Week five in this round of the Educated Leadership blog
finds us looking at protected values in our decision making process. In another
assignment we had for this week, we were tasked with making a concept map about
three values that we consider protected in our lives. I chose to map the
banning of shark finning, protection of our air quality, and the phasing out of
cars powered by an internal combustion engine. One of the caveats I proposed
was that there are very few absolutes in today’s world. Therefore, it is very
important to examine multiple facets of one’s values in order to weigh the real
cost of holding them as protected. That flies in the face of one of the
defining characteristics of a protected value, which is that they be considered
independent of consequences. (Hoch, et al., 2001, p.252) I struggle to look at
situations in a vacuum. Therefore, as I have considered the values I mapped,
that do not appear to fit the definition completely.
Overall, the level of protection I associate with banning
the finning of sharks is fairly high. I have no intention of ever supporting
the practice by eating the soup made from shark fins. I will contribute to
charities that work to educate consumers of the shark fin products about the
issues surrounding the product and its collection process. However, my mea
culpa is this: I have traveled to China and will continue to do so, even though
that country is a huge user of shark fins. My level of protected status stops
where I have to consider being unable to travel where my company needs me to do
business.
In regard to the phasing out of cars with internal
combustion engines, I consider that value fairly protected. I have a car that
can be operated solely on electricity, but has a gas engine as a backup. If I
could have afforded a car with better range, I would have opted for electric
only. However, the only car with the range I could see as usable was the Tesla ®
and a six-figure price tag. I have considered the fact that in order to
generate the electricity that I charge the car with each night, fossil fuels
are consumed at the power station. Looking at my electric bill, however, I
cannot see an appreciable increase in usage and feel the point is moot. I would
not boycott gas stations or car dealers that do not make electric cars. I will
not un-friend people that have gas powered cars. I will support companies and
ideas that work toward my intended desire, though.
Atmospheric cleanliness is a value I hold on par with that
of the phasing out of electric cars. I will spend my money on companies and
products that are aligned with my way of thinking. I would point out ways to be
more eco-friendly to friends and relatives if I saw a place they could improve.
Luckily, I work at a company that is leading the way when it comes to reducing
emissions from its products and manufacturing processes.
My most close-held protected values surround the safety of
my family and myself. In this area, decisions are a bit more black and white.
However, heavy decisions, like those surrounding the use of deadly force have
caused me to dwell upon the ramifications of such a predicament. My primary
mitigation plan is to not get into a situation requiring such a decision. Yet,
one never knows when some odd twist of fate may put them in a place requiring a
life and death decision. Military and law enforcement personnel are far more
trained to make a decision of that magnitude, and even they struggle, at times.
Again, there are repercussions to those protected value decisions and the
conflict that can occur when defending them.
As I mentioned in the concept map assignment, the older I
get, the fewer iron-clad protected values I seem to have.
Hoch,
S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & with Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
No comments:
Post a Comment