The passage from Barry Posner’s paper that reads, “Deference to higher authority, risk-taking, celebration, and the like in one cultural context are likely to vary in another cultural setting” refers to how subordinates and colleagues are handled and how these cultural norms relate to the worldwide response to the 2008 financial crisis. Different nations responded to the crisis in different ways according to their cultural norms and beliefs, which had an impact on both the leadership style and the general results for their populations and economies.

The Borrie and Bigart (2021) article’s focus on adaptive management inside the Visitor Use Management Framework is an intriguing feature. Decision-making may be flexible using this technique, adapting quickly to shifts in visitor behavior and surrounding circumstances. Managers may better combine conservation efforts with recreational usage by monitoring and revising tactics on a regular basis. This helps to ensure that protected places remain robust to challenges from both the natural world and human activity.

Posner’s quotation highlights how different leadership styles work in different cultural contexts. While the leadership in Iceland encouraged a more regional recovery and held executives accountable, the leadership in the United States concentrated on stabilizing the financial markets. The celebration of success and recovery took on a distinct form as well; although stock market gains signaled the U.S. recovery, Iceland’s more modest and people-centered recovery was hailed as a victory of communal resilience. This incident serves as an example of how cultural context profoundly influences leadership and decision-making, as Posner explains, and how various strategies can produce different results in times of crisis.

Posner, B. Z. (2015). It’s how leaders behave that matters, not where they are from. The Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 22(3), 285-292.

I discovered that making decisions that impact not just people but also governments, businesses, and society at large requires careful consideration of ethics. Ethics is the study of and use of a framework to judge what is good and wrong in an activity. It is not just about obeying the law, one’s emotions, or social conventions. The literature teaches us that there are several views or “lenses” that we may use to analyze acts when it comes to ethics. Some examples of these lenses include the Rights Lens, Justice Lens, Utilitarian Lens, Common Good Lens, Virtue Lens, and Care Ethics Lens. Every lens offers a different perspective on moral dilemmas and enables us to see how our actions affect other people. For instance, the Virtue Lens inquires as to whether a choice advances our goal of becoming the sort of person we like to be, whereas the Utilitarian Lens concentrates on achieving the greatest benefit for the largest number. These methods support the process of making thoughtful judgments. The essay highlights that making ethical decisions involves more than just according to one’s instincts or external norms; it also takes careful analysis and evaluation of a variety of issues. This viewpoint is best expressed by the remark, “Ethics refers to standards and practices that tell us how human beings ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves.” This emphasizes how crucial it is to approach ethical decision-making methodically rather than depending just on situational or subjective judgments.

Source: https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/

I discovered from the text that tackling moral difficulties calls for deep analysis of ethical norms and principles in addition to fact-finding. The five methods of ethical problem-solving that are highlighted in the work are virtue ethics, rights, justice, utilitarianism, and the common good. By framing moral quandaries in various ways, each strategy aids in helping us arrive at more morally sound conclusions. For instance, the rights approach stresses upholding people’s liberties and dignity, whereas the utilitarian approach concentrates on maximizing benefit and reducing damage. In addition to helping us navigate challenging circumstances, these frameworks promote introspection about how we interact with others and whether our behavior is consistent with the ideals of our community. What really stood out to me was how well the various ethical perspectives worked together. For example, the common-good approach pushes us to look beyond our own interests and prioritize the welfare of the community as a whole. According to the text, “Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society.,” when we hear appeals to the common good. This quotation strikes a chord with me because it emphasizes the value of group accountability in moral decision-making and challenges us to think about how our actions affect everyone, not just ourselves.

Source: https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/thinking-ethically/

Grant Wilson – Test