Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
Check Instructions
Level:
APA
Subject:
Management
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 29.16
Topic:

Ethical Lense Inventory Essay. Management Assignment. (Essay Sample)

Instructions:

INTRODUCTION
Leadership is often defined as the ability to influence people. An effective ethical leader guides an organization and its employees to accomplish organizational goals. In the same vein, an unethical leader can guide an organization and its employees to act unethically, harming both the organization and the stakeholders. Being a leader is an exploration, a reflection, and a test of your leadership values. Seeking understanding of how you resolve ethical dilemmas, taking inventory of where an ethical weakness may lie, and examining the traits of an ethical leader helps you define, shape, and apply an ethical decision-making framework, while also taking into consideration all stakeholders who may be impacted by your decisions.
For this task, you will respond to an ethical situation as well as analyze the results of the Ethical Lens Inventory (ELI), including your top five values from the Clarifying Your Values exercise, both of which should be completed in the course of study. This task focuses on you as a leader by helping you to define, refine, and test your ethical boundaries through self-reflection and analysis.
SCENARIO
You are a sales representative for a medical device company that manufactures artificial joints. Your company has developed an artificial knee joint that is less expensive than the competition and will dramatically reduce healing time for patients. However, it is also known to produce a serious and potentially lethal infection in a small percentage of patients. The company refuses to disclose this potential side effect. You feel you have a duty to divulge this issue, but you signed a nondisclosure agreement when you were hired and worry about possible repercussions.
REQUIREMENTS
Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. The originality report that is provided when you submit your task can be used as a guide.
You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.
Write an essay (suggested length of 6–8 pages) in which you do the following:
A. Select a nonfictional leader who you feel has exhibited exemplary ethical conduct and do the following:
1. Discuss two ethical traits your chosen leader has demonstrated.
2. Explain how your chosen leader has exhibited ethical conduct.
Note: The chosen leader can be someone you know personally or someone famous.
B. Compare the deontological and consequentialist perspectives and how each perspective would approach the dilemma from the scenario.
C. Explain which level of cognitive moral development (i.e., preconventional, conventional, or postconventional) is represented in the scenario for each of the following questions:
• Which action would most likely serve the greater good in society?
• If I reveal this information, will I get into trouble and possibly even lose my job?
• Which action best aligns with my long-held belief in the principle of justice?
• What do the laws say, and what would a law-abiding citizen do?
• If I keep quiet will I get some sort of reward?
D. Reflect on your Ethical Lens Inventory (ELI) by doing the following:
1. Explain your preferred ethical lens, or what it means to have a center perspective relevant to the ELI.
a. Analyze whether you have the same preferred lens in different settings (e.g., work, personal, social).
2. Explain both your primary values and classical virtue(s) from the ELI.
a. Compare two primary values and one classical virtue from part D2 individually with three of the top five values from the Clarifying Your Values exercise.
3. Describe one of the following from the ELI: your blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice.
a. Discuss three steps you can take to mitigate the blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice described in part D3 in order to make better ethical decisions in the future.
4. Discuss how you plan to use the ethical lens(es) to approach ethical situations throughout your professional life.
E. Submit a copy of the PDF file with your results from the ELI, as a separate document.
F. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.
G. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.
File Restrictions
File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! - _ . * ' ( )
File size limit: 200 MB
File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z
RUBRIC
A1:ETHICAL TRAITS
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of the ethical traits the chosen leader has demonstrated is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussion of 1 or more of the 2 ethical traits the chosen leader has demonstrated is illogical or poorly supported.
COMPETENT
The discussion of 2 ethical traits the chosen leader has demonstrated is logical and well supported.
A2:ETHICAL CONDUCT
NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of how the chosen leader has exhibited ethical conduct is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of how the chosen leader has exhibited ethical conduct is illogical, or the ideas presented are poorly supported.
COMPETENT
The explanation of how the chosen leader has exhibited ethical conduct is logical, and the ideas presented are well supported.
B:DILEMMA ANALYSIS
NOT EVIDENT
The submission does not compare the consequentialist and deontological perspectives.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The submission does not compare how the dilemma found in the scenario would be approached from both the deontological and consequentialist perspectives. Or the comparison is illogical or poorly supported.
COMPETENT
The submission compares how the dilemma found in the scenario would be approached from both the deontological and consequentialist perspectives. The submission is logical and well supported.
C:LEVELS OF COGNITIVE MORAL DEVELOPMENT
NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of which level of cognitive moral development is represented in the scenario is not provided for any of the given questions.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of which level of cognitive moral development is represented in the scenario is poorly reasoned or illogical for 1 or more of the 5 given questions.
COMPETENT
The explanation of which level of cognitive moral development is represented in the scenario is well reasoned and logical for each of the 5 given questions.
D1:PREFERRED ETHICAL LENS
NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of the preferred ethical lens or center perspective is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of the preferred ethical lens or what it means to have a center perspective is illogical or irrelevant to the ELI results.
COMPETENT
The explanation of the preferred ethical lens or what it means to have a center perspective is logical and relevant to the ELI results.
D1A:DIFFERENT SETTINGS
NOT EVIDENT
An analysis of whether the candidate has the same preferred lens in different settings is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The analysis of whether the candidate has the same preferred lens in different settings is poorly supported, or the ideas presented are illogical.
COMPETENT
The analysis of whether the candidate has the same preferred lens in different settings is well supported, and the ideas presented are logical.
D2:PRIMARY VALUES AND CLASSICAL VIRTUE(S)
NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of the primary values or classical virtue(s) from the ELI is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of the primary values or classical virtue(s) from the ELI is illogical or irrelevant to the ELI results.
COMPETENT
The explanation of both the primary values and classical virtue(s) from the ELI is logical and relevant to the candidate’s ELI results.
D2A:COMPARISON TO TOP FIVE VALUES
NOT EVIDENT
A comparison of 2 primary values and 1 classical virtue from part D2 with 3 of the top five values from the Clarifying Your Values exercise is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The comparison of the 2 primary values and 1 classical virtue is not completed individually with 1 or more of 3 of the top five values from the Clarifying Your Values exercise. Or 1 or more of the comparisons is illogical or poorly supported.
COMPETENT
The comparison of the 2 primary values and 1 classical virtue is completed individually with each of the 3 of the top five values from the Clarifying Your Values exercise. Each comparison is logical and well supported.
D3:BLIND SPOT, RISK, DOUBLE STANDARD OR VICE
NOT EVIDENT
A description of the blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice from the ELI is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The description of the chosen blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice from the ELI is illogical or irrelevant.
COMPETENT
The description of the chosen blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice from the ELI is logical and relevant.
D3A:MAKING BETTER ETHICAL DECISIONS
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of any steps that can be taken to mitigate the chosen blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice in order to make better ethical decisions in the future is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussion of 1 or more of the 3 steps that could mitigate the blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice from part D3 in order to make better ethical decisions in the future is illogical or poorly supported.
COMPETENT
The discussion of each of the 3 steps that could mitigate the blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice from part D3 in order to make better ethical decisions in the future is logical and well supported.
D4:USE OF ETHICAL LENSES
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of how to use the ethical lens(es) to approach ethical situations throughout the candidate’s professional life is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussion of how to use the ethical lens(es) to approach ethical situations throughout the candidate’s professional life is illogical, or the ideas presented are poorly supported.
COMPETENT
The discussion of how to use the ethical lens(es) to approach ethical situations throughout the candidate’s professional life is logical, and the ideas presented are well supported.
E:ELI RESULTS
NOT EVIDENT
A copy of the PDF file with the results from the ELI is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
Not applicable.
COMPETENT
A copy of the PDF file with the results from the ELI is provided.
F:SOURCES
NOT EVIDENT
The submission does not include both in-text citations and a reference list for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized, and a reference list; however, the citations and/or reference list is incomplete or inaccurate.
COMPETENT
The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are properly quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list that accurately identifies the author, date, title, and source location as available.
G:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
NOT EVIDENT
Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective.
COMPETENT
Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.

source..
Content:


Looking Through the Ethical Lens
Your Name
Subject’s name
Professor’s name
Date of Submission
* Select a nonfictional leader who you feel has exhibited exemplary ethical conduct and do the following:
1 Discuss two ethical traits your chosen leader has demonstrated.
Howard Schultz, the Starbucks CEO, has demonstrated both compassion and a sense of integrity. Being compassionate means that he can feel sympathy or empathy, or in a simpler explanation, it means that the person understands the other. As for integrity, Schultz is known to be an honest person with a sound character.
2 Explain how your chosen leader has exhibited ethical conduct.
He is compassionate to his customers, employees, and the environment. Under his leadership, Starbucks can provide employee benefits for both part- and full-timers. He uses his company to address the needs of certain charities through volunteerism and financial aid. The company seeks to help the lives of the suppliers of raw materials for their products. As for his customers, he makes sure that the products being offered are of quality. He also makes sure that the quality of service the employees give would meet the standards of the company allowing good customer satisfaction.

...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Other Topics:

  • ETHICS AND LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY ANALYSIS. Ethical Culture of Walmart. Management Essay
    Description: Walmart Company revolves and works under three core ethical principles. These principles include respect for the individual, striving for excellence, and service to customers....
    6 pages/≈1650 words | APA | Management | Essay |
  • Policy and Program Development - Ethics/Leadership
    Description: The goal of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is to make sure that a firm ethically conducts its activities, while also following the legal requirements. The CSR efforts offer the company an opportunity to give back to the immediate community and other stakeholders....
    6 pages/≈1650 words | APA | Management | Essay |
  • Capstone 7 Managing Conflict. Management Assignment
    Description: Workplace conflict is any disagreement among colleagues which may disrupt work flow, hinder teamwork and hurts productivity (De Dreu., et al 2001) Human resource personnel are normally involved in resolving conflicts....
    2 pages/≈550 words | APA | Management | Essay |
Need a Plagiarism Free Essay?
Submit your instructions!