Friday, August 26, 2005
Codes of Conduct Not Enough
I have to agree with Wallace Immen in the article excerpt below from Canada's "national newspaper": All the rules in the world won't stop corporate misconduct if people are afraid, or have no forum, to discuss their concerns about proposed activities.
Whether it involves what the lawyer does or what the lawyer knows the client is going to do, most law firms offer no mechanism for discussion of the ethics of it. This is not a matter of the absence of the technological means, but the absence of a sincere interest in meaningful conversation...
This alone can cause you enough anxiety to bolt and raise llamas in Wyoming.
Immen's comments:
"...The spate of corporate scandals has burdened employers with mountains of new regulations and stern demands from shareholders, the public and the media to cover all contingencies with codes of conduct.
"But all the rules in the world won't give rise to true integrity unless company leaders take the further crucial step of modelling and encouraging their staffs to talk about what that now-overused word really means in their organization, the experts say.
"I can't help but think that if employees had a more open process for talking about their concerns about questionable actions taken at Enron or WorldCom, these scandals would not have happened," says Donna Kennedy-Glans president of consultancy Integrity Bridges in Calgary and co-author of a new book, Corporate Integrity, A Toolkit for Managing Beyond Compliance.
"In research for the book, Ms. Kennedy-Glans says she couldn't find a single U.S. or Canadian corporation that didn't have a code of conduct emphasizing the importance of integrity before the current scandals hit. They didn't stop the number of class-action lawsuits brought against companies from skyrocketing..."
Good Governance, All the rules in the world won't give rise to integrity
by Wallace Immen, Globe and Mail, Friday, August 26, 2005, Page C1
I have to agree with Wallace Immen in the article excerpt below from Canada's "national newspaper": All the rules in the world won't stop corporate misconduct if people are afraid, or have no forum, to discuss their concerns about proposed activities.
Whether it involves what the lawyer does or what the lawyer knows the client is going to do, most law firms offer no mechanism for discussion of the ethics of it. This is not a matter of the absence of the technological means, but the absence of a sincere interest in meaningful conversation...
This alone can cause you enough anxiety to bolt and raise llamas in Wyoming.
Immen's comments:
"...The spate of corporate scandals has burdened employers with mountains of new regulations and stern demands from shareholders, the public and the media to cover all contingencies with codes of conduct.
"But all the rules in the world won't give rise to true integrity unless company leaders take the further crucial step of modelling and encouraging their staffs to talk about what that now-overused word really means in their organization, the experts say.
"I can't help but think that if employees had a more open process for talking about their concerns about questionable actions taken at Enron or WorldCom, these scandals would not have happened," says Donna Kennedy-Glans president of consultancy Integrity Bridges in Calgary and co-author of a new book, Corporate Integrity, A Toolkit for Managing Beyond Compliance.
"In research for the book, Ms. Kennedy-Glans says she couldn't find a single U.S. or Canadian corporation that didn't have a code of conduct emphasizing the importance of integrity before the current scandals hit. They didn't stop the number of class-action lawsuits brought against companies from skyrocketing..."
Good Governance, All the rules in the world won't give rise to integrity
by Wallace Immen, Globe and Mail, Friday, August 26, 2005, Page C1
Monday, August 22, 2005
Self-Compassion Helps People Cope with Failure
Newswise — High self-esteem may not be as important as high self-compassion in coping with negative life events, according to research by Wake Forest University psychologist Mark Leary.
“Although Western society has emphasized the importance of high self-esteem, the more important thing may be to have self-compassion, the ability to treat oneself kindly in the face of failure, rejection, defeat and other negative events,” Leary said.
Leary conducted three studies that consistently showed self-compassion is beneficial in helping people cope with negative events in ways that are often different from and better than high self-esteem. He presented his findings at a meeting of the American Psychological Association Aug. 20.
Self-compassion and self-esteem are related. “Self-compassion involves treating yourself with the same kindness you would show a friend whether you feel good about yourself or not,” he said. “Self-esteem is simply feeling good about yourself.”
Leary found those with higher self-compassion were more likely to think “Everybody goofs up now and then” and less likely to think “I am such a loser” or “I wish I could die” in response to each scenario.
“Self-compassion may buffer people against negative events and engender positive self-feelings without the negative features that are sometimes associated with high self-esteem such as defensiveness and a sense of entitlement,” Leary said.
“Highly self-compassionate people actually took more responsibility for their shortcomings and problems,” he said. “Because they didn’t beat themselves up when things went badly for them, they were able to admit their mistakes.”
Newswise — High self-esteem may not be as important as high self-compassion in coping with negative life events, according to research by Wake Forest University psychologist Mark Leary.
“Although Western society has emphasized the importance of high self-esteem, the more important thing may be to have self-compassion, the ability to treat oneself kindly in the face of failure, rejection, defeat and other negative events,” Leary said.
Leary conducted three studies that consistently showed self-compassion is beneficial in helping people cope with negative events in ways that are often different from and better than high self-esteem. He presented his findings at a meeting of the American Psychological Association Aug. 20.
Self-compassion and self-esteem are related. “Self-compassion involves treating yourself with the same kindness you would show a friend whether you feel good about yourself or not,” he said. “Self-esteem is simply feeling good about yourself.”
Leary found those with higher self-compassion were more likely to think “Everybody goofs up now and then” and less likely to think “I am such a loser” or “I wish I could die” in response to each scenario.
“Self-compassion may buffer people against negative events and engender positive self-feelings without the negative features that are sometimes associated with high self-esteem such as defensiveness and a sense of entitlement,” Leary said.
“Highly self-compassionate people actually took more responsibility for their shortcomings and problems,” he said. “Because they didn’t beat themselves up when things went badly for them, they were able to admit their mistakes.”
