Leader Who Exhibited Exemplary Ethical Conduct

Table of Contents

Abstract        3

Leader Who Exhibited Exemplary Ethical Conduct        4

The Dilemma        5

Cognitive and Moral Development        6

Reflecting on the Ethical Lens Inventory        8

Conclusion        11

REFERENCES        12

Abstract

In this paper I will discuss a leader who has exhibited exemplary ethical conduct, analyze a given dilemma from two points of view (consequentialist and deontologist), and reflect upon the results of my Ethical Lens Inventory.

Leader Who Exhibited Exemplary Ethical Conduct

        I am choosing my current manager at work as my leader who exhibited exemplary ethical conduct. Chelsea is a mid-level manager at high paced for-profit software solutions development organization. Chelsea treats every individual equally, with dignity and respect, is a servant leader, is fair and just (fights for what is right at the time and long term), focuses on the greater good of the organization through individual and team growth, and is always honest in even the toughest situations.

        There are two traits that I will focus on for the purposes of this analysis; treating every individual equally and being fair and just. First, I will discuss treating every individual equally this is often referred to as dignity and respectfulness. Chelsea shows complete and total respect for every individual she encounters from the janitor to the CEO knowing everyone by name and remembering key details about them. She greets every individual everyday by name, with a smile, and asking them how they are. Above and beyond the general respect she shows in knowing everyone by name and greeting them she remembers key things about each one of them. Our janitor, Jeffery, has diabetes. Every morning she asks him if he remembered to test his sugar, what his results were, and if he remembered to take his medications.  She carries this over into the team she immediately manages on a personal and professional level. She knows what is going on personally with everyone on her team and ensures she stays in the know about their families and personal goals. Chelsea also knows what each team member values most and adjusts her interactions with them appropriately. There is one highly religious member of our team, she ensures that no one cusses in front of her and she is provided time to pray in a reserved conference room every day. Above and beyond the personal levels of dignity and respect she is very much a servant manager and ensures that is not using her followers to advance her career. She is more focused on each person advancing. She is a listener, she ensures every person has a chance to speak and provide ideas when a new project hits or an issue is found. Chelsea ensures that no person is ever put down for a poor idea but thanked for their idea and explained to as to why it may not be the right one at the time.  

        The second trait that I will focus on is being fair and just. When Chelsea joined the team, she was new to the company and coming in on the coat tails of two failed managers who were dismissed from their positions. Day one she came in and met with each team member individually to find out what was important to them, what they valued the most and what they wanted from her. The team was overall pleased from day one, as this was the type of leader they hadn’t seen in a long time. After three months in the position and having time to evaluated everyone’s work she determined that the gaps in compensation she was seeing for the same people doing the same jobs was incorrect and that not every person was in the right position for their skill set. She set out to make this right. Chelsea set up many meetings with the director and VP to get the playing field leveled. She ensured that every person in the same position was being compensated appropriately. Next, she took a skill set inventory and fought to get the right people in the right positions. She found that one of the developers was not truly happy being a developer and would rather design, since he had the proper skill set to be a designer she worked to move him into that role. Lastly, she found that two people who consistently go above and beyond in their work had not been promoted in several years. She fought the fight to make sure that they were promoted to the positions that they were already performing in and were compensated appropriately.  

        In conclusion, it’s hard enough to come in as a new mid-level manager having to learn the company, but it’s even harder to be the one who rocks the boat and makes things right. Chelsea is the type of leader who I, because of her level of great ethical leadership, greatly respect and learn from every day. She is the type of leader that I hope to grow into in the future.  

 The Dilemma

        When reading the given scenario and thinking about what should be done from an outside point of view there are two ways that people would respond to it. This depends upon if the person is a consequentialist or a deontological ethical believer. I will first look at it from the approach of the consequentialist.  The consequentialist would look at the dilemma from the prospective of the ethical or moral decision to be made is determined by the majority rules results of that action. The consequentialist would see that the good outweighs the bad in this situation. He would morally and ethically stand by the fact that there is a greater good coming from the fact that the knee saves people and insurance companies money, the vast majority of patients experience less healing time, the percentage of negative outcomes is extremely low and no matter what surgical procedure anyone has there is always the chance of someone having a negative outcome – whether you disclose it or not – the nondisclosure doesn’t come into play since the good outweighs the bad. Even though this view might seem sinister to some, the results are overall are way more positive than negative, so the knee should be taken to market as is. When the consequentialist thinks about the scenario he would ask himself questions such as; Does the good out weigh the bad? Do the rules and regulations set forth by governing parties prevent the greater good from being obtained? Will patients ultimately benefit from letting this go to market without disclosing the tiny percentage of negative outcomes? Will people, businesses, and insurance companies ultimately save more money than lose if this knee goes to market? Since the consequentialist would answer yes to these questions he would allow the knee to go to market and would be able to sell it without feeling morally or ethically unjust.