Trust as an Important Aspect in Human Resources

2754 words (11 pages) Business Assignment

10th Jun 2020 Business Assignment Reference this

Tags: Business AssignmentsHuman Resources

Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work produced by our Business Assignment Writing Service. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of BusinessTeacher.org.

Within International Relations, IR theories help us in obtaining an understanding of the nature of the international political environment across our registered timeline. The Focus here is to understand our best approach to international relations, in developing a practical consensus moving forward. It’s necessary to utilize both Stephen M. Walt’s argument for Realism, in balance with Rachel Vogelstein’s arguments on Feminism, in addition to Liberalism and Green theory to understand what features across all of them. The anchor here that radiates across all of these theories is how indebted the 5 concepts of  are to a feature of ‘Trust’, both on individual and institutional scales. The suggestion here is that, if we are to evaluate the approach to modern day IR theories, a more improved understanding on the importance of Trust is required, to illustrate how this is reciprocated and translated through to the actors in the world. The five IR concepts of interest are: Power, Security, Gender, International institutions, and sustainable policy.

Its important to establish how to define Trust, Rachel Bostman defines it as a confident relationship to the unknown, expressing it as the foundation for every action and relationship, which is influenced by the of element of risk and uncertainty[1] Whereas Trudy Govier defines its similarly as ‘an attitude based on beliefs and expectations about what others are likely to do’.[2] Both definitions require a leap of faith; an action or decision, which enables the state, actor, or player to interact with one another without guaranteed confidence of the expected outcome.

Within Realism, the two major concepts to formulating an understanding of theory are Power and Security.

Both Classic Realism, and Neo-realism relate to trust on two different approaches, the former relates individual perspective whilst the latter on an institutional one. For Structural Realism the dynamic of both Security and Power is seen less in absolute terms, to more relative terms. The more recent theory looks at the international system a transformation from human and domestic factors to focus on the structure of the international environment. With two constraints: anarchic nature of the international environment’, and the relative power of other states[3]

In addition to M.Walt Realist scholars have provided insight that: as Humans our behavioral tendencies tend to be repetitive, that what drives our actions is Hobb’s concept that its due to the state of nature.[4] This relates to the assertion that we will always seek power, and that our inability to trust others has lead to predictable outcomes in world, this has lead players to take actions that further their own best interest of Security.[5]

M.Walt touches on the concept of Power, that the “key to understanding politics lies in focusing on who has power and what they are doing with it”.[6]  A neo realist view this translates into Gaining Power, typically done at the expense of others to further enable the ‘balance of power’ within the international system. It is also echoed by Machiavelli ‘that trusting no one is crucial to when climbing up the political ladder’.[7] . Relatable as both these efforts further survival of both the states and the individual in order to maintain power, and thus security. [8]

Furthermore, the article states how we should be thinking in terms Realist, in particular for nations at odds with US hegemonic power such as North Korea and Iran. M.Walt highlights how important Security is, to these states that they’re willing to go to enormous lengths to protect themselves.[9]  Trusts influence on the issue of Security is evident, as the question of why it’s necessary to take these risk at great cost, fall into question. Distrust is prevalent here; if nations had stronger trust between one another these nuclear deterrents might not be necessary. The extent, to which countries are willing to risk economic and political ties, is partly explained by both trust and security reasons, trust adds a layer of importance to the view of Security.

Trusts level of influence over both power and security; offers alternative reasoning to issues where Realism does not have valid explanation. Within the article there is mention that realism ‘downplays the role of individual leaders’, this ironically doesn’t hold the answers to reasons why leaders like Trump are elected, whom think they’re “the only one that matters”.[10] The possible explanation that the feature of Trust offers is that the rise of Trump-populist movement could be suggestive evidence that people are beginning to have lack of belief and perhaps distrust in the incumbent institutions that represent them, where in the past these institutions have compromised on integrity, we start to see this transfer of trust from the institutions to the individual, creating a ‘trust shift’. [11]

Feminism as a theory that has it linkages with critical theory,  is built on the importance on the concept of Gender, with motive to reduce the level of inequality, that historically has resulted in negative disproportionate skew between men and women. The Effort to rebalance for the future is required in improving the status for the marginalized.  The articles argument focuses less on international ‘balance of power’ between states, like realism, however shifts the focus on the balance of power that exists between Genders.

Immediately noticeable comparison between the two articles is the theories both attempt to serve the same concept, Security. Sweden has taken the first step to achieve this by adopting  “a feminist foreign policy,” putting the promotion of gender equality and women’s rights at the center of its diplomatic agenda.[12] The way in which it aims to further security improvements is having a woman at the heart of its policy process. Research suggests, that when women are integral part of peace process, the agreements they are apart of are more likely to last and be initially forged.[13]

This research on women’s inclusion and stability, acts as a counter weight to M. Walts of argument on how we should view IR he mentions about the ‘inevitability of conflict’.[14] Which arguably could be seen as very masculine approach to the theory that could suggest that males in the area of peaceful negotiation are actually not adequate at facilitating peaceful agreements without leading to a conflict. Research shows that when war or conflict arises, women fall disproportionally more victim to conflict situations than men, which could suggest men are not as incentivized. [15]

Trust is important into further understanding the concept of Gender, and its importance in IR. Especially into aiding why its influential in its impact on Security, on a foreign policy level. Historically the lack of attention given by philosophers to the topic of Trust is due to the fact that until very recently nearly all philosophers have been men. [16] Its relevant, as its suggested that women are more accustom to fostering levels of Trust, as often have more experience when it comes to vulnerability, dependency and intimacy within relationships.[17]These experiences have the possibility of being transferred in approaches to other relationships and interactions. Where their ability to engage in trust could prove pivotal in international agreements, and further security efforts.

On an institutional level Sweden can be seen to taking the necessary steps to reaffirm trust of the people in the current system negating the risks that could follow, through promotion of feminist based policy. As “When we distrust, we fear that others may act in ways that are immoral or harmful to us; we are vulnerable to them”.[18] The interpretation of this is that there is a requirement in engaging a political voice for the marginalized; this could have a variety of benefits to understand IR by removing friction that could exist and lead to revolt.

Liberalism, in particular neo-liberalism has essentially institutionalized this idea of cooperation in the political Environment.  International institutions create an international system that facilitates international law, free trade and human rights. War is not deemed profitable so there is an Incentive to remain peaceful, and up hold these norms and remain cooperative.

This IR approach of neoliberalism is mainly a benefactor of the concept of international institutions, which benefit significantly from cooperation, if they trust one another to live up to their agreements.[19] This theory is dependent on cooperation, thus in turn cooperation is dependent on the idea of trust, as without it no agreements would be made.

International Institutions like international law and the UN help the creation of trust mechanisms, so states can feel more confident that the opposing state will also commit to an agreement.

If pre-standing trust is fairly weak between states, states need to be able to trust in the agreements and international law to uphold them, if not the structure suffers.

Rachel Bostman states that trust needs time and friction in order to establish its self. She mentions that for everything to run smoothly it would remove the hurdles needed for trust to blossom as there would be less risk in the uncertain outcome. [20]

Green theory can be defined as a critical theory, which saw its emergence born out of around problem oriented, and unapologetic normative orientations, for its quest to promote environmental policy justice, and transforming the social structures.[21]

It challenges neoliberalism theory in the international environment by directing attention to international regimes that optimize the rational exploitation of nature, ‘both as a tap, and as a sink’ meaning they drain the earth of its natural resource’s and dump back into the land, oceans, and atmosphere. [22] A tragedy of the commons exists, and green theorist look to prevent an escalation of this.

To understand Green IR theorist position is to understand how they have begun to develop distrust in the institutions that were meant to act in their best interest. They are now concerned with exposing ways in which these social structure serve to stop the development of more effective environmental initiatives’.

A further influence of trust on this theory is how as result of distrust green theorists support non-state actors in taking initiative to influence climate change negotiations to enforce ideas of democratic accountability.

As a critical theory is important to point that most of the signed international treaties making and made are regarding environmental issues, which shows it’s a growing concern in international politics.

Bibliography:

  • Walt, Stephen M. 2018. ‘The World Wants You To think Like A Realist’. Foreign Policy, 30 May 2018. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/05/30/the-world-wants-you-to-think-like-a-realist/.
  • Vogelstein, Rachel and Alexandra Bro. 2019. ‘Sweden’s Feminist Foreign policy, Long May It Reign’, Foreign Policy, 30 January 2019. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/30/swedenfeminist-foreignpolicy/ .
  • Dunne, T., Kurki, M. and Smith, S. (2013). International relations theories. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.266-286.
  • Botsman, R. (2017). Who can you trust? How Technology Brought Us Together and Why It Might Drive Us Apart. 1st ed. PublicAffairs.
  • Govier, T. (1992). Trust, Distrust, and Feminist Theory. Hypatia, 7(1), 16-33.
  • Meiser, J. (2019). Introducing Liberalism in International Relations Theory. [online] E-International Relations. Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/18/introducing-liberalism-in-international-relations-theory/ [Accessed 13 Jun. 2019].
  • Camisão, S. (2017). Introducing Realism in International Relations Theory. [online] E-International Relations. Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/27/introducing-realism-in-international-relations-theory/ [Accessed 12 Jun. 2019].
  • Machiavelli, Niccolò. (2008) The prince. Hackett Publishing,
  • Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Knopf, 1978), introduction and chapter 1.
  • Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
  • Robyn Eckersley, “Green Theory,” in International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, eds. Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steve Smith (Oxford: Oxford University Press, third edition, 2013).

[1] Botsman, R. (2017). Who can you trust? How Technology Brought Us Together and Why It Might Drive Us Apart. 1st ed. PublicAffairs.
[2] Govier, T. (1992). Trust, Distrust, and Feminist Theory. Hypatia, 7(1), 16-33.

[3] Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co

[4]

[5] Camisão, S. (2017). Introducing Realism in International Relations Theory. [online] E-International Relations. Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/27/introducing-realism-in-international-relations-theory/ [Accessed 12 Jun. 2019].

[6] Walt, Stephen M. (2018). ‘The World Wants You To think Like A Realist’. Foreign Policy, 30 May 2018. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/05/30/the-world-wants-you-to-think-like-a-realist/.

[7] Machiavelli, Niccolò. (2008) The prince. Hackett Publishing,

[8] J. MEARSHEIMER, J. (2006). Structural Realism. [online] Mearsheimer.uchicago.edu. Available at: https://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/StructuralRealism.pdf [Accessed 13 Jun. 2019].

[9] C,S (2017

[10] Walt, 2018

[11] Botsman,2017
[12] Vogelstein, Rachel and Alexandra Bro. 2019. ‘Sweden’s Feminist Foreign policy, Long May It Reign’, Foreign Policy, 30 January 2019. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/30/swedenfeminist-foreignpolicy/ .
[13] Voge, Rachel

[14] Walt, Stephen M. 2018. ‘The World Wants You To think Like A Realist’. Foreign Policy, 30 May 2018. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/05/30/the-world-wants-you-to-think-like-a-realist/.

[15] Conover, P., & Sapiro, V. (1993). Gender, Feminist Consciousness, and War. American Journal of Political Science,37(4), 1079-1099. doi:10.2307/2111544

[16]  Govier, T. (1992). Trust, Distrust, and Feminist Theory. Hypatia, 7(1), 16-33.
19 Meiser, J. (2019). Introducing Liberalism in International Relations Theory. [online] E-International Relations. Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/18/introducing-liberalism-in-international-relations-theory/ [Accessed 13 Jun. 2019].

[18] Gov,(1992)

[20] Botsman, R. (2017). Who can you trust? How Technology Brought Us Together and Why It Might Drive Us Apart. 1st ed. PublicAffairs.
[21] Robyn Eckersley, “Green Theory,” in International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, eds. Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steve Smith (Oxford: Oxford University Press, third edition, 2013).

[22] Ibid

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this assignment and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: