Ethics_Reflection_Paper

Ethics, as a branch of philosophy, is concerned with morality, moral problems, and moral judgments, dealing with such elusive terms as ‘values,’ ‘right,’ and ‘good.’ It deals with issues beyond the realm of traditional rules and customs and unconscious habits. However, at its deepest level of inquiry, public opinion takes a cursory look at possible contributing factors and solutions to unacceptable conduct. This approach to ethical thinking represents a critically deficient attempt at normative ethics. (TWI, 2010) Ethics are essential in the workplace because they allow for order and alignment in making the “right” decisions. Ethics are the reason that people make good decisions even when not directly told to do so. There are standards that are implied and generally not documented. When dealing with those who may not subscribe to the same ethical standards, you can attempt to draw on intrinsic human qualities such as the desire to achieve and succeed in the workplace. In many circumstances, leadership will look at your ability to support the goals and mission of the company. Even if those are not exactly the same standards and goals which you would have preferred to set forth, employees abide by them in order to get ahead. A manager is essential in supporting the internal drive while motivating and encouraging the follow through of ethics and morality of the company as a whole. The Williams Institute Ethics Awareness Inventory assesses your responses to questions whose underlying ethical perspective is one of four core beliefs; Character, Obligation, Results and Equity. Character, represented by the letter C, is most closely aligned with virtue theory for which the primary concern is what it is “good to be”, rather than what it is “good to do”. In other words, this theory looks to an individual’s character, rather than to an individual’s duty, conduct, or actions. Morality focuses on judgment and the cultivation of virtues. This theory focuses more on the development of moral character, on the kind of traits one would consider to be exemplary. In some respects, it goes beyond the expression of duty or obligation, and beyond the expression of moral standards of right and wrong. Instead, it calls for the qualities of character we can bring to bear on complex ethical decisions that require judgment, wisdom, and integrity in order to choose between conflicting rules or standards of right and wrong. Obligation, represented by the letter O, is most closely aligned with the theory which focuses on an individual’s duty or obligation to do what is morally right. This theory looks at what we intend by our actions, rather than the consequences of our actions. Results, represented by the letter R, are most closely aligned with utilitarianism for which the primary concern is the consequences of our actions, seeking to maximize the greatest balance of good over evil. This standard for measuring rightness or wrongness is referred to as the principle of utility. It is particularly appealing to consider the notion of being able to measure good and evil mathematically and efficiently in the interest of achieving a net balance of good in people’s lives. Equity, represented by the letter E, most closely defined as “fairness” or “justice tempered by ethics”, challenges five major characteristics of modern thought including; 1) its commitment to individualism; 2) its commitment to equality; 3) the notion of social progress; 4) its commitment to universal principles shared by a common humanity and based on the concept of universal reason; and 5) its commitment to absolute truths, objective science, and the rational planning of ideal social orders. Previously, my values include but were not limited to beliefs, ideals and actions which affected my own physical and mental well being. Potentially because I believe in and value “the golden rule”, the primary values signify and revolve around respect. This includes respect for my individuality, my thought process, my ideals, morals and standards, respect for my personal space, my privacy and my time. I am more apt to continue a cooperative relationship if there is obvious respect for my time and other responsibilities. People at times have an unconscious way of taking advantage of kindness and feeling entitled to the things a person may do for them. Simply based on being a fellow human being with these expectations for myself, I will do the same for others. I have never forced another person to be a part of my life and to share my space unwillingly, but if you choose to do so there are “rules” and expectations for doing so. Adaptation in accordance with my values and beliefs are part of that. I do not require that these things become your intrinsic beliefs as well, but at least respect that fact that they are important to me when sharing time and space with me. I value the fact that I am an intellectual and very rational, conscious thinker. I am more than capable and competent of making my own decisions. As a matter of fact, I prefer to. I value my own communication abilities, but I also value that others communicate with me directly, clearly and completely. I value communication which is respectful, courteous, and with integrity. I value economical spending, awareness and interest in the word around us. I try to be efficient and practical in my spending and retention on finances. Unfortunately, I have not always been as comfortable and accessible with my “soft skills”. I have previously been labeled as a troublemaker, crass, verbally direct sometimes to a fault and hard to work with. At the end of the day, I have always done well at my assigned tasks and been knowledgeable beyond requirement. My rationale had been that I would rather have a hard working intellectual who may be sarcastic, crass or rough around the edges, than the emotionally involved, remembers everyone’s birthday, upset because you aren’t having a good day “social butterfly” on my team any day. I continued to feel this way until I realized that my leadership felt differently and I was the one suffering and being left behind. When enough people who have that close-knit social relationship with management decide that they don’t want you around, it doesn’t matter how bright you are or how well you do your job. You will have to speak up and assert yourself, or be left behind. It has become cliché and grossly overlooked, but the phrase “it’s not what you know, but who you know” is more commonplace than acknowledged. All employees have strengths and weaknesses. Some people are grandiose personalities, driven by charm and social situations. Others are intellectual, possessing skills and knowledge but potentially lacking social comfort and poise. Rather than the ethical leader utilizing position and experience to motivate and develop those soft skills, it becomes easier to advance those with whom they have a better social or personal relationship even if they are not fully capable of performing to the standard of the position description.