results of the experiment Stanley Milgram power can help to educate managers about how people respond to authority and how to become a director of a better result.
in the Stanley Milgram experiment, which was conducted in 1974, he investigated the degree to which individuals would respond to authority, even if asked to do something that would hurt another person. In the experiment, "volunteer teachers" were told topics, referred to as the learner was supposed to remember pairs of words, and it was supposed to be used to give him a shock increase the intensity levels of the machine, which was supposed to help the learner remembers best word pairs. While using volunteer teachers device, the researcher sat next to volunteers. Although the learner was not actually being harmed, learner acted as if he were facing a more and more severe pain and shock to increase, and he was the head teacher to believe that these shocks may even threaten the life of the learner.
The results of the horrific experience of a high percentage of issues continued to give the shocks, even when the shock may be fatal emerged. Although some of the volunteers initially resisted, he complied with the insistence of a researcher supervision. Thus, threads went along with what the researcher have to do, even though they believed what they were doing was wrong, and some wanted to stop the experiment. Moreover, very few of the people who have left the experiment, initially cooperated, such as electric shocks, and continued pain before finally resisted.
There are a lot of similarities to the experience in the real world, such as the German people generally go hand in hand with Hitler attacks spiraling against the Jews and other people targeted. Another example is that the soldiers in the regime forces in Libya was ready to shoot at innocent civilians, despite the fact that an increasing number of soldiers had defected as the system has been weakened. In the business has been gone many employees along with internal corruption instead of leaving or become informants, even the government's campaign to drop the heads of the company and witnesses and then it became, as in Eliot Spitzer's campaign on Wall Street, when he was a prosecutor in New York .
what this experience, as well as similarities to the real world, we have learned that people will usually follow the orders that come from someone perceived to be in a position of power, even if those orders are harmful to others. If the people after orders may feel is unwarranted or malicious commands, and will carry out normally, as long as they feel this person continued to give in order to be in a position of authority over them. And then they are ready to go against their own moral compass in response to the demands of power.
while this willingness to go along with these instructions may seem shocking to those who have a strong sense of what is right and wrong on the basis of ethics they learned from their parents and their teachers, church, and symbols of other power while growing up, it can be seen as a survival mechanism. This is because those who comply with and follow the rules may be more successful in the survival and thriving in what is often unfair, and survival of the fittest type of world. They may go along to get along, and often these works survive in the community strategy, which usually rewards conformity.
as a manager, and the results of this experiment mean that employees will usually go along with the orders, even when we disagree with them or feel instructions may have negative consequences, because they are afraid to say anything, or the question of power. Thus, employees can implement policies and procedures that backfire, interfere with operations, or harmful to the organization, because they are doing their manager what to do, because they feel it is safer for them to do so.
Under these circumstances, with the knowledge from this experience, and managers must make it safe for employees to raise questions about anything they feel uncomfortable with, because it may have a negative or inconsistent with their feelings what is right and what is wrong consequences. To this end, it should develop specific actions managers so that they can feel safe airing their concerns, such as the ability to come to me privately to discuss concerns or to be able to send a message to an anonymous director for the participation of concern if they feel more comfortable sharing it this way. Another alternative would be to have a chance during a staff meeting for employees to raise their concerns, with an emphasis on there will be no negative consequences for doing so. Managers may even offer a reward as an incentive for employees bringing up concerns that lead to positive changes to improve the workplace.
0 Komentar