The Leadership Competencies in the Competing Values Framework - Assignment Example

MGT 3110 Individual Writing Assignment Table of Contents Question 3 Question 2 5 Question 3 7 References 13 Question Describe how a responsible business leader can improve the ethical work culture of an organization. Among the factors to consider in your answer, include elaboration on the following: (1) the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines for Organizations; (2) the Organizational Ethics Needs Assessment; and (3) Ethical Leadership Perception Measurement Instrument. A dependable business leader has the ability to develop the ethical atmosphere or environment in a company or organization through institutionalization of the ethical systems and the company compliances (Petrick & Quinn, 2000, 2001). In USA there are two major component of legal compliance, which focuses on averting the criminal misconduct. They are: a) The US Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations (United States Sentencing Commission, 2000), and b) the Sarbanes Oxley Act (DesJardins, 2011). There are numerous system components which are designed for enabling dependable conduct in the companies. Among them two most important components are ethical leadership perception measurement instruments and organizational ethics needs assessment. The US Federal Sentencing Guidelines are especially formulated to punish those organizations which have involved themselves into criminal and offensive activities. The organizations like individuals can also be found guilty for conducting criminal offenses. Accordingly norms have been set to punish those organizations found violating the business ethical standards. As organization unlike the individuals cannot be imprisoned for their criminal activities, so they are fined, ordered for restitution or issued public notices for exposing or sharing their forfeiture status. The sentencing commission collects data against the company convicted of crime. It has been seen over the years that there are a wide variety of crimes. The commonly found offenses among these are fraud, tax offense, drug or food violations, discharge of environmental waste, etc. The system components are designed to maintain ethical norms within the organization, so that criminal activities are not followed within the company. Organization ethics involves the ethics of the organization, and how the organization responds to the external and internal stimulus ethically. The ethics that prevails within the organization is highly dependent on the culture of the organization. It also helps in expressing the values of the organization to the employees and the other stakeholders of the company. There are various organizational studies and theories that are related to the organizational ethics, but ethics and organizations have different application and scopes. The ethical practices in any organization cannot function without appropriate leader. The power of leadership in the organization plays a significant role in maintaining ethics because the leaders in the organization have complete knowledge regarding visions, and goals of the organization. Developing and implanting the ethical system in the organizations, is difficult but it becomes easy when the right organization culture prevails. The organizational ethics need assessment means to understand the needs of the organization, identifying them, assessing the needs according to the ethical regulatory standards and implement them in the organization so as to set ethical and sustainable working environment in the organization. The leaders should be the major source of ethical supervision for the employees. Many social learning theories have been put forward to understand the ethical leadership styles and offer constitutive explanation regarding ethical leadership. Organizations have developed new instruments for measuring ethical leadership in the organization. Ethical leadership is associated with honesty, consideration behavior, and trust for the leader, charismatic leadership and supervision. Ethical leadership forecasts outcomes such as the apparent effectiveness of the leaders, dedication and job satisfaction (Brown, Trevino & Harrison, 2005, p. 117) Question 2 Describe how the leadership competencies in the Competing Values Framework (CVF) may complement one another if they are fully integrated. Explain the dysfunctions that may arise in business leadership if certain competencies are overemphasized. Illustrate your answer with at least four specific competencies, one from each quadrant, elaborating on the relationship between them. Include a discussion of Figure C.2 (Quinn et al, 2011, p. 335) in your answer. The leadership ability in the Competing Value Framework (CVF) may correspond to another if they are totally incorporated, demonstrated, efficient, effective, innovative leadership performance and thoughtful (Lawrence, Lenk & Quinn, 2009). However, if certain capabilities are overemphasized, as depicted in Figure C.2, dysfunctional leadership presentation is expected to happen (Quinn, Faerman, Thompson, McGrath, & St. Clair, 2011). Competing Value Framework (CVF) was developed to act as an indicator for measuring the performance of the organizations. CVF has been found to be an excellent tool for understanding and organizing the leadership competencies, organizational effectiveness and enhancing the leadership roles, quality of the organization’s performance, and financial strategies. One of the biggest strengths of this framework is its robustness. The CVF is used as a map, sense-deriving device or learning system. CVF is applied to many facets in the organization such as leadership, decision making, motivation, communication, etc. There are four quadrants in a CVF model. They are: a) collaborate, b) Create, c) Control, and d) Compete. Collaborate signifies doing things collectively and create means to do before than anybody else. Control is to do things correctly and compete is to do things quickly. These four quadrants reveal the four competing values which are required in the organization and are implemented by the leaders. The common factor in all these four quadrants is people. For collaborating and creating things organizations also require purpose and practice along with people. Collaborating is a long-term process. But if proper control is there on the strategy formulation, then doing many things collectively becomes easy. Similarly the purpose of creating something new is to compete in the market successfully. On the other hand collaborating and creating things requires flexibility, while controlling and competing things requires a focused approach. This shows that all the quadrants are interrelated to each other in some way or the other. Dysfunctional morals in competency model may arise due to environmental and social performance. It has been seen that in case of global accountability, many corporate leaders take actions thinking that public interest is similar to the corporate property rights. Dysfunctional consequences may arise when one or more components in the quadrants are neglected by the leaders. All the four components in the quadrants assist in enhancing integrity and also contribute to the sustainability of the organization. However, problems may arise when due to lack of proper control things cannot be done or performed collectively, or due to excessive control there is lack of adequate flexibility. Similarly creating something new requires creativity and purpose, but absence of it might not fulfill the purpose. On the other hand excess of creation is also not feasible for an organization. Competing in a healthy environment is acceptable, but a cut through competition is also something not acceptable. So it can be depicted that any of the four values in the framework should be in correct proportion. Anything more or less would lead to dysfunctions in business leadership. According to the Figure C.2 in (Quinn et al, 2001, p. 335), four quadrants are mentioned, namely: a) Management Human Relations Theory, b) Management Open System Theory, c) Management Internal Process Theory, d) Management Rational Goal Theory. Management human resource theory and management internal process theory are both internal process of the organization because these specifically involve people within the organization. So they also involve working in an ethical environment. On the other hand management goal system and management rational goal theory are for achieving the external goal of the organization through employing the internal resources skillfully. These two quadrants help the organization to derive results, while the first two quadrants help to implement rules. Rules assist in proper controlling and lead to multitasking or collaborative work environment, which would further help to derive results by achieving the goals of set by the management. Question 3 Elaborate on the ways in which the integrity capacity approach to business ethics and the competing values approach to business leadership complement each other in the development of moral and leadership competencies respectively (with regard to integrity capacity theory, show the parallels of moral results, moral rules, moral character and moral context to the competing values theory emphases on competing, controlling, collaborating, and creating.) and how they contribute to fulfilling the RSCOB strategic mission to develop successful and ethical business leaders. The integrity capacity approach to business ethics (Petrick & Quinn, 2000, 2001) and the competing values approach to business leadership (Quinn, Faerman, Thompson, McGrath, & St. Clair, 2011) harmonize each other in the progress of ethical and leadership capabilities, as portrayed in Figure 1. This integrated growth of ethical and leadership capabilities directly contribute in satisfying the Raj Soin College of Business (RSCOB) strategic mission to synthesize successful and ethical business leaders. Figure 1 Source: (Petrick, & Quinn, 2001, p. 333). Integrity capacity involves combined or individual ability for recurring process association. It involves moral awareness, character, consideration, and conduct that exhibit balanced judgment, augments constant moral development, and encourages supportive structure for ethical decision making. The four different dimensions of integrity capacity engage process, development, judgment, and system. These four intangible dimensions are the vital ingredient for establishing a resource base for the organization and also put forward challenges for the leaders in the organization. The organizations and business leaders which have high integrity capacity will have the capability to respond to the rising competition more easily and quickly than the competitors. So in a way both Integrity capacity approach and competency value model is interrelated because integrity capacity approach would be helpful in setting ethical business rules or framework which are adopted and utilized by the business leaders to set their own leadership styles for integrating the competing values within the organization. Integrity capacity approach is the ingredient, while competing value model is the tool through which this ingredient is mixed in the organizational culture. Integrity capacity is the attribute collective or individual capability to infuse certain characteristics which is signified as ethical in the organization and which determines ethical leadership. The ethical policy implementation, rules and moral or ethical culture of the organization would reap ethical results and also assist in suitability. In this context the competing value model and the elements in the four quadrants of this model, namely collaborating, controlling, creating and competing, can be analyzed. Collaborating and controlling functions are internal. They are both long-term approaches which are very much driven by the implementation of virtual ethical theory called character and Deontological ethical theory called rules. Similarly creation and competing involves moving towards an external goal, so they are driven by contextual ethical theory called system and teleological ethics theory called result, as can be seen in Figure 2. Figure 2 Source: (Petrick, & Quinn, 2001, p. 335). The strategic mission of Raj Soin College of Business (RSCOB) is to offer an opportunity and resources to persistently improve the moral capabilities in business education and also to encourage responsible and ethical practices in business community. This institution has streamlined the mission of the college that is sustainable development and ethical or moral business leaders with the focused services like research activities and teaching. The competing value model assists RSCOB to achieve its strategic mission in the way as described above. Question 4 Provide an individual analysis and resolution of a business ethics case in your major or minor field(s) from the pre-selected online list of case options, incorporating both the business ethics case structured format presented in class and the professional functional code/ oath of your major or minor field(s). The business ethics case that will be evaluated and discussed in this part will be BP’s Gulf Oil Spill Risk Management mainly in the disciplinary field of Human Resource (Ethics Case 5: BP’s Gulf Oil Spill Risk Management, n.d. ). The planned framework for the business ethics case study and discussion will include the following components (Petrick & Quinn, 2001): Understanding stakeholder’s problems, classification and prioritization of the ethics issues, pluralistic examination of ethical context, results, character, rules, proposal of a reasonable ethical resolution after consideration of substitutes, and management of the realistic application of the projected resolution. During the internal investigation, BP has revealed the reasons behind the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which also exposed that due to certain unethical decision making, the mishappening could not be stopped. In this oil well drill not only BP but many other partner companies were also involved to do tasks like sealing the pipes, so that the oil does not leak into the sea bed, designing and installing the cement seal, etc. They were also equally responsible for the disaster, which killed 11 members and injured 17. Here we can say that the stakeholders of the company that is the employees were at fault for showing unethical behavior. This is said because the cement which was pumped to the production casing revealed a negative result in the pressure test. However, the BP site managers or leaders and the crew members of Transocean rig derived an incorrect view predicting that the test conducted was successful. They also depicted that the integrity has been well establish, which not the case was. The crew members of the rig also did not make out the influx and act accordingly to control the situation until the hydrocarbon has passed through BOP, inside the riser. Moreover, if the fluids that have been diverted to MGS have been moved to overboard, then the scenario would have been different. The disaster could have been reduced. In the investigation, the crew members and the rig team were found guilty of not delivering their responsibilities and unethical behavior. This is also a matter of faulty human judgment of the rig crew and the BP team leaders. References Brown, M. E., Trevino L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, (97), pp. 117-134. DesJardins, J. (2011). An Introduction to business ethics. (4th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Lawrence, K., Lenk, P., & Quinn, R. (2009). Behavioral complexity in leadership: The psychometric properties of a new instrument to measure behavioral repertoire. Leadership quarterly, (20), pp. 87-102. Petrick, J. A. & Quinn, J. F. (2000). The integrity capacity construct and moral progress in business. Journal of Business Ethics, (23), pp. 3-18. Petrick, J. A. & Quinn, J. F. (2001). The challenge of leadership accountability for integrity capacity as a strategic asset. Journal of Business Ethics, (34), pp. 331-343. Quinn, R. E., Faerman, S. R., Thompson, M. P., McGrath, M. R., & St. Clair, L. S. (2011). Becoming a master manager: A competing values approach. (5th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. United States Sentencing Commission (USSC). (2000). Guidelines manual. Washington, DC: United States Judiciary. Read More