Question 1a The company proposes launching Catalisten, an AI-based software that could diagnose individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) by analysing their speech. However, Catalisten has a high false-positive rate for women which may lead such patients to be prescribed unnecessary medication and be negatively affected in terms of emotions, social interactions and legal rights. Taylor wants to convince Darnell, her chief product officer, to delay the product launch date which is just three weeks away. Appraise the four (4) approaches to ethical reasoning (Table 5.1 of the textbook) that Taylor can use to justify the proposed delay on the basis that it would not be ethical to launch without first addressing the gender bias. Please limit your answer to no more than 600 words and indicate the word count at the end of your answer. Question 1b Before contacting Darnell, Taylor would like to get Eduardo's support to delay the company's launch of its AI-enabled product, Catalisten. Though Eduardo earlier told Taylor to let the issue (regarding high false positive rates for female patients) go, she wants to persuade him so that they can present a united front as the development team. The Harvard Program on Negotiation summarised several research studies on ways to build trust (see Box 9.2 of the Textbook). Formulate three (3) ways in which Taylor can build and gain Eduardo's trust. Please limit your answer to no more than 400 words and indicate the word count at the end of your answer. To help with question 1A End-results Rightness of an action is determined by considering consequences Duty ethics Rightness of an action is determined by considering obligations to apply universal standards and principles. Social contract ethics Rightness of an action is determined by the customs and norms of a community Personalistic ethics Rightness of an action is determined by one's conscience. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) John Stuart Mill 1806-1873) One must consider all likely consequences. •Actions are more right if they promote more happiness, more wrong if they produce unhappiness Happiness is defined as presence of pleasure and absence of pain Promotion of happiness is generally the ultimate aim Collective happiness of all concemedi the goal Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) J. Martin Buber (1878-1965) How does one define happiness. pleasure, or unity? How does one measure happiness pleasure, or unity? How does one trade-off between short-term and long-term happiness? If actions create happiness for 90% of the world and misery for the other 10%, are they still ethical? Human conduct should be guided by primary By what authority do we accept particular moral principles, or "oughts." Individuals should stand on their principles and restrain themselves by rules. The ultimate good is a life of virtue (acting on principles) rather than pleasure We should not adjust moral law to fit our actions, but adjust our actions to fit moral law rules or the "goodness" of those rules? -What rule do we follow when rules conflict? How do we adapt general rules to fit specific situations? How do rules change as drcumstances change? -What happens when good rules produce bad consequences? .Are there rules without any exceptions? .People must function in a social, community How do we determine the general wil? context to survive .Communities become "moral bodies" for determining ground rules. Duty and obligation bind the community and the individual to each other What is best for the common good determines the ultimate standard. Laws are important, but morality determines the laws and standards for right and wrong .Locus of truth is found in human existence. Conscience within each person calls them to fulfill their humanness and to decide between right and wrong. Personal decision rules are the ultimate standards What is meant by the "common good"? .What do we do with independent thinkers who challenge the morality of the exist ing social order jeg. Jefferson, Gandh Martin Luther King? Can a state be corrupt and its people still be "moral" (eg, Nan Germany? How could we justify ethics other than by saying. "It felt like the right thing to do"? How could we achieve a collective definition of what is ethical if individuals disagreed? How could we achieve cohesiveness and This is table 9.2, this to help with 1B BOX 9.2 Building Trust at the Negotiation Table The Program on Negotiation has summarized a number of research studies on ways to build trust at the negotiation table: 1. Learn what you can about your counterpart. Investigate their reputation with others. Getting reputational information from even one source can help, and it is even more helpful if you can triangulate the information from several people who know the individual. 2. Get to know the person before you formally negotiate. In Western culture, it is much more likely that parties negotiate and then get to know each other. However, as we point out in Chapter 16, in many cultures, negotiators spend considerable time getting to know each other before they negotiate. This strategy is recommended whether one has dealt with the other negotiator before or not. If one has not dealt with the other before, a preliminary session is useful coffee or a shared meal in which you learn a bit about each other's background, family, hobbies, etc. The more commonalities or linkages that can be established, the more they will create the groundwork for trust. In contrast, if one does know the other party, this time period can be used for catching up with each other. Researcher Janice Nadler (2004) found that just five minutes of getting- to-know-you conversation considerably increased cooperation, information sharing, and trust development in a subsequent negotiation. 3. Proceed with caution on the other's trustworthiness. Even if you believe that you can trust the other, you should use safeguards to protect yourself against errors of judgment. Various cognitive biases (see Chapter 6) contribute to significant overconfidence in the other's trustworthiness. As this section is being written, President Donald Trump has had several negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in which multiple promises were made by President Un, but it has been difficult to show evidence that the North Koreans intend to keep those commitments. 4. Win the other's trust. Learn as much as you can about the other party's history, interests, and culture. Make sure the other understands the "cost" of a major concession on your part and that you don't underestimate the value of a concession on his part. 5. Listen to and acknowledge the other's concerns. Listening and acknowledging the other party creates feelings of fairness which have a strong impact on trust development and overall satisfaction with the negotiation deal. Pay particular attention to areas of concern she is emotional about-acknowledging emotion may be one of the most important parts of effective listening as a vehicle for building trust. Source: Adapted from "Negotiating Skills for Trust Building at the Negotiation Table," Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School Newsletter, January 1, 2018.

Question 1a The company proposes launching Catalisten, an AI-based software that could diagnose individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) by analysing their speech. However, Catalisten has a high false-positive rate for women which may lead such patients to be prescribed unnecessary medication and be negatively affected in terms of emotions, social interactions and legal rights. Taylor wants to convince Darnell, her chief product officer, to delay the product launch date which is just three weeks away. Appraise the four (4) approaches to ethical reasoning (Table 5.1 of the textbook) that Taylor can use to justify the proposed delay on the basis that it would not be ethical to launch without first addressing the gender bias. Please limit your answer to no more than 600 words and indicate the word count at the end of your answer. Question 1b Before contacting Darnell, Taylor would like to get Eduardo's support to delay the company's launch of its AI-enabled product, Catalisten. Though Eduardo earlier told Taylor to let the issue (regarding high false positive rates for female patients) go, she wants to persuade him so that they can present a united front as the development team. The Harvard Program on Negotiation summarised several research studies on ways to build trust (see Box 9.2 of the Textbook). Formulate three (3) ways in which Taylor can build and gain Eduardo's trust. Please limit your answer to no more than 400 words and indicate the word count at the end of your answer. To help with question 1A End-results Rightness of an action is determined by considering consequences Duty ethics Rightness of an action is determined by considering obligations to apply universal standards and principles. Social contract ethics Rightness of an action is determined by the customs and norms of a community Personalistic ethics Rightness of an action is determined by one's conscience. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) John Stuart Mill 1806-1873) One must consider all likely consequences. •Actions are more right if they promote more happiness, more wrong if they produce unhappiness Happiness is defined as presence of pleasure and absence of pain Promotion of happiness is generally the ultimate aim Collective happiness of all concemedi the goal Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) J. Martin Buber (1878-1965) How does one define happiness. pleasure, or unity? How does one measure happiness pleasure, or unity? How does one trade-off between short-term and long-term happiness? If actions create happiness for 90% of the world and misery for the other 10%, are they still ethical? Human conduct should be guided by primary By what authority do we accept particular moral principles, or "oughts." Individuals should stand on their principles and restrain themselves by rules. The ultimate good is a life of virtue (acting on principles) rather than pleasure We should not adjust moral law to fit our actions, but adjust our actions to fit moral law rules or the "goodness" of those rules? -What rule do we follow when rules conflict? How do we adapt general rules to fit specific situations? How do rules change as drcumstances change? -What happens when good rules produce bad consequences? .Are there rules without any exceptions? .People must function in a social, community How do we determine the general wil? context to survive .Communities become "moral bodies" for determining ground rules. Duty and obligation bind the community and the individual to each other What is best for the common good determines the ultimate standard. Laws are important, but morality determines the laws and standards for right and wrong .Locus of truth is found in human existence. Conscience within each person calls them to fulfill their humanness and to decide between right and wrong. Personal decision rules are the ultimate standards What is meant by the "common good"? .What do we do with independent thinkers who challenge the morality of the exist ing social order jeg. Jefferson, Gandh Martin Luther King? Can a state be corrupt and its people still be "moral" (eg, Nan Germany? How could we justify ethics other than by saying. "It felt like the right thing to do"? How could we achieve a collective definition of what is ethical if individuals disagreed? How could we achieve cohesiveness and This is table 9.2, this to help with 1B BOX 9.2 Building Trust at the Negotiation Table The Program on Negotiation has summarized a number of research studies on ways to build trust at the negotiation table: 1. Learn what you can about your counterpart. Investigate their reputation with others. Getting reputational information from even one source can help, and it is even more helpful if you can triangulate the information from several people who know the individual. 2. Get to know the person before you formally negotiate. In Western culture, it is much more likely that parties negotiate and then get to know each other. However, as we point out in Chapter 16, in many cultures, negotiators spend considerable time getting to know each other before they negotiate. This strategy is recommended whether one has dealt with the other negotiator before or not. If one has not dealt with the other before, a preliminary session is useful coffee or a shared meal in which you learn a bit about each other's background, family, hobbies, etc. The more commonalities or linkages that can be established, the more they will create the groundwork for trust. In contrast, if one does know the other party, this time period can be used for catching up with each other. Researcher Janice Nadler (2004) found that just five minutes of getting- to-know-you conversation considerably increased cooperation, information sharing, and trust development in a subsequent negotiation. 3. Proceed with caution on the other's trustworthiness. Even if you believe that you can trust the other, you should use safeguards to protect yourself against errors of judgment. Various cognitive biases (see Chapter 6) contribute to significant overconfidence in the other's trustworthiness. As this section is being written, President Donald Trump has had several negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in which multiple promises were made by President Un, but it has been difficult to show evidence that the North Koreans intend to keep those commitments. 4. Win the other's trust. Learn as much as you can about the other party's history, interests, and culture. Make sure the other understands the "cost" of a major concession on your part and that you don't underestimate the value of a concession on his part. 5. Listen to and acknowledge the other's concerns. Listening and acknowledging the other party creates feelings of fairness which have a strong impact on trust development and overall satisfaction with the negotiation deal. Pay particular attention to areas of concern she is emotional about-acknowledging emotion may be one of the most important parts of effective listening as a vehicle for building trust. Source: Adapted from "Negotiating Skills for Trust Building at the Negotiation Table," Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School Newsletter, January 1, 2018.

Understanding Management (MindTap Course List)

10th Edition

ISBN:9781305502215

Author:Richard L. Daft, Dorothy Marcic

Publisher:Richard L. Daft, Dorothy Marcic

Chapter15: Managing Quality And Performance

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 6AL

See similar textbooks