Ethics and Principles of the Milgram Study

1a

Executive Summary

This essay addresses the roles of managers and leaders in organizations today by looking at how those roles are challenged by globalization, innovation and the need to create harmony in the workplace. One of the areas of exploration discussed is the use of humor in the workplace to help workers bond and increase confidence so as to develop intelligent followers. It also discusses the risks of the laughter advantage, particularly when it comes to crossing lines that might lead to loss of respect for the leader or a damaged reputation for the organization.

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

The Roles of Managers and Leaders 1

Areas to Explore 2

Conclusion 4

References 4

Introduction

Organizations today require that managers and leaders be authentic, accountable and capable of motivating employees in diverse environments as a result of globalization and the rise of virtual workplaces. Managers must be effective at providing and obtaining feedback (Steelman & Wolfeld, 2018). Leaders must be able to engage in critical thought and analysis, make decisions, and communicating a vision (Johnson & Hackman, 2018). However, one important researchable issue surrounding manager and leadership roles in organizations today is the extent to which laughter and humor should be incorporated into management and leadership strategies to help create more effective teams, better cultures, and harmony in the workplace: this concept is known as using the laughter advantage (Georganta & Montgomery, 2019). At a time when so many organizations struggle to establish a universal appeal that can facilitate bonding among employees, the laughter advantage has been suggested as a suitable approach for both managers and leaders to bring people together and establish group cohesiveness (Greatbach & Clark, 2003). The idea that humor can be used to overcome relationship, communication, and trust issues in an organization of today is, therefore, one deserving of more consideration and research in the field of management and leadership.

The Roles of Managers and Leaders

Managers and leaders are often thought of being two different positions held in organizations: managers focus on the day-to-day affairs while leaders focus on the big picture perspective, inspiring visions, and motivating workers to achieve those visions. The truth is that there is a great deal of overlap between management and leadership, and the two really do belong together. Great leaders are also great managers and vice versa. Sun, Chen and Zhang (2017) point out, for instance, that instilling empathy, intelligence, and communication in an organization requires transformational leadership—but transformational leaders also have to be effective at on-the-ground management because of the way in which this leadership style requires support from various working parts and players in an organization. Transformation is a must in any organization over time, for stagnation limits and frustrates growth. Yet transformation cannot occur unless there is buy-in from stakeholders. Getting stakeholders on board demands more than just a transformational leaders; it also demands strong followership. Followers cannot be mere yes-men, however. They must be able to think for themselves and even challenge leadership ideas that are bad for an organization—and a good leader will recognize that need (Chaleff, 2015). Managers and leaders, in spite of everything, will sometimes make mistakes, and that is where intelligent disobedience can come into play to help managers and leaders realize a misstep and correct it before the entire organization is run off course from achieving its vision. If there is any disaster to be avoiding in managing and leading it is the disaster of groupthink, which prevents honest and open debate from happening when it is needed most (Jaeger, 2020).

One of the key roles of managers and leaders should be, for that reason, to promote a culture that is open and respectful, one in which groupthink is deterred so that when a wrong course of action is taken, intelligent disobedience can be demonstrated. That is why Chaleff (2015) states that “followers must know when to say ‘no’ to a harmful instruction and ‘yes’ if there is a legitimate alternative to the original instruction. For the sake of the team, its mission, and its values, the guide dog knows how to retain its own accountability while being an agent of the leader and how to reclaim its autonomy when required for the common good” (p. 5). An environment that is filled with tension, wherein people are too afraid to say a word because of fear of ostracism, managers and leaders have to know how to defuse the environment and bring people back to themselves to avert potential crises. Again, that is where laughter and humor can come into play: laughter and humor relax people, open them up, make them less afraid to contribute, keep situations light and comfortable, and keep the door open for the possibility of others making meaningful contributions that might otherwise never be made.

Areas to Explore

Organizations face a number of challenges today: globalization, the constant need for innovation, and creating a working structure and environment in changing times are just a few of them. Globalization brings with it issues of increased competition as well as a more diverse talent pool; innovation particularly in the way of technology presents issues of security, protecting IP, developing new ideas, and incorporating them into the structure of the workplace and in the way products and services are delivered; and maintaining a positive workplace culture is an issue that has to be addressed to ensure that the vision of the organization is achievable. In such a situation, a manager role and a leader role can overlap in terms of creating an environment of connectivity, authenticity, and appreciation, where respect, communication, and trust are fostered.

One of the ways in which this feat can be accomplished is through the use of laughter and humor in the workplace. Managers and leaders can use humor to create an environment in which people feel more comfortable with speaking their minds (Greatbach & Clark, 2003). As Hatzipapas, Visser and Van Rensburg (2017) have shown, laughter is a great way to promote psychological well-being even in times of great stress. Any manager and leader can affirm that organizations face stress at all times, from external or internal directions. Humor has the potential as a tool to help alleviate stress in the workplace and foster greater psychological health among workers. Healthy-minded workers may be more likely to avoid or resist groupthink, as there is less fear of speaking out. When there is less fear of speaking out, the chances of intelligent disobedience and the kind of followership promoted by Chaleff (2015) can significantly rise.

Thus, a major area to explore in the field of management roles and leadership roles to explore is how managers and leaders can use humor effectively in the workplace. Admittedly this is not as easy as it sounds, as comedy and humor themselves have come under greater scrutiny as a result of the rise of cancel culture and social media. Comedy is relative and humor is different for everyone—so what makes some laugh can cause offense to others. Thus, the manager and the leader must know how to use humor inoffensively and in a way that has universal appeal. If the wrong kind of joke is made, it can spell disaster for a manager or leader within the organization and even for the organization itself if the complaint of the offended person goes viral on social media. The reputation of the organization can be damaged.

Is it therefore worth the risk of trying to use laughter to bring people together in the workplace? This is a question worth exploring. One possible way to mitigate the risk of giving offense can be to make sure the manager or leader has a high level of social and emotional intelligence. Social and emotional intelligence can allow the manager or leader to understand the audience and gauge the extent to which a joke might work or to which humor might be beneficial in de-stressing an environment. The type of humor to be used should also fall under this purview. A leader has to be able to realize that off-color jokes are risky and should be avoided, but that in certain situations with certain types of workers a joke that is that edgy might be acceptable to build rapport. Again, this could be a risk not worth taking, however, because jokes can get around and if a leader’s reputation becomes tarnished in this manner it can undermine his potential as a leader and his efforts at management. Resentment should be avoided at all costs, even if it means steering clear of types of humor.

Not all humor has to be edgy or envelope-pushing. A simple humorous, self-deprecating demeanor on the part of a leader or manager may be enough to show workers that they should be at their ease. That is the whole point of leadership and management: it is to get people comfortable so that they can perform at a high level and do what is in the best interests of the organization. Understanding boundaries and how they should be implemented is thus an area that should be explored in research when it comes to how to implement humor in the workplace.

Another area of exploration that could be considered is how managers and leaders demonstrate authenticity. Authentic leadership and authentic personalities tend to be more open and honest in the workplace than autocratic leaders or other types of leaders. They are useful in organizations that are trying to recover from a previous scandal or problem wherein a lack of trust in organizational management and leadership has emerge. Authenticity has to be rooted in an ethical framework, however; an ethical approach to leadership shows others that character is what matters. When character is lauded, people observe the higher standards of behavior that they are expected to meet. They are more willing to follow a leader who conforms to standards of behavior that are befitting an organization.

If humor is used well, authentic leaders may be able to establish great rapport with followers and develop the type of intelligent followership recommended by Chaleff (2015). Rapport is crucial to the success of leadership, because it brings people together, facilitates communication, and fosters trust. A team that does not trust its members is one that is at risk of failure due to contention, hostility, suspicion and an inability to resolve conflict. Can humor be used to defuse conflicts? The research suggests that it absolutely can (Georganta, & Montgomery, 2019). But as all comedians know, there are lines that one must not cross because it risks losing the audience altogether: a leader and manager must know what those lines are and where they differ among audiences. In a globalized workplace, these lines are bound to differ from one group to the next.

Additionally, how this approach can be used in a virtual workplace is another issue. With more and more workers coming together in virtual teams, leaders and managers have to find ways to keep the culture vibrant so that performance is where it should be. Can humor and the laughter advantage be of any help in these types of situations? It is possible that they can be, but some exploration of how is worth looking into.

Conclusion

Today’s organizations are impacted by issues such as globalization, the need for innovation, and the rise of virtual workplaces. As leadership and management roles overlap, integrating the day-to-day management of processes with the overall need to inspire, motivate, communicate a vision, and enhance workplace performance, new methods and practices for bringing workers together are welcome. The laughter advantage has been identified by some researchers as being helpful in alleviating stress, enhance group communication, and engaging team workers. However, it is just one possibility for helping leaders and managers to fulfill their roles. Leaders and managers also have to be able to create a culture in which workers avoid groupthink and maintain an attitude of intelligent followership for the good of the organization. Ultimately, managers and leaders must see that the vision of the organization is achievable, and if humor can be used to help workers reach the vision, it is something to consider. Risks vs. rewards should always be carefully weighed, however, because if one wrong step is taken in this direction it could mean ruin for the leader and reputational harm for the organization. Common sense along with social and emotional intelligence should always be utilized by leaders and managers. Authentic leadership and a strong moral and ethical framework should also be used to guide leaders and managers in their roles.

References

Chaleff, I. (2015). Intelligent disobedience. ILA Member Connector.

Georganta, K., & Montgomery, A. (2019). Workplace fun: a matter of context and not

content. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal.

Greatbatch, D., & Clark, T. (2003). Displaying group cohesiveness: Humour and laughter

in the public lectures of management gurus. Human relations, 56(12), 1515-1544.

Hatzipapas, I., Visser, M. J., & van Rensburg, E. J. (2017). Laughter therapy as an

intervention to promote psychological well-being of volunteer community care workers working with HIV-affected families. SAHARA-J: Journal of Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS, 14(1), 202-212.

Jaeger, E. L. (2020). Not the desired outcome: Groupthink undermines the work of a

literacy council. Small Group Research, 51(4), 517-541.

Johnson, C. E., & Hackman, M. Z. (2018). Leadership: A communication perspective.

Waveland Press.

Steelman, L. A., & Wolfeld, L. (2018). The manager as coach: The role of feedback

orientation. Journal of business and psychology, 33(1), 41-53.

1b

Introduction

A manager must perform a cluster of roles, but one of the most essential roles that must be performed is that of academic researcher. Conducting academic research ensures that the manager can incorporate evidence-based practices into the management approach. Research is what provides the foundation for best practices to be cultivated and implemented. Without research, there is no expansion of knowledge, and without expansion of knowledge the manager risks being left behind as the evolution of management progresses. New ideas and new methods of management are always being investigated and brought to light, with evidence from research there to support the claims and arguments of researchers. Managers must be flexible and adaptive, and engaging in academic research helps them to do just that.

How to Add the Role of Academic Researcher to a Manager’s Cluster of Roles

Altamony and Gharaibeh (2017) note that in addition to the interpersonal, informational and decisional roles that a manager must fulfill, the role of academic researcher also is something the manager must accept. The reason is simple: new problems and challenges are always arising in the field of management as the field itself is always changing due to innovations, new structures, and new dimensions. Research can help the manager find new solutions to new problems.

Adding the role of academic researcher to a manager’s cluster of roles depends upon the manager being able to implement appropriate academic research methods. On top of this, the manager must have an understanding of academic research theories so as to be able to interpret the conclusions reached by researchers. Critical thinking skills are necessary to achieve this function: it requires that the manager be able, first, to identify a problem; second, to gather data related to the problem from multiple sources; third, to be able to parse the data and determine which sources of information are most relevant; fourth, to be able to make a decision about that information in order to resolve the issue at hand in the most effective manner.

Business intelligence systems can be one way to help a manager add the role of academic researcher to his already robust cluster of roles (Masa’Deh, Obeidat, Maqableh & Shah, 2021). But as Devasia (2020) notes, managers are typically action-oriented. Managers tend to adopt individualized models that allow them to act based on generalized theories and assumptions. The academic researcher acts differently: the academic researcher uses a systematic method of investigation. The academic researcher must be open, must be a careful planner, must be able to implement a multi-dimensional approach to investigation, and must be ethical and accepting of feedback. How can the manager who must act on the go integrate a methodical approach to investigation with his day-to-day operations?

The answer to that question is provided by Devasia (2020): “developing practice-based management systems using qualitative methodological approach contributing to real-life situations, defines a critically reflexive practitioner-scholars and also critical to the success of the role amalgamation” (p. 11). In other words, the manager has to be able to combine the careful, thoughtful, meticulous operations of the academic with the daily operations of the traditional manager. It is very much a balancing act, but the benefits of this combination can be a more thoughtful, cautious manager who is attentive to the details while able to maintain a view of the general principles of management at the same time.

In the end, the manager has to be willing to learn and leverage that learning so as to advance the aims of the organization. The manager must set aside time for learning and continue his education in the field of management by reviewing academic articles, publications available through the various resources, and even easy-to-access search engines like Google Scholar. A quick key-word search in Google Scholar can bring up dozens of articles that can help a manager understand what researchers in the field have uncovered about a particular problem that the manager might be facing.

Differences in Approach

The main difference in approach between the traditional cluster of roles identified by Mintzberg and the approach of the academic researcher is that manager, traditionally, acts in a passive way with regard to his informational role: he monitors, controls, and delegates. But as an academic researcher, he has to be proactive—meaning he must actively engage in seeking out new information rather than simply sit back and allow information to come to him through the various channels set up in his operational system. By engaging in active research, the manager develops a better understanding of how to lead people, how to manage information, how to develop projects, and so on. Managers who delegate responsibilities are used to having others accomplish designated tasks. But when it comes to engaging in academic research, the manager cannot delegate this responsibility to anyone. The manager can assign someone the task of gathering academic research for review, but he must be the one to review it in the end and to make a decision about what the information is suggesting. To that end, the manager must be able to critically analyze and evaluate academic research (Yukl, 1989).

To some extent, engaging in academic research is really no different from management in any of the other roles: the manager can never really be passive in any role. For instance, even though monitoring may seem like a passive activity on the surface, it does require the manager to be engaged and to know what to look for, what standards should be met, and how performance should be measured. To acquire that understanding the manager had to learn it. Academic research is simply the extension of the manager’s learning. It is nothing more than the continuing of his education. The approach may seem more investigative, but even when a manager is monitoring and identifies a problem, an investigation must be mounted and some decision-making ensues. This is why the manager is never really passive: he must manage the flow of information, accept and give feedback, and deem what is essential and what is non-essential in the execution of his role as communicator. All of academic research can be understood within the framework of this nuanced approach. The manager who conducts academic research is simply extending his frame of reference so that he can be the best possible communicator, leader, and doer as possible (Kyvik, 2013).

Challenges

One of the challenges of engaging in academic research is that the manager has to set aside time for it; and not only that but also the manager must be open to adapting to new information that he acquires as a result of research. A manager who conducts research only to confirm preconceived ideas is one who is acting out of confirmation bias, which runs contrary to the ethics of research (Miyazaki & Taylor, 2008). The manager must conduct research in good faith, meaning he must be willing to make changes if the evidence supports such changes. At the same time, the manager should not accept all evidence as equal. Some research findings are appropriate in given circumstances or situations, and the manager must determine what information is relevant and what is not.

That is why the challenge of engaging in critical thinking is so important. Managers may be used to simply following a pre-set method of applying management practices and principles without thinking about their effect. As one who must juggle various responsibilities, a manager is often not open to considering whether a practice or principle is appropriate: it is what he has learned and what the organization is familiar with, so he uses it. Research itself can challenge these notions and it can upset the status quo. Some people are very uncomfortable with change, which is why it is so challenging to manage change in the first place: resistance to change is a common obstacle that transformational leaders face. The manager who engages in academic research has to be aware of these challenges and be prepared to face them—otherwise, it is all for nothing.

Change may be necessary, but it may also be unnecessary. Unnecessary change can cause unnecessary problems, but necessary change can help an organization to evolve to the next stage of growth and development. A manager who conducts academic research should be prepared to explain both to higher-level managers and to lower-level followers why some changes may be needed or not needed. The manager not only must demonstrate critical thought throughout this process but have the skills needed for communicating the most essential points in the most distilled way possible.

The distillation of evidence is the most essential aspect of the manager’s role as an academic researcher. Findings from studies can be obtuse or unclear to those unfamiliar with the concepts, problems, methodologies or topics under consideration. The manager who comes across important information must return to his informational role once data that supports a decision has been compiled. He must disseminate not just that data as supporting evidence but also, and more importantly, an argument based upon that data that enables others both upstream and downstream to grasp its meaning and value. In so doing, the manager not only takes the burden of conducting their own research from the shoulders of higher-level managers and lower-level followers but increases their understanding through logical application of the communication process. Communication should be brief, clear, on-point, and complete. Thus, the manager who has obtained findings from research must deliver a clear presentation that distills the evidence in such a way that it can be grasped easily by other stakeholders inside the organization.

The end of academic research is an increase of understanding. That increase cannot be had without the distribution of information. Clarity is of the essence in the distribution of information, and so the manager who engages in research must also be able to present the findings just as a researcher does at the conclusion of a study. The manager must also be able to receive feedback from others once that information has been disseminated. This feedback will tell the manager whether he has been successful in distributing the information or not, or whether another approach is needed to increase understanding on the subject. In the end, communication is one of the biggest challenges of conducting academic research as a manager.

Conclusion

Academic research is a necessary role that the manager of today should incorporate into the cluster of roles defined by Mitzberg. Those roles include the informational, the interpersonal, and the decisional roles. Each of these roles plays a part in the overall conducting of academic research. The approach to conducting research may be different from the general managerial approach in that is methodical and requires critical thought—but that is only on the surface. The successful manager is more than a passive monitor: he is proactive, insightful, understanding, and willing to increase understanding in himself and in others. To complete research, the manager must not only be able to assess the most relevant information but also to communicate findings to others in a way that allows them to increase their understanding as well. When change is required, buy-in from others is necessary lest resistance rear its head. To obtain buy-in the manager must communicate logically, clearly, concisely and completely. The evidence obtained from research has to be presented fully but in a manner that is simple and effective. Most people who do not conduct research are not going to want to know all about the researcher’s methods, sample sizes, or limitations. The manager has to evaluate those issues on his own and then determine whether the findings are appropriate to his situation or not. The manager must use critical thinking to parse data and decide what types of research help to address a particular problem. Only then can the issues of an organization be addressed in a truly leader-like way, with the best information available used to facilitate the decision-making process. This is why academic research fits in with the cluster of roles defined by Mintzberg: it relies on the interpersonal, informational, and decisional skills of the manager.

References

Altamony, H., & Gharaibeh, A. (2017). The role of academic researcher to Mintzberg’s

managerial roles. International Journal of Business Management and Economic Research, 8(2), 920-925.

Devasia, J. (2020). Merging Academic Researcher Role to the Managerial Roles Cluster.

Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jophy-Devasia/publication/348324784_Merging_Academic_Researcher_Role_to_the_Managerial_Roles_Cluster/links/5ff7f3b7299bf140887d8a05/Merging-Academic-Researcher-Role-to-the-Managerial-Roles-Cluster.pdf

Kyvik, S. (2013). The academic researcher role: Enhancing expectations and improved

performance. Higher Education, 65(4), 525-538.

Masa’Deh, R. E., Obeidat, Z., Maqableh, M., & Shah, M. (2021). The impact of business

intelligence systems on an organization’s effectiveness: the role of metadata quality from a developing country’s view. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 22(1), 64-84.

Miyazaki, A. D., & Taylor, K. A. (2008). Researcher interaction biases and business

ethics research: Respondent reactions to researcher characteristics. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 779-795.

Pather, S. & Remenyi, D., (2019). Reflections on Being a Successful Academic

Researcher. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 17(2), 55-66.

Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of

Management, 15(2), 251-289.

2a

Introduction

In Milgram’s (1963) study, the researcher tested the hypothesis that a person will act against his own moral code if he believes he is being instructed to do so a competent authority who is giving orders. It was a study that bordered on psychological abuse, as it affected the way subjects think on top of how they felt. The difference between emotional harm and psychological harm is that the former affects the feelings of a person while the latter affects the person’s cognition. Feelings can be hurt deeply, but they can be forgotten—whereas psychological harm can cause long term distress in unrealized ways, particularly when it comes to how an individual makes decisions that affect his life. Psychological harm is a more serious problem because one is not even aware it is happening at times. Emotional harm is typically obvious and apparent on the surface, but psychological harm can be hidden.

Difference between Emotional and Psychological Harm

Gaslighting is a popular term used today to refer to psychological abuse. It comes from the 1940s film Gaslight, in which a husband tries to convince his wife that she is insane even though she is not. Psychological harm typically occurs in this fashion: a person is pushed to accept something that is not true even though the individual is certain about what is true. Milgram’s study explored this to some extent in that participants were pushed to continue to cause pain to other “participants” who were actually actors: Milgram wanted to see how far people would go to commit some evil even when they knew the evil was wrong. His inspiration for the study was the story of average Germans accepting the Holocaust and going along with it during WW2. Milgram hypothesized that if ordinary people could do something evil based on the justification that they were simply following orders others could do so as well. He did not realize at the time that his own experiment could be a form of psychological abuse.

Psychological harm should be avoided whenever a person has authority over others because the foundation of the leader-follower relationship is trust. When that trust is abused or misused it undermines both the relationship and the authority of the individual who is supposed to be acting as a leader. Milgram violated the trust of participants with his study: it was not a deliberate violation but grew out of his own curiosity about the human condition and the desire to experiment with it. The experiment did reveal some startling conclusions about human nature, but the manner in which the experiment was conducted showed much also about the ways in which authority can be abused.

Emotional harm is bad enough and is typically decried in the public realm because it is akin to bullying: a bully might pick on another individual in order to make that person upset—the bully derives amusement from it. It causes emotional harm in that the individual struggles to regulate his own emotions as a result. It can also cause psychological harm, though, if the person begins to believe that what the bully says is true. That is where the real problems begin. A bully may play upon some truth and exaggerate for his own pleasure, and the victim may begin to think that whatever the issue is it is as great as the bully makes it seem. Thus, emotional harm morphs into psychological harm.

Recommendations

Leaders have to be mindful of the fact that followers naturally are going to trust and follow them based on the person’s established credentials and position of authority. Much of this same issue was seen in 2020 with the onslaught of fear mongering regarding COVID and lockdowns. Health authorities routinely went on major media stations to promote fear and paranoia, even though this goes against all established policies for how to handle a pandemic. One of the most established policies for public health is to reduce fear and paranoia through health education—but this was rarely seen in the 2020. In fact, if a medical authority tried to rationally or calmly discuss COVID he was kicked off from social media for spreading misinformation. It was as though the only way to discuss COVID was from the standpoint of fear and paranoia. It was an excellent example of psychological abuse in the public realm. Many people have suffered psychological harm as a result, and that harm will be dealt with for years to come.

Leaders must not be bullies: the must be calm, rational and adherents to truth. It is what makes authentic leaders so powerful in the workplace. They operate from a standpoint of truth, ethics, and openness. In an organization, an authentic leader can be the difference between having a great workplace culture and a miserable one where no one is happy or confident.