Recent Post

Searching...
September 23, 2013

Essay on Integrity and Dignity Leadership Organization/Behavior

Integrity and Dignity Leadership Organization and Behavior
Leaderships and ethical values in the workplace setting almost go hand in hand and is an extricable part in any organization. Core values of organizational leadership are identified to be things that people hold as the most significant aspects such as who we are and how we treat others in the workplace.  In terms of workplace leadership, our core beliefs about the people and how we should treat them leave an impact on the management of workplace behavior. There are different leadership styles but the essential values of the leader determine it. 
Effective leaders are driven by the self-belief that their own values such as integrity and dignity which can motivate the employees to fully realize their potential at workplace. Effective core values are working behind the scenes. Like an operating system on a computer. (Andrew, 2000)
Leadership is the ability to influence organization members to adopt the behaviors needed for strategy implementation (Galbraith and Kazanjian, 1986). Leadership helps to create an ethical working climate by job satisfaction, motivation, cohesiveness, norms, and conflict resolution and stress management of the employees of the organization. 
Ethics is not an easy term to define. In a general sense, ethics is the code of moral principles and values that govern the behaviors of a person or group with respect to what is right or wrong. Ethics sets standards as to what is good or bad in conduct and decision making (Shea, 1988).
Ethics can be more clearly understood when compared with behaviors governed by laws and by free choices. Human behaviors fall into three categories. The first is codified law, in which values and standards are written into the legal system and enforceable in the courts. In this area lawmakers have ruled that people and corporations must behave in a certain way, such as obtaining licenses for cars or paying corporate taxes. The domain of free choice is at the opposite end of the scale and pertains to behavior about which law has no say and for which an individual or organization enjoys complete freedom. An individual’s choice of a marriage partner or religion or a corporation’s choice of the number of dishwashers to manufacture is examples of free choice.
Between these domains lies the area of ethics. This domain has no specific laws, yet it does have standards of conduct based on shared principles and values about moral conduct that guide an individual or company. In the domain of free choice, obedience is strictly to oneself. In the domain of codified law, obedience is to laws prescribed by the legal system. In the domain of ethical behavior, obedience is to unenforceable norms and standards about which the individual or company is aware.
Many individuals and companies get into trouble with the simplified view that choices are governed by either law or free choice. It leads people to mistakenly assume that if it is not illegal, it must be ethical, as if there were no third domain (Kidder, 1990). A better option is to recognize the domain of ethics and accept moral values as a powerful for good that can regulate behaviors both inside and outside corporations. As principle of ethics and social responsibility are more widely recognized, companies can use codes of ethics and their corporate cultures to govern behavior, thereby eliminating the need for additional laws and avoiding the problems of unfettered choice.
Because ethical standards are not codified, disagreements and dilemmas about proper behavior often occur. An ethical dilemma arises in situations when each alternative choice or behavior is undesirable because of potentially negative ethical consequences. Right or wrong cannot be clearly identified. (Behling,2004)
Criteria for ethical decision-making:
Manager faced with ethical choices may benefit from a normative approach-one based on norms and values-to guide their decision making. Normative ethics uses several approaches to describe values for guiding ethical decision making. Four of these are relevant to managers are:
·         Utilitarian approach
·         Individualism approach
·         Moral-rights approach
·         Justice approach (Cavangagh, Moberg and Velasquez, 1981) 
Utilitarian Approach:
The utilitarian approach holds that moral behavior produce the greatest good for the greatest number. In this approach, a decision-maker is expected to consider the effect of decision alternative on all parties and select the one that optimizes the satisfaction for the greatest number of people. Because actual optimizations can be very complex, simplifying them is considered appropriate. For example, a simple economic frame of reference could be used by collecting dollar costs and dollar benefits. Also, a decision could be made that considers only the people who are directly affected by the decision and not those are indirectly affected.
Individualism Approach:
The individualism approach also called egoism contends that acts are moral when they promote the individual’s best long-term interests. Individuals calculate the best long-term advantage to themselves as a measure of decision’s goodness. The action that is introduced to produce a greater ratio of good to bad for the individual compared with other alternatives is the right one to perform. With everyone pursuing self-interest, the greater good is ultimately served because people learn to accommodate each other in their own long-term interest. Individualism is believed to lead to honesty and integrity because that works best in the long run. Lying and cheating for immediate self-interest just causes business associates to lie and cheat in return. Thus individualism ultimately leads to behavior towards others that fits standards of behavior people want towards themselves (Tulega, 1987). One value of understanding this approach is to recognize short-term variations if they are proposed. People might argue for short-term self-interest based on individualism, but that misses the point. Because individualism is easily misinterpreted to support immediate self-gain. It is not popular in the highly organized and group-oriented society of today. Individualism is closest to the domain of free choice.
Moral-Rights Approach:   
The moral-rights approach asserts that human beings have fundamental rights and liberties that cannot be taken away by an individual’s decision. Thus an ethically correct decision is one that best maintains the rights of those people affected by it.
Most rights that could be considered during decision making are:
·         The right of free consent: individuals are to be treated only as they knowingly and freely consent to be treated
·         The right to privacy: individuals can choose to do as they please away from work and have control of information about their private life
·         The right of freedom of conscience: individuals may refrain from carrying out any order that violates their moral or religious norms
·         The right of free speech: individuals may criticize truthfully the ethics or legality of actions of others
·         The right to due process: individuals have a right to an impartial hearing and fair treatment
·         The right to life and safety: individuals have the right to live without endangerment or violation of their health and safety
To make ethical decisions, managers need to avoid interfering with the fundamental rights of others. Thus a decision to eavesdrop on employees violates the right to privacy. Sexual harassment would be considered unethical because it violates the right to freedom of conscience. The right of free speech would support whistle-blowers who call attention to illegal or inappropriate action within an organization.
Justice Approach:   
The justice approach holds that moral decisions must be based on standards of equity, fairness, and impartiality. These types of justice are of concern to managers. Distributive justice requires that different treatment of people not be based on arbitrary characteristics. Individuals who are similar in respects relevant to a decision should be treated similarly. Thus men and women should not receive different salaries if they are performing the same job. However, people who differ in a substantive way, such as job skills or job responsibility, can be treated differently in proportion to the differences in skills or responsibility between them. This difference should have a clear relationship to organizational goals and tasks.
Motivation is one of the most frequently discussed topics of management. How can one make the employees to perform their best in any type of organization? The answer is very simple, by motivating them.
Motivation means different things to different individuals. For some it may be an incentive and for others, a psychological backing or setting a good example. Motivation is something abstract and the difficulties arise when someone tries to explain the meaning and application of motivation. Motivation can be defined in number of ways. One definition says that motivation is a process, which govern choices made by persons or lower organisms among alternative forms of voluntary activity. Motivation is actually the act of inducing an individual to follow a desired course of action. The desired course of action may be for the good of the individual or for the one who is inducing the individual towards a desired course of action or both.
According to Atchinson, motivation is the immediate influence on the direction, vigor and persistence of behavior (Atchinson 1964). According to some other researchers motivation is actually steering one’s actions towards certain goals and committing a certain part of one’s energies to reach them. Similarly some other think that motivation is a reported urge or tension to move in a given direction or to achieve a certain goal.
Motivation is one of the most essential skills of a good and result-oriented leader. It is the quality of a good leader that he equipped his followers and team members with the burning desire to achieve their desired goal. Although achievement of a goal depends upon the vision of the leader and the team member but a burning desire to achieve a goal is equally necessary.
            A good leader is a self motivated person who set his own goals for himself and trained his team in such a manner that they too share the same desire to achieve the goal.
Thus we can say that, Motivation is the skill and ability to influence people and a leader with motivation skill can easily increases the ambition in his or her followers.  
            The self-motivated people are also goal oriented. They set their own goal and when achieve one goal set another and try to achieve it. In most organization the leader is the visionary in customer services and employee leadership. The leader trained and motivated the staff as such that the leader and the employees share the same goal.
Self-motivated projects are the actual power behind motivation. The first requirement for such projects is interest, then information gathering and after getting the sufficient knowledge the goal is set. When action to achieve such goals is taken, then different barriers like risk, fear and failure become the challenge itself. 
Motivation is a very important skill of a good leader. Although the achievement is based on the size of the vision, but to achieve the goal a burning desire is necessary, and a good leader ignite their team with the desire to achieve their common goal.
















References
Andrew Ede and Andre Legosz,(2000) Monitoring the Ethical Climate of Organizations

Anona Armstrong, Hadri Kusuma and Mary Sweeney,(2009) THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHICAL CLIMATES AND THE QUALITY OF WORKING LIFE, http://www.cm.deakin.edu.au/aice/aice99/Paper/ARM99030.pdf

Atchinson, J. W. An Introduction to motivation, Van Nostrand, Princeton, N. J, 1964

Behling, Orlando, Labovitz, George and Kozmo, Richard, The Herzberg's Controversy: A Critical Reappraisal, Academy of Management Journal, March 1968, p. 105

Bernard, Chester, I. The function of the Executive, Harvard university press, Cambridge, Mass




0 comments:

Post a Comment