A632.9.3.RB_MedleyKim_Confidence: The Name of the Game

Confidence: The Name of the Game

           Baba Shiv serves as Professor of Marketing and Director of the Strategic Marketing Management Executive Program for Stanford University. In a presentation, posted by Stanford (2011), Professor Shiv discusses the role of confidence, and its virtues, in the decision making process, particularly during the emergence period once a decision has been reached. As a child, I remember my father singing the theme played before National Football League games were played, “Confidence, is the name of the game, confidence…”. Professor Shiv’s work demonstrates that not only is confidence “vastly under-rated”, it has many virtues crucial in the decision making process (Stanford, 2011).

            Recently, my campaign team and I made a decision to host a table at a local event, The Flagler Home and Lifestyle Show. An annual event that draws thousands from Volusia, Flagler, and St. Johns counties. As a candidate, I have the option to either pay a fee that nears $6,000.00; or, to collect 719 petitions from registered voters in Flagler County, representing one percent of the total number of registered voters. As noted by Hoch, Kunreuther, and Gunther (2001), evidence suggests both “affect and emotions play an important role in people’s decision processes” (p. 269). I have attended the Home Show annually and was quite familiar with the numbers expected and had seen many candidates gather petitions. Professor Shiva notes that confidence can result in passion, a contagious confidence that spreads to others, and a utility that is extracted from the experience itself, which causes a “direct impact on the wanting center or dopamine areas of the brain” which explains how motivated and engaged we become having emerged from the decision making process and implementing the decision (Stanford, 2011). Once each team member began to realize the numbers of registered voters willing to stop at our table and sign a petition, they became excited, and this excitement and passion became contagious, and we all became more engaged with voters and more motivated to gather petitions. It truly was an amazing two days, money well spent, and a confident decision that worked.

            Just as a confident decision impacts the dopamine center of the brain, it stands to reason that less confident decisions have a particular affect, too. Professor Shiv describes a situation wherein a commander in the military needs to give an order in which he does not have confidence (Stanford, 2011). His troops will sense this lack of confidence; and, this too will spread to cause troops to be uncertain (Stanford, 2011). I felt somewhat less confident with my decision to enroll in College Algebra when I first returned to school. It was a required course for any degree program. It had been many, many years since my last Algebra class; and my confidence level was extremely low. My emotions initially caused me to be less engaged in a verbal manner during class. I feared being labeled as too old for the class, or out of step. I was not as passionate about my math class as I was with my other courses. Although I was motivated and engaged, those feelings stemmed from wanting to pass in order to advance in my degree work; not because of my experience with Algebra. As the course continued, many of those lessons learned so many years ago came back and my confidence levels grew; so much so I now tutor struggling College Algebra students.

            Confidence is the name of the game; and, it should be. As a leader, we need to share passion, create contagious confidence, and inspire a level of motivation and engagement that impacts the hedonic areas of not only our brains; but, the brains of those charged with carrying out our decisions (Stanford, 2011).

References

Hoch, S.J., Kunreuther, H.C., & Gunther, R.E. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions.

            Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Stanford. (2011, Nov. 7). Brain Research at Stanford: Decision Making. [Video file]. Retrieved

            from https://youtu.be/WRKfl4owWKc

A634.7.4.RB_MedleyKim_Twin_Eagles

Twin Eagles

            In his presentation, Dr. Bruce Weinstein, also known as The Ethics Guy (2012), polls his audience as to what one ought to do when faced with the flu. Do we stay home? Do we go to work and limit interaction with others? Do we purposely interact with those we dislike? Of the points he discusses, understanding criticism, apologizing in an ethically intelligent manner, and making others feel appreciated combine to help us realize what we ought to do in situations (TheEthicsGuy, 2012). Imagine a situation wherein a graduate student earnestly endeavors to complete assignments and submit the same by the prescribed deadline. The student has demonstrated one of “Ben’s 13 Virtues” presented by Twin Cities Public Television (TCPT) (2002). According to TCPT (2002) resolution requires one to perform what one ought. Should the reverse apply with regards to the grading obligation of the professor? Should professors resolve to grade what one ought? Weinstein expounds on the value of criticism; and, that if it can be harnessed and applied correctly, criticism can bring out the best in others (TheEthicsGuy, 2012).

            It has been my experience, since returning to school in 2009, graded assignments often include feedback, a form of criticism. It is presented by the professor in a constructive manner that, if taken by the student in an open-minded way, can help the student learn and improve future assignments. Most of the instructors I have been fortunate to have are able to return graded assignments in a relatively short amount time. A select few return grades with lightning speed which is very much appreciated when working within a seven day period to complete assignments. One of my current professors is one of the select few. I wonder how many students take time to not only appreciate this; but, actually thank their professors. Weinstein demonstrates how making someone feel appreciated can change not only that person’s outlook; it can change the outlook of those who took the time and effort to show appreciation (TheEthicsGuy, 2012). For me, receiving grades and feedback in a timely manner, tells me that professor appreciates my work; and even if the feedback offers constructive criticism, he or she took the time and believed my work worthy of not only reading; but, the professor sees room for improvement. Yes, I am a self-professed perfectionist and grade “weenie”; but, taking in feedback and applying the recommendations helps me to resolve to be a better student and listener.

            Citing Aristotle, LaFollette (2007) provides the only way to develop virtues is “by habituation”, and that being virtuous is something one must enjoy doing (p. 215). Additionally, LaFollette (2007) queries, “Is morality demanding?” (p. 253). I truly believe the professor who posts grades with lightning speed enjoys what she does and resolution is a strong virtue. My second professor seems to be experiencing difficulty with posting grades; and, although several inquiries have been made, the reason for the delay is unclear. Is it morally wrong to not grade a paper within a reasonable amount of time and does it fall within the scope of morality (LaFollette, 2007)? What weight is given to grading a paper timely or grading a paper eventually? Is it possible for a professor’s personal interests to trump his or her resolution to grade assignments (LaFollette, 2007)? If circumstances were such the delay in returning grades could be explained; then an “ethically intelligent apology”, defined by Weinstein as one that demonstrates sincerity, ownership, and a plan of action to avoid future delays, would certainly go a long way in helping this student understand and further the student’s own sense of tranquility (TheEthicsGuy, 2012; TCPT, 2002). Unfortunately and sadly, such as not occurred. Instead, a student who strives to learn and submit good assignments is literally left to flap in the wind and continue with ongoing assignments without understanding or guidance timely grading and criticism would offer.

            Chuck Gallagher (2013) speaks of an “unethical continuum” whereby if one begins to slide down its slopes, illegal actions may result. Certainly it is not my contention such will come to pass with a professor simply because he or she fails to resolve to return grades in a timely fashion; however, what’s the difference between a professor who does resolve and one who does not? Is such a reputation good for the university? Who would know, especially if the practice is something many professors do? Students are required to submit assignments on time. From a moral and virtuous standpoint, a student ought to resolve to submit his or her assignments by the deadline. Shouldn’t the same apply to the professors? If the student were to voice concern and if the professor were to retaliate by assigning lower grades, could that lead the professor further down Gallagher’s (2013) continuum? If the professor could not discern any difference between returning grades timely or returning grades eventually, if the professor tended to personal tasks instead of university tasks like grading assignments, and if the professor violated university policy, written or unwritten with regards to grading and gave little consideration to his or her action; then it is plausible the slippery slope could lead to retaliation against any student who sought to question the process (Gallagher, 2013).

            Ethics and values can vary within the same organization. As Weinstein demonstrated, people view what one ought to do through different lens (TheEthicsGuy, 2012). Do I grade assignments timely? Do I only grade those assignments from student who routinely do well? Do I grade those assignments from students I dislike? Those professors, who resolve to do what they ought to do, grade assignments because they believe a student deserves to know his or her grade, are to be applauded. Those professors who choose to perform a task other than grading do their university, their student body; and, ultimately their selves a dis-service.

References

Chuck Gallagher. (2013, Jan. 27). Business Ethics Keynote Speaker – Chuck Gallagher – shares

            Straight Talk about Ethics! [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/gUJ00vNGCPE

LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

TheEthicsGuy. (2012, Aug. 24). Keynote Speech Excerpts from The Ethics Guy. [Video file].

            Retrieved from https://youtu.be/eLxbHBpilJQ

Twin Cities Public Television. (2002). Ben’s 13 Virtues. PBS.org. Retrieved from

            http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/pop_virtues_list.html