The guest column in the Triangle Business Journal, “Strong ethics provide guidance,” discusses feelings of uncertainty and unrest in the modern world. These feelings can be attributed to human nature, best represented by common questions that have been puzzling philosophers for thousands of years. Some of these questions include “What was I made for?”, “What is the purpose of life?”, or even “How should we conduct ourselves?”. People regularly find their purpose through their career, which often reflects their key personal values. The author proposes that during times of distress, people should look toward formal leadership for guidance. Reflecting on the article’s overall message, I drew from experiences in my own life. Recently, I was feeling lost in my career and felt unsure of where I fit into the bunch. I wanted to fill needs and consistently meet expectations– Where I increasingly felt I had been lacking. These thoughts clouded my mind and ability to recognize my own strengths and passion for higher education. During this time, similarly to the author’s suggestion, I sought the advice of my supervisor. She affirmed that I had been fulfilling the responsibilities of my role, exceeding in certain areas, and highlighted areas of growth. By having a one on one conversation about values of the office, she grounded my experience and encouraged me to continue being my authentic self. Creating a workplace culture that addresses the individualized needs of all employees, supports growth, and promotes wellness keeps employees motivated and in touch with their purpose.

Marshall, E. (2017, February 17). Triangle Business Journal. Guest Column: Strong Ethics Provide Guidance. https://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2017/02/17/guest-column-strong-ethics-provide-guidance.html

Immediately, when I started reading “Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model” by Thomas M. Jones, the definitions for his terms stuck out to me. For the sake of his model, a moral issue describes any situation where “a person’s actions, when freely performed, may harm or benefit others.” Where I perked up was the phrase “when freely performed”. Sometimes, when we consider morality and the actions of others, we forget about all of the outside pressures and expectations put upon society. This reminded me of a similar model that focuses on conflict management. The purpose of this model is to minimize conflict and maximize positive outcomes. For this model, a conflict is defined as an expressed struggle between at least two interdependent parties who perceive goals as incompatible. The key phrase being “expressed struggle”. By this definition, a conflict does not exist unless the parties have made an attempt to verbally, or nonverbally, express their issue and made the other person away. Otherwise, it is simply a private struggle within the individual. 

Taking a step back, these small aspects of these models are crucial to understanding what constitutes a decision. More specifically, a decision must be consciously made or considered and there must be viable alternatives. This reminds me of how pure ignorance can prevent people from maximizing their choices. If people are simply unaware of their options, they are not capable of making another decision. Thus, limiting their free will. When analyzing situations and ethical decisions, it’s important to consider the available knowledge of both parties.

Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. The Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366. https://doi.org/10.2307/258867

After scrolling through “Principles of Management”, distributed by University of Minnesota Libraries under a Creative Commons license, I focused on how biases can influence decision making in a negative way. This section elaborates on common biases that people fall into: hindsight bias, overconfidence bias, anchoring, and framing bias. I had recently been trained to spot some of these biases through online training offered by LinkedIn.
Reflecting on my own experiences and past decisions, I still sometimes fall into these common traps, despite my subconscious awareness of them. When considering them all, I most often play into hindsight bias. This kind of bias “occurs when looking backward in time where mistakes made seem obvious after they have already occurred.” Basically, believing one knew that something would happen after being presented the realities of the situation. I regularly find myself being judgmental of other people’s decisions, especially when they ask me for advice. The reality of the situation is, I– and they– have no way of considering every single detail in the situation. I can only take the miniscule amount of information I am aware of and apply my past experiences to it– which are remotely similar situations at best. Thinking that I “saw it coming” is an inaccurate statement, because every single day I am honestly surprised by the decisions people make. At a larger scale, this reading forced me to consider how much of decision making is actually logical and how much is fueled by emotions. I believe that there is no true way to separate the two. Honestly, I’m not sure if we should make it a goal to make decisions in a fully logical fashion. To ignore feelings strips humanity out of our decisions. That would simply toss out any consideration we have for the feelings of others. It’s not always a bad thing to keep people in mind. Taking it all in, I would like to be more conscious of how these biases affect my decisions while remaining true to myself.

Publisher. (2015). Principles of management. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing edition, 2015. This edition adapted from a work originally produced in 2010 by a publisher who has requested that it not receive attribution. https://doi.org/10.24926/8668.1801

While reading through “LuLaRoe Was Little More than a Scam, a Washington State Lawsuit Claims” I became intrigued by the formation of the so-called “pyramid scheme”. LuLaRoe is a clothing company that markets its merchandise through social influencers. The central company is responsible for manufacturing and distributing articles of clothing and training brand ambassadors. LuLaRoe attracts online influences– Often young stay at home mothers– through promises of high profits and offering refunds for unsold products. These individuals were sold a dream of financial freedom through at home entrepreneurship. LuLaRoe specifically preyed on individuals who did not feel productive and were seeking a remote way to build up their savings. The central company earned money through its enormous onboarding costs that ranged in the upper thousands of dollars. Social influencers were encouraged to find a source of funds by any means necessary to start up their own business, leaning on loans or crowdfunding. Because it was an entrepreneurial venture, it was up to the individual retailers to make returns on the packages of clothing they shipped. However, LuLaRoe gave little agency to the individuals when it came to selecting articles of clothing and certain designs to sell, putting their retailers at a disadvantage. Eventually, the company got rid of its guarantee to buy back all the unsold merchandise from retailers, leaving individuals stranded. Ultimately, the dream sold by LuLaRoe proved to be a facade for many people across the United States. A number of individuals ended up in significant debt and piles of unsold clothes on their hands. 

LuLaRoe is just another example of pyramid schemes marketed to individuals looking to make genuine profits through entrepreneurship. Everywhere around the world, people are trying to get a leg up and are often willing to do whatever it takes to support their families. This emphasizes the need to research companies before paying costly onboarding fees or recommending products that you have no knowledge of. Even here at NCSU, many schemes exist targeting college students who seek any way to make a quick buck through a flexible schedule. Often, these jobs are in the form of selling some product or telemarketing.

Jones, Charisse. “LuLaRoe Was Little More than a Scam, a Washington State Lawsuit Claims.” USA TODAY, https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/01/28/lularoe-pyramid-scheme-duped-consumers-washington-suit-says/2700412002/. Accessed 16 Oct. 2025.

I spent time reading  “Transparency and Authenticity: The Value of Open Communication”– A chapter straight out of the CEO of KIND, a snack manufacturing company. The chapter dove into the company’s philosophies, emphasizing certain branding choices and organizational management. I was particularly drawn to the beginning of the chapter, which focused on packaging and company reputation. The CEO writes about the value of transparency and how it translates into their marketing strategy– Literally using transparent packages for their snack bars. Prior, I had never paid much conscious attention to the packaging of some of my favorite brands. I have always leaned toward options that feel more “natural” or organic– straying away from highly processed foods with over fantasized product labeling. Given much thought, I would agree that, as a consumer, I lean toward brands that are more transparent about their product quality and make an effort to be at the forefront about product ingredients. Wildly far-fetched product advertisements such as TV-Dinners and popular cereal brands consistently lead to disappointments with the actual product. I remember reading about how these brands use non-food products in their commercials to ensure that the items look appealing to a consumer base. I always found this practice to be sensical, but also disingenuous. The idea of milk being represented by glue feels wrong. Taking a step back, I never really imagined how much product testing and trials go into creating a logo or design for a product. The article from KIND showed the full process of values to creation. 

Lubetzky, Daniel. Do the Kind Thing : Think Boundlessly, Work Purposefully, Live Passionately. With Internet Archive, New York : Ballantine Books, 2015. Internet Archive, http://archive.org/details/dokindthingthink0000lub

The article “Moral Person and Moral Manager: How Executives Develop a Reputation for Ethical Leadership” explores how leaders build trust and shape the culture of their organizations through personal integrity and active ethical management. The authors argue that effective ethical leadership requires a balance between being a moral person and a moral manager. This dual approach ensures that ethics are both personal and systematic, preventing pressure to stay silent and promoting an environment where doing the right thing becomes the norm rather than the exception. Ethical leadership is not simply about having good intentions. It involves deliberate communication, consistent actions, and accountability. Only by reinforcing these behaviors will an organization truly be ethical. This means that leaders must set clear expectations, follow through on their commitments, and hold both themselves and others to high moral standards. By doing so, they establish a sense of trust and credibility that strengthens both the workforce and the company’s long-term goals.

The article’s ideas mirror real-world dynamics where leadership values shape not only a company’s reputation but also public confidence in institutions. While some leaders may value and practice strict adherence to morals in their personal life, the article emphasizes that ethical leadership requires visible action and structure. Companies that lack clear ethical structures and leadership are prone to ethical failures. These failures can result in legal fees and a negative impact on their company culture. In the long run, ethical failures tear down the reputation of the company, create rifts in the company, and breeds distrust at all organizational levels. This article highlights how true ethical leadership remains both a moral and managerial responsibility, expanding beyond individual actions.

Treviño, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166057

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.