C206 Task 1 Part A: How to Choose and Write About an Ethical Leader

Updated on: Oct 15, 2026

By Dan Palmer, MBA · Academic strategy consultant for working adult learners · LinkedIn

Part A is the first section of WGU C206 Task 1 (EHM2), and the one most students think will be easy: pick a leader you admire and describe them. It’s also where many papers lose their first rubric points, because a leader who is admired isn’t automatically a leader you can support with evidence. The rubric asks for two ethical traits and an explanation of ethical conduct that are “logical and well supported,” and support means specific actions, not praise.

This page covers Part A only, for working adults who want to choose well the first time. It explains how to test a leader before you commit, how to tie each trait to evidence, how to keep A1 and A2 from repeating each other, and how to cite a leader you know personally. It ends with a worksheet and a model Part A written about a fictitious leader.

For the rest of the essay, see our C206 Task 1 guide and example, which covers every part and includes a full example paper.

C206 Task 1 Assignment

Introduction

Leadership is often defined as the ability to influence people. An effective ethical leader guides an organization and its employees to accomplish organizational goals. In the same vein, an unethical leader can guide an organization and its employees to act unethically, harming both the organization and the stakeholders. Being a leader is an exploration, a reflection, and a test of your leadership values.

Seeking understanding of how you resolve ethical dilemmas, taking inventory of where an ethical weakness may lie, and examining the traits of an ethical leader helps you define, shape, and apply an ethical decision-making framework, while also taking into consideration all stakeholders who may be affected by your decisions.

For this task, you will respond to an ethical situation as well as analyze the results of the Ethical Lens Inventory (ELI), which should be completed in the course. This task focuses on you as a leader by helping you to define, refine, and test your ethical boundaries through self-reflection and analysis.

Scenario

You are a sales representative for a medical device company that manufactures artificial joints. Your company has developed an artificial knee joint that is less expensive than the competition and will dramatically reduce healing time for patients. However, it is also known to produce a serious and potentially lethal infection in a small percentage of patients. The company refuses to disclose this potential side effect. You feel you have a duty to divulge this issue, but you signed a nondisclosure agreement when you were hired and worry about possible repercussions.

Requirements

Your submission must represent your original work and understanding of the course material. Most performance assessment submissions are automatically scanned through the WGU similarity checker.

Students are strongly encouraged to wait for the similarity report to generate after uploading their work and then review it to ensure Academic Authenticity guidelines are met before submitting the file for evaluation. See Understanding Similarity Reports for more information.

Grammarly Note:

Professional Communication will be automatically assessed through Grammarly for Education in most performance assessments before a student submits work for evaluation. Students are strongly encouraged to review the Grammarly for Education feedback prior to submitting work for evaluation, as the overall submission will not pass without this aspect passing. See Use Grammarly for Education Effectively for more information.

Microsoft Files Note:

Write your paper in Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) unless another Microsoft product, or pdf, is specified in the task directions. Tasks may notbe submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc. All supporting documentation, such as screenshots and proof of experience, should be collected in a pdf file and submitted separately from the main file. For more information, please see Computer System and Technology Requirements.

You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.

Write an essay (suggested length of 6–8 pages) in which you do the following:

A. Select a nonfictional leader who you feel has exhibited exemplary ethical conduct and do the following:

1. 1. Discuss two ethical traits your chosen leader has demonstrated
   2. Explain how your chosen leader has exhibited ethical conduct

Note: The chosen leader can be someone you know personally or someone famous.

B. Compare the deontological and consequentialist perspectives and how each perspective would approach the dilemma from the scenario.

C. Identify and explain which level of cognitive moral development (i.e., preconventional, conventional, or postconventional) is represented in the scenario for each of the following questions:

• Which action would most likely serve the greater good in society?
• If I reveal this information, will I get into trouble and possibly even lose my job?
• Which action best aligns with my long-held belief in the principle of justice?
• What do the laws say, and what would a law-abiding citizen do?
• If I keep quiet, will I get some sort of reward?

D. Reflect on your Ethical Lens Inventory (ELI) by doing the following:

1. 1. Explain your preferred ethical lens, relevant to the ELI

a. Analyze whether you have the same preferred lens in different settings (e.g., work, personal, social).

2. Explain one of your primary values and one classical virtue from the

Note: If you are a Center Perspective, choose any primary value.

a. Compare your primary value from part D2 with one of your own self-identified or personal Then compare your classical virtue from part D2 with a different self-identified or personal value.

Note: Examples of personal values can be found in the attached “Clarifying Your Values” chart.

3. Describe one of the following from your ELI:

• blind spot
• risk
• double standard
• vice

a. Discuss two steps you can take to mitigate the blind spot, risk, double standard, or vice described in part D3 in order to make better ethical decisions in the future

4. Discuss how the information from your ELI could be applied to an ethical situation in the workplace

E. Submit a copy of the PDF file with the results from your ELI as a separate document

F. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized

G. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your

What Part A Asks

The directions add a note: the leader “can be someone you know personally or someone famous.”

Someone You Know, or Someone Famous?

Both are allowed, and both can reach Competent. The difference is where your evidence comes from:

For many working learners, a current or former manager, a commanding officer, a charge nurse, a pastor, or a coach is the strongest choice. You saw their decisions up close, and your paper will be unmistakably yours.

Four Tests Before You Commit

Spend ten minutes testing two or three candidates. Choose the one who passes all four:

1. A specific ethical decision. Can you name a moment, with a setting and a rough date, when this person made an ethical choice?
2. A cost. Did that choice cost them something, such as money, status, comfort, or a relationship? Ethical conduct is most visible when it isn’t free.
3. Two traits, two examples. Can you support two different traits with two different examples?
4. Support. For a famous leader, can you find credible sources? For a personal leader, can you describe what you saw firsthand?

If a candidate fails test 1 or 2, A2 will be hard to support, however much you admire them.

A1: Naming and Supporting Two Traits

Ethical leadership research increasingly focuses on what leaders actually do toward the people they serve, rather than on general impressions of their character (Banks et al., 2021). That’s a useful rule for A1: every trait needs an observable behavior behind it.

For each trait, write three things: the trait and a one sentence definition, what the leader did (who, what, when), and why that action shows the trait.

Vague: “My manager is very honest and always does the right thing.”

Specific: “When an audit found the agency had overbilled several insurers, she reported the error herself, repaid the full amount, and explained it to staff, including her own part in missing it.”

A2: Ethical Conduct, Not a Repeat of A1

A2 asks how the leader has exhibited ethical conduct. The most common mistake is restating the A1 examples. Use A2 to show a pattern:

• New examples. Add one or two actions you didn’t use in A1.
• Consistency over time. Show that the conduct wasn’t a one time event.
• Why it was ethical. Explain whom the conduct protected or served, and what the leader gave up.
• Effect on others. Describe how people responded, such as trust, loyalty, or a change in how the team behaved.

Writing About a Famous Leader

If you choose a well known figure, keep Part A about ethics, not achievement:

• Focus on specific decisions, not career milestones or company growth.
• Cite every fact from a credible source, such as a reputable news outlet, a biography, or the organization’s own records.
• If the leader has a mixed record, either acknowledge it briefly and explain why the conduct you describe is still exemplary, or choose someone else. Ignoring a well known controversy weakens “well supported.”
• Expect overlap with posted papers if you choose one of the most frequently used names, and make your examples and wording entirely your own.

Citing a Leader You Know Personally

APA 7 treats information from a conversation, email, or message with someone you know as a personal communication. It’s cited in the text only, with the person’s initials, surname, and an exact date, and it doesn’t appear in the reference list (American Psychological Association, 2022). For example: (L. Ortega, personal communication, March 3, 2026).

Your own observations don’t need a citation. If you confirmed a detail with the leader, cite that conversation as a personal communication.

C206 Part A Example: Worksheet and Model

Our C206 Part A example is a three page worksheet and model built around a fictitious fire captain described by a fictitious former EMT. It includes:

• A four test table for comparing candidate leaders
• A trait and evidence table to fill in before you write
• A model Part A with A, A1, and A2, with comments explaining what each paragraph does
• A correctly formatted personal communication citation

Here’s part of the model’s A1:

In 2023, a crew member under his command administered a medication dose that was later found to be outside protocol. The patient was not harmed, but Captain Ortega filed the incident report himself, named his own supervision gap in it, and asked the medical director to review the whole crew’s training rather than single out one person.

The leader and the student are fictitious, so the model can’t be used for your submission. Part A must be about a real leader you choose.

Download the C206 Part A worksheet and model (.docx)

Plan It Around Your Work Week

1. Lunch break (about 20 minutes): List two or three candidates and run the four tests.
2. Evening one (about 1 hour): Fill in the trait and evidence table, and gather sources or confirm details with your leader.
3. Evening two (about 1 hour): Write A, A1, and A2, then check that A2 uses new examples.

Common Reasons Part A Comes Back

• The leader is fictional, or a character rather than a real person
• A1 names traits without a specific example for each
• Both traits rest on the same example
• A2 repeats A1 or summarizes the leader’s career
• Facts about a famous leader are uncited
• A personal communication is listed in the references, or missing its date

Pre-Submission Checklist for Part A

• A real, nonfictional leader, introduced with why you chose them
• A1: two different traits, each defined and supported with its own example
• A2: new examples showing a pattern of ethical conduct, and why it was ethical
• Famous leader: every fact cited in APA format
• Personal leader: any personal communication cited in the text only, with a date

Related C206 Resources

• Our C206 Task 1 guide and example covers the whole essay, with a full example paper.
• Our C206 Parts B and C guide covers deontology, consequentialism, and moral development levels.
• Our Ethical Lens Inventory guide covers Parts D and E.
• Browse all of our C206 guides.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can my C206 Task 1 leader be someone I know personally?

Yes. The directions say the leader can be someone you know personally or someone famous, as long as they’re nonfictional. A personal leader often gives you the most specific examples.

What ethical traits should I use in A1?

Any two you can support with different, specific examples. Honesty, integrity, fairness, accountability, courage, and compassion are common choices, but the evidence matters more than the label.

What’s the difference between A1 and A2?

A1 names and supports two traits. A2 explains the leader’s ethical conduct more broadly, ideally with new examples that show a consistent pattern.

How do I cite a leader I know personally?

As a personal communication, in the text only, with initials, surname, and an exact date, for example (L. Ortega, personal communication, March 3, 2026). It doesn’t go in the reference list.

Can I choose a leader who has done something controversial?

You can, but address it. Briefly acknowledge the controversy and explain why the conduct you describe is still exemplary, or choose a leader whose record you can support more clearly.

Want Help With Part A?

If you’re working full time and want structured assignment support choosing a leader you can document, pairing each trait with evidence, or checking that A2 doesn’t repeat A1, message Gradevia on WhatsApp at +1 564 544 6924 or email Support@gradevia.com.

Message us on WhatsApp

Sources

American Psychological Association. (2022). Personal communications. APA Style. https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/citations/personal-communications

Banks, G. C., Fischer, T., Gooty, J., & Stock, G. (2021). Ethical leadership: Mapping the terrain for concept cleanup and a future research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 32, Article 101471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101471