Ethics of Transformative Leadership [1]
· Responsibility Ethics (Relationality – Responsibility Model for ethics) – the literature review should rely on Charles Curran’s work, specify how he defines this approach to ethics, how it is different from other approaches, particularly deontological and teleological ethics, and why this approach is well suited for Transformative Leadership.
· Conscience – the literature review should specify a definition of conscience suitable for ethics (e.g., how conscience leads to the avoidance of both absolutism on the one hand and extreme forms of relativism on the other. Here, coursework related to the work of Richard Gula, for instance, is helpful.
· Ethics of Risk in contrast to an Ethics of Control – this portion of the literature review should focus on the work of Sharon Welch and others who offer a definition of both. The literature review should include a precise definition of both, following from her work (and the work of others). Remember that both an ethics of risk and an ethics of control were conceptualized by Sharon Welch. An ethics of risk is especially well suited for Transformative Leadership, and the literature review should make this clear.
· Systematic Injustice – this portion of the literature review should rely on the work of Iris Marion Young and her conceptualization of “Five Faces of Oppression.” Other references about systematic injustice can be used so long as they are consistent with Transformative Leadership and the ethics for Transformative Leadership.