Leadership and Ethical Theories - Assignment Example

Leadership al Affiliation: Task Ethical Theories Ethics are crucial since they define how an organization relates with the society. Ethical theories also define how employees in an organization relate with one another. This paper will discuss five ethical theories and their influence in an organization setting. Utilitarianism According to this theory, actions of one person may cause happiness or suffering to the other persons (Brenkert, 2009). This theory controls the people who act as if they are better than others are. In an organization, there are many employees with different ranks. However, despite having different ranks, there are still all human beings. The actions of every person should mind the effect they have to other people. Utilitarianism emphasizes on equality for there to be a state of understanding. All people in an organization should ensure that their actions produce happiness to most people (Trevino & Weaver, 1994). However, it is sometimes difficult to please all people and at time, what is right tends not to please people. The theory, therefore, has to accompany by other theories for it to be sufficient. Duty and Right Ethics According to this theory, actions of people are only good if they respect the rights of other individuals (Hasnas, 2008). It requires that every employee mind the rights of other employees in the work environment. The organization itself should also ensure that its actions do not violate the rights of the public. The actions of one person should not hinder the other people from performing their duties comfortably. Applying this theory ensures that all people are comfortable in the work environment, and it fosters teamwork (Hasnas, 2008). However, it is possible for the rights of people to conflict and hence creating an unavoidable violation of the duty and rights ethics theory. It is difficult for an action to be according to rights of all people in a workplace with diversified people. Virtue Ethics A virtue is what is morally accepted as good or bad in a certain society or an organization. Every organization has a unique culture, which has specific virtues that facilitate the achievement of goals and good relationship of people. This theory requires that the actions of every individual should respect the ethics of the organization (Derry & Green, 2009). It also requires that an organization should respect the value-system of the society in which it operates. Virtue ethics determines the image of an organization, and it helps in maintaining an organizational culture. Acting according to this theory ensure that all employees are virtuous, and their actions are goo and with beneficial aspects. It brings about the spirit of teamwork since all the employees have respect for both the organization and other another. It discourages characters such as pride and ignorance, which negatively affect the organization. However, the theory has a limitation since it is possible for personal and corporate morality to differ (Whetstone, 2001). Such situations are possible in case where the corporate morality overlook the religions and cultures of some of their employees. For example, setting a certain dress code for all employees may lead to violating certain cultures or religions. Employees in such a category will most likely quit the job or not be happy while working. Casuist Theory Casuist theory emphasizes on comparing current ethical dilemmas with past similar dilemmas in order to know how to act (Oddo, 2007). Past incidences of certain characters and actions may offer guidance to the organization on setting the best ethical requirement. It also entails an organization looking at what how other organizations have performed ethically. Successful ethical behaviors may be copied so that the organization can achieve certain ethical standards. The organization can also learn from previous ethical behaviors and act accordingly. Certain ethics can be adopted if they proved beneficial, and some could be dropped if they proved not to be beneficial (Brenkert, 2009). It helps the organization predict the outcomes of certain behaviors and hence act accordingly to prevent negative consequences. This theory has not efficient since behaviors keep changing and what is right now may be wrong in the future. With the changing characteristics of new generations, the theory is ineffective since ethics are highly dynamic. Kantian Ethics The theory requires that the actions of people should always be right regardless of the practical consequences (Derry & Green, 2009). Kantian ethics emphasizes that certain procedures and actions should be followed for anything to be rightly done. In a normal business environment, there are certain procedures that should be followed in order to achieve something. The theory discourages any other actions even of the same result will be attained in the end. For example, an organization may want to win a certain tender. They can either follow the tendering process or offer a bribe in order to get the tender easily. Both actions will lead to winning the tender, but one is ethically wrong. The theory is important since it encourages fairness. However, it may also limit the organization from achieving much success. All the ethical theories are aimed at ensuring that there is a positive relationship between the employees and the society. Theories such as virtue ethics and right ethics are similar since they focus on doing what is right for you and the other people. However, all the theories are unique in their own ways, and they tend to emphasize on different ethical aspects. No individual theory is sufficient on its own and hence managers and leaders should integrate them (Trevino & Weaver, 1994). Ethics are bound to change and hence an organization should keep changing its ethical requirements. Ethics should not be static and should be changed depending on the people working in an organization and the surrounding environment. Task 2 Historical examination of leadership over the past decades People and Scholars generally view leadership in very different angles than they did in the past generation. Leadership has changed over the past decades. Leadership, in the past decades, was something that was done by the book, was straightforward, and was easy to learn. Currently, leadership tends to be more complicated. The main state of art theories in the 1960s and 1970s were the Contingency or situational leadership theories (Winkler, 2010). These theories maintained that the people in leadership were obligated to fit their particular leadership styles to the needs of the situation. Task-oriented leaders portrayed best performance in extreme situations. The decision-making model of leadership assisted managers to come up with viable decisions either on their own or by incorporating the entire team or department. These situational theories dominated the development of leadership and training for decades. In the last twenty years however new ways of viewing leadership have been developed. The approach views leadership as an extremely complex and more focused on the followers. Currently, the most popular leadership theories include the leader member exchange and transformational leadership. They assert that effective leadership is highly dependent on the ability of the leader to energize, engage and develop his or her followers. Moreover, theories of leadership theories have been experienced where the power of decision-making and team leadership is dispersed among several members (Winkler, 2010). Leadership Perspectives The main perspectives on leadership in today’s leadership include replacement of left-brain leadership with whole brain leadership, and that leadership is principle centered (Day, 2012). In the late 80s and early 90s, much leadership concentrated on developing technical leadership skills that seemed to be “left brain.” There was belief that financial literacy, business analysis, systems thinking, workflow management, planning and process improvement was what leadership entailed. These skills however are not enough to engage followership. In the mid-90s, there were various shifts in the understanding of what effective leadership comprises of. There is need for the right brain traits such as empathy, intuition, creativity and humility in effective leadership. For organizations and institutions to succeed, it is advisable that they replace the left-brain leadership with leadership that tends to be whole brain. The capacity of a leader to demonstrate intuition, emotional intelligence, creativity and humility comes out as distinguishing success criteria. Leadership is principle-centered as seen in the four key principles of effective leadership that represent language, skills, mindsets and behaviors (Day, 2012). All these apply at all times and places. As a leader, it is guaranteed that one will succeed if you model these principles. In addition, assisting other people follow the four principles enables all to succeed and entrench leadership as an institutional capability. Key Axioms of Leadership An axiom is an idea or statement that people acknowledge as self-evidently true. The key axioms of leadership are being a learner to be a leader and building relationships (Ford, 2010). For effective leadership, it is essential that a leader be someone ready and willing to learn. Learning entails studying and analyzing the employees and the organization strategies towards reaching the goal. It is only by learning that one can identify loopholes and come up with interventions. Through learning it becomes easier for a leader to engage with his or her team and motivate them. Building relationships is yet an essential axiom in the leadership field. A leader is expected to be social and open to meet and exchange view not only with his or her team but also with the other organizations to learn new ideas and innovations. Good relationships with your team ensure that the employees are motivated and willing to work towards the end goal. In addition, building relationships with other organizations ensures that the leader learn new ways and strategies of making his or her organization successful (Ford, 2010). Challenges Faced By Leaders Challenges experienced in leadership vary from organization to organization. Most of the challenges will lie in the categories of encouraging and motivating the followers. The main challenges in leadership include motivating the employees and encouraging action and innovation (Marsh, 2006). There is no single organization that is successful if the employees and followers are not motivated. Employees who are uninterested or generally lack focus in the organizational goal tend to be unproductive and often undermine the efforts of the leader and the authority. Sometimes the leaders are tasked to work with the employees to figure out an effective intervention. The happier and more appreciated employees feel, the more it is likely for them to give their best efforts towards the organizational goal. A leader must make sure that he or she invests in employees’ happiness and ways to ensure that they are at peace to perform their daily duties (Marsh, 2006). Another challenge encountered by leaders is encouraging employees and followers to come up with creative ideas and have the urge to take risks in their duties. It is however important for employees to parameters and boundaries to stay focused but some latitude is necessary for growth (Tierney, 2005). Organizations must have a continuous flow of new ideas and innovations to survive in the current competitive world. The leader is often obligated to come up with employees who are innovative and are always around to produce new ideas in line with the organizational goal (Marsh, 2006). A leader who does not have the ability to encourage and motivate the employees to take action and be innovative may face many challenges in ensuring that the organization remains standing. Characteristics One Expects To Find In A Leader. The key qualities that a leader should portray to be categorized as efficient include the ability to delegate, confidence, honesty, commitment, positive attitude and creativity (Freedman, 2012). As a leader, it is always important note that the business and its employees are a good reflection of who you are. If you practice honesty and ethical behavior, it is most likely that the team will follow suit. Creating trust among your team is essential to make them responsible. A leader should delegate duties to different people according to the respective departments. The aspect to delegation is identifying your team’s strengths as a leader and capitalizing on them. A leader is also expected to maintain the team’s morale by keeping his or her confidence high particularly in problem solving. As a leader, show efforts by leading by example by showing commitment and positive attitude towards the end goal of the organization (Freedman, 2012). References Brenkert, G. G. (2009). The Oxford handbook of Business ethics. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Pr Derry, R., & Green, R. M. (2009). Ethical theory in business ethics: A critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 8(7), 521-533. Day, D. V., & Antonakis, J. (2012). The nature of leadership. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE. Ford, J. (2010). Studying Leadership Critically: A Psychosocial Lens on Leadership Identities. Leadership, 6(1), 47-65. Freedman, J. (2012). Being a leader: Organizing and inspiring a group. New York: Rosen Pub. Hasnas, J. (2008). The normative theories of business ethics: a guide for the perplexed. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19-42. Oddo, A. R. (2007). A framework for teaching business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(3), 293-297. Marsh, M. (2006). Leadership and Leading: Leadership Challenges. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(4), 382-384. Tierney, P. (2005). Special Issue On Destructive Leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(2), 313-314. Trevino, L. K., & Weaver, G. R. (1994). Business ETHICS/BUSINESS ethics: One field or two?. Business Ethics Quarterly, 113-128. Whetstone, J. T. (2001). How virtue fits within business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 101-114. Winkler, I. (2010). Contemporary leadership theories: Enhancing the understanding of the complexity, subjectivity and dynamic of leadership. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag. Read More