In my opinion, I think the four types of moral leadership namely ethical, authentic, servant, or spiritual may not be easily divided. The main reason for this assertion is that they are centered on the aspect of morality. They are particularly concerned with producing the best outcomes that are conform to the expected norms and morals.
Marsha accepted the position of assistant professor and had a lot of tasks to accomplish. However, she had her own expectations such as performance reward system. However, she encountered problems such as inequity in pay as well as unclear performance metrics among others. If Marsha had effectively negotiated the terms of her increase, there are likely chances that she would have received it. It can be noted that Marsha is very cooperative and unassertive, forms a peaceful coexistence, creates a lose-lose scenario. When negotiating, this is quite dangerous since it gives the other party an advantage to bargain from the process. Marsha should adopt a win-win situation if possible such that her concerns are taken into account while the concerns of the organization are also prioritized. Fred has been taking advantage of her because of the negotiating styles used.
The other issue highlighted in the case is related to lack of organizational justice deficiencies in procedural and distributive justice where it can be seen that Marsha is not treated like others. Basically, this involves “playing down differences among conflicting parties and highlighting similarities and areas of agreement” (Schermerhorn, 2010, p.241). In order to resolve this issue, it is imperative for the responsible authorities to treat all the employees as valuable asserts to the organization. This can be done through taking into account their interests, needs and grievances since they also have their own goals to fulfill apart from work oriented goals. Employee engagement in the decision making process in the organization can significantly help to