BUSS2000 · Leading And Influencing In Business
Career Goals, Values & Ethics
This chapter connects who you are to where you go: modern career patterns (boundaryless and protean careers in a high-mobility job market), turning values into SMART career goals, value congruence and person-organisation (P-O) fit, and ethical frameworks for resolving workplace dilemmas. It is the theoretical core of the 30% Design the Future YOU report and is also exam-usable, where the marks come from showing a value → goal → action chain and from naming and weighing ethical lenses to reach a reasoned decision rather than fence-sitting.
What this chapter covers
- 01New career patterns: boundaryless and protean careers, high job mobility
- 02Decision-making approach to careers (Gati & Levin 2015)
- 03Turning values into SMART career goals (revisits goal-setting)
- 04Values & value congruence — person-organisation (P-O) fit
- 05P-O fit → satisfaction and retention
- 06Ethical frameworks: consequentialist/utilitarian, deontological/duty, virtue lenses
- 07Resolving workplace ethical dilemmas — weigh lenses, then decide
Resolve an ethical dilemma with a three-lens framework
- +2Frame with the consequentialist/utilitarian lens: what produces the best overall outcome? Hiding the result may win short-term approval but risks worse long-term decisions and a loss of trust if it surfaces later.
- +2Apply the deontological/duty lens: is omission a breach of a duty to report truthfully, regardless of outcome? Yes — selectively deleting an inconvenient result misrepresents the data.
- +1Add the virtue lens: what would an honest, courageous professional do? Flag the result with context rather than bury it.
- +1Decide (don't fence-sit): present the full data with a brief framing note explaining the result — the principled middle path that satisfies the duty to report while managing how it lands.
Key terms
- Boundaryless / protean careers
- Modern career patterns that have replaced the linear, single-employer career: careers now move across organisations and roles (boundaryless) and are self-directed around personal values and growth (protean). High job mobility is the norm, so career planning is an ongoing, values-driven activity.
- SMART career goals
- The goal-setting discipline applied to careers: translate a value into a Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound goal and then into concrete actions. The reflective move is to show the chain value → goal → action, not an isolated aspiration.
- Value congruence / person-organisation (P-O) fit
- The degree of alignment between an individual's values and an organisation's values. Higher P-O fit predicts greater job satisfaction and retention, which is why matching your values to an employer is a career-decision criterion, not an afterthought.
- Consequentialist / utilitarian lens
- An ethical framework that judges an action by its outcomes — the right action produces the best overall consequences. Useful for surfacing long-term and trust costs, but it can rationalise harm if the 'greater good' is defined too narrowly.
- Deontological / duty lens
- An ethical framework that judges an action by whether it honours duties and rules, regardless of outcome. It captures obligations like honesty and truthful reporting that a pure outcome calculation might trade away.
- Virtue lens
- An ethical framework that asks what a person of good character (honest, courageous, fair) would do. It shifts the question from rules or outcomes to the kind of professional you want to be, and often points to the principled middle path.
Career Goals, Values & Ethics FAQ
How is this chapter relevant to the 30% Design the Future YOU report?
It is the core theory bank for it. The report applies design-thinking plus Theme-1 self-knowledge to a critical self-analysis and career road-map covering strengths, values, ethics and person-organisation fit — exactly the concepts here. Mastering value congruence, SMART career goals and the ethical lenses lets you write the report with named theory, which is what earns the higher marks.
What does an examiner want when I 'resolve' an ethical dilemma?
Name at least two lenses (consequentialist, deontological, virtue), weigh them honestly against the facts, and then DECIDE. The most common failure is describing the lenses and refusing to commit. Reasoned judgement — a defensible decision with a short justification — is what scores, even if the marker might have decided differently.
How do values, goals and motivation connect?
They form a chain: your values define what matters, SMART goals translate those values into concrete targets, and self-determination theory (from the motivation chapter) explains the energy to pursue them — a goal aligned with your values supports autonomy and relatedness. Strong answers link these layers rather than treating careers, goals, values and motivation as separate topics.
Is high job mobility a problem for career planning?
It changes the approach rather than making planning pointless. In a boundaryless/protean world you plan around portable skills, values and learning rather than a single ladder, and you revisit goals as you and the market change. The decision-making approach to careers (Gati & Levin 2015) frames this as an ongoing, structured choice process rather than a one-off.
Exam move
Treat this chapter as the engine of your Design the Future YOU report and rehearse the value → SMART goal → action chain on your own life until it is fluent. Learn the three ethical lenses as a fixed trio you can deploy on any dilemma, and practise the discipline of weighing then deciding — write three short dilemma answers that each end in a committed, justified call. Keep P-O fit ready as a career-decision criterion and link careers back to motivation (self-determination theory) and values so your answers chain themes rather than silo them. On the A4 sheet, note 'value → goal → action' and 'utilitarian / duty / virtue → decide.'
