The Moral Dilemma:
Values, Ethics, and Leadership
By Matthew K. Sharp
The task that we as leaders have been presented is something that has never been faced in
the history of the Colorado Evans Scholars. We are being tested by our peers on many
different levels of character and leadership, and there is no doubt that we have limited
tools and experience at our dispense.
A “defining moment” is characterized by the decisions, and actions in which one employs
when two rights must be weighed against one another. It is my intention to provide each
of us with some insight as to which of these perceived rights is actually a result of
cognitive restructuring through a behavioral conduct, influenced by group dynamics,
known as groupthink.
Each of us has accepted a leadership role. “Leadership is the ability to inspire support
and confidence among the people who are needed to achieve organizational goals.” It
can also be seen as “getting people to think, believe, see, and do what they might not
have without your presence.”
There are eight identified leadership traits. These are self-confidence, trustworthiness,
assertiveness, emotional stability, sense of humor, self-awareness and self-objectivity,
cognitive skills, and emotional intelligence. Of these eight, four have been challenged
this past few weeks. I will briefly discuss each of the four tested traits below:

Self-Confidence – As a group our confidence in the decisions we have made is under scrutiny. As
leaders we are asked to make the best decision to influence the largest amount of people for the
greatest length in time. At times these decisions require us to set aside our personal bias and
interests, and do what is best for the group.

Trustworthiness – A few weeks ago each of us publicly accepted the responsibility to enforce and
abide by an alcohol-free policy. In doing so, we entrusted each member of this Executive Board
with our individual confidence, expecting that confidence would be respected.

Assertiveness – Should we actively choose to demonstrate an inability to be assertive now, we set
the tone for the remainder of our term as leaders. Studies have shown that one of the biggest
difficulties of inexperienced leaders is confronting others. It is important to overcome this
difficulty if we are to be effective as a group this following year.

Emotional Stability – Because people need and expect consistency in the way the are treated, it is
important to remember that we must avoid allowing our emotions to cloud our ability to make
sound decisions.
Each of us is experiencing conflict. To resolve conflict efficiently we must first fully
specify the underlying facts, logic, and emotions involved. Once this is accomplished we
may choose a problem solving method as a means of resolution.
The first question that is important to answer is whether we individually find ourselves
confronted with a person-role conflict, or simply a role conflict. In order to do this, we
must first clarify and prioritize values that may be involved.
As each of us holds a differing set of values, the answer to this question may vary among
individuals. As a reference I provide the following section explaining my values and
prioritization with a brief discussion of each. I encourage you to clarify in your mind
how these values compare to your own in this context.

Friendship – I highly value my friends. To me friendship is based upon characteristics such as
trust, loyalty, honesty, mutual respect, and love. I don’t equate friendship with the ability or desire
to drink with another person. Certainly enjoying pleasures of life, and sharing our experiences
with others is the fundamental fabric which ties us together socially, but alcohol is not the only
pleasure in this life to be shared. It is not a fundamental characteristic on which I base my
friendships.

Scholarship / Education – With out this scholarship there are many friendships that I would never
have formed. I wouldn’t be able to attend a university of such high quality. Finally, it can be
guaranteed that the opportunity to study, and live in a foreign country would have been eliminated.
The material, and sentimental worth of the experiences and opportunities this scholarship has
provided far out weight the importance I place on alcohol.

Opportunity to gain leadership experience – The combination of group living and leadership
experience that this scholarship exposes us to is what separates us from the trust fund babies in
fraternities, and the thousands of our peers we attend class with each day. As I’ve stated before,
this scholarship is a vehicle, not a ride. I plan to take full advantage, and I expect that each of you
has the same ambitions.
Now that we have defined our values, we must define person-role conflict and role
conflict before we determine which conflict it is that we are faced with.
A person-role conflict occurs when organizational values clash with personal values.
Considering this, we ask ourselves if friendship, scholarship / education, leadership, and
personal integrity are more important than alcohol. If you are like me the answer is yes.
So now we examine a simple role conflict, defined as the obligation of choosing between
two competing demands or conflicts by an organization.
Many feelings and intuitions must be considered, and I’ve summarized them in the
following manner. Choosing to uphold and enforce the alcohol-free policy, a decision
based upon ethics and values, we run the risk of being ostracized by our peers. It is
important for us not to perceive a decision to act upon responsibilities as a betrayal of
friendship, but rather to recognize that in choosing to violate rules, an individual must
also accept the consequences for his actions. I have enough respect and confidence in
my fellow scholars to expect that this recognition can be made. I believe this group is
mature enough to accept responsibility for its actions.
An explanation for the group’s willingness to publicly consume alcohol while aware of
the consequences can be found in groupthink. “Groupthink is a deterioration of mental
efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment in the interest of group solidarity. Simply
put, groupthink is an extreme form of consensus. The group atmosphere values getting
along more than getting things accomplished. The group thinks as a unit, believes it is
impervious to outside criticism, and begins to have illusions about its own invincibility.
As a consequence, the group loses its powers of critical analysis.” I’m confident that no
individual scholar would willingly sacrifice his scholarship for the privilege to drink at
home.
An alternate solution can be presented as such. Ignore the policy, our ethics and values,
and cower at the first sign of adversity, accepting failure because it’s “just easier that
way.”
Having considered logic and emotion, we now review the facts. In recent Evans Scholar
history there have been many alcohol related incidents which cannot be ignored. These
include vandalism, assault, rape, and the burning of an entire chapter house. Not to
mention one young lady will never see out of one eye again, and a fellow scholar is in his
grave. If this were not reason enough, the truth of the matter is that it comes down to
economics. WGA cannot afford the insurance and now we must accept responsibility, as
young adults, for our actions. Furthermore, as leaders we have accepted additional
responsibilities.
I’m not a quitter or a failure, and neither is any one of you in this room. I refuse to allow
peer pressure to sway my decisions, or influence my actions. Each of us is here for a
good reason, so lets consider several conflict resolution techniques, and decide which
best fits our situation.

Competitive – A desire to win one’s own concerns at the expense of the other party, or to dominate.

Accommodative – This style favors appeasement, or satisfying the other’s concerns without taking
care of one’s own.

Sharing – Sharers prefer to moderate but incomplete satisfaction for both parties, which results in
a compromise.

Collaborative – The collaborative style reflects a desire to fully satisfy the desires of both parties.
It is based on an underlying philosophy of win-win. This reflects our current implementation of
our alcohol policy.

Avoidant – The avoider is a combination of uncooperative and unassertive. He or she is
indifferent to the concerns of either party. The person may actually be withdrawing from the
conflict to rely upon fate.
The conclusion I have drawn after much reflection remains unchanged. The alcohol-free
policy is a necessity, and must be enforced.