MARLON D. MACALMA
Divine Word College of Laoag, Ilocos Norte, Philippines
Abstract
This reflection paper presents insights on ethical
decision-making issues in supply management concentrating on strategies for declining
requests while upholding moral and professional standards. It highlights the
significance of balancing organizational norms with operational efficiency,
using an example of turning down a request to assign a driver to an office
staff in the absence of an official driver. Guided by the principles of duty of
care and servant leadership, the issue was resolved with the well-being,
accountability, and equity of the employees as the primary consideration. In
the Philippine context, the reflection paper uses leadership management theories
and real-world examples to explore how ethical choices promote an
integrity-based culture, how to build trust and how to reconcile immediate
demands at work with long-term management responsibilities. This analysis
emphasizes the importance of moral leadership in cultivating an accountable and
values-based organization.
Keywords
Ethics, Leadership,
Decision-making, Organizational Integrity, Philippine Setting
Introduction
Beyond logistical and operational responsibilities,
leadership in supply management entails the vital duty of maintaining moral standards
in decision-making. As an administrative officer, I am tasked with balancing
operational efficiency while safeguarding the security, respect, and welfare of
my team. Ciulla (2020) emphasizes that moral decision-making is important to
leadership, requiring a considerable approach to handling challenging schedules
and fostering a culture of respect and responsibility.
One challenging aspect of leadership is declining
requests that, while seemingly practical, may have broader organizational
consequences and ethical implications. In one notable instance, I turned down a
request from a co-worker asking one of my staff to drive the office car since
there was no official driver available. Such a rejection may seem
straightforward, but it is actually a reflection of more difficult considerations
such as risk mitigation, professional boundaries, and organizational
accountability. Using the servant leadership principle (Greenleaf 1977) and
ethical leadership frameworks (Northouse 2022), this reflection explores the
moral difficulties and broader implications of such decisions. Saying no represents
a commitment to ethical governance, strengthening organizational values and
striking a balance between short-term demands and long-term accountability. In
leadership, saying no signifies a commitment to upholding ethical principles,
fostering trust, and safeguarding organizational integrity. This analysis
supported by real-world examples from the Philippine context and various leadership
theories, can be understood further. Finding a balance between meeting urgent
operational needs and upholding long-term organizational values is a key
component of ethical leadership according to Northouse (2022). Integrity-based
decisions make it profusely evident, that a leader values the general goals of
the company and the welfare of their team. Leaders who consistently make
morally right decisions uphold an environment of justice and accountability by
proving that integrity is unquestionable even in trying situations.
Prioritizing Safety and
Mitigating Risks
Ensuring safety and mitigating risks are essential
responsibilities for leaders, especially in supply management. Refusing a
request to assign my office staff in charge of office cars emphasizes the moral
need to put worker safety over operational convenience. Since employee
well-being is crucial to long-term success, Ciulla (2020) contends that moral
leaders must protect their staff members from harm. Allowing outright personnel
to handle such tasks could also put the company at risk for legal issues and
damage its reputation demonstrating that taking shortcuts in safety are both
impractical and unethical. Leaders fulfil their duty of care and cultivate a
culture of trust and accountability by prioritizing a strong stance on safety.
Respecting Professional
Boundaries
Respecting the roles and boundaries that employees
have established is another vital component of ethical leadership. Assigning tasks
beyond an employee’s expertise like driving without adequate training, not only
threatens operational effectiveness but also challenges morale, operational
effectiveness, and job satisfaction. Greenleaf’s servant leadership theory
(1977) emphasizes the importance of maintaining professional roles to promote
an atmosphere of cooperation, trust and dignity. Leaders empower their teams,
foster professional development, and maintain a culture where all team members
feel appreciated and respected by respecting these boundaries. This strategy
improves team structure as well as individual morale promising the organization
runs smoothly and morally.
Ethical Leadership and
Decision-Making
Fairness, accountability, and adherence to organizational
policies and values are characteristics of ethical leadership (Weber, 2014, Schroeder,
et al., 2019, Upholding these values and principles, even in seemingly minor
situations, establishes a benchmark for the entire organization. It would be
against workplace safety regulations, illegal and a threat to a leader’s
authority in the Philippines to allow untrained employees to drive office
vehicles. Leaders who adhere to ethical and professional guidelines reinforce organizational
integrity and public trust. In the end, choices based on justice and
responsibility uphold an organizations moral character and the public
confidence in its leadership.
Real-World Scenarios:
Ethical Leadership in Practice
Leaders often face ethical problems rejecting
requests that violate organizational values (Mueller & Straatmann, 2014). For
example, in addition to ensuring compliance with the Government Procurement
Reform Act (RA 9184), the rejection of requests to waive procurement procedures
highlights the importance of transparency and legal integrity. Similarly,
denying the use of public resources for personal purposes reinforced ethical
governance and public trust. Promoting equality and dignity by prohibiting
favouritism in performance evaluations also fosters a spirit of professionalism
and trust. These real-life situations reveal the need for moral leadership in maintaining
institutional values and ensuring accountability.
Leadership Theories in
Action
Through the frameworks of transformational
leadership and servant leadership, the ethical aspects of saying no and
declining improper requests can be understood. Because Greenleaf’s servant
leadership emphasizes safeguarding employee welfare and dignity, compelling
leaders to reject requests that compromise safety or ethical principles (Spears,
2010). In contrast, transformational leadership motivates staff through
exemplary moral conduct and alignment with organizational values (Ellen, 2016, Ellen,
2023). Long-term organizational success is ensured by leaders who consistently exhibit
integrity in their decisions which not only uphold an accountable culture but
also inspire their teams to emulate such behavior.
The Broader Ethical
Imperative
Declining unethical or improper requests shows a dedication and commitment to respecting institutional rules, moral standards, and the concepts of justice and accountability. Rule-based ethics place a higher priority on following obligations and regulations and stress the value of long-term gains over short-term convenience. Leaders who make principled decisions protect the organization's values, foster a culture of integrity, and uphold public trust in governance. In addition, these actions reinforce workplace accountability, trust, and respect.
Conclusion
The ability to say no appears as a dynamic aspect
of ethical leadership in the ever-changing and frequently difficult field of
supply management. This reflection highlights that turning down unfitting
requests is a profound declaration of honesty, justice, and accountability
rather than just a formality. Leaders uphold a culture in which moral values
are dominant and the team’s welfare is protected by stressing safety, honouring
professional boundaries, and following company policies. The transformative
power of principled decisions is enhanced by the concepts of transformational
and servant leadership. Saying no protects and empowers workers guaranteeing
that their roles and dignity are respected as highlighted by Greenleaf’s
servant leadership theory. Transformational leadership also shows that moral
decision-making fosters trust and harmonizes team conduct with company
principles. These methods of leadership show that integrity is an active factor
promoting long-term success rather than a passive quality. Saying no to unethical or impractical requests has wider consequences in the
Philippine context where maintaining public trust and following the law are
crucial. It promotes public trust in governance, preserves the legitimacy of
leaders, and supports institutional values. Beyond just adhering to the law,
these choices demonstrate a dedication to a higher ethical imperative: ensuring that deeds done now support a foundation of justice, trust, and
accountability for the future. In the end, saying no has ethical power because
it can strike a balance between short-term demands and long-term values
creating an environment at work that values honesty and responsibility.
Adopting this duty enables leaders to foster a culture based on mutual respect,
trust, and advancement while improving organizational results and acting
as stewards of ethical governance.
References
Ciulla, J. B. (2020). Ethics: The Heart of
Leadership (4th ed.). ABC-CLIO.
Ellen, B.P. (2016). Transformational Leadership.
In: Farazmand, A. (eds) Global encyclopedia of public administration, public
policy, and governance. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1343-1
Ellen, B. P. (2022). Transformational
Leadership. In: Farazmand, A. (eds) Global encyclopedia of public administration,
public policy, and governance. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66252-3_1343
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant Leadership: A
Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Paulist Press.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The
Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations
(6th ed.). Wiley.
Mueller, K., & Straatmann, T. (2014).
Organizational Values. In: Michalos, A.C. (eds) Encyclopedia of quality of life
and well-being research. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2031
Northouse, P. G. (2022). Leadership: Theory and
Practice (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Republic Act No. 9184 (2003). Government
Procurement Reform Act. Republic of the Philippines.
Schroeder, D., Chatfield, K., Singh, M., Chennells,
R., & Herissone-Kelly, P. (2019). The Four Values Framework: Fairness,
Respect, Care and Honesty. In: Equitable research partnerships. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15745-6_3
Spears, L. (2010). Servant Leadership and Robert K.
Greenleaf’s Legacy. In: van Dierendonck, D., Patterson, K. (eds) Servant
Leadership. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230299184_2
Spears, L. (2010). Servant Leadership and Robert K.
Greenleaf’s Legacy. In: van Dierendonck, D., Patterson, K. (eds) Servant
Leadership. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230299184_2
Weber, J. (2014). Leadership, ethics of. In: ten
Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of global bioethics. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_265-1