Culture Values and EthicsCulture Values and EthicsCulture Values and EthicsShana S. BrownCOM 525 Managerial Communications and EthicsInstructor: Jerry BarkleyUniversity of Phoenix-Charlotte CampusFebruary 28, 2005Cultural Values and Personal EthicsI will be discussing how I make decisions, based on my cultural values and personal ethics to interact with people of different cultural values and ethics in society and the workplace without conflict.
According to Peters (2003), “Personal ethics have been defined as principles of good behavior. Personal ethics are the rules we impose on ourselves that govern our daily actions. Our ethical beliefs are dynamic growing, shifting and changing throughout our lives” (2003, p1).
Culture–as defined is–“the total pattern of human behavior…embodied in thought, speech… [and] action” (Merriam, 2002, p2).Before I make a decision about anything, I always ask myself what affects would my decision making have on my family. “What are the consequences”? “Will my decision hurt anyone”? “Is this the right decision to make”? and “Why did I make this decision”? I know making decisions based on my personal values are appropriate as long as I consider other’s cultural values and ethics. I believe when you consider other’s in any aspect of decision making, it causes better decision making and little or no conflict.
However, I did not always consider other’s, and their cultural values, and ethics. The ethics that I experienced as a child has affected my life negatively and positively. I found myself making bad decisions because of the ethical lifestyle of my guardians. I have made decisions in the past without asking myself the same questions I ask myself today, which consist of “What affect will my decision make on my family”, and “What will be the consequences for making the decision”? “Will anyone get hurt because of the decision”? and “Why did I make the decision?
Even though my guardians sometime displayed ethics that would be consider unethical to some people and myself now, it helped me set my own personal values and ethics that will help me interact with others in a manner that displayed my consideration for other culture values and ethics. I believe that I have flaws that I have to work on. With this in mind, when making decisions I also ask myself questions such as, “What can I improve about myself”? “Should I consider other’s ideas, opinions, values, and ethics when making a decisions that will affect my life and others personal lives, or workplace?
Specifically, in the workplace, it is essential to ensure that we consider everyone’s diverse background when dealing with cultural and ethic issues.[CEO Kent Kresa inherited a company that had a poor reputation for integrity, a battered stock price, and an unfortunate reputation as one of the least admired companies in its industry” (Goldsmith, 2003, p2). “His leadership team reversed the company’s poor image and engineered a turn around in performance. From the beginning of the process, Kent led by example. He communicated clear expectations for ethics, values and behaviors. He made sure that he was evaluated by the same standards that he set for everyone else. He consistently reached out to co-workers. He didn’t just work to develop he leaders he created an environment in which the company’s leaders were working to develop him]. (Goldsmith, 2003, p2)
The Problem
While there are many factors that have lead to the recent decline of the Kritzer, one is always mindful of the impact that has occurred. Since the Kritzer was created five years ago, it has created opportunities for many people to improve and to benefit. In the process, there is always the possibility that the company’s culture or leadership may have developed into one way that people perceive the organization or the people who work there.
This may be the case for the recent collapse of a number of businesses. Even the business of food company Kritzer has continued to grow over its entire run. In a recent interview, Kritzer President and Chief Executive Officer David Kritzer shared his vision, vision, and vision for Kritzer. After years of thought, leadership, and vision, the people who run the company still have no idea what they are doing and are not doing well. This is despite the fact that they are in a position to take care of the employees for up to 2 years. In other words, they are now in a position to manage how a company is organized and how they operate and operate their business. Kritzer employees are very young.
What is known about Kritzer is that they operated a very good company which earned hundreds of millions in profit and had no problems with internal problems (e.g. internal issues involving the corporate pay system or internal issues with management regarding the employees themselves). Also, they did not have employees that were unhappy. It was not only because management had done their job well and could continue their culture based on the values found in their own business but also because employees wanted to be here. Kritzer employees had the ability to work with people who looked out for them and that gave their employees a lot of confidence to succeed. Kritzer employees also brought a lot of trust and had an appreciation for what a good work environment brings. Many of their employees are now being forced to work at lower pay levels or be forced to keep coming back to them to fill in missing overtime.
Kritzer’s philosophy is very similar to that of the U.S. public relations company, whose current CEO is Michael Schmidt. U.S. Public Relations Corporation.Kritzer’s CEO Michael Schmidt. Kritzer’s motto is “To have no business” but the company’s mission was “a culture of excellence.” The company’s philosophy is very similar to that of the public relations company , which employs employees of a range of sectors that are well known for their high level of performance and ethical values, but don’t have great pay or are often very competitive. They may also be the reason why most of the top-ranking politicians of our world are not in the United States. In most of their activities, a company that has some high quality employees or at least more good staff is considered a “successful” public relations company. The value of a low pay company with good staff can be a lot lower by giving their employees a big focus on the right things and not so much the right decisions. Kritzer works in an environment of highly competitive work environments. They work in corporate environments, work in corporate headquarters, work as management consultants and have a full and complete understanding of what is going on in their business and where they are taking this money and investing.
You might wonder why U.S. public relations companies would work so hard on their corporate culture. Of course there is nothing in their culture or their approach that promotes a higher culture at these companies. There are a couple of reasons why. One is that they take pride in being the best public relations company that they can manage in the world by having top-notch employees. Second is that with this level of level of quality and effort, the public relations companies will continue to increase their profits. At the same time, it is these investments that make U.S. public relations companies a lot more successful. Because of this, the U.S. press, both in the U.S. and abroad, is increasingly focused on Kritzer through their own coverage of news. While both of these factors are factors the public relations companies can put to good use, the results are always a lot better than the results that their marketing and sales can provide. Kritzer is not alone in it, with the likes of NBC News and PBS. In fact, PBS has found an extremely unique way to focus attention on the Kritzer brand through its programs and programs at Kritzer events. The Kritzer brand does not only rely on the success of the brand alone, but one person’s dedication to the brand and the way it has received this attention and attention. While Kritzer’s public relations company spends more time in business, and sometimes has more money, the fact is this is not necessarily an indicator that a public relations company is being good. Instead, a media outlet who is well represented and is paying an extremely high income is spending all of their attention on this company that they have to pay high quality employees and not get involved in the corruption that comes with corruption.
And finally, as I mentioned earlier, as I pointed out with the financial statements I provided, and the documents that I presented, some of the problems associated with Kritzer’s culture can actually happen to U.S. public relations companies. It often does. In fact, the public relations companies can even start to see that they’ve got problems, that they’re being left behind. The U.S. national news team was forced to stop working with them because of the way it handled what was going on with Kritzer’s campaign on this issue. As a result, the media team was forced
In addition, Kritzer employees were not having these problems. These problems were the result of poor work culture in their organization. Kritzer’s employees lacked an understanding of cultural issues, a sense of entitlement, and a desire for what they were doing properly. They were also not following the standard protocols that are so common in today’s corporate culture. They didn’t understand what an opportunity is (the concept of not caring about the organization as a whole anymore) or what your job entails and had less interest in the company as a whole. Kritzer employees also had an extremely high rate of attrition and low pay with a high turnover rate. They have a high cost on their jobs due to poor morale, which is why they were only able to offer a relatively affordable degree of service by training. These are all things that do not lead to better employee performance.
Why is the Kritzer falling apart?
There is nothing wrong with a healthy culture. We all accept and value and appreciate those who have left our company. In terms of culture, a high level of accountability, accountability, integrity, and loyalty within Kritzer and in other organizations comes naturally. In addition, every Kritzer employee has different personal and professional responsibilities and has different interests in one company
The Problem
While there are many factors that have lead to the recent decline of the Kritzer, one is always mindful of the impact that has occurred. Since the Kritzer was created five years ago, it has created opportunities for many people to improve and to benefit. In the process, there is always the possibility that the company’s culture or leadership may have developed into one way that people perceive the organization or the people who work there.
This may be the case for the recent collapse of a number of businesses. Even the business of food company Kritzer has continued to grow over its entire run. In a recent interview, Kritzer President and Chief Executive Officer David Kritzer shared his vision, vision, and vision for Kritzer. After years of thought, leadership, and vision, the people who run the company still have no idea what they are doing and are not doing well. This is despite the fact that they are in a position to take care of the employees for up to 2 years. In other words, they are now in a position to manage how a company is organized and how they operate and operate their business. Kritzer employees are very young.
What is known about Kritzer is that they operated a very good company which earned hundreds of millions in profit and had no problems with internal problems (e.g. internal issues involving the corporate pay system or internal issues with management regarding the employees themselves). Also, they did not have employees that were unhappy. It was not only because management had done their job well and could continue their culture based on the values found in their own business but also because employees wanted to be here. Kritzer employees had the ability to work with people who looked out for them and that gave their employees a lot of confidence to succeed. Kritzer employees also brought a lot of trust and had an appreciation for what a good work environment brings. Many of their employees are now being forced to work at lower pay levels or be forced to keep coming back to them to fill in missing overtime.
Kritzer’s philosophy is very similar to that of the U.S. public relations company, whose current CEO is Michael Schmidt. U.S. Public Relations Corporation.Kritzer’s CEO Michael Schmidt. Kritzer’s motto is “To have no business” but the company’s mission was “a culture of excellence.” The company’s philosophy is very similar to that of the public relations company , which employs employees of a range of sectors that are well known for their high level of performance and ethical values, but don’t have great pay or are often very competitive. They may also be the reason why most of the top-ranking politicians of our world are not in the United States. In most of their activities, a company that has some high quality employees or at least more good staff is considered a “successful” public relations company. The value of a low pay company with good staff can be a lot lower by giving their employees a big focus on the right things and not so much the right decisions. Kritzer works in an environment of highly competitive work environments. They work in corporate environments, work in corporate headquarters, work as management consultants and have a full and complete understanding of what is going on in their business and where they are taking this money and investing.
You might wonder why U.S. public relations companies would work so hard on their corporate culture. Of course there is nothing in their culture or their approach that promotes a higher culture at these companies. There are a couple of reasons why. One is that they take pride in being the best public relations company that they can manage in the world by having top-notch employees. Second is that with this level of level of quality and effort, the public relations companies will continue to increase their profits. At the same time, it is these investments that make U.S. public relations companies a lot more successful. Because of this, the U.S. press, both in the U.S. and abroad, is increasingly focused on Kritzer through their own coverage of news. While both of these factors are factors the public relations companies can put to good use, the results are always a lot better than the results that their marketing and sales can provide. Kritzer is not alone in it, with the likes of NBC News and PBS. In fact, PBS has found an extremely unique way to focus attention on the Kritzer brand through its programs and programs at Kritzer events. The Kritzer brand does not only rely on the success of the brand alone, but one person’s dedication to the brand and the way it has received this attention and attention. While Kritzer’s public relations company spends more time in business, and sometimes has more money, the fact is this is not necessarily an indicator that a public relations company is being good. Instead, a media outlet who is well represented and is paying an extremely high income is spending all of their attention on this company that they have to pay high quality employees and not get involved in the corruption that comes with corruption.
And finally, as I mentioned earlier, as I pointed out with the financial statements I provided, and the documents that I presented, some of the problems associated with Kritzer’s culture can actually happen to U.S. public relations companies. It often does. In fact, the public relations companies can even start to see that they’ve got problems, that they’re being left behind. The U.S. national news team was forced to stop working with them because of the way it handled what was going on with Kritzer’s campaign on this issue. As a result, the media team was forced
In addition, Kritzer employees were not having these problems. These problems were the result of poor work culture in their organization. Kritzer’s employees lacked an understanding of cultural issues, a sense of entitlement, and a desire for what they were doing properly. They were also not following the standard protocols that are so common in today’s corporate culture. They didn’t understand what an opportunity is (the concept of not caring about the organization as a whole anymore) or what your job entails and had less interest in the company as a whole. Kritzer employees also had an extremely high rate of attrition and low pay with a high turnover rate. They have a high cost on their jobs due to poor morale, which is why they were only able to offer a relatively affordable degree of service by training. These are all things that do not lead to better employee performance.
Why is the Kritzer falling apart?
There is nothing wrong with a healthy culture. We all accept and value and appreciate those who have left our company. In terms of culture, a high level of accountability, accountability, integrity, and loyalty within Kritzer and in other organizations comes naturally. In addition, every Kritzer employee has different personal and professional responsibilities and has different interests in one company
Kent reminds me of my boss in the way she runs her company. My boss conducts team meetings, which consist of all employees, to find out our ideas, concerns, how we feel abut the workplace environment, and she always ask the question, “What can I do to help you”? My boss is always willing to help out employees. I really admire that my boss always relate to the company as “Our Company” because she feels that the employees make the company successful. I work for a company that believes and demonstrate team work everyday. Even though our pay rate and positions, are different our culture values and ethics are always respected.
Culture values and OrganizationIn addition to cultural values, organizational values too can affect a person’s decisions. For example, the