Recent orders
Too often historical narratives do not take into account mineralized experiences, including the lives of racial, gendered, se
Name
Professor
Class
Date
Admission essay
Too often historical narratives do not take into account mineralized experiences, including the lives of racial, gendered, sexual, or religious outsiders. Therefore, one vital task of art and literature is to supplement so-called official history. This essay addresses and analyzes how our authors write alternative histories. These stories are important to document because these authors choose to trade a path that most authors fear. In doing so, this essay will evaluate Mohsin Hamid’s Reluctant Fundamentalist, and Toni Morrison’s Recitatif.
In Reluctant Fundamentalist Mohsin Hamid through Changez leaves readers asking themselves about who should shoulder the blame following the 9/11 incursion on US soil. Changez blames the US and India for the problems in his country. However, Changez is not sincere he is the one to blame for his predicament for he was well educated in the USA he asserts “I have access to this beautiful campus … to professors who are titans in their fields (3)” America made Chavez who he is his actions after 9/11 are betrayal in nature since it was in the US that he was able to get a starting salary of over $78,000 but he decides to become a reluctant fundamentalist after Muslims start being stereotyped following the attack. He should have found a better way of confronting the problem rather than being ungrateful.
Despite getting an education in the US and a good starting salary he turns his back on America when he asserts that not one “of these worthy restaurateurs would consider placing a western dish on his menu (101)” While he says so he does not consider the fact that it is the Americans who gave him the fishing rod he uses to fish. A Changezian perception has been adopted in his home country Pakistan where they believe that America, the Army and Allah are the sources of their problems. He does not show any sorrow for the lives that were lost on 9/11 but is quick to accuse America for solely targeting Pakistan after 9/11 in spite of the opposition it faced from a multitude of countries globally. He critiques the US for unilaterally causing harm to millions of people worldwide.
Changez recalls smiling when he witnessed on his Television set the twin towers fall. Even as he blames the US for its campaigns worldwide in pursuit of terrorists he does not bother to know the identity of those who perpetrated the 9/11 terrorist attack on US soil. Coincidentally they were trained in Pakistan before the attack. He is bitter about the US and Indian attack on his country after the terrorist attack on Indian parliamentary buildings. However, he fails to realize that once again the perpetrators of this awful act were of Pakistan origin. As much as he claims that Pakistanis “were not the crazed and destitute radicals you see on your television channels but rather saints and poets (102)” his acting radical worsens the situation rather than finding a solution to it.
The reader is thus very much disappointed in Changez because he being amongst the new generation of Pakistanis bred and educated in the USA should have like his contemporaries seen the light. However he fails miserably and joins the old guard who do not see anything good in America.
In Toni Morrison’s Recitatif a society’s undisclosed racial codes are exposed. Apart from that, the author exposes things happening amongst the urban poor that are very inhuman it they have no otherwise because they are poor. For instance he begins the book by this statement: “My mother danced all night and Roberta’s was sick. That’s why we were taken to St. Bonny’s (1).”Twyla’s mother has failed in her role as a mother because of poverty. Twyla thus went to live at the St. Bonaventure shelter where she is introduced to Roberta whom they have very many things in common; they are both eight years and register failing grades; “We were eight years old and got F’s all the time (2)”. The author tries to indicate that grades are not racial in nature in spite of the fact that the two girls were of two different races they all failed in class because they did not work hard. This means that if anyone regardless of race races is exposed to an enabling environment he can make a difference.
Even though the author does not point out which of the two girls is black or white he points out codes that identify with both races, for instance: “The food was good, though. At least I thought so. Roberta hated it and left whole pieces of things on her plate: Spam, Salisbury steak-even jello with fruit cocktail in it, and she didn’t care if I ate what she wouldn’t (2).” Its only whites who have it all that behaves like Roberta while impoverished blacks behave like Twyla.
The relationship between race and disability is the central point of the story. The issues of race are remolded through the perspective of disability “Maggie fell down there once. The kitchen woman with legs like parentheses, And the big girls laughed at her. We should have helped her up, I know, but we were scared of those girls with lipstick and eyebrow pencil. Maggie couldn’t talk. The kids said she had her tongue cut out, but I think she was just born that way: mute. She was old and sandy-colored and she worked in the kitchen. I don’t know if she was nice or not. I just remember her legs like parentheses and how she rocked when she walked (2)”. Maggie represents the racial minority in the society; even though they are disabled economically, socially and politically the racial majorities trod on them inhumanly leaving them in a worse situation.
The two girls were separated after school and later met several times, in one of their last meetings. The theme of racism is well brought out, the racial minorities are protesting in the streets against segregation when Twyla drives by. She notices Roberta and stops to greet her but Roberta gives her a cold face. The other protesters would have harmed Twyla were it not for the police intervening. “Maybe I am different now, Twyla. But you’re not. You’re the same little state kid who kicked a poor old black lady when she was down on the ground. You kicked a black lady and you have the nerve to call me a bigot (16)” The fact that Twyla responds that Maggie might have been white shows that the racial problem was deep rooted and did not choose between disabled and able people.
Toms Shoes Inc
Toms Shoes Inc.
Abstract
Every leader in the corporate world understands that a successful business does not exist in isolation and neither should the pursuit of making money be its sole objective and purpose. Throughout its entire existence, a business entity is intricately entwined with the community through its employees, customers, and suppliers among other members of the society. Its products and services eventually leave an impact on both the natural and cultural environments. Corporate social responsibility is all about understanding this impact of the business on the wider community and the world, and how it can be used in a positive way. It means taking a responsible and brave step by going beyond the minimum expectations of the company by the society to contribute to the improvement of human living conditions nationally and internationally.
Many companies have exceptional CSR records that are, however, not reflected in their professional performance. It is not common to find firms with visibly superior corporate social responsibility performance that is incorporated in their strategy for success. Toms Shoes Inc. is a good example of this trend that is emerging as a form of “philanthropic capitalism” and for all the good reasons. This paper traces the origins and motives behind the exemplary corporate social responsibility of Toms Shoes Inc. from its humble beginnings as the handiwork of Blake Myscoskie. Blake’s work and innovations as a young entrepreneur with a big heart has brought a new spin in the field of corporate social responsibility. In evaluating Toms Shoes Buy One Give One business model, the paper delves into the criticisms leveled against the company, and Blake Myscoskie’s philanthropic business model, from different sectors.
Introduction
Blake Mycoskie’s company Toms Shoes Inc. has been described in many ways by admirers and critics but one thing that both camps agree on is the fact the company is still relentlessly winning hearts and sales simply by donating a pair of shoes for each pair that it sells to a customer. This ingenious business promotion and corporate social responsibility strategy is a brainchild of Blake Myscoskie that dawned upon him while visiting Argentina. His tour of Argentine brought him face to face with many children walking barefoot while adults walked in simple but comfortable almost sole-less footwear contraptions called alpargata. Mycoskie grew up in Texas and readily admits to have never witnessed the appalling conditions of poverty as he saw in Argentina.
When Mycoskie returned to the USA and formed his shoes company, Toms Shoes Inc., he adopted the alpagarta and produced it in many designs, styles, and colors making a promise to his customers that for every pair they bought, the company would donate another pair to the needy children. It was an idea that finally took off and left Mycoskie spending half of his time managing the company and the other half making ‘shoe drops’ to grateful children all over the world.
In trying to distance itself from the rest of the competition, Toms Shoes Inc. went beyond what the competition does. It was initially founded on the principle of equating sales to the good done to the society. Mycoskie had to give one pair for every pair sold otherwise he would not be in business for that is what drove customers to his business. An examination of Toms Shoes business structure shows that it is built on sustainability. The founder could have decided to take five hundred thousand dollars and bought shoes for the kids once but that would not have kept him in a position of doing good continuously. It would never have been as far reaching and sustainable as the company is.
Mycoskie’s style of corporate social responsibility gives his employees something to be proud of and their morale is always high when they know they are doing something to improve the life of needy children. They are changing the world in their own small ways. Every purchase at Toms Shoes has a story attached to it which is one thing most socially conscious customers find quite appealing. The wearer of the shoes bought at Toms Shoes can proudly talk of where the shoe was bought and the good it did years after purchasing the product. Toms Shoes Inc. can accurately be said to be a leader in innovative ways of using corporate social responsibility in promoting and improving a company’s performance. It is a beacon of hope to many children in underdeveloped nations and a leading example in the corporate world.
In order to comprehensively examine how Mycoskie has been able to achieve such a feat, it is imperative to analyze various factors about the company. A good starting point would be to examine its historical background from inception and the circumstances that sparked this idea of marrying corporate social responsibility with business. It would also be imperative to look into the company structure bearing in mind that the company started with only nine employees and has grown to a 55member full-time staff whose average age is just twenty three years. It is also interesting to note that the leading mode of advertisement for the company is by word of mouth.
An analysis of the company’s products is also important in verifying that it does not simply use a hyped up corporate social responsibility strategy to sell substandard products. The majority of its products, as discussed in this paper, are based on the alpargata style which consists of a simple canvas top and a rubber or rope sole.
In understanding how the world views Mycoskie’s unique corporate social responsibility strategy, a literature review of other writers’ opinions about his style of doing business is equally important. The literature review included various definitions of pertinent issues like corporate social responsibility, corporate social entrepreneurship, and corporate social entrepreneurship in small business. The paper examines how Mycoskie’s strategy fits into each of these concepts with an emphasis on how the company is a model for Corporate Social Entrepreneurship. The company’s One for One campaign provided an interesting concept that not only sustains the business but also ensures that the number of needy children walking barefoot is considerably reduced in less fortunate parts of the world.
Conclusion
Toms Shoes Inc. continues to be a model for ways in which a company integrates in its marketing strategy a visibly felt social responsibility presence. However, in evaluating the effectiveness of this campaign, it was observed that Toms Shoes Inc. has had to contend with criticism in various forms. There have been claims that its corporate responsibility efforts have had little or no effects in improving public health by donating shoes because the children only get one pair which wears out after a short duration due to overuse. The worn and discarded shoes are claimed to be creating an environmental problem added to the permissive garbage problem in third world countries due to lack of effective recycling abilities. There has also been criticism on the grounds that such activities create and promote dependency among the less fortunate which prevents them from taking steps to improve their living conditions. The paper has analyzed these criticisms include the claim that shoe drops have become a form of poverty tourism which to most people is a controversial issue.
Despite the criticism on TOMS social entrepreneurship model, business leaders need to admit that it has been effective from the wide appeal it has on customers. Mycoskie’s method has been such a phenomenal success that it is being adopted by social entrepreneurs, most of whom are young adults, as a working model for their start up businesses that will also allow them to make a change in the world. An example discussed in the paper is Wardy Parker that donates pairs of glasses to people suffering from bad vision.
Toms Shoes Inc. provides important lessons to other companies seeking to combine corporate social responsibility with business. The company was able to ride with the trend of rising number of customers who had become even more conscious of their spending. These are the conscious customers who prefer to spend on products and services that end up doing good to either the environment or to other less privileged people around the world. This trend, which companies exploit in the name of cause-related marketing, has been on the rise alongside green marketing and done much good to the world as companies try to polish their images and portray themselves as decent corporate citizens.
Tolerance and Openness in Workplaces
Tolerance and Openness in Workplaces
Student Name:
University:
Management:
Instructor:
September 22, 2013.
Tolerance and Openness in Today’s Workplaces
Introduction
Nowadays workplaces are more open and tolerant. This paper analyses how diversity, ethics and leadership have helped contemporary organizations to be more open and tolerant. Tolerance in organizational context can be defined as permissive, fair and objective attitude towards people whose nationality, religion, race, practices etc vary from one’s own, freedom from bigotry (Dennis & Winston, 2008). To promote tolerance within workplace, organizations have sought to understand others, be conscious of what they say, set examples and make endeavors to understand cultural differences. It is critical to understand where you mark a limit with tolerance. If an individual is being hurt or employees’ actions or words are harming the organizational mission the members of workforce must understand that is right to step in.
Even though being tolerant implies accepting other’s viewpoints or behaviors, it is not same as indulgence, indifference, condescension, or apathy (Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2006). Tolerance does not mean justifying or accepting behavior, which is ethically or morally wrong or that is harmful to other people. While practicing tolerance, organizations today understand where to draw line with certain actions or behaviors. Likewise, openness is also a critical aspect of successful organizational and personal relationship.
Today, organizations ensure that their employees are satisfied so that they are able to comfortably ask questions and voice concerns, and are aware of where to get answers. Within the current global economic difficulties, openness is paramount is establishing an environment of trust between employees and employers. Openness within workplaces begins with each employee getting information regarding the business one is contributing to. Today, public financial information, annual goals and mission statement are easily accessible to all members of staff. Training guidelines as well as other information needed to accomplish day to day tasks for every position are readily available. Organizations have also made it possible for the workforce to know where to get help; voice concerns and how they can contribute ideas that can assist organization attain its goals.
Diversity:
Diversity can be described as the differences in different defining personal traits such as education, religion, ethnic origin, marital status, gender, race, and age among others (Dennis & Winston, 2008). Organizational diversity within workplace can be described as the sum makeup of employee workforce and the level of diversity included. Today, organizations have undergone various phases to assimilate different society groups within its realm and address the diverse needs of the workforce. Openness and tolerance allows employees to develop and nurture their abilities to the fullest. It is a common knowledge today that people within organizations shape the business and its success and this is why productive and creative workplace has to be one that is open and tolerant and is devoid of prejudice and any form of discrimination.
Today, organizations deploy diversity management as an effort of integrating people with different social, religious, ethnic and older members within the workplaces. Organizations have taken actions to account for increasingly and formal practical equality of women and men. Management of diversity has also helped organizations to appreciate tolerant and open diversified workforce actuality through negotiating the different aspects of diversity such as education, age and religion.
An open and tolerant interaction of workplace and family on equal measure has led to identification, motivation and greater participation in the organizations, concerns and improved health (Ackroyd & Crowdy, 1990). In regard to diversity dimensions such as ethnic origin, education and age are consciously considered in the open negotiation of requirements of organizations and their workforce. The emphasis of different diversity dimensions also curbs the fixation of people based on one criterion of identity for instance family. Nurturing the collective genius of individuals- that is tolerance for people’s ways of doing things, structuring and planning work has resulted to unpredicted solutions in organizations as fulfill the sense of individual responsibility of workers. Diversity training as opposed to affirmative action assists people from different backgrounds to work together. In order of the tolerance and openness to be a business framework, it has not just been limited to the managerial elite and multinational corporations, who are easily able to communicate in most global contexts. Even SME businesses today, embrace a more diverse population (Jackall, 1988).
Today, organizations value their differences, in sexual orientation, experience, gender identity, thought and culture- understanding that inclusion and diversity are desirable for business and make organizations stronger. Through empowering everyone to excel in their respective roles and attain their optimal potential, people are more open and tolerant because their employees recognized and reward based on results and performance not their social or cultural ideologies. Promoting an inclusive and diverse workplace enables organizations to earn the advantage of meeting and understanding the needs of diverse communities, clients and customers. Diversity also promotes fresh perspectives and ideas through open and tolerance workplace thus encouraging ingenuity.
Another way through which diversity has contributed positively to tolerance and openness at work place is the general understanding and perception that the best way of improving and promoting morale of workers in a company is to treat every worker with utmost respect regardless of their social differences from those people of yours.
By embracing diversity through the understanding of differences and also identifying the meeting points, employees are by far likely to be committed fully, adopt a robust loyalty and enjoy maximum job satisfaction. Employees are fully aware that this is what is needed to be done and therefore find it a necessity to promote tolerance and openness that will lead to harnessing the different capabilities and skills of their workforce.
Most of corporate managements have learnt that when diversity is embraced and adored, novel ideas of maximizing and capitalizing on the diverse skills, styles and sensibilities of work force normally becomes the cornerstone of the organization’s goals and aspirations. Together with openness where the labor force is given an opportunity to express itself and its opinions and ideas respected.
Ethics
According to Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) organizational ethics can be described as set of informal and formal standards of conduct which employees use to direct their behavior in workplaces. Partly, these standards are based on fundamental values such as trust, represent, tolerance, openness and honesty, however they can also be learned or acquired directly from the actions of other employees. For instance, what employees see their organizational coworkers, manages and leader do on the workplace can influence their personal views on what behavior is acceptable or not. Ethical program are those formal processes, practices and policies that company establish to manage their own ethical matters.
Organizations today understand that developing an ethical program cannot be an exact science. Just like establishing other organizational programs, it embraces an open and tolerant interaction, input, decision making, cooperation and continuously commitment of all members of workforce. Organizations today are alive to the fact that the best results are attained when employees when together across the entire organization (Kaptein, 2008). They appreciate that great teams are developed on accountability, openness, shared ownership, tolerance and mutual trust, therefore, therefore, work as one organization and believe when they work as a unit, they best satisfy the full needs of their clients and customers.
According to Kaptein (2008) organizations understand that their clients and customers what to know that their employees will fairly treat them, tolerate their demands, make honest, ethical and clear decisions and communicate forthrightly. Due to the trust, which organizations expect their clients and customers to accord them, comes with a massive responsibility for ethical conduct in all things that they do and code of conduct of most organizations is their guide to fulfilling this great responsibility. Today’s organizations have code of ethics, which applies to everybody who is employed by the organization- all directors and employees. Hence, every member of the organization is accountable to maintain the highest level of ethical standards as they carry out their responsibilities as a result leaders and managers are responsible for nurturing and developing a culture which their employees completely feel fully obligated, supported and empowered to do the correct thing (Gabriel, 1997). Organizational code of ethics is today majorly based on organizational values. They language that companies utilize to describe their values is inspirational and brief- it reflects the spirit of their culture. Through code of ethics organizations are able to offer the guidance they need to translate their values into practice as they engage with vendors, shareholders, clients and customer and compete within the marketplace.
Today organizations appreciate that due to market competition they have no option but to fairly deal with their vendors, teammates, and competitors, hence they value open and clear communication and recognizes the contributions of everyone and thus employees are not retaliated for reporting information according to the code of ethics and in good faith. Most organizations today do not demote, terminate employment, discriminate or transfer to unfavorable assignment an employee for raising attention to supposed unethical act, comprising giving information associated with an investigation.
Jackall (1988) argues that tolerance and openness are also characterized by ethical practices and behavior. This entails corporate governance structures characterized by equality, equity, justice, and participation. This could also comprise the absence of anti-social conducts for instance corruption. In corporate context, corruption entails unethical behaviors for instance conflicts of interest, advancing private interest, bribery, stealing or lying. Open and tolerant organizations have in place ethical code of conduct that outlines clearly the standards of ethical policies and behaviors and procedures, which it uses to get rid of corruption and to discipline infringement of any code. Other organizations do not have ethical code of conduct, but strong norms of integrity, honesty and trustworthiness exit in organizational culture rendering making organization to be more open and tolerant.
An atmosphere of independence and confidentiality that is promoted by code of conduct is critical for employees to openly communicate with others, reflect and learn and be honest. Open and tolerant atmosphere is where employees are respectfully treated, there are no or limited incidences of back-biting and employees feel they can be open and honest without any reprisal. Each of the elements is significant for building a tolerant and open workplace.
Leadership:
Today’s, organizational leadership corresponds and considers appropriately the capacities, feelings and needs of various employees in different situations, and is sensitive, compassionate, tactful and treats employees with dignity and respect (Kaptein, 2008).
Contemporary organizations have leadership that possess interpersonal skills which are critical for productivity within diverse workplaces that progressively more deploys team approach to accomplish organizational complex tasks. Today, leaders at all organizational levels understand communicate and motivate their followers and irrespective of brilliance of the approach and thought convincing employees to accomplish their goals require well-established leadership skills that are anchored on tolerance and openness (Dennis & Winston, 2008). Leadership skills (such as integrity, helpfulness, respect, discretion, empathy, courtesy for cultures and ideas of employees, active listening, sensitive and effective oral and written communication, emotional maturity, cognitive flexibility, understanding of others’ positions) promote organizational atmosphere of openness and tolerance that develops valuable relationship and motivates a team or group to accomplish organizational tasks.
Leadership skills are demonstrated at the foundation level through tolerance and self-awareness of one’s impact on the others, empathy to the others needs, and demonstration of interest in your members. Organizations with strong leadership skills are able and willing to look at issues from others viewpoint, reflect an understanding of the concerns of employees and exhibit listening and other skillfulness allowing employees to the felt and heard. Effective leadership treats employees with respect, use and understands effective body language, establish trust through authenticity and reliability, and attain commitments. Today’s organizational leadership is sensitive to emotional cues, cooperate with each other and seek feedback to shed light on issues and establish mutual understanding of performance objectives and goals.
Contemporary leadership has helped workplaces to be more tolerant and open by promoting an atmosphere of trust and confidence, developing a team, which is characterized by empowerment, involvement and trust. Organizations today are increasingly fostering good morale, friendly climate and cooperation among employees, establish and maintain supportive working relationships, promote the contributions of each member, and guide employees through effective discussion, questioning and listening. Leadership in organizations today helps team members to develop norms that advance trust, participation and respect. Organizations are cognizant in the manner in which feelings and emotions impact a situation and hence they express sensitivity to the needs of employees who perceive offence. Leadership in organizations recognizes and reward supportive actions and behaviors, establish a structure that encourages and permits the ideas of employees to be heard, and is also serves as a positive role model of desirable behaviors and interpersonal skills (Jackall, 1988).
Effective leadership at either senior or mid-levels promote openness and tolerance, through counseling, coaching, motivating and empowering direct reports to engage with all employees in a respectful manner. Leadership in organizations contributes openness and tolerance through problem solving, particularly in contentious, difficult situations, enabling win-win scenarios. Leadership in organizations demonstrates sensitivity to tolerance and openness by working with employees from different backgrounds and treats everyone (from all organizational levels) with courtesy and caring (Gabriel, 1997). They develop the institution for a high-performing workplace by investing in employee training and development to make sure that direct reports have proficiency that can assist then understand others’ perspectives, by establishing an environment of courtesy and helpfulness and treating employees with tact while carrying out organization’s work.
Senior and mid-level leaders of organizations nowadays are communicating with enthusiasm, and are assertive, but at the same time are flexible and tolerant and are sensitive and aware of interpersonal skills and body languages, understand and demonstrate deeper understanding of the core reasons for employees’ responses and behaviors, and offer constructive, candid and timely feedback to assist employees develop.
According to Dennis and Winston (2008) organizational leadership today set, inspire and establish the standards for organizational culture that is trustworthy, trusting, engaged, caring, self-aware, tolerant, empathetic, confident, secure and open, while rewarding and promoting direct reports who cultivate such ideals. Organizational leadership utilize their interpersonal relationship skills to put in place integrated, pragmatic system solutions that bypass traditional departmental limits and that promote enterprise-wide and agency-wide cooperation and consistency. Current executives establish trusting relationships and long-term connections with stakeholders which encourages them to be more open to share their views. Leadership accurately assesses employees, maintain productive and positive relations with workforce and identity and offer desirable support to people to ensure win-win negotiation outcomes.
Organizational leadership effectively promotes openness and tolerance at workplace through modeling the desired behaviors. They foster frequent face-to-face interactions with employees in various positions and departments to demonstrate to employees that managers and other bosses are approachable, available and are ready to discuss workplace matters. Routine conference calls, regular mails, and bulletins or memos concerning updates regarding important developments or special projects also demonstrate commitment from leadership in improving communication.
Conclusion:
This paper has revealed that nowadays organizations are more tolerant and open. The paper demonstrated that diversity, ethics and leadership are key elements fostering openness and tolerance within the contemporary workplaces. Tolerance is an objective, just and nonjudgmental approach towards individuals whose nationality, religion, race, practices etc vary from one’s own. Likewise openness is critical to creating an organizational environment of trust among the stakeholders of the organization.
Diversity is the difference is various defining personal peculiarity for instance their age, gender, marital status, religion, ethnic origin, educational background etc.
Nowadays, workplaces value diversity in sexual orientation, experience, gender identity, thought and culture- appreciation that inclusion and diversity are desirable for their businesses as it makes companies stronger. Through empowering people of diverse backgrounds to excel in their respective roles and attain their optimal potential, employees are more open and tolerant because they recognized and reward based on results and performance as opposed to their educational, social, cultural or religious backgrounds.
Ethics in workplace context refers to the informal and formal standards of conduct which organizational stakeholders must use to guide their behavior in workplaces. Organizations today have ethical code of conducts that are anchored on principles of equality, equity, justice, and participation and these greatly contributes towards an open and tolerant workplace.
Finally, nowadays leadership has helped workplaces to be more tolerant and open by promoting an atmosphere of trust and confidence, developing a team, which is characterized by empowerment, involvement and trust.
(Words=)
References
Ackroyd, S. and Crowdy, P. (1990) ‘Can culture be managed?Working with “raw” material: the
case of the English slaughtermen’ Personnel Review 19(5): 3-12
Dennis, R. and B. E. Winston (2008). “A factor analysis of Page and Wong’s servant leadership
instrument.” Leadership and Organization Development Journal 24(8): 455-459.
Gabriel, Y. (1997) ‘Meeting God: When Organizational Members Come Face to Face with the
Supreme Leader’ Human Relations 50(4): 315-342.
Jackall, R. (1988) Moral mazes: the world of corporate managers Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Kaptein, M. (2008). “Developing and testing a measure for the ethical culture of organizations:
the corporate ethical virtues model.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 29: 923-947
Lewicki, R. and Tomlinson, E. (2006). “Models of Interpersonal Trust Development: Theoretical Approaches, Empirical Evidence, and Future Directions.” Journal of Management
32(6): 991-1022