Executive Ethics: Beliefs, Practices, and Leadership Challenges
This paper examines executive ethical decision-making through an in-depth interview with a senior leader with nearly fifteen years of C-suite experience. Drawing on frameworks including virtue ethics, deontological theory, utilitarianism, and situational ethics, the paper explores how personal moral beliefs interact with organizational culture, formal codes of ethics, and industry norms. Key topics include the role of character ethics in leadership, human resources' contribution to ethical culture, stock-based compensation risks, servant leadership, and the triple bottom line. The analysis synthesizes the interviewee's perspectives with scholarly literature to argue that strong character, open dialogue, humility, and a well-defined code of ethics together form the foundation of effective and responsible executive leadership.
- Introduction: Ethics at the Executive Level: Overview of executive ethical dilemmas and interview context
- Ethical Beliefs and Organizational Culture: Subject's virtue ethics beliefs and formal code advocacy
- Human Resources, Compensation, and Ethical Culture: HR's role and risks of stock-based compensation
- Analysis of Ethical Frameworks in Practice: Applying virtue, situational, and character ethics to interview
- Character Ethics, Diversity, and Universal Standards: Diversity, affirmative action, and universal ethical norms
- Synthesis and Personal Reflections: Student reflections on ethics, courage, and the triple bottom line
- Conclusion: Teamwork, Humility, and Courage: Lessons on teamwork, humor, and collaborative ethical leadership
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper seamlessly integrates primary interview data with peer-reviewed scholarly sources, grounding the subject's practical experience in established ethical theory.
- It maintains analytical balance, presenting the strengths and limitations of each ethical framework (virtue ethics, utilitarianism, deontology, situational ethics) rather than advocating for one uncritically.
- The three-part structure — interview summary, theoretical analysis, and personal synthesis — gives the paper a logical progression that builds toward a well-supported conclusion.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective triangulation: it uses a qualitative interview as a primary source, then cross-references the subject's stated views against multiple theoretical frameworks and empirical studies. This technique strengthens credibility by showing where real-world leadership experience confirms or complicates scholarly predictions about ethical behavior in organizations.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized into three clearly delineated sections. The first presents the interview findings, outlining the executive's beliefs, the role of HR, and compensation practices. The second applies ethical theory — virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, and situational ethics — to analyze the interviewee's responses. The third section offers the student's own reflective synthesis, drawing personal lessons about humility, teamwork, courage, and the triple bottom line from the interview experience.
Introduction: Ethics at the Executive Level
Persons in positions of leadership inevitably encounter major ethical dilemmas and in fact make ethical decisions on a daily basis. Interviews with senior executives can reveal the complexities of ethical decision-making at the executive level, as personal morals frequently disconnect from the ethical culture governing the organization or the industry's regulatory climate (Bailey & Shantz, 2018). Bandwagon fallacies — the sense that because something is normative it is therefore ethical — predominate in the workplace. An interview with a senior executive (name altered to protect the individual's privacy) shows how personal ethical beliefs can clash with the prevailing norms and values in a given field. Employee diversity adds further complications to executive ethical decision-making. The predominant ethical challenges usually relate to balancing two equally compelling ethical objectives, or weighing the pros and cons of a decision when there are no clear black-and-white resolutions.
No genuine dilemma has a straightforward answer; it is not as if C-suite leaders are faced with simple choices like whether to steal, accept a bribe, or commit a crime. The most common ethical challenges are those that require discipline and self-restraint, but also courage and humility. Understanding how experienced executives navigate these challenges offers valuable insight into the relationship between personal character and institutional ethics.
Ethical Beliefs and Organizational Culture
The subject of this interview holds ethical beliefs that align with universal principles, while leaning more toward the philosophy of character ethics. As Crossan, Mazutis, and Seijts (2013) point out, character ethics or virtue ethics can prove to be a more sensible model or framework for guiding the decisions made by leaders. Unlike deontological or utilitarian ethical frameworks, virtue and character ethics demand self-reflection, the willingness to change, and the ability to act based on intrinsic motivation to do the right thing. At the same time, the subject agrees that a formal ethical code remains essential in any organization.
Research substantiates the subject's belief in a formal ethical code that outlines behavioral guidelines and the ramifications of transgressions. For example, Schwartz (2013) found that formal elements such as "code of ethics, ethics training, an ethics hotline, and an ethics officer" prove far more effective than nebulous means of approaching dilemmas and decisions (p. 39). Leadership always remains critical for the entire corporate culture, inculcating the values and norms of the organization through C-suite behavioral characteristics. The subject shares Hatcher's (2008) conviction that "an organization is only as ethical as its leaders" (p. 98). One of the subject's biggest challenges has been to speak out against immoral acts, even when committed by colleagues he would consider friends. The courage to speak out involves delicate and tactful approaches to communication and emotional intelligence. He notes that the first step should always be direct confrontation with the individual, and then, if necessary, alerting senior leadership.
References
Bailey, C. & Shantz, A. (2018). Creating an ethically strong organization. MIT Sloan Management Review. http://ilp.mit.edu/media/news_articles/smr/2018/60101.pdf
Crossan, M., Mazutis, D. & Seijts, G. (2013). In search of virtue. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4): 567–581.
Hatcher, T. (2008). The value of values in the C-suite. In Sims, R.R. & Quatro, S.A. (Eds.), Executive Ethics. Charlotte: IAP, pp. 97–122.
Hoekstra, E., Bell, A. & Peterson, S.R. (2008). Humility in leadership: Abandoning the pursuit of unattainable perfection. In S.A. Quatro & R.R. Sims (Eds.), Executive Ethics: Ethical Dilemmas and Challenges for the C-Suite. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, pp. 79–96.
MacDougall, A.E., Bagdasarov, Z. & Buckley, M.R. (2008). Applying a primary risk management model to the C-suite. In Sims, R.R. & Quatro, S.A. (Eds.), Executive Ethics (2nd ed.). Charlotte: IAP, pp. 211–234.
Martin, R. (2011). The CEO's ethical dilemma in the era of earnings management. Strategy & Leadership, 39(6): 43–47.
Schwartz, M.S. (2013). Developing and sustaining an ethical corporate culture: The core elements. Business Horizons, 56(1): 39–50.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.