Ethical leadership is a form of leadership that is determined by respect for ethical beliefs and values, as well as the rights and self-esteem of other people (Anwar & Shah, 2018). Ethical leadership is also interconnected with the concepts of honesty, confidence, and fairness. Ethics is linked with the kind of morals and values any society or person thinks are appropriate or desirable. Ethics is the mixture of a desire for individuals and their motives. Ethical leadership can be defined as the form of leadership in which a leader performs every task that is morally acceptable in every area or every department of the company (Anwar & Shah, 2018). Ethical leadership can impose a positive environment in a company. A leader displaying ethical conduct in the company will tend to have these factors imposed on others in the organization as well. People will try to follow those steps that the leader is following. It can also enhance the energy of the team. A sense of collaboration can be demonstrated in the team, where people tend to work with each other (Anwar & Shah, 2018). The morale of the team will also be improved. Being ethical can improve the overall health of the organization because people showing respect to each other and working with each other will improve the financial and strategic strength of the company.
Ethical Traits:
A perfect example of an ethical leader is Steve Jobs, who was the CEO of Apple Inc. People in his organization say that he was a man who always focused on moral values and building the overall strength of the company and also kept in mind how the products could be ethically beneficial for the customers. Being in a company that produces the best type of technological items, Steve Jobs focused on demonstrating the best kind of ethical values in the organization. There are a lot of ethical traits that lead to a perfect ethical leader. A strong focus on team building is one of them, which was acquired by Steve Jobs. When a leader tends to achieve a certain goal, he/she is not doing it from a personal perspective but tries to make it a team goal that is achieved with collaboration (Anwar & Shah, 2018). Steve Jobs focused on team building, which was one of his strong suits and had a very positive impact on the company.
It also displays a sense of confidence in the workers’ minds that their leader is putting his trust in them and they are being valued. In ethical leadership, justice is very important, which ensures that every person in the company is treated equally. Steve was one of the very few leaders in the modern world who tried to be fair and tried to treat everyone equally. Without any racial or gender discrimination, he always tried to be fair with different levels of employees in the organization (Erol, 2015). It is some sort of theory that, in order to make a customer happy, first you have to make your employees happy. This is the reason that Apple Inc. is considered a top-notch company, as its leader treated everyone equally and employees had no fear of any gender, race, ethnicity, or any other factors.
Ethical Conduct:
Good ethical conduct in a workplace displays that employees take pride in their company and the ethical standards of the company, and also that they respect the customers, employees, partners, and suppliers (Erol, 2015). Ethical conduct describes the company’s legal, ethical, and professional responsibilities. Companies expect their employees to adopt the ethical laws and regulations set by the government. Ethical conduct displayed by Steve Jobs has helped the overall organization in terms of the company’s legal and managerial affairs. It has helped the workforce of the company to bring positive outcomes because somehow their leader was being morally effective, and it resulted in positive outcomes. Local laws and regulations were demonstrated by the leader in the company.
Dilemma Analysis
Consequentialism is a formation of normative ethical beliefs that says that the consequences of an individual’s ethical conduct are the basis of the judgment about the correctness or incorrectness of certain conduct (Rutland & Killen, 2015). To put it simply, the consequentialist approach means that, in an organization, the right and wrong judgment is made on the type of ethical conduct a person acquires. Thus, the approach of a person should produce a positive outcome, and the person should act morally.
The deontological perspective of ethics says that the morality of any action is judged by the rules or laws involved in it. It can be stated that it is bound by the rule and obligation depending on the situation (Rutland & Killen, 2015). It is also known as rule-based ethics, where every judgment is made on the basis of rules and regulations.
In this case, the medical company is producing artificial joints at a lower price than its competitors and with a shorter healing time. The company has not told the customers about the side effects of using its product, which can cause some serious injuries to the patients. Here, the company is doing wrong because it is ethically and legally wrong not to disclose the harmful effects of using those joints. The consequentialist approach says that when a person comes to know about this issue, he/she will directly make a bad judgment in their mind, which is also ethically wrong (Rutland & Killen, 2015). This type of approach clearly says that the company will be judged negatively because it is wrong in not telling the customers about the side effects of the product, which is also unfair to the patients.
From the deontological perspective, the company will be judged on the basis of rules concerning why it acted this way. The person who is trying to tell the government authorities about this will get help from following the deontological approach, as this approach abides by the rules in the company.
Level Of Cognitive Moral Development:
Cognitive moral development is a set of psychological theories that describe the moral code adopted by companies and individuals and help in understanding the ethical dilemma in a better way. It consists of pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional theories. At the pre-conventional stage, morality is judged by the direct consequences at hand (Rutland & Killen, 2015). In the conventional stage, the morality of activities is evaluated by comparing them to the view of society and its expectations. Keeping society in mind, a person’s or company’s morality is judged as right or wrong. At a post-conventional level, which is also known as the principle level, people believe that individuals are a separate reform, and their view may take over society’s view (Rutland & Killen, 2015). At this level, people tend to make their own rules and believe that the rules can be modified according to the need.
What Action Should Be Best For The Society In The Long Term?
In the long run, providing the best type of products without any harmful effects would be great for society and the company. The company serves its customers, and it is its core responsibility to provide the best medical joints needed by society and eliminate anything hidden from society. A very low level of conventional theory is observed by the company because it is not ethically thinking about society and tends to focus on its perspective. But post-convention is highly observed, as it has made its own laws of not disclosing the side effects of using the products to the customers. Ethical laws differ from this type of approach.
If I Reveal This Info, Will The Organization Find Out And Fire Me?
There are certain reasons why I will disclose the information, one of which is the violation of ethical laws. There is a good chance that the company might find out, but a person should do the right thing. From a pre-conventional perspective, it was clear to me in the first place that the company is doing wrong and it will fire me directly after finding out. But if the company thinks of the conventional method, it will consider that it was for the betterment of society.
Which Course Of Action Would Best Serve Justice?
According to the scenario, the company is hiding information from the people that the use of this type of medical product will have harmful effects. Conventionally, it is totally wrong, which says that the company should take into account the social views of the scenario. So, the company is highly practicing the conventional method, where it is not involved in considering social views.
Are There Any Laws That Indicate That I Should Disclose The Information?
There are certain confidentiality laws that explain that if an employee witnesses certain disobedience committed by their company, he/she can report it to the local authorities, keeping in mind if he/she is being harmed by the issue (Rutland & Killen, 2015). The pre-conventional approach explains this stage, where the company tends to have an image of being corrupt just as it commits this crime. Not disclosing the side effects of using that joint will directly make a negative impact on people when they know about it.
If I Keep Quiet, Will The Company Reward Me For That?
The company will never reward me for staying quiet because, from the company’s perspective, it is not doing anything wrong. This explains that it is morally post-conventional, where it is disrupting the main laws and focusing on its own principles. Ethically, it is also wrong because the patients will not buy the product again, and instead of being healthier, their health will decrease.
Ethical Lens Inventory (ELI) Results
ELI is a tool that helps to answer certain questions about organizational values through a person’s actions (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). According to the choices a company makes, they are translated into actions and depict what a person or a company is doing. ELI helps to identify the core values and priorities that lead to the decision-making process (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). There are four different dimensions of Ethical Lens Inventory, which include the rights lens, relationship lens, reputation lens, and results lens. The rights lens is for people who focus on individual rights and rely on rational mindsets in decision-making (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). People in this category value respect and try to provide benefits from their work for other people. The results lens also focuses on individual rights, but these kinds of people take actions based on intuition and emotional beliefs. People with a results-lens mindset value individual responsibility and mutual respect.
The relationship lens includes people who emphasize community rights and depend on emotion and intuition in the decision-making process (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). People with this kind of belief focus on empowering the powerless and value fairness. The reputation lens is for those who depend on rational thoughts and focus on providing value to the community. People in this category prioritize compassion.
Preferred Ethical Lens:
The ELI that I have generated explains that I lie in the results-lens perspective, and it means that I tend to focus on individual goals when given a specific task. It says that I listen to my intuitions and make decisions according to them. It also applies to me and every person linked to me. While making decisions, I think about what effect they will have on the other people linked with that result. While making decisions, I make them with my heart, and following my heart leads me to the best possible decision.
Different Setting:
Being in the results-lens category means that achieving any goal is ethically satisfying. Whether in a social, personal, or work context, my lens remains the same because I tend to make every decision while keeping in mind ethical and moral values as a result.
Blind Spot, Vice, Risk, Or Double Standards:
The blind spot I have gained explains that I become satisfied with too few things. Blind spots are areas where a person or organization does not pay attention (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). It says that I am very sensitive to emotions and mostly listen to the rational voice. Due to this reason, I cannot maintain consistency in long-term goals and my actions. In order to make everyone happy, I forget that I also need to be happy, and sometimes it makes me angry. By keeping in mind that I want to make others happy and what they expect from me, I become accepting of small things that I have achieved.
Steps to mitigate blind spots:
A blind spot can be eliminated by considering some points before taking actions. In the blind-spot category, one tends to ignore a certain thing that can be ethical or personal and forms some other types of results. It can be mitigated by:
- Consider your goal and the people linked with it, aligned with the main purpose so that you do not deviate from the main objective. The results lens has shown that I tend to forget my main purpose by making others happy. So, in making others happy, it is important to remember the main objective I have indulged in.
- The thinking of providing the community with more and getting less is good, but accepting any small thing is not acceptable. It can be ignored to make a forecast of your goals on a high milestone so that gradually it comes to the level of result which is required. For example, if the monthly target is 200, the aim should be 400 so that the target of 200 can be achieved and does not look like accepting something less.
- Keeping ethics in mind, everything should be achievable and acceptable. Focus on results that can be ethically acceptable to satisfy everyone.
Primary Values And Classical Virtues:
The primary values that came as a result of the ELI analysis show that my primary values are Considered Sensibility (CS) and Mild Autonomy (MA). It means that I pay attention to my intuition to decide the best outcome for myself and for every other person. Considered Sensibility makes me think from the heart instead of my head, while Mild Autonomy indicates that I respect every individual and treat them equally. As an MA, I choose my own path and goals, and my decisions are mostly influenced by analyzing the community and people. In short, I act more like an ethical person.
The classical value identified in my ELI result is temperance, where I act more moderately and with self-restraint. As my desires are moderated by my actions, my decisions are self-restrained and moderate. I keep the problems that can be caused by greed and try to accept moderation in all aspects to become an ethical person in the community. My desires are mostly governed by discipline and control.
Comparison to top five values:
The main five values that are selected from the given material are creativity, justice, equality, honor, and power. When we compare the classical virtues and primary values from the ELI analysis, it is obvious that they have clear links because autonomy and sensibility are in line with these. When a person is creative, he will produce innovative outcomes, and the same is the case when I am thinking of my hearing. The desire to provide for the community first is also ethical and comes in comparison with justice and equality. Having to look for my own goals and paths to consider creates a link with having power and honor over my decisions.
Use Of Ethical Lenses:
When we apply these ethical lenses in our professional lives, they already apply a lot of courses to professionalism. I think about making the community happier and also about how a person becomes a team player in a company where he/she provides better results and creates an effective atmosphere (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). Applying considered sensibility in professional life also makes it clear that I will be creating innovative solutions to the problems my company is facing.
References
Anwar, S., & Shah, N. (2018). IMPACT OF PERSONALITY TRAITS ON ETHICAL BEHAVIOR. The Government-Annual Research Journal of Political Science., 6(6).
Drover, W., Wood, M. S., & Fassin, Y. (2014). Take the money or run? Investors’ ethical reputation and entrepreneurs’ willingness to partner. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(6), 723-740.
Erol, F. (2015). An Investigation of the Relationship between Organizational Commitment Levels of Academic Staff and Ethical Conducts in Behavioral and Decision Making Process of University Management. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science (EIJEAS), 1(2).
Hassan, S. (2015). The importance of ethical leadership and personal control in promoting improvement-centered voice among government employees. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(3), 697-719.
Pryor, W. H. (2017). Returning to Marvin Frankel’s First Principles in Federal Sentencing. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 29(2-3), 95-103.
Rutland, A., & Killen, M. (2015). A developmental science approach to reducing prejudice and social exclusion: Intergroup processes, social‐cognitive development, and moral reasoning. Social Issues and Policy Review, 9(1), 121-154.
Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards
Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.
