U4-assignment

Business Executives’ Perceptions of Ethical Leadership and Its Development

Catherine Marsh

Received: 6 July 2011 / Accepted: 22 May 2012 / Published online: 12 June 2012

� Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Abstract This paper summarized the findings of a qual-

itative study that examines the perceptions of ethical

leadership held by those who perceived themselves to be

ethical leaders, and how life experiences shaped the values

called upon when making ethical decisions. The experi-

ences of 28 business executives were shared with the

researcher, beginning with the recollection of a critical

incident that detailed an ethical issue with which each

executive had been involved. With the critical incident in

mind, each executive told the personal story that explained

the development of the values he or she called upon when

resolving the ethical issue described. The stories were

analyzed through the use of constant comparison, which

resulted in the development of two models: (1) a frame-

work for ethical leadership illuminating valued aspects of

ethical leaderships and the value perspectives called upon

when making ethical decisions, and (2) a model explaining

how the executives’ ethical frameworks developed. The

paper concludes with a brief discussion on virtue ethics,

experiential learning, and human resource development.

Keywords Ethics � Virtue � Leadership � Action learning

Introduction

As the daily news carries allegations of corrupt behavior in

all arenas of life, the world’s attention is focused on the

behavior of leaders in government, business, social, and

even religious institutions. The courts selectively prosecute

high profile-offenders, the Catholic Church sends priests

into retirement, and political candidates challenge one

another’s records for signs of moral weakness. Legislation,

in the form of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, passed by

the United States Congress following the Enron, Tyco and

Worldcom scandals, has been enacted, but the scandals

continue.

Both executives and scholars are realizing that while

legislation is necessary, leadership may be the primary

determinant in ethical action. Gini (1998) stressed, ‘‘The

ethics of leadership—whether it be good or bad, positive or

negative—affects the ethos of the workplace and thereby

helps to form the ethical choices and decisions of the

workers in the workplace’’ (p. 28). Pollard (2005) stated,

‘‘While rules may bring a higher standard of accountability

and add the ‘stick’ of more penalties, they cannot deter-

mine the honesty, character, or integrity of the people

involved’’ (p. 14).

Lavengood (Pollard 2005) conceded that where public

policy leaves off, leadership must assist with the devel-

opment of a moral community that shapes human character

and behavior. Gough (1998) concurred and explained that

when caught in an internal struggle with regards to getting

ahead or doing the right thing, ‘‘The determining factor is

nothing less than the strengths and the weaknesses of your

character’’ (p. 43).

Badaracco (2006) emphasized, ‘‘Questions of character

are not simply useful … they are crucial to successful leadership….’’ (pp. 8–9). Quinn (2004) indicated that as leaders become more inwardly focused on their values,

their inner and outer worlds become aligned, significantly

impacting organizational behavior. He expounded, ‘‘We

also become less self-focused and more other-focused’’ (p.

22).

The study summarized in this paper examined the eth-

ical character of leadership in today’s organizations by

C. Marsh (&) North Park University, Chicago, IL, USA

e-mail: [email protected]

123

J Bus Ethics (2013) 114:565–582

DOI 10.1007/s10551-012-1366-7

assisting executives in turning inward and uncovering the

values upon which they base their most difficult business

decisions, and listening to them reveal clues pertaining to

the development of a framework for ethical leadership.

This study can be differentiated from other studies that are

predominantly quantitative and utilize a measurable

approach that begins with existing research on values, such

as that of Rokeach (1973), Schwartz (1992, 1994, 2000), or

research on values embedded in existing leadership models

(Kanungo 2001; Mendonca 2001; Bass and Steidlmeier

1999; Greenleaf 1970/1991). Based on Rokeach (1973),

Hood (2003) connected leadership values with business

ethics in a study that measured, by means of a Likert scale,

the relationship of 14 of the Rokeach values with trans-

formational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership

styles (Burns 1978, 2003). Based on a modified version of

Schwartz’s instrument (1994) developed by Stern et al.

(1998), Sosik (2005) used multisource field data collected

in five organizations to examine links among managers’

personal values, charismatic leadership of managers, and

three outcome measures. Also, employing the tool devel-

oped by Stern et al. (1998), Fritzsche and Oz (2007) related

personal values to ethical dilemmas, by means of a Likert

scale, to determine the extent to which personal values

inform ethical decisions. To assess the impact of the

exposure of foreign culture on the development of leaders’

values, Chang and Lin (2008) used a modified version of

Schwartz’s Likert based Portrait Values Questionnaire

(PVQ) (Schwartz 2005, 2006). Graf et al. (2011) also made

use of the PVQ in their assessment of the effects of ideal

and counter-ideal values (Van Quaquebeke et al. 2010)

between leaders and followers. Recent empirical studies

that examine leader values through indirect values frame-

works embedded in leadership models include Groves and

LaRocca (2011) and Reed et al. (2011). Groves and LaR-

occa (2011) utilized the historic ethical philosophies of

teleology and deontology as associated with models of

transformational and transactional leadership (Kanungo

2001; Mendonca 2001; Bass and Steidlmeier 1999) to

examine leader ethical values. Reed et al. (2011) examined

ethical leader values implicited within the servant leader-

ship model (Greenleaf 1970/1991).

While the import of quantitative methods in determining

statistical relationships between the variables of human

values and ethical leadership must be acknowledged, the

need for a more interpretative approach to understanding

the immeasurable aspects of ethical leadership, as repre-

sented in the current study, is emerging. A number of

researchers (Trevino et al. 2003; April et al. 2010; Resick

et al. 2011) have approached the topic by means of qual-

itative methods. Trevino et al. (2003) conducted inductive

research by interviewing corporate ethics officers and

senior executives to examine ‘‘the perceived content

domain of executive ethical leadership’’ (p. 5), including

values and behaviors. April et al. (2010) had middle

managers, enrolled in MBA programs in South Africa and

the Netherlands, self-report enablers (values), and stum-

bling blocks to ethical action. Resick et al. (2011) used

qualitative methods to identify attributes (values are

included) and behaviors that managers from Asia, Amer-

ica, and Europe ascribe to ethical and unethical leaders.

Although their findings were consistent with the GLOBE

(House et al. 2004) framework of values across culture, the

Resick et al. (2011) did not design the study with the

GLOBE framework in mind. The three above-mentioned

qualitative studies explored particular phenomenon and did

not attempt to correlate findings to particular models or

frameworks, unlike the quantitative studies. These quali-

tative studies differ from the quantitative studies in that

they do not measure known variables; they explore per-

ceptions of each study’s participants through open-ended

questions. They do not generalize externally (Maxwell

2002), rather they explore multiple perspectives and

meanings in an attempt to understand the complex phe-

nomenon of ethical leadership within a particular, inter-

nally generalizable, context (Maxwell 2002). The

qualitative studies are not designed to measure variation;

they are more concerned with ‘‘describing in detail what

survey questionnaire results do not permit to be descri-

bed—the assumptions, behaviors, and attitudes of a very

special set [of participants]….’’ (Freidson 1975, pp. 272–273).

The study summarized in this paper utilized a qualitative

approach to add to the growing knowledge base that clar-

ifies and expands the concept of ethical leadership. How-

ever, unlike the qualitative studies described above, this

study investigated not only the phenomenon of ethical

leadership, but also examined how ethical leadership

develops. The context of the study was senior executives,

in American businesses ranging from small entrepreneurial

ventures to large multi-national corporations, who were

perceived by others, and identified themselves as ethical

leaders. The field of research on ethical leadership is young

and the topic broad and complex (Trevino et al. 2003),

providing ample territory for a constructivist theory-

building approach (Creswell 2003). Further, due to the

subjective nature of ethical leadership (Conger 1998) a

qualitative exploration may prove more suitable than post-

positivist empirical observation and measurement (Cre-

swell 2003).

Problem Statement and Purpose

Based on the premise that leadership is a fundamental

determinant in ethical action, the study summarized in this

566 C. Marsh

123

paper examined both executives’ perceptions of the

frameworks that guided their ethical decisions and their

thoughts on how those frameworks came into existence. As

previously mentioned, a modicum of research linking

values and business ethics exists (April et al. 2010; Chang

and Lin 2008; Graf et al. 2011; Groves and LaRocca 2011;

Fritzsche and Oz 2007; Hood 2003; Resick et al. 2011;

Sosik 2005; Trevino et al. 2003), but little has been done to

draw upon the actual perceptions of the business leader as

to what life experiences have fostered the development of

values and character. The growth of virtue ethics as an

aspect of the business leadership development provides

new opportunity for research that explores the link between

the growth of personal values and leadership development.

As Donaldson (2003) stated, ‘‘at no time has the legitimacy

of business depended so heavily on clarifying its connec-

tion to human values’’ (p. 365). Further, virtue ethics is

seen to develop through experience (Brewer 1997; Hart-

man 2011; MacIntyre 1984), hence examining the experi-

ences of those who perceive themselves to be ethical may

add to our understanding of ethical leadership develop-

ment. This study, in its attempt to clarify that connection

between the development of personal values and ethical

leadership behavior, took its participants on a journey in

which they discussed their values in the context of ethical

issues with which they had struggled. It allowed them to

take the time to tell their personal stories regarding their

understanding of the dimensions of their ethical frame-

works and the development of the values upon which those

frameworks were based. Specifically, this study contributes

not only to the emerging knowledge on ethical leadership

but also the nascent field of ethical leadership

development.

Research Questions

Two overarching questions guided this study.

1. What aspects of ethical leadership are valued by those

who consider themselves ethical leaders?

2. In what ways do the life experiences of those who

perceive themselves to be ethical leaders inform the

understanding of the process of ethical leadership

development?

Theoretic Framework

In recent years, business ethicists have begun to investigate

the merit of the inclusion of virtue ethics, based on values,

in business ethics education (Whetstone 2001, 2003).

Miller and Collier (2010) cited Crockett (2005) to explain

virtue ethics in the Aristotelian sense: virtues ‘‘…are meant to be exercised in practical judgments, habitualized with frequent

use and gradually adopted as a stable part of one’s character’’

(Crockett 2005, p. 199). This is in keeping with Aristotle who

described ethics as a habit of virtue that is modeled and

developed through practice’’ (Miller and Collier 2010, p. 83).

Similarly, Morrell and Clark (2010) explained, ‘‘virtue ethics

has at its heart the habits and character of key actors—who

become virtuous through carrying out right actions, acting in a

manner that communicates the importance of considering the

means by which outcomes are achieved’’ (p. 257).

This turn toward the character perspective comes as a

result of research that shows that the teleological and

deontological cognitive decision-making approaches alone

have not had sufficient impact (Rest and Narvaez 1994),

and that ethical decisions are ultimately an expression of

the decision maker’s value system. Further, ‘‘by shifting

the focus from the act to the agent, virtue ethics overcomes

these problems [problems posed by act-centered teleolog-

ical and deontological approaches to ethics]’’ (Dawson and

Bartholomew 2003, p. 127). Bastons (2008) discussed the

cardinal virtues as personal decision-making competencies

and stresses, ‘‘… without these competences it is not pos- sible to guarantee a decision is really optimal’’ (p. 399). As

the focus of the research summarized in this paper was on

the connection between leadership values and ethical

decision-making, virtue ethics provided the study with a

foundational framework due to its emphasis on character,

rather than cognitive act-centered decision-making schema,

in the exercise of ethical leadership.

One of the most recognized calls for a return to Aristo-

telian virtue ethics has come from Alasdair MacIntyre

(1984). MacIntyre asserted that current ethical theory and

practice are in a state of grave disorder brought on by the

liberal individualism of the Enlightenment, most notably

articulated by Nietzsche. He postulated that people can best

remedy this disorder by reviving the Aristotelian tradition

of virtue ethics. Moore (2002, 2003) insisted that corpora-

tions can only resist the power of corrupting influences

through incorporation of the virtues of those who represent

the organization. A major tenet offered by MacIntyre’s

premise is that we discover our virtuous character only in

acting it out in relationship within community—it is only

through our association with virtue that we can become

virtuous (Blum 1988). If the community itself is not virtu-

ous, and MacIntyre struggled with the notion that the

business organization could be virtuous, the actions of

community members will be victim to the desires/morals of

the community (Dobson 2009; Hine 2007). MacIntyre

conceded, however, that individual members of the com-

munity are not necessarily bound by what he perceives to be

the moral limitations inherent within business institutions

operating within a capitalist society (Schwartz 2009).

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 567

123

Dawson and Bartholomew (2003) argued that in as much

the business organization serves as community, it plays a

significant role in encouraging and developing the virtues.

Through his or her experience, then, ‘‘the manager would

draw upon an ever increasing understanding of what con-

stitutes the good’’ (Brewer 1997, p. 832). In Hartman’s

examination of the role of the Aristotelian virtues in busi-

ness decision-making he suggested, ‘‘We learn through

experience, and we may look to the insights of literature,

including religious literature, to distill that experience and

improve our moral imagination’’ (2011, p. 14.). Hence,

moral education is at the heart of virtue ethics, and, in turn,

virtue ethics provides a basis for understanding the expe-

riential development of ethical leadership and supports the

quest, undergirding this study, to comprehend the process

by which executives develop their ethical frameworks.

Understanding this process may provide clues for those

engaged in the arduous task of not only leadership devel-

opment, but also ethical leadership development.

Methodology

As previously mentioned, the design for the research

undertaken in the present study is qualitative. As the study

relied primarily upon the capability of the researcher to

enter into dialog with the participants to extract meaning

from lived experience (Maxwell 1996) in an inductive

fashion, an interpretive approach, which is qualitative by

nature, was required (Merriam et al. 2002). In addition, as

the study was undertaken with the hopes that it would pave

the way for new theory to emerge from the perceived

reality of the participants rather than from the researcher’s

own perspective, a qualitative process assisted with the

formulation of theory from the data as it unfolded (Morse

and Richards 2002). The semi-structured data collection

interviews were based on the following questions:

(1) Think of a time in your career in which you were

confronted with a difficult business decision you

considered to be an ethical dilemma.

(2) What was at stake?

(3) What did you decide?

(4) What process did you use in reaching that decision?

(5) Now—tell me some stories about how you developed

the values that supported the decision.

(6) Which of these do you consider to be the most

important influence(s) on your ethical perspective?

The constant comparison methods (Glaser and Strauss

1967), supplemented by critical incident technique (Flan-

agan 1954), were key elements of the data analysis. They

provided the structure that allowed theory to evolve from

the research process. First, the critical incident technique

was used to isolate the ethical dilemmas through which the

executives told their stories. With the incident clearly in

mind, each executive told stories of how he or she came to

hold the values called upon when making the decision.

Second, after the collection of data, the method of constant

comparison was used to understand patterns among the

stories that were shared.

Examples of the incidents detailed in the complete write

up of the study are: (1) A bank executive recalled a time

when he had been asked by his commanding officer to hire

the future son-in-law of a powerful senator over a qualified

internal candidate; (2) A vice president of human resources

of a multi-national software corporation discussed a time

when she was employed by a telecommunications com-

pany that was downsizing for the first time in its over

100 year history. She found herself needing to lay off

employees in their 50s and 60s; and (3) A managing

partner of a professional services firm talked about a time

when he reached a decision to sell his small firm to a more

financially secure competitor knowing that some of his

employees would lose their jobs.

Participants

The participants whose stories informed the research were

senior-level executives ranking from the level of director

and above. The participants ranged in age from 38 to 73.

The goal was to interview between 20 and 30 participants

until the point of saturation was reached (Creswell 1998)

and no new interpretative patterns emerge. 31 executives

were interviewed and 28 of the interviews were utilized in

this study. One of the 31 was eliminated due to his high

public profile and concern as to whether his data could be

kept confidential. Two others were eliminated after their

interviews had been conducted and it was clear that they

did not see themselves as having the power to make

decisions that impacted their organizations and therefore

no longer fit the selection criteria.

There are limitations to this study. The participants were

selected through the technique of nomination by reputa-

tional-case selections in which individuals are selected on

the recommendation of experts in the area to be studied

(Goetz and LeCompte 1984). Initially, business leaders

within this researcher’s own network were contacted due to

her belief that these leaders were ethical; they in turn

nominated others for participation. There was no external,

independent verification conducted to indicate that the

participants were indeed ethical leaders. The participants

perceived themselves to be ethical leaders, and that per-

ception, together with their nomination, qualified them to

participate in this study. Finally, the trustworthiness and

transferability of the data generated by the participants, rest

568 C. Marsh

123

upon the researcher’s ability to write clearly and remain

true to the participants’ stories by providing rich, thick

descriptive (Merriam et al. 2002) narrative to which the

reader could relate. Initial feedback from the participants as

well as practitioners and scholars indicates that the findings

ring true.

Findings

Two models emerged from this study—a framework for

ethical leadership and a model for its development. The

supporting quotes contained within the following synopsis

are representative of a much larger body of data that may

be found in the original study.

A Framework for Ethical Leadership

In answering questions regarding the development of their

ethical frameworks, the participants in the study also

revealed what they most valued in their ongoing practice of

ethical leadership. As the participants’ insights merged, a

framework for ethical leadership surfaced. The overall

framework is made up of four value perspectives and each

of the value perspectives is formed by approaches valued

by the participants in their ongoing practice of ethical

leadership. The term, value perspective, was developed to

retain the integrity of both the study’s purpose and the

questions asked to generate the data. The first research

question asks, ‘‘What aspects of ethical leadership are

valued by those who consider themselves ethical leaders?’’

The participants were not asked about the development of

their leadership qualities, behaviors, or competencies; the

interview questions asked them to discuss how they had

developed the values upon which their most difficult

decisions were based. Hence, the data that emerged rep-

resented the participants’ perspectives on what they valued

in their exercise of ethical leadership. A value perspective

is not a value in and of itself; it is a conduit through which

the participants were able to connect their values with their

decisions and actions. The concept of the value perspective

may be one way in which this study contributes to the

growing body of knowledge on ethical leadership.

The data support the conclusion that the value per-

spectives of mindfulness, engagement, authenticity, and

sustainment provide clues to the practice of ethical lead-

ership. The value perspective of mindfulness, representing

cognitive processes involved when acting ethically, is

composed of the valued approaches of ethical leadership:

observation, time for reflection, systems thinking, rational

process, and dialog and questioning. The value perspective

of engagement, representing involvement in ethical action,

is composed of the valued approaches of ethical leadership:

embraces diversity, cultivates relationships, terminates

relationships, and encourages risk taking. The value per-

spective of authenticity, representing character called upon

in being ethical, is composed of the valued approaches of

ethical leadership: personal integrity, self-knowledge, and

author of one’s own life. Sustainment is the term that

represents the value perspective that anchors the frame-

work, arising from the participants’ narratives as the ‘‘that

without which’’ of ethical leadership. The value perspec-

tive of sustainment is composed of the valued approaches

of ethical leadership: no illusions, hope, and a holistic

approach to work and life.

Mindfulness

The value perspective of mindfulness is supported through

participants’ stories that underscored the exercise of

observation, time for reflection, systems thinking, rational

process, and questioning and dialog in the practice of

ethical leadership. A number of scholars (Boyatzis and

McKee 2005; Fiol and O’Connor 2003; Hansen and Haas

2001; Langer 1989; Langer and Piper 1987; Marques

2012; Ruedy and Schweitzer 2010; Varela et al. 1991;

Verhezen 2010; Weick 1995; Weick et al. 1999) have

begun to investigate the concept of mindfulness in rela-

tionship to leadership activity in organizations. Ruedy and

Schweitzer (2010) defined mindfulness as, ‘‘an individual’s

awareness of his or her present experience,’’ (p. 73). The

study participants highlighted the exercise of observation

as practice for gaining awareness of the present. Obser-

vation was also seen as a method that could assist with

moving beyond self to see and understand the experience

of others. Accordingly, Hays (2007) expanded that defi-

nition, indicating that ‘‘mindfulness is a state of acute

awareness, attentiveness, and perceptiveness in everything

going on around oneself while minimizing the effect of

self and ego’’ (Marques 2012). Verhezen (2010) indicated

that mindfulness, as opposed to ‘‘moral muteness in a

culture of silence’’ (p. 187), will lead not only to compli-

ance with regulations but also to ethical innovations that

demonstrate integrity and respect for all parties. Many of

the study participants understood the importance of

breaking the silence and stimulating questioning and dia-

log with those who held differing perspectives as a method

for challenging their ego-bound assumptions, generating

new ideas and approaches as well as honoring individuals.

The importance of acknowledging and honoring individ-

uals supports Marques (2012) understanding of mindful-

ness pointing not only to the practice of letting go of ego

but also to the nurturing of kindness and compassion.

Vanentine et al. (2010) surmised that ‘‘mindfulness is a

positive characteristic that enables individuals to more

effectively respond to environmental demands’’ (p. 457).

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 569

123

Mindfulness is akin to awareness that is active and con-

stantly taking in, processing, and assimilating information.

This dimension of mindfulness was acknowledged by

many of the participants, as they stressed time for reflec-

tion as essential to remain vigilant to the constant flow of

ideas and action. Marques (2012) suggested that in the

workplace, mindfulness can lead to ‘‘greater concentration,

more joy in the moment, the ability to remain calm in

turbulent situations, and a greater ability to link occur-

rences with one another, which will help to detect pat-

terns’’ (p. 34). The ability to link occurrences and detect

patterns showed up in the participants’ stories that high-

lighted the use of rational process and systems thinking as

aspects of mindfulness.

Of the many stories shared by the participants, one in

particular highlights many of the approaches of mindful-

ness that emerged from the data. This vice president of an

international software consulting company observed, took

time to reflect, engaged in questioning and dialog, and

worked at uncovering deep systematic patterns. He also

assisted his team with using the same approaches. He

shared:

This meeting had ended up with a sense that it didn’t

go anywhere, and the issues still remained with a lot

of bottled-up passions and energy. People were really

frustrated… I just kept thinking….A week later I called the team back. …I got everybody to process their feelings and emotions and then I asked every-

body to get to the root of the dissatisfaction and

unhappiness. I wanted us to know where that was

coming from so we could figure out how to work with

it and change it. I told them that, now that they were

wiser with the experience of the last meeting, I

wanted them to write down three things that we could

do differently so the tone, nature, and product of our

meetings would get us to where we needed to be.

That was a great leadership moment.

As witnessed by the study participants, leadership is

enhanced through the practice of mindfulness: observation,

reflection, questioning and dialog, rational process, and an

understanding of patterns [systems thinking]. While the

participants spoke to the need of developing a mindful

perspective in the practice of ethical leadership, the pur-

pose behind the value perspective of mindfulness was to

prepare the leader to engage in ethical action.

Engagement

The value perspective of engagement is supported through

participants’ stories that underscored the exercise of

embracing diversity, cultivating relationships, terminating

relationships, and encouragement of risk-taking in the

practice of ethical leadership. While mindfulness refers to

the preparation of the ethical leader, engagement describes

the visible activity that can be observed when watching the

leader exercise power in performance of the leadership

function. Mindfulness provides the inner clarity that allows

the leader to fully engage self and others in purposeful

action (Buckingham 2005). The value perspective of

engagement introduces the ethical dimension where the

leader is fully involved—transparently living before those

being led, and freeing others to risk the same degree of

openness and transparency throughout the organization

(Ladkin 2006). Ladkin stated,

A leader striving to find an ethical way forward

within a multidimensional and multi- stakeholder

situation will learn far more from the nuances and

textures of the territory through engaging with it.

Through doing so, completely novel and previously

unimagined paths could unfold, especially if the

leader is willing to be influenced by emerging

insights and perspectives. (p. 95).

Further, active ethical engagement is not only about

interacting with the situation but also with the people that

are touched (Ladkin 2006); engagement does not take place

at a distance but from deep within the locale of the

problem.

The overall tenor of the data reverberates with the

notion of engagement. The participants’ experiences sup-

port the concept of engagement from deep within the sit-

uation, through the valued approaches of embracing

diversity and taking risks. Ladkin (2006) stated, ‘‘this

approach necessitates putting ‘knowing’ to one side and

trusting that good ways forward will emerge through open

and engaged interactions with those involved in the situa-

tion’’ (p. 96). A representative story came from a vice

president of business operations for a multinational soft-

ware consulting company who recalled a time where risk

taking required that he embrace diversity:

But there I was in the Philippines. I didn’t even know

how the phones worked or how to use the money. I

became a minority overnight–even more so when I

was in India. And I wasn’t the guy anymore, with all

of my skills and knowledge; in many ways what I

knew just wasn’t applicable. And I learned to rely on

others, and I learned humility, and I learned not to

judge or to assume moral superiority… It was sink or swim, but I wouldn’t give that experience back.

A story shared by a vice president of large marketing for

a manufacturing company represents well the valued

approach of building relationships with the people who are

touched (Ladkin 2006) by the situation. He recalled:

570 C. Marsh

123

While in Malaysia I had an employee whose five-

year-old son developed a heart problem. So we flew

him to the United States for surgery. He came

through with flying colors, but died two days later.

We were all devastated, but that employee came

back, and he still works for us. You never saw a more

loyal employee.

While relationship building was an essential aspect of

leading ethically, the importance of knowing when and

how to terminate a relationship was also stressed by a

number of the study participants. One example came from

a vice president of global sales and marketing for a five star

resort:

She was a long-term employee, and I didn’t want to

lose her, but she just didn’t care anymore. She needed

a change, but she wouldn’t take the step herself.

Instead she made everyone else miserable, and trea-

ted her colleagues with disrespect. I counseled her

over a period of about a year, but I finally had to let

her go. It was the right thing for us and for her, and

you know what, she agrees with that. And now she is

happy in her new life. But I agonized over that

decision, but it was the ethical thing to do.

While engagement with people was discussed as a part

of many of the participants’ ethical frameworks, many of

them also discussed engagement with task and the impor-

tance of taking risks (Ladkin 2006). One example that

represents the data came from the vice president of a

financial institution who was previously a career military

officer. He told a story about standing up to his com-

manding officer after being asked to hire a powerful sen-

ator’s future son-in law over a well-qualified internal

candidate:

Needless to say, this just wasn’t right. And I had a

two-star [general] agree with me on this all the way,

and the two of us went over to the three-star’s

[general] office and said, you can’t do this. If you go

through with this we are resigning, and that’s pretty

heavy stuff when you’re still a couple of years from

retirement. And I never forgot the look on his face… And we went out of that office thinking this might be

the end. He decided he would find another job for this

guy. Oh, and I forget to say that the three-star was

counting on the senator for an appointment for his

son to the air academy.

As noted by the study participants, ethical leadership is

enhanced through the practice of engagement: embracing

diversity, cultivating and terminating relationships, and

encouraging risk taking. Whereas, the value perspective of

mindfulness focused on the preparation for action, the

value perspective of engagement underscored the capabil-

ity to engage from deep within the situation with real-life

human matters. The participants also spoke about the need

for personal authenticity.

Authenticity

The value perspective of authenticity is supported through

participants’ stories that underscored the exercise of per-

sonal integrity, self knowledge, and being the author of

one’s own life. In the framework for ethical leadership, just

as engagement is not possible without mindfulness,

authenticity at the heart of the ethical leader provides the

moral courage (Hannah et al. 2011) to submit to the dis-

cipline of mindfulness and the ability to engage people in

the organization with empathy. As ‘‘inauthenticity is a

refusal of engagement and reflection … is a practice of getting lost in the busyness of everyday living and

expresses itself as disconnected… and divorced from being present in situations’’ (Segal 2011, p. 476), the reverse may

be seen as true. Authenticity upholds the value perspectives

of engagement and mindfulness, and allows the leader to

take on the moral ambiguity of complex situations. The

participants in this study discussed not only the mental

processes involved with mindfulness and ethical action of

engagement, but also outlined specific qualities pointing to

the character of leadership that allowed them to make

ethical choices when in the midst of ambiguous and com-

plex situations.

In the search for the appropriate terminology to repre-

sent the data that pointed to character, authenticity (Avolio

and Gardner 2005; Freeman and Auster 2011; George

2003; George et al. 2007; Hannah et al. 2011; Ladkin and

Taylor 2010; Luthans and Avolio 2003; Sparrowe 2005;

Walumbwa et al. 2008) emerged as the term that best

portrayed the value perspective represented by the data, as

the participants honed in on a self-referential aspect of

leadership, based on self-knowledge to which the leader

remains true, and personal convictions that are not swayed

by public pressure (Avolio and Gardner 2005). In addition,

‘‘Authenticity points us toward a more self-responsible

form of life. It allows us to live (potentially) a fuller and

more differentiated life, because [our life is] more fully

appropriated as our own’’ (Taylor 1991, p. 74). At the same

time, the findings of this study, which include a model for

the development of ethical leadership, support the devel-

opmental nature of authentic leadership: ‘‘the essential

nature of authenticity is developmental—it is a process of

continually becoming’’ (Liedtka 2008, p. 238). Freeman

and Auster (2011) stated,

We see being authentic as an ongoing process of

conversation that not only starts with perceived

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 571

123

values but also involves one’s history, relationships

with others, and aspirations. Authenticity entails

acting on these values for individuals and organiza-

tions and thus also becomes a necessary starting point

for ethics’’ (p. 15).

Developing self-knowledge, or self-awareness, and

being the author of one’s life (Sparrowe 2005) were themes

that emerged through many of the interviews. Both are core

aspects of authentic leadership theory (Ericksen 2009);

both are developmental and ongoing. The managing

director of a large retail location provided an example that

represents the valued approaches of developing self-

knowledge and being the author of one’s life: ‘‘Who am I

now when so much of my life I defined myself by the

person who completed me?’’ she asked herself. ‘‘I had to

figure out who I was through my own judgment, not

someone else’s. I had to stop thinking about myself as

incomplete. I had to accept that being a woman was OK,

that it was good.’’ Another participant, a vice president of

human resources at a large manufacturing company, pro-

vided a clear example of the data on self-authorship:

One day, after my dad passed away, I woke up, and I

said, ‘‘You are better than that,’’… I went back to school and got my B.A. and my M.B.A. I knew that if

I didn’t take charge of my destiny, nobody else

would, and it was time. I spent so many years

accepting what others thought of me, or at least how

others made me feel. I couldn’t succeed until I real-

ized that I was in the driver’s seat—nobody else.

Living out of personal integrity was another theme

generated by the data that supports the aspect of authentic

leadership based on personal convictions to which the

leader remains true (Avolio and Gardner 2005) and the

self-responsible, differentiated life (Taylor 1991).

An example from the data comes from a vice president

of a large manufacturing company and founder of a non-

profit serving HIV infected children, emphasized,

… when I see people in situations where an ethical decision needs to be made…, I look at how it is a particular gain or loss to that person both personally

and professionally. I look at it as sort of being who

those people are. What they do at work either

enhances or diminishes who they are in their personal

lives. Start making compromises and you become a

compromised person, and who wants that? So,

continuing to behave ethically helps you to continue

to act ethically.

Authenticity, as articulated above, is not only about the

internal being of the leader, but also about acknowledging

a unique identity formed by values that are visibly lived

and cultivated within the organizational culture (Hess and

Cameron 2006). Whereas, mindfulness spoke to the prep-

aration of the ethical leader, and engagement surfaced as

that which was necessary to be involved with real-life

human matters, authenticity described the leader’s moral

anchor.

…authentic leaders are anchored by their own deep sense of self; they know where they stand on

important issues, values and beliefs. With that base

they stay their course and convey to others, often-

times through actions, not just words, what they

represent in terms of principles, values and ethics

(Avolio and Gardner 2005, pp. 329–330).

Authentic leaders know themselves; they are aware of

their talents, skills, strengths, and weaknesses. They have

the courage to admit their weaknesses and, perhaps even

more importantly, have the courage to author their own

stories, and by so doing, lead others in the development of

strong, authentic organizations. However, in that ‘‘it is

through the recognition and acceptance of personal guilt

that we can take up an authentic stance’’ (Gardiner 2011,

p. 101), authenticity, with its ongoing acknowledgement of

imperfections and the no blinders approach to reality, may

be difficult to sustain as a form of leadership (Ford and

Harding 2011; Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2009).

Sustainment

The value perspective of sustainment is supported through

participants’ stories that underscored living with no illu-

sions, living with hope, and having a holistic approach to

work and life in the practice of ethical leadership. The

value perspective of sustainment is the final value per-

spective that allows the framework to endure. Sustainment

unifies the other three value perspectives. It is the glue that

melds disciplined mindfulness, empathetic engagement,

and courageous authenticity into a substantial force for

ethical action; it reconciles the paradoxical forces of

autonomy and community (Elliott and Turnbull 2003).

The term sustainment was chosen to represent this

enduring force of ethical leadership, as this term refers to

the aspect of ethical leadership without which the others

could not function. Mindfulness includes the ability to

think through long-term implications of decisions with

regard to the sustainment of the outcomes. The ability to

sustain relationships is a fundamental requirement for the

engagement of the ethical leader, and authenticity cannot

exist without the consistency and reliability of character

with constancy of purpose and vision. Sustainment should

not be confused with sustainability, which has become

synonymous with environmental ethics (Des Jardins 1993;

572 C. Marsh

123

Hatcher 2002). An international software group’s CEO’s

image of a tree helps explain the value perspective of

sustainment. He stressed,

Values are like the roots of the tree, and you don’t

really see them, but they are there. What you see are

the leaves and the tree grows branches and the

branches fall off and shit happens above the ground.

But the root system is consistent and continues to

grow deeper beneath the ground.

Sustainment, like the roots of the tree, is the value

perspective that allows the other value perspectives to

continue to grow and thrive. The gardener is one metaphor

provided by Wheatley (1999) to visualize the dynamic of

one who leads from the perspective of sustainment. One

role of the gardener is insuring that plants flourish in the

soil and climate in which they’ve been planted. The

gardener will never plant the seeds if there is no hope for

growth; the gardener has no illusions; the gardener’s hope

is not just wishful thinking but is grounded in reality.

Realistic hope … is based on the attempt to under- stand the concrete conditions of reality, to see one’s

own role in it realistically, and to engage in such

efforts of thoughtful Realistic hope … is based on the attempt to understand the concrete conditions of

reality, to see one’s own role in it realistically, and to

engage in such efforts of thoughtful action as might

be expected to bring about the hoped-for change

(Menninger et al. 1963, pp. 285–286).

The data indicated that to maintain an ongoing ethical

perspective, a leader needed to have hope, yet have no

illusions about life. Being grounded in reality, with no

illusions, was a highly valued element to a number of the

participants’ ethical approaches. The CEO who provided

the tree image, spoke about having hope without illusions.

He elaborated, ‘‘… you have to be open to and acknowl- edge your reality, whatever the hell it is. The success

comes from affirming that and saying yes to it and then

seeing the possibility that rests within it.’’ A vice president

of a large software consulting company shared a story that

demonstrates living within reality, without illusions, and

maintaining hope as an approach to sustainment:

In Germany I knew, or at least I suspected, that I

would need a visa, but our Brussels staff kept telling

me ‘‘you don’t need a visa.’’ And you see over in

Brussels they are accustomed to dealing with Amer-

ican and the Europeans, they never really realized

that an Indian is not like an American, and an Indian

needs a visa even to go to the bathroom, but they

didn’t realize this. So there I was without a visa,

getting thrown off trains in the middle of the night.

And you feel a horrible humiliation when you have to

go through that, and you start blaming this and that

and all of that. But then you realize that being an

Indian, you know you have to go through all of these

things. … It’s not what you want, but we are in a global reality and it’s bound to be there and I don’t

think, as long as you know inside you have not done

anything wrong, ultimately it will right itself…as long as I know, as long as I am living out of my

integrity, I firmly believe, that that’s another thing, I

think, it will correct itself. It may not happen in my

lifetime, it may not happen for me, but it will…. Because there is absolutely nothing that is not natural

that can survive…. Human beings might want it, human beings might force it, human beings might

cultivate it for a while, but it will not sustain itself. It

will not live.

While many of the participants expressed in different

ways their ability to maintain hope in the midst of the

sometimes overwhelming current realty, they acknowl-

edged additional pitfalls to which they saw a holistic

approach to work and life as a remedy. The trap that may

defeat the leader, even when hope is present, is the dedi-

cation to the vision of the organization, at the expense of a

home life.

The words of a vice president of world wide sales for a

major resort represent the value of a holistic approach to

work and life as discussed by the participants. He

emphasized,

I catch myself so often, even at home, thinking about

the way I’m managing in a particular situation and

it’s like, hey, wait a minute here, let’s make sure that

I’m doing the right approach. Is this the time to

address this, or do we just chill for a second and

address it later, and this is how I teach my children… I can’t be one person at home and another person at

work. But we have to be aware of the impact of work

on home when, I mean, you’re putting in 50 h a

week, and the waking hours I have at home are

obviously much less than that, so the influence of

work transcends your marriage, your parents, your

family, and your friends. Better be the person you

want to be at work, or you won’t be that person at

home, either.

The data generated during the interviews indicates that

to be sustained as an ethical leader, hope balanced by

reality and a work life balanced by a life outside of work

are essential. The value perspectives of mindfulness,

engagement, and authenticity cannot endure unless con-

nected to one another and sustained by a realistic vision

and a balanced lifestyle.

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 573

123

The short stories shared above are examples of the data

generated in the interviews that came together to form a

framework for Ethical Leadership (Fig. 1). Ethical leader-

ship has a value perspective of mindfulness that allows the

leaders to develop the discipline to prepare to lead ethically

through practicing observation, taking time for reflection,

comprehending the systems within which they operate,

approaching work as process, and understanding multiple

perspectives through dialog and questioning. In addition,

the value perspective of engagement provides for action,

generated through empathy, that pays particular attention

to the cultivation of multiple and diverse relationships,

fosters risk taking, yet knows when it is time for relation-

ships to end. Further, as leaders think, plan, and engage in

the business of the organization, they develop the courage

to act out of a value perspective of authenticity based on

personal integrity, self-knowledge, and the ability to author

their own lives. Finally, ethical leaders have a value per-

spective of sustainment which is rooted in a balanced

lifestyle. While they have no illusions about the reality

within which they operate, they maintain hope in the

future. With a clear understanding of reality and a supple

mind that does not resist future possibilities; ethical lead-

ership can grow and endure. The combination of all the

value perspectives within the framework of ethical lead-

ership answers the research question: ‘‘What aspects of

ethical leadership are valued by those who consider

themselves to be ethical leaders?’’

A Model for the Development of Ethical Leadership

After a framework for ethical leadership became apparent,

attention was turned to the experiential development model

formed by the common elements of the development

journey. Portions of the participants’ journeys occurred in

childhood and adolescence, while other parts took place in

adulthood. Events and people influenced development at

different times and in many ways, but a consistent pattern

emerged that can be used to explain a common journey.

The blueprint for the journey involved experiences with

trauma (defined as events that had a significant emotional

impact), that shaped an awareness of the contingencies of

life, the support of a community of people who provided

challenge and encouragement along the way allowing for

continued exploration and growth, and encounters with

difference that expanded their understanding of identity to

include relationships with those quite different from

themselves.

It is important to note that Fig. 2 is drawn with arrows

pointing in both directions to indicate the cyclical, non-

linear nature of this model. The experience can start any-

where, and continues back and forth among the three types

of experiences. Some of the participants experienced

trauma at an early age through the death of a loved one or

physical abuse, but others did not experience the limits

presented by trauma until later in life when confronted with

divorce, termination of employment, or a near-death

experience. Similarly, although the experience of love and

acceptance was a critical aspect of the narratives, some of

the participants grew up in supportive, loving families, and

others did not. For some, an accepting and supportive,

loving relationship did not occur until someone reached out

to them as they were going through a crisis or until they

discovered a loving presence in their marriages. Some of

the participants did not encounter diversity until their

employment sent them out of the country, while others

grew up as minorities and were intimately familiar with the

dynamics of difference from an early age. What is

important to keep in mind is not the sequencing of events,

but the coming together of the three types of experiences to

create the reservoir of knowledge from which learning

takes place. It is through the development model, presented

in Fig. 2, that the answer to the research question, ‘‘In what

ways do the life experiences of those who perceive

Fig. 1 Framework for ethical leadership

574 C. Marsh

123

themselves to be ethical leaders inform the understanding

of the process of ethical leadership development?’’ can be

found.

Experiences with Trauma

As the data was examined, it became evident that most of

the participants in this study mentioned a specific life-

altering event as critical to the development of their ethical

perspectives. The adjective ‘‘traumatic’’ was used to

describe these experiences because they were considered

by the participants to be life-changing events. It may be of

interest to note that, in his research on the development of

leadership wholeness, Thakadipuram (2010) uses the word

‘‘crisis’’ to explain a dynamic similar to that which was

discussed by participants in the current study. The partic-

ipants did not simply learn something through mental

cognition; they were also affected psychologically by their

encounters.

Some events involved the death or absence of a parent

or the suicide of a friend, while others were concerned with

a sacrifice made by a loved one. Others included a cul-

turally taboo observation, relocation to a new culture, or

experience as being a member of a minority group. Adult

onset of trauma occurred in response to divorce, termina-

tion of employment, and, in one instance, an encounter

with death. In each instance, the event brought about the

onset of a new awareness that triggered an appreciation for

life’s contingencies.

One of many stories that indicated an experience with

trauma came from a vice president of sales for a manu-

facturing company. When talking about her father’s death

and her mother’s remarriage she confided,

She remarried when I was 5 years old. He was an

alcoholic and…he was also a sexual abuser. He was

so violent; he used to beat her. We had the police

over and it was very bad.

A managing partner for a global HR consulting firm

recalled a childhood incident:

… my parents were asleep, and I heard what I first thought were fireworks, but then I became curious

because it was past the 4th of July. So I wondered

why people would be blowing off fireworks. So I

went down out of the apartment, down the stairs,

through this hall, into the next side of the building,

which was the tavern, and I saw this guy on the floor

of the tavern and there was, you could see the smoke

in the air. And I said to myself, ‘‘Please God, don’t let

it be my uncle.’’ But it wasn’t my uncle, but the guy

was shot right between the eyes, and so I looked

around for my uncle, and he comes out of the back

with a mop and a bucket. I think he was in shock.

The two previous stories are examples of the many

traumatic events, shared by the participants, in their dis-

cussion of the events that formed their values. They coped,

and with the help of others, matured and developed greater

self-knowledge. The next section, therefore, moves on

from experiences with trauma, and begins to reflect on the

necessity of a supportive community or the role that others

play in the development of ethical leadership.

Experiences with Supportive Community

Although trauma played a role in the lives of the study

participants, the data also indicated that the participants

realized that, with the help of others, life goes on and

provides opportunities for exploration and growth. Parents,

grandparents, spouses, in-laws, teachers, priests, nuns,

pastors, and mentors were given credit for helping the

study participants grasp the possibilities that were open to

Fig. 2 A model for the development of ethical

leadership

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 575

123

them and recognize the freedom that comes from not being

bound by limitations imposed by trauma. For some, the

experience of affirmation and support laid the foundation

for handling life’s challenges, while for others, love and

support emerged following a particular event.

One of the stories about the role of supportive com-

munity came from a vice president of a large telecommu-

nications company who in her youth had skated

competitively. She recalled,

My mother was on edge and could snap at me and

pushed me to be overly competitive with my skating.

My father had been more balanced and when he died,

my grandmother helped me a lot and stayed with me

while I was doing my training and provided that

support. She wanted me to do my best, ‘‘I will support

you however I can,’’ but she was not overbearing. She

wanted me to make my own choices…

A vice president for a national retail organization spoke

about the support of his teacher:

That night we were having a pizza party with Ms.

Hammerstrom, my teacher. She called me and said,

‘‘Do you want me to pick you up?’’ I told her what

just happened [death of his grandfather], and she said,

‘‘Well, why don’t I pick you up a little early, and you

and I can talk a little bit about it?’’ She urged me to

go and we had a really good conversation.

The above stories are only a few examples of the par-

ticipants who had memories of being cared for, being

singled out to receive special attention, or being the reci-

pient of someone’s ongoing love and affection. Often they

sought out the relationship, but when looking back, they

frequently discovered that the support was not solicited, but

freely given.

Encounters with Diversity

The third dynamic involved with the development of eth-

ical leadership, as described by the study participants, was

an encounter with difference that expanded their under-

standing of identity to include relationships with those

quite different from themselves. Some of the encounters

took place during visits or assignments to other countries or

meeting members of minority groups within their own

country. Some occurred in response to involvement with

subcultures within their own country and still others

through the act of falling in love. New linkages developed

and bonding took place that created new possibilities and

purposes in the external world, while at the same time

shaping a new awareness of life—its obligations and

rewards. The expanded worldview came about through

openness and connection to others.

The participant, who in the previous section spoke about

the support of his teacher, also discussed the impact of her

difference:

She was from England, drove a Volkswagen bug, and

she was kind of zany and hip and bright. And she

took a liking to me, and she spent extra time with

me…. She focused on what I did really well and gave me a tremendous amount of confidence. She also

helped me become more of a world mental traveler;

she taught us about England and Europe in a different

way than just a map on a board.

A vice president of marketing for a large manufacturing

company spoke about his experience with difference while

working in Malaysia.

A good relationship depends on finding out what you

respect in one another, what you trust in one another.

It can’t be artificial or superficial….You have to examine your own biases. Does the color of the

uniform really matter? I could give someone a dif-

ferent color uniform if our standard colors were

offensive to him. At the end of the day, when you’ve

got it figured out, there is so much satisfaction from

having connected.

The two stories shared above are examples of what

many of the participants included in their narratives—times

time during which they became conscious of the power of

diversity through encounters with people quite different

from themselves. The lessons were not about coping with

diversity; they were about recognizing a larger reality than

their own and understanding that while differences must be

respected. There are commonalities that can unite those

with vastly differing perspectives. From the perspective of

this study’s participants, ethical leaders become so partially

through their cognizance of differences, and the power that

comes from understanding the intricate interrelationships

that connect people and allows them to learn and benefit

from one another.

Based on the experiences of the participants in this

study, the attainment of ethical leadership was gradual and

took place over many years. The participants revealed that

at numerous points throughout their careers, they made

conscious choices to lead ethically, and the ability to make

those choices was rooted in an understanding of life that

acknowledges uncertainty and human frailty, knows the

redemptive power of love, and realizes the web of con-

nection that holds together even the most diverse per-

spectives. The choice to lead ethically came as a result of

the development of the leaders’ characters; therefore, eth-

ical leadership development was intricately involved with

the moral development of the leaders. Figure 2 depicts the

journey that was shared by the participants in this study. It

576 C. Marsh

123

may serve to help cultivate ethical leaders as moral agents.

The awareness required to lead ethically culminated over a

lifetime and was a result of learning from multiple

experiences.

Discussion

Virtue Ethics

The development of ethical leadership is multifaceted and

involves a variety of forces, over some of which the leader

has no control. It also involves not only processes of

meaning making that take place as an internal quest but

also in dialog with members of the community within

which the leader operates. As previously articulated, for the

purpose of this study, it was determined that virtue ethics

best encompassed the complexities of ethical leadership in

a corporate environment due to its focus on character and

the connection between personal values and ethical activity

of those possessing considerable organizational decision-

making power. This study attempted to clarify the role of

virtue ethics in a business environment, more specifically,

the role of virtue in determining ethical leadership behav-

ior. In that, virtue ethics is character-oriented rather than

act-oriented, this study examined executives’ perceptions

of themselves as ethical leaders rather than as ethical

decision makers. Although the interviews began with the

recollection of a particular ethical decision, the interview

questions that followed were not intended to elicit how the

decision was made, rather how the participant developed

the values out of which the decision was made. Gough

(1998) stated, ‘‘the all important connecting link between

knowing right and good and doing right and good will

always be having the character to do what is right and

good’’ (p. 53). The findings of this study indicate that the

participants have a similar belief, as the framework for

ethical leadership that emerged from the data depicts the

importance of the value perspectives of mindfulness

(knowing right and good), engagement (doing right and

good), and authenticity (having the character to do what is

right and good) linked together through a perspective that

values the sustainment of the framework over time.

The emergence in this study of the concept of value

perspectives also supports virtue theory as a prominent

ethical foundation for organizational leadership. A value

perspective, is not the same thing as a value, or a set of

values; rather, it is a conduit through which an individual

who chooses to lead from an ethical vantage point may

connect personal values with actions. Leaders may call

upon differing values based on their religious, political, and

cultural backgrounds and experiences, but the four value

perspectives defined by this research clarify a common

approach for leading ethically in the complex, global world

of business. Through the process of making ethical deci-

sions, leaders call upon the four value perspectives, any

one alone of which may not lead to a sound ethical deci-

sion. Each value perspective is only one piece of an overall

ethical worldview grounded in virtue.

The ethical framework containing the four value per-

spectives aligns itself with virtue theory in that when

making an ethical choice the leader does not simply

examine the consequences or the rightness or wrongness of

a decision. Rather, the leader asks, ‘‘Am I approaching this

decision from a perspective of mindfulness, from a per-

spective of engagement, from a perspective of authenticity,

and from a perspective of sustainment?’’ The act-oriented

teleological theories may be relied upon in the mindful

exploration of an issue (mindfulness) as the analysis of an

issue, through the use of systems thinking and/or rational

process, will take into consideration the impact of specific

actions and the ensuing consequences to the organization

as a whole. In addition, the act-oriented deontological

theories may come into play as the leader is engaged in the

determination of what is right, or what is just, with regard

to human organizational concerns (engagement). The use,

however, of such consequential or nonconsequential

thinking is encompassed within a series of value perspec-

tives, including authenticity and sustainment, which

determine an overall ethical worldview that allows the

leader to operate from the outlook of virtue. Ultimately, in

calling upon the complete framework that unites the four

value perspectives, the leader desires to be an ethical lea-

der, not just to act ethically.

It is in the combination of all the value perspectives

within the framework of ethical leadership that an answer

to the research question of, ‘‘What aspects of ethical

leadership are valued by those who consider themselves to

be ethical leaders ?’’ can be answered. While one might

suppose that the clue is found in the value perspective of

authenticity due to its focus on the virtues of an individ-

ual’s character, MacIntyre (1984) warned that individual

transcendence without regard for the social world within

which the leader operates results in decisions made in

solitude without regard for the thoughts or actions of oth-

ers. MacIntyre suggested that the leader who believes he or

she lays claim to some kind of objective morality ‘‘cannot

enter into relationships mediated by appeal to shared

standards or virtues or goods; he is his own only authority

and his relationships to others have to be exercises of that

authority’’ (p. 258). He continued,

To cut oneself off from shared activity in which one

has initially to learn obediently as an apprentice

learns, to isolate oneself from the communities which

find their point and purpose in such activities, will be

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 577

123

to debar oneself from finding any good outside of

oneself. (p. 258)

While the value perspective of authenticity is a strong

element of a framework for ethical leadership, authenticity

is not found outside of community. The value perspective

of mindfulness suggests that mental models are developed

not only through solitary observation and reflection, but

also in dialog with others and through seeking out diverse

perspectives. In addition, the value perspective of

engagement implies that action occurs in association with

others who not only inform, but are also impacted by, the

leader’s decisions and actions. Finally, the complete

framework of ethical leadership is sustained by hope that is

grounded in, not separate from, the real world within which

the leader lives and works.

The framework of ethical leadership proposed in this

study emerged in response to participants’ thoughts and

reflections on how they developed as ethical leaders. While

as individuals their ethical decisions were not all neces-

sarily made from the perspective of virtue ethics, the

framework is rooted in the virtue, as discussed by MacIn-

tyre (1984), which takes into account relationships and the

societal context within which the leader operates.

Experiential Learning

The model for the development of ethical leadership, as it

emerged in this study, is based on the understanding that

adults develop, grow, and learn through experience. As the

virtues develop through experience (Brewer 1997; Hartman

2011; MacIntyre 1984), a natural synergy exists between

the two models. The second model presented in this study

answers the research question: In what ways do the life

experiences of those who perceive themselves to be ethical

leaders inform the understanding of the process of ethical

leadership development?

Experiential learning as an aspect of adult development

was touted as early as 1926 when Lindeman (1926/1961)

declared that ‘‘the resource of highest value in adult edu-

cation is the learner’s experience. If education is life, then

life is also education…. Experience is the adult learner’s living textbook’’ (pp. 6–7). Another notable authority on

adult learning, Knowles (1970/1980), stated, ‘‘As people

grow and develop, they accumulate an increasing reservoir

of experience that becomes an increasingly rich resource

for learning’’ (p. 44). And Jarvis (1987) went so far as to

claim, ‘‘All learning begins with experience’’ (p. 16).

Fenwick (2003) said similarly, ‘‘All of learning is experi-

ence-based’’ (p. ix).

The three double-ended arrows (See Fig. 2) create what

Knowles (1970/1980) referred to as reservoir of experience

that forms the framework for ethical leadership. The

presence of the reservoir is a critical aspect of the model.

Dewey (1938) indicated that if learning from experience is

to happen then continuity of experience and interaction

with the environment must be involved. The reservoir

allows the executives’ experiences to collect and build

upon one another, rather than to be used and discarded as

incidents isolated in time. As the reservoir fills, the

framework for ethical leadership is available to the exec-

utive as he or she engages with new situations that occur in

day-to-day interactions within the workplace.

Learning was required in order for the experiences,

expressed in Fig. 2, to inform the development of the value

perspectives contained within the ethical framework,

depicted in Fig. 1. Learning occurred as a result of having

processed the experiences through what some have called

as the reflective practice (Merriam and Caffarella 1999).

This ability to interpret life’s experiences and make

meaning of them is what Mezirow (1996) called as the

transformative learning. ‘‘Learning is understood as the

process of using a prior interpretation to construe a new or

revised interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience in

order to guide future action’’ (p. 162). Not only do the

findings of this study indicate that learning takes place

through a process of relational learning through experi-

ences with a supportive community, but also reveal that

learning is the result of involvement with the other two

types of experiences represented in the model presented

represented in Fig. 2: traumatic experiences and encounters

with difference. Both of these types of experiences give

credence to Mezirow’s (1991) concept of a disorienting

dilemma, originally conceived by Mezirow as a single

dramatic event that has evolved to be understood as a

gradual process of multiple events that build upon one

another (Taylor 2000). The nonlinear nature of the Model

for the Development of Ethical Leadership represented in

Fig. 2 is also supported by current views on transforma-

tional learning that have progressed from Mezirow’s initial

conception of transformational learning as a linear process

to include more complex, less rational means of growth

involving thoughts and feelings (Baumgartner 2001).

This learning that leads to awareness, however, is not

necessarily as given. The expansion of awareness requires

motivation on the part of the leader to learn and grow.

Merriam and Caffarella’s (1999) assumptions of reflective

practice indicate why business executives may be inher-

ently motivated due to the demands of their positions: (1)

They are in situations in which they are committed to both

problem finding and problem solving; (2) they are con-

stantly required to make judgments about which action to

take; and (3) action is the intended result of their decisions,

even when the decision made is not to act.

Relationship cultivation, critical to the engagement

value perspective in the framework for ethical leadership,

578 C. Marsh

123

may also enhance motivation to expand awareness based

on lived experience. Throughout this study, the participants

relayed some evidence that supported their beliefs in the

importance of ongoing learning as they discussed their

handling of life’s crises, their willingness to explore their

identities and values because they knew they were loved,

and their encounters with others who challenged their

assumptions by calling their worldviews into question.

The ability to remain vigilant in one’s self-development,

according to McClusky’s (1963) theory of margin, is

dependent upon the balance represented by the ratio

between load (the problems and difficulties encountered)

and power (the support one has to overcome the load).

Throughout this chapter, the experiences of love and sup-

port articulated by the participants are detailed. McClu-

sky’s theory suggests that to cope with an increasing load,

as that which business executives face in a complex busi-

ness environment, that power must also be increased, or the

heavy load will handicap the executives’ abilities to con-

tinue learning. Internal awareness, in light of McClusky’s

theory, is dependent not only upon critical thinking, but

also on the continued presence of a support network,

confirming the importance of the presence of experiences

that provide love and acceptance as well as those that

present limits. The experiences of limitations (defined as

trauma in this study) also must continue or the resulting

unchecked power can lead to arrogance and a loss of the

vulnerability essential for continued growth.

Human Resource Development (HRD)

If HRD professionals are able to associate the complex

inter-relationships among mindfulness, engagement,

authenticity, and sustainment, as portrayed in Fig. 1, with

ethics, they would strive to develop a training agenda,

moving well beyond Kohlbergian dilemma scenarios (Rest

et al. (1999). Such an agenda may include a focus on

training in systems thinking and relationship building;

Systems thinking may help develop the aptitude to think

critically (mindfulness) and relationship building would

enhance the ability to connect with others (engagement)

who are a part of the overall intricate set of linkages in and

between systems. It is more difficult to suggest how

trainers might involve themselves in the development of

authenticity and sustainability; the valued approaches of

ethical leadership contained within those two value per-

spectives are more likely to be influenced by an organi-

zation’s leadership and its culture through the ongoing

interactions that take place as business is conducted. As

Hatcher (2002) indicated, it is essential that leadership take

responsibility for establishing a climate of integrity.

Finally, as the results of this study point strongly in the

direction of experiential learning, formal classroom

training may have little impact on ethical leadership

development.

It follows that one HRD approach to ethical leadership

development warranting further investigation is action

learning (Bierema 1998; Dilworth 1998; Dixon 1998;

Marquardt 1999, 2004; Raelin 2006). Similar to the pro-

cess depicted in Fig. 2, action learning relies on experi-

ential approaches based on the conscious application of

coaching and mentoring for potential leaders as they

operate within the context of their real business environ-

ments. Using action learning, the intentional use of diverse

teams in international locations assigned to solve complex

business problems within limited time frames will likely

provide experiences with trauma while providing

encounters with difference. Manufacturing artificial trau-

matic situations is not encouraged, but learners should be

able to process challenges as they arise. At least one study

on developing responsible global leaders through interna-

tional assignments (Pless et al. 2011) supports that over-

coming the substantial challenges present in international

encounters may be one aspect of the development of

ethical leaders. Further, as indicated by the finding of the

current study, the difficulty of such a project will lead to

significant learning, only if leadership supports the process

by providing compassionate coaches who encourage

openness and dialog, and champion learning through

processes while holding accountability for business

outcomes.

References

April, K., Peters, K., Locke, K., & Mlambo, C. (2010). Ethics and

leadership: Enablers and stumbling blocks. Journal of Public Affairs, 10(3), 152–172.

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership

development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership.

Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338. Badaracco, J. L. (2006). Questions of character: Illuminating the

heart of leadership through literature. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Bass, B., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic

transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181–217.

Bastons, Miquel. (2008). The role of virtues in the framing of

decision. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(3), 389–400. Baumgartner, L. M. (2001). An update on transformational learning.

In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), The new update on adult learning theory: New directions for adult and continuing education, No. 89 (pp. 15–24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bierema, L. L. (1998). Fitting action learning to corporate programs.

Performance Improvement Quarterly, 11(1), 86–107. Blum, L. (1988). Gilligan and Kohlberg: Implications for moral

theory. Ethics, 98(3), 472–491. Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership: A compel-

ling business case for benevolence and compassion, optimism, and hope. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 579

123

Brewer, K. B. (1997). Management as a practice: A response to

Alaisdair MacIntyre. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(8), 825–833.

Buckingham, M. (2005). The one great thing you need to know: About great managing, great leading and sustaining individual success. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership: The pursuit of

happiness. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press. Chang, H. W., & Lin, G. (2008). Effect of personal values

transformation on leadership behavior. Total Quality Manage- ment and Business Excellence, 19(1–2), 67–77.

Conger, J. A. (1998). Qualitative research as the cornerstone

methodology for understanding leadership. Leadership Quar- terly, 9(1), 107–121.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crockett, C. (2005). The cultural paradigm of virtue. The Journal of Business Ethics, 62(2), 191–208.

Dawson, D., & Bartholomew, C. (2003). Virtues, managers and

business People: Finding q place for MacIntyre in a business

context. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 41–53. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier

Books.

Dilworth, R. L. (1998). Action learning in a nutshell. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 11(1), 28–43.

Dixon, N. M. (1998). Action learning: More than just a task force.

Performance Improvement Quarterly, 11(1), 44–58. Dobson, J. (2009). Alasdair MacIntyre’s Aristotelian business ethics:

A critique. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(1), 43–50. Donaldson, T. (2003). Editor’s comments: Taking ethics seriously—a

mission now more possible. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 364–368.

Elliott, C., & Turnbull, S. (2003). Reconciling autonomy and

community: The paradoxical role of HRD. Human Resource Development International, 6(4), 457–474.

Ericksen, M. (2009). Authentic leadership: Reflexivity, self-aware-

ness and self-authorship. Journal of Management Education, 33(6), 747–771.

Fenwick, T. J. (2003). Learning through experience: Troubling orthodoxies and intersecting questions. Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. J. (2003). Waking up! Mindfulness in the

face of bandwagons. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 54–70.

Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327–358.

Ford, J., & Harding, N. (2011). The impossibility of the ‘true self’ of

authentic leadership. Leadership, 7(4), 463–479. Freeman, R. E., & Auster, E. R. (2011). Values, authenticity and

responsible leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 15–23. Freidson, E. (1975). Doctoring together: A study of professional

social control. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Fritzsche, D. J., & Oz, E. (2007). Personal values’ influence on the

ethical dimension of decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(4), 335–343.

Gardiner, R. A. (2011). A critique of the discourse of authentic

leadership. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(15), 99–104.

George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A. N., & Mayer, D. (2007).

Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 129–138.

Gini, A. (1998). Moral leadership and business ethics. In J. B. Ciulla

(Ed.), Ethics: the heart of leadership (pp. 27–45). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Gough, R. W. (1998). Character is destiny: The value of personal ethics in everyday life. Roseville, CA: Prima Publishing.

Graf, M. M., Van Quaquebeke, N., & Van Dick, R. (2011). Two

independent value orientations: ideal and counter-ideal leader

values and their impact on followers’ respect for and identifi-

cation with their leaders. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(2), 185–195.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970/1991). The servant as a leader. Indianapolis, IN: Robert K Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Groves, K. S., & LaRocca, M. A. (2011). An empirical study of leader

ethical values, transformational and transactional leadership, and

follower attitudes toward global social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(4), 511–528.

Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2011).

Relationships between authentic leadership, moral courage and

ethical and pro-social behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 21(4), 555–578.

Hansen, M. T., & Haas, M. R. (2001). Competing for attention in

knowledge markets: Electronic document dissemination in a

management consulting company. Administrative Science Quar- terly, 46, 1–28.

Hartman, E. M. (2011). Virtue, profit, and the separation thesis: An

Aristotelian view. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 5–17. Hatcher, T. (2002). Ethics and HRD: A new approach to leading

responsible organization. Boulder, CO: Perseus Publishing. Hays, J. M. (2007). Dynamics of organizational wisdom. Business

Renaissance Quarterly, 2(4), 77–112. Hess, E. D., & Cameron, K. S. (2006). Leading with values:

Positivity, virtue, and high performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hine, J. A. H. S. (2007). The shadow of MacIntyre’s manager in the

Kingdom of Conscience constrained. Business Ethics: A Euro- pean Review, 16(4), 358–371.

Hood, J. N. (2003). The relationship of leadership style and CEO

values to ethical practices in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(4), 263–273.

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V.

(2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in the social context. London: Croom Helm.

Kanungo, R. (2001). Ethical values of transactional and transforma-

tional leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4), 257–265.

Knowles, M. (1970/1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. New York: Cambridge Books.

Ladkin, D. (2006). When deontology and utilitarianism are not

enough: How Heidegger’s notion of dwelling might organiza-

tional leaders resolve ethical issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 65(1), 87–98.

Ladkin, D., & Taylor, S. S. (2010). Enacting the true self: Towards a

theory of embodied authentic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 64–74.

Langer, E. (1989). Mindfulness. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Langer, E., & Piper, A. I. (1987). The prevention of mindfulness.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(2), 280–287. Liedtka, K. (2008). Strategy making and the search for authenticity.

Journal of Business Ethics, 80(2), 237–248.

580 C. Marsh

123

Lindeman, E. C. (1926/1961). The meaning of adult education. Norman, OK: Harvest House.

Lips-Wiersma, M., & Morris, L. (2009). Discriminating between

‘meaningful work’ and ‘management of meaning’. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(3), 491–511.

Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership: A positive

developmental approach. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R.

E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–261). San Francisco: Barrett Koehler.

MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue (2nd ed.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Marquardt, M. J. (1999). Action learning in action: Transforming problems and people for world class organizational learning. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

Marques, J. (2012). Consciousness at work: A review of some

important values, discussed from a Buddhist perspective.

Journal of Business Ethics, 105(1), 27–40. Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive

approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Maxwell, J. A. (2002). Understanding and validity in qualitative

research. In A. M. Huberman & Matthew. B. Miles (Eds.), The qualitative researcher’s companion (pp. 37–64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McClusky, H. Y. (1963). The course of the adult life span. In W.

C. Hallenbeck (Ed.), Psychology of adults (pp. 10–20). Wash- ington, DC: Adult Education Association.

Mendonca, M. (2001). Preparing for ethical leadership in organiza-

tions. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4), 266–276.

Menninger, K. A., Mayman, M., & Pruyser, P. (1963). The vital balance: The life process in mental health and illness. New York: Viking Press.

Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., et al. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46(3), 158–172.

Miller, E. R., & Collier, E. W. (2010). Redefining entrepreneurship: A

virtues and values perspective. Journal of Leadership, Account- ability and Ethics, 8(2), 80–89.

Moore, G. (2002). On the implications of the practice-institution

distinction: MacIntyre and the application of modern virtue

ethics to business. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(1), 19–32. Moore, G. (2003). Hives and horseshoes, Mintzberg or MacIntyre:

what future for corporate social responsibility? Business Ethics: A European Review, 12(1), 41–53.

Morrell, K., & Clark, I. (2010). Private equity and the public good.

Journal of Business Ethics, 96(2), 249–263. Morse, J. M., & Richards, L. (2002). Read me first: For a user’s guide

to qualitative methods. Newbury Park, NY: Thousand Oaks. Pless, N. M., Maak, T., & Stahl, G. K. (2011). Developing responsible

global leaders through international service learning programs:

The Ulysses experience. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10(2), 237–260.

Pollard, B. (2005). The heart of a business ethic. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Quinn, R. (2004). Building the bridge as you walk on it: A guide for leading change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Raelin, J. (2006). Does action learning promote collaborative

leadership? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(2), 152–168.

Reed, L. L., Vidaver-Cohen, D., & Colwell, S. R. (2011). A new scale

to measure executive servant leadership: Development, analysis

and implications for research. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(3), 415–434.

Resick, C. J., Martin, G. S., Keating, M. A., Dickson, M. W., Kwan,

H. K., & Peng, C. (2011). What ethical leadership means to me:

Asian, American and European perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(3), 435–457.

Rest, J., & Narvaez, D. (1994). Moral development in the professions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1999).

Postconventional moral thinking: A neo-Kohlbergian approach. Malwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.

Ruedy, N. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2010). In the moment: The effect

of mindfulness on ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 73–87.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of

values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries.

In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). New York: Academic Press.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure

and contents of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50(4), 19–45.

Schwartz, S. H. (2000). Value consensus and importance: A cross-

national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(4), 465–497.

Schwartz, S. H. (2005). Robustness and fruitfulness of a theory of

universals in individual human values. In A. Tamayo & J.

B. Porto (Eds.), Valores e comportamento nas organizações [Values and behavior in organizations] (pp. 56–95). Petrópolis:

Vozes.

Schwartz, S. H. (2006). A theory of cultural value orientations:

Explications and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5, 137–182.

Schwartz, M. (2009). Moral vision: Iris Murdoch and Alasdair

MacIntyre. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 315–327. Segal, S. (2011). A Heideggerian perspective on the relationship

between Mintzberg’s distinction between engaged and discon-

nected management: The role of uncertainty in management.

Journal of Business Ethics, 103(3), 469–483. Sosik, J. J. (2005). The role of personal values in the charismatic

leadership of corporate managers: A model and preliminary field

study. Leadership Quarterly, 16(2), 221–244. Sparrowe, R. T. (2005). Authentic leadership and the narrative self.

Leadership Quarterly, 16, 419–439. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G. A. (1998). A brief inventory

of values. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58(6), 984–1001.

Taylor, C. (1991). The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Taylor, E. W. (2000). Analyzing research on transformative learning

theory. In J. Mezirow, et al. (Eds.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 29–310). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Thakadipuram, Thomas. (2010). Leadership wholeness: A human

resource development model. Human Resource Development International, 13(4), 463–475.

Trevino, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative

investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Percep-

tions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations, 56(1), 5–37.

Van Quaquebeke, N., Kerschreiter, R., Buxton, A. E., & Van Dick, R.

(2010). Two lighthouses to navigate: Effects of ideal and

Ethical Leadership and Its Development 581

123

counter-ideal values on follower identification and satisfaction

with their leaders. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(2), 293–305. Vanentine, S., Godkin, L., & Varca, P. (2010). Role conflict,

mindfulness, and organizational ethics in an education-based

healthcare institution. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 455–469. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, F. (1991). The embodied mind:

Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Verhezen, P. (2010). Giving voice in a culture of silence. From a

culture of compliance to a culture of integrity. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(2), 187–206.

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., &

Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and

validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89–126.

Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (1999). Organizing for

high reliability: Processes of collective mindfulness. Research in Organizational Behavior, 21(8), 1–123.

Wheatley, M. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett- Koehler.

Whetstone, J. T. (2001). How virtue fits within business ethics.

Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 101–114. Whetstone, J. T. (2003). The language of managerial excellence:

Virtues as understood and applied. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(4), 343–356.

582 C. Marsh

123

Copyright of Journal of Business Ethics is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.