have to go to correct other people's moral missteps?

These are some of the questions the ethics panel takes up on this archive episode of Grappling with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Benny was widely recognized as a whiz kid by his fellow economics students, asking all the right questions in class and coming up with smart answers that impressed even the professor.

Over the summer, he arranged his notes into a short primer on economic theory, which he self-published in hope of making a few bucks by selling them to incoming freshmen at the start of the fall semester. He left a couple of dozen copies with the owner of a popular off-campus bookstore.

A week later, the store owner called to tell Benny the books had sold out and he needed more copies.

“Wow,” said Benny, “I had no idea they would sell that fast.”

The shopkeeper grinned. “I have a secret system,” he said. “I post a preorder sign-up sheet in the school library. I write about 15 fake names on the sheet, which makes the book look like a hot item and gets more people to order it so they won’t miss out on something good.”

Was the shopkeeper unethical? If so, what should Benny do?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Kimberly Davis is a coach, trainer, TEDx speaker, author of Brave Leadership and founder of the Brave Leadership University.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimberlyd...

Kira Day is a passion-based coach specializing in innovation, leadership and professional transformation. She is CEO of The Passion Centre and Creator of The Passion-Based™ Incubator.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kiraday/

Peter Winick is the founder and CEO of Thought Leadership Leverage and host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/peterwinick/

Grappling with the Gray #42: Poison Pen?

Wed, 15 Mar 2023 04:00:00 -0500

True story:

A couple went out to dinner together. They ordered a variety of appetizers and shared them. A couple of hours after returning home, the wife became extremely ill, vomiting so violently that the husband felt compelled to call 911.

An ambulance arrived (together with a fire truck), and took them to the emergency room, where they spent six hours as the doctors attempted to treat the wife for what they believed to be food poisoning. In a state of agitation, the husband sent an email to the restaurant informing them that their food had made his wife seriously ill, and he identified the one appetizer his wife had eaten that he hadn’t.

He also informed them that the cost of the ambulance was over $600 and implied that they should offer to pay the expense.

48 hours later, he had received no reply. So he sent the same message to the restaurant’s Instagram account. He never received a reply to the second communication, either.

Subsequently, tests came back confirming that the wife had not been sick from food poisoning but from a virulent stomach flu.

Considering that the doctors initially diagnosed the wife with food poisoning, was the husband wrong to send the initial email? Was the restaurant wrong to ignore the message? Considering that the restaurant did not reply, should the husband follow up with a note apologizing for his false accusation?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Stewart Wiggins is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Ipek Williamson is an Insight Coach, Meditation Teacher, Speaker, Author, and Change Master who helps people initiate and navigate change in their personal and professional lives.

Grappling with the Gray #41: Has the clock run out?

Wed, 08 Mar 2023 04:00:00 -0600

A recent article on Substack by Gurwinder outlines in horrifying detail how TikTok is intentionally designed in a way that promotes addiction, encourages irresponsible and antisocial behavior, erodes fundamental human values, accelerates mental impairment, and contributes to mass psychological illness.

The China-based platform is now the most downloaded app on the web. At the same time, the Chinese Communist Party has banned its own children from access to it. Even the “spinach” version, which is primarily educational content, is only available to kids for 40 minutes a day, between 6 am and 10 pm.

Evidence suggests that the Chinese government sees TikTok as a tool that will lead the United States to committing societal, intellectual, and cultural suicide, and there’s good reason to believe they might be right.

If so, what is the ethical response individually and collectively? Can and should the government impose electronic warning labels, as it did on cigarettes? Should it ban the platform outright, or does the government restricting our freedoms provide the CCP with a different kind of victory?

As individuals, should we boycott the platform, or can we rely on our self-discipline to choose beneficial content to manipulate the algorithm in our favor? Should creators attempt to produce beneficial content, or is contributing to the platform in any manner contributing to the problem?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is a Concierge High Performance Psychologist who works with people who have to keep it together because the stakes are too high for them to fall apart, and host of the Quick Hits Podcast. See less

Peter Winick works with individuals and organizations to build and grow revenue streams through their thought leadership platforms and is host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #40: Smell the Coffee?

Wed, 01 Mar 2023 04:00:00 -0600

To how much collateral damage can we subject others in order to save ourselves?

That's this week's topic on Grappling with the Gray.

In the movie Passengers, a computer malfunction wakes up Chris Pratt out of hibernation too early, 90 years before his spaceship is going to reach its destination. He now faces the prospect of spending the rest of his life alone, with no one for company except the robot bartender.

Within a year, he has grown so depressed that he comes close to committing suicide. After pulling back from the brink, he is walking among the hibernating passengers when he spots Jennifer Lawrence, asleep in her pod. He looks her up online and discovers that she is a talented writer. He reads her books, listens to her interviews, and falls in love with her.

He becomes obsessed with the idea of waking her up so he’ll have someone for company to save his sanity. He tells himself that it’s wrong, but he can’t keep the idea from coming back to him again and again.

Would he be wrong to wake her up, causing her to lose her future in order to save him from madness and possibly death? If he did, would he be obligated to tell her the truth, or would it be better to allow her to think they were both victims of a system failure?

In general, is it ever acceptable to impose hardship on some to prevent disproportionate hardship on others, like stealing from the grocery store to feed starving children? If so, how do we calculate when we’re crossing the line?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer H. Elder, CSP, CPA is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

S. Scott Mason Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a speaker, podcast host, and coach working with executives and entrepreneurs to Magnetize & Monetize Professional Freedom by Dislodging Toxic Myths to Ignite the Charisma Within

Lisa K. McDonald is the founder of Career Polish, an Executive Career Coach and Master Mindset Coach who helps successful professionals reach their next phase of career-happy and life-healthy.

Grappling with the Gray #39: Truth be Told?

Wed, 22 Feb 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Can we trust the whistleblowers?

A video released last week by Project Veritas appears to show a Pfizer executive admitting that the company has at least considered producing mutations of the Covid virus in order to perpetuate its lucrative vaccine manufacturing business.

If true, the video provides damning evidence of highly unethical and predatory practices.

A columnist in Forbes claims to have found “no legitimate source” online to verify that the purported subject of the video, Jordan Trishton Walker, is indeed a Pfizer Director of Research and Development - Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning. The video clip also seems to be severely edited, raising questions of whether the comments are provided in full context.

At one point in the conversation, the subject of the video says, “Don’t tell anyone about this.” Is this equivalent to telling a reporter something “off the record”? Is recording someone without their knowledge ethical, aside from being illegal in many states?

Does Project Veritas have an ethical obligation to make the unedited video available to the public? Should they provide substantiation that the subject of the video is who they claim he is?

Finally, if the video is authentic, what action should the government of the justice system take, particularly if these were merely musings by Pfizer executives without any actual implementation?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Mariah Edgington, BSN, RN Edgington is a Keynote Speaker and, together with her husband, Byron, Co-Author of Journey Well, You Are MORE Than Enough: (RE)Discover Your Passion, Purpose, & Love of Yourself & Life.

Mark O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping companies add innovation to their mindsets and their operations to create discernible competitive advantage.

Grappling with the Gray #38: Rust Removal?

Wed, 15 Feb 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Does taking responsibility require micromanaging?

Is it ever possible to expect too much oversight?

Can due diligence erode the foundations of trust?

These are some of the issues the ethics panel takes up in this week's ethics challenge:

Recently, Alec Baldwin and Hannah Gutierrez-Reed were charged with involuntary manslaughter in the accidental death of Halyna Hutchins by a prop gun that turned out to be loaded with live ammunition.

We’re not going to discuss the legalities of the case, but how can we evaluate the ethics of diffused responsibility? Alec Baldwin was handed a gun and told it was a prop. As an actor, did he have a moral responsibility to check the gun, or was it proper to rely on the expertise of the armorer?

On the other hand, he was also producer of the film. Does that make him ultimately responsible for underlings who fail in their responsibilities?

How might these issues extend to other areas? Do I have to check my car’s brakes after I buy it, or can I rely on the responsibility of the manufacturer? Is the CEO of a corporation with 20,000 employees responsible if a junior executive misuses company resources to embezzle funds from clients or customers?

To some degree, the smooth running of society demands that we trust those around us to do what they’re supposed to do. Is it healthy, or even realistic, for us to try to assume responsibility for others doing their jobs? If not, where does accountability lie?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Christopher Bauer is a Speaker, Author, and Consultant on Ethics, Compliance, and Accountability.

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.

Catherine Fitzgerald is a speaker, writer, certified coach, and founder of BrassTacksWithHeart - Executive Coaching. She works with C-level leaders and their teams as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

Grappling with the Gray #37: I, Robot?

Wed, 08 Feb 2023 03:00:00 -0600

Are the ethics between human beings different from the ethics between Man and Machine?

That's what we'll be investigating in this week's episode of Grappling with the Gray.

Here is our ethics challenge:

In 1955, Walter M. Miller won the first ever Hugo Award for his science fiction novelette, The Darfsteller, the story of a former actor who had refused to let his persona be digitalized when robot actors replaced real ones.

The unveiling of ChatGPT is the latest example of life imitating art. The new technology mimics human writing so perfectly that it may be impossible to tell the difference between the two.

Consider the consequences: The entire writing profession may become extinct. High school teachers and college professors won’t be able to tell whether students did their own work. Source materials will be appropriated without regard for citation or copyright infringement.

Then there’s the influence on lobbying. Comments submitted in the regulatory process might be computer generated. Anyone with the software could do from their kitchen table what the Russian Internet Research Agency did in its attempt to influence our 2016 elections, with far less overhead and far more precision.

In the Netflix documentary, The Social Dilemma, creators of Google, Facebook, and Apple recount how horrified they are at the creations they unleashed on society, but we don’t seem to be learning from their experience.

What are some other ethical consequences of this technology? And once we release into the world technology that promotes, encourages, and even necessitates unethical behavior, what options do we have for preserving an ethical society?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Paul Edwards used to drive large military vehicles through the deserts of the Middle East, armed with an assault rifle. Today, his occupation of ghostwriting requires him to ask questions first, and shoot later.”

K Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski Hirotsu Ziemski is Founder of KSP Partnership, providing project management and project leadership courses and workshops to improve team dynamics and communications.

Sarah Kalmeta aka Sara the Pivoter, is founder of Pivot Point, a career transition coach, author, and podcast host.

Grappling with the Gray #36: A time to mourn?

Wed, 01 Feb 2023 03:00:00 -0600

If there's a time for every season, how do we determine which season we're currently in?

Join this week's panelists on LinkedIn Live as they grapple with this ethical challenge:

The entire country has followed the story of Buffalo Bills safety Damar Hamlin, his dramatic collapse during a game against the Cincinnati Bengals, his suspension between life and death, and his remarkable path toward recovery. Our collective obsession with these events raises a number of points for reflection.

As Mr. Hamlin was being resuscitated on the field, FOX Sports pundit Skip Bayless tweeted:

“No doubt the NFL is considering postponing the rest of this game - but how? This late in the season, a game of this magnitude is crucial to the regular-season outcome... which suddenly seems so irrelevant.”

Mr. Bayless was attacked from all sides for his “inhumanity,” but his observation opens the door for further discussion. Rockies pitcher Juan Nicasio was carried off the field after being hit in the head by a line drive in 2011. The Rockies went on to lose to the Washington Nationals. In 2008, St. Louis Cardinal Juan Encarnacion was hit by a foul ball that ended his career and may have cost him his vision. But the game went on.

How do we decide when life goes on and when respect requires us to suspend normal activity? Furthermore, why did this incident capture national attention, overshadowing objectively more profound tragedies that fill the headlines? Should we be reexamining our priorities, or is there something exceptional about this story?

Finally, a WSJ editorial contrasted past incidents of coaches fired for leading team prayers with the midfield prayers offered up for Damar Hamlin’s recovery. If public prayer is wrong sometimes, shouldn’t it be wrong all the time? What are we to make of these apparent inconsistencies, and what should our approach be to individual tragedy that mars public events?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Mark Brown, CSP Brown is a world champion speaker, an executive coach, and an artificial intelligence software advisor.

Lieutenant Colonel JC Glick is a retired Army Ranger. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as an author and TEDx speaker.

Nick Sternberg is Interim CEO of Hope and Change. He is a writer, creativity consultant, and LinkedIn provocateur.

Grappling with the Gray #35: All in a good cause?

Wed, 25 Jan 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Is misrepresentation ever justified if it motivates beneficial action?

Can the greater good or a higher truth provide an excuse for lying?

What are the unintended consequences of the ends justifying the means?

These are some of the topics addressed when the panelists grapple with the gray.

This week's ethics challenge:

In February, 2017, Dr. John Bates made headlines by claiming that his former boss, Thomas Karl of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, had knowingly misrepresented data to influence government policy on global warming.

Predictably, climate change skeptics railed against the corruption of the scientific community, while climate change advocates charged Dr. Bates with exaggerating his claims.

For the sake of our discussion, let’s assume that the charges are true. If so, it’s likely that Dr. Karl was motivated by the purest intentions, that he wanted to spur action to prevent what he genuinely believed to be the devastating effects of global warming, and that he viewed the data as representing an anomaly rather than a larger global trend.

Aside from the climate change debate, could it ever be justified to doctor facts or embellish the “story” told by the data to motivate public action in a way that serves the greater good?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Laura Elizabeth Gray is a Passionate People Connector, Columnist, Author, and Development Director of The ALS Association Northern Ohio Chapter

Jonathan Ross is an executive for a defense manufacturing company, writer, and management and communications consultant as time allows.

Annette Simmons is a speaker, trainer, consultant, and author of The Story Factor -- named one of the 100 Best Business Books of All Time.

Grappling with the Gray #34: Yesterday's Gone?

Wed, 18 Jan 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Is a crime ever victimless, even where there really are no victims?

If I take someone else's idea but then make it my own, how much have I actually stolen?

If pursing the right course demands an act of piracy, can piracy itself be the right course?

These are some of the topics addressed when this week's panel grapples with the gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

In the 2019 movie “Yesterday,” struggling musician Jack Malik wakes up one morning to discover that the entire world has forgotten that the Beatles and their music ever existed. He records their classic hits as his own and becomes a sensation, but eventually he begins to question whether he is entitled to claim the music as his own.

In Jane Hanff Korelitz’s novel The Plot, Jacob Bonner is teaching creative writing at a third-rate MFA program. One of his students submits a manuscript draft with the most brilliant plot Jacob has ever read. When he later learns that the student died without completing the manuscript and apparently without heirs. Jacob steals the plot, publishes the story as his own, and becomes a celebrated author.

In both cases, creative works would have been lost to the world if not for the person who appropriated them. Since no one lost through their appropriation, did they do anything wrong?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Professor Pete Alexander is Adjunct Marketing Professor at Antioch University, as well as a professional speaker and author on reducing stress in everyday life.

Rosemary Ravinal 🎤 is a public relations expert, C-Suite presentation coach. and creator of the ZoomScore™, a yardstick for measuring the essential elements of success.

Kathryn Woods is a Communications expert, confidence and voice coach, speaker, and speech pathologist.

Grappling with the Gray #33: In the Bag?

Wed, 11 Jan 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is this episode's ethics challenge:

We’re encouraged to buy reusable shopping bags that make disposable bags unnecessary and thereby help protect the environment. But is that actually a good idea?

In 2019, the top ten grocery stores in Britain reported selling 1.5 billion reusable bags, an average of 54 per household in the UK, arguably ten times more than a family a family needs. In 2018, supermarkets in Britain distributed nearly 20,000 more tons of plastic than they did the year before.

Moreover, much of our home recycling practices are more placebo than cure. Families that fail to sort their trash properly end up contaminating genuine recyclables, jacking up labor and machinery repair costs. For years, much of our recycling was shipped to China for disposal, relocating the problem rather than solving it. And even under ideal conditions, the cost of recycling has often made it financially impractical.

In general, does the illusion of taking positive action encourage complacency, so that we exempt ourselves from implementing practices that might address our problems in a meaningful way? Or might a public awareness campaign that fails to meet measurable objectives nevertheless help change consumer behavior and so help progressive policies eventually succeed?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Melissa Hughes, Ph.D. is Founder and Principal of the Andrick Group, applying recent brain research to improve employee engagement, company culture, team dynamics, and innovation.

Mark O'Brien O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping companies add innovation to their mindsets and their operations to create discernible competitive advantage

Cris Parker is with us from Sydney, Australia. She is Head of The Ethics Alliance, a community of organizations across sectors that are connected through The Ethics Centre, providing ethics-based counseling, consulting and education programs.

Grappling with the Gray #32: Don't say cheese?

Wed, 04 Jan 2023 04:00:00 -0600

Not everything is black and white. That's why we have to grapple with the gray.

Here is this episode's ethics challenge:

A woman recently sued Kraft Heinz for $5 million over misleading advertising. The company markets its Velveeta Shells & Cheese as being "ready in 3 1/2 minutes.” In fact, that's the amount of time each cup needs to be microwaved; but it doesn’t include the actual preparation process, from stirring in water to letting the cheese sauce thicken.

The 15-page class-action lawsuit states:

"As a result of the false and misleading representations, the Product is sold at a premium price.”

The plaintiff claims she chose Velveeta over other similar products because of the prep time prominently promised on its label. She wouldn't have bought it "had she known the truth."

As a side note, the plaintiff’s lawyer has reportedly filed over 400 similar lawsuits.

Granted that the preparation time promised was not entirely accurate, can it be considered sufficiently misleading to be considered false advertising? To what standard should manufacturers and marketers be held?

Is the response of a class action lawsuit and a $5 million claim proportionate, or do such cases do more harm than good by contributing to an already litigious society and straining an already inefficient legal system?

Join us on today at 5:00 pm ET on LinkedIn Live as we dive into this topic on Grappling with the Gray.

Meet this week’s panelists:

Tim Hawkes is managing director of Unlimited Potential Coaching Specialists in the UK and director of global operations. He is an international speaker and works with organizations to develop organizational culture.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is a Concierge High Performance Psychologist who works with people who have to keep it together because the stakes are too high for them to fall apart. She is also the host of the Quick Hits Podcast, on which all of today’s panelists have appeared.

Stewart Wiggins is Chief Advisor at Induna Advisors, working to significantly increase company revenue by developing positive client reports and establishing solid business relationships.

Grappling with the Gray #31: Fox in the Henhouse?

Wed, 28 Dec 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Not everything is black and white. That's why we need to grapple with the gray.

Here is this episode's ethics challenge:

Daniel owned a neighborhood restaurant. One day, he received a frantic call from his friend Michael, who owned a local catering business. “My freezer just broke down. Can I store a few cases of chickens in your freezer for a week or two until I get mine repaired?”

Daniel had room to spare and was happy to help Michael out. When Michael arrived with the chickens, Daniel noticed that the expiration date on the cartons was past due. He pointed this out to Michael, who shrugged it off.

“The expiration date only applies when they’re fresh,” he said. “Once they’re frozen, you can keep them forever.” Daniel wasn’t so sure, but it was Michael’s business, so he let the matter drop.

Three months later, despite repeated calls from Daniel, Michael still had not picked up his chickens.

One afternoon, Daniel got a call from a nearby restaurateur. “The inspectors are making surprise visits this week,” he told Daniel. “They’ve already dropped in on me and they could be at your place any moment. Make sure you have everything in order.”

Daniel remembered the expiration date on Michael’s chickens. The inspectors might not agree with Michael’s reasoning and might not believe that Daniel was storing them for someone else. They might fine him, or even shut him down. Daniel decided he had given Michael enough chances. He carried the chicken cases into the back alley and tossed them into his Dumpster.

A few hours later, Michael showed up unannounced. “I’m here for my chickens,” he said with a smile. Daniel explained why he hadn’t been able to hold Michael’s chickens any longer, saying he was free to retrieve them from the Dumpster. However, in the summer heat the chickens had defrosted enough to attract some local cats, which had rendered the chickens unfit for humans.
Michael demanded that Daniel compensate him for the chickens. Daniel replied that he had ceased to be responsible when Michael failed to retrieve his chickens on time and after repeated requests to do so.

Does Daniel have to compensate Michael for the chickens?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sam Ardery is a national mediator, trial lawyer, consultant, speaker, and author. He teaches negotiation at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and is author of Positively Conflicted: Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World.

Jo Erven is an accountant, an auditor, and an ethics speaker, who prides herself on not being your TYPICAL accountant, auditor, or ethics speaker. She is the author of Becoming the Everyday Ethicist.

Diane Wyzga, RN, JD & story consultant is founder of the Engaged Storyism® Method. She helps professionals identify, shape & deliver their messaging stories with value & heart that are understood, remembered, recalled & acted upon.

Grappling with the Gray #30: Doctor's Orders?

Wed, 21 Dec 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Not everything is black and white. That's why we need to grapple with the gray.

Let’s face it: we’re all a little neurotic. But when quirks and mild aversions grow into crippling phobias, psychologists may search for novel and creative solutions.

As an antidote for pathological shyness, one psychologist instructed patients to go into department stores and engage salespeople by asking for product information and advice. In some cases, patients were instructed to make purchases, then come back a few days later to return the merchandise.

The concept is simple. Through repeated interactions of this kind, patients gradually become comfortable with approaching strangers, asking for information, and asserting themselves in the normal give-and-take of daily human discourse.

However, this form of therapy depends on the unknowing collaboration of store personnel, potentially interfering with their job of attending to paying customers, distracting them from other work, creating extra work in dealing with returns and restocking, and possibly costing them commissions from real customers.

Is it ethical for the psychologist to treat the patient in a way that might cause even a minor loss and inconvenience to the store and its sales force?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Ozlem Brooke Erol works with growth-mindset leaders who want to create work cultures defined by authentic purpose, harmony, and passion where innovation, engagement, and profit become a natural outcome.

Diane Helbig is Chief Improvement Catalyzer at Helbig Enterprises, providing guidance and training to business owners and leaders around the world.

Ipek Williamson is an Insight Coach, Meditation Teacher, Speaker, Author, and Change Master who helps people initiate and navigate change in their personal and professional lives.

Grappling with the Gray #28: Salary Cap?

Wed, 07 Dec 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This week's ethics challenge:

From time to time, the makers of soda and sports drinks promote their products through bottle cap lotteries. After opening your drink, you can check online to see if the number printed inside the cap is a winner.

True story. A group of coworkers were sitting together and socializing in the lunchroom. When their break was over, they got up to return to work. That’s when one of them, let’s call her Zelda, noticed that someone -- she didn’t know who -- had left a bottle cap on the table. She recognized it as a lottery cap and picked it up. Later she checked the number and discovered the cap was a million dollar winner.

When the original owner, call him Victor, learned about the winning cap, he claimed that the money was his. When Zelda insisted the cap and the winnings were hers, Victor sued her in New York state court.

Aside from the decision of the court, what are the ethical issues involved in this story? What should Zelda have done, if anything, upon discovering that cap was worth a million dollars? Does Victor have any ethical claim after apparently discarding the cap?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Dave Bricker is a Speaker, Presentation Consultant, and sailing aficionado. He works with leaders and professionals to master the art of business storytelling—on the stage, on the page, or on the screen!
.
Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Carl Loop, MBA Loop works with organizations that want to increase productivity, engagement and profits by decreasing turnover and burnout. He’s a Keynote Speaker and author of "Mondays Reimagined: Master Your Monday. Win the Week!"

Grappling with the Gray #29: All for One?

Mon, 28 Nov 2022 13:00:00 -0600

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is our ethics challenge:

There was a time when labor unions were desperately needed to protect workers from despotic bosses, inadequate pay, and odious work conditions. Unions provided a vital service protecting members from unreasonable demands, health hazards, and retaliatory firing, as well as negotiating higher salaries to keep up with the marketplace and inflation.

Over time, however, unions became increasingly political. They often spent huge amounts of dues-revenue to support candidates and policies that many of their members disagreed with and engaged in political activism contrary to values of many workers. Whereas workers once had no recourse against unfair treatment by employers, now they had no recourse against the way union leadership spent their money.

Recent legislation has made it possible for at least some employees to opt out of union membership and not pay union dues. On the one hand, workers should not be forced to pay into an organization that supports policies they disagree with. On the other hand, if the union negotiates higher wages, it doesn’t seem fair that employees who are not paying-members should share benefits with those who are.

How do we balance respecting the values of individual employees who disagree with union activism against the equity of all employees contributing in proportion to the benefits they receive?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Jennifer H. Elder, is a CPA and Certified Speaking Professional who helps leaders future-proof their businesses by making smart decisions and staying ethical.

Catherine Fitzgerald is owner of Catapult Leadership Group, working with organizational leaders as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits.

S. Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a Transformational Coach for Executives, Entrepreneurs & Other Leaders, podcast host, and keynote speaker.

Grappling with the Gray #27: Should Big Brother be Watching You?

Mon, 28 Nov 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is this episode's scenario:

Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter has renewed debate over free speech vs. responsible speech, over the need for and the dangers of censorship, over standards and double standards.

Granted that implementing equitable policy solutions across social media may be beyond our reach, what about in the workplace: we want employees to feel free to express themselves, but we don’t want to ignore caustic speech and behavior; we want to promote sensitivity and respect, but we don’t want to compel speech; we want to create a culture where employees feel trusted, but we don’t want some employees to abuse our trust in a way that makes other employees uncomfortable in the workplace.

Increasingly, reports indicate that efforts to create a healthier work environment often backfire, with some employees feeling vilified because of their identity and others feeling disempowered or tokenized by possibly well-intentioned efforts to support them.

Given that some individuals are hypersensitive and others are socially clumsy or downright disrespectful, we struggle to set in place policies, checks, and balances to safeguard the dignity of employees without creating an oppressive work atmosphere.

Is it ethical to impose blanket policies that may go beyond their intended goals and produce unintended consequences? Is it ethical to do nothing, if the cure might be worse than the ailment? How do we maintain our ethical balance while trying to improve workplace culture?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Michael de Groot is a storyteller, helping clients bring their business stories alive and is host of the Share Your Story podcast.
.
Lisa K. McDonald is the founder of Career Polish, an Executive Career Coach and Master Mindset Coach who helps successful professionals reach their next phase of career-happy and life-healthy.

Toni McLelland MSc is Founder and Director of 1st Life Group. She is a Critical Friend & Business Mentor in Social Justice, Mobility & Impact.

Grappling with the Gray #26: Last Respects?

Mon, 21 Nov 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Do private sins outweigh public virtue, or vice versa?

Does the benefit of the many permit us to overlook the transgressions of the few?

Is it best to leave the past in the past, or does that compromise the integrity of the future?

These are some of the topics we address when this week's ethics panel Grapples with the Gray.

Here is our ethics challenge:

15 years after retirement, a prominent metropolitan city police commissioner passes away. He was highly effective during his long term of service as both the face of the department to the public and as an advocate for the welfare of his officers.

He was both admired and respected throughout the force and throughout much of the city. After his retirement, he recorded 60 hours a week as an administrator for a local charity.

However, behind the scenes he was guilty of misuse of power, misappropriation of funds, and other egregious instances of graft. Upon investigation, the current commissioner discovers that his involvement with the charity was nominal: he showed up infrequently, fulfilled few responsibilities, and used his office for extramarital activities.

Traditionally, former commissioners have always received large-scale funerals, not merely to honor the individual but to honor the office and the institution. The current commissioner finds himself caught between pressure from top brass to hold the traditional funeral ceremony with full regalia as a show of respect for the department on the one side and his own contempt for the man who abused the power of the office on the other.

What are the current commissioner’s options, and how should he decide what to do?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Laura Gray is a Passionate People Connector, Columnist, Author, and Development Director of The ALS Association Northern Ohio Chapter

Mark O'Brien O’Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping Companies Manage Their Brands, Solve Their Problems, and Simplify the Complex.

Peter Winick is the founder and CEO of Thought Leadership Leverage and host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

Grappling with the Gray #25: Checking Out?

Mon, 14 Nov 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is today’s ethics challenge:

True story:

After eleven years working as office manager for a medium-sized company, Charlene found a position with another company offering a higher salary and improved benefits. Her future employer wanted her to start in two weeks, but her current contract required her to give four weeks’ notice.

She went to her employer, explained the situation, and asked to be released from the four-week notice restriction. Her employer flatly refused. When she explained that the job might not be available to her if she did not start in two weeks, her employer said that if she left her position early she would be placed on a no-rehire list, she would not be paid for her remaining paid-time-off, and that she would receive no end-of-the-year bonus. (It was mid-December).

The next Friday was payday. Charlene waited until her paycheck cleared, then stopped coming to work. She never called in or let anyone know about her absence, leaving her former colleagues scrambling to cover her responsibilities. No one in the office ever heard from her after that.

Where did the problems actually begin, and how might it have been prevented from blossoming to produce this result?

Meet the panel:

Jane Adshead-Grant Adshead Grant is a Master Certified Coach, leadership facilitator, author, speaker, and faculty member of Time to Think, LTD..

Dr. Nora Gold is a prize-winning author, the publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Jewish Fiction .net (an online literary journal), and a former professor of social work.

Dr. Robyn Odegaard is a concierge, high performance psychologist who works with successful individuals who have “hit a bump in the road” in one area of their life. She helps keep the chaos of that bump from spreading to the rest of their life.

Grappling with the Gray #24: Pull the Plug?

Mon, 07 Nov 2022 04:00:00 -0600

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is today’s ethics challenge:

A medical supply company creates a surgical implant designed to stop seizures in patients with epilepsy and similar conditions. In beta testing, the implant proves effective in only 15% of patients, but for those patients it is a miracle cure.

However, because of the low success rate, it is not economically viable for the company to produce or market the device. Moreover, the company does not want the expense of maintaining the software system that monitors and regulates the implant. By disabling the system, those trial patients whose seizures have been eliminated will likely face the return of their symptoms, possibly worse than they were before.

Does the company have an ethical obligation to maintain the software?

Meet this week's panelists:

Mark Brown, Certified Speaking Professional, is an executive coach and World Champion of Speaking.

Lisa Nichols is CEO of Technology Partners, an award-winning, certified Women Business Enterprise, and host of the Something Extra podcast.

Robert Zafft is an Ethics Keynote Speaker, Executive Leadership coach, Corporate trainer, and author of The Right Way to Win.

Grappling with the Gray #23: Secret Identity?

Mon, 31 Oct 2022 04:00:00 -0500

When you do the wrong thing for the right reason, it is still the wrong thing?

Is it possible to apply the principle of fairness so even-handedly that it leads to unfair outcomes?

Since mercy is the suspension of justice, how do we avoid sacrificing a core value when we have to choose between them?

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Here is this episode's ethics challenge?

Grappling with the Gray #22: Part of the Plan?

Mon, 24 Oct 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

A noted psychologist had just finished his address to a group of professionals when a member of the audience approached him and introduced himself. The psychologist immediately recognized the name. Before him stood a world-famous doctor, once featured on the cover of Time Magazine, whose medical innovations had transformed treatments and revolutionized curative procedures.

The esteemed doctor proceeded to confess that he had suffered his entire life from depression. As a boy, he loved to draw, and he had possessed a natural talent for artistic design. Growing up, he dreamt of one day becoming a successful architect.

But his parents had other ideas. “Architecture?” they asked. “No. You need to use your intelligence to support a family. You are going to medical school.”

And so he did, with almost unparalleled success. Nonetheless, despite his extraordinary contributions to medicine, the doctor felt unfulfilled in life for not having pursued his passion.

Sometime later, the psychologist lamented the insistence of the doctor’s parents, how they had deprived him of the life he had wanted and the sense of purpose that he had never realized. When he finished, the psychologist found himself confronted by several doctors from the audience.

“We know who you were talking about,” they said. “Do you have any idea how many lives were saved through his procedures and inventions? How dare you suggest that his own personal gratification outweighs the contribution he made to the world and the people he benefited.”

The psychologist later expressed his ambivalence. Were those other doctors right? Was the cost of personal satisfaction outweighed by the value to society? He admitted that he did not have an answer himself.

Meet this week’s panelists:

Kimberly Davis is an author, TEDx speaker, and founder of the Brave Leadership University, leading development programs world-wide, around authentic leadership, purpose, presence, and influence.

Lieutenant Colonel JC Glick, LTC (R), U.S. Army, MA Glick is a retired Army Ranger. He is a leadership, strategy, and culture advisor, as well as an author and TEDx speaker.

Stewart McClain is a speaker, author, and president of All Hoods Unite, providing mentoring, mental health support, and advocacy for the homeless.

0 Comments

SORT BY

Grappling with the Gray #21: Foul Investment?

Wed, 12 Oct 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

In case you missed it, on Oct. 2, 2021, while interviewing NASCAR driver Brandon Brown, the winner at the Talladega Superspeedway in Alabama, an NBC Sports reporter misinterpreted the chanting of the crowd as “Let’s go, Brandon.” They were actually chanting “F—- Joe Biden.” Instantaneously,, "Let's Go Brandon" became code for expressing contempt for the president.

Not long afterward, a client came to me with the following question:

The client was attracted to a particular cryptocurrency she thought to be a promising investment. However, the name of the currency was FJB -- not just the letters, but the words written out. The client told me that, as a matter of principle, she avoids profanity and tries to disassociate herself from it at all times.

Then she asked whether her sensitivity to profanity was reason to decline investing in the currency if, by doing so, she would forfeit any potential financial gain.

Points to ponder:

To what degree are we obligated to disassociate ourselves from people, projects, products, or opportunities that violate our own personal standards, even if they have wide social acceptance and do not violate the law?

If we would advise the woman not to invest, how is this different from “Cancel Culture,” in which individuals or groups respond to behaviors or attitudes they find objectionable by withdrawing support, financial or otherwise?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Deb Coviello, aka the Drop in CEO, is an author, speaker, podcast host, and silver medalist curler who coaches C-Suite leaders of today and tomorrow to navigate challenges with confidence.
.
Sonia Funk is a Speaker and Corporate Wellness Strategist for Leaders and their Teams, and also an award-winning Canadian singer/songwriter.

Libby Kiszner, coming to us all the way from Jerusalem, is a developmental editor and writing coach, helping authors share their wisdom with the world, find fulfillment, and attain financial success.

Grappling with the Gray #20: No Laughing Matter?

Mon, 03 Oct 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Most humor elicits laughter at someone else’s expense: ridicule, mocking, derision and, frequently, misrepresentation. Late night television has built a cottage industry out of corrosive humor.

It wasn’t always that way. An old article in Civilization Magazine explained the difference between irony and sarcasm by contrasting late night hosts Johnny Carson and David Letterman. The ironic Carson often laughed at himself. The sarcastic Letterman was always laughing at someone else. Especially disquieting is a study that found sarcastic people are perceived as being more intelligent.

Satire seems to fall in the middle. I was called to task recently by a correspondent challenging the ethics of my video series, The Ethics Consultant, in which I use the straw man tactic of a one-sided conversation to raise ethical challenges, often in response to headline news.

The commenter wrote: “I can't think of anything less ethical than to openly discuss something with someone who isn't there and create your own answers for them.”

In principle, his observation is sound. But do the rules apply equally in the context of satire? Did I cross an ethical line? Ethical minds want to know.

Caveat: I haven’t invited you because I want you to defend me. I want an honest discussion of the topic.

Meet this week’s panelists:

Paul Edwards used to drive large military vehicles through the deserts of the Middle East, armed with an assault rifle. Today, he’s a ghostwriter who often gets mistaken for a therapist.
.
Bonni Scepkowski is an unapologetically triple-vaxxed meeting professional specializing in life sciences who has spent 25 years surrounding herself with people smarter than she is.

Dr. Bruce Weinstein, The Ethics Guy®. Bruce Weinstein aka The Ethics Guy is a speaker, trainer, Forbes contributor, and CEO of the Institute for High-Character Leadership.

Grappling with the Gray #19: The Gift of Acceptance?

Mon, 26 Sep 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Only by investigating all sides and contemplating every angle can we improve decision-making skills, build more trusting relationships, and help create a more ethical world.

This episode's ethics challenge:

A close friend calls you up and explains that his brother and his family are planning a vacation. His brother, however, is struggling financially and can’t afford nice accommodations. Your friend wants to help his brother cover the cost of the trip, but he knows his brother is too proud to accept his help.

He has a plan. He’ll tell his brother that he has a friend – you – who owns an AirBNB where he can stay for no charge. Your friend will pay you for rental, and his brother will think you’re just doing your friend a favor by letting his brother stay there.

You agree.

The brother comes with his family, and they have a wonderful vacation. As they’re packing up and preparing to leave, they repeatedly express how grateful they are for your kindness and present you with a thank-you gift – a fancy crystal vase bought at a local curio shop.

Do you accept the gift?

Meet this week's panel:

Deb Brown Maher

https://www.linkedin.com/in/debbrownmaher/

Yoram Solomon

https://www.linkedin.com/in/yoramsolomon/

Andy Vargo

https://www.linkedin.com/in/andyvargo/

Grappling with the Gray #18: The Right to Entitlement?

Mon, 19 Sep 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Only by investigating all sides and contemplating every angle can we improve ethical decision-making, build more trusting relationships, and help create a more ethical world.

This episode's ethics challenge:

You've just finished your medical residency. You've been hired by a respected hospital that wants you to start immediately. However, because of state regulations and bureaucratic red tape, your accreditation to practice medicine will be delayed and you won't be able to start working for two months.

You are eligible for unemployment. However, your parents paid for medical school so you have no student debt, and your spouse has a good-paying job so you face no financial pressure.

Do you file for unemployment?

Meet the panelists:

Jennifer Elder

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenniferhelder/

Catherine Fitzgerald

https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherine-a-fitzgerald/

Dr. Robyn Odegaard

https://www.linkedin.com/in/robynodegaard/

Grappling with the Gray #17: When truth isn't good enough?

Mon, 12 Sep 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Popular movies are often introduced with the message, “Based on true events,” implying a reasonably accurate depiction of reality. We take it for granted that there may be a bit of poetic license, but we probably expect that the basic facts of the story will be authentically represented.

But that’s not always the case.

The movie Remember the Titans is about Herman Boone, a black football coach in the deep south in the 1970s. In the movie, his team was the only racially integrated team in the conference. In reality, all the teams were integrated by then.

In the movie Cinderella Man, boxing champion James Braddock goes into the ring against Max Baer, who had killed another boxer in a previous fight. The movie portrays Baer as a vicious killer. In reality, he was horrified by his opponent's death and had to be convinced not to retire from boxing.

In the movie Argo, the final scene shows Iranian security officials chasing the American plane down the tarmac as it carries the American escapees to safety. The scene was a Hollywood fabrication.

What about historical fiction in general: does it bring history to life or does it blur the lines between fact and fiction?

It’s been said that you shouldn’t let the facts get in the way of a good story. What responsibility do storytellers have to be truthful? When do we cross the line from poetic license into the realm of fantasy or deception? What are the effects on society when the truth isn’t good enough to keep an audience engaged?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sarah Elkins is a communication and leadership coach, using the power of storytelling to connect, engage, and inspire.

Mark O'Brien is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, helping Companies Manage Their Brands, Solve Their Problems, and Simplify the Complex.

Matthew Rosenberg teaches communication, argumentation, and critical discourse at Oregon State University.

Grappling with the Gray #16: Too Good to be True?

Mon, 05 Sep 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Upon arriving at the grocery store, Sonny remembered that this was a “green” store that charged extra to supply shopping bags, and he had neglected to bring his own bags. Not wanting to pay for more bags, he stepped outside and helped himself to one of the many cardboard containers that were stacked up outside for recycling. He put the carton in his shopping cart and filled it with his groceries as he shopped.

On his way out of the store, Sonny found himself blinded by the flash of camera lights and face to face with a microphone.

“Congratulations!” a man said in a booming voice. “You’ve been chosen as the Pepsi customer of the day.”

Unbeknownst to Sonny, this camera crew prowled the city daily to bestow prizes on random Pepsi customers as they emerged from their shopping adventures.

“That’s great,” said Sonny. “But I didn’t buy any Pepsi products.”

“Of course, you did,” replied the man with the microphone. “You have a Pepsi carton right there in your shopping cart.”

Only then did Sonny realize that the box he had grabbed from the front of the store was emblazoned with the Pepsi logo. Sonny immediately began explaining the mistake, but neither microphone man nor his crew seemed the least bit interested. They put a Pepsi baseball cap on Sonny’s head, handed him a $100 gift card, and vanished as quickly as they had appeared.

Should Sonny keep the gifts?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Solomon Ezra Berezin is a health and performance coach, using nutrition, meditation, and mindfulness to develop a mindset for success.

Jeff Koziatek is a certified speaker and peak performance coach, helping professionals to navigate change, sharpen focus, avoid burnout, and make a difference.

Mary Kutheis is a certified executive coach, Axiogenics coach, and author of Making Minutes Matter: a guide to being content with how you spend your time.

Grappling with the Gray #15: Cancellation Compensation?

Mon, 29 Aug 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Sylvie and Hannah grew up as best friends. Even after they settled in different cities, they remained in close contact.

After Sylvie became engaged, she was so eager for Hannah to attend her wedding that she offered to pay the airfare for Hannah to participate in the celebration. Hannah left for the airport in plenty of time, but a multi-car accident delayed her arrival. When she finally got to the gate, the plane had not yet taken off, but the agent had already bumped her from the overbooked flight. The agent offered to book Hannah on a flight the next day and gave her a $500 gift card as compensation for her delay.

Since the later flight would not allow Hannah to reach her destination in time to attend Sylvie’s wedding, she called off the trip. When questioned whether she should get the gift card since she had paid for the flight.

Who is entitled to the compensation: Sylvie or Hannah?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sam Ardery is an attorney and mediation guru. He is the author of Positively Conflicted Engaging with Courage, Compassion and Wisdom in a Combative World, which I have read and heartily recommend.

Laura Staley, Ph.D., is founder of Cherish Your World. She is a columnist, author, speaker and coach, empowering clients to produce remarkable results in their lives

Frank Zaccari is a Business and Organizational Development Expert, keynote speaker, TV and podcast host, 4X Amazon bestselling author, and Air Force veteran.

Grappling with the Gray #14: Anti-Minority Quotas?

Mon, 22 Aug 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Welcome to Grappling with the Gray, a forum for promoting the development of an ethical mindset and ethical decision-making to help us clearly see both sides of complex issues and better navigate the moral challenges of everyday life.

And here is today’s ethics challenge:

In October 2019, a federal judge upheld the right of Harvard University to set a higher standard of admissions criteria for Asian-American students and allow entry to a larger number of underrepresented ethnicities, thereby creating a more diverse student population.

The case hearkened all the way back to the 1978 Bakke decision, which declared racial quotas unconstitutional while maintaining the constitutionality of affirmative action.

On the one hand, there is clear benefit to creating an academic environment in which a diversity of cultures, values, and viewpoints are represented. A variegated student body promotes discussion and debate in a way that a homogeneous community cannot.

But on the other hand, it seems unfair that a university – or any organization – should have one set of standards for one group and a different set of standards for others. Is that not essentially that same kind of discrimination that made the need arise for affirmative action in the first place?

How can we practice compassion for disadvantaged groups and create diverse environments without unfairly handicapping worthy individuals?

Meet the panelists:

Rachel Druckenmiller 🗣 is the Keynote Speaker who Sings, turning burned out, checked out employees into energized, motivated, and connected teams.

Sarah Kalmeta aka Sara the Pivoter, is founder of Pivot Point, a career transition coach, author, and podcast host.

Lester Young is a re-entry specialist, founder of Path2Redemption, a member of The Leadership Challenge, The Commission of Minority Affairs, and The Affordable Housing Task Force.

Grappling with the Gray #13: Unsanctioned Intervention?

Tue, 16 Aug 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

True story:

Susan was working in the back office of a neighborhood clinic one morning. A patient arrived and was admitted for consultation. Susan heard raised voices, after which the patient reappeared and quickly left the clinic in a state of apparent grief or anger. Had there been some disagreement or misunderstanding? Susan assumed so but couldn’t know for sure.

Under normal circumstances, Susan probably wouldn’t have thought twice. But only a week earlier, a disgruntled client had left an office just down the street after a conflict, then returned with a gun and started shooting.

Susan didn’t want to take the chance that her inaction might put others (and herself) at risk. Perhaps with a simple check-in she might determine if there was any cause for genuine concern.

Because all visits were confidential, looking up the man’s identity would be a violation of privacy. Susan tried to reach her supervisor for permission to open the database, but her supervisor was unavailable.

Susan took the initiative. She looked up the man’s name and phone number, then gave him a call.

“Hello,” she said into the phone. “I’m calling to check in… you seemed upset when you left our office. Is there anything I can do to help?”

“Oh, no,” the man replied. “I was a little distressed, but I’m fine now. Thanks so much for calling.”

Subsequently, Susan found herself reprimanded by her supervisor.

Was she wrong to do what she did?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Sonia Funk is a corporate wellness strategist and speaker, a nutritional therapist, and an award winning singer and songwriter.

S. Scott Mason , aka the Myth Slayer, is a Transformational Coach for Executives, Entrepreneurs & Other Leaders, podcast host, and keynote speaker.

Heather R Younger is a keynoter and consultant on employee engagement and DEI, a TEDx speaker, podcast host, and author of the new book, The Art of Caring Leadership.

Grappling with the Gray #12: Rumored Intentions?

Mon, 08 Aug 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

A writer in Psychology Today poses the following dilemma:

Coach Ted is a legendary figure in town. For 30 years, he’s coached the kids’ baseball league and promoted community values.

But now two women who work for the large accounting firm where Ted is CEO have come forward with serious complaints of sexual harassment by him. He denies everything.

The parents I’ve hung out with over the years at practices have always gushed about how much they love Ted’s way of dealing with the kids. But now some of the moms are saying they always thought there might be something fishy about him. He’s made what could be taken as suggestive remarks. The moms have caught him seeming to check out their bodies. And so forth.

All plausibly deniable by Coach Ted if they’d confronted him.

Instead, they've organized a petition to demand that Ted be removed as coach. They have asked me to sign it.

I don’t know what to do.

On the one hand, I want to support the women bringing the charges: Believe women. I also want to support the moms who feel betrayed and think themselves lucky to have escaped Ted’s predations.

On the other hand, I don’t know enough about what actually happened and I probably never will. And even if I knew everything, I’d still be confused by conflicting obligations.

The author begins the article with his conclusion:

As I’ve gotten older, I’ve found it harder and harder to apply moral reasoning to any situation that actually needs it. So I've pretty much given up on it.

Grapple with this:

1) What is the ethical response to the allegations against Coach Ted? Should the author sign the petition?
2) How should we evaluate the writer’s conclusion that he has “pretty much given up on moral reasoning”?

Thanks again to guest panelists Dave Bricker, Dr. Diane Hamilton, and Wayne Schoeneberg for a lively and thoughtful conversation. Our topic is presented below.

Grappling with the Gray #11: Not in my House?

Mon, 01 Aug 2022 04:00:00 -0500

This episode's ethics challenge:

On an episode of House, a patient with a brain tumor suffered frontal lobe disinhibition, which caused him to say every thought that came into his head. He ended up insulting everyone around him, including his wife who -- spoiler alert -- left him after discovering "what kind of person he really was."

Was the wife justified in her claim that her husband was not the man she thought he was?

Join me and my panelists, Nick Gallo, David E. Marlow, and Charlotte Wittenkamp, as we Grapple with the Gray.

GWTG #10: Office Hours?

Fri, 22 Jul 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

I bumped into my neighbor, a doctor, one morning and asked him about a chronic problem that was flaring up. He suggested I try a couple of over-the-counter products and schedule an appointment with him in his office a month later in case the OTC medicines didn’t help.

I saw him again a couple of weeks later and told him that my symptoms had abated. In that case, he said, I didn’t need to come in to see him.

He then asked me not to cancel my appointment. He assured me that I wouldn’t be charged for missing the visit. However, his group required him to see a minimum number of patients each week, and if I kept my appointment scheduled that would lighten his workload.

His request put me in a quandary. Was it ethical of him to ask me not to cancel an appointment I no longer needed? If not, would it be ethical for me to become his conspirator in doing just that?

Join this week's panel: Dr. Adam Martin, Dr. Margarita Gurri, and Mariah Edgington, as we grapple with the gray.

GWTG #9: Invisible Customers?

Fri, 15 Jul 2022 04:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Benny was widely recognized as a whiz kid by his fellow economics students, asking all the right questions in class and coming up with smart answers that impressed even the professor.

Over the summer, he arranged his notes into a short primer on economic theory, which he self-published in hope of making a few bucks by selling them to incoming freshmen at the start of the fall semester. He left a couple of dozen copies with the owner of a popular off-campus bookstore.

A week later, the store owner called to tell Benny the books had sold out and he needed more copies.

“Wow,” said Benny, “I had no idea they would sell that fast.”

The shopkeeper grinned. “I have a secret system,” he said. “I post a preorder sign-up sheet in the school library. I write about 15 fake names on the sheet, which makes the book look like a hot item and gets more people to order it so they won’t miss out on something good.”

Was the shopkeeper unethical? If so, what should Benny do?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Kimberly Davis is a coach, trainer, TEDx speaker, author of Brave Leadership and founder of the Brave Leadership University.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimberlyd...

Kira Day is a passion-based coach specializing in innovation, leadership and professional transformation. She is CEO of The Passion Centre and Creator of The Passion-Based™ Incubator.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kiraday/

Peter Winick is the founder and CEO of Thought Leadership Leverage and host of the Leveraging Thought Leadership podcast.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/peterwinick/

SHOW LESS

GWTG #8: Squid Game?

Fri, 08 Jul 2022 04:00:00 -0500

Welcome to Grappling with the Gray, a forum for promoting the development of an ethical mindset and ethical decision-making to help us clearly see both sides of complex issues and better navigate the moral challenges of everyday life.

Visit https://www.gwtg.live/Login#/ to join our community.

This episode's ethics challenge:

Last year, the inaugural "Dash for Cash" event at a junior hockey game in Sioux Falls featured 10 local teachers scrambling on their hands and knees on a rug at center ice, scooping up $5,000 in donated $1 bills and stuffing them into their shirts and pockets. The promotion encouraged teachers to collect as much money as they could to help fund their classroom projects.

Video of the teachers jostling to grab dollar bills quickly sparked outrage nationwide. Some critics said the stunt turned schoolteachers' chronic funding shortages into a public spectacle. Others compared it to "Squid Game," the South Korean TV series about desperate people who compete in deadly children's games to win money.

The organizers apologized.

In an increasingly voyeuristic society, how do we weigh using spectacle in pursuit of noble causes against the loss of personal dignity?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Brooke Erol is an author, advisor and coach who supports leaders in their journey to catch up with our times, to grow their business without sacrificing the wellbeing of their people so profit becomes a natural by-product.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ozlemerol/

Mira Culic Griffiths is a transformational leadership coach, guiding her clients to mental clarity and helping them cast aside limiting beliefs.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mira-culi...

Peter Griffiths is a leadership and creativity coach. He and his wife, Mira, are co-founders of the Mind Takeaway and co-hosts of the Mind Takeaway podcast.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-gri...

SHOW LESS

0 Comments

SORT BY

GWTG #7: Unsolicited Advice?

Fri, 01 Jul 2022 04:00:00 -0500

SHOW LESS

GWTG # 6: Collateral Damage?

Sun, 26 Jun 2022 00:00:00 -0500

This episode's ethics challenge:

Anyone even tangentially associated with education is familiar with the phenomenon of grade inflation. Where a C used to stand for competent but uninspired work, it now stands in place of D or F, either of which is viewed as an academic nuclear button. Participation trophies are the norm in baseball and soccer, lest some children feel less accomplished than others – even if they are.

To make matters worse, instructors are under pressure to not only inflate students’ grades but to write glowing recommendations, even if this forces their testimonials into the realm of fiction or fantasy. In a few celebrated cases, disgruntled students and parents filed lawsuits against instructors who dared to issue a grade the student actually earned.

Many instructors have given up the fight and acquiesced to the new normal. They simply don’t believe it’s worth subjecting themselves to angry calls, pressure from administrators, and the specter of litigation. But more than that, they may rationalize that grade inflation is necessary for those good but unexceptional students who will find themselves competing with other good but unexceptional students. If students from other schools enjoy the benefit of inflated grades and fancifully written recommendations, why should their own students appear lackluster because they were honestly evaluated?

What should a teacher do? Provide an honest assessment, or go with the flow of inflated grades and hyperbolic reference letters?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Steve Epner is a serial entrepreneur who flunked retirement to become a business professor and mentor at Saint Louis University. He is also the godfather of Grappling with the Gray, so we wouldn’t be here if not for him.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/steveepner/

Catherine Fitzgerald has survived her own harrowing leadership roles as CEO and mother of three boys. She now works with organizational leaders as they navigate the choppy waters of aligning people, performance, and profits as owner of Catapult Leadership Group.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherine...

Kimi Hirotsu Ziemski is the founder of KSP Partnership, developing and delivering project management and project leadership courses.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimihirot...

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

Visit

GWTG #5: Fraudulent Philanthropy?

Mon, 20 Jun 2022 00:00:00 -0500

Here’s this week's episode's ethics challenge:

A 30-year old, attractive, fluent English speaking woman from central Africa published a memoir detailing her abduction and forced marriage as a teenager. Subsequently, she escaped and found refuge in America, where she distinguished herself in college and graduate school. As a speaker and writer, she has brought attention to the plight of child-brides and child-soldiers in Africa.

Through her story, she has raised millions of dollars, generated mass-media attention, and catalyzed international efforts that are making a dramatic, positive difference in the lives of thousands of children.

You discover that her own personal story is a lie. However, you believe that she was motivated not by personal profit or fame, but rather by the belief that she was uniquely positioned to motivate interest in a cause that had gone largely ignored… which she clearly has done.

Will you expose her story as fraudulent?

Meet this week’s panelists:

Mark Brown is a world champion speaker, an executive speaking coach, and former director of community relations.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-l-brown-speaker/

Deb Coviello, The Drop In CEO, who drops into your business, partners with you and helps you to navigate to steady waters by elevating your people for lasting impact.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborahacoviello/

Paul Edwards used to drive large military vehicles through the deserts of the Middle East, armed with an assault rifle. Today, frequently gets mistaken for a therapist, because his occupation of ghostwriting requires him to ask questions first, and shoot later.”

https://www.linkedin.com/in/meetpauledwards/

GWTG #4: Ethics at 40,000 feet?

Sun, 29 May 2022 14:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethical challenge:

Imagine this real-life scenario:

You know the child will spend virtually the entire trip in your lap regardless, so you see paying for a seat as a waste of money. However, you don’t want to lie to the airline.

Your travel agent offers the following suggestion:

GWTG #3: Life and Death Ethics?

Sun, 29 May 2022 13:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethical challenge:

On June 8, 1985, British climber Simon Yates was descending from the 21,000-foot summit of Siula Grande in the Peruvian Andes when his partner, Joe Simpson, fell and shattered his leg. As blizzard conditions engulfed them, Yates turned to the grueling work of getting his friend down the mountain alive.

For nine hours, Yates labored to lower Simpson by rope down the steep incline 300 feet at a time. Then, Simpson lost purchase and began sliding out of control, his ice axe unable to bite into the powdery snow.

Up above, Yates felt the rope jerk hard and knew that Simpson had gone over the edge. Yates still had control of the rope, literally holding Simpson’s life in his hands. But frostbitten and exhausted after the previous day’s climb and the present day’s ordeal, Yates had no strength to pull his friend up. All he could do was wait helplessly, which he did, as Simpson dangled above the abyss.

But after one hour, Yates felt the snow beneath his feet begin to give way. In moments, he would be pulled down the slope and over the edge, together with Simpson. Instinctively, he reached for his Swiss Army knife and cut the rope, knowing that he was letting his friend fall to his death.

Did Simon Yates do the right thing?

Meet this episode's panel:

Michael Alcee, Phd, is a clinical psychologist in private practice and at Manhattan School of Music whose mission is to inspire everyone to live life creatively.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-alcee-14417755/

Carey Portell is a partially disabled cowgirl and head-on collision survivor who inspires us to change perspectives by confronting our biggest fears.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/carey-portell-a0724156/

Ipek Williamson is an Insight Coach, Meditation Advocate & Teacher who intends to bring the world closer to peace and calm, one beautiful soul at a time.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ipekwilliamson/

SHOW LESS

GWTG #2: Skydiving Insurance?

Sun, 29 May 2022 13:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethical challenge:

About 20 years ago I was applying for life insurance. The first question on the application form asked, “Have you ever gone skydiving?”

Well, I had gone skydiving, but that was back when I was a reckless sophomore in college. I had no intention of ever jumping out of a plane again.

So what should I do? Should I tell the truth and risk damaging my eligibility or incurring higher premiums? Or should I lie to give a more accurate impression of who I am now?

Meet this episode's panelists:

Byron Edgington is a retired military pilot and co-author of "Journey Well: You are More than Enough."

https://www.linkedin.com/in/byronedgington/

S. Scott Mason, aka the Myth Slayer, is a transformation coach, speaker, and podcaster.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/smason1/

Diane F. Wyzga, JD, is a storyteller and global podcaster guiding professional woman to get to the heart of their message so they are seen, heard, understood, and listened to.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/diane-f-wyzga-qmsa/

SHOW LESS

GWTG #1: Supply and Demand?

Sun, 29 May 2022 13:00:00 -0500

You can’t be ethical until you’ve fully examined and understood both sides of any issue.

Few things in life are black and white. That’s why we have to learn to Grapple with the Gray.

This episode's ethical challenge:

In July 1977, a lightning strike in Westchester County set off a power outage that plunged New York City into 25 hours or darkness. Flights were cancelled, baseball games suspended, and subway trains ground to a halt. Looting spread through neighborhoods in Brooklyn and the Bronx, along with hundreds of fires set by arsonists.

Imagine that you were walking from your office in Brooklyn to catch the subway home when the lights went out. Within moments, you hear the sound of shattering glass and see flames rising up into the sky. A taxi pulls up beside you, and the cabbie yells, “You want to get out of here?”

It’s a $30 ride home, but you consider it a bargain. As you climb in, the driver says, “For a hundred bucks I’ll take you wherever you want to go.” The crowds seem to be growing more unruly by the moment. “All right,” you say, “whatever you want.”

When the cabbie pulls up in front of your house, you say, “Listen. I’ll pay the regular fare, and I’ll even give you a tip. But I’m not paying you a hundred dollars. That’s extortion.”

“A deal’s a deal,” the cabbie replies. “You agreed to the price. You have to pay.”

Who’s right?

Meet this episode's panelists:

Here are the panelists:

Dave Bricker is a speaker, presentation coach, and business storytelling expert.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidbric...

Deb Brown Maher is a sales expert and the author of Sell Like Jesus. She equips others to sell and serve their customers with integrity and without compromise.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/debbrownm...

Mark O’Brien is a writer, columnist, and skeptic. He is founder and principal of O’Brien Communications Group, as well as co-founder and president of EinSource Consulting Services.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/markobrien/

SHOW LESS