CAN YOU DO THIS FOR ME?
Discussion Board Forum 1: Replies
Reply Prompt: For your replies, respond to 2 classmates, identifying at least 1 strength and 1 weakness in their reasoning, supported by scholarly sources, the text, and biblical principles. You may to reply to any of the thread responses, even if they are different than the thread prompt you chose.
Submit your replies by 10:59 p.m. (CST) on Sunday.
You are required to reply to 2 other classmates’ threads; each reply must be 250–300 words. Each reply must include at least 2 scholarly sources (published within the last 5 years) in addition to the course textbook and relevant biblical integration. All citations and references must be in current APA format.
FIRST THREAD TO RESPOND TO
Amy Dill: DB #1
In a world that is quick to state discrimination has taken place, there is a new discrimination emerging (i.e. reverse discrimination). Is this form of discrimination really discrimination? What diversity practices would you put in place to prevent any kind of discrimination?
The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution notes that States must consider all citizens to be entitled to the same life, liberty, and property, as well as protection by the law, without consideration of various demographic traits such as race, age, etc. (Noe, Hollenback, Gerhart, & Wright, 2017, p. 104). This amendment is viewed as one that is directly related to protection from discrimination, specifically in regards to race. Noe, et al. (2017) note that this amendment was passed shortly after the Civil War and was initially an attempt to curtail discrimination against black citizens, however as time has passed this intent has been expanded to other racial groups including white citizens who allege reverse discrimination (p. 104). Craig & Richeson (2017) explain that there is currently a shift in demographics within the United States and that it is predicted that by mid-century the U.S. population will be comprised of less than 50% white Americans (p. 1/20). With this increased change in the racial makeup of the population it is certainly possible that reverse discrimination can and may exist both now and in the future.
There are three theories of discrimination that legal scholars have identified including that of disparate treatment which is when “individuals in similar situations are treated differently and the different treatment is based on the individual’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability status” (Noe, et al., 2017, p. 114). The concept of reverse discrimination would fall into this category or theory of discrimination based upon the fact that an individual is alleging discrimination based upon race. If/when an employer uses a racial quota when considering applicants for positions and hires an applicant who is less qualified for the position versus a more qualified applicant based upon their race, this could be considered reverse discrimination if the more qualified applicant were white. In a recent case involving several white firefighters and the New Haven Fire Department, the Supreme Court ruled that the white firefighters had been victims of reverse discrimination when their promotion test scores were discounted because they would have received promotions that their peer black firefighters would not receive based upon their results on the same promotion test (Craig & Richeson, 2017 p. 1/21).
The first action that I would put in place to prevent discrimination would be to obtain a commitment from the CEO of the company to a strict no discrimination policy, which would in turn affect the culture of the entire company and the way it views discrimination. Ng & Sears (2018) discuss that CEOs who have a commitment to diversity tend to exhibit behaviors that are positive in relation to diversity, ranging from “communicating their personal commitment to diversity to creating employee resource groups and setting diversity goals for their managers” (p. 3). The culture would be directly impacted by this diversity plan that excludes discrimination.
Furthermore, I would incorporate diverse, nondiscriminatory activities in recruitment for open positions coupled with applicant testing to gauge the best candidate for a position regardless of race, religion, etc. One way to do this would be to utilize an HRIS system that assigns an applicant a random applicant number that would be unknown in the evaluation process of the testing results. The applicants would be ranked in order of the highest scores down and the top candidates would be identified based upon that criteria. The HRIS system could then compile additional scoring based on years of applicable experience and education. A final score would then be generated to identify the top candidates to be interviewed. This should alleviate any potential for discrimination in the selection of the top applicants to interview. The HRIS system generated scoring would be valid support for any EEOC inquiry that might allege discrimination in the applicant scoring process.
Galatians 3:28 (NIV) states that “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This is one of the most important Biblical principles that could be applied when considering the topic of discrimination. Our Lord is one that teaches to love all equally, the most nondiscriminatory practice that one could adopt. This is clearly stated in Galatians 5:14 (NIV) in which we are taught “For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: Love your neighbor as yourself.” By applying this Biblical principle, discrimination would certainly be absent from the policy that would be adopted and followed.
Craig, M.A., & Richeson, J.A. (2017). Information about the US racial demographic shift triggers concern about anti-white discrimination among the prospective white “minority”. PLoS One, 12(9), e0185389. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185389
Ng, E. S. & Sears, G. J. (2018). Walking the talk on diversity: CEO beliefs, moral values, and the implementation of workplace diversity practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-14. doi:10.1007/s10551-018-4051-7.
Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. (2017). Human Resource Management: Gaining a Competitive Advantage. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Education.
SECOND REPLY TO RESPOND TO
DB Forum 1
2. Do you believe that managers should be given more autonomy to make personnel decisions such as hiring, appraising, and compensating subordinates, or do you believe that managers should be given less autonomy to make such decisions? Explain and substantiate your reasoning.
Managers are mostly familiar with the responsibilities and requirements that a job entails to allow good judgement on hiring and performance (Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright, 2017), since they have the ability to assess candidates on the level of technical expertise concerning the position to be filled. In a rapidly changing environment, labor force decisions such as hiring, appraising, and compensating subordinates are very important task to accomplish and should be given the needed attention by involving the right individuals that can make the best decisions. With that said, a manager with a technical background of the position in question might be a better candidate to screen applications than a Human Resource personnel. To achieve motivated and effective workforce, managers should have the ability to make personnel decisions, provide constructive feedback and determine compensation for the members of their teams. These decisions can have an effect on the organization’s culture, job satisfaction, and as a result could impact productivity.
Due to constant business environmental changes and increased technology, managers are becoming more comfortable with the system and are given control over transactions such as approving bonuses, reviewing resumes for posted jobs, and evaluating potential job candidates. With this new responsibility for managers, there is the need to demonstrate fairness across board. Treating employees fairly is crucial and a manager having less than total autonomy is another way achieving fairness in the working environment. However, it is worth mentioning the impact of giving autonomy to managers, as they are able to develop training plans that fit the needs of the overall organization and team. They also could help develop their employees skills and provide direct feedback to impact and promote those team members in a personal and meaningful way. Thus, in the null shell using managers own judgement, is a more consistent regression model, which could improve the quality of hiring for management in the organization. The model proposed is easy to implement and can remove erratic component in hiring decisions for all (Vrat, & Sangwan, 2016).
Despite the many advantages in encouraging managers to lead the way in hiring, appraising, and compensation, some managers lack the skill set to make right recruitment choices and can be bias, which could cost the business financial lost. Some managers tend to make such personnel decisions against Human Resource recommendations. A Human Resource article about discretion of hiring stated that, when faced with similar applicant pools, it was found that managers who hired against test recommendations ended up with worse average hires. This points to the fact that managers often overrule test recommendations because they are biased or mistaken, and not necessarily due to the fact that they have superior and technical knowledge (Hoffman, Kahn, & Li, 2018).
When it comes to compensation, managers might not be the best resource to make such decisions due to the potential of favoring other employees over others. Often times, managers may struggle with the ability of treating every employee equally. It is uncommon to find managers tend to relate better with associates who bear the same personality type as them and could impact their perception over such employees and ultimately impact compensation as well. In analyzing this further, the impact of performance-based pay on the tendency for managers to make economically desirable choices and use management tools that help them consider how their emotions factor into decision-making, and the use of brain activity to confirm that emotions impact decisions despite compensation (Farrell, Goh, Kahle, Shackell, & White, 2017).
In conclusion, rapid environmental changes and the need for competitive advantage makes it a smart ideal to empower managers to take charge of hiring, appraising and even recommend compensation. This could promote growth and competition among employees, at the same time caution needs to be applied in order to ensure fairness for all employees. Thus, as Christian leaders, the word of God teaches us to be just and fair in all dealings. “Blessed are they who observe justice, who do righteousness at all times” Psalm 106:3, (English Standard Version).
Bol, J. C., Hecht, G., & Smith, S. D. (2015). Managers’ discretionary adjustments: The influence of uncontrollable events and compensation interdependence. Contemporary Accounting Research/Recherché Comptable Contemporaine,32(1), 139–159.
Farrell, A., Oon Soo Goh, J., Kahle, R., Shackell, M., & White, B. (2017). When managers make emotional business decisions: Will they be more successful, or will they lose track of what’s good for the organization? Strategic Finance, 46–53.
Hoffman, M., Kahn, L. B., & Li, D. (2018). Discretion in hiring. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(2), 765–800.https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/https://academic.oup.com/qje/issue
Noe, R.A., Hollenbeck, J.R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P.M. (2017) Human resource management: Gaining a competitive advantage (10th edition) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Vrat, P., & Sangwan, S. (2016). Employability models for consistency in quality of hiring decisions: A Context of MBA Graduates. Vision (09722629), 20(4), 323–330. https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1177/0972262916668746