DECISION MAKING

Decision Making



Decision Making

In decision making amongst the corporate colleagues there are certain steps that are to be considered in order to make them understand one's points and decision. These decisions making are as follows:

Step 1: Identify the Problem and Your Relationship to It

The initial step requires CIO s to be as specific and as objective as possible. It may be helpful to write down the situation that led to the knowledge of impairment, separating facts from innuendos, assumptions, hypotheses, and suspicions. Committing to paper the dimensions of the problem can be useful in clarifying one's thinking. (Pope, Vasquez, 2001) Questions to ask oneself include:

How did I learn about the colleague's possible impairment? If it was reported by a third party, how much credence should I give to the information and what responsibilities (if any) does this reporting create for me? If it is based on direct observations, what are the indicators that there may be a problem? Do these indicators form a basis for the likelihood that impairment is present?

Who is affected by the problem? Does it affect me? What am I or am I not doing? Does it have an impact on clients? On the institution or agency in which I work and on its policies and procedures? On a combination of these?

What are my own needs in this situation? How might these needs affect my judgment or cloud my thinking? If I am feeling reluctant to act, is it because I don't want to lose a valued friend, create tension in my work environment, or have others think less of me for getting a fellow professional in trouble?

Step 2: Apply the Current ACA Code of Ethics

The ACA Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice provides clear guidance regarding impairment. CIO s are required to "refrain from offering or accepting professional services when their physical, mental, or emotional problems are likely to harm a client or others. They are alert to the signs of impairment, seek assistance for problems, and, if necessary; limit, suspend, or terminate their professional responsibilities" (C.2.g.). (Pope, Vasquez, 2001) When impaired CIO s fail to recognize or deal with their problems, and when there is potential for harm to those sewed (clients, students, supervisees, or consultees), colleagues who have knowledge of the condition.

A careful reading of the Code of Ethics at this point will reveal that actions such as consulting with colleagues or experts and attempting an informal resolution (H.2.d.) should be taken, if possible, before reporting an impaired colleague. This information provides the individual CIO with the beginnings of a "road map" for action. (Pope, Vasquez, 2001)

Step 3: Determine the Nature and Dimensions of the Dilemma

This step begins with a consideration of the moral principles of the helping professions, which include autonomy, nonmaleficence, justice, fidelity, and beneficence, and might be applied to a case of colleague impairment in the following ways.

Autonomy means fostering self-determination. The essence of this principle is allowing an individual to exercise freedom of choice ...