Hello!  I am Blackdog714's wife.

I am so pissed that I cannot see straight! My husband has said that there are members that live and work outside of the U.S. and can help me in a debate that I am involved with in my Global Business class.  I am going to just post the discussion and maybe some of you can help me.

1st post by Instructor:
Hi all -

We had a previous discussion on "Americanizing" and culture.  I see that in this discussion several students have talked about how we are not allowed to base our HR decisions on certain aspects and one student even said as long as we are a US company we must follow our laws.  I was wondering how do you all see this as fitting into our other discussions - the previous week's discussions on culture and "Americanizing"?  Are we not respecting other's cultures in this situation or trying to "Americanize" other regions?

my response:

I think we forget that not everywhere is the same and what may unethical or illegal here is not the same everywhere.  We have to follow what is current in the host country and understand that it is not illegal or unethical if your company has to do what it needs to work in another country and its culture and law.

Another classmate's response:

Well, Dolores, if that is the case, and everything is relative, what will be the deciding factor in what is globally ethical?  If is going to be based on global majority, then subjugation of women, abuse of homosexuals and promotion of child labor will be fine and the US will need to take these practices on to fit in. With differences between countries, what ethical standards will have to be considered non-negotiable when establishing global practices?

My response:

The reason I said we go by where the company is doing business was meant for certain decisions (such as contracts,leases, scheduling, job applicant choice, etc) but the process of globalization is involved in finding answers to these questions still.  I am definitely not advocating the abuse of homosexuals or subjugation of women, I am actually offended by your assumption that I would mean that.  I in no way stated that I would think it be ok for a company to condone such actions.  But strictly in the realm of our conversation that what we may hold as illegal and unethical may not be true in other countries such as contract law, labor requirements (hours, pay, age), and for a specific example that our belief that a person's sex should not be a factor for a position in a foreign country.  We cannot force what we believe down their throats but through planning and thought help them see why we believe certain things in our culture. I never intended for anyone to believe I meant US companies take part in all unethical behaviors but  for example, the topic of women not getting the position because she is a female may be prudent if she is going to a country that may inflict bodily harm and emotional stress to them. It is the company's responsibility for the safety of their employee and I think it would be irresponsible not to factor that issue in.

Her response:

As much as you find it offensive, issues of homosexuality, gender and moral belief structures fall directly into international labor law issues, as well as into the ability of businesses to hold successful negotiating stances. The values that you were offended at my questioning are some of those that the world finds offensive in the "thrust of Americanization." There is still the old maxim about "business being done on the golf course." Even if we follow the minimum surface rules you mentioned that involve basic regulations, the company will lose business if it doesn't fit in with the social structure of associate companies (and the market population) in the host country. So, do you turn down business with a company in a host-country if impressing their management team requires firing you female managers?  Do you willingly support a homosexual-bashing marketing campaign in a host-country if it is necessary to offset your company's "unfavorable" position of supporting "immoral lifestyles?"

My "civil rip her a new one" response:

Jodi, I am a 38 year old Puerto Rican who grew up in the South Bronx.  I certainly understand the issue of discrimination if because not only my sex but my race.  What I found offensive to be clear is that you were essentially calling me a homophobe and misogynist, which I am definitely far from.  In the pursuit to discuss such issues which are relevant to our discussion, I would recommend to be careful as to how you phrase them because I DID TAKE OFFENSE to them though you may have not directed them to me personally which you did not state in your reply.  I apologize to everyone in this class and Marie but I want to be clear as to why I was offended and NEVER in all my classes have I had to explain myself.

What do you think?  Am I right?  I was raised by a strong mother who was a NOW member married to a former Marine sgt, so I got the best of both worlds, I think. But I am so close to getting my Bachelor's in Business but I am so close to going over the line!  Thankfully she does not live near me.  Anyway, what do you think and can anyone give me some examples of working in another country and dealing with such issues besides your opinion.

You're headed in the right direction. Companies that have done business abroad throughout history learned very quickly to assimilate to their surroundings (culture etc) or else face enormous expense to do otherwise or worse...not be able to do business at all in said country.

"Convert" a society in another country just so you can do business there? Hilarious.

t

ps : for us simpletons, what the heck is "HR decisions"?

Human Resources?
Human Relations?

acronyms will be the death of us all

It appears to me your too easily offended. Maybe you need to realize if your going to stick your neck into a controversial conversation your going to hear things you dont like. Quit carrying this "I am a victim" mindset. I saw nothing directly insulting to you, quit acting like it is.

Quoted: You're headed in the right direction. Companies that have done business abroad throughout history learned very quickly to assimilate to their surroundings (culture etc) or else face enormous expense to do otherwise or worse...not be able to do business at all in said country. "Convert" a society in another country just so you can do business there? Hilarious. t ps : for us simpletons, what the heck is "HR decisions"? Human Resources? Human Relations? acronyms will be the death of us all

Human Resources

your ethics should not be relative, ie your ethics are not changed by the local customs and culture.

Your processes and methods may vary to suit the culture, but they should be based upon the underlying ethical considerations.

For example, let's say your company is opening a plant in India.

You have in the US an excellent plant manager who would be well-suited for the position at the new facility.

However, this guy is of a low caste. He wouldn't be able to command the respect of the lowest line workers from higher castes.

What should you do?

Quoted: It appears to me your too easily offended. Maybe you need to realize if your going to stick your neck into a controversial conversation your going to hear things you dont like. Quit carrying this "I am a victim" mindset. I saw nothing directly insulting to you, quit acting like it is.

Thanks for your opinion but this is not what I am asking for.  I am definitely in no way acting like a victim.  Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?  If you forgot to read the part where this took part in a class setting, if it was my peers I can handle my own and respond as such but I cannot stand people who assume what I am and stand for.  You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject?

I'd remind her that the post is about ethics in general, not homsexuality or homophobia. She is tryng to provoke you in to a debate of her personal issues. Stay focused on your class and not her or her crap.

Quoted: I'd remind her that the post is about ethics in general, not homsexuality or homophobia. She is tryng to provoke you in to a debate of her personal issues. Stay focused on your class and not her or her crap.

That is my whole issue, thank for putting that into the words I was looking for.  This has not been a single issue with this woman, she has been hounding me like this since the class started

Hi!  You must be Michele.  Blackdog714 posts pictures of you in the team forum and talks about you all the time.  You have the most beautiful blue eyes and curly red hair.  We're all jealous of him.  

Though, I didn't think you guys were married.    Why don't you wear a ring?

Quoted: Hi!  You must be Michele.  Blackdog714 posts pictures of you in the team forum and talks about you all the time.  You have the most beautiful blue eyes and curly red hair.  We're all jealous of him.   Though, I didn't think you guys were married.    Why don't you wear a ring?

BDog here  What?

 I'm just kidding.  Welcome to the site.

Funny Yahoo had no problem handing the Chinese government a list of citizens who visited certain web pages. The Chinese told Yahoo hand us the list, or you will never do business in our country again.

So yes, sometimes a company has to do things that it would never do in the United States in order to do business in foreign countries.

Quoted: I'd remind her that the post is about ethics in general, not homsexuality or homophobia. She is tryng to provoke you in to a debate of her personal issues. Stay focused on your class and not her or her crap.

Absolutely.  And by the way, nice to finally meet you, ma'am.

I do online college classes, and the message board text discussions can get a bit heated.  But the focus needs to stay on the subject:  Ethics in this case, which will always have a personal cant towards one side or another.  As a manager, your ethical considerations involve the stakeholders, the shareholders, and your personal resolve.  It's not about your views on homosexuality, which is the tangent she broached, it is about conflicts in personal versus professional ideals and the impact a weighted decision has on an organization and its stakeholders.  

You both brought valid points to the conversation, and I think you both just got a little sidetracked.  Her point that any "Americanization" can be taken too far and offend the host country is a matter of business, while you were debating structure.  That's what I read, anyway.

I'm sorry I can't give you examples from experience (I've never been involved with International Labor Laws outside of classroom discussion), but "ripping her" a good one isn't really taking into context that these issues can and do present themselves to executive professionals.  They're only extreme possibilities in the discussion you posted, but they do make for interesting debate.  

FWIW (For What It's Worth), I'd run her gauntlet if I were you and continue your line of questioning while doing some serious thought on how you'd react if one of these scenarios ever did you into a position of moral conflict in your business ventures.  In other words, make it fun - and learn from her as she learns from you.  I don't see either of you "winning" this, in my opinion, as there is nothing to subjective victory.

Best wishes to you, and congratulations on being so close to your degree!  

Quoted: Quoted: It appears to me your too easily offended. Maybe you need to realize if your going to stick your neck into a controversial conversation your going to hear things you dont like. Quit carrying this "I am a victim" mindset. I saw nothing directly insulting to you, quit acting like it is. Thanks for your opinion but this is not what I am asking for.  I am definitely in no way acting like a victim.  Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?  If you forgot to read the part where this took part in a class setting, if it was my peers I can handle my own and respond as such but I cannot stand people who assume what I am and stand for.  You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject?

You are easily offended. You also are a little abrasive (rude).

Quoted: Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?    You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject?

I think you need to examine yourself a little closer. You have some issues. You can't even get thru a post without contradicting yourself. I agree with Specop_007

Quoted: Quoted: Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?    You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject? I think you need to examine yourself a little closer. You have some issues. You can't even get thru a post without contradicting yourself. I agree with Specop_007

Last time I checked this was not a classroom setting...

Quoted: Quoted: It appears to me your too easily offended. Maybe you need to realize if your going to stick your neck into a controversial conversation your going to hear things you dont like. Quit carrying this "I am a victim" mindset. I saw nothing directly insulting to you, quit acting like it is. Thanks for your opinion but this is not what I am asking for.  I am definitely in no way acting like a victim.  Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?  If you forgot to read the part where this took part in a class setting, if it was my peers I can handle my own and respond as such but I cannot stand people who assume what I am and stand for.  You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject?

I have to agree a little with him though.  The other poster posited some questions that are relevant to the discussion and you took them to be a direct insult to you when it does not appear that was the case.  Now, you are also right that this person seems to have a strange hangup on homosexual and women's rights in other countries and I think that is also taking the debate off track (which you duly recognized).

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?    You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject? I think you need to examine yourself a little closer. You have some issues. You can't even get thru a post without contradicting yourself. I agree with Specop_007 Last time I checked this was not a classroom setting...

Doesn't matter at all. You have a problem and it is obvious in every post you have made in this thread. We have a code of conduct here as well. You have already violated it by calling someone an ass.

Moving right along...

Bring up Richard Gere as an example.  Doing volunteer charity work one second, being burned in effigy the next, all for doing what we see as harmless here.

What's more important, "winning" this argument with some random internet woman or successfully completing your online course with a minimum of drama and angst?  Will ignoring this little misunderstanding cost you with your class?  I'm going to guess that it won't, but who knows.  

If you worry about every powerless person on the internet that disagrees with you, these sorts of discussion groups (both the class and the Arfcom) will result in nothing but frustration and anger.  Figure out what you're looking to get out of either, turn up your bullshit filter, and keep your eye on the prize.

My opinion (worth what you paid for it):

The other person might have taken the topic slightly off course, but not really - since the issues are legitimate labour issues, even if not the most important or widespread for U.S. companies to deal with in foreign countries.  Still, as examples, they are certainly legitimate.

You WAY over-reacted, first by uneccessarily pointing out that you are offended (instead of staying on topic and arguing the facts), and then by taking the entire conversation off track with a defensive rant, including immaterial information about your background.


Not trying to attack you, just providing my opinion as part of the feedback I believe you were asking for.


ETA: Your overly defensive response to Specop_007's feedback (which you asked for), with a personal insult thrown in - seems to illustrate the same pattern.  You take things personally, and you over-react.  If you want to success in a business/management setting, my advice is to become better at self-monitoring that, and managing your communication style better.

Quoted: your ethics should not be relative, ie your ethics are not changed by the local customs and culture. Your processes and methods may vary to suit the culture, but they should be based upon the underlying ethical considerations. For example, let's say your company is opening a plant in India. You have in the US an excellent plant manager who would be well-suited for the position at the new facility. However, this guy is of a low caste. He wouldn't be able to command the respect of the lowest line workers from higher castes. What should you do?

Let him fire the first 5 higher caste idiots that speak back to him without question.  Publically.

The other higher caste idiots will fall right in line to keep their jobs.

"Americanizing" is such a misnomer.  The should be replaced by what it is: capitalism.  And yes, as "we" venture into foreign markets, the appeals of capitalism have a "converting" effect.  Is this ethical!?

My question:  what ever happened to plain profiteering?  Why do "we" need to have ethics about venturing into foreign markets?  This is capitalism...  individual businesses behave according to their profit-driven needs.  What is ethical for one is unethical for another.  I fire all the females in my management team, the other guy hires only 6-year-old children to make his shoes, and the next owner hires only women.

Business ethics = make your own decisions.

Americanizing = capitalism at work.

Unethical = no such thing (not in global capitalism, anyway).

Please, also, do not confuse "ethics" and "ethical" with "good," "moral," "correct," or "intelligent."  Companies must mind a market that is beyond dynamic.  Dolphin-free tuna was neither ethical or moral, it was capitalism at work, it was intelligent, and, looking back, correct, particularly for the company maintaining it's market share.

I too agree with Specop_007. I think you took personal offense where none was intended. You were argueing from the legal perspective and your classmates were argueing from the moral and ethical perspective. Both sides are right, which goes to the essence of "The Clash of Civilations". That is why Exxon needs a building full of lawyers to negoiate the minefield of international law vs. local customs.

I think Condi Rice is the epitome of a real world example of this dilemma. A black female some think is of nontraditional sexual orientation speaking for the most powerful country. When she sits down with the King of Saudia Arabia, it sends a powerful message of who we are and what we stand for. The King is forced to deal with it. But could a weak country afford to make that same statement? Could you send her to represent your small company in neogations in an Arab country. Legally and morally, yes. But practally, maybe not a good idea.

Our soldiers in Iraq deal with this daily. Pat down a Muslim woman in a burka for weapons and they have committed a deadly offense to her watching husband.

This whole debate is a grey area that is still being defined. It will fall to people of your generation to resolve these conflicts. Hopefully, it can be done peacefully.
Good Luck!


pa-15

Sounds to me like the other person asked a legitimate question that might be slightly off-topic and possibly even trollish, and you flipped out over it.

Why are you so offended at the vague implication that someone might think that you are advocating the abuse of homosexuals or the subjugation of women? I've found quite a bit of truth in the statement that people don't get offended when lies are told about them - they get offended when the truth is told about them.

Whatever you believe, be confident and proud of it. If someone accuses you of something that isn't true, just go on being who you are, and it will be clear to everyone what you really believe and that the other person is making wild accusations to deflect criticism of his own poor arguments. Responding to those accusations, especially in a shrill, panicky tone, makes it look as if you really do believe that but feel guilty about it and don't want people to know, in addition to deflecting the argument to be about your beliefs rather then the topic at hand.

Treatment of homosexuals and women is a hot-button issue here, but it's something that has to be dealt with if a company wants to have a serious presence overseas. You have to understand that other cultures have very different priorities from ours. You'll never be able to do business if you don't respect their customs, culture, and hot-button issues. See the caste system in India, government censorship in China, subjugation of women in Saudi, etc.

Quoted: Quoted: It appears to me your too easily offended. Maybe you need to realize if your going to stick your neck into a controversial conversation your going to hear things you dont like. Quit carrying this "I am a victim" mindset. I saw nothing directly insulting to you, quit acting like it is. Thanks for your opinion but this is not what I am asking for.  I am definitely in no way acting like a victim.  Or do you believe that to be part of an intelligent debate involves insulting people to make you feel superior?  If you forgot to read the part where this took part in a class setting, if it was my peers I can handle my own and respond as such but I cannot stand people who assume what I am and stand for.  You assume and make an ass of yourself.  Anything constructive you can contribute in terms of the actual subject?

Jodi, I am a 38 year old Puerto Rican who grew up in the South Bronx. I certainly understand the issue of discrimination if because not only my sex but my race. What I found offensive to be clear is that you were essentially calling me a homophobe and misogynist, which I am definitely far from.

Please show me where they were calling you a homophobe or misogynist. I didnt see it.

Quoted: Quoted: your ethics should not be relative, ie your ethics are not changed by the local customs and culture. Your processes and methods may vary to suit the culture, but they should be based upon the underlying ethical considerations. For example, let's say your company is opening a plant in India. You have in the US an excellent plant manager who would be well-suited for the position at the new facility. However, this guy is of a low caste. He wouldn't be able to command the respect of the lowest line workers from higher castes. What should you do? Let him fire the first 5 higher caste idiots that speak back to him without question.  Publically. The other higher caste idiots will fall right in line to keep their jobs.

I don't know that much about India, but I doubt this will go well. This isn't some game they dreamed up in a bar and play for kicks. It is an integral part of their culture for thousands of years. If you don't respect it, you will be the one who finds it impossible to do business.

What I found offensive to be clear is that you were essentially calling me a homophobe and misogynist

Bullshit.

You didn't.

She is trying to force you into a defense.

She is not having a discussion, she is attacking you with false accusations.

  Companies here and abroad have one single common goal,
and that is to generate as much wealth as possible from the
labor force and or natural resources.  

 

Mrs BlackDog714 = Really wrong  

Quoted: Please show me where they were calling you a homophobe or misogynist. I didnt see it.

Hey guys, its me.  My wife is at work right now, however some are being overly critical.  This is my wife you guys are talking to.  Some, should really show the respect that would be given to their wives if the situation was reversed.  That being said, I did tell her that she might get this reaction if she didnt post the WHOLE story.

This whole thing started out with a simple question that I will paraphrase here:

You have a job opening for an Area President for your corporation in the Middle East.  Your 2 prime candidates both have the same skill set however one is a woman and one is a man.  The man has a family and the woman is single.  The man is a slow starter but really encompasses the job at hand.  The woman is known to be VERY aggressive and a real go getter.  Which do you send?

When discussing this with me, I explained that it would  really depend on the country we are talking about.  Dubai or Saudi maybe send the woman, someplace else hell no.  I have heard stories of female commanders in the ME that had to have their XO's issue orders to locals because they would be rejected or simply ignored if they were given by the female commander.  I also believe the phrase "very aggressive" wouldn't bode well for a female living and working in the ME.  I do believe the company would have a responsibility to their employee to not let them get kidnapped, raped and beheaded and that by sending a "strong" woman into a place like that might be disadvantageous for both the employee and the company.


Please keep this respectful.  I'll talk with her about the "ass" thing.  Being female and a New Yorker, she does let the emotion go free sometimes

Quoted: It appears to me your too easily offended. Maybe you need to realize if your going to stick your neck into a controversial conversation your going to hear things you dont like. Quit carrying this "I am a victim" mindset. I saw nothing directly insulting to you, quit acting like it is.

In online class discussions you are required to participate.  It is not optional.

Quoted: Hi!  You must be Michele.  Blackdog714 posts pictures of you in the team forum and talks about you all the time.  You have the most beautiful blue eyes and curly red hair.  We're all jealous of him.   Though, I didn't think you guys were married.    Why don't you wear a ring?

Darn I gotta re-up my membership

     

Quoted: You're headed in the right direction. Companies that have done business abroad throughout history learned very quickly to assimilate to their surroundings (culture etc) or else face enormous expense to do otherwise or worse...not be able to do business at all in said country. "Convert" a society in another country just so you can do business there? Hilarious. t ps : for us simpletons, what the heck is "HR decisions"? Human Resources? Human Relations? acronyms will be the death of us all

For those not familiar with HR let me explain. HR is the department you only want to see once. (when your hired) and even then you wish they did not have that department. HR is generally the place in the office where you put all the people that contribute nothing but hassle to the hard working employees. In short, HR is the devil.

Quoted:

??

Sorry BD.  Marked the thread to come back to later.  

I just started back with distance learning classes to finish a BA degree and am curious to follow this.  Procrastinating on a paper due today for an entreprenuer class.  Business Plan thesis was submitted the day before the VT shooting on the expansion of a gun shop to begin manufacturing suppressors.  Female prof response was surprisingly positive on Tue.  

Hijack over.  Carry on.  

Quoted: Sorry BD.  Marked the thread to come back to later.   I just started back with distance learning classes to finish a BA degree and am curious to follow this.  Procrastinating on a paper due today for an entreprenuer class.  Business Plan thesis was submitted the day before the VT shooting on the expansion of a gun shop to begin manufacturing suppressors.  Female prof response was surprisingly positive on Tue.   Hijack over.  Carry on.

Hard to believe in this day and age...  

I don't think she was accusing you of being homophobic, as much as I think she was relating that homosexuality is still an "iffy" subject at best in Amercia, and that many countries have accepted it, or at least tolerate it more openly. Then again, you can get stoned (not , ) for practicing it as well.

And consider that many countries do relegate a "2nd class" stutus to women.

I think her question

Do you willingly support a homosexual-bashing marketing campaign in a host-country if it is necessary to offset your company's "unfavorable" position of supporting "immoral lifestyles?"

was rhetorical, or at least in the context of the discussion, rather than a personal attack.

JMHO

Our company handbook tells us that we are allowed to bribe foreign officials in order to speed up certain acts (getting phones installed, setting up offices, etc.). We even have an expense report specifically for these "service" bribes.

I don't really have a problem with it. When in Rome...

Remember this...  Its simple and it works.

When in Rome...  DO AS THE ROMANS!