Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

what situations influence our choices?, conflict of interest from UT…

- - - - informational conformity: you actually doubt you're correct and become convinced others are correct
      - normative conformity: conform because you're apprehensive the group will disapprove & you want to avoid that discomfort
      - reminds of Orwell's quote from 1984: "the Party told you to reject the evidence of your own eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command" --> this is obviously a very extreme instance of what the pressure to conform can do to a society, but it reminds me of the dire danger of falling victim to this effect
        
        in this way what starts out as conformity bias as explained in the UT Austin video can quickly become dangerous and spiral. this experiment was just with lines but for questions of morality this can devolve into moral muteness
        
        so what do we do about it?? awareness is part of the solution but what else?
- - - - this makes it incredibly important for authority figures to have the right ethical awareness and standards, because if they can be ethical then it's possible this effect doesn't need to be disastrous. not all leaders will tell you to do bad things so it means we need to put people in charge who will encourage the right behavior
        
        "employees bend or break ethics rules because those in charge are blind to unethical behavior and may even unknowingly encourage it" (Ethical Breakdowns HBR)
        
        relating back to the MBAs & Wage podcast, I wonder whether ethics or ethical outcomes at least are negatively correlated with MBAs (and executive positions). are we teaching those in charge to act ethically? can that even be taught? all this HBR article really implores us to do is to "be aware" and conscious - but what does that look like?
        
        "Bud" Krogh example from the UT Austin video especially shows the dangers of unintentionally ignoring ethics in favor of pleasing superiors because his superior was President Nixon
        
        worrying especially if the authority figure has so much power. i wonder how this plays out in current events (Marco Rubio & Trump, for example) which connects back to the idea of moral decoupling
- - - - example: Apple. their whole philosophy is beautiful design and a delightful customer experience, but to make money they also do certain things at odds with that - the closed ecosystem can be thought of as being for design purposes, but it also forces users to spend more to buy products within the ecosystem.
- - - - by nature, slippery slope/incrementalism can often apply to situations where the intentions are pure but the outcome has spiraled so far beyond our control. i think there's an interesting overlap between outcome vs intentions and this concept
  - - - could imply that yes business objectives are typically at odds with what's good