MGB1010 · Introduction To Management
Communication and Ethics
The closing block (Weeks 8–10) covers the human layer of management. Communication is the transfer and understanding of meaning — a process model from sender through encoding, channel and decoding to receiver, with feedback closing the loop and noise threatening every link; the practical skills are active listening (Bolton's attending, encouraging, reflecting) and assertive communication (Dwyer's win–win style, distinct from aggressive and submissive). Ethics, CSR, ESG and governance tackle the question to whom is a firm responsible? — the shareholder (Friedman) view vs the stakeholder view, the CSR continuum from social obligation to social responsibility, and ESG as the modern reporting frame. Diversity, equity and inclusion close it: surface vs deep-level diversity, equity vs equality, inclusion as belongingness + valued uniqueness (Randel et al.), and the quotas-vs-targets debate. The thread across all three weeks is managing people well.
What this chapter covers
- 018.1 The communication process model & channel richness
- 028.2 Barriers & noise
- 038.3 Active listening (Bolton's three skills)
- 048.4 Assertive vs aggressive vs submissive (Dwyer)
- 059.1 Shareholder (Friedman) vs stakeholder; 9.2 the CSR continuum
- 069.3–9.5 ESG, corporate governance & RepTrak
- 0710 Diversity, equity & inclusion; belonging (Randel); quotas vs targets
Worked example: diagnose the communication style, then locate the firm on responsibility
- +1(a) Communication style. Stating her own view and listening, validating the other, solutions-focused = assertive (Dwyer) — outcome win–win.
- +1(a) Not aggressive. Assertive respects both parties' rights; aggressive would override the colleague (win–lose), submissive would yield (lose–win). The trap is treating assertive as aggressive.
- +1(b) Active-listening skill. Drawing out and validating the objection is reflecting (Bolton's third skill) — paraphrasing and reflecting feelings, which also supplies feedback and defuses defensiveness.
- +2(c) CSR continuum. Going beyond obligation to pursue long-term social good by choice is social responsibility (CSR) — the far end, past social obligation and social responsiveness.
- +1(c) Reporting frame. Reporting on environmental footprint, social impact and governance integrity is ESG — the modern frame operationalising the stakeholder view.
Key terms
- Communication process model
- Communication is the transfer AND understanding of meaning. The model runs sender → encoding → message → channel → decoding → receiver → feedback, with noise able to distort any stage. If meaning is not understood, communication has not occurred — which is why feedback (asking the receiver to restate) is the single most powerful corrective.
- Active listening (Bolton)
- Listening for full meaning without premature judgement, in three skill clusters: attending (nonverbal readiness — eye contact, open posture), encouraging (drawing the speaker out with open questions and allowing silence), and reflecting (paraphrasing content and reflecting feelings to confirm understanding). Reflecting is the payoff — it proves understanding and supplies feedback.
- Assertive communication (Dwyer)
- The managerial ideal: state your own view AND listen, validate others, stay solutions-focused — a win–win stance. Contrast aggressive (wins at others' expense, win–lose) and submissive/passive (fails to state own needs, lose–win). Only assertive both states a view and listens; treating assertive as aggressive is the quiz trap.
- Shareholder vs stakeholder view
- Two answers to “to whom is a firm responsible?” The shareholder (classical) view — Milton Friedman — says management's prime duty is to maximise profit for owners within the law. The stakeholder (socioeconomic) view says managers owe responsibility to a broad set — employees, customers, suppliers, community, environment. Modern CSR/ESG sits on the stakeholder side; Friedman is the benchmark it contrasts against.
- Inclusion & belongingness (Randel et al.)
- An inclusive organisation moves beyond bias and prejudice to valuing uniqueness and creating belongingness. Randel et al. (2018): positive outcomes need both at once — belongingness alone risks assimilation, valuing uniqueness alone risks feeling an outsider. Inclusion = “I belong here AND my distinct contribution is valued.” Distinct from diversity, which is just the mix.
Communication and Ethics FAQ
What is the difference between assertive and aggressive communication?
Both state a view, but they differ on respect. Assertive communication (Dwyer's ideal) pursues your own goals without trampling others — it states a view and listens, validates the other party and seeks a win–win solution. Aggressive communication advances your goals by overriding the other — win–lose. (Submissive sacrifices your own needs — lose–win.) Only assertive both states a view and listens, which is the quiz trap.
What is the difference between the shareholder and stakeholder views?
They answer “to whom is a firm responsible?” differently. The shareholder (classical) view — Milton Friedman, “the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits” — says management's prime duty is to maximise profit for owners within the law. The stakeholder view says managers owe responsibility to a broad set — employees, customers, suppliers, community, environment. Modern CSR and ESG practice sits firmly on the stakeholder side; Friedman remains the benchmark to contrast against.
What is the difference between diversity and inclusion?
Diversity is the mix — who is in the room (surface-level demographics like age, gender, ethnicity; and deep-level differences in values and personality). Inclusion is the experience — whether those people are valued and heard once there. You can hire a diverse workforce and still fail at inclusion. As the unit puts it: “diversity is being invited to the party; inclusion is being asked to dance.” Randel et al. add that inclusion needs both belongingness and valued uniqueness.
What is the difference between a quota and a target?
A quota is a mandatory minimum number or proportion that must be met — binding, with consequences for non-compliance; it drives fast change but can be seen as tokenistic and breed backlash. A target is an aspirational goal to work towards over time — voluntary, a benchmark not a rule; it provokes less backlash but is easy to miss without accountability. The unit stages this as a live diversity-policy debate.
Exam move
These three weeks share one thread — managing people well — so learn them as one toolkit. For communication, know the process model (transfer and understanding; feedback closes the loop; noise distorts every link), Bolton's three active-listening skills, and Dwyer's assertive/aggressive/submissive split (assertive ≠ aggressive is the trap). For responsibility, anchor the Friedman shareholder view against the stakeholder view, place a firm on the CSR continuum (social obligation → responsiveness → responsibility), and know ESG and governance as the modern operationalisation. For DEI, keep diversity (the mix) distinct from inclusion (the experience), equity from equality, and quotas from targets. For any case: name the model, locate the firm on the continuum or the quota/target choice, and judge whether it builds belongingness or merely ticks a box.
