Ethical Differences In Men And Women In Negotiations. Introduction.

Therefore, division of moral labor creates a different structure of moral thought in males and females and the cultural expectation of men and women to “exhibit moral dichotomy” (p.96) gives rise to different primary moral commitments in both genders. Due to this, Friedman argues that men are more inclined towards the moral commitment of rules and principles and females are inclined towards moral commitments of responsiveness and care. Friedman’s views about the origin of moral dichotomy resonate with Weeks.

For a long time, men and women have been dealing with the controversy of gender roles. In modern day, the battle for gender equality has been more known. In the story “Guys Suffer from Oppressive Gender Roles Too”, the author Julie Zeilinger explains how males are held to a more macho standard, but do have prevalent emotions. If we were to let go of these rigid rules about what is manly, there would be no standard for any gender. If that was reality, men shouldn’t have to feel humiliated about staying home, and if their companion makes more money than they do. Zeilinger talks about how males detach themselves from some emotions, and live a “life nub to a true range of human emotion” so they can meet this masculinity standard. However if males

Which of the following statements is most accurate regarding America’s political climate between 1876 and 1896? A. Southern states tended to vote Republican. B. The party that won the presidential election also controlled Congress. C. Little political power or influence was left to the states. D. The influence of the president over Congress diminished.

Today, the working industry has made substantial progress towards gender equality pay while adding numerous career opportunities for woman in the workforce. However, society still poses ethical concerns between women and men regarding gender pay gap and discrimination for the same job function that apparently still exist. To put it differently, women regrettably have struggled as they continue in trying to make headway in gaining the respect of the working-class industry since the mid-1900’s. In some cases, researchers state that women in the workforce will not get paid equally for the same job function because of discrimination of gender gap. According to one research study, “there is still a gender pay gap. Women continue to earn considerably less than men on average” (Blau & Kahn, 2007, p. 8). While men have the higher ground of work tenure there should be equal pay for women with the same qualifications; I will argue the concerns of gender gap pay while using the utilitarian theory, deontological theory and the objection of moral reasoning to prove the ethical theory.

Whether we like it or not, the stereotypes of gender are still prevalent in our life. In 2018, we like to act that stereotypes do not exist in our lives, but they do; however, this does not cause these stereotypes true. Often these stereotypes persist in how men and women morally reason. Women are more often seen as care reasoners where they make their moral decisions based on their instincts to care for others, while society perceives men as justice reasoners who make their decisions based on the law and what is just. In Moral Orientation, Carol Gilligan argues that these are the only two ways of going about moral reasoning. Women focus on care and men focus on justice. I will critique the argument made by Gilligan and propose why an alternative way that people morally reason is necessary.

Annette Bair and Marilyn Friedman have opposing views on whether women have distinct moral perspectives. Like Friedman, I believe that women have no different moral perspectives than men. Some people, like Bair, think that women base their moral perspectives on merely trust and love and men base theirs on justice. Friedman points out that care and justice coincide . People use justice to decide what is appropriate in caring relationships and care is brought into account when determining what is just. Since these two moral perspectives correspond, gender does not distinguish different moral perspectives.

Kennedy, Kray, and Ku (2017) conducted five separate studies involving social-cognitive frameworks to describe differences in gender negotiating ethics, and when females employ smaller amounts of unethical negotiating behaviors than men do. The study found women had a stronger moral identity compared to men, which decreases the temptation to rationalize, plot, and participate in

Women tend to be more emotional and rational then men, whereas men are far less emotional and react on impulse. The different understanding of the ways that each sex communicates is still to be studied. Women tend to react more emotionally than men, resulting in submerging themselves, mind body and soul into making decisions. Meanwhile men, impulsively react to situations for the sake of having a reason to do so. Men see women as less competent to making decisions that involve a lot of thought, and this is due to women’s

Making consistently ethical decisions is difficult. Most decisions have to be made in the context of economic, professional and social pressures, which can sometimes challenge our ethical goals and conceal or confuse the moral issues. In addition, making ethical choices is complex because in many situations there are a multitude of competing interests and values. Other times, crucial facts are unknown or ambiguous. Since many actions are likely to benefit some people at the expense of others, the decision maker must prioritize competing moral claims and must be proficient at predicting the likely consequences of various choices. An ethical person often chooses to do more than the law requires and less than the law allows.

We negotiate every day for different purposes, and each day we experience emotions, both positive and negative. When negotiating, formally or informally, with family or in the organizational workplace we often do not know how to handle ourselves, yet alone the emotions of the other person or group.

Ethical behavior is often seen as amoral when used for persuasive purposes. This is possible because persuasion may be used in unethical situations as well as ethical situations. Either way, it depends upon the person who is trying to persuade others. Adolf Hitler is an excellent example of someone who persuaded millions of people to behave unethically. On the other hand, Mother Teresa used persuasion for ethical reasons by caring for the sick and the orphaned, and because of this has impacted an entire world.

Gilligan’s moral development of “care ethics” is based on the findings that men tend to establish their relationships in a ranked order and pledge to the morality of rights. Women in comparison are more focused on the interpersonal relationships with people that include caring, sensitivity and being connected (Skoe, 2014). Gilligan’s “care ethics” differs from Kohlberg in that she believes emotions, cognition and action are not separate and to really act upon morality one has to know that they are intertwined. Knowing what moral actions to take therefore involves understanding the other person and caring is expressed through emotions. Kohlberg sees moral reasoning directed by principles of right actions and involves less emotions and more rationality (Blum, 1988). Nevertheless, Gilligan stresses that the male “justice” and female “care” theory of moral development are both equal and valid and by integrating the two forms the full potential of moral development (Skoe,

Personal values may conflict with ethical decision making if those personal values are different than the organizational norms of the business or institution. Constructing, and maintaining personal ethics in the workplace rests with the individual, and how willing he or she is in assimilating to the evolving cultural dynamic of the corporate world. Many times a person find their personal, cultural and/or organizational ethics conflicting and must reconcile a course of action that will mitigate cognitive dissonance. In order to be a productive member of society, in small groups and globally, one must reconcile these conflicts on a daily basis and continually move forward while maintaining personal integrity and

Ethics are the social principles or gauge whether some body is following the set social standards or not. The role of these social or ethical standards is very important in any type of negotiation for both parties. This gives the chance for both parties to know the tactics which are being used are deceptive, ethical or unethical and then help them examining the ethical tones and aid them in decision making. This also help both parties distinguish among different criteria, or standards, for judging and evaluating a negotiator’s actions, particularly when questions of

Individual factors helps to understand the reason for some people perceive specific action to be unethical whiles others do not. However, the decision-making cannot simply be explained in terms of these individual factors, because after all several people seems to have ‘multiple ethical selves’ (Trevino and Nelson 2007:180) – that is, they make different decisions in different situations. Situational factors accepted to be the most important.