In the article “What Are Your Values? Deciding What’s Important in Life” by Jonathan Hancock, it is underlined that “your values are the things that you believe are important in the way you live and work” (Hancock). This statement highlights how values serve as the foundation for our decisions and behaviors, acting as a compass to guide us through life’s complexities. As Hancock notes, identifying and prioritizing these values can ensure that our actions align with our sense of purpose and integrity (Hancock).

This article resonates deeply with my own experiences. I have often found that my values of hard work, empathy, and family-orientedness shape the decisions I make, both in personal and academic contexts. For example, when choosing to pursue a career in finance, I realized that these values aligned with the profession’s demand for ethical standards, dedication, and care for others. Hancock’s idea to consider moments of pride and fulfillment as a starting point in identifying core values led me to reflect on my accomplishments so far, especially through internships.

The article also allows for comparisons to larger social contexts. For example, the value of work-life balance, which is a shifting value according to Hancock, indicates the shift in societal values toward greater consideration for people’s mental health and well-being than for success defined solely in material terms. Other cultures or industries still consider competition and long hours more important than balance. This also reflects how values develop both at the personal level and across societies.

In the guest column, Strong Ethics Provide Guidance in Triangle Business Journal, the author emphasizes that in the midst of turbulence, ethical leadership provides anchoring influence, just like a lighthouse to guide a ship to safety through troubled waters. The article claims, “Ethical leadership reminds us we are all ethical leaders who can speak up, support others, and hold people accountable for behavior that fails to point out the sacrosanct principles of respect, trust, honor, dignity, integrity, and responsibility” (Triangle Business Journal). It is an ethical foundation that, in particular during times of hardship, establishes the workplace as one in which respect and common values create a caring culture.

I was able to relate some of the concepts presented in this article to my own work environment. I have had the privilege of witnessing ethical leadership in action within my fraternity here on campus; our president exemplifies many of these principles. He makes each member of the fraternity feel valued and appreciated because open communication is always encouraged and he hears all of our voices.

Today, ethical leadership holds a deeper meaning since any kinds of social and political issues may also spill into the workplace and create divisiveness. One great example of how ethical leadership can make a difference around the world can be viewed with organizations that truly promote diversity and inclusion, such as Ben & Jerry’s. Supporting social justice and embedding ethical values into business operations fortifies a message of unity and respect. Unlike companies that have a profit-oriented rationale only, ethical-led companies remind their employees and the public of something bigger than themselves, namely, that well-principled actions can make a difference.

In the guest column Needed: Leaders Who Inspire, Listen, the author of the article underlines that this is a time when leaders are needed who can inspire from the very core and authentically connect with their workforce. This article highlights characteristics of an inspirational leader, including that the inspirational leader “honors people,” listens attentively, gives a purpose, and builds an environment of psychological safety where employees feel valued and involved. These qualities of effective leaders are highly needed in today’s pressing and time-constrained work environment, where feelings of isolation or insignificance among an onslaught of demands are common.

I can truly attest to the fact that this article hit home because effective, authentic leadership goes a long way in the dynamic of a team environment. My current manager in the car detailing business has expressed several of these attributes. He keeps recognizing each member within the team at all times, listens to any concerns with interest and seriousness, and keeps everyone in the team informed about decisions involving the team. All these have fostered an open and supportive atmosphere, making me feel more vested in my work and reinforcing my belief in the transformational power of servant leadership based on authenticity and respect.

What was required for inspirational leadership not only in my personal work experience but part of the greater social demand was leadership that is relatable on a human basis. Strong worldly examples of this were provided by Jacinda Ardern, former Prime Minister of New Zealand, in her approach to leadership at times of crises, such as the Christchurch shooting. Her response was empathetic and inclusive, thus reaching every corner of the world, proving that leaders who truly value and support people can unite and bring hope in the face of tragedy.

In Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model, Thomas M. Jones relies on the idea of “moral intensity,” which he describes as “a new set of variables” affecting ethical decisions (Jones). This model shows how ethical decisions shift with perceived consequences, indicating that not all ethical issues are viewed or acted upon with the same importance. Jones’s model, based in social psychology, suggests that the perceived intensity of a moral issue impacts each step of decision-making, from awareness to action.

This model reminds me of an unethical situation I noticed at school. A colleague was misusing school resources, and although I knew it was wrong, I hesitated to act because the consequences seemed minimal and I did not want to be “that guy”. With Jones’s framework, the lower “moral intensity” explains my reluctance to report it. Looking back, if the consequences had been greater or impacted others, I might have acted differently. Jones’s model shows how perceived seriousness shapes our response.

Jones’s model also relates to corporate scandals like Enron, where employees likely observed unethical practices but may not have grasped the full consequences. This “issue-contingent” nature of ethics shows how individuals sometimes overlook small ethical breaches that grow into major problems. While everyday decisions suggest early action, corporate scandals show how a lack of action due to perceived low intensity can lead to systemic failures. Jones’s model reminds organizations that preserving integrity and trust requires addressing ethical issues early, regardless of perceived intensity.

The Josephson Institute of Ethics recognizes six core ethical values—trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship—that are the building blocks of ethical behavior and coincide with good decision-making. In one passage, Josephson relates, “Ethical values and principles always take precedence over nonethical ones. The ethical person should always choose to follow ethical principles” (UC San Diego). As can be derived, this instills that moral values will always come first before one’s self-interests, no matter how difficult the circumstances may present themselves.

This source reminds me of a situation when I had to decide whether to report a coworker who cut corners at work. It was not an easy decision, but eventually, my parents’ clarity assured me that it was more ethical to take responsibility for the sake of the organization and my own well-being, like the Josephson model for ethical decision-making suggests. This experience connects well with the values of responsibility and fairness because, through it, I realized my responsibility for ensuring standards were upheld, even if it meant a path not comfortable to tread.

In a broader perspective, the process of ethical decision-making has parallels with cases such as corporate fraud, whereby executives may put their personal interests before those of corporate integrity, leading to scandals and harm to the organization. There are quite a number of instances in the world where failure to observe ethical principles leads to disastrous outcomes, such as loss of reputation or legal fines, and shows the applicability of sustained ethical behavior in organizations.

In “Do the Kind Thing” Daniel Lubetzky underlines the transformative power of kindness: “Kindness is not just a feeling; it’s a practice that leads to action”. This outlook has really made a lot of sense in my life, especially when I was working at BurgerFi. When one is in the fast world, one really needs to create an atmosphere of mutual support and encouragement among the people working on the team. I indeed, have worked in an effective teamwork environment while getting over the challenges of the busy shift, while making sure customers get good service. Also just being kind to coworkers on the job creates a good atmosphere down the road and helps yourself down the road, especially when you need someone to cover your shift.

The theory of Lubetzky actually parallels global trends in society. Recently, in the last couple of decades, programs that encourage random acts of kindness and social responsibility have grown in popularity. These movements, such as the “Random Acts of Kindness” movement, foster the development of love towards all human beings and the creation of a community and cooperative behaviors among people. For example, a business with large amounts of corporate social responsibility and philanthropy creates a loyal customer base, and employees experience enhanced job satisfaction. This does not make the challenge go away when trying to scale up. Many organizations genuinely promote values of kindness and generosity but struggle with systemic issues in actually putting into practice what they preach.

Guth and Tagiuri in their article, “Organizational Values and Corporate Strategy,” talk about how “An organization’s culture is largely determined by the personal values of its members”. This observation really echoed my experiences in group projects during my academic career. But when team members share values and objectives, collaboration thrives and high-quality outcomes follow. I can still remember how integrity and excellence shared by my group has kept the atmosphere accommodating and drove us into impressive results in every group project where this has been the case. In contrast, it always falters in a team whose members have different values that thereby cause friction and misunderstanding.

On a larger scale, this connection of values with culture speaks volumes about the real dynamics within organizations. Organizations whose cultures are aligned with their core values tend to have better employee engagement and customer loyalty. For example, companies such as Patagonia have embedded their environmentalist values into the core of their cultures, hence fostering a closer connection with customers and reinforcing brand identity. The end result is a loyal group of workers who show pride in their ability to contribute to the company mission.

Scott Lichtenstein, in his article “The Role of Values in Leadership: How Leaders’ Values Shape Value Creation,” reinforces that thought when he says, “The values of the leaders influence decision-making processes and eventually mold the culture and values of the organizations” (Lichtenstein, 2012, p. 2). This quote has been a sort of reflection for me on what values mean in my life. Through my experiences, I have realized that the values passed on by my family and mentors have played a major role in my decision-making processes, both academically and interpersonally. For example, the importance of integrity has led me to be truthful with others; thus, people develop trust in me.

In the broader perspective, Lichtenstein’s views remind me of the debates taking place in the world regarding corporate leadership. Examples of high-profile cases showing how the implementation of weak values leads to resounding disasters abound, including the destruction of major corporations through illegal unethical practices. When leaders choose to put profit before integrity, they harm not only their organizations but also the communities they serve. This also somewhat resembles the article, where strong-value leaders create an environment that nurtures good ethics and social responsibility.

While the article offers insight into some of the very positive results of value-led leadership, reality often shows a more nuanced picture. Where many leaders may espouse values, few consistently live them, engendering skepticism in employees and stakeholders. This inconsistency undercuts positive benefits of value-based leadership that are clearly and positively correlated in Lichtenstein’s analysis.

https://moodle-courses2425.wolfware.ncsu.edu/pluginfile.php/654205/mod_resource/content/2/Lichtenstein_Role_of_Values_in_Leadership.pdf

According to the Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society, Ethical Role of the Manager, it has been said that “managing and leading can be said to be inherently ethics-laden tasks because every managerial decision affects either people or the natural environment in some way” (p. 1). The above quote is meant to help bring about the importance of ethical decision-making, first and foremost not only to the direct stakeholders but also to society and the environment. That does strike a deep part within me, thinking of some leadership role I once held in a student organization. I vaguely recall the many decisions I needed to make in event planning and in team management-small ones at that time-but they seemed to come full circle with implications for my peers as far as their feelings over their importance in that group dynamic went. It reminded me that all decisions, no matter how minute they are, have ethical consequences and impacts on people and the community in general.

This text also pertains to wider, more realistic contexts. For example, decisions about ethical dilemmas many companies still face today actually mirror what this text has to say. Consider, for instance, companies that have to make decisions on sustainability practices. Economically, a business would need to weigh the benefits of lower costs against the ethical responsibility to reduce environmental damage. While the text reminds one that a proper balance of “rights and duties” must be considered along with utilitarian principles, businesses also must consider the “greatest good” and their duty concerning environmental sustainability (p. 2).

https://moodle-courses2425.wolfware.ncsu.edu/pluginfile.php/654207/mod_resource/content/1/Ethical_Role_of_the_Manager.pdf

In “Thinking Ethically,” the five approaches to ethical decision-making that the authors review include what they call the utilitarian approach, which offers that the ethical action is the one that produces “the greatest balance of good over evil” (Santa Clara University). This brings to mind work situations in which the choice between reducing employee hours or laying off a small group are often had to be made. When the leadership decides to cut hours; this they consider would distribute the impact more evenly, a decision grounded on the utilitarian notion of the greatest good for the greatest number.

On a bigger scale, the Rights Approach focuses on the respect of an individual’s rights, such as that to privacy and to choose freely. It would say, “We have the right to do, believe, and say whatever we choose in our personal lives so long as we do not violate the rights of others” (Santa Clara University). It reminds me of those hot debates going on around the world about data privacy. It is an ethical question whether companies are justified in collecting and selling personal information when often people do not give their consent for everything happening with their data.

Both cases show how the ethical frameworks guide moral standpoints, both personally and globally, by considering the rights well and the impacts.