b. Employee turnover in an organization can be functional.
c. Some conflict in an organization is good.
d. Whistle-blowers do more harm than good for an organization.
e. An employer has a responsibility to provide every employee with an interesting and
challenging job.
f. Everyone should register to vote.
g. Organizations should require all employees to undergo regular drug tests.
h. Individuals who have majored in business or economics make better employees than
those who have majored in history or English.
i. The place where you get your college degree is more important in determining your
career success than what you learn while you’re there.
j. It’s unethical for a manager to purposely distort communications to get a favorable
outcome.
11-9. Party B is to choose a position on this topic (for example, arguing against the view “some
conflict in an organization is good”). Party A now must automatically take the opposite
position. The two parties have 10 minutes in which to debate their topic. The catch is that the
individuals can only communicate verbally. They may not use gestures, facial movements,
body movements, or any other nonverbal communication. It may help for each party to sit on
his or her hands to remind them of their restrictions and to maintain an expressionless look.
11-10. After the debate is over, form groups of six to eight and spend 15 minutes discussing the
following:
a. How effective was communication during these debates?
b. What barriers to communication existed?
c. What purposes does nonverbal communication serve?
d. Relate the lessons learned in this exercise to problems that might occur when
communicating on the telephone or through e-mail.
Ethical Dilemma
BYOD
This exercise contributes to:
Learning Objectives: Contrast oral, written, and nonverbal communication; Identify common barriers to
effective communication
Learning Outcome: Describe the factors influencing effective communication in organizations
AACSB: Ethical understanding and reasoning; Written and oral communication; Reflective thinking
“What’s your cell phone number? Good, I’ll call you about the meeting.” If you’re like many people in the
world who have used a smartphone for years, or one of the 1.3 billion people who bought one recently,
chances are you’ve used it for work. In fact, your employer may have even invited—or asked—you to use
your smartphone, tablet, or laptop in your job. Such is the bring-your-own-device (BYOD) trend, which
started out of friendly convenience but now carries major ethical issues. For instance:
• Did you know your employer can wipe your personal devices clean? Remotely? With no warning? It
happens, and not just at the 21 percent of organizations that erase devices when employees are terminated.
Any time an organization has a privacy concern, it may wipe all devices clean to prevent a further breach of
its cyber-defenses. Health-care consultant Michael Irvin lost his personal e-mail accounts, apps, music,
contacts, and photos suddenly one day, leaving his multi-use iPhone “like it came straight from the
factory.” Another individual lost pictures of a relative who had died.
• Is your device part of your employment contract, either explicitly or by understanding? Who pays for the
device? Well, you did, and you continue to pay for the service. If the device breaks, then … who pays for
the replacement device? Can you lose your job if you can’t afford the device and service?
• Can you use your device for all work-related communications? The cloud has brought opportunities for
people to send classified work information anywhere, anytime. Organizations are concerned about what
social media, collaboration, and file-sharing applications are in use, which is fair, but some policies can
limit how you use your own device.
• Once you use your personal device for work, where are the boundaries between work and home life?
Research indicates that intensive smartphone users, for instance, need to disengage in their off-hours to