After reading “Identifying and Assessing Managerial Value Orientations”, this reminded me of what the workplace looks like in our world today. Weber’s article examines the values and ethical orientations of managers across different generations, highlighting how personal and generational differences influence decision-making in organizations. This relates directly to the real world because the values of leaders shape the culture, policies, and overall success of companies. For example, in today’s workplace, issues like diversity and inclusion, corporate social responsibility, and sustainability are often influenced by the values of organizational leaders. Many younger leaders today are more focused on social responsibility and ethical transparency, pushing companies to adopt eco-friendly practices, improve mental health support, and create equitable workplaces. Meanwhile, older generations often bring a strong sense of loyalty, structure, and accountability that ensures stability and consistency. Companies led by managers who prioritize ethical considerations and long-term societal impact often implement policies that reflect these values, such as environmental initiatives, equitable hiring practices, and transparent corporate governance.

The events and findings in Weber’s study mirror real-world situations where managerial values impact employee experiences, customer relations, and public perception. For instance, leaders who value collaboration and fairness are more likely to create workplaces that are inclusive and supportive, while leaders who focus primarily on profit may make decisions that benefit the bottom line but could harm employee morale or social responsibility. The study provides valuable insight into the connection between leadership values and organizational behavior, offering a lens through which we can understand and evaluate real-world management practices.

Weber, James. “Identifying and assessing managerial value orientations: A cross-generational replication study of key organizational decision-makers’ values.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 132, no. 3, 16 Sept. 2014, pp. 493–504, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2364-8.

After reading “Strong Ethics Provides Guidance,” a previous work experience immediately came to mind. The source discusses ethical leadership and how ethical leaders have the ability, and responsibility, to speak up and support those around them. I was able to relate this to my own experience, as my team of co-workers consistently had each other’s backs, whether they were managers, head staff, chefs, servers, or medical staff. Whenever someone needed help, the team would respond without hesitation.

I believe this supportive environment was rooted in our leadership team and the work culture they fostered. We felt comfortable asking for help because we all respected each other’s boundaries and shared deeply held principles. For example, my boss would often offer to help set up or bring out food when he saw I was busy with multiple tables. Small gestures like this created a workplace that felt safe and appreciated. Sometimes I didn’t even need to ask for help, he would anticipate the need because he understood how to support his team. This demonstrated his ethical leadership, showing care and consideration for those around him.

Leading ethically also meant addressing challenges directly. My boss frequently held team meetings to reinforce the importance of respecting one another and ensuring everyone understood that certain behaviors would not be tolerated. He consistently emphasized that actions misaligned with our company culture would not be accepted. While difficult to enforce, his commitment to ethical leadership ensured a fair and respectful work environment. Reflecting on this, I can see how ethical leadership not only guides behavior but also builds a positive, collaborative culture that benefits everyone.

“Guest Column: Strong Ethics Provide Guidance.” Triangle Business Journal, 17 Feb. 2017, https://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2017/02/17/guest-column-strong-ethics-provideguidance.html.

The article “Ethical Decision-Making by Individuals in Organizations” reminded me of the leadership interview we recently conducted. As I reflected on the multiple questions I asked both of my chosen leaders, I noticed how closely many of them aligned with the “Questions to Ask Yourself” section from the article. It reinforced the idea that ethical decision-making is not just about following rules, it’s about being mindful of how your choices align with your personal values and moral principles. In both leadership and everyday life, it’s important to recognize whether the decisions and actions we take are consistent with our core beliefs and do not conflict with our ethical standards.

Another meaningful connection I found in the article was the discussion of the six key ethical values that help individuals build strong character within themselves and in those around them. Among these, trustworthiness and respect stood out to me the most. These two values have appeared repeatedly in several readings and class discussions throughout the semester, and it is clear why they are so significant. They have appeared in many of our group simulations, particularly within our companies’ core values and mission statements. Trustworthiness forms the foundation of strong relationships, allowing others to rely on you and believe in your integrity. Respect, on the other hand, encourages fairness, understanding, and positive collaboration in any setting.

Reflecting on this article helped me better understand how ethical principles influence leadership behavior and organizational culture. By consistently practicing ethical awareness and aligning our actions with our values, we not only strengthen our character but also inspire others to act with integrity and respect.

“Ethics Awareness.” Ethics Awareness, blink.ucsd.edu/finance/accountability/ethics-awareness.html#core-ethical-values. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.

After reading the chapter “Decision Making” from Principles of Management, I began to reflect on the different types of decisions I make in my everyday life. It was interesting to realize how many of my daily choices can be categorized as programmed decisions, those that are routine, repetitive, and follow a certain pattern. For example, each morning I decide what to wear based on the weather, which route I want to take when walking to class, and what I will have for dinner that evening. These decisions are made quickly and almost automatically because they are part of my regular routine. I never thought about them as “decisions” in the management sense, but this chapter helped me recognize how much structured thinking goes into even the simplest parts of our day.

In contrast, an example of a nonprogrammed decision I recently made was creating travel plans for a family trip coming up in December. My family and I will be spending a week in Colorado over Christmas, and we have been working together to decide what activities we want to do while we are there. This type of decision-making process involves more creativity and research. We’ve had to compare various ski resorts, restaurants, and other attractions to make sure we choose the best options that fit our budget and interests. Because there are so many alternatives, we’ve had to carefully evaluate the pros and cons of each choice.

Moving forward, I think it’s valuable to recognize the difference between programmed and nonprogrammed decisions. Understanding how and why we make different types of decisions can help us become more intentional, thoughtful, and effective in both our personal and professional lives.

Principles of Management. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing, 2010.

After reading “Playing Favorites? Hospital Boards, Donors Get COVID Shots,” I was reminded of the uncertainty and fear that surrounded the world during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. This article connects directly to the real events we all lived through in 2020, an experience that changed countless lives and reshaped the way we think about health, fairness, and responsibility. The pandemic disrupted my high school years and affected millions of people around the world, leaving lasting impacts on education, employment, and social trust.

The article highlights how certain hospital board members and donors were offered COVID-19 vaccines during the early phases of distribution, even when eligibility was meant to be restricted to essential workers, first responders, and elderly individuals. This situation closely mirrors the real-world debates about who should have access to limited medical resources. During that time, vaccines represented hope and safety, but also raised difficult moral questions about equity and privilege. Many believed that older adults and healthcare workers deserved priority because they were at the highest risk of severe illness or death.

However, as the article shows, those with influence or financial power were sometimes given early access, creating public outrage and ethical concerns. It revealed how privilege often plays a role in decisions that are supposed to be fair and impartial. Because vaccine distribution guidelines varied across states, it was often unclear where the line between fairness and favoritism was drawn.

This article reminded me of how social inequality can surface even in times of crisis, when unity and compassion are needed most. It reflects how moments of global struggle often expose deeper issues within systems of power and how important transparency and accountability are in rebuilding public trust.

Bynum, Russ, et al. “Playing Favorites? Hospital Boards, Donors Get Covid Shots.” AP News, AP News, 20 Apr. 2021, apnews.com/article/technology-washington-coronavirus-pandemic-russ-seattle-c453fc84e9378ba4259715d3e0ad50d9?fbclid=IwAR0f5KQatkPEoDv64vUzJLY1qg24st1qSKop4uZI8XaU9HOS4PnXHdAdskA.

After reading “Transparency and Authenticity: The Value of Open Communications,” I found many meaningful connections to my current marketing internship. Concepts such as packaging, product naming, and authenticity are central to what businesses consider every day. These elements might appear minor to consumers on the surface, but they carry a lot of weight behind the scenes. Often, it’s only when poor marketing choices are made that customers begin to recognize the importance of those behind-the-scenes decisions and how they influence brand perception and trust.

In my internship, I frequently face similar challenges to those described in the article. Each week, I’m involved in analyzing market trends, evaluating consumer behavior, and helping decide which strategies will have the most positive impact on our audience. The article’s emphasis on authenticity, ensuring that consumers receive exactly what they are shown, without excessive editing or misleading visuals, stood out to me. KIND’s decision to use transparent packaging symbolizes honesty and a willingness to stand by their product. That level of openness builds consumer trust, which is something every marketing professional should strive for. At my internship, I’ve noticed that marketing campaigns highlighting real customers, genuine experiences, or unfiltered product images tend to perform better. It reinforces that authenticity isn’t just a moral value, it’s a competitive advantage.

I also appreciate KIND’s approach because, as consumers, we rarely think about the thought process and strategy behind packaging design or product presentation. It shows that they value their customers’ happiness and trust as much as their profit margins. For me, this article reinforced how important it is for marketers to balance creativity, honesty, and strategy in order to build lasting relationships with their audience.

Lubetzky, Daniel. Do the Kind Thing: Think Boundlessly, Work Purposefully, Live Passionately. Ballantine Books, 2015.

After reading and analyzing “The Role of Values in Leadership: How Leaders’ Values Shape Value Creation,” I noticed strong connections to leadership concepts I studied in my public sector leadership class. In that course, we often discussed the significant impact leaders have on their followers or employees. Research showed that many employees reported being unhappy in their workplace because of ineffective leadership from a boss or someone in a higher position of authority. This demonstrates how leadership style, attitudes, and values can shape workplace culture and employee satisfaction.

The article aligns with those discussions by emphasizing how leaders’ values directly influence their ability to lead. In my other class, we examined how values shape decision-making and the relationships leaders build with their teams. For example, motivation was highlighted as a key value. Leaders who lack motivation often transfer that lack of energy to their employees, creating an environment where people feel unmotivated or disengaged. This can lower both performance and job satisfaction, ultimately harming the organization as a whole.

One part of the text that stood out to me stated, “Understanding why people do what they do necessitates investigating the forces that drive behaviour, because people engage in the same behaviour but for very different reasons.” This idea connects directly to what I studied in my other class as well as the article in this class. Both emphasize that leaders must look beyond surface-level actions and examine the deeper motivations behind them in order to effectively inspire, guide, and manage people.

Overall, while my other class focused specifically on leadership within the public sector, this article demonstrates broader leadership principles that apply across different fields. Both emphasize how values, motivations, and behaviors intertwine to shape the effectiveness of leaders and the satisfaction of those they lead.

Lichtenstein, Scott. “The Role of Values in Leadership: How Leaders’ Values Shape Value Creation.” Integral Leadership Review, 2012, integralleadershipreview.com/6176-the-role-of-values-in-leadership-how-leaders-values-shape-value-creation/.

After reading “Ethical Role of the Manager,” I was reminded of previous texts I have read about utilitarianism in ethics. In a prior class focused on business ethics, we explored various philosophical frameworks, including utilitarianism, the concept of seeking the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This idea has come up repeatedly in several ethics courses I have taken. Utilitarianism emphasizes the overall impact of a decision or action on a group as a whole, rather than focusing on the benefits or harms to just a few individuals.

This text is similar to the one I read before because it also explains the definition of utilitarianism and examines the key principles and considerations involved in applying this ethical framework. However, it differs in its focus, as it specifically applies the utilitarian framework to managerial decision-making. While the other text explored utilitarianism more generally, discussing the underlying beliefs and philosophical foundations, “Ethical Role of the Manager” narrows the lens to managers and the workplace context. It emphasizes the questions managers should ask themselves when making decisions, such as, “Who will be affected by the decision, and to what extent will the various parties be harmed or benefited?” This approach helps managers weigh the potential outcomes of their choices on employees, customers, and other stakeholders, providing practical guidance for ethical leadership.

Overall, these texts are not entirely different, but they highlight different aspects of utilitarianism. While utilitarianism is only one part of “Ethical Role of the Manager,” it is the aspect that drew a clear connection for me to the other text I had read. By examining the application of utilitarian principles specifically in management, this text deepens the understanding of how ethical frameworks can be implemented in real-world workplace decisions.

Waddock, Sandra. “Ethical Role of the Manager.” Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society. Ed. . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 786-91. SAGE Reference Online. Web. 30 Jan. 2012.

When reading “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making,” I immediately connected it to the Hot Topic article in this module about using genetically modified pig kidneys for human transplants. People may wonder whether it is morally acceptable to use animal organs for human survival, what risks patients might face, and whether society is ready to adopt this kind of procedure. Because of these uncertainties, applying ethical decision-making frameworks becomes essential. They give medical teams and biotech companies a structured way to evaluate their choices, ensuring that they proceed responsibly and with respect for both patients and broader societal values.

These two readings align because they both highlight the role of ethical frameworks in guiding decisions when moral dilemmas arise. In particular, the utilitarian and rights-based approaches seem especially relevant to the pig kidney transplant scenario. The rights lens, as defined in the article, focuses on protecting and respecting the moral rights of all individuals affected by a decision. This would apply to ensuring that patients fully understand the risks, give informed consent, and are treated with dignity throughout the process. Meanwhile, the utilitarian lens emphasizes the consequences of actions, aiming to maximize overall well-being. In the context of organ transplants, this means weighing the potential to save thousands of lives against the possible risks or objections to using animal organs.

Together, these two frameworks provide a balanced way to analyze the situation. The rights lens ensures that individual patients are protected, while the utilitarian lens helps society consider the broader benefits of advancing this technology. By applying both perspectives, medical teams can make decisions that are not only scientifically sound but also ethically responsible.

University, Santa Clara. “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making.” Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, 2021, www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/.

Kounang, Nadia. “Pig Kidney Transplants Take a Step Forward with Approval of Human Trials.” CNN, Cable News Network, 8 Sept. 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/09/08/health/pig-kidney-transplant-human-trial-fda.

In the article “Frameworks for Ethical Analysis,” four commonly used ethical frameworks are outlined. Reading through them reminded me of past articles and textbooks I’ve studied in my business ethics course. In that class, we also focused on ideologies such as utilitarianism, consequentialism, autonomy, and virtue ethics. Each framework offers a different lens through which ethical decisions and actions can be examined, and together they help explain the reasoning behind why individuals or organizations make certain choices. This article reinforced those concepts by providing clear definitions of each framework and how they apply to ethical judgment.

Michael Reiss, a bioethicist, emphasizes an important point, people do not need to share the same ethical viewpoints in order to reach consensus. Instead, what matters is the ability to respect, acknowledge, or even avoid conflict when perspectives differ. This idea highlights the practicality of ethics, not as a rigid system where everyone must agree, but as a tool for navigating complex human interactions in ways that allow collaboration and mutual respect.

Reiss also discusses the four frameworks in more depth, and his descriptions closely align with material I encountered in my coursework, particularly when learning about how philosophers approached these concepts. For example, in The Sovereignty of Good, Iris Murdoch explores virtue ethics and argues that “the good” should be seen as an objective reality, an ideal that individuals strive toward. Murdoch believed that goodness is less about following strict rules or calculating outcomes, and more about cultivating moral character. Her perspective resonates with Reiss’s description of virtue ethics, which emphasizes traits such as honesty, kindness, patience, and thoughtfulness. Both perspectives highlight the importance of character-building over rule-following. Virtue ethics asks us to consider who we are becoming as individuals, not just whether our actions meet societal standards or maximize utility.

Murdoch, Iris. The Sovereignity of Good. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970. 

“Frameworks for Ethical Analysis.” Science Learning Hub, 2007, www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/2146-frameworks-for-ethical-analysis.