This article discusses the different ways we can approach moral dilemmas, presenting five distinct methods: the Utilitarian Approach, the Rights Approach, the Fairness or Justice Approach, the Common-Good Approach, and the Virtue Approach. Each of these frameworks offers a unique perspective for evaluating ethical issues, helping us consider the various factors involved in making responsible decisions.

The Utilitarian Approach involves three steps. First, we identify the different courses of action available to us. Second, we assess who will be affected by each option and how they will be impacted. Finally, we choose the action that will result in the greatest benefit and the least harm. This approach is about finding the balance that maximizes overall well-being and minimizes negative consequences.

The Common-Good Approach, on the other hand, encourages us to think beyond individual interests and consider what will benefit society as a whole. It highlights our interconnectedness and the importance of shared values and resources in building a healthy community. This perspective is crucial for addressing issues that affect everyone, such as public health, environmental sustainability, and social justice.

The Virtue Approach shifts the focus inward, prompting us to reflect on the kind of people we want to become and the virtues we should strive to embody, such as honesty, integrity, and compassion. It’s not just about what we do in specific situations, but about the kind of character we are developing over time.

Together, these approaches provide a well-rounded guide for making ethical decisions. They remind us that addressing moral dilemmas requires more than just gathering facts; we must also thoughtfully consider the values and principles at play. By applying this framework, we can better navigate the complexities of ethical decision-making and strive to act in ways that are fair, respectful, and beneficial to all.

The article “Personal Values and Performance in Teams” by David J. Glew examines the relationship between individual personal values and team performance. Through two studies, involving undergraduate and MBA students, the research explores whether personal values like accomplishment, equality, helpfulness, and honesty influence individual and team-level outcomes. Glew found that personal values, although expected to have a positive impact, were generally not significant predictors of peer-evaluated performance. Instead, prior individual performance was a stronger indicator of how well team members would perform within their teams. At the team level, the value of equality was found to have a positive impact on overall team performance among undergraduate teams, but the results were less clear for MBA teams. This research highlights the complexity of understanding team dynamics, showing that while values are important, other factors like past performance may have a greater influence on team success. The findings suggest that the interplay between values and performance is nuanced, with individual and team-level dynamics contributing differently depending on the context.

Denise A. Bonebright’s article, “40 Years of Storming,” provides a thorough historical analysis of Bruce W. Tuckman’s influential model of small group development. Originally introduced in 1965, Tuckman’s model outlines four stages—forming, storming, norming, and performing—that describe the progression of groups as they develop cohesion and effectiveness. The model was later expanded in 1977 with Mary Ann Conover Jensen to include a fifth stage, adjourning, acknowledging the group’s eventual dissolution. The article traces the model’s rise in both academic and professional circles, emphasizing its widespread adoption due to its practicality and adaptability across various fields, especially in human resource development. Bonebright also highlights the model’s limitations, such as its reliance on therapy groups in initial research and the lack of consideration for external factors affecting group dynamics. Despite these limitations, the model has maintained its relevance for over four decades, offering a simple yet effective framework for understanding team dynamics and development in diverse settings.

In the article Top 10 Qualities That Make A Great Leader, Ted Myers discusses the essential qualities that define a great leader. He emphasizes the importance of honesty, noting that leaders must model ethical behavior to influence their team. Delegation is critical for scaling operations and trusting the team, allowing leaders to focus on high-level tasks. Effective communication ensures that team members understand the vision and goals clearly. Confidence is vital, especially during challenging times, to maintain team morale. Commitment from the leader motivates the team, as seeing a leader work hard inspires them to do the same. A positive attitude helps maintain a healthy work environment and keeps the team motivated. Creativity allows leaders to navigate complex situations by thinking outside the box. Intuition is necessary for making decisions when there is no clear roadmap. The ability to inspire the team is crucial for keeping everyone focused on long-term goals, while a personalized approach to each team member ensures that the leader can get the best out of their team by understanding their individual needs and preferences.

DEJ 2 part 2

Over the summer I was a camp counselor for an all-boys camp. I was working in the 7th-grade bunk which came with many behavioral challenges. I had to use a lot of the traits discussed in Myers’s article to try to lead the kids properly. Communication was very important to get the kids to listen. The approach was also a key trait that was used in working with these kids. The campers were all different and required different approaches to how they were talked to. This helped me develop many skills in conflict resolution and learning how to recognize the correct way to approach different people. 

test