When determining
the appropriate steps in decision-making and public reasoning that shape
behavior, you are working on the ‘good’ of public accountability, based on Public Decision Making. Public accountability
has (3) communicative commitments when using this ethical form of decision-making.
The three commitments are: Diversity of ideas, engagement of public decision-making,
and public account for continuing a communicative practice. The research done
by Ronald Arnett and Pat Arnesons is that, “ A given communication ethics
decision in the public arena protects and promotes a place where one can decide”
(Pg. 103). Therefore the unity of ideas that are respectful or ethical behavior
considered in public decision-making will lead not only to more diverse ideas
but promote more possibilities within the dialogue of decision-making in the
public. The area of sharing ideas a holding accountability ethically in the public
will result in promoting a healthy space for more ideas.
An example of
this would be involved with a committee I founded for the Allina Healthcare
System. I started a committee that was based on employee recognition with
employee engagement in the company called voice, vision, and values. This
committee was constructed to building teamwork and acknowledges engagement
within the work place. After I selected roughly (6) other people to be in this committee
we started having weekly meetings to discuss results of our projects that
define promoting engagement. With our small group, our decision had to be based
on multiple perspectives and ideas that would benefit each employee and the
companies mission statement of good health. These meetings had to be respectful
and promote the common good of recognizing employee’s voices, without negative disclosure.
I opened the group up to provide opinions and created a space where employees
were able to voice concerns on particular company process. The reason this was
such a successful committee (based on feedback from peers), was because we held
each person accountable in their decisions and created an open environment for
all members communicate if choosing to.
Hi Barbett,
ReplyDeleteThat sounds like a great experience. I am curious about any strategies that you took to avoid what the book calls "I" talk, i.e. someone rejecting different opinions and "...demanding that others or activities be as 'I' proclaim" (105). Did you ever encounter a situation where someone just wanted to be at one of your meetings to complain? If so, how did you handle this situation? If something like this did not occur, then why do you think that it did not?
An example when this happened to me was when I was leading a customer service training seminar at work. Several of my coworkers were disgruntled that they had to come in to work outside of their regularly scheduled shift and were not at all receptive to anything that I had to say. They continually countered my positive points with negative comments. I handled this situation by maintaining my optimism and moving on to the next topic when possible, but I wish that I would have had a better strategy to open up their comments to helpful discourse.