Attached are the information I need done. Thank you.
Discussion Board Forum 2 for Taylor Miolen
Top of Form
Hello Class,
Changing environments can lead to many issues among law enforcement agencies. Whenever an issue arises the need to hear a person's view of what happened is important. However, sometimes a person's voice is not able to be heard or is not allowed. This can lead to challenging situations. The two environments mentioned above are very different. The main difference, in this author's opinion, is the setting. The first environment where brutal facts were not confronted can lead to a tense and hostile environment. If the facts are never faced, then perceptions can change and people will assume things. The second environment is one where the facts were heard and people had the chance to speak their mind. I believe that this environment is the better of the two options because it allows for everyone to be heard and also allows for a clear communication pathway between all of those involved. If this is dealing with a workplace incident it can cause issues between employees and it becomes imperative that supervisors can distinguish between what is truth and what is false. One journal writes, "For police officers, the ability to distinguish between truthful and deceptive statements in interrogations is essential. However, research shows that their classification accuracy is typically rather low" (Andre & Dahm & Scharmach, 2012, p. 822). I believe that agencies should provide their supervisors with the training to be able to lead a shift with the correct type of openness and integrity. Another look at this is that in the second environment, employees are allowed to be heard among one another. This can be huge for the stress factor of all those affected. One journal writes, "Co-worker support had a significant direct negative effect on job stress" (Yang & Shen & Zhu & Liu & Deng & Chen, 2015, p. 72). I believe that the best way to construct truth in the workplace is to start with the top and work down. One journal writes, " We argue that the parrhesiastic modality of truth-telling threatens the established ‘working solutions’ that reconcile the tensions inherent in the regime of practices and thus introduces a ‘critical opening’ that harbours the potential for both personal and organizational transformation" (Weiskopf & Miersch, 2016, p. 1621). As I mentioned before it is imperative to give supervisors training about being open with one another and the people that are under them. This also means that communication needs to flow freely. This in itself will help with truthfullness in the workplace. The Bible says, "And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free" (John 8:32, ESV). If you are working towards the truth, then you are working on building a foundation in Christ as well. By following this you are working on being ethical and true as well.
God Bless,
Taylor Miolen
References
Andre, R. M., Dahm, J., & Scharmach, M. (2012). Perceived experience and police officers' ability to detect deception [Electronic version]. Policing, 35(4), 822-834.
Weiskopf, R., & Miersch, Y. T. (2016). Whistleblowing, Parrhesia and the Contestation of Truth in the Workplace [Electronic version]. Organization Studies, 37(11), 1621-1640.
Yang, T., Shen, Y. M., Zhu, M., Liu, Y., Deng, J., & Chen, Q. (2015). Effects of Co-Worker and Supervisor Support on Job Stress and Presenteeism in an Aging Workforce: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach [Electronic version]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(1), 72.
Bottom of Form
Bottom of Form
