The leader that I feel has exhibited exemplary ethical conduct is J. Harold Chandler, the CEO of Milliken &Company LTD. Having led the company to be awarded as the world’s most ethical company, Harold has demonstrated certain ethical traits that he has instilled in the company making it the most ethical. Harold is a fair and just leader. As a leader of the firm, he has demonstrated highest degree of fairness and just by advocating for equality of all employees in the organization. Under his leadership, no employee is ever treated with bias based on gender, ethnicity or even nationality. He values all the employees and gives them just and fair treatment. He has introduced policies that makes it illegal for any employee to discriminate a fellow worker on the basis of gender, race or religion. Also, Harold have demonstrated the highest degree of honesty and integrity. Under his leadership, corruption and misappropriation of funds has been eliminated. He has always put every manager at task to account for any resources at their disposal. His stance stand for openness in the use of company resources has earned him respect not only in the firm but also in the entire country.
The scenario creates a moral dilemma by either having to do what is moral and ethical or keeping the secrets of the company. In the consequentialism result-based ethics, two principles are applicable. The decision on whether the act is wrong or right depends purely on the results of the act itself (Galea, 2013). The more good outcomes the act produces, the better or more right that act. When faced with an ethical dilemma, one should choose an action that will minimize the harmful outcomes and maximize the right results. In the scenario, the artificial knee joint can dramatically reduce the healing time for the patients even though it could have some small percentage of patients getting an infection. Consequentialist will ask questions such as; “Is the act bad for the community?” Does it consider the welfare of many? There are more good consequences than the adverse effects, and therefore keeping the company secret is the best action because it will maximize good outcomes by healing many patients quickly while at the same time increasing the revenue of the firm.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In the deontology perspective, a leader has to act ethically and morally. It is not the consequence of the action that makes the action right or wrong (Ditto & Liu, 2011). The question asked here will be; “Is the action good in itself and good without qualification?” An ethical action has to be both good in itself and good without qualification. In the scenario, failing to disclose the negative effects of the product to the patients could make the situation worse for the few who will get an infection, causing the act lose the “good without qualification” aspect. In this dilemma, the leader can focus on the patients who could suffer as a consequence of the product. If the two scenarios in the deontology perspective, disclosing the information to customers will be a betrayal to the firm but a show of ethics, while keeping the information will make the act lose the “good without qualification” aspect and subsequently loss of ethical values. It will be therefore ethical in the deontology perspective to disclose the harmful effects of the artificial knee joint to the patients.
Cognitive moral development levels
What action would be best for society in the long term? The cognitive moral development represented here is the post-conventional morality where people look at their actions in terms of how it will benefit or impress others and not themselves. They want to achieve a universal long term equality and fairness for all.
If I reveal this information, will my company find out and fire me? The cognitive moral development here is the pre-conventional morality where people do right or wrong depending on the possible consequences the action might have on them.
Which course of action would best serve justice? The level represented here is the post-conventional morality where people recognize the need to follow the rules and protect the rights of every individual member of the society.
Are there any laws that indicate whether I should disclose this information? The level represented is the conventional morality where people look at the community for guidelines on what is wrong and right. They know some rules need to be obeyed to keep the society run smoothly.
If I keep quiet, will my company reward me for that? It represents the pre-conventional morality where people act based on the possible consequences of their actions or what they could gain or lose ( Gibbs, 2013). They recognize that others also have needs and it becomes a give me I give you tactically.
Ethical Lens Inventory
My preferred ethical lens is considered autonomy and mild sensitivity. I listen to senses I determining the virtues that will best serve my community; I advocate for equality in the society. A society that everyone has equal rights and is given equal treatment without biases. I stand for what is right in the society and advocate for the wellbeing of all individuals. I aim at having a society where every individual’s right are respected. I make decisions autonomously; independently without outside influence. I, however, prioritize the value of autonomy; respecting individuals over equality; giving the groups priority. I stand to defend and protect the rights of every individual community member. I advocate for a good life for every one of them and ensure they live to their full potential.
The preferred ethical lens varies depending on the setting. At the workplace, my preferred ethical lens is equality for everyone. I would like it when the employer treats every worker equally without any bias or favor. Equality at workplace remains my ethical goal. A working environment where equality is valued creates a more ethical work relationship. Treat me the same way you treat others is always my ethical goal. At a personal level, my preferred ethical lens will be autonomy over equality. I would like to be a person who can make independent decisions, decisions that will be of good to everyone in the community. I like making decisions that are not for only my personal gains, but also for the general benefit of the society at large. I however like to make my decisions without being influenced or coerced by any one. At the social level, the preferred ethical lens is rationality. As I interact with friends and colleagues, I would like our talks to be based on rationality and agreeable reasons that could benefit other community members. My goal is to see the society prosper, and my talks therefore need to be based on rationality, facts and agreeable reasons that can benefit the society.
My risk is being calculating. When I am faced with a conflict, I believe in reducing every decision to a cost-benefit analysis in which the short-term goals are balanced with the principles. As I do my calculations, I may not respect other people’s desires and humanity. With human beings developing complex desires than just maximizing economic status, the economic utilitarianism has a place. Assuming that everyone wants the same things as myself, I may fail to understand the wants or wishes of others.
The three steps that can be used to mitigate the risk when faced with conflict is first to establish the standard goal for both parties. By understanding what is common to all, it will be easy to fulfill the needs of all. The second step is to identify possible ways in which to meet the common goal that will leave everyone satisfied. The final step is to identify any barriers that could hinder achievement of the common goal and finally settle on the best solution.
My primary values are sensitivity and autonomy. My emotions and passions are tempered by reasons as I seek my heart desires. My classical virtue is temperance. I attempt to embrace sobriety and become self-restrained as I try to achieve ethical maturity. I seek to achieve moderation in all the things I do. These values are comparable to the core values of truth, integrity, and justice. Justice seeks to ensure everyone receives equal and fair treatment in the society. Integrity deals with doing the right thing always, free from fraud or corruption.
I will use ELI to make my personal evaluation tool that will help me comprehend the virtues and values that can have influence on choices to be made. It will guide me in prioritizing the values that are most preferred while making ethical decisions. Upon gaining an understanding of what values are the most significant to me and what values are the most significant to others, I will be able to minimize any conflict that could arise when values contradict. From here I will be able to make better ethical decisions that will be of common good to everyone in the community.
References
Ditto, P. H., & Liu, B. (2011). Deontological dissonance and the consequentialist crutch. The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil , 51-70.
Galea, S. (2013). An argument for a consequentialist epidemiology. American journal of epidemiology , 178 (8), 1185-1191.
Gibbs, J. C. (2013). Moral development and reality: Beyond the theories of Kohlberg, Hoffman, and Haidt . Oxford University Press.
