Thereby Muawiyah accpeted his proposal. D , so called because the Muslim Community came together in recognizing Muawiyah, ending the political division of the first civil war.
Jalaluddin al-Suyuti mentions this very fact, with the utmost clarity in his work, History of the Caliphs Tarikhul Khulafa with the following words:. Then he marched against al-Hasan, who abdicted in his favor. A a pro-Umayad mentioned that: Muawiyah was a scribe of the revelation. Is your character judgement better then that of the Prophet?
In the previous parts, I have given the opinion of the Prophet S about those who will fight Ahlul-Bayt based of the most authentic Sunni collections of the traditions. According to the opinion of the Prophet, such people were hypocrites and infidels. Muawiyah and his father Abu Sufyan were among those who fought the Prophet till last minutes and when they found that Mecca will be captured shortly and their turn is over, they decided to go under the guise of Islam to save their life and to destroy Islam from inside.
This is what Abu Sufyan, his son Muawiyah and his grandson Yazid were trying to achieve every day and night. Now they suddenly became the Scribe of Revelation! Here is the reason behind it:. From the time the Caliphate fell into the hands of the Umayad, they strove to distort the truth and turn everything head over heels. They, thus, elevated to the zenith of power people who were, during the life of the Prophet S , ordinary, with no special standing, while they ignored others who were at the peak of honor and nobility during the lifetime of the Prophet S.
They sought nearness to those who opposed the Prophet, accorded them high positions and grants so that they enjoyed favors and respect among the populace. They sought to denigrate, fabricate defects, falsify reports that denied the superiority and merits of anyone who used to love the Prophet S and would defend him. Thus Umar Ibn al-Khattab, who used to dispute every command of the Prophet of Allah S , even accusing the latter of hallucination in his last days, became the hero of Islam amongst the Muslims during the time of the Umayad dynasty.
An encyclopedia of philosophy articles written by professional philosophers.
Similarly Aisha, who caused the Prophet of Allah S much torment and disobeyed his instructions and the instructions of her Lord, rose against the successor of the Messenger of Allah and caused the worst strife known to the Muslims, a strife which resulted in the death of thousands of Muslims, became the most famous lady in Islam, with religious rulings being accepted from her. But Fatimah al-Zahra sa , the leader of the women of this world and the world after, she for whom the Lord gets angry if she becomes angry, and she for whom the Lord is happy when she is happy, became a forgotten woman, and was buried in the secrecy of the night, after they had threatened to burn her, and after they forced the door of her house against her stomach, causing her to lose her child.
You can hardly find one amongst Sunnis who knows a single Hadith which she reported from her father. As for al-Hasan and al-Husayn, the masters of the youths of paradise, the delights of the Prophet of this nation, the Imams from the progeny of the Prophet S , the custodians of this Ummah, they were banished, imprisoned, murdered, and poisoned. In this way, Abu Sufyan the hypocrite, the leader in every battle that was waged against the Prophet, came to be praised and thanked.
He also came to be described as a man of wisdom, political acumen and reflection. As for Abu Dharrr al-Ghifari, the earth did not carry nor the sky did put its shadow on anyone more truthful in speech than him; he was treated as a mischief monger.cyfifevexywu.ga/map7.php
He was beaten, exiled and banished to Rabdha. Whoever opposed them was judged to be a disbeliever. As for those who followed the school of the Ahlul-Bayt and followed the gate to the city of knowledge and the first one to accept Islam, he whom the truth revolved around wherever he was, those who followed the Ahlul- Bayt and the infallible Imams came to be considered as the people of innovation and misguidance, and whoever opposed and fought against them came to be seen as a Muslim. Surely there is no power and no strength except with Allah, the Highest, and the most Powerful.
Allah surely spoke the truth when He said:. Certainly they are indeed the corrupt ones but they do not realize it. They are the stupid ones, though they know it not. A brother mentioned that one may kill another with good intention and with love towrd each other and both the killer and the killed one would go to Paradise.
The above incedent is true. However, there is a falacy hiden in the above argument. Abraham as was a prophet and the order to sacrifice his son was given by God through revelation. It was the order of Allah, and both father and son were submissive to that. There was no dispute between them. But let me ask you this question: Did Talha and Zubair received revelation from God to kill people? If so, why not against the first three Caliphs?
And finally, they slaughtered the whole household of Prophet S including his beloved son grandson in the same way. It is the attribute that makes a certain type of responsible leadership rare. It refers to the ability or inclination to act in an appropriate fashion as when an individual acts responsibly. The concept of appropriateness is key to this connotation in that it associates responsible action with what is right, correct, or best. Behaving responsibly in this sense means being good or doing good Walsh et al.
Of course, what is considered good is often controversial, 2 but one term that connotes universal standards of rightness, correctness, and goodness is the concept of virtuousness Cameron and Winn ; Cameron et al. This concept is a universally accepted standard for the best of the human condition Comte-Sponville ; Dutton and Sonenshein ; Peterson and Seligman Using this connotation, responsible leadership is equated with virtuous leadership, or leadership oriented toward being and doing good.
Responsibility used in the first three ways is associated with achieving desired instrumental results, such as productivity, customer retention, sustainability, morale, effective networks, or employee well-being. Used in the fourth way, responsibility is associated with promoting goodness for its own sake Cameron et al. It focuses on the highest potentiality of human systems, or on virtuousness. Virtuousness is not a common term in scientific circles. The prevailing tradition in organizational studies suggests that discussions of virtuousness are associated with social conservatism, religious dogmatism, and scientific irrelevance Chapman and Galston ; MacIntyre ; Schimmel Fineman argued that virtuousness is culturally restrictive and narrow-minded.
Its relevance in the world of work and in organizations has little credence in the face of economic pressures and stakeholder demands. The use of these terms remained negligible across the same year period of time. Most articles focus on the debate about whether or not virtuousness actually exists Alzola ; Wright and Goodstein ; Weaver ; Whetstone , on the development of virtue in societies Moore and Beadle ; Nielsen , or on the definition of the term Fowers ; Moberg ; Rachels A few articles have attempted to identify universal attributes of virtuousness or to develop instruments to measure them Chun ; Peterson and Seligman ; Shanahan and Hyman , but two striking features characterize this literature.
First, virtuousness is seldom associated with leadership and almost never with organizations. Second, very few studies have been conducted in which virtuousness is investigated empirically Rego et al. The term virtue refers to singular attributes that represent moral excellence. One can possess too much or too little of a strength, and in doing so it may become a weakness or produce a negative outcome as when too much tolerance becomes spinelessness and too little tolerance becomes bigotry.
Virtuousness, on the other hand, cannot be exceeded. Virtuousness also differs from the concept of ethics. A dominant although not exclusive emphasis in the leadership ethics literature is on avoiding harm, fulfilling contracts, ensuring compliance, and obeying rules and laws Brown and Trevino ; Handelsman et al. In practice, ethics are understood and implemented as duties Rawls They are usually specifications designed to prevent damage or avoid injury Orlikowski , or to ensure compliance Brown and Trevino Unethical action is harmful, detrimental, or destructive, and so to behave ethically is to avoid doing harm, damaging another individual, or destroying something valuable.
Admittedly, a few authors e. In contrast to the dominant approach to ethics, virtuousness possesses an affirmative bias and focuses on elevating, flourishing, and enriching outcomes. Virtuousness pursues the ultimate best—eudaemonism—rather than merely avoiding the negative or emphasizing the attainment of more valuable outcomes. More importantly, unlike ethics—which may be situational—virtuousness represents a universal and stable standard of the good Cameron Virtuousness refers to a constellation of virtues in the aggregate.
Just as individuals may possess more than one virtue, responsible leadership in organizations also may display and enable more than one virtue. Responsible leadership as equated with virtuousness, then, is leadership that exemplifies a combination of virtues. From the organization level of analysis, virtuousness may be fostered by the organizational policies, processes, practices, and culture nurtured by leaders Cameron ; Dutton and Sonenshein They offered to provide free relocation services from the UK to the U.
Confusion regarding the meaning of virtuousness has been an important inhibitor to its use in organizational and leadership research. For example, virtuousness has been used interchangeably in the organization studies literature with corporate social responsibility CSR , citizenship behavior, business ethics, justice, and strengths. Sison associated virtuousness with the content of speech logos , character traits ethos , and emotional disposition pathos in the service of persuasion and governance, and Fowers , equated virtuousness with ethics and with personal strengths in the pursuit of that which leads to beneficial instrumental outcomes, implying a hedonistic pursuit of human fulfillment.
Rather than being an instrumentally motivated action or emotion valued only because of what it produces, however, virtuousness as associated with responsible leadership refers to the most ennobling behaviors and outcomes, the excellence and essence of humankind, the best of the human condition, and the highest aspirations of humanity Comte-Sponville ; Weiner ; Chapman and Galston ; Dent ; MacIntyre That is, virtuousness in leadership is less a means to another more desirable outcome than an ultimate good itself. This is important because some authors have criticized the current literature on virtuousness, ethics, and positivity as being co-opted by a market-based, profit-as-the-summon-bonum ethic Caza and Carroll They claim that if virtuousness is relevant only to gain a desired end e.
Virtuous leadership does not assume, however, that profitability, customer service, or shareholder value are the ultimate ends. Responsible leadership using the fourth connotation does not assume that more suitable outcomes are needed in order for virtuous action or virtuous decisions to be taken. Rather, responsible leadership in this sense is characterized by three core assumptions—a eudaemonic assumption, an inherent value assumption, and an amplification assumption Bright et al.
Virtuousness is synonymous with the eudaemonic assumption. This is the assumption that an inclination exists in all human beings toward moral goodness Aristotle, Metaphysics ; Dutton and Sonenshein Several authors have provided evidence that the human inclination toward virtuousness is inherent and evolutionarily developed Tangney et al. Inherent virtuousness, or an inclination toward the best of the human condition, develops in the brain before the development of language. Studies of the human brain indicate that individuals appear to have a basic instinct toward morality and are organically inclined to be virtuous Haight ; Hauser ; Pinker Krebs , p.
In functional terms, virtuousness is claimed to be evolutionarily developed because it allows people to live together, pursue collective ends, and protect against those who endanger the social order. From a genetic or biological perspective, virtuousness plays a role in the development and perpetuation of humanity. This also explains why virtuousness is highly prized and admired, and why virtuous individuals are almost universally revered, emulated, and even sainted.
They help perpetuate the human species Cameron and Winn Miller pointed out, for example, that a selective genetic bias for human moral virtuousness exists. He argued that mate selection evolved at least partly on the basis of displays of virtuousness. Virtuousness in leadership is not a means to obtain another end, but it is considered to be an end in itself.
In fact, virtuousness in pursuit of another more attractive outcome ceases by definition to be virtuousness. Forgiveness, compassion, and courage in search of recompense are not virtuous. If kindness toward employees is demonstrated in an organization, for example, solely to obtain a payback or an advantage kindness is displayed only if people work harder , it ceases to be kindness and is, instead, manipulation. Virtuousness is associated with social betterment, but this betterment extends beyond mere self-interested benefit.
Virtuousness creates social value that transcends the instrumental desires of the actor s Aristotle, Metaphysics VII. Virtuous leadership produces advantages to others in addition to, or even exclusive of, recognition, benefit, or advantage to the actor or the organization Cawley et al. This also explains why leadership virtuousness is different than participation in normatively prescribed CSR, sponsoring environmentally friendly programs, or utilizing renewable resources Bollier ; Hoffman and Haigh Although some activities included in the CSR and corporate citizenship domains may represent virtuousness, these activities are typically explained as motivated by instrumental benefit or exchange relationships.
That is, engagement in these actions is initiated to acquire benefit to the firm or advantages from a reciprocal arrangement Batson et al. Exchange, reciprocity, and self-serving motives, however, are not indicative of virtuousness. Of course, virtuousness does not stand in opposition to concepts such as citizenship, social responsibility, or ethics, but it extends beyond them.
A third assumption is that virtuousness creates and fosters sustainable positive energy. It is elevating and self-perpetuating, and it requires no external motivator for its pursuit. Because it is an ultimate end and an inherent attribute of human beings, virtuousness produces an elevating effect. This is to say, virtuousness is amplifying when it is experienced George Observing virtuous leadership creates a self-reinforcing inclination toward more of the same. Leaders cannot be too virtuous. Fredrickson and Joiner found evidence that observing virtuousness in leaders creates upward spirals of positive dynamics.
Compassion begets gratitude, gratitude motivates improved relationships, witnessing good deeds leads to elevation, elevation motivates prosocial behavior, and observing virtuousness fosters even more virtuousness also see Algoe and Haight ; Maslow ; Hatch ; Sethi and Nicholson Studies reported by Cialdini and Asche support the idea that when people observe exemplary or virtuous behavior, their inclination is to follow suit. This amplifying quality of virtuousness can be explained by its association with the heliotropic effect. In nature, this is exemplified by light from the sun.
Several researchers have described the dynamics of individuals and groups that experience virtuousness e. Observing virtuousness creates a self-reinforcing cycle toward more virtuousness. In sum, one infrequently acknowledged connotation of responsibility in leadership is its association with virtuousness. Because virtuousness is a universal standard for the best of the human condition, it addresses the question: What is the most responsible approach to leadership?
Being clear about what is meant by the term virtuousness is a prerequisite to addressing this question. Responsible leadership, of course, refers not only to the actions of leaders but also to the processes, strategies, and culture that they foster and enable which support and manifest collective virtuous behavior.
That is, leaders behave in ways, and help foster organizational attributes, that are consistent with the highest aspirations of human kind. They enable and perpetuate virtuousness so that its self-perpetuating and amplifying effects are experienced by members of the organization in which they interact Maak and Pless b ; Pless Accepting virtuousness as a key attribute of responsible leadership provides at least two functional benefits.
While supplemental advantage is not needed for virtuous leadership to be valued, benefits do accrue nevertheless. One benefit is the role virtuousness plays in creating a fixed point in decision making. Another benefit is the increases in performance that virtuousness produces in organizations. It is commonly acknowledged that the most dominant feature of the current environment for organizations is turbulence. Change is generally acknowledged as ubiquitous and constant.
Unfortunately, when everything is changing, it becomes impossible to manage change Cameron Without a stable, unchanging reference point, direction and progress become indeterminate. Airplane piloting offers an instructive metaphor. Without a fixed referent, it is impossible to steer a course. Pilots with no visual or instrumentation contact with a fixed point are unable to navigate.
Consider the last flight of John Kennedy, Jr. He lost sight of land and, when it grew dark, the horizon line as well. He lost his fixed point of reference. The result was disorientation, and he flew his plane into the ocean, likely without even knowing he was headed toward the water. He was unable to manage the continuously changing position of his airplane without a standard that remained unchanged.
The same disorientation afflicts individuals and organizations in situations where there are no unchanging referents. When nothing is stable—no clear fixed points or undisputed guiding principles exist—leaders are left with nothing by which to steer.
Hume’s Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
It becomes impossible to tell up from down or progress from regress. When nothing is stable—i. They make sense of the ambiguity and chaos they experience by deciding for themselves what is real and what is appropriate based on criteria such as past experience, immediate payoff, personal reward, and so on March In the ethical arena, it has become clear that in high-pressure, high-velocity environments, some leaders have simply made up their own rules.
They operated in rapidly evolving, complex, and high-pressure environments where rules and conditions change constantly. Although their actions are now judged to be unethical and harmful to others, within the rationale they had created for themselves, and within their socially constructed context, those actions made perfect sense to themselves at the time Mitchell This is why rules and standards meant to guide what is right and wrong, appropriate and inappropriate, legal and illegal have escalated in the interest of identifying fixed points e.
The problem is, standards that avoid harm or control wrongdoing are not the same as standards that lead to one that is the best. Avoiding the bad is not the same as pursuing the good. Rules and standards that initially appear to guide ethical obligations and socially responsible action may actually lead to the reverse. This pattern of behavior quickly destroys normal organizational functioning. Similarly, following the letter of the law in accounting practices, environmental pollution standards, or performance appraisal systems often leads to the opposite of the intended outcome—e.
More importantly, ethical standards often change over time and circumstance. Ethical standards regarding segregation in public schools, for example, have changed markedly between the s and the present time.
The same can be said for ethics associated with financial transactions, accounting principles, environmental policies, sustainability, death, marriage, free speech, and many others. Ethical standards frequently do not remain stable because they are socially constructed. Hence, ethics may serve as inadequate fixed points and may not always identify universalistic standards across different contexts.
Rules meant to specify duty or control behavior may be inadequate standards because they change thus, disqualifying them as fixed points and do not always lead to desirable outcomes Caza et al. On the other hand, virtuousness can serve as a fixed point to guide leadership in times of ambiguity, turbulence, and high velocity change. This is because virtuousness represents what people aspire to be at their best—goodness and nobility—and these aspirations are universal and unchanging in essentially all societies, cultures, and religions Peterson and Seligman ; Kidder Without virtuousness, it is difficult to identify unchanging fixed points by which to manage change.
Thus, responsible leadership, as represented by virtuousness, is leadership that can effectively manage the turbulence and instability characterizing the current external environment. Virtuousness represents the unchanging standard by which to make decisions. Despite the fact that virtuousness need not be associated with instrumental outcomes to be of worth, an extensive amount of evidence has been produced showing that virtuous behavior is associated with desirable outcomes. While relatively few studies have investigated virtuousness in the leadership of organizations, a limited number of investigations have explored the effects of virtuous leadership on organizational performance.
For example, Cameron and Caza and Cameron et al. All organizations in these studies had recently downsized, so that the well-documented negative effects associated with downsizing were likely to accrue. That is, downsizing almost always produces deteriorating performance. Most organizations regress in productivity, quality, morale, trust, and customer satisfaction after downsizing Cameron , ; Cascio et al. Organizational performance outcomes consisted of objective measures of profitability, productivity, quality, customer retention, and employee retention voluntary turnover from company records, as well as employee ratings of similar outcomes.
Statistically significance relationships were found between virtuousness scores and both objective and perceived measures of performance outcomes.
Organizations with higher virtuousness scores had significantly higher productivity, quality, customer retention, and lower employee turnover than other organizations. When controlling for factors, such as size, industry, and amount of downsizing, organizations scoring higher in virtuousness were significantly more profitable, and, when compared to competitors, industry averages, stated goals, and past performance, they also achieved significantly higher performance on the other outcome measures as well.
In a more refined study, Bright et al. When leaders demonstrated virtuousness in the midst of downsizing, their organizations were significantly more able to absorb system shocks, to bounce back from difficulties, to heal relationships, and to collaborate. When organizations had virtuous leaders—both tonically and phasically —they were also more proficient at carrying on effectively despite the setbacks associated with downsizing.
A different kind of study was conducted in the U. This study investigated the relationships between the virtuousness of the downsizing strategies implemented by leaders and the financial return achieved by the organizations Gittell et al. The tragedy led to enormous financial losses for the U. Virtuousness in this study was defined as preserving human dignity, investing in human capital, and providing an environment in which employee well-being was a priority.
Eight of ten U. The company with the highest level of leadership virtuousness earned the highest level of financial return in the industry. Two additional studies specifically investigated the extent to which leadership virtuousness produces these performance improvements rather than having higher performance lead to virtuousness on the part of leaders Cameron et al. One study examined 40 financial service organizations, and the other examined 30 health care organizations over multiple years to discover what happened to performance when virtuousness scores increased or decreased.
These studies investigated the extent to which leaders fostered and enabled virtuous practices and promoted a culture characterized by virtuousness. Virtuousness was measured by six dimensions: caring people care for, are interested in, and maintain responsibility for one another as friends , compassionate support people provide support for one another including kindness and compassion when others are struggling , forgiveness people avoid blaming and forgive mistakes , inspiration people inspire one another at work , meaning the meaningfulness of the work is emphasized, and people are elevated and renewed by their work , and respect, integrity, and gratitude people treat one another with respect and express appreciation for one another as well as trusting one another and maintaining integrity.
At the beginning of the study period, leaders of these financial services organizations had embarked on systematic efforts to incorporate virtuous practices into their corporate cultures. The performance outcomes of interest were employee turnover, organizational climate, and six financial performance measures, all of which were obtained from company records.
Organizations that became highly virtuous generated better results in the following year than comparison organizations. This suggests that leadership virtuousness was predicting financial results rather than the reverse. The second study conducted among 30 health care organizations also investigated changes in virtuousness scores over time and their effects on certain indicators of organizational performance. Leaders of these organizations had engaged in multi-day sessions designed to help them implement and facilitate virtuous practices and processes in their organizations.
Two findings of interest emerged from this study. Units not exposed to virtuousness training did not improve. A second finding is that organizations which improved the most in their virtuousness scores also produced the most improvement in the outcomes. Organizations that improved in overall virtuousness outperformed organizations that did not improve in subsequent years in patient satisfaction, turnover, climate, resource adequacy, and quality of care.
The irony in this research is that while virtuousness does not require a visible, instrumental pay-off to be of worth, if observable, bottom-line impacts are not detected, then attention to virtuousness usually becomes subservient to the very real pressures related to enhancing financial return and organizational value Jenson ; Davis Few business leaders invest in practices or processes that do not produce higher returns to shareholders, profitability, productivity, and customer satisfaction.
Without visible payoff, in other words, those with stewardship for organizational resources ignore virtuousness and consider it of little relevance to important stakeholders. Hence, when associations between virtuousness and desired outcomes are observed in organizations, leaders may be more likely to respond to its pragmatic utility.
Enhancing virtuousness also enhances economic outcomes. Associating responsibility with virtuousness provides two advantages. One is that it helps identify a universally accepted standard for what leaders can consider the best or good for individuals and their organizations. Virtuousness represents the best of what humankind aspires to achieve, and responsible leadership in pursuit of the highest good is a worthy aspiration.
Second, evidence suggests that virtuous leadership produces desirable ends. These ends can provide advantages for all constituencies—rather than benefiting some at the expense of others—by focusing on virtuous outcomes. For example, Seligman recently articulated a goal for the field of psychology to be achieved by the year Flourishing is defined as having people experience positive emotions, experience engagement flow , experience satisfying relationships, experience meaningfulness in their activities, and experience achievement. These indicators were selected because they are argued to represent universally valued outcomes for all human beings.
In the terms of this article, they represent potentially virtuous objectives. Huppert et al. Adopting an approach to responsible leadership that includes the connotation of virtuousness would seem to be one of the most likely mechanisms for making progress toward such an aspiration. Taking responsibility as a leader, in other words, certainly involves accountability, dependability, authority, and empowerment. If responsibility also includes the notion of virtuousness, however, the implications then become much more far-reaching and inclusive.
Responsibility implies the pursuit of the ultimate best—eudaemonism—and, secondarily, to produce advantages for constituencies who may never be affected otherwise. This connotation of responsible leadership, of course, raises the issue of what is meant by right, correct, beneficial, or good. The problem, of course, is that some argue that what may be right or good for one may not be good for another, or what is beneficial for some may not be beneficial for all Fineman This article does not propose to review these various arguments but, rather, to suggest that virtuousness can serve as one universalistic standard for what is defined as right, correct, or good.
These six dimensions of virtuousness were empirically derived from an assessment of indicators of virtuousness. They are very similar to a proposed comprehensive list of virtues reported in prior published literature. Specifically, in one of the few published listings of proposed virtuous practices in organizations, Chun reviewed several previous inventories of virtues and analyzed the corporate ethical value statements of Fortune Global firms.
Her analyses produced six dimensions of virtuous practices. Her six dimensions incorporated lists of individual virtues proposed by Aristotle, Solomon , Murphy , Moberg , and Shanahan and Hyman This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author s and source are credited.
Skip to main content Skip to sections. Advertisement Hide. Download PDF. Responsible Leadership as Virtuous Leadership. Open Access. First Online: 27 September The Meaning of Virtuousness in Leadership Virtuousness is not a common term in scientific circles. Virtue Versus Virtuousness The term virtue refers to singular attributes that represent moral excellence. Attributes of Virtuousness Confusion regarding the meaning of virtuousness has been an important inhibitor to its use in organizational and leadership research. The Eudaemonic Assumption Virtuousness is synonymous with the eudaemonic assumption.
Amplification Assumption A third assumption is that virtuousness creates and fosters sustainable positive energy. Virtuousness as a Fixed Point It is commonly acknowledged that the most dominant feature of the current environment for organizations is turbulence.
- When All Moons Rise;
- Confucianism | Meaning, History, Beliefs, & Facts | edyfovydusut.gq.
- Who Moved My Job?!
- Seven virtues - Wikipedia!
- Seeing the Spirit at Work.
- Hebrew word for hero?
Virtuousness and Positive Organizational Outcomes Despite the fact that virtuousness need not be associated with instrumental outcomes to be of worth, an extensive amount of evidence has been produced showing that virtuous behavior is associated with desirable outcomes. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author s and source are credited.
Algoe, S. Witnessing excellence in action: The other-praising emotions of elevation, gratitude, and admiration. Journal of Positive Psychology, 4 , — Google Scholar. Alzola, M. Character and environment: The status of virtues in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 78 , — Andersson, L. On the relationship of hope and gratitude to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 70 , — Aquinas, T.
Treatise on the virtues J. Oesterle, Trans. Nicomachean ethics M. Oswald, Trans. Aristotle : Metaphysics XII 7, 3—4. Asche, S. Social psychology. Barge, J. Working with appreciation in managerial practice. Academy of Management Review, 28 , — Bass, B. The bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications 4th ed.
New York: Free Press. Batson, C. Immorality from empathy-induced altruism: When compassion and justice conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68 , — Bollier, D. Aiming higher: 25 Stories of how companies prosper by combining sound management and social vision. New York: Amacom. Bright, D. The amplifying and buffering effects of virtuousness in downsized organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 64 , — Brown, M. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions.
Leadership Quarterly, 17 , — Cameron, K. Strategies for successful organizational downsizing. Human Resource Management Journal, 33 , 89— Strategic organizational downsizing: An extreme case. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20 , — Good or not bad: Standards and ethics in managing change. Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal, 4 , — Paradox in positive organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44 , 7— Five keys to flourishing in trying times.
Leader to Leader, 55 , 45— Exploring the relationships between organizational virtuousness and performance. American Behavioral Scientist, 4 , — Organizational and leadership virtues and the role of forgiveness. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9 , 33— Contributions to the discipline of positive organizational scholarship. American Behavioral Scientist , 47 , — Positive organizational scholarship. San Francisco: Berrett-Kohler. Making the impossible possible: Leading extraordinary performance—the rocky flats story.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Effects of positive practices on organizational effectiveness. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 20 , 1— Virtuousness in organizations. Spreitzer Eds. New York: Oxford University Press. Cascio, W. Financial consequences of employment change decisions in major U. Academy of Management Journal, 40 , — Cawley, M. A virtues approach to personality.