Impacts of government intervention

Government intervention refers to measures done by the government to control economic activity, resource distribution, and generally how people interact in the nation. Policies aimed at Muslims have been implemented in a number of western nations. The European Court of Justice's decision prohibiting the hijab in the workplace is the most significant (Valdez, 2016). A travel restriction against select nations with a majority of Muslims was subsequently imposed by the Trump administration. The travel restriction on numerous Muslim-majority nations is really a sideshow to certain harmful measures that Trump has pledged in his quest to restore America's greatness (Shear, 2017). The effects of several types of government involvement on the long-term effectiveness of organizations are discussed in this essay.
Effects of government intervention on organizations

Introduction

Government intervention relates to actions taken by the government to regulate economic activities, allocation of resources and generally how individuals interact in the country. Several western countries have put in place policies geared towards people of the Muslim faith. The most notable being the ruling by the European Court of Justice banning hijab in the workplace (Valdez, 2016). Subsequently, the Trump administration has issued a travel ban on some Muslim majority countries. The travel ban on several Muslim-dominated countries is a sideshow to some detrimental actions that Trump has promised in his pursuit of making America great again (Shear, 2017). This paper discusses the arguments against these forms of government intervention on organization’s long-term performance.

Effects of government intervention on organization’s long-term performance

These forms of intervention on Muslims have gathered extensive criticism from religious leaders and human rights activists. The critics are of the view that these policies violate human rights and individual freedom. Business leaders have also actively spoken out against these actions (Hong, 2017). Among those who have criticized the travel ban are Silicon Valley company leaders. Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg stated that such a ban is personal for him since his grandparents were immigrants (Amy, 2017). These remarks are a clear indication of the negative implications of the travel bans on the business community. The immigration bans limits highly skilled technicians and other professionals from entering and living in America. Restriction of intellectual minds inhibits innovation in business (Hong, 2017).

Even more troubling to organization’s long-term performance are the retaliatory actions by Muslim dominated countries. Government intervention on Muslims has provoked Muslim majority countries thus limiting international trade (Heilmann, 2016). For instance, it is hard for U.S based firms to carry out business in Iran since their citizens are discriminated in U.S. The Iranian government has put in place bureaucratic controls making it costly for U.S firms to set up operations in the country (Heilmann, 2016). More to this, citizens of Muslim dominated countries have threatened to boycott products and services by U.S based organizations. The boycotts slow down expansion of U.S organizations in these markets (Heilmann, 2016).

The ruling banning hijab in the workplace is a form of discrimination against Muslims. The hijab is an essential part of Muslim women. Hence by authorizing the ban, Europe is essentially persecuting women in the workplace (Harrison, 2016). The personnel in today’s century is inclusive of all religions and instances of discrimination on Muslims affects a number of workers. This brings about a culture of rivalry among staff and formation of groupings in the workplace (Valdez, 2016). All these moves affect teamwork and effective communication in the place of work. Additionally, Muslims may avoid working in European companies in solidarity to their faith. Muslim women will undeniably avoid workplaces that violate their religious practices (Valdez, 2016).

Conclusion

In today’s globalized world, it is murky at best to discriminate individuals based on their religious affiliations. Though some of these government policies are justifiable in fighting terrorism, not all Muslims support terrorist activities. From the above arguments, it is evident that these policies affect business performance negatively. The government should involve business and religious leaders when formulating intervention policies to prevent these repercussions. Prevention is beyond doubt better than cure; and it is much better to be safe than sorry.

References

Amy, B. (2017). Facebook CEO ‘concerned’ about Trump immigration order: ‘These issues are personal for me.’ The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/01/28/mark-zuckerberg-concerned-about-trump-immigration-order-these-issues-are-personal-for-me/?utm_term=.1e300611d3b8

Harrison, K. A. (2016). Hiding under the Veil of Dress Policy: Muslim Women, Hijab, and Employment Discrimination in the United States. Geo. J. Gender & L., 17, 831.

Heilmann, K. (2016). Does political conflict hurt trade? Journal of International Economics, 99, 179-191.

Hong, K. E. (2017). The Costs of Trumped-Up Immigration Enforcement Measures.

Shear, M. D., & Cooper, H. (2017). Trump bars refugees and citizens of 7 Muslim countries. The New York Times (New York), A1.

Valdez, I. (2016). Nondomination or Practices of Freedom? French Muslim Women, Foucault, and the Full Veil Ban. American Political Science Review, 110(01), 18-30.