Ethics of Teamwork

Report
Ethics of Teamwork
William Frey
College of Business Administration
UPRM
Overall Task in Module
• Realize Values through…
– Discovery
• discover’ the values that are relevant to, inspire, or inform a given
design project
– Translation
• embodying or expressing…values in system design. Translation is
further divided into operationalization, which involves defining or
articulating values in concrete terms, and implementation which
involves specifying corresponding design features
– Verification
• designers assess to what extent they have implemented target
values in a given system…. [M]ay include internal testing among
the design team, user testing in controlled environments, formal
and informal interviews and surveys, the use of prototypes,
traditional quality assurance measures such as automated and
regression-oriented testing, and more
• In Software Engineering…
–“‘discover’ the values that are relevant to,
inspire, or inform a given design project”
(Flanagan et. al., 334)
• Ethics of Teamwork
–discover values that help define your
group
• Constructing a socio-technical table
(Exercise 2a)
• Setting value goals in Preliminary selfevaluation
• In software engineering…
– “embodying or expressing…values in system design.
Translation is further divided into operationalization, which
involves defining or articulating values in concrete terms, and
implementation which involves specifying corresponding
design features.” (Flanagan et. al., 339)
• In group work…
– Values are operationalized by developing value profiles in
Preliminary Self-Evaluation
• Using SOV to broadly characterize group’s values
• Developing procedures (how you divide group work) to realize values
– Values are implemented by using procedures in class to carry
out group assignments and reporting on these in midsemester audit
• Preparing assignments and recording what your group’s procedures are
and how well they work
• Identifying challenges and recording how your group responded
• In software engineering…
– “designers assess to what extent they have implemented
target values in a given system…. [M]ay include internal testing
among the design team, user testing in controlled
environments, formal and informal interviews and surveys, the
use of prototypes, traditional quality assurance measures such
as automated and regression-oriented testing, and more.”
(Flanagan et. al., 344-5)
• In Ethics of Teamwork you will validate your values in your
final group self-evaluation
– Repeat the values and strategies you developed in the
Preliminary self-evaluation
– Describe the procedures your group used to realize values and
document how well they worked
– Identify challenges faced by group, responses, and how well
the responses worked
– What were the lessons you and your group learned through
your work this semester
Pitfalls of group work
• Groupthink
– Your group fails to process and respond to critical information.
(Setting up filters to “delete” critical information)
• Polarization
– Differences between group members harden into opposition
that paralyzes group deliberation and action
• Going to Abilene
– Group reaches a consensus—each member gives way to the
consensus because they think the other members want it. But
the consensus is embraced by nobody. Group deliberation and
action breaks down because of a failure in communication.
Some more pitfalls and problems
• Free Riders
– A group member benefits from the work done by others but fails to
contribute. He or she rides along for free
• Outliers
– A group member tries to participate but fails to penetrate the clicks that exist
within a group
• Hidden Agendas
– A group member withholds his or her views and solutions because they seem
to be “at odd” with the majority view of the group
• Conflict of Effort
– Each group member is over-committed. Group never has time to work
together because of conflicting schedules and winds up producing fragmented
work (Each individually does something which is never integrated with the
work of others)
Exercise 2
• Develop strategies to avoid group pitfalls
• Strategies from Module
–
–
–
–
–
–
negotiate interests instead of positions
expand the pie
nonspecific compensation
logrolling
cost-cutting
bridging
• See also strategies from Irving Janis on avoiding groupthink
– devil’s advocate
– outside respondent
– techniques for avoiding “hidden agendas”
• These, in general, realize the value of reasonableness (See
module)
Design roles to realize values and avoid
pitfalls
•
Leader
–
•
Spokesperson
–
•
This person criticizes the group’s consensus. This should be a rotating position so that no individual gets
labeled as a trouble-maker.
Mediator
–
•
This person participates but also records and documents the group’s procedures. How did the group
prepare its first assignment? What challenges did the group face? How did it respond and how successful
was this repsonse?
Devil’s Advocate
–
•
Have somebody outside of group respond to procedures, practices, and habits. Listen, don’t defend.
Recorder
–
•
This individual communicates group concerns, interests, and contributions to the teacher and the rest of the
class
Independent outside observer
–
•
There are different kinds of leader. Rotate this role and experiment with these
This individual is especially adept at empathy, compassion, and role taking. Bridges the gap between
differing individual and prevents difference from hardening into opposition
Sub-Groups
–
If the group has a difficult reaching a consensus, divide into sub-groups charged with exploring the differing
points of view. At the very least, this guarantees a voice for dissenting views.
Value Profiles
• Value: “a claim about what is worthwhile. [A] single word
or phrase that identifies something as being desirable.”
• Reasonableness: Resolving differences and disagreements
with civility and respect. Avoids extremes of giving in and
holding on. Openness to arguments of others and
willingness to validate one’s own arguments
• Responsibility: To stand committed to carrying out the
tasks associated with one’s social and professional role.
(Being a good leader, devil’s advocate, recorder….Seeing
through on one’s commitments)
• Respect: To treat each individual (including oneself) always
as an end and never merely as a means to an end.
• Trust: According to Solomon, it is the expectation of moral
conduct from others, especially one’s group members
•
Brincat and Wike, Morality and the Professional Life: Values at Work
Value Profiles
• Justice: Giving to each his or her due. A just or fair
distribution of work and responsibility integrates equality,
need, and merit. You and your group need to think
carefully about how you will distribute the benefits and
burdens of group work
• Honesty: disclosing the truth while avoiding the extremes
of brutal indifference (making the truth hurt) and
dishonesty (deception or withholding of vital information)
• Integrity: This meta-value sheds light on the overall
coherence of the other values as they are expressed in
character and action. The opposite of integrity is
corruption where there is a breakdown at an individual or
organizational level or both.
– See Robert Bolt’s play, “A Man For All Seasons”
What you will do now
• Preliminary Self-Evaluation
• Exercises 1, 2, and 2a in Ethics of Team Work
Module
• Identify value goals, profile these, and describe
procedures to realize them
• Identify strategies your group will use to avoid
group pitfalls and problems
• Develop, briefly, a STS table to describe the
different interacting environments in which you
will be working
Socio Technical Systems
Socio-Technical systems provide a tool to uncover the different environments in which
business activity takes place and to articulate how these constrain and enable different
business practices.
A STS can be divided into different components such as hardware, software, physical
surroundings, stakeholders, procedures, laws, and information systems.
But while different components can be distinguished these are, in the final analysis,
inseparable. STSs are, first and foremost, systems composed of interrelated and interacting parts.
STSs also embody values such as moral values (justice, responsibility, respect, trust, and
integrity) and non-moral values (efficiency, satisfaction, productivity, effectiveness, and
profitability). Often these values can be located in one or more of the system components.
Often these values conflict with one another causing the system to change.
STSs change and this change traces out a path or trajectory. The normative challenge
of STS analysis is to find the trajectory of STS change and work to make it as value
positive and value realizing as possible.
Example of STS Table
Technology
Software
Physical
Surroundings
Stakeholders
Procedures
Laws
(university
regulations
Information
systems
Classroom
Computers
Microsoft
Office
(Social
Networking
Media)
Describe
classroom
and show
how
constrains
interaction
Teacher,
your group
members,
you, other
teachers,
other
classmates
Give one of
your
procedures
for value
realization
Rules on
research
misconduct
How your
group
assembles
information
scattered
throughout
group
Timeline
• Today: Orientation to module and
division of class into work groups
• Next Class: Classroom laboratory
time for groups to work on module
• Next Class: Preliminary selfevaluations due. (One from each
group)

similar documents