I spent a lot of time reading through a research review, “The Role of Values in Leadership: How Leaders’ Values shape Value Creation” by Scott Lichtenstein. To open his review, he started by briefly mentioning the organizational leadership of great historical leaders– Egyptian pharaohs and Chinese emperors– and comparing them to modern day companies. A stark contrast exists between these two, once common, forms of leadership. The author then moves into reviewing existing research, which he claims to be minimal due to conflicting measures. According to him, personal values and personality types are often used interchangeably when discussing leadership traits. He goes on to identify what values are and their use in leadership. The article itself focuses on how leaders can create values within their company and shift cultural norms. 

One line in particular stood out to me: “a vision that isn’t shared is an unrealised dream”. It stressed out the importance of clarity with employees and stakeholders. If leaders do not share values of the larger company they are likely to be let go. This is because they are not a proper fit for the mission and execution of company goals. By ensuring that the entire company, including stakeholders, are on the same page, a leader’s vision is more likely to become a reality. This raises an important question: how much of leadership is about personal vision versus collective support? It also makes me think about whether values should be implemented from the top down or should it be co-created by the larger organization to create sustainable change.

The Role of Values in Leadership: How Leaders’ Values shape Value Creation – Integral Leadership Review. (n.d.). Retrieved September 29, 2025, from http://integralleadershipreview.com/6176-the-role-of-values-in-leadership-how-leaders-values-shape-value-creation/

I took some time to walk through the common ethical frameworks listed out by Santa Clara University in “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making”. The article outlined six common ethical lenses. These ethical frameworks were created by philosophers, ethicists, and theologians to form a basis on what is right and what is wrong. The most common of which were the rights lens, the justice lens, the utilitarian lens, the common good lens, the virtue lens, and the care ethics lens. Each of these lenses are used to determine standards of behavior that are acceptable in society. However, someone could look through a problem through multiple lenses at once. That raises the question: Which ethical lens should you follow? A deep-analysis of approaches and a plan in place could make this process more streamlined. At the end of the article, the authors outline a multi-step process to coming to a conclusive decision within a group setting. The steps are broken down into five linear parts: identifying ethical issues, gathering the facts, evaluating alternatives, choosing an option, and implementing a decision. Of these steps, I spent more time focusing on what actions to take to gather the facts. Under this section, it listed out several questions to ask yourself while evaluating ethical dilemmas. I feel that this is an often overlooked or rushed step in the process. With the boom of social media platforms, people have been made hyper aware of every little current event on the global stage. Oftentimes, people are expected to have an opinion on a matter, no matter how recent the event. Individuals rarely take the time to analyze the sources of information on their own, rather trusting what is readily available on a small text. This reliance on little tidbits of information and the overwhelming number of events has led to an overall decline in media literacy within the last two decades. I believe that to form a proper opinion, people need to spend more time researching a case. It is also socially acceptable to say that you lack the knowledge to have a concrete opinion.

University, Santa Clara. A Framework for Ethical Decision Making. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/. Accessed 17 Sep. 2025.

The short article published by Santa Clara University, “Thinking Ethically,” left me with much to consider. As defined in previous readings, ethical frameworks are what guide and influence individual behaviors and actions. These frames of mind could lead people to support their teammates, try to get ahead, or to cut corners– All dependent on what principles shape their thought process. The article details several common ethical frameworks identified when coming up with a decision. The authors mention each approach’s roots in philosophy, citing major “think-tanks” in the field. Lastly, it gives a perspective into the mindset by offering questions you could ask yourself to make decisions.

While reading this article, I took notice of “The Rights Approach”. This ethical framework prioritizes the individual’s right to choose for him or herself. Essentially, people have a fundamental right to have their choices respected. It immediately reminded me of the values our federal government upholds. In several of our founding documents, our country outlines the right of its citizens to certain actions or belongings. Similarly, in politics, discourse revolves around the rights of the individual versus the responsibility of the government. This ethical framework is engrained into our country’s existence, making it hard to introduce other frames of mind. It is important to recognize that while this line of thinking is dominant in the United States, it does not discount alternative ways of thinking. Oftentimes, people’s opinions are shot down because they stray from traditional values. At the end of the day, there is value in considering all kinds of solutions– It might just bring up something nobody has ever considered before.

University, Santa Clara. Thinking Ethically. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/thinking-ethically/. Accessed 16 Sep. 2025.

I took some time to critically read through the scientific article “Personal Values and Performance in Teams: An Individual and Team-Level Analysis” by David J. Glew. First, the researchers read over the preexisting literature, identifying a lack of conclusive evidence. They noted that not many studies have been conducted on identifying values that make a strong team player. Previous studies have failed to reveal a general effect of values on the performance of a team. Scholars in the field have called for research that uses “deep-level composition variables” (p. 671). Glew’s research aims to answer this question by focusing on a central trait: personal values. 

For the purpose of the research, personal values are described as guiding principles in life. These traits help explain individual behaviors and actions. The article addressed how personal values affect both individual and team performance. Notably, it does not specifically address the significance of the values held, rather how well it matched between the individual and their occupation. The researchers hypothesized that individual importance of values will be positively related with performance within a team. For their sample, they chose a group of undergraduate students and MSB students. Despite general expectation from the literature, personal values were not significant predictors. I found this to be surprising– From my personal experience, if my values align with my work, I tend to put more effort into my performance. I am sure from personal anecdotes, others would agree. But, it may just not make a pronounced difference in worker output when examined from afar. I am excited to see how the literature will develop over the years as more accurate tools of measurement become available to researchers. 

Glew, David J. “Personal Values and Performance in Teams: An Individual and Team-Level Analysis.” Small Group Research, vol. 40, no. 6, Dec. 2009, pp. 670–93. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496409346577.

In the article “How to link personal values with team values,” authors Jaffe and Scott examine how companies such as Levi Strauss, AT&T, and Nordstrom conduct “values discussion” to mitigate conflicts and build a sense of togetherness for employees. They detail the process that these companies took to center their employees around company values and show the diversity of thought among their employees. One unique approach that I noticed was how the AT&T Southwest area managers held a workshop to explore their values. From the workshop, they were able to highlight how “different values were sometimes the root of work disagreements”(pg.5) and identify behaviors they wanted to see in their teams. I found this section to be especially applicable in team environments. Oftentimes, in roles of leadership, I can find myself in conflict with other people and how we approach problems. By understanding the values of one of my coworkers, I feel like I would be more considerate of varying perspectives and able to identify my personal biases when coming up with solutions. 

After finishing the reading and given time to reflect, I was reminded of something most students dread: group projects. Oftentimes as a student, I get a little nervous. I never know what to expect when being paired up with a random group of students from across campus. I realized that this conflict could have its roots in a difference of values. Some students are high-achievers and strive for perfection. Others want to be timely and have work done ahead of time. A handful of students value their social lives or work commitments over education. The mix and matching of values leads to students butting heads while all trying to score a passing grade. In the future I’ll try to be more understanding of the circumstances other students are in. 

“How to Link Personal Values with Team Values.” SlideShare, https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/how-tolinkvalues-article/15146403. Accessed 3 Sep. 2025.

In the magazine article “Why Ethical People Make Unethical Choices,” author Ron Carucci explores the devastating consequences of ethical failures in the workplace, offering reasons as to why individuals sometimes make morally questionable decisions. Carucci argues that even when leaders possess “good intentions,” their actions can inadvertently create environments where unethical behavior not only emerges but thrives. He outlines five key reasons behind these ethical failures, including “excessive pressure” and the absence of strong role models, emphasizing how systemic issues within organizations contribute to poor individual choices.

Carucci uses real-world examples to illustrate each point, exemplifying his principles in preexisting workplace scenarios. These examples made his arguments especially relatable and impactful for me. Reflecting on my own experiences, I now recognize how organizational culture shapes individual behavior. When those at the top engage in unethical conduct, it sends a message that integrity is negotiable, prompting other employees to cut corners, hide issues, or make compromises in the name of preserving “order” or avoiding conflict. I’ll admit that, in the past, I chose to temporarily conceal problems to keep my former employer satisfied. I now recognize that my decision was influenced by the toxic culture at the time. Comparing several positions I have held, healthy work environments not only encourage honesty, but lowers stress and boosts productivity. Sometimes having integrity and working as a true team can lead to the most optimal outcomes, even if it comes with short-term delays or costs.

Ultimately, Carucci’s article highlights that unethical choices are rarely the result of personal failings alone. More often, they stem from organizational environments that encourage unethical choices. His analysis serves as a reminder that creating and maintaining ethical workplaces starts with its leadership.

“Why Ethical People Make Unethical Choices.” Harvard Business Review, 16 Dec. 2016. hbr.org, https://hbr.org/2016/12/why-ethical-people-make-unethical-choices.