Ethical leadership is a leadership which is determined by respect for ethical beliefs and its values, also the rights and self-esteem of other people (Anwar & Shah, 2018). ethical leadership is also interconnected to the concepts of honesty, confidence, and fairness. Ethics is linked with the kind of morals and values, any society or a person thinks is appropriate or desirable. Ethics is the mixture of a desire for individuals and their motives. Ethical leadership can be defined as the form of leadership, where a leader performs every task which is morally acceptable in every area or every department of the company (Anwar & Shah, 2018). Ethical leadership can impose a positive environment in a company. A leader displaying ethical conducts in the company will tend to have these factors imposed on others in the organization as well. People will try to follow those steps, which the leader is following. It can also enhance the energy of the team. A sense of collaboration can be demonstrated in the team, where people tend to work with each other (Anwar & Shah, 2018). Morale of the team will also be improved. Being ethical can improve the overall health of the organization, as people showing respect to each other and working with each other will improve the financial and strategical strength of the company.Ethical Traits:A perfect example of an ethical leader is Steve Jobs who was the CEO of Apple Inc. People in his organization tell that he was a man who always focused on moral values and building the overall strength of the company, and also kept in mind how the products can be ethically beneficial for the customers. Being in a company which produces the best type of technological items, Steve Jobs focused on demonstrating the best kind of ethical values in the organization. There are a lot of ethical traits which leads to a perfect ethical leader. A strong focus on team building is one of them, which was acquired by Steve Jobs. When a leader tends to achieve any certain goal, he/she is not doing it for a personal perspective but tries to make it a team goal which is achieved with collaboration (Anwar & Shah, 2018). Steve Jobs, focused on teambuilding which was one of his strong suits’ and had a very positive impact on the company.It also displays a sense of confidence in the workers’ mind, that our leader is putting his trust in us and we are being valued. In ethical leadership, justice is very important which makes every person in the company being treated equally. Steve was one of a very few leaders in the modern world, who tried to be fair and tried to treat everyone equal. Without any race, gender discrimination, he always tried to be fair with the different level of employees in the organization (Erol, 2015). It is some sort of theory that, in order to make a customer happy, first you have to make your employees happy. This is the reason that Apple Inc. is considered a top-notch company, as their leader treated everyone equal and employees had no fear of any gender, race, ethnicity, or any other factors.Ethical Conduct: A good ethical conduct in a workplace displays that employees pride their company and the ethical standards of the company, and also they respect the customers, employees, partners, and suppliers (Erol, 2015). Ethical conduct tells about the company’s legal ethical and professional responsibilities. Companies expect their employees to adopt the ethical laws and regulations set by the government. Ethical conduct displayed by Steve Jobs has helped the overall organization, in terms of company’s legal and managerial terms. It has helped the workforce of the company to bring positive outcomes because somehow their leader was being morally effective and it turned out in positive results. Local laws and regulations were demonstrated by the leader in the company.Dilemma analysisConsequentialism is a formation of normative ethical beliefs, which says that the consequences of an individual’s ethical conduct are the basis of the judgment about the correct and incorrect of a certain conduct (Rutland & Killen, 2015). To be simple, consequentialist approach means in an organization the right and wrong judgment is made on the type of ethical conduct a person acquires. Thus, the approach of a person should produce a positive outcome and the person should act morally.While the deontological perspective of ethics says, the morality of any action is judged by the rules or laws involved in it. It can be stated, that it is bound by the rule and obligation depending on the situation (Rutland & Killen, 2015). It is also known as rule-based ethics, where every judgment is made on the basis of rules and regulations.In this case, the medical company is producing artificial joints at a lower price than their competitors and with a less healing time. The company has not told the customers about the side effects of using their product, which can cause some serious injuries to the patients. Here, the company is doing wrong because it is ethically and legally wrong, not to disclose the harmful effects of using those joints. Consequentialist approach says that when a person will come to know about this issue, he/she will directly make a bad judgment in the mind, which is also ethically wrong (Rutland & Killen, 2015). This type of approach clearly says that the company will be judged on the negative side because they are wrong in not telling the customers about the side effects of the product, which is also unfair for the patients.In deontological perspective, the company will be judged on the basis of rules, that why they did like this. The person who is trying to tell the government legal about this will get help from following the deontological approach, as it will be abided by the rules in the company.Level of Cognitive Moral Development:Cognitive moral development is a set of physiological theories which describe the moral code adopted by the companies and individuals which help in understanding the ethical dilemma in a better way. It consists of pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional theories. At the pre-conventional stage, morality is judged by the direct consequences on hand (Rutland & Killen, 2015). In conventional stage, the morality of activities is evaluated by comparing them to the view of society and its expectation. Keeping in mind, about the society, a person or company’s morality is judged right and wrong. At a post-conventional level, which is also known as principle level, people believed that individuals are a separate reform, and their view may take over the society’s view (Rutland & Killen, 2015). At this level, people tend to make their own rules and believe that the rules can be modified according to the need.What action should be best for the society in the long term?In a long run, providing the best type of products without any harmful effects would be great for the society and the company. The company serves their customers and it is their core responsibility to provide the best medical joints needed by the society and eliminate anything hidden from the society. A very low level of conventional theory is observed by the company, because they are not ethically thinking about the society, and tend to focus on their perspective. But, post-convention is highly observed, as they have made their own laws of not disclosing the side effects of using the products to the customers. Ethical laws differ from this type of approach.If I reveal this info, will the organization find out and fire me?There are some certain reasons that I will be disclosing the information, one of which is the disobeying of the ethical laws. There is a lot of chance that the company might find out, but a person should do the right thing. From a pre-conventional method, it was clear to me in the first place, that the company is doing wrong and they will fire will directly after knowing. But, if the company thinks of the conventional method they will consider that it was for the betterment of the society.Which course of action would best serve justice?According to the scenario, the company is hiding information from the people that using this type of medical product will have harmful effects. Conventionally, it is totally wrong, which says that the company should take in account the social views of the scenario. So, the company is highly practicing conventional method, where they are not involved in considering the social views.Are there any laws that indicate that I should disclose the information?There are certain confidentiality laws, which explain that if an employee witnesses certain disobedience committed by its company, he/she can tell that to the local authorities, keeping in mind if he/she is being harmed by the issue (Rutland & Killen, 2015). Pre-conventional approach explains this stage, where the company tends to have an image of being corrupt just as they commit this crime. Not disclosing the side effects of using that joint, will directly make a negative impact on the people when they will know about it.If I keep quiet, will the company reward me for that?The company will never reward me for staying quiet because from the company’s perspective they are not doing anything wrong. This explains that they are morally post-conventional, where they are disrupting the main laws and focusing on their own principles. Ethically, it is also wrong because the patients will not buy your product again and instead of being healthier, their health will decrease.Ethical Lens Inventory (ELI) resultsELI is a tool which helps to answer certain questions about the organizational values through a person’s action (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). According to the choices a company makes, they are translated into actions and depicts a scenario that what a person or a company is doing. ELI helps to identify the core values and priorities which lead to the decision-making process (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). There are four different dimensions of Ethical Lens Inventory, which include right lens, relationship lens, reputation lens, and results lens. Rights lens is for the people who focus on individual rights and rely on rational mindsets in decision making (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). People in this category value respect and try to impose benefit from their work for other people. Results lens, also focus on individual rights but these kinds of people take actions based on intuition and emotional beliefs. People with a results lens mindset, value individual responsibility, and mutual respect.Relationship lens, include people who emphasize community rights and depend on emotion and intuition, in the decision-making process (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). People with this kind of belief, focus on empowering the powerless, and value fairness. While reputation lens is for those who depend on rational thoughts and focus on providing value to the community. People in this category prioritize compassion.Preferred Ethical Lens:The ELI which I have generated explains, that I lie in the result lens perspective, and it means that I tend to focus on the individual goals when given a specific task. It says that I listen to my intuitions and make decisions according to it. It also applies to me and every person linked to me. While taking decisions, I think that what effect will it have on the other people linked with that result. While taking decisions, I take it with my heart and following my heart leads me to the best possible decision.Different Setting:Lying in the result lens category explains that any goal of achieving it is ethically satisfied. Whether in social, personal, or work context, my lens remains the same because I tend to take every decision keeping in mind the ethical and moral values as a result.Blind Spot, Vice, Risk, or Double Standards:The blind spot I have gained, explains that I become satisfied with too little things. Blind spots are areas where a person/organization do not pay attention (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). It says that I am very sensitive to emotions and mostly listen to the rational voice. Due to this reason, I cannot maintain consistency in the long-term goals and my actions. In order to make everyone happy, I forget that I also need to be happy and sometimes it makes me angry. By keeping in mind that I want to make others happy and what they expect from me, I become acceptable to a small thing that I have achieved.Steps to mitigate blind spots:Blind spot can be eliminated by considering some points before taking actions. In blind spot category, one tends to ignore a certain thing which can be ethical or personal and forms some other types of results. It can be mitigated by:Consider your goal and the people link with it, aligned with the main purpose so that you do not deviate from the main objective. Result lens has shown that I tend to forget my main purpose by making others happy. So, in making others happy it is important to remember the main objective I have indulged in.The thinking of providing the community more and getting less is good, but accepting any small thing is not acceptable. It can be ignored to make a forecast of your goals on a high milestone so that gradually it comes to the level of result which is required. For example, if a target of the month is 200 to achieve, the aim should be 400 so that, the target of 200 can be achieved and does not look like accepting something less.Keeping the ethics in mind, everything should be achievable and acceptable. Focus on results which can be ethically acceptable, to satisfy everyone.Primary values and Classical virtues:The primary values which came as a result of the ELI analysis show that my primary values are considered Sensibility (CS) and Mild Autonomy (MA). It means that I pay attention to my intuition to decide the best outcome for my self and for every other person. Considered Sensibility makes me think from the heart instead of my head, while Mild Autonomy tells that I respect every individual and treat them equal. As an MA, I choose my own path and goals, and my decisions are mostly influenced by analyzing the community and people. shortly, I act more like an ethical person.The classical values identified in my ELI result is temperance, where I act more moderate and self-restrained. As my desires are moderate by the actions, my decisions are self-restrained and moderate. I keep the problems which can be caused by greed, and try to accept the moderation in all aspects to become an ethical person in the community. My desires are mostly run by discipline and control.Comparison to top five values:The main five values which are selected from the given material are; creativity, justice, equality, honor, and power. When we compare the classical virtues and primary values from the ELI analysis, it is obvious that it has a clear link, because autonomy and sensibility are in line with these. When a person is creative, he will produce innovative outcomes, and same is the case when I am thinking of my hearing. Feeling to provide for community first is also ethical and comes in comparison with the justice and equality. Having to look for my own goals and paths to consider, makes it a link with the having power and honor over my decisions.Use of ethical lenses:When we apply these ethical lenses, in our professional life it is already applying a lot of course to the professionalism. By thinking to make the community happier, also tells that a person becomes a team player in a company where he/she provides better results and create an effective atmosphere (Drover, Wood & Fassin, 2014). Applying considered sensibility in the professional life, also make it clear that I will be creating innovative solutions to the problems my company is facing.ReferencesAnwar, S., & Shah, N. (2018). IMPACT OF PERSONALITY TRAITS ON ETHICAL BEHAVIOR. The Government-Annual Research Journal of Political Science., 6(6).Drover, W., Wood, M. S., & Fassin, Y. (2014). Take the money or run? Investors’ ethical reputation and entrepreneurs’ willingness to partner. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(6), 723-740.Erol, F. (2015). An Investigation of the Relationship between Organizational Commitment Levels of Academic Staff and Ethical Conducts in Behavioral and Decision Making Process of University Management. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science (EIJEAS), 1(2).Hassan, S. (2015). The importance of ethical leadership and personal control in promoting improvement-centered voice among government employees. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(3), 697-719.Pryor, W. H. (2017). Returning to Marvin Frankel’s First Principles in Federal Sentencing. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 29(2-3), 95-103.Rutland, A., & Killen, M. (2015). A developmental science approach to reducing prejudice and social exclusion: Intergroup processes, social‐cognitive development, and moral reasoning. Social Issues and Policy Review, 9(1), 121-154.