Course Project APA Unit 10 Assignment

1
COURSE PROJECT – ANALYSIS OF AN ETHICAL DILEMMA
Course Project – Analysis of an Ethical Dilemma
Yusef Ismail
Capella University
DPA8404-Ethics & Social Responsibility
[u10a1] Unit 10 Assignment 1

2
Introduction
The public service sector in the United States is in flux, due to the accelerated
pace of political, social and technological advancement. In recent years, high-profile
ethical and fiscal scandals have afflicted the sector. Reports of scandalous behavior
within the public sector has ranged from nepotism and corruption within government to
excessive compensation for top government officials (Fioramonti, & Thumler, 2011).
Subsequently, regulators have begun to announce strengthened accountability
standards formed to ensure that the actions of organizations don’t cause harm or
conflict with the public’s interests.
Now more than ever, public organizations and their leadership are being called
upon to prove that they are complying with high levels of ethical, and moral values.
Because important ethical issues have profound effects upon organizations, their
leadership, and the public at large, it is critical that leaders make decisions which are
carefully thought out and not made by intuition alone. The tenets of ethical decision
making are a crucial component in the effectiveness of leadership (Elm, & Radin, 2012).
There are a plethora of ethical decision making models which can help public
administrators make better ethical decisions.
Leaders within public organizations face ethical dilemmas on a continual basis.
Ethical issues in public administration is complicated, and often involves opposing
values and various ways to justify the right solution. Ethical decision making is a crucial
component in the effectiveness of leadership. An ethical decisions may be described as
a decision that is both morally and legally acceptable to the public at-large, whereas an
unethical decision is be defined as illegal or morally unsatisfactory to the community at

3
large (Thiroux, & Krasemann, 2012). Because important ethical issues have profound
effects upon organizations, their leadership, and the public at large, it is crucial that
these decisions are carefully thought out and not made by intuition alone.
Description of the Ethical Dilemma
As a leader within the public sector, this learner has worked within the public
sector for over a decade. Throughout his professional career, he has worked for, and
with various organizations. One of the learner’s experiences involves an issue that took
place during his tenure as a trustee for an unnamed charity in Newark, NJ. The agency
received substantial amounts of funding from the City of Newark Division of Economic
Development (DED). At one point, the director of the charity was contacted by a high
level official from the city who encouraged her to hire a friend of his. Initially, the director
was unsettled and sought out advice from the organization’s board of trustees.
The decision was set to be put to a vote at an upcoming board meeting.
However, there was not the required quorum to vote upon the issue at that time.
Subsequently, a number of trustees advised the director against hiring the official’s
friend due to budgetary restraints, and the apparent conflict of interests. Nevertheless,
the choice was hers to make as the agency’s director. As time passed, the city official
continued to put pressure on the director and also insinuated that he could cut her
agency’s funding if she did not comply with the request. The director eventually
conceded and hired the city official’s friend as a consultant. After working at the agency
for several months, the friend stopped reporting to the office, and did not prove his
worth to the agency.

4
It was also brought to the director’s attention that official’s friend had not yet
retired from his job as Chief Clerk with the County of Essex. When confronted by the
director about his double dipping and incompetence, he brushed her off and assured
that he was working diligently to raise money for the agency. Subsequently, the director
decided to give him more time to prove his worth to the organization. Over time, the
official’s friend continued the no-show job and requests from the official to hire others
under the same grant became too much for this learner to bear. The learner eventually
realized that the actions of the agency, and its leadership was ethically and legally
inappropriate. After just a few more months of serving in the capacity as a trustee, the
learner eventually stepped down from the position, and unfortunately, the level of
service at the agency began to dwindle.
Ethical Theories Analysis
During the duration of the Ethics and Social Responsibility course, this learner
was afforded with the opportunity to gain a more comprehensive perspective and
understanding of the broad fields of ethics, and moral decision-making. The learner was
also able to study and evaluate, traditional, and contemporary ethical theories, and
apply these theories to ethical dilemmas within public organizations which allowed him
to determine suitable ethical conduct. Ethics, morals, and values are all concepts which
are fundamental for leaders in the process of determining whether an action is morally
wrong or right in a host of situations. Each of the terms has been used interchangeably
at times, but they are not the same (Teulon, 2014).
Values are what an individual believes to be of merit or importance in his or her
life. Values are types of beliefs (central to a total belief system) that guide and motivate

5
our attitudes and actions, whether good or bad. Values, therefore, are part of a complex
set of attitudes which affect our behavior and the behavior of the individuals with whom
we interact. Morals are values that are attributed to a belief system, generally a religious
system, but it may be a political system or some other set of beliefs. These values are
generally believed to derive from a higher authority. Thus, morality is the condition of
being in accord with good and right conduct, or a system of concepts which fall into
similar categories. It is a complicated system of principles and judgments based on
religious, cultural, and philosophical beliefs (Thiroux, & Krasemann, 2012).
In general, when people conform to the beliefs, they are considered to be moral.
And so this system of standards and beliefs are utilized to produce decent, honest, and
ethical results which are considered to be moral. Ethics, on the other hand, is a branch
of philosophy which involves arranging, defending, and recommending theories of right
and wrong actions, or greatest good. As such, ethics essentially puts our morals and
values into practice. These ethical principles mean that as a professional, leaders
should minimize the risk of harm to the public, and avoid using deceptive practices
(Brecher, 2014).
Virtue Ethics
The theory of virtue ethics is devoted to a certain kind of morally comprehensive
excellence. Virtue-based theories in ethics place very little emphasis on the rules
individuals should abide by, but instead emphasize helping people cultivate good
characteristics, like generosity and kindness. These characteristics will, subsequently,
allow an individual to make good decisions later in their lives. Virtue theorists also
encourage the need for people to determine how to break destructive habits and

6
characteristics, like anger and greed. These habits are known as vices and may stand
in the way of becoming a righteous person (Hursthouse, 2013).
Virtue ethics dates back to prominent thinkers in ancient Greece and is one of
the oldest types of ethical theories in Western philosophy. The primary organized
description of virtue ethics was posited by Aristotle in his renowned work dubbed
Nichomachean Ethics. He considered four essential virtues: wisdom, temperance,
courage and justice. According to Aristotle, people who acquire correct habits of
character are better at regulating their emotions and reasoning. In turn, this may help
individuals reach morally appropriate decisions when they are faced with crucial choices
(Kucukuysal, & Beyhan, 2011).
The fundamental attributes of virtue ethics highlight the importance of specific
generally accepted virtues or characteristics. It is through nurturing and perfecting these
virtues that people can become truly ethical. Moreover, the existence of a vigorous
community which nurtures these virtues is encouraged. According to Thiroux and
Krasemann (2012), the successful recognition and emulation of moral role models is
paramount for the diffusion of morality within the aforementioned community. Virtue
ethics makes clear that in a noble life, individuals cannot merely rely on guidelines or
rules. The ability to display sound ethical judgment is needed.
There are a couple of basic approaches to the integration of virtue-ethics within
the public sector: the agent-based, and the action-based approaches. The traditional
action-based approach focuses on the development of guidelines and rules to constrict
management conduct. These guidelines generally exhibit themselves in corporate
codes of ethics, or codes of conduct (Martinez, 2009). Contrarily, the agent based

7
approach does not focus on rules of governance, but on the fundamental motivations
and character of an individual.
Under this approach, ethical behavior is not confined to the adherence of rules
but involves the individual agent pursuing moral excellence as the objective. Thus the
virtuous individual is involved in a constant search to find balance in decision-making.
Such an individual does not apply explicit rules in decision-making, but instead attempts
to make decisions which are aligned with the quest for a specific form of excellence.
These decisions must entail the employment of sound moral judgment based on such
virtues as integrity, wisdom, courage, and fairness (O'Neill, & Bourke, 2010).
Consequentialism and Non-Consequentialism
Consequentialism is an additional category of ethical ideologies which may help
leaders decide upon the moral rightness or wrongness of conduct. Consequentialism is
an expansive and diverse group of ethical theories that gives consequences a critical
role in deciding upon the moral rightness of acts. Thus, from the standpoint of a
consequentialist, morality of conduct should only be evaluated with reference to positive
outcomes or consequences (Segev, 2010). Subsequently, it is logical for leaders to
consider the consequences of their conduct before acting. The counterpart of
consequentialism is known as non-consequentialism.
Non-consequentialist theories are based on the moral reasoning or the
underlying standards of the motive of the decision-maker. Non-consequentialism
believes that actions are right or wrong because the underlying motives are morally right
or wrong, not due to consequences (Chakrabarty, & Bass, 2015). Immanuel Kant’s
moral theory is probably the most prominent of non-consequentialist approaches. In

8
Kant’s view, righteous conduct has moral worth only if it is done for the sake of duty or
goodwill. Kant believed that good will is the only basic moral worth. For Kant, a desire
that is right is one that abides by the maxim of doing goodness because it is the right
thing to do.
Under the theory of Kant’s categorical imperative, people are essentially required
to do good regardless of whether they want to do it or not, and even if other people
around them are insisting they do something differently. Non-consequentialist theory
bases its moral reasoning on the underlying standards of the motive of the decision-
maker (Shaver, 2014). Actions are right or wrong because the underlying motives are
morally right or wrong, not due to consequences. From a non-consequentialist
approach, one may conclude that certain unscrupulous behaviors are considered
ethically acceptable. This is due in part to the actions which are taken, that may emerge
under a duty and not the desire toward self-gratifications or a favorable outcome.
In terms of the agency’s director, this learner believes that she thought she was
justified in hiring the city official’s friend because it was for the greater good of the
organization. While the director may have been engaging in unethical practices, her
hiring of the friend may have helped ensure that much needed funding for the agency to
continue. Davis (2013) asserts that the determinant of whether conduct is ethically
permissible or not rests upon the premise that the agent acts only out of a duty to help
others, not a desire for self-gratification, or a sense of satisfaction.
Utilitarianism and Egoism
Utilitarianism and ethical egoism are two consequentialist theories which are
commonly used in leadership decision making. Both utilitarianism and ethical egoism

9
are considered consequentialist theories which give consequences a critical role in
deciding upon the moral rightness of acts. It is logical for leaders to consider the
consequences of their conduct before acting. Utilitarian theory is not only focused on
the happiness of one person, but on that of the entire community.
On the other hand, ethical egoism supposes that each individual or group should
augment their own good. Thus, it is ethical to behave on behalf of one’s own selfish
interests even if that behavior could potentially harm others (Burgess-Jackson, 2013).
Under the context of egoism, the director of the learner’s organization may have felt
justified in committing such ethical violations in the best interests of herself and/or her
family, even if her behavior could potentially harm others. Nevertheless, utilitarian
theory is not only focused on the happiness of one person (or group), but the
ramifications for society at large are of crucial importance (Shaver, 2014).
Absolutism versus Relativism
There are absolute and relative ethical beliefs that cross the boundaries of all
societies. These contrasting beliefs differentiate whether something is wrong or right
within ethics. Moral absolutism is a deontological ideology which determines whether an
act is fundamentally right or wrong. Absolutism is a moral duty that is objectively right or
wrong for everyone, at all times, cultures and places. On the other hand, moral
relativism is a teleological ideology which determines whether an act is right or wrong
on the basis of its consequences. This correlates with situation ethics and the theory of
consequentialism. Relativism posits that all truth is dependent upon the principles of an
individual or society. Therefore, there are various differences between moral absolutism
and moral relativism (Foshee, & Heath, 2010).

10
The disparity among philosophical opinions introduces much ambiguity and
complexity. An absolutist would believe that murder is always wrong in in every
situation. In contrast, a relativist may argue that murder could be seen to be right in
some situations, depending on the circumstances. For instance, if other peoples’ lives
were at stake, killing one to save a large number may be justified. Moral relativism as a
valid ethical theory comes into question because it posits that all moral ideals are proper
or incorrect in regards to the customs of a given group or society. Viewing ethical
standards as culturally determined and not generalized, denies that any moral
standards exist independently outside of a society. If this basis was logically sound,
then there would be no validity in the fact that there are some moral guidelines that
every society must share in order for society to exist (McDonald, 2010).
In essence, morality is absolute, objective, and universal. People may incorrectly
conclude moral judgments (as individuals or as a culture) but this does not prove the
relativity of morality. It clearly demonstrates our incapability to comprehensively lay the
foundation and enact the implementation of moral determinations. Subsequently, the
morality of an action or decision should be decided upon by whether or not it was
conducted out of respect for the absolute moral requirement, or the categorical
imperative (Thiroux, & Krasemann, 2012).
Ethical Decision-Making
In order to get a handle on these serious issues, many organizations have
created ethical codes to ensure that their officers, directors, and employees are
cognizant of and in adherence to standards of conduct which ensures that the
organization is represented in a responsible and ethical manner. Codes of ethics are a

11
vital component of an ethical public domain. They are guidelines that encourage ethical
conduct, and the enforcement of sanctions when such conduct is deficient. Although
these codes of ethical conduct offer the essential principles to guide the conduct of
public service leaders, they alone are not sufficient in dealing with tough ethical
dilemmas (O’Neill, & Bourke, 2010). Subsequently, many researchers have provided a
systematic way in which to evaluate and make ethical resolutions.
There are a plethora of ethical decision making models which can help leaders
within public administration make better ethical decisions. Enck (2014) identifies six
steps in ethical decision making which may be adapted to meet the specific needs of
public sector leaders in addressing ethical dilemmas. These steps include: (1) Define
the specific ethical conflict or issue. (2) Identify internal/external factors that may
influence the outcome. (3) Identify fundamental values. (4) Identify the individuals who
will be most affected by a decision and define the leader’s obligation to each. (5)
Choose the ethical guidelines that steer the decision making procedures. (6) Make a
decision and substantiate it.
The complex and constant change within the public sector requires more
effective actions from public leaders when faced with a growing number of varied
issues. This form or process of decision making is essential due to the number of
decisions and issues public sector leaders are faced with every day. These six steps
incorporate a process which will lead to the most efficient decision under given
circumstances. According to (Elm, & Radin, 2012), decision-making processes are not
meant to achieve identical solutions to issues, but to act as a model which promotes
organized, ethically profound, and creative solutions. The overall line of action is

12
identical, however essential details must be tailored to be appropriate for specific
situations and attainable for any leader.
According to Thiroux and Krasemann (2012), organizational culture is among
one of the most important determinants of how successful an organization (or team) will
be in implementing ethical decision-making. Organizational culture is essentially the
“personality” of an organization—the principles it lives by, its processes, and its systems
of communication. It is the arrangement of fundamental assumptions which a group has
developed in order to manage its issues of external adaptation and internal assimilation.
The culture of the learner’s organization is a direct reflection of the ingrained
political patronage which continues to flourish and has a corrupting effect on New
Jersey’s public service sector. Despite court injunctions and anti-patronage personnel
systems, various illegal and unethical violations continue to thrive within the political
system. These violations include the demand of political contributions for employment
and contracts, to the suppression of wrongdoing (Pelletier, & Bligh, 2006). As a result of
his silence, this learner may be denying his moral duty and essentially becomes a
contributor to the problem
Plan to Aid in Decision-Making
The course of action that would be followed by the learner under these
circumstances would be to essentially become what is known in some circles as a
whistleblower. According to Heumann, Friedes, Cassak, Wright, and Joshi (2013), the
number of whistleblowing incidents in the US and other countries has undoubtedly
increased in recent years. Whistleblowing takes place when employees report corporate
misconduct, usually within their organization, to agents of the law. The occurrence of

13
whistleblowing generally involves three actors in a communal setting, the perpetrator of
the offense, the whistleblower, and the authority to whom the violation is reported to.
Thus, each of the parties involved are crucial to explaining the whistleblowing
process. Whistleblowing essentially comprises of four steps. In the primary step, the
potential whistleblower has to decide whether an observed activity is truly an illegal or
immoral form of misconduct. An occurrence will be perceived to be a violation if it is a
conflict with either the stated values of the whistleblower or the organization (Svara,
2014). If this learner was forced to bring alleged whistle blowing to the surface he would
first have to weigh his options. The next step of whistleblowing is comprised of the
decision to report the activity or not. The whistleblower must first weigh the gravity of the
offense and whether blowing the whistle will stop the activity.
It would be prudent for the learner to first remind the director of how poor ethical
decision-making can destroy the reputations of individuals and organizations. In these
tough economic times, it would not be wise for the director to hire the official’s friend as
a favor. Accountability is both legally and ethically obligatory for organizations that
utilize public resources (Fioramonti, & Thumler, 2011)̈ . Whistleblowers should also know
to whom they should report the violation(s). This learner would contact the
organization’s board chair with hopes that he would encourage the board of trustees to
reach a decision about the issue. If the director still does not comply after the board’s
decision, she could possibly be fired.
The organization’s board has an affirmative ongoing responsibility to ensure that
the organization fulfills obligations to the law, their donors, clients, and the public at

14
large. At the least, nonprofit boards must be devoted to effective oversight of their
organizations while ensuring transparency from management (Hazen, & Hazen, 2011).
Unfortunately, in many events, if an employee or other agent blows the whistle,
they may be subjected to retaliation. Subsequently, it is typical for whistleblowers to be
demoted, dismissed, or otherwise treated negatively by their leadership after the
disclosure of corruption or malfeasance. The organization as a whole may decide to halt
the actions or they may choose to uphold the wrongdoing. They may also choose to
silence and vilify the learner for whistle blowing or choose to discredit the offense
against it by the whistle blower (Miceli, & Near, 2013). If the organization’s leadership
chooses to ignore the situation, nothing will change within the organization, and the
problem may never be dealt with.
The last resort for the learner would be to report the improprieties externally
through channels such as law enforcement or the news media. These types of external
whistleblowing cases will likely result in some form of remedial action. Yet, there are
numerous issues with this solution. This method will usually bring bad publicity to the
organization and cause the whistleblower to be deemed as disloyal. There is a good
chance that the whistleblower will lose their position and be ostracized for not being a
team player (Thiroux, & Krasemann, 2012).
Conclusion
In closing, it is paramount that public sector leaders be called upon to prove that
they are complying with high levels of ethical standards. In general, public sector
leaders, whether elected or appointed, must maintain a position of trust, and the
topmost standards are expected of them. This example and others has helped this

15
learner realize that it must be his duty to act with integrity, openness, and honesty while
encouraging a working environment that values fairness, and respect (Yukl, Mahsud,
Hassan, & Prussia, 2013).
At the core, these ethical principles stress the need to do what is good (known as
beneficence), and to do no harm (known as non-malfeasance). Public service leaders
should not take advantage of their positions of power or exploit others for their personal
benefit. They must inform the public whenever a real or possible conflict of interest
emerges and work to resolve the issue to protect the public’s interests (Brecher, 2014).
Thus, as a leader within the public sector, the learner must attempt to make decisions
which are aligned with the quest for a specific form of excellence. These decisions must
entail the employment of sound moral judgment based on such virtues as integrity,
wisdom, courage, and fairness (Ferguson, 2014).
A systematic approach to ethical decision making encourages individuals and
organizations to cautiously define an issue, collect information, apply ethical values,
identify and assess alternative forms of action, and follow through on their decisions.
The director of the learner’s agency committed a blatant violation of the public’s trust by
agreeing to hire the official’s friend in the first place (Garza-Mitchell, 2012).
Subsequently, the learner decided to take a stand against the decision and other
unscrupulous decisions of which he was not comfortable with. According to Eisenbeiss
(2012), all leaders have a responsibility that should be based on a system of morals and
values in which conduct and decision making is ethically justified. If decisions and
actions are detrimental to individuals or society as a whole, they should be considered
morally irresponsible.

16
References
Burgess-Jackson, K. (2013). Taking Egoism Seriously. Ethical theory and moral
practice, 16(3), 529-542.
Brecher, B. (2014). 'What is professional ethics?'. Nursing Ethics, 21(2), 239-44.
Chakrabarty, S., & Erin Bass, A. (2015). Comparing virtue, consequentialist, and
deontological ethics-based corporate social responsibility: Mitigating
microfinance risk in institutional voids. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), 487-
512. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1963-0
Davis, g. (2013). Traces of consequentialism and non-consequentialism in bodhisattva
ethics. Philosophy east & west, 63(2), 275-305.
Eisenbeiss, S. A. (2012). Re-thinking ethical leadership: An interdisciplinary integrative
approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 791-808.
Elm, D. R., & Radin, T. J. (2012). Ethical decision making: Special or no
different? Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 313-329.
Enck, G. (2014). Six-step framework for ethical decision making. Journal of health
services research & policy, 19(1), 62-64.
Ferguson, J. L. (2014). Excessive risk exposure: A question of ethical decision-
making. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2684-2685.
Fioramonti, L., & Thumler, E. (2011). The financial crisis and the nonprofit sector: Can̈
philanthropic foundations support the creation of a civic watchdog of international
finance?. International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, 13(3), 33.
Foshee, A. W., & Heath, W. C. (2010). Between absolutism and relativism: The

17
economist's search for a middle ground. Journal of Economic Issues, 44(3), 819-
829.
Garza Mitchell, R. L. (2012). Doing the Right Thing: Ethical Leadership and Decision
Making. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2012(159), 63-72.
Hursthouse, R. (2013). Normative virtue ethics. ETHICA, 645.
Hazen, T. L., & Hazen, L. L. (2011). Duties of Nonprofit Corporate Directors-
Emphasizing Oversight Responsibilities. NCL Rev., 90, 1845.
Küçükuysal, B., & Beyhan, E. (2011). Virtue ethics in Aristotle’s Nicomachean
ethics. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8(2), 43-51.
Martinez, J.M. (2009). Public Administration Ethics for the Twenty-first Century. New
York: Peter Lang USA
Miceli, M. P., & Near, J. P. (2013). An International Comparison of the Incidence of
Public Sector Whistle‐Blowing and the Prediction of Retaliation: Australia,
Norway, and the US. Australian Journal of Public Administration,72(4), 433-446.
O'Neill, J., & Bourke, R. (2010). Educating teachers about a code of ethical
conduct. Ethics & Education, 5(2), 159-172.
Pelletier, K. L., & Bligh, M. C. (2006). Rebounding from corruption: Perceptions of ethics
program effectiveness in a public sector organization. Journal of Business
Ethics, 67(4), 359-374
Segev, R. (2010). Hierarchical consequentialism. Utilitas, 22(3), 309-330.
Shaver, R. (2014). The appeal of utilitarianism. Utilitas, 16(3), 235-250.

18
Svara, J. H. (2014). Who Are the Keepers of the Code? Articulating and Upholding
Ethical Standards in the Field of Public Administration. Public Administration
Review, 74(5), 561-569.
Teulon, F. (2014). Ethics, moral philosophy and Economics (No. 2014-288).
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2012). Ethics: Theory and practice. (11th ed.)
Pearson.
Küçükuysal, B., & Beyhan, E. (2011). Virtue ethics in Aristotle’s Nicomachean
ethics. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8(2), 43-51.
Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., Hassan, S., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). An improved measure of
ethical leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,20(1), 38-48.

Course Project APA Unit 10 Assignment

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (17)

Ähnlich wie Course Project APA Unit 10 Assignment

Ähnlich wie Course Project APA Unit 10 Assignment (20)

Course Project APA Unit 10 Assignment