Reading “Ethical Role of the Manager” made me realize how managerial tasks are ethical choices. When I led a campus project, I thought I was optimizing, but I realized that these decisions are unavoidable in management because every choice affects people or the environment. This helped me understand my responsibilities of being a moral person with clear values, honesty, and concern for others, and being an ethical manager. This means rewarding and disciplining in ways that make those values clear and discussing them openly. If I feel uneasy about sharing my decision publicly, I need to reconsider it. The four-lens framework of rights and duties, utility, justice, and care provides me with the language to articulate the trade-offs I used to feel but couldn’t express. In that case, part of leadership is helping myself and my team look beyond peer norms and ask first questions backed by systems that support the behavior we say we value.

This article’s pairing of “moral person/moral manager” reminded me of leadership readings that distinguish between inner character and outer systems. While some texts stop at slogans about integrity, this one argues that ethical leadership encompasses role-modeling, incentives, discipline, and ongoing communication, enabling people to see what the organization values every day. It also refines classic frameworks by placing them in the context of management. The four ethical lenses are not presented as abstract ideas, but as tools for navigating real conflicts when no clear option is available. While other texts focus on individual virtue as the goal, this chapter incorporates research on moral development to explain why teams often become stuck at “what’s normal here” and why leaders must guide them toward post-conventional, principle-based thinking. This connection between thought and culture helped me understand why some organizations settle for the status quo while others strive for broader reasoning based on stakeholder interests.

The chapter reads like a guide for today’s institutions. In companies, hospitals, schools, and city agencies, leaders frequently encounter moral dilemmas. It demonstrates how leaders can translate their vision into operational values, enabling execution to progress more effectively and efficiently. Developing post-conventional reasoning expands the focus on stakeholders. This is the basis for lasting reforms, whether redesigning incentives in a company or establishing clear rules in a public agency.

Waddock, Sandra. “Ethical Role of the Manager.” Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society. 

Ed. . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2007. 786-91. SAGE Reference Online. Web. 30 Jan. 

2012.

Reading Lichtenstein’s piece made me examine how my own values influence my choices. When I lead group work, I naturally focus on inclusion and setting the context before taking action. This approach helps people feel heard, but I’ve noticed it can slow down decisions when time is limited. Recognizing this in the article made me realize it’s not just a random habit; it’s my values that decide what I pay attention to, such as voices, trade-offs, and risks, and what I do next, like seeking consensus or documenting the reasons. It also explains why some teams operate smoothly while others feel challenging. The piece left me with a guiding principle for future projects: to identify the filter, check the fit, and build the bridge, so that what matters to me not only feels right but also speeds up our work.

Scott Lichtenstein’s claim that leaders’ values subtly filter what they notice and how they choose aligns with Harry Kraemer’s view in Forbes that values-based leadership is essential for sound decisions and employee trust. Kraemer sees values as the compass leaders should check daily through self-reflection, understanding trade-offs, and explaining the reasons behind their choices. This way, decisions feel consistent to stakeholders. Lichtenstein provides a diagram for that compass: values guide strategic choices and, through culture, influence results. Together, Kraemer encourages leaders to look inward and practice consistently. Lichtenstein illustrates how those inner commitments can either align with or clash against an organization’s existing norms, impacting performance. This combination also clarifies why things fail. Lichtenstein explains that misaligned values cause cultural friction, which slows execution and stifles innovation, even when plans seem reasonable.

The 3M mini-case illustrates a pattern I recognize across industries: efficiency drives can unintentionally stifle innovation. Under James McNerney, 3M’s strong push for Six Sigma represented values of uniformity and control; veterans worried that a Post-it-like idea wouldn’t thrive. The paper’s “values dynamic” applies beyond just corporations. Schools, nonprofits, and city governments face issues when leaders attempt to impose their values on a culture without understanding it first. Lasting change occurs when visions become part of the everyday values of those expected to implement them. This way, the desired behaviors feel natural instead of forced. That’s why execution speeds up when leaders make values clear through routines, rewards, and stories that reflect the community’s daily experiences.

Kraemer, Harry M. Jansen, Jr. “Do We Really Need Values to Lead?” Forbes, 11 Mar. 2025, https://www.forbes.com/sites/harrykraemer/2025/03/11/do-we-really-need-values-to-lead/.
Accessed 5 Oct. 2025

Integral Leadership Review, integralleadershipreview.com/6176-the-role-of-values-in-leadership-how-leaders-values-shape-value-creation/.
Accessed 05 Oct. 2025. 

“Scrutinizing Six Sigma.” Bloomberg, 1 July 2007, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2007-07-01/scrutinizing-six-sigma. Accessed 5 Oct. 2025.

Reading the Science Learning Hub’s frameworks on rights and responsibilities, consequences, autonomy, and virtues reminds me of the simple choices I had to make in kindergarten. I decided whether to share crayons, tell the teacher when someone was being left out, or admit I spilled paint. Even then, I thought about my desire to use my favorite color for my drawing. I understand my responsibilities to share that color with other classmates who needed it just as much as I did. The article emphasizes that good decisions result from considering different viewpoints and discussing them thoroughly in light of an ethical perspective. 

The Science Learning Hub’s ethical frameworks closely relate to the U.S. Bill of Rights because both focus on rights in decision-making, though in different ways. The Bill of Rights sets firm guidelines, such as free speech, privacy from unreasonable searches, and due process. At the same time, the SLH resource encourages you to consider various perspectives, including rights, along with outcomes, character, and informed choice. Both require identifying stakeholders and explaining decisions clearly, as courts do in opinions and classrooms do through structured discussions. Also, the Bill of Rights is a binding law that restricts government power and is enforced by courts. In contrast, the SLH framework serves as a tool for facilitating discussion and understanding of ethical or moral decisions.

A timely connection to the real world is NC State University’s response to Poe Hall, which was closed in November 2023 after tests revealed the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls. These chemicals, which can cause cancer, are often found in older buildings. This situation illustrates how the Science Learning Hub’s views on consequences, rights and duties, autonomy, and virtues affect actual policy decisions. The consequences are critical, as campus operations were disrupted to lower the risk of exposure. Media reports of hundreds of self-reported cancer cases among those who spent time in Poe Hall highlight the human impact and the importance of ethical reasoning as investigations continue.

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

Arthur, K. (n.d.). Closed: Poe Hall. WRAL. Retrieved September 20, 2025, from https://poe-hall.wral.com/

While reading this website, I reflect on how I handled gossipers in high school and what I should consider trustworthy. Understanding moral issues requires knowing the facts. Separating what is real from what I value helps me avoid spreading rumors. Then I consider the approach on the websites. Would repeating this help anyone, or mainly cause anxiety and harm to someone’s reputation?  People have a right to privacy and fair treatment; sharing unverified personal details violates that. Often, the right action is to stop the spread of rumors, check facts privately if there’s a duty to act, or steer the group back to constructive topics. 

The website article reminds me of the Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone book. Harry and his friends break the rules to stop Voldemort for the greater good. Hermione decides to tell a professor when she suspects Snape is cursing Harry’s broom. This shows her desire to protect a friend and respect for others. Even the Invisibility Cloak has its limits of only using it for safety or truth instead of malicious intentions. Like the SCU model, it demonstrates that making good decisions requires facts, some moral considerations, and the courage to act and learn from the consequences. Otherwise, it also shows that feelings and intentions are more critical than understanding and getting facts.

The text appealed to a variety of real-life situations, such as voting in the United States of America. Before choosing candidates or ballot measures, check trustworthy official sources. This bases your decision on what actually matters: deadlines, rules, and what’s on your ballot, so that later questions of value are not based on rumors and apply some of the approaches of ethics. Which choices are most likely to reduce harm and improve community well-being broadly? Finally, reflect on your decision. After the election, compare the promises made to the actual outcomes and update your criteria accordingly. This maintains both personal integrity and the public trust in elections.

Rowling, J. K. (1998). Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. Scholastic Press

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/

Reading Jaffe and Scott made me think about a class project where my group kept clashing without understanding why. I focused on reliability and clear communication, while a teammate pushed hard for originality. The article’s idea of starting with a simple values sort and then naming the behaviors for each value seemed like the step we missed. If we had mapped our top values and agreed on “what we’d see more of” and “less of,” we could’ve avoided a lot of friction. I realize we only cared about finishing on time without thinking about what success means. Completing an objective on time is the ideal goal, but understanding each teammate’s strengths and weaknesses would make the overall product more effective (Jaffe & Scott, 1998).

Jaffe and Scott say that values only matter when they become clear behaviors with real rewards. This is similar to The Hunger Games novel. Katniss’s main value is protecting her family and the vulnerable. This is evident in her actions: she volunteers for Prim, teams up with Rue, and refuses to kill Peeta. Her choices reflect a set of values in the arena, where alliances depend on shared ideas like care, trust, and fairness. The Capitol emphasizes honor and tradition, but its reward system promotes spectacle and ruthless individualism. As a result, tributes quickly discover the true culture (Collins, 2008).

Nordstrom’s focus on one principal value, customer satisfaction, shows how clear principles allow frontline workers to make decisions. Levi Strauss managers work together to create a set of shared values, and AT&T teams write specific behavior guidelines. This approach fits today’s teamwork, where rules can’t cover every situation. The concern about “values for the wall” feels relevant when companies talk about empathy but use metrics that hurt collaboration. On the other hand, prioritizing and rewarding consistent behavior provides a realistic way to build credibility and trust.

Collins, S. (2008). The Hunger Games. Scholastic Press.
Jaffe, D. T., & Scott, C. D. (1998). How to link personal values with team values. Training & Development, 52(3), 24–30

Reading the Bonebright article the Tuckman’s stages reminded me of my computer science group last year (Bonebright, 2010). At first, we were polite and a bit awkward, which is classic forming. By the final coding project, we were performing with quick check-ins, clear roles, and our results came together smoothly. After the presentation, we kind of skipped adjourning and moved on. Looking back, I wish we had taken a moment to celebrate and reflect because the model showed me how endings matter for closure and future teamwork.

This review of Tuckman’s model reminds me of Gersick’s punctuated-equilibrium research. This research argues that teams don’t always move in a straight line and often change in spurts around midpoints (Ape, 2025). The Bonebright article notes that real groups can be more iterative and context-dependent than a neat sequence. It resembles other brief frameworks I’ve read that offer a shared language, even if they simplify things.  It highlights limitations, like therapy-group bias in early sources and a lack of attention to creativity or teams that never progress past storming.

In the real world, organizations continue to invest heavily in teams, including project squads, product trios, leadership groups, and other virtual teams. The article explains why Tuckman’s labels spread, which offer memorable and practical terms during a time of increased team use. The article also relates to today’s situations. Remote and cross-functional teams often see longer forming phases and more intense storming because norms aren’t as obvious. Additionally, some highly creative teams thrive on constructive conflict rather than resolving it afterward. However, as the review points out, having a simple, shared map aids discussions about what’s happening and what to do next. This is true even if people need to consider context, power dynamics, and environmental factors. In this way, Tuckman’s stages provide a solid starting point rather than a final goal.

Ape. (n.d.). The punctuated equilibrium model of group development. Retrieved September 10, 2025, from https://apepm.co.uk/punctuated-equilibrium/

Bonebright, D. A. (2010). 40 years of storming: A historical review of Tuckman’s model of small group development. Human Resource Development International, 13(1), 111–120.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13678861003589099

In her HuffPost article “How to Live With Purpose, Identify Your Values, and Improve Your Leadership,” Anne Loehr argues that purpose becomes practical when we first name a handful of values and then use them to guide our daily choices. Framing decisions through values turns “purpose” from a vague idea into a repeatable process. Before committing, we should ask how well the option fits what matters most and choose accordingly. When read alongside the course material “Why Ethical People Make Unethical Choices” by Ron Carucci, Loehr’s argument becomes clearer. Purpose isn’t just about feeling fulfilled; it’s about creating conditions where our choices consistently reflect what we stand for. Loehr’s advice reminds me to slow down before making significant commitments and quickly check my values. When I pause to ask if an opportunity aligns with my top priorities, I avoid overcommitting to projects that seem impressive but would crowd out mentoring and community work. That brief moment of alignment doesn’t remove trade-offs but makes them visible.

Loehr’s emphasis on clarifying values complements Carucci’s warning about environments that quietly push good people toward bad decisions. Carucci writes, “Creating a culture in which people freely speak up is vital to ensuring people don’t collude with, or incite, misconduct.” Loehr offers the personal practice of naming and rating our values, while Carucci explains why organizations must reinforce these practices systematically. Both texts reflect current news about workplace scandals and burnout. When targets or incentives overpower values, it may cause cultures to drift. However, when people have the words for their values and feel free to express them, trust grows and a more positive relationship between people creates opportunities in the future. I observe this in service organizations and local nonprofits that begin meetings by revisiting their shared values. Volunteers stay longer because the work connects to something meaningful, which would allow more people to get the appropriate help and achieve their fullest potential.

Loehr, A. (2014, May 6). How to live with purpose, identify your values and improve your leadership. HuffPost. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-to-live-with-purpose_b_5187572

Carucci, R. (2016, December 16). Why ethical people make unethical choices. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/12/why-ethical-people-make-unethical-choices