An Ethical Dilemmas in Leadership - Case Study Example

An Ethical Dilemma* Introduction: Leadership is defined as “influence, the art or process of influencing people so that they will strive willingly and enthusiastically toward the achievement of group goals” (Koonz and Weihrich 437). It is also true that leaders face ethical dilemma while influencing people. The case under review presents one such scenario where the leader (Lucy) faces a precarious situation. This has been examined by using PISCO model which stands for Problem, Input, Solution, Choice and Operation. Problem: The problem here is Lucy has three candidates considered for promotion. The first one is Liz, an African American with the company for five years. Here performance was considered just average but her energy rated high. Second one was Roy who was with the company for twenty years. He has been considered below average in all performance parameters and his retirement is almost due. Yeh, Asian, has limited stint in the company. He is a above average performer, but disliked by many. Left to her own decision, Lucy would have succeeded in choosing the right person. But the problem is that all the three are candidates for many. Lucy is sympathetic towards Liz because of the illness of her kid that exerts extra financial burden to her. Promotion could indeed help her to surmount the financial problems to a great extent. It also appears that Lucy has connections with Liz that is beyond their work relationship. On the other hand, Roy had been with the company for a long time. If promoted, he would retire happily with a great sense of accomplishment. This would go a long way in motivating other staff who are aging. But the problem is very severe with the third candidate Yeh, who has been engaged to the son of Vice-President. Lucy her self is a subordinate to Vice-President. The Vice President has already spoken to Lucy on the need for promoting Yeh because of the social respect stake involved in it. There are very many considerations other than work related that Lucy would have to consider before recommending a suitable candidate to the management. Management has already indicated to Lucy that the selection of the candidate had to be done very carefully as a significant stake of the company was involved in it. At one level, Lucy has to live up to the professional ethics; but at another level, she would have to decided by considering factors beyond work relationship. Input: A good leader is one who could influence people to perform tasks willingly with zeal and confidence. Invigorating enthusiasm amongst the ranks and files is central to leadership. There are about four ingredients of leadership, generally identified as skills set required for an effective leader. They are, one, the ability to use power effectively in a responsible manner, two, the ability to appreciate that different individuals have different motivating factors at different time, three, the ability to inspire and create passion, and, four, the ability to create a climate which responds to and arouses motivations. These days management requires strategic leadership for effective implementation of every decisions and actions. Strategic leadership has been defined as “the ability to anticipate, envision, maintain flexibility, and empower others to create strategic change as necessary” (Hitt, Ireland and Hoskisson, 489). A common characteristic of successful leaders, who were able to steer the company into higher growth trajectory or helped companies to turnaround, is that they have tremendous multifunctional skills. They understand the process in each area and delegate responsibilities to right people instead of being engaged in subunit level. Leaders have a well-stated vision and effectively communicate them to all others who are empowered to take decisions with flexibility. These leaders provide the strategic direction in which all functional units have to align their workings with exploiting of core competencies and achieving excellence in whatever they do. To this end, leaders work very hard to evolve and implant a strong organization culture so that individual’s interests are subordinated to such goals. While this being said, one cannot ignore the motivation part. Leadership is all about influencing people to work better, inspire the subordinates, create passions in them, and finally, arouse the motivation. Without being promoted, some would be in a position to achieve all these expected outcomes of new roles and responsibilities and therefore there will be overall improvement in the performance. At the same time, promotion can act as the big motivator. It may be the case that everyone may be self motivated. But motivation level will go down if they fail to get promoted, that too when there is an opportunity to get promoted. Thus, one can see a positive relationship between promotion and motivation. At the same time, if people in the organization feel that promotion was not fair, then they get distressed and become less motivated. Thus promotion is a two edged sword. If done with meticulous care, it brings lot of respect for leader and hence leaders would be in a position to bring enthusiasm in the work place. If on the other hand, promotion is considered as unfair, leaders not only lose the respect but credibility of their actions. Consequences of this would be mind boggling as it may pave the way for best talents to depart from the company. For those who choose to stay within the organization, such action of leaders would reduce their morale level and hence their productivity. Solution: Possibly three solutions can be thought of. a. Promote one of the candidates purely on the basis of merit and being less mindful of inputs that come from other quarters. Strength: If this option is exercised, then Lucy can avoid any gossip on her leadership style. She would become a model leader within the organization. This will bring her lots of respect. Weaknesses: Lucy will cease to be a favorite leader among the people who had been informal with her. Those people liked to feed Lucy with their preferences because of the informalities they had. If she does not heed to their informal suggestion, probably she will lose a good source of information. b. Constitute a panel of outside experts who would conduct interview in their own style and select the appropriate candidate based on the job descriptions provided to then in advance. Strength: Lucy will neither lose the respect amongst her colleagues now will she lose her informal friends. Weakness: System will begin to treat her one of the colleagues rather than a leader. This is so because a leader witnesses the power of individuals and plans for harnessing their growth. If outside experts have to choose, then Lucy will be losing the power of being a leader. c. Promote one of them by carefully considering positive benefits that would accrue as a result of that action. Strength: Lucy will satisfy one of the three people, who felt free to share their preferences with her. Moreover, she will gain favor from those persons, whose candidates has been promoted. Weakness: She will become the target of criticism. Others will not accept her action. If she chooses wrong person, the organization will have to pay a huge price and this may risk her job security. Choice: Exercising the first of three above options would be the right choice. When candidates are promoted solely based on their merits, it is possible that Lucy may be placing the right candidates at the right place. This will go a long way in protecting the interests of the organization in the long run. In turn, Lucy’s boss will become extremely satisfied with the performance of the candidate and hence they may provide better career options to Lucy in the long run. As a leader, getting wider acceptance amongst peer is very important. This is an opportunity for Lucy to prove to her colleagues that promotion would not be placed on any consideration other than their performance and behavior. By conveying this message across files and ranks, Lucy will be in a position to bring the right behavior at work at the same time ensuring high performance. This choice will also communicate to the rest within the organization that on the organizational matters, no prejudices and personal agenda get entertained. In fact, such approach would further provide fillip to her acceptance and leveraging on this, she can bring new enthusiasm amongst those who perform low due to denial of opportunities in the past. This option thus will ensure that promotion is fair. Respect for life as an important principle of ethical decision. Further, managerial decision could be guided by conscience. That is, merit of dealing with each of these situations should be judged from the angle of fairness, reasonableness and common good (Petrick and Quinn, 22). What has been suggested is that the dilemma could be resolved if Lucy considers only factors primary for discharging the responsibilities embed to the roles, then not only promoted candidate would feel elated but also other candidates may not feel being let down. Thus, Lucy would be able to match job requirements with the individual capabilities, performance and behavior, and thereby achieving fairness in what she does. From the point view of the organization, Lucy would have done a praiseworthy job by placing right people at the right jobs. Many organizations have failed because they do not find right candidates for the right job. When right people are given responsibilities, the overall performance level of the organization goes up. This provides job security for all employees and improves return on investment as well. Operation: The chosen option of promoting candidates solely on the basis of merit will be considered. Now the issue is, what could be the right criteria? The company has to confirm to employment of minorities and women. At the moment, it is certainly falling short. Moreover, the company requires some faces externally that will boost its market image. In this context, the advice of public relation department would help. At the same time, such criteria should not be inimical to the interests of the performing candidates. If Liz is promoted, the performance will not suffer. She is just the average, and so there will not be significant change in the overall performance. She may get motivated to perform well because promotion also ensures improvement in her financial standing. As she is African American, the company would stand to gain on both employment conditions as well as in the market, much to the likings of the minorities and women. This will bring enhance common good of the organization. Personally, Lucy will feel gratified having helped one of her colleagues in the difficult times. Of the other two candidates, Yeh may get hurt. But then she is too young to go low on the performance level. Yeh also has behavioral problem as her colleagues do not feel comfortable dealing with her. Thus, some coaching is required. Lucy will have to call Yeh and explain to her the circumstances leading to promoting Liz and the benefits of her action to the company. Moreover, Lucy will have to walk into the room of the Vice President and present all the facts in favor of Liz in a persuasive manner. At the same time, Lucy would have to promise to Yeh that as she gets wider acceptance, she would become the obvious choice for the next round of promotion. As for Roy, one-to-one meeting would suffice. He has been with the company for a longer period of time. He would have developed a better understanding of the job requirements and hence explaining in a cordial way about his misfit and benefits of promoting Liz would certainly convince him. It can therefore be concluded that resolving dilemma lies in considering the merits and the common good that the promotion will do to the organization and dealing in a persuasive manner with the other candidates. References Hitt. A.M, Ireland. R.D and Hoskisson, E.R. Strategic Management Competitiveness and Globalization. Ohio: South-Western College Publishing. 2001. Johnson. G. and Scholes. K. Exploring Corporate Strategy. New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2002. Koonz, H, and Weihrich. H. Management. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1988. Patrick J. A and Quinn J. F. Management Ethics Integrity at Work. California: Sage Publication. 1997. Robbins, S.P. and Coulter, M. Management, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. 1998. Read More