BMAL 570 Forgiveness
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Liberty University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
570
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by MinisterRockMagpie32
Running head: FORGIVENESS
1
Forgiveness
BMAL 570
Liberty University
FORGIVENESS
2
The article of Sam and John could represent any two people in any organization.
More
often than not there are misunderstandings, disagreements, and an unwillingness to admit or to
relent to the possibility the opposition may be right and just in their actions.
In the case of John
and Sam, each individual thought there was nothing wrong with what they were doing.
Sam was
furious at the thought of being reprimanded for doing what others before him had done.
To
further exacerbate the situation, John was the “new guy” and did not fully understand the way
things worked and operated.
Interestingly, Sam, believing he was right, failed to see John’s
position of enforcing or adhering to company policy.
Sam professed he was just doing his job
and it was common practice for drivers to stop, leave the truck running, and get a snack (Hess, &
Cameron, 2006, p. 174).
John believed in following rules, regulations, and policy and felt that it was his
responsibility to enforce them.
In John’s zealous endeavor to establish himself within the
organization he failed to consider the consequences of his actions.
As a result, he undermined
the leadership of other departments and portrayed the members as being rogue.
On the other
hand, Sam failed to consider the consequences of relaxing the standards and failed to enforce
policy.
Sam’s failure only encouraged and fostered a lackadaisical and lethargic attitude towards
policy and resulted in lowering established standards.
This incident has another dimension and sets the stage for future interaction.
According
to Wallace, attitudes are oppositional stances that induce friction into relationships.
This is a way
of standing up for oneself and establishing boundaries (Wallace, 2019 p. 548-549).
Again, John
believed he was enforcing company policy by reprimanding Sam for leaving his truck
unattended and Sam believed he was justified in filing a grievance against John for singling him
out for something that was common practice.
In an article on understanding forgiveness, the
FORGIVENESS
3
author asserts that the most common problem that prevents overcoming forgiveness is the
negative reactive attitudes or emotions that a victim harbors towards the other (Slowikowski,
2020, p. 58).
Forgiveness is a motivational process and a willed change of heart (Tsarenko,
Strizhakova, & Otnes, 2019, p. 140).
If individuals refuse to change, resentment, hatred, anger,
and distrust will continue to flourish, and forgiveness will never be accomplished.
“Get rid of all
bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and
compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you”
(Ephesians 4: 31-32 NIV). Our reading of LTL Trucking revealed that John and Sam were able to
set their differences aside.
They made a conscious attempt to refrain from acting as individuals
and segregated departments.
They realized neither department was more important than the
other and that both were needed for the organization to remain successful.
This professional
display of leadership between former rivals transcends within the organization and results in
subordinates emulating their leaders.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
FORGIVENESS
4
References
Hess, E., & Cameron, K. (Eds.). (2006).
Leading with Values
: Positivity, Virtue and High
Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511753770
Slowikowski, A. (2020). Crossroads of Forgiveness: A Transcendent Understanding of
Forgiveness in Kierkegaard’s Religious Writings and Immanent Account of Forgiveness
in Contemporary Secular and Christian Ethics.
International Journal for Philosophy of
Religion
, 87(1), 55-80.
Tsarenko, Y., Strizhakova, Y., & Otnes, C. C. (2019). Reclaiming the Future: Understanding
Customer Forgiveness of Service Transgressions.
Journal of Service Research
:
JSR, 22(2), 139-155.
Wallace, R. J. (2019). Trust, Anger, Resentment, Forgiveness: On Blame and Its
Reasons.
European Journal of Philosophy
, 27(3), 537-551.