Blog Assignment #2

MSMC Blog Assignment #2
Organizational Behavior MGT 505.0-D1
Professor Cynthia L. Krom By May Lee
Chapter 2: Case 2 “Professional Sports: Rewarding and Punishing the Same Behavior?” 9/29/07

Question #1
What type of reinforcement schedule does random drug testing represent? Is this type of schedule typically effective or ineffective?
Random drug testing represents an intermittent schedule, since not every instance of drug used is detected, or punished. This type of schedule is typically ineffective. Actually, the word random itself represents no schedule at all. If all the players are randomly tested then the effectiveness of the drug testing is increased. But if only random players are tested, then the drug testing schedule would not apply to all of the players, thus rendering it 100% ineffective towards the players not tested.

Question #2
What are some examples of behaviors in typical organizations that supervisors reward but may actually be detrimental to others or to the organization as a whole? As a manager, what might you do to try to avoid this quandary?
For want of a better word, “snitching” has long been rewarded in all organizations. The military has long prized itself on the cohesion of its organization. The individual is sacrificed for the group and the common good. Although I do not condone the military’s policy on sexual orientation, if say, a soldier’s homosexual orientation was reported to an officer, then the individual “snitching” is rewarded, but the organizational cohesion suffers. As a manager, I would thank the “snitcher” for coming forward, whilst orchestrating opportunities for the identified party to come forward on his own, rather than call him out. If the individual took responsibility for his actions, then the cohesive whole does not suffer, but is made stronger by supporting the weakest link. The “snitcher” receives no positive reinforcement in “snitching”, thus will be less likely to repeat the act.

Question #3
If you were the commissioner of baseball, what steps would you take to try to reduce the use of steroids in baseball? Is punishment likely to be the most effective deterrent? Why or why not?
The superstars in baseball are not unlike the superstars in any athletic field or organization. They are rewarded financially beyond mere mortals. The motivation for steroid use is financial gain. The motivation for most illegal act is financial gain. It is an operant behavior …or learned behavior. The tendency to repeat such behavior is influenced by the reinforcement … Therefore; reinforcement strengthens a behavior and increases the likelihood that it will be repeated. If we remove the reinforcement, i.e. the financial gain, and then there is no motivation. This type of shaping behavior by the withdrawal of something is called negative reinforcement (Robbins & Judge, 2007). This is the most effective deterrent. The reason the players take steroids is athletic success and financial gain. I would fine the athlete one year’s salary for each positive drug test. The dilemma is that the owner and corporate sponsors of the athletes want them to have “super” human prowess, so the public will buy anything these “super” human endorses. If there are no “super” humans, then there are no fans, and then there are no corporate sponsors, and no large pocket owners, and there will be no desire to be “super” humans, and then who would care about a sports game?

Question #4
Is it ever “okay” to allow potentially unethical behaviors, which on the surface may benefit organizations, or persist? Why or why not?
The law is black and white, but the enforcement is always grey. Cops look the other way at jay walkers and small time crooks that pick pocket all the time. But homicide and bank robberies are another thing. Crooks are usually caught and punished to the full extent of the law. Ethics are also black and white, but the enforcement is also grey. The organization’s CEO creates the climate of tolerance or lack thereof by publicizing the organization’s mission, vision, priorities, goals, and objectives. Every organization has a formal written code of conduct that provides functional operational guidelines (Fuqua & Newman 2006). It’s “okay” to me to allow potentially unethical behaviors to persist if it benefits the organization, and the corporate climate is tolerant. If the corporate climate is not, then unethical behaviors will not be tolerated.

References
1 Robbins, S.P., & Judge, T.A. (2007). Organizational Behavior ,Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall
2 Fuqua, D. R., Newman, J. L. (2006). Moral and Ethical Issues in Human Systems. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, Vol. 58, No. 4, 206–215