Moral Dilemma: The Case in Between

Introduction

Every day we are facing moral issues because morality is about our life. This world is not a perfect world and we have to face many moral issues along the way. Some moral issues are easy to handle and others are not easy to handle. Solving moral issues often time involve conflict of moral values like which one is more important than the other. Some moral issues involve issues that cannot be overridden. It is here we have serious and not serious moral dilemma. This short paper will discuss and explain moral dilemma and how we approach moral dilemma. I believe the discussion may raise some serious questions and this paper is only to define what moral dilemma is.    

Moral Dilemma is defined

Moral dilemma is defined as a state of “between two choices” that are equally good and equally bad if you make a choice to choose one of them. In this case if you choose one and not the other one, you still have moral problem and at the same time, not to take action is also your moral failure. You do it, you are wrong, and you do not do it, you are wrong. It is a moral dilemma.  You need to make a decision but you cannot do both.  You do either one or the other and by failing to do it, you fail morally. You really have an uncomfortable situation and face unpleasant choice to make between two moral choices and in this situation you are forced to choose one and violate one.  You wish to do both and it is the right thing to do but you are in a situation that you have to choose one of the two.  

What is common to the two well-known cases is moral conflict. In each case, an agent regards herself as having moral reasons to do each of two actions, but doing both actions is not possible. Ethicists have called situations like these moral dilemmas. The crucial features of a moral dilemma are these: the agent is required to do each of two (or more) actions; the agent can do each of the actions; but the agent cannot do both (or all) of the actions. The agent thus seems condemned to moral failure; no matter what she does, she will do something wrong (or fail to do something that she ought to do). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), 

Let us take the example of Sophie’s case. Sophie is instructed by a guard in a Nazi concentration camp to decide which one of her two children will be killed, and if she doesn’t decide, both will be killed. Sophie needed to make a decision. She saved one and she sacrificed one and both actions are equally bad because you save one at the expense of the other. Saving the life of one will not make her action is morally acceptable because she has to kill the other one.   No matter which of her children Sophie saves, she will experience enormous guilt for the consequences of that choice. Indeed, if Sophie did not experience such guilt, we would think that there was something morally wrong with her. In these cases, proponents of the argument (for dilemmas) from moral residue must claim that four things are true: (1) when the agents acts, she experiences remorse or guilt; (2) that she experiences these emotions is appropriate and called for; (3) had the agent acted on the other of the conflicting requirements, she would also have experienced remorse or guilt; and (4) in the latter case these emotions would have been equally appropriate and called for [McConnell (1976, 1986). In these situations, then, remorse or guilt will be appropriate no matter what the agent does and these emotions are appropriate only when the agent has done something wrong. Therefore, these situations are genuinely dilemmatic.

If we follow the argument of Socrates and Satre (1957), it will be easier to take action in the case of Sophie. Socrates and Sartre argue that there is always conflicting moral obligation that someone has to take but one value overrides the other. Their argument would indicate that there is always one value higher/better than the other. In this case, one can override the other.  In the case of Sophie, one would say that Sophie should save one of her child and let the other one be killed, since that is the best she can do (Zimmerman (1996). Following their argument one would say that there would not be a serious moral dilemma because there is one best action to take, there is a conflict of moral values facing the moral agent but there is still one more important value than the other to take. However, the case of Sophie is hard moral dilemma.  In this moral dilemma, someone is forced by the circumstance to sacrifice one value for the sacrifice of the other which is both equally important, one is not better than the other, one cannot override the other.  Sophie should kill the other son in order to save the other one or not to take action but the consequence of such action is that both of her children would be killed. In this situation we acknowledge that these are the situations in which an agent does not know what he ought to do. This may be because of factual uncertainty, uncertainty about the consequences, and uncertainty about what principles apply. So for any given case, the mere fact that one does not know which of two (or more) conflicting obligations prevails does not show that none does.

Types of Moral Dilemma

From the argument of Socrates, Sartre and the case of Sophie, we can argue that there are two kinds of moral dilemmas namely solvable and not solvable moral dilemmas.  In the idea of Plato and Socrates, moral conflicts can be resolved by looking at the priority. It involves conflicts between two (or more) moral requirements and the agent does not know which of the conflicting requirements takes precedence in her situation. Everyone concedes that there can be situations where one requirement does take priority over the other with which it conflicts, though at the time action is called for it is difficult for the agent to tell which requirement prevails. Let us take the example of Francis. Francis was on the way home from school. It was still far to reach home and he was hungry and he had no money. He looked around and he found bread on the store along the road. He wanted to request the owner of the store but no body was around. He got the bread and he was able to reach home. In this case, Francis was fully aware that stealing is not good but at the same he was fully aware that he had no choice to survive, except to steal the bread. His life took priority over stealing.  In the case of Sophie, it is hard moral dilemma. There is no better choice. It is the case of conflicts between two (or more) moral requirements, and neither is overridden. This is not simply because the agent does not know which requirement is stronger; neither is. Another example is the case of double effect. A doctor diagnosed a pregnant mother. The doctor found that the mother is in risky situation. The solution was only through the operation but the result would be either the mother or the child would be sacrificed. However, no operation means both will die. The doctor consulted the husband if the operation continues.

The husband has to make the decision. In this situation all actions would be wrong. To take action is wrong and not to take action is wrong. What the husband should do? 

How to Approach Moral Dilemma

Moral dilemma needs to be solved because at the end of the day we have to make a decision because it is one of our moral obligations. We need to figure out what to do and how to do it. Ethical studies present us several approaches to handle moral dilemma and we can mention it here;

1.      Motives/intentions. Moral agent needs to examine his/her motive in carrying the action. The motives must be good.

2.      Means/actions. What are the means/actions in carrying out his motive? In this case, the means must be also good.

3.      Ends. Examine the purpose of actions. The purpose must also be good.

4.      The consequence. Examine the actual outcome. Consequence must be considered because sometime the ends that a person plans may not be the actual outcome.

However in reality the four approaches we have mentioned are subjected to the call of the situation. It is hard to follow the four processes. Some groups emphasize the motives or the intention, like Emmanuel Kant. They argued that as long as the motives are good, it is enough to carry out the action. But other group emphasizes the consequences.  If the consequences bring better result than harm, then the action can be carried out.

Those who emphasizes on the consequences propose the following the procedures:

1.      Analyze the consequence. These groups argue that it is easier to start by looking at the consequences of the actions you’re considering. Assume you have a variety of options. Consider the range of both positive and negative consequences connected with each one. Examine the consequences from different aspects or angles. The question here is which consequence is the lesser evil or which consequence is better? In this case, we take into considerations all those who will be affected by the action.

2.      Analyze The Actions. Now consider all of your options from a completely different perspective. The moral agent should now examine what actions he/she should apply to bring out the good consequences. Concentrate instead strictly on the actions. How do they measure up against moral principles like honesty, fairness, equality, respecting the dignity of others, respecting people' s rights, and recognizing the vulnerability of individuals weaker or less fortunate than others? Do any of the actions that you’re considering "cross the line," in terms of anything from simple decency to an important ethical principle? If there’s a conflict between principles or between the rights of different people involved, is there a way to see one principle as more important than the others? What you’re looking for is the option whose actions are least problematic or less evil. .

3.      Make A Decision. And now, take both parts of your analysis into account and make a decision. This strategy should give you at least some basic steps you can follow. Be ready to accept the outcomes because the consequences or the outcome will not always as you expected.  

Conclusion

At the end deciding moral dilemma will not bring the moral agent free from moral responsibility because he/she has to sacrifice one moral value in the process. Applying the approaches we have discussed, they will not be able to solve all moral dilemmas. They are only to minimize or mitigate the moral burden of the moral agent. The burden and the guilt are still to be shouldered by the agent. And some moral dilemma cannot be solved. This is the reality of life that we have bear with it.  

References

1.       McConnell, Terrance, 1976, “Moral Dilemmas and Requiring the Impossible,” Philosophical Studies. New York: Cambridge University Press

2.       -----1986, “More on Moral Dilemmas,” The Journal of Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press

3.       Sartre, Jean-Paul, 1957/1946, “Existentialism is Humanism,” Trans, Philip Mairet, in Walter Kaufmann (ed.), Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre, New York: Meridian.

4.       Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2010. Moral Dilemmas. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-dilemmas/

5.       Zimmerman, Michael J., 1988, An Essay on Moral Responsibility, Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.

6.       –––, 1996, The Concept of Moral Obligation, New York: Cambridge University Press.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leadership Skills and Values that Bring Change to Organization

Introduction

Discussions on the topic of leadership are almost every day. Many seminars have been conducted to discuss the topic. It is interesting to discuss it because of its importance.  No society, no organization stands without a leader. The direction of society, organizations lies on him/her. Thus, the function of a leader is crucial. This is the reason why people never stop discussing about leadership and proposes their own concepts of what kind of leadership that can affect positive change in the society or organizations. Thus, the question like “what kind of leadership that produces positive results or change” is becoming relevant. The answer to this question is not all about leadership skills but also leader’s values. What we present in this article is based on experience and supported by the theory of leadership given by authorities on leadership theory.  

This article may give us clear understanding about what kind of leadership that is needed in changing the organization. As we know that leadership is not just a position. Position is a venue in which a person given the authority exercises his/her leadership role. However, many people who have been given position in many organizations are often not aware of their leadership role. Some may have the idea of leadership but what kind of leadership that they will apply, the skills and values that will help their role to produce positive change is still unknown to them. Others do not have the idea at all on what leadership is. They assume such position by certain circumstances, not because they are prepared for such position. The result is that they just simply repeat things that have been practiced from years to years and consequently bring the institution to no where and stay as it is. We have witnessed institutions that have been in existence for many decades but there is no difference between yesterday-today and tomorrow. They are just stagnant and slowly deteriorating and finally closed down. No change. No development is a failure of leadership.

Based on experience in managing an organization, the followings skills and values are important for creating change in the organization. The organizations need leaders with knowledge in strategic planning, problem solving, decision making, developing people, sharing information, motivating and appreciating people,  moral values, delegation and empowerment. There are other aspects, but we focus on those issues in this article.    

Leadership Skills

Leadership skills are necessary tools to carry out the job as leader. Many kinds of leadership skills but in this article, the writer just presents skills that are important according to his observations and experience. 

Strategic Planning Skills

            Leader needs to be equipped with the knowledge on how to make strategic planning.  This is the foundation of leadership. He/she should know where to lead and where they want to be in the future and how to get there. Thus, first requirement is a leader should have a vision. This is the end point of where the leader is leading his/her followers. It is the futuristic picture of the organization that is described in words or vision statement, (Morato, 2006) which inspires people to pursue. However, having vision alone is not enough.  Harvey Macey (2003) said, “A dream is just a dream if there is no deadline. Thus, a vision is a dream with a plan and a deadline and it should be executed.

To execute vision into action, the missions of the organization or the basic purpose of the organization have to be determined and clear. It may specify the product or services to be rendered, which in effect also defines the market. Then the mission has to be translated into specific objectives and these objectives have to be measurable. Thus, from the established objectives, specific key result areas have to be determined in order to be measured (KRAs). It is a qualitative statement that defines objectives is being attained. Qualitative statements are always hard to measure, thus, end results must be measured and stated in numerical values or percentage, or what we call Performance Indicator (PIs). Up to here, things are still at the level of ideas unless the strategies are formulated. These are actions to be taken which include activities and tasks, resources required in term of money, facilities and people (Morato, 2006). Unless, the leader knows where to go and how to get there, the leader will never bring any change for a better. Thus, a leader needs strategic planning skills.

Problem Solving Skills

Problems are part of human life. In the same way we may say that problems are part of organizational life, no way of avoiding it. They may be caused internally which is within our control and could be caused externally which is beyond our control. The world keep on changing and the behavior of people follow, then problems become complex. We can not escape change, and then we can not escape problems. It is our ability to adapt and manage change and solve these problems caused by the change determines the survival of the organization.

Organizations within the changing world are always facing problems. Problems may vary; it may be financial problems, human problems, technological problems and management problems. Therefore, leader in this changing environment needs to be equipped with skills to solve such complicated problems. The organization needs a leader who is committed to solve problems and has the basic knowledge in solving problems.

Problem solving is a skill because it is a scientific process. It involves methodical thought process. The issues must be identified and then analyzed. Then develop options and evaluate it in which alternatives of choices can be made and finally implement the choice that has been made (Heller, 1998). Systematic method of reaching a decision ensures that all correct issues are addressed. A systematic process enables the leader to prepare a logical and effective plan of actions so that decisions process can be explained clearly to employees.      

Commitment to solve problems is another matter. The life of the organization depends on how he/she commits her/himself to solve problems. Problems can not be avoided but it has to be faced. His/her commitment and ability to solve issues affecting his/her organization determine the survival and the development of the organization.

Decision-Making Skills

Our lives consist of a constant stream of decisions and choices, from the everyday to the highly consequential. Thus, an organization as part of society and composed of human beings naturally consists of constant stream of decisions and choices. The type of decisions then may include routine, emergency, strategic and operational. Based on the nature and type of these decisions, naturally there is a need to have a leader who can make better decision on emergency basis and a strategic decision. There are times that data are not available at hand and so leader must be ready for surprises. In case of strategic decision, the leader should have the ability to process multiple alternatives available out there and to choose an optimal course of action.

As decision makers, they are responsible for making a judgment and often crucial judgment, between two or more alternatives. It is not an instant effort and arbitrary game but it is a process. Making decisions take the leader through the whole process of making good, effective decision, from initial deliberation to final implementation (Heller, 1998).

Developing People Skills

The organization grows not only because of its leaders but because of people who are working for the organization. Naturally, preparing people to handle specific responsibilities is necessary. Thus, the job of leader is to identify the need of the organization and develop people who can handle those particular needs or jobs.  Maxwell (1995) emphasized that the great function of a leader is to develop people around him to their full potential. Developing people is not only their skills related to their job but also to develop them become a leader. His/her success is measured by how many people he/she has developed becoming leaders. 

In line with idea of Maxwell, JP.Maroney (2007) argues that great leaders invest in their people. They understand that their ultimate role is to develop people. They invest in human development and professional training and believe in spending time with their people. He specifically pointed out three resources in the process of helping people become their best and these are time, energy and money. He reiterates that a great leader must invest time. He/she should make a habit of spending time with people in their organization. By spending time with people, leaders come to know more about their people and bring out the best in them. Besides investing time, leaders must invest energy. Leaders must realize that working with people can be taxing. A leader who thinks of their people and their organization will not take things easy but they will use their energy to think of ways to better maximize the results of their people. Finally, he suggests that investing money for the development of people is necessary. Leaders should know that the best place to invest money for organization to grow is in their people. They should realize that the greatest untapped potential for success is in the people who are in the organization. Great leader would rather invest in people than in the furniture or company vehicle.

Bass (1998) as he cited from McGregor Burns (1978) emphasized the importance of building a great organization. An organization may grow if the people grow. Therefore, a job of a leader is to transform their people to be their best. A measure of a great leader is their people, in the sense that they should be able to develop people in their organization to become leaders. Bass recommends four several leadership style in order to develop people and these are idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. Bass believes that developing people is not always through money but it can be done through role model (idealized influence). They are looked up to because of their ethical and moral conduct. Consequently people are inspired to follow their behavior. However, acting as a role model is not enough; it must be coupled with inspirational motivation. It is the ability of leaders to inspire their followers to go beyond their self interest for the sake of the organization, for the sake of the common good. It should be started from the leader him/herself. Bass also recognized that people are not object in the organization but they are subject, in the sense that people should be involved in solving problems of the organization. Therefore, the function of a leader is to promote intellectual stimulation or discussion in solving problems. It is the ability of a leader to stimulate followers to be innovative, creative in solving problem of the organization and challenge traditional way of thinking and solving problems. Finally, it is also a need for a leader to pay attention to individual needs. Leader should know that different individuals have different needs and leaders see to it that their individual needs are attended to.

 

Information Sharing Skills.

Information and knowledge still represent power. This is truer in today’s economy than ever before. Organizations may grow fast or slow depending on how fast it is adapting to the changes in the outside world. Technologies are changing very fast, the way how things are done is also changing very fast. Thus, leader’s interaction with the outside world is necessary to adapt to change and finally change the organization. Interactions with other people outside the organization may yield new knowledge and information that can benefit their business/work in a tangible ways. As a leader, new information, new knowledge must be shared to people/employees for them to grow and cope with the rapid change. Thus, people and organization need to have the right information to react to changes.

Maribeth Achterberg (2001) argues that information sharing is always better than hoarding information. However, she emphasizes that sharing information is not just for the sake of sharing but it must have a business purpose as its root. In contrary, information hoarding is the other extreme. Holding information results from a lack of trust. In this case, leader and employees do not trust each other. Such situation hinders the growth of the organization because opportunities that are seen by both are not shared.

Sharing information is a necessary when a leader wants to empower his people and allow them to join in building up the organization. When leaders share information, the employees feel trusted and feel owning the organization and this can generate positive energy of employees to bring out their best to do whatever required of them. The organizations grow not because only of its leaders but by how leaders empower employees to do their best. Thus, the job of a leader is to share information related to what is happening within and around the organization for people to be aware of what is happening and make the necessary adjustment or response to problems/issues that affect the organizations.

Motivation Skills

Motivation is getting others to do something because they want to do it. To motivate others is one of the most important management tasks. It comprises the ability to understand what drives people, to communicate, to involve, to encourage, to set example, to develop and coach, to obtain feedback and to provide a just reward (Kotelnikov, 2009).

 The underlying concept is that leader-manager can not do things alone; he/she needs others to do it for him. So, the challenge is not in the work but in the leader who creates and manages the work environment. Success comes through people. For the manager who knows how to energize people and maintain their enthusiasm, then the art of motivating is one of the success secrets. Thus, if the leader/manager understand what motivates people, he/she has at her/his command the most powerful tool for dealing with them to get them achieve extraordinary results. Motivation and power are so closely linked together that one can say there is power in a motivated person.

Motivation is not all about money or right compensation. Money does not buy love, happiness and commitment. That’s why people say that man does not live from bread alone because you might end up toast. Thus, recognition and praise for the job well-done is also a motivation tool. Usually in the corporate world, recognition is used for one reason: to drive more business (Gostick, 2001).

Delegation of Authority Skills

A leader can not do everything alone; he accomplishes things through other people. That is the essence of delegation.  Leader empowers people to make decisions for the organization on behalf of the leader without being restricted. Thus, the concept of delegation is based on trust. The trust is given to subordinates to make things happen on their own. The trust is given because of perception of competence. The leader perceives the ability of others with whom he/she works to perform competently at whatever is needed in the current situation (Heathfield, 2009). Once the delegation and trust are given to subordinates, they can not be withdrawn back and the leader should accept whatever the consequences would be. When things go wrong as a result of delegation, a leader can not wash his hands and blame others but has to accept it as his own.  

Thus, delegation is not the same as blanket authority. There are things not to be delegated; only the leader can do it. Thus, the leader should know what to delegate and what not to delegate. Clear boundaries have to be drawn so that the one who is delegated will not go beyond the limit.

Delegating things to others involves some risks and the leader should accept the negative outcome of delegation. Often time negative outcome may happen. These things may occur unintentionally or intentionally. The leader should embrace the responsibility and accept it as his/her own. These risks may be a good lesson for the leader to know how to delegate and whom to delegate and maybe not to delegate.

Leader’s Values

Leadership is not all about skills but it has also something to do with values. It is about their belief and philosophy that guide and inspire their actions or behavior. Success is not only resulted from applying the right skills in executing their functions but both skills and values. Skills and values may affect performance of organization and organizational climate. Latest study on the impact of leadership skills, ethics/values toward performance and organizational climate pointed out that leadership skills and ethics/values affect performance and organizational climate (Foronda, 2010). Thus it is important to see the personal values of leaders as important ingredients to leadership success. Core values of leaders remind leaders what it takes to get the mission done. Values inspire the leaders to do their best at all times  The following values are considered necessary values that accompany leadership skills.  

Integrity

Strategic planning is not only the concern of leaders. Supporting values to carry out the strategic plan is crucial. One of the values leader should possess is integrity. It is a concept of consistency of actions, values, measures, methods, principles, expectations and outcome. A person who has the integrity is the one who behave according to the values, beliefs and principles they claim to hold. It is the opposite of hypocrisy. Such value is crucial to lead people in the organization. Some groups claim that people are led not by the hand but by head. This group would claim that intelligence is a prerequisite to be a successful leader. Justin Menkes (2006) in his “Executive Intelligence” book argues that executives do not lead companies with their hands; they lead them with their minds. So without possessing the requisite amount of cognitive ability for the workplace, a leader has little chance for success. Thus knowledge is crucial. However, such ideas have been contested by several people.

 Without dismissing such claim, other author on leadership would also claim that integrity is a powerful influence to create a positive change. Bass (1997) in his book on the Ethics of Transformational Leadership emphasized the idea of idealized influence, in the sense that identification with the leader is one major process that enables leaders to influence the perceptions, needs, values and behaviors of followers. The question here is how can people identify themselves with their leaders? People identify themselves with their leader not only because of their intelligence but because of their good example, their life and their values. Or in other words, leaders should have self-integrity. It is moral values that leader upholding that matters. It is a guideline, benchmark, point of reference that is used to make decisions that rely on truth and honesty. To maintain integrity, the leader must remember to refer to truth and honesty in all decisions, thoughts, actions and reactions. It is not an option (Chris Zach Hidalgo, 2002). Thus, leader with knowledge but without integrity is just like a house built on the sand.  

 Creativity and Innovativeness

Many people say that the game of business survival is creativity and innovation. It means that there are no permanent product or services, everything have to be changed and innovated according to the taste of the market, the demand of the market. Market is the king of the products and services. Products and services have to serve the needs of the king. It is the key to success and to stay in business.

Two terms are often used interchangeably. However, they are not really the same. Creativity is referred to the act of producing new ideas, approaches, methods, strategies or actions, while innovation is the process of both generating and applying such creative ideas in some specific context (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/creativity). In the context of organization, innovation refers to the entire process by which the organization generates creative new ideas and converts them into useful products, services and business practices, while the term creativity is referred to the generation of new ideas by individuals or groups as a necessary step within the innovation process. It is the starting point to innovation. No matter they are different, they go hand in hand. In order to be innovative, leader and employees have to be creative to stay competitive. 

Reflecting on the importance of the value of innovativeness and creativity, thus, it is necessary to inculcate those values in the leader and the employees. If the leaders do not possess such values, it will be hard to inspire his /her followers to be creative and innovative and it will be hard to change the old face of the organization. Such situation may lead to downfall.     

Teamwork

A leader who possesses the value of teamwork will inspire people to work in the team, and will reward group performance and not individual performance. A leader supports a group of people working for one goal, the goal of the organization, where each individual brings forth his/her skills in a concentrated manner and coordinates it with others skills, to produce a desired ends.  Thus, the challenge of a leader is form a team and how each team member will be able to work together and contribute their different skills for the achievement of the goal. Working together all the time must be taxing but it has to be done to produce results (Chevalier, 2007)

The tough question posted by a leader is how to makes effective team? Good teamwork does not happen automatically but there are number of factors required to develop effective team. Thus a leader should know what factors contributing to effective team. Thus, the following are factors that vital to building a good team that works successfully:

-Effective teamwork is about good leadership. This means that the team leader should have the skills to create and maintain a working culture or working climate that is positive or conducive. A Study conducted recently on the relationship between leadership and organizational climate found that leadership significantly influence organizational climate (Foronda, 2010).  

-Effective teamwork is about effective communication.

Communication is a vital factor of interpersonal interaction and the very term (teamwork) represents interpersonal interaction. Thus, one requirement for team member to be effective is open communication.

-Effective teamwork is about defining clear cut roles.

A team is not the same with biking group or lunch group. Each team member possesses certain skills to contribute to the success of a team. Therefore, each member should be given clear-cut responsibilities, what is one person responsible for. 

- Effective team should have procedures for conflict resolution.

There is always possibility of conflict between team members. Team members should have a way of expressing their opinions or grievances without fear of causing offence to anyone. A hands-on approach that resolves them quickly is better. The team leader should sit down with the parties in conflict and work out the differences among them.

- Team leader should set a Good example.

Team leader should set good example which can be emulated by member. A good team leader should have all the good qualities to keep the team motivated and inspired. After all, a team leader is the person the team looks to for support, direction and guidance. It is with him, the team member find strength and inspiration. Thus, a team leader should maintain a supportive and positive attitude.     

There are three condition for team work as pointed out by McCrimmon (2008):

-          Resources and commitment. Does the team have the resources to support in carrying out duties and responsibilities and is the team committed to the common goal?   

-          Ownership and heart. Team member feel “belonged” to the team and own the team and believe it from the heart and act in a way that is aligned to team principles and live a common team values. Team is not a place for politicking and competing each other for popularity. 

-          Learning. Each member must be ready and willing to learn from team member. 

Excellence

Excellence has become common core values in all organizations. All organizations aspire to be excellent. However, excellence must first be a personal core value of a leader, and then all members of the organization. Employees may not be inspired if leaders have no ambition to excellence. Mediocre leader will not attract followers to follow. Thus, it should become inspiration for all in conducting their activities. Therefore, such values have to be translated into product/service excellence, community service excellence, instruction excellence, and faculty excellence. The leader and the member should focus on providing quality products/services, community service, instruction and faculty that fully respond to customer needs (students’ needs), and must do so within the established excellent criteria.        

Conclusion

After all, leadership is not just a position and authority. These are only instruments to exercise certain leadership skills. Leadership without skills will never produce a good result. Thus, someone can not be assigned to leadership position if he/she does not have the necessary skills and qualities to perform the job. Training in related skills and other qualities of leadership is necessary to be given to those who are and will be assigned to leadership position. If not given training, at least those who are planned to be given leadership position must be assigned in lower position to learn the necessary skills to carry out the job before they are assigned to be manager/leader.

            Leaders are not only a dreamers but doers at the same time. Position and skills are going hand in hand in order to become effective leader. Skills are not born but they are learned. A leader then has to learn how to make a better leader. A better leader is determined by how good he is in carrying out his duties and responsibilities.

References

Books:

Bass, B.M. 1997. The Ethics of Transformational Leadership. Maryland: The James MacGregor BurnsAcademy of Leadership Publication.

Bass, B.M. 1998. Transformational Leadership: Industrial, Military and Educational Impact. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Chevalier, Roger. 2007. Improving Workplace Performance. AMACOM: New York.

Foronda, Lalaine. 2010. The Impact of Leadership Skills, Ethics/Values Toward Organizational Climate, Dissertation. Makati: Philippines

Gostick, Adrian & Elton, Chester. 2001. Management With Carrots. GIBBS-SMITH Publisher: Salt Lake City.

Heller, Robert & Hindle Tim.1998. Dorling Kindersley: New York

Maxwell, John. 1997. Developing the Leaders Around You. Thomas Nelson Publisher: Nashville.

Menkes, Justin. 2006. Executive Intelligence. Collins Publisher: New York

Morato Jr, A. Eduardo. 2006. Strategic Planning and Management. Singapore: Prentice Hall

Internet:

 1. Achterberg, Maribeth. 2001. Information Sharing Versus Information Hoarding. http://www.kwork.org/white_paper/cultural.html

2. Hidalgo, Chris Zach. 2002. Integrity. http://www.webweevers.com/integrity.htm

3.  Heathfield, Susan M. Delegation and Trust. http://www.humanresourceguide.com

4. Kofelnikov, Vadim. 2009. Effective Motivation. http://www.1000ventures.com/business_guide/crosscutting/motivating_main.html

5. Maroney, Jp. 2008. Investing in The Developme of People. http://www.asiaselect.com.ph/content/investing-development-people

6. Macey, Harvey. 2003. Leadership and Direction. http://www.leadership&planning.html.

McCrimmon, Mitch. 2008. Leadership and Teamwork. http://www.leadershipteamwork.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/creativity

 

 

 

 

 

 

Integrity of Administrators and Employees' Job Satisfaction

Damianus Abun

Introduction

The performance of the organization does not depend on how much capital (money) you invest in the school/organization. Or it does not depend on the managerial skills the administrators/managers have but it depends on many aspects of organization life. Pay attention to the details of organization life is necessary, not only on physical matters or tangible things but the things that we cannot see. Small things, if they are not given attention, can be a big hindrance to the development.  Along this line, people often focus on big things such as efficiency, managerial skills, leadership skills together with their technical skills in carrying out their duties and responsibilities but one  aspect that people often undermine are the values, the values of those who lead, those who are on the top. Values can be a motivating factor that can improve satisfaction of their employees and finally lead to higher performance of the company.

One value that is often undermined is integrity. Value of integrity may seem to be small in our eyes but it has a tremendous power to bring down or up the organization. The bankruptcies of businesses and organizations around the world are caused by the value integrity. Just mention for a few like ENRON and WorldCom. They committed fraud in their financial reporting to the public, misled the investors and then the result was their bankruptcy. Such value, how small it is, it can bring up or down the organization.

Since value is important part of running the organization, thus the paper would focus on the value of integrity and how it affects the satisfaction of employees. The purpose of the paper is to open the eyes of everybody, particularly administrators, to see the importance of values in running the school or organization. The value of integrity has been posted under the vision and mission statement of any organization and the purpose is for the employees and management to live by it. Some literatures and related studies will be presented to support the idea that integrity and job satisfaction is related.  

Integrity

Integrity has been part of core values in any organization. However, not many organization’ members really understand the meaning of integrity and how integrity works and influence the organization. Integrity is a value which is abstract and can be seen in action. Through action, we can understand the difference between integrity and dishonesty.

However to provide a basis for our discussion, let us find out the meaning of integrity and how it affects the organization and how integrity affects the satisfaction of employees.

The word “Integrity” can mean many things. Integrity can be applied to person and object. When integrity is used as a virtue, it refers to a quality of a person’s character. But when integrity is applied to objects, then integrity refers to the wholeness, intactness or purity of a thing. These meanings that are supposed to be used for objects; they are used for human beings or persons. An object has integrity when it has not been corrupted or damaged. Such meaning is carried over when we call a person as a person of integrity which means that the person has not been damaged inside –out by wrong doing or immoral act. Along the concept of integrity, we are going to see different concepts of integrity offered by different philosophers.

Lucaites, Condit & Caudill (1999) defines integrity as consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcomes. In ethics, they argued, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one’s actions. Such word (integrity) stems from Latin word “integer” (whole, complete). In this context integrity is the inner sense of wholeness deriving from honesty and consistency of character. Philosophers have been trying to understand integrity in relation to a person’s character and life. What is it to be a person of integrity? Answering such a question, we are going to discuss two fundamentals intuitions: first, that integrity is primarily a formal relation one has to oneself. Second that integrity is connected in an important way to acting morally. In this case, there are some substantive constraints on what it is to act with integrity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2011).  Talking of substance of integrity means that integrity is not just the image of integrity but its substance. The substance of integrity is about what you see from the outside is a reflection of what is inside you. Inside and outside of you is integral part of you. Your action must be a reflection of your inner values.

Latest discussion on integrity, integrity is related to the integration of self, integrity as maintenance of identity, integrity as standing for something, integrity as moral purpose and integrity as a virtue. Integrity as self-integration is a matter of keeping the self intact and uncorrupted (wholeness/intactness). In this sense, integrity is a formal relation to the self. According to Frankfurt (1987) a wholly integrated person is a person who acts without any conflicting desires or person who constitute themselves without ambivalence. He bases his arguments on his ideas on desires and volition (act of will). He argued that desires and volition are arranged in hierarchy. First order desires are desires for goods. Second order desires are desires that one desire certain goods or that one act on one first order desire rather than another. Similarly one may will a particular action (first order volition) or one may will that one’s first order volitions are of particular sort (second order volition). Second order desire and volition pave the way for third order desires and volitions, and so on. According to Frankfurt, wholly integrated people bring these various levels of volition and desires into harmony. There is not no conflict of desires. 

 Related to integrity as maintenance of identity, integrity means a person’s holding steadfastly true to their commitment, rather than endorsing desires as suggested by Frankfurt.  Commitment refers to different kind of intentions, promises, convictions and a relationship of trust and commitment. A person of integrity in this sense is the one who committed to people, institution, traditions, causes, ideals, principles, jobs/ duties and so on.  Since the commitment is related to many kinds of commitments, thus it is difficult to determine what kind of commitment that a person of integrity to remain true. People can be committed to a certain act that is not good or even immoral. In this case, the question is: what commitment that people hold true. Bernard Williams (1973) argued that integrity in terms of the commitment means commitment to what is most deeply, and fundamental to their life. This is what he called: “identity-conferring commitment”. To abandon the identity-conferring commitment is to abandon what is fundamental to their life, to abandon what gave them identity or character or to abandon a condition for their existence. 

Such view of integrity has still problem because it does not reflect integrity as a virtue. Defining integrity as maintenance of identity conferring commitment cannot really be a virtue. A virtue motivates a person to act in desirable ways or it enables a person to act in desirable ways.  A person of integrity in its sense of maintenance of identity means a person who can act in a way that reflects his sense of who he is/she is, to act from her/his motives, his/her interest and commitments that are her/his own (Williams, 1981). The questions here are: what are those commitments? What are those motives? What are those interests? Are they good commitments or bad commitments? In this case, people of integrity in this sense can do bad things as long as it is their own; it is their motives and interest. Defining integrity as a virtue is also presented by Cox, La Caze and Levine (2003) They argued that virtue is a quality held to be of great moral values.

Since such concept poses a problem, Colhoun (1995) defines integrity as a social virtue. As a social virtue, integrity is defined by a person’s relations to others. Colhoun (1995) argues that integrity is a matter of a person’s proper regard for their own best judgment. In this case, persons of integrity do not just act consistently with their endorsement, they stand for something: they stand for their best judgment within a community. A person of integrity treats their own endorsement as ones that matter or ought to matter to fellow deliberators. In this case, a person of integrity is committed to what is best, not only for himself but also for the community. Such person is not lying to his own statement/decision, concealing them, recanting them under pressure, selling them out for rewards or changing stand under pressure. He stands for what he/she believes to be best not only for him/herself but also for community.

Halfon (1989) argues that integrity is not just self-integration, maintenance of identity and standing up for something but integrity has a moral purpose. He describes integrity in terms of a person’s dedication to the pursuit of a moral life and their intellectual responsibility in seeking to understand the demands of such life. They are pursuing a commitment to do what is best morally. In this case, a person of integrity is the one who acts with moral purpose and display intellectual integrity in moral deliberation. However some still argue that understanding integrity only in terms of moral concern seem too narrow because there are other matters like love, friendship and personal commitments appear highly relevant to judgment of integrity.

In summary we can say that integrity is self-integration or wholeness, commitment to what is best for self and community, standing up for something and a moral purpose.  When someone is called a person of integrity, it means that she/he is considered to have a self-integration, commitment, standing up for something and have strong moral character. A person of integrity bases her/his action on well-thought moral principles. What she/he does is the same with what he/she says. Such concept of integrity is based on ethics. 

Integrity in Organization

When we talk of organizational integrity, we cannot avoid of talking personal integrity because organization is composed of individual persons. Therefore individual integrity matters to organizational integrity. Integrity conveys a sense of wholeness, as in a person of integrity who is a whole individual or a person who is somehow undivided (Adler & Bird, 1988). In this case, integrity is not just about single-mindedness but completeness. It refers to the serenity of being confident in the knowledge that one is following ethical principles despite pressures or personal temptation. By saying that, it implies that uncompromising adherence to a code of moral and other values. Such integrated self-picture of integrity, with its consistency and non-ambivalence about values and principles is often perceived as an essential of integrity. Although such integrity is considered as an individual virtue, it only gains respect in concrete situation in relationship with others and within the organization.

Along with the stated idea above, we can say that integrity failure in an organization is caused by character flaws of the responsible individual. Integrity discerns what is morally appropriate and what is not, implicitly implying consideration of others with whom one lives in a community or works in an organization. By extending personal integrity into social domain, then it becomes a basic element that can be perceived as organizational integrity (Trevinyo Rodrigues, 2007). Thus, organizational integrity becomes a social virtue that emphasizes connectedness with a large purpose. A person of high integrity must act according to moral principles and values that relate to other members of the organization (Becker, 1998). Organizational integrity then is a social phenomenon that involves, not only consistency between action and principles, but adherence to reasonably accepted principles. In other words, organizational integrity is a standard of personal moral excellence (Habermas, 1998). A possible internal conflict between personal integrity and organizational integrity can not always be excluded, since an individual’s autonomous and deeply held convictions are not always completely aligned with the organizational structures or values and principles.

Organizational integrity is expressed in normative statement included in the organization’s mission statements (Paine 2003). However, even though an organization has organizational values, it does not guarantee that all employees will act according to the stated organizational values. One needs attitude of integrity that not only follows the letter of the rules but adheres to deeply held and internalized ethical values. In this case, leadership maintains organizational ethos in relation to collective mission, identity and long term objectives. The most challenging is when managers or administrators are confronted with competing and ambiguous demands. In such situation, a person of integrity needs to make a decision about right versus right, inevitably leading to certain compromises that do not undermine integrity (Badaracco, 2002). 

The importance of Integrity

We can have a lot of theories of integrity but we will still find ourselves in the dark until we see it in the action. Integrity has to be lived in reality. Not living the integrity means the collapse of the organization.  We do not need to mention all bankruptcies around the globe. We just mention several big corporations such as ENRON scandal, WorldCom, Parmalat, Waste Management, Qwest Communications, Tyco International, AIG, and Satyam Computer Services, Adelphia Communications, AOL Time Warner and many more. All these companies are brought down not because of capital inadequacy but because of fraud. The managers and the auditors are conniving to mislead the public by not telling the truth about the financial situation of their companies (Patsuris, 2002). Generally they use different methods for misusing, misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of corporate assets, underreporting of the existence of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other cooperation or affiliates. In other words, someone did something wrong intentionally or unintentionally and tried to cover it up by cooking the accounting books.

Just by knowing what happens to those companies and ask why, we simply say that they cheated, they lied or they were not honest. The prize of being dishonest was so expensive.

One may conclude that practicing dishonesty may cause short term and long term consequences. Short term consequences include employees dissatisfaction, employees morale are down and work performance or productivity is down.     

Job Satisfaction

There have been a lot of theories related to job satisfaction. We recall the five hierarchy needs of Maslow, Herzberg theory and many more. However, talking of job satisfaction is not simple because job satisfaction is not only physical needs but also psychological needs. In terms of physical needs, it can be identified such as basic needs and wants, however, when it comes to psychological needs, it is hard to pinpoint exactly what exactly are those needs, given the fact that humans are different in nature. Psychological needs encompass many aspects of life and many factors either internal or external can affect psychological needs. Thus the term “job satisfaction” is understood to mean everything from “making all aspects of a job easy for employees” to “making the job meaningful, significant and challenging.” Even such description is still limited because aspects of jobs are not the only ones make people happy but there are unrelated to job that makes people happy. In other words, we can say that all the factors contributing to employee motivation and effectiveness are not captured in any one of the single ambiguous concepts of job satisfaction. Thus, much of the qualitative research has not been verified by qualitative data. Research conducted by Schleicher, Watt and Greguras (2004) indicates that individuals with identical responses to questions on job satisfaction often possess entirely different behaviors relating to job performance. Additionally, differing factors relating to job satisfaction hold varying degrees of importance to individuals. Thus, a proven model showing the relationship between job satisfaction and performance has been elusive despite the vast quantity of qualitative data supporting the relationship. These issues are very complex and have simply not been fully deciphered by researchers.

Kevin Scheid (2010) argued that although job satisfaction, employee motivation and productivity are complex and confusing issues, management should not back away from facing them. Understanding that some parts of job satisfaction and motivation are simply an attribute of the employee over which you have no influence should temper your approach to improving job satisfaction. Managers should focus on two areas to improve job satisfaction, motivation and productivity: how employees are treated and the content of their work. A good employee survey should help management focus in on areas which are creating dissatisfaction or which are not providing adequate motivation.

There have been few essays discuss about integrity and job satisfaction on how integrity affect job satisfaction. Along this interest, Narasimhan & Lawrence (2011) argued that employees’ perception that their leader’s actions and words are consistent leads to desirable workplace outcomes. However, they further explain that although BI (behavioral integrity) is a powerful concept, the role of leader referents, the relationship between perceived BI of different referents, and the process by which BI affects outcomes are unclear.

The Relationship between Integrity and Job Satisfaction

Several literatures have been written along this line. However, we try to examine some available literature along the relationship of job satisfaction and integrity. Integrity is an essential value in the organization. Integrity is an umbrella term that covers all other values such trust and honesty. Practicing such values naturally will improve organizational climate and finally job satisfaction. Callaway (2006) argues that without trust or lack of it among organizational members and between management and employees, organizational communication and organizational performance may decline. Trust has been identified as a crucial ingredient for organizational effectiveness. A linkage between trust and job satisfaction in private organizations has been established by researchers.  

Manager’s integrity is interpersonal relationship of manager.  A manager who helps employees, listen to their innovative ideas, motivates them, directs them, remain open and friendly with them is known to possess integrity. Manager’s integrity helps an organization in achieving short term and long-term goals. Due to manager’s integrity, organization can better respond to internal and external needs. Manager’s value play a significant role in employees involvement. Ethical code set by the manager must be acceptable for the employees. Managers have the authority to make decisions and implement them. Such decisions affect on the performance of an organization in both positive and negative means. Implementation and outcome of these decisions show the intensity of integrity of manager (Allen, Eby &Lentz, 2006).  

Job satisfaction and manager’s integrity has direct relationship. Actions and words of manager govern the action of employees. If manager’s words depict trust and honesty, employees will follow the rules and principles of manager. In other words, integrity is significant to the employer-employee relationships. Employees behave ethically and use ethical ways to complete their task and achieve organizational objectives. Lack of integrity can weaken the performance of an organization by making employees dissatisfied and demotivated. If employees perceive unfairness and inequality, they will adopt unethical behavior (Kosgaard, 2006)   

Social exchange theory is based upon trust that is built between two persons. Building a trust between two persons, builds a social relationship also, known as social exchange. This theory identifies the factors that initiate trustworthy and fair relationships. It also identifies the motivational factors that are involved in creating social relationships. This theory can be applied between any two individuals in the world (Cropanzano and Mitzchel, 2005)

Social exchange theory also works in an organization. Employees and employers work together to achieve the objective of the organization as a team. Team work creates a friendly and cooperative environment that makes employees and employer emotionally attach with each other. Emotional attachment builds a trust based relationship between employees and manager. In the light of this theory, manager and employees share a formal relationship. Both work for the betterment of the organization. Social exchange theory exchanges social benefits such as support, advice, etc. (Grant & Sumanth, 2009)

Related Studies on the relationship between Integrity and satisfaction

 Several studies have been made to demonstrate the relationship between Integrity and job satisfaction.

The value of Integrity cannot be undermined after all. It affects the organization positively and negatively depending on how integrity is exercised by those who lead the organization. Along this line, there have been a lot of studies along integrity and how it affects job satisfaction of employees. Some researchers argue that leaders need integrity to be effective, while others argue that only results matter, not how you get them. Few have empirically examined the impact of integrity on leadership effectiveness. Hooijberg and Lane (2005) examine the impact of leadership behaviors on effectiveness as well as values such as integrity, flexibility and conformity, using a sample of top-level public service managers. They find that the values of Integrity and Flexibility have a significant impact on effectiveness over and above the impact of various leadership behaviors: Integrity for managers and their peers and flexibility for direct reports and peers.

Going into the same line of interest of study, Davis & Rothstein (2006) conducted a study entitled  The Effect of the Perceived behavioral Integrity of Managers on Employee Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis. This meta-analysis examined the relationship between perceived behavioral integrity of managers and the employee attitudes of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, satisfaction with the leader and affect toward the organization. Results indicate a strong positive relationship overall (average r = 0.48, p<0.01).

Other studies conducted along the value of integrity and employee attitude. Prottas (2007) conducted a study on “Perceived Behavioral Integrity: Relationship with Employee Attitudes, Well-Being and Absenteeism. The study concluded that perceived behavioral integrity (PBI) was positively related to job and life satisfaction and negatively related to stress, poor health, and absenteeism. The effect size for the relationship with job satisfaction was medium-to-large while the effect sizes with respect to the other variables were small-to-medium.

Following the same lead, Yammarino and Palanski (2011) also introduced a similar study on the Impact of behavioral integrity on follower job performance: A three-study examination. The study determines the relationship between leader behavioral integrity and follower job performance, follower behavioral integrity and job performance, and the effects of leader and follower behavioral integrity on follower job performance. Study 1 was an online experiment in which behavioral integrity was manipulated in written scenarios; Study 2 was a field study; and Study 3 was a longitudinal lab study with temporary work teams. Findings from the studies indicated that leader behavioral integrity was not directly related to follower job performance, but was related indirectly via trust in the leader and follower satisfaction with the leader. Results also indicated that follower behavioral integrity had a significant impact on job performance, both directly and indirectly via leader trust in the follower and satisfaction with the follower.

Since integrity is an organizational value, it has to be reflected in its code of conduct. Along this line, Somer (2001) conducted a study on the relationship between code of conduct, employee behavior, and organizational values. It wanted to measure how these codes of conducts affect employee perception and behavior. The study found out that the presence of corporate codes of ethics was associated with less perceived wrongdoing in organizations, but not with an increased propensity to report observed unethical behavior. Further, organizations that adopted formal codes of ethics exhibited value orientations that went beyond financial performance to include responsibility to the common good. In contrast to corporate codes of ethics, professional codes of ethical conduct had no influence on perceived wrongdoing in organization nor do these codes affect the propensity to report observed unethical activities.

The finding of Somer indicated that corporate code of ethics, professional codes of ethical conduct had no influence on wrong doing in organization is negated by another finding.  Sean,Lynn, Godkin & Barnett (2010) went deeper into finding the relationship between positive job response and ethical job performance. The purpose of this study was to investigate a possible relationship between positive job response (conceptualized as job satisfaction and intention to stay) and behavioral ethics. Ninety-two matched manager-employee pairs from a regional branch of a large financial services and banking firm completed survey instruments, with each employee providing information about his or her job attitudes and intentions and each manager assessing the ethical/unethical performance of his/her employees. Respondents also provided additional information required for the analyses. The results indicated that positive job response among subordinates was associated with higher supervisory ratings of the subordinates’ ethical job performance.

 Naturally exercising integrity by those who are on the top will always bring a positive impact on job satisfaction. Kaluturi (2008) conducted a study on Job Satisfaction. He tried to find out what are the factors that influence job satisfaction. To understand these dimensions a study was carried out in Hyderabad where employees from four different sectors in Marketing industry, Government, other sectors, and IT industry were located. They were identified and the scale developed by Wood, Chonko and Hunt was used to understand job satisfaction.  The results indicate an association between job satisfaction and attributions for the experiences. Dissatisfied workers, more than their satisfied colleagues, tend to employ more external attributions in their causal analysis for low job satisfaction. This confirmed postulations from job models in which dissatisfied workers have a propensity to attribute to workplace and environmental factors as agents of their dissatisfaction.

Conclusion

Now we have a clear idea on the integrity and how it is related to job satisfaction of employees. Literatures and related studies have supported our idea that integrity can affect job satisfaction of employees. Employees are not only motivated by money but also by the values that top management live in their organizational life.

References.

Addler, Nancy R., and Frederick Bird. 1988. International Dimension of executive Integrity: Who is Responsible for the World? In Executive Integrity: The Search for High Human Values in Organizational Life, edited by Suresh Srivaatva. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Allen, T.D., Eby, L.T & Lentz, E. 2006. Mentorship Behaviors and Mentorship Quality, Associated with Mentoring Programs. Journal of Applied Psychology. http://www.docstoc.com/Docs/Document-Detail-Google.aspx?doc_id=104461839

Badaracco, Joseph L., Jr. 1997. Defining Moments: When Managers Must Choose Between Right and Right. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Becker, Thomas E. 1998. Integrity in Organization: Beyond Honesty and Conscientiousness. Academy management Review 23, no. 1: 154-161. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

Callaway, L. Phuong. 2006. The Relationship between Organizational Trust and Job Satisfaction. Boca Raton: Florida USA • 2007ISBN: 1-58112-352-3

Calhoun, Cheshire. 1995. Standing for Something. Journal of Philosophy, XCIL: 235-260. http://www.philosophyonlineresearch.com

Cox, Damian, La Caze, Margueritr & Levine, Michael P. 1999. Should We Strive for Integrity? Journal of Value Integrity, 33/4:519-530. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

------2003. Integrity and Fragile Self, Adelshot: Ashgate. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

Frankfurt, Harry. 1987. Identication and Wholeheartedness. New York: Cambridge.

Grant, Ruth W. 1997. Hypocrisy and Integrity, Chicago and London. University of Chicago Press.

Habermas, Jurgen. 1998. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press. 

Halfon, Mark. 1989. A Philosophical Inquiry, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Hampshire, Stuart. 1983. Morality and Conflict. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

John Louis Lucaites; Celeste Michelle Condit, Sally Caudill. 1999. Contemporary Rehetorical theory: a reader. Guilford Press.

Koehn, Daryl.(2005). Integrity as Business Assets. Journal of Business Ethics 58 (1-3):125 - 136. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

Kaluturi, Sarath Bhushan.  2008. Job Satisfaction: An Empirical Study. Krishna University: India

Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S. & Whitener, E. 2002. Trust in the Face of Conflict: the Role of Managerial Trustworthy Behavior and Organizational Context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 312-319

Pottras, J. David. 2007. Perceived Behavioral Integrity: Relationships with Employee Attitudes, Well-Being, and Absenteeism.  Journal of Business Ethics: Springer Science & Business Media.

Palanski, E. Michael & Yammarino, J. Francis. 2011. Impact of Behavioral Integrity on Follower Job Performance: A three-study examination. The Leadership Quarterly, Volume: 22, Issue: 4, Publisher: Elsevier Inc.   http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

Matthew Pianalto (2012). Integrity and Struggle. Philosophia 40 (2):319-336.

Paine, Lynn Sharp. 1994. Managing for Organizational Integrity. Harvard Business Review, 72: 106-117. http://www.harvardbusinessreview.com

Planalto, Mathew. 2012. Integrity and Struggle. Philosophie 40, 319-338. Philpapers: online research in Philosophy.

 Somers, John, Mark. 2001. Ethical Codes of Conduct and Organizational Context: A Study of the Relationship Between Codes of Conduct, Employee Behavior and Organizational Values. Journal of Business Ethics 30 (2):185 - 195. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

Stanford Encyclopedia. 2001. Integrity.

Trevinyo-Rodriguez, R. 2007. Integrity: A System Theory Classification. Journal of Management History, 13, no:1: 74-93.

Valentine, Sean, Varca, Philip, Godkin, Lynn (2010). Positive Job Response and Ethical Job Performance. Journal of Business Ethics 91 (2):195 - 206. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5.

Robert Hooijberg, Robert & Lane, Nancy. 2005. LEADER EFFECTIVENESS AND INTEGRITY: WISHFUL THINKING. IMD – International Institute for Management Development, Chemin de Bellerive 23: Switzerland.

Davis, L. Anne & Rothstein, R. Hannah.  2006. The Effects of the Perceived Behavioral Integrity of Managers on Employee Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics 67 (4):407 - 419. http://philpapers.org/rec/DAVTEO-5

Kaiser, R.B., Hogan, R. (2010). How to (and how not to) assess the integrity of managers. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(4), Dec 2010, 216-234.

 Patsuris, Penelope. 2002. The Corporate Scandal Sheet. http://www.corporatescandal.com

Srivastva Suresh. 1988. Executive Integrity: The Search for High Human Values in Organizational Life. New York: Jossey-Bass.

Scheid, Kevin. 2010. Job Satisfaction: What is it? Why is It Important? How can You Get It? Best Christian Workplace Institute. 

Rangapriya Kannan-Narasimhan & Barbara S. Lawrence. Behavioral Integrity: How Leader Referents and Trust Matter to Workplace Outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics. Philpapers.org

William, Bernard. 1973. Integrity. New York: Cambridge.

---------------------- 1981. Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 173-1980, Cambridge: Cambridge, University Press.