Business Ethics in Group Work: A Self-Reflective Analysis
This paper examines the ethical dimensions of group dynamics through a personal case study involving a seven-person team tasked with developing a Police Benevolent Association website. Drawing on Johnson's (2016) framework for organizational ethics, the author evaluates his performance as a morally responsible group member, identifying specific leadership failures, participation shortcomings, and structural problems that prevented the group from achieving its goal. The paper concludes with actionable steps — including better member selection, collaborative task assignments, and ethical encouragement — that could improve the group's effectiveness when work resumes.
- Introduction: Context and purpose of the ethical reflection
- The Group Situation: Overview of the PBA website project and team
- Participation Failures and Moral Climate: Meeting attendance problems and cooperative climate breakdown
- Leadership Shortcomings and Member Selection: Errors in selecting and managing group members
- Current Status and Personal Reflection: Project stalled; author acknowledges personal role
- Steps Toward Improvement: Actionable strategies for better group ethics
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The author demonstrates intellectual honesty by including himself among those who bear moral responsibility for the group's failure, avoiding a purely blame-outward narrative.
- The paper consistently grounds personal observations in a theoretical framework, using Johnson (2016) to give academic weight to experiential claims.
- Concrete, specific details — the seven-person team, the 3-week meeting schedule, the six-month timeline — anchor the reflection in verifiable reality rather than vague generalization.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper integrates direct quotation strategically: rather than over-citing, the author selects three focused quotes from Johnson (2016) that directly map to observed behaviors (fair share of work, member selection, cooperative duty). Each quote is introduced with contextual framing and followed by application to the specific group situation, modeling effective use of a single authoritative source across a short reflective essay.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a clear three-part arc: (1) scene-setting, where the group context and moral stakes are established; (2) diagnosis, where specific ethical failures in participation, leadership, and member selection are identified; and (3) prescription, where actionable improvements grounded in Johnson's framework are proposed. The conclusion ties the lessons back to the original project, suggesting a constructive path forward rather than simply cataloguing failure.
Introduction
"Groups tend to bring out the moral best and worst in us." — C. E. Johnson, 2016
Because most significant projects require a group effort, self-directed groups are becoming increasingly commonplace in companies of all sizes and types today (Johnson, 2016). These groups are being tasked with a wide range of responsibilities, including making decisions that are important for achieving organizational goals (Johnson, 2016). As the epigraph above emphasizes, despite their importance, not all groups succeed in achieving their goals, and others fail to reach their full potential due to unethical activities or suboptimal moral choices (Johnson, 2016).
These issues came to the fore during one recent experience involving a seven-person group that failed to achieve its goals due to various immoral behaviors on the part of group members, including the author. This paper evaluates my performance as a morally responsible group member, including the types of behaviors that were demonstrated and which still need to be developed. Finally, the paper concludes with a discussion of specific steps that could be taken to improve these behaviors.
References
Johnson, C. E. (2016). Organizational ethics: A practical approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.