UPI Study › Courses › Business Ethics › Free lessons › Lesson 19.1 Free with a free account
How Personal Values and Moral Reasoning Shape Professional Business Decisions
Business Ethics · Chapter 19: Individual Integrity and EthicsSection 19.1 · lesson 103 of 10515 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Business Ethics.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Business Ethics
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Defining and Developing a Personal Moral Code in a Business Context →← Bribery in Global Markets: Ethical Analysis and Real-World CasesNext lesson: Defining and Developing a Personal Moral Code in a Business Context →
In this lesson
Recognizing the ethical choice and carrying it out are distinct achievements.
- Explain individual decisions within organizational ethics.
- Distinguish personal values from professional norms.
- Define awareness, judgment, intent, and action.
- Locate the expense-report example’s breakdown.
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,961 words). Read along, or search it.
Individual Integrity and Ethics
Personal Values and Moral Reasoning
This section shifts attention from organizational systems to the person making a particular business decision. Policies, laws, and commitments need people to interpret expectations and carry them into actual behavior. A code of conduct cannot implement itself or anticipate every detail of a situation. The source therefore asks what shapes individual decisions and where ethical follow-through can break down. Two inputs are personal values and the professional norms relevant to a particular role. They can support the same response to a situation. They can also create a conflict requiring careful assessment. The source then distinguishes moral awareness, moral judgment, moral intent, and moral action. These components explain why recognizing the right response does not guarantee that someone performs it. The expense-report illustration supplies an employee's awareness and correct reporting judgment as intact. Concern about personal cost then disrupts intent, and the issue is never reported there. We will preserve that exact illustration rather than inventing a named employer or particular punishment. Individual attention also does not eliminate organizational responsibility for supervision, incentives, and reporting conditions. The goal is locating the actual gap between noticing, evaluating, prioritizing, and carrying out behavior.
From policies to people
A code needs interpretation and implementation
Earlier course topics addressed laws, agencies, corporate policies, and strategies for responsible business operations. Those systems require decisions from people who interpret facts and carry out relevant expectations. An employee may need to recognize a problem that written guidance does not describe exactly. The employee then needs to assess the relevant facts and what an appropriate response requires. Simply possessing a code does not establish that everyone understands it or implements it effectively. The source therefore moves from organizational arrangements to individual decision-making within those arrangements. This shift does not imply that every failure belongs exclusively to one isolated person. Supervision, incentives, access to guidance, and reporting conditions can affect the decisions people make. Organizations can bear responsibilities that coexist with the responsibilities of managers and other employees. Likewise, individual judgment does not permit ignoring applicable duties whenever written guidance feels incomplete. Seek evidence and justified standards when interpreting the situation. Obtain appropriate clarification rather than relying only on personal confidence. A policy becomes practical through interpretation and behavior under the actual conditions people encounter. Understanding those decisions helps explain how an organizational ethical commitment succeeds or fails in practice.
Two inputs
Personal values and professional norms can agree or conflict
Personal values are individually held beliefs about right and wrong brought into a professional decision. The source describes upbringing, culture, and life experience as influences on those personal beliefs. Professional norms concern the codes, industry standards, and company policies relevant to a particular role. These two inputs are related but distinct from one another. They may support the same response to a situation. For example, a person can endorse honesty while a professional standard also requires accurate disclosure. That is an additional conceptual illustration, rather than a supplied case with a measured outcome. Harder questions arise when personal beliefs conflict with what an organization or professional role expects. Identify what each expectation requires and what reasons are offered in support of it. A sincerely held belief does not automatically establish that the belief is ethically justified. Likewise, an organizational expectation does not become ethical merely because a policy formally requires it. Assessment needs the relevant facts, affected people, obligations, and reasons rather than choosing by label alone. The source describes alignment as common, but supplies no numerical rate establishing its frequency. Retain the distinction between individual beliefs and role expectations while assessing whether either is justified.
The four components
The source calls these stages of moral reasoning
Moral awareness means recognizing that a situation has an ethical dimension requiring relevant attention. Moral judgment means working out which course of action is right in that situation. Moral intent means deciding to act on that judgment despite pressures favoring another response. Moral action means actually carrying out the intended behavior under the conditions being encountered. The source presents these as four stages within its framework for understanding ethical business behavior. Each addresses a different task rather than four interchangeable labels for knowing right from wrong. A person can recognize an ethical problem yet reach an inadequately supported judgment about it. Another person can reach a sound judgment yet decline to prioritize it when pressures arise. A person can also intend to act appropriately. However, that intention may fail to become actual behavior. Thus success at one component does not independently prove that the other components are successful. Use the framework to organize assessment instead of assuming every decision follows a guaranteed timetable. Real decisions can involve reconsideration and interaction among the components while new information becomes available. The useful distinction remains between recognizing the issue, evaluating the response, committing, and actually doing it.
Think About It: judgment without action
Yes—the source separates knowing, intending, and doing
The conceptual path displays awareness, judgment, intent, and action in the sequence used by the source. Each arrow connects the preceding component to the next without promising that the person completes it. The source's reflection asks whether someone can reach moral judgment without ever reaching moral action. Its answer is yes, because identifying the right response does not guarantee carrying it out. A person may understand what should happen yet fail to prioritize that response over competing interests. This is a possible gap between judgment and intent, which the expense-report illustration later emphasizes. Another person may intend to act yet encounter difficulty translating the intention into actual behavior. That is a different possible gap and should not automatically be diagnosed as lacking ethical intent. The framework helps distinguish these possibilities by asking what was understood, decided, and actually done. Knowing, intending, and doing are related tasks, but none should be substituted for another. A real assessment should establish evidence about the person's decision and the available conditions for implementation. The diagram is a conceptual teaching sequence for this framework. It does not prove every person's internal psychological process. Its central lesson is that correct judgment alone cannot establish successful ethical action in practice.
Awareness and judgment
Seeing the issue is different from evaluating the response
Awareness begins with recognizing an ethical dimension rather than treating the situation only as an operational task. That recognition can direct attention toward affected people, responsibilities, and the interests at stake. Judgment then evaluates which response is justified in light of the relevant facts and obligations. Simply noticing a concern does not establish that someone has completed an adequate assessment of it. Likewise, confidence about a proposed response does not itself prove that the judgment is sound. Evidence, clarification, and appropriate guidance may be needed before deciding what should actually happen. The expense-report illustration supplies recognition of wrongdoing and the judgment that reporting is appropriate. Those are given facts within that illustration, rather than conclusions inferred merely from later silence. In a real workplace, establish what the person noticed and how the person assessed the issue. Someone may miss the ethical dimension of a situation entirely. Another person may recognize that dimension but reason inadequately. Both also differ from the source's employee, whose awareness and reporting judgment are intact. These distinctions prevent assuming that every failure to report reflects ignorance about right and wrong. Locate the relevant component using evidence rather than treating the eventual behavior as a complete explanation.
Intent and action
A decision to act is distinct from its implementation
Moral intent concerns deciding to act on the judgment despite competing pressures or personal interests. The source emphasizes this component because correctly judging a response does not ensure prioritizing it. Possible personal costs can become more influential than the ethical conclusion the person already reached. However, the source supplies no comparative data proving that intent fails most often across every context. Treat its emphasis as a focused teaching example rather than a universal measured frequency claim. Moral action concerns whether the person actually performs the behavior that was intended or required. A genuine intention can still face difficulties involving capability, access, timing, or another implementation obstacle. Those are additional conceptual possibilities, rather than established facts about the supplied expense-report employee. Lack of observed action alone does not demonstrate which component of the person's process failed. Investigate priorities and implementation conditions rather than automatically deciding that every silent employee lacked intent. The source's case specifically locates the breakdown at intent. Its facts supply intact awareness and judgment beforehand. It then identifies competing pressure as disrupting the decision to follow through on reporting. Separate that stated mechanism from a general conclusion about every unreported concern in every workplace.
The expense-report illustration
An employee notices a colleague inflating expense reports
The actual source diagram shows an employee noticing a colleague inflating expense reports at work. At awareness, the employee recognizes that the situation is wrong rather than missing its ethical dimension. At judgment, the employee concludes that the issue should be reported through an appropriate response. At intent, reporting is associated with a possible personal cost. That concern interrupts the commitment to follow through. The final action component shows that the issue is never reported within this particular illustration. The source therefore locates the breakdown at intent, rather than at awareness or moral judgment. Competing pressure displaces acting on a conclusion that the employee has already understood and accepted. The diagram does not identify a real company, expense amount, specific threatened punishment, or later event. Do not invent dismissal, lost promotion, or a prosecution result when explaining the supplied facts. The case illustrates a mechanism rather than measuring how frequently employees encounter that exact pattern. It also does not establish that every unreported issue results from the same competing-pressure mechanism. In another situation, evidence might identify missed recognition, different reasoning, or an actual implementation barrier. Keep the illustration precise while using its component distinctions to guide careful assessment elsewhere.
Five review questions
Use the source’s distinctions and exact illustration
The first review asks why this section focuses on individuals after discussing organizational policies and laws. People interpret and implement commitments through particular decisions, while organizational conditions continue to matter. The second asks what distinguishes personal values from professional norms as inputs to a decision. Personal values concern the individual's beliefs about right and wrong. Professional norms concern role-related codes, standards, and company policies. The third asks for the four stages and what each contributes to ethical behavior. Awareness recognizes the issue, judgment evaluates the response, intent commits, and action carries it out. The fourth asks why the expense-report employee's problem is located specifically at moral intent. The example supplies recognition and a correct reporting judgment before personal-cost concerns block follow-through. It therefore does not describe a failure to notice wrongdoing or to identify the appropriate response. The fifth asks whether someone can reach moral judgment without ever reaching moral action. Yes, because correct judgment does not guarantee either commitment to act or actual implementation. Use the supplied facts to identify the breakdown rather than diagnosing solely from a lack of reports. These answers preserve the distinction between what someone recognizes, judges, prioritizes, and actually does.
Carry forward
Knowing the response does not guarantee doing it
Carry forward the distinction between personal beliefs and the professional expectations relevant to a role. Both influence decisions, but neither label alone proves that an expectation is ethically justified. Moral awareness recognizes an ethical dimension, while moral judgment evaluates the response that should follow. Moral intent prioritizes that judgment despite pressure, while moral action concerns actual follow-through in behavior. Retain these as distinct components rather than assuming one successful component guarantees all the others. The expense-report illustration specifically shows intact recognition and judgment, followed by a breakdown at intent. Concern about personal cost interrupts commitment, and the source shows no report being made afterward. Do not add a particular punishment, monetary amount, named employer, or later outcome to that illustration. Likewise, do not assume every unreported concern reflects the same internal process or competing pressure. Ask what the person noticed, understood, prioritized, and did under the actual conditions of the decision. Organizational support and responsibilities remain relevant alongside the individual's duties and choices within that organization. The framework helps locate missed recognition, unsound judgment, competing priorities, or difficulties in implementation. Knowing the appropriate response matters when making a decision. Responsible behavior also requires commitment and actual follow-through.
About Business Ethics at UPI Study
Business Ethics (Business 211) is a self-paced online course of 105 video lessons in 19 chapters, from moral reasoning and compliance to governance, diversity, government and society, social responsibility, consumers, advertising, technology, the environment and global business. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Business courses Every course with PRO →
Compare: Which ethics course? · Business Law vs Business Ethics
Why take it here
Why students take Business Ethics with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Business Ethics carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About How Personal Values and Moral Reasoning Shape Professional Business Decisions
What are the four components of ethical decision-making?
Can someone know what is right but still not do it?
What is the difference between personal values and professional norms?
Are ethical failures at work only the individual's fault?
About the Business Ethics course
How many college credits is Business Ethics?
How much does Business Ethics cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Business Ethics take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Business Ethics.
105 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →