Running head: LITERATURE REVIEW 1

Literature Review: Principled Decision Maker

Wendi D. Sparling

Azusa Pacific University

LITERATURE REVIEW 2

Literature Review: Principled Decision Maker

Individuals are seeking membership in organizations in which their personal values and

organizational values are in alignment. Values are what guide the decisions people and

organizations make on a daily basis (Posner, 2010). Williams states, “if organizations do not

clarify their values first, and use those values sets as foundations for their strategic business

plans, they risk the loss of the knowledge, commitment and creativity inherent in an intrinsically

engaged workforce,” (2002, p. 228). Research by Posner (2010) indicates, as managers continue

to grow in their positions they are increasingly more interested in aligning their personal and

organizational goals. Values should matter to the organization and they should matter to those

involved in the organization.

Principled decision makers are characterized by their ability to strategically and

intuitively make decisions based on moral and ethical insight and judgement. They are

responsible for the decisions that reflect their personal values and those of the organization.

People want to know that their leaders are trustworthy and reliable. Followers look at the

behaviors of their leaders in establishing validity to a strong ethical organizational culture

(Pelletier & Bligh, 2008). Leadership is considered trustworthy if there is alignment between the

organizational values and if the leader is fair with members (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011).

What happens if this trust is broken? Organizations are representative of the people in

which it is comprised. When a breach of ethics or values occurs, these transgressions can have a

devastating impact on an organization. Followers could attribute behavior and decision making

to leader hypocrisy and disingenuous ethics that could lead to a loss of trust in an organization’s

leadership (Pelletier & Bligh, 2008). Emotional reaction such as cynicism, anger, and fear is
LITERATURE REVIEW 3

inevitable and can be detrimental to the organization (Pelletier & Bligh, 2008). During times of

confusion, what is valued influences decisions and emotions (Posner, 2010).

The purpose of this literature review is to provide an overview of pertinent issues related

to principled decision making and the importance of maintaining trust in organizations that

emphasize collaboration. There is interest in knowing how a leader can influence collaborative

effort when moral and ethical decisions are based on personal integrity and organizational

authority. Review of the literature will include brief discussion on collaboration, overview of

trust and engagement, and leadership considerations that promote values espoused through

principled decision making.

Review of the Literature

Collaboration and Innovation.

Organizations are seeking opportunities to engage in innovation and creativity as they

seek solutions to problems (Carmeli, Gelbard, & Reiter-Palmon, 2013). Collaboration has

become a mechanism in which organizations develop innovative solutions to achieve their

purposes (Adler, Heckscher, & Prusak, 2011). Innovation recognizes that a variety of knowledge

and problem-solving solutions should be utilized to in order to fulfill a shared purpose or vision.

Collaborative efforts in organization requires intentional design with regard to purpose, ethical

contribution, process development centered on maintaining flexibility and discipline, and

infrastructure that supports and values collaboration (Adler, Heckscher, & Prusak, 2011).

In a collaborative effort, contribution is not limited nor defined by a job description.

Intentionally collaborative communities value those who are able to look beyond their present

role and toward the common purpose (Adler, Heckscher, & Prusak, 2011). Responsibility is in

the shared contributions. Imbedded in this ideal is inclusiveness. Collaboration requires an

LITERATURE REVIEW 4

interdependencies of knowledge and skills that is deliberately utilized to promote innovative

ideas (Adler, Heckscher, & Prusak, 2011). Collaborative communities are diverse in that it seeks

ideas of others.

Although idea of collaboration presented by Adler, Hecksher, and Prusak is limited on

specific leader behaviors, it does reveal valuable insight in how organizations can utilize

collaboration to their benefit. Carmeli, Gelbard, & Reiter-Palman (2013) further this concept of

innovation and collaboration in their study on knowledge sharing and creative-problem solving.

They indicate that there are specific leader behaviors that can be utilized to facilitate and

encourage and further support a creative culture. Carmeli, Gerbald, and Reiter-Palmon (2013)

found that the kind of knowledge sharing that cultivates creativity is facilitated through role-

modeling and culture shaping. Findings also indicate that leadership behaviors that support the

exchange of knowledge also cultivate creative engagement (Carmeli, Gerbald, and Reiter-

Palmon (2013).

Engagement.

How involved others are in this process is dependent on their connectivity. Luthans and

Peterson (2002) state that this involves emotional and cognitive engagement. Emotional

engagement involves creating meaningful connections and demonstrating genuine empathy and

concern for others (Luthans & Peterson, 2002). Cognitive engagement is an awareness of the

mission or purpose of the organization and their role in it (Luthans & Peterson, 2002).

Furthering this thought, Engelbrecht, Heine, & Mahembe (2017) state that, “because the

relationship between leaders and follwers is so important…, trust and leadership are key aspects

that should be considered, especially when it can contribute to the presence of employee work
LITERATURE REVIEW 5

engagement,” (p. 369). Their findings support the idea that engagement is influenced by trust.

Trust is influenced by leaders.

Trust.

There are several concepts related to the development of trust. One, is that trust comes

from the belief that there is shared commitment to a common purpose (Adler, Hecksher, &

Prusak, 2011). Other believes that a leader builds credibility and trust through the encouragement

and inclusivity of diverse viewpoints and the ability to establish collaborative

relationships (Avolio et al., 2004). Avolio, et al. (2004) also argues that trust is established

through the intimacy that comes through authentic relationships.

To function effectively, there needs to be interpersonal trust between leaders and

members of the group (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011). Although there is little research to support

which leadership practices are used to engender trust, it is known that the relationship between

leaders and members requires trust (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011). Finding the congruence between

articulated shared attributes and values between leaders and their followers enhances

relationship. Follower trust results in feeling comfortable and empowered for successful

completion of required tasks (Avolio, et al., 2004).

Leadership:

Principled decision makers recognize that their actions and decisions are do not go

unnoticed by either their followers or the organizations they represent. As research indicates,

role-modeling can be an important influencer for a leader (Carmeli, Gelbard, & Reiter-Palomon,

2013). Research has shown that trust is established when a leader’s integrity is actively

demonstrated through honesty, consistent and moral behavior (Engelbrecht, Heine, & Mahembe,

2017). This trust can be characterized and established by differing leadership perspectives and
LITERATURE REVIEW 6

behaviors. Two similar, but distinctive styles that will be discussed are authentic and ethical

leadership. Although seemingly similar, they are distinctive in their approach to principled

decision making.

One approach is authentic leadership. Posner (2010) indicates that knowing and

understanding values are crucial to being an authentic leader. Authentic leaders are characterized

for their candor, transparency, and accountability (Avolio et al., 2004). They have a strong sense

of identity and are able to articulate their beliefs and values through their transparent interactions

with their followers (Avolio et al., 2004). “If leaders are seen as transparent, acting according to

espoused values, and not displaying self-protective motives then they develop trusting

relationships with their employees which in turn contribute to positive employee work outcomes

as work engagement,” (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011). Authentic leaders are, “capable of judging

ambiguous ethical issues, viewing them from multiple perspectives, and aligning decisions with

their own morals,” (Brown & Trevino, 2006).

Avolio et al. (2004) states that “because authentic leaders exemplify high moral

standards, integrity, and honesty, their favorable reputation fosters positive expectations among

followers, enhancing their levels of trust and willingness to cooperate with the leader for the

benefit of the organization” (p. 810). Indicated by Luthans & Peterson, leaders should assist in

creating an environment in which there is emotional and cognitive engagement (2002). As their

study indicates, the ability to succeed and achieve goals can have a spiraling effect between

leaders and followers (Luthans & Peterson, 2002). Organizations would be remiss in not

acknowledging the link between including their clarified values in their business plans, and the

encouragement of an engaged employees (Williams, 2002).

LITERATURE REVIEW 7

It is argued that the ethical behaviors demonstrated by authentic leaders are limited by

definition. Ethical leadership should also be considered when discussing principled decision

making. Ethical leadership should be considered a separate style (Engelbrecht, Heine, &

Mahembe, 2017). Ethical leadership as defined by Brown and Trevino (2006) is a leader who is

characterized as, “honest, caring and principled individuals who make fair and balanced

decisions,” (p. 597). Differentiated from authentic leadership, there is thought to be a greater

emphasis on others, rather than self-awareness (Brown & Trevino, 2006).

Findings from Engelbrecht, Heine, & Mahembe, (2017 indicate that, “ethical leaders treat

employees equally and promote fair and principled decision making,” (p. 375). Additionally, a

leader is considered trustworthy and will influence the “way in which a follower places his/her

confidence, trust and belief in the leader,” (Engelbrecht, Heine, & Mahembe, 2017, p. 375).

Emphasis is on their ability to not only intentionally modeling their ethical behaviors, but in

holding others accountable as well (Brown & Trevino, 2006).

Conclusion.

“Few business leaders can deny the probable benefit of a workforce engaged in

intrinsically engaged in a mutual sense of purpose,” (Williams, 2002, p. 228). Research findings

confirm that people want to be proud of the work they do, and trust those in the organization in

which they work (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011). Organizations should take heed. Principled decision

makers work within a context of being both deliberative, yet collaborative. This becomes

imperative as leaders and their followers seek to work for organizations that align with personal

convictions. Principled decision makers are committed to act in a manner that is in accordance to

morals and ethics. They are posed to act with the open and honesty to facilitate what is necessary

in whatever capacity. This literature review is by no means exhaustive, but offers a brief
LITERATURE REVIEW 8

narrative on challenges and issues to consider when engaging as a principled decision maker.

Additional considerations and implications, such as differences in leadership challenges between

for profit, non-profit, organizations with articulated social responsibility initiatives could be

considered.
LITERATURE REVIEW 9

References

Adler, P., Heckscher, C., and Prusak, L. (2011), “Building a collaborative enterprise. Four keys

to create a culture of trust and teamwork,” Harvard Business Review, July-August, 2011,

pp. 95-101.

Avolio, B.J., Gardner, W., Walumbwa, F., Luthans, May, D. (2004), “Unlocking the mask: A

look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors,”

The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15, pp. 802-823.

Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R., and Reiter-Palmon, R. (2013), “Leadership, creative problem solving,

and creative performance: The importance of knowledge sharing,” Human Resource

Management, Vol. 52 (1), pp. 95-122.

Engelbretcht, A., Heine, G., and Mahembe, B. (2017), “Integrity, ethical leadership, trust and

work engagement,” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 38 (3), pp.

368-379.

Hassan, A., and Ahmed, F. (2011), “Authentic Leadership, Trust, and Work Engagement.”

International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, Vol. 6 (3), pp.164-168.

Luthans, F. and Peterson, S. (2002), “Employee engagement and manager self-efficacy.

Implications for managerial effectiveness and development,” The Journal of Management

Development, Vol. 21 (5), pp. 376-387.

Pelletier, K., and Bligh, M. (2008), “The Aftermath of Organizational Corruption: Employee

attributions and emotional reactions,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 80, pp. 823-844.

Posner, B.Z. (2010), “Values and the American Manager: A Three-Decade Perspective,” Journal

of Business Ethics, Vol. 91, pp. 457-465.

Williams, S. (2002), “Strategic planning and organizational values: Links to alignment,” Human
LITERATURE REVIEW 10

Resource Development International, Vol. 5 (2), pp. 217-233.