| 
                   A Common Vision | 
					What Makes an Ethical Leader?  
         
                  What Makes an 
					Ethical Leader?
                   
					Gregg Franzwa 
					Professor of Philosophy 
					
					We speak approvingly of 
					leaders in three ways: good leaders, moral leaders and 
					ethical leaders. Those represent three very different 
					conceptual classifications, even though in everyday language 
					there is a lot of overlap.  
					
					Good leadership is the basic 
					meaning of instrumental goodness. It’s about effectiveness 
					as a leader or a given pursuit – if a leader has achieved a 
					set of goals. A good leader, in this context, is similar to 
					the usage of “good lawyer,” “good plumber” or “good public 
					speaker.” It involves one who has a particular kind of skill 
					that allows him or her to be successful in obtaining 
					positive results. You might select General Dwight D. 
					Eisenhower as a shining example of this. As leader of the 
					Allied Forces, he was successful. That’s the key criterion. 
					
					Moral leadership has no such 
					instrumental meaning attached to it. It doesn’t have 
					anything to do with accomplishing goals in an effective 
					manner. Rather, it concerns the presentation of a model of 
					personal moral conduct. That moral conduct should positively 
					affect the behavior of the followers. We could look to Billy 
					Graham as an obvious candidate as a moral leader. It’s a 
					concept that has to do with living the right kind of life.
					 
					
					Ethical leadership is built 
					on the principle of promoting the best interest of the 
					followers. It involves the ability to determine what the 
					best interest of the followers really is and acting to 
					further those interests in a way that does not impinge on 
					the rights of others. We might choose Martin Luther King Jr. 
					as an example.  
					
					The words moral and ethical 
					are often used interchangeably, but there is a distinction 
					between their meanings. Morality, at its core, means 
					something about individual relations. Morality is a guide to 
					interpersonal interaction in private relationships. Ethics 
					is more concerned with public relations. Personal relations 
					are not the focus of concern. Ethical judgments are made 
					about goodness at arm’s length.  
					
					Given those distinctions, it 
					strikes me that at the moment that our mission statement was 
					conceived there was confusion between the notions of ethics 
					and morality. The question of ethics comes down to is: How 
					is leadership effective for people around the world? So I am 
					suggesting a set of criteria by which we judge ethical 
					leaders.  
					
					We should evaluate ethical 
					leaders on the utilitarian standard of the greatest good for 
					the greatest number, subject only to the constraint of not 
					violating anyone’s rights. Ethical leaders maximize good 
					outcomes for the greatest number of followers without 
					trouncing on anyone’s rights.  
					
					This is what we ought to be 
					doing at TCU under the rubric of educating ethical leaders. 
					I think it’s a good thing to teach students about ethics, to 
					give them systematic grounds to make value judgments. It’s 
					also good to develop students’ leadership skills, so long as 
					we acknowledge that we’re not all born equal and there will 
					always be more followers than there will be leaders. 
					 
					
					Similarly, it’s good to make 
					students aware of the global community as an antidote to 
					parochialism and nationalist prejudice. But I think it is 
					equally important to teach students how to recognize and 
					evaluate ethical leadership in others. This is the education 
					of the citizen.  
					
					You have often heard it said 
					that we ought to teach them both sides and let them make up 
					their minds for themselves. This sounds so wonderfully 
					democratic. But before we can do anything like that, we have 
					to teach people how to make up their minds. That turns out 
					to be rather more difficult than it seems at first. 
					 
					
					Evaluating leaders as to 
					their ethics is a complicated proposition. The criterion may 
					be straightforward, but learning how to apply it in a 
					real-world context with competing ideologies requires a kind 
					of savvy that people aren’t born with. 
					
					Jack Hill  
					Associate professor of 
					religion 
					
					I define ethics as thinking 
					about moral experience. In descriptive ethics, we reflect on 
					moral values, principles, attitudes, presuppositions, 
					characters and actions. Here, we simply talk about what 
					people think should be the case, but we make no claim 
					about what in a larger sense really ought to be the 
					case. Let me propose four theses about what constitutes a 
					good ethical leader. 
					
					First, ethical leaders care 
					about suffering. One of the hallmarks of moral development 
					is the capacity to empathize with those who are hurting. In 
					fact, there are probably few things that are more morally 
					reprehensible that the spectacle of someone laughing at a 
					person in pain. This is why the photo of the Unites States 
					soldier smiling while pulling a dazed, naked Iraqi prisoner 
					by a dog collar epitomizes ethical bankruptcy.  
					
					It is bad enough to be 
					indifferent to suffering; it is morally abhorrent to inflict 
					it with glee. What an ethical leader does is guide the rest 
					of us in acknowledging the suffering in our midst, and where 
					possible, preventing it.  
					
					For most of us, it is 
					natural to focus on the suffering near at hand – what we 
					directly experience ourselves in our families, in our 
					nation. But given the TCU mission, if we are to think of 
					ethical leaders in the global community, we must be mindful 
					of suffering in the global neighborhood. To paraphrase the 
					Peruvian theologian Gustavo Gutierrez, “The real ethical 
					challenge is to step out of our familiar walkways, outside 
					our usual routines, so that we intentionally encounter those 
					who are different from us: the poor, the destitute, those of 
					other races and cultures.” 
					
					In today’s global village, 
					this means attending to the have-nots. And such attending 
					entails an empathetic reaching out – an other-orientedness – 
					which exudes a quality of compassion, or what the Chinese 
					refer to as Jen – a “human heartedness.” In short, an 
					ethical leader in the global community will lead us away 
					from an “It’s about me” or “It’s about my country” mentality 
					and toward an “It’s about us” or “It’s about the integrity 
					of the Earth.” 
					
					Secondly, ethical leaders 
					are exemplars of justice and fairness. They not only care 
					for the suffering of others, but they are able to see 
					themselves as others see them. One of the signs that we are 
					becoming morally aware as children is that we develop the 
					capacity to put ourselves in someone else’s shoes. When we 
					have done something nasty to our brother, our parent may 
					say, “How would you feel if Johnny did that to you?” We 
					become able to imagine ourselves in Johnny’s shoes. 
					 
					
					In the classic work A 
					Theory of Justice, the philosopher John Rawls argues 
					that we should think about decisions about social policies 
					as if wearing veils of ignorance about what roles we occupy 
					in the social hierarchy. For example, I would not vote on a 
					policy about the distribution of social welfare simply 
					assuming that I was white, male, upper middle-class and 
					college-educated, but I must be open the possibility that I 
					might be, for instance, black, female, poverty-stricken and 
					not formally educated. Standing in such shoes, the impact of 
					the social policy would look very different. 
					
					While we need to be able to 
					do this as individuals, we also need to be able to do it as 
					groups: as a university, as United States citizens, as a 
					nation. So what does it mean to be ethical leaders today in 
					the United States? In the world’s strongest military state? 
					In a country where a mere 6 percent of the world consumes 
					more than a quarter of the world’s resources? When viewed by 
					those standing in the poor countries of the global 
					neighborhood, what does justice require? Is it fair that 
					those who earn more than $10 million in income should have 
					similar tax rates as those who earn $100,000? Is it just 
					that we in the United States spend billions feeding our 
					pets, which can now also get massages and pedicures, while 
					millions of people are malnourished and starving around the 
					world? 
					
					An ethical leader in the 
					United States today should guide the rest of us in wrestling 
					with these basic questions of social justice. 
					
					Thirdly, an ethical leader 
					is self-reflective and self-critical. He or she ought to 
					embody what the Latin American sociologist of religion Otto 
					Maduro has called autocriticality. Extrapolated from Ancient 
					Greek philosophy, the principle not only calls for knowing 
					one’s self but also possessing an awareness of how one views 
					social reality through biased lenses.  
					
					One of the hallmarks of 
					autocriticality is a consciousness of one’s own limitations, 
					coupled with a willingness to acknowledge personal 
					wrongdoings. In short, the ethical leader is one who is 
					aware of her failures and who can admit mistakes. And 
					because of this capacity, she is likewise prepared, and 
					genuinely able, to forgive others for their mistakes. 
					
					Fourthly, an ethical leader 
					is concerned about the cohesiveness of community life. Such 
					a leader instigates creative dialogue in what the Greeks 
					called polis – the community of stakeholders. In the 
					words of the Asian-American feminist theologian Rita 
					Nakashima Brock, “We are essentially relational beings – not 
					isolated, individual monads.” We are born people persons who 
					are intended to be in friendships, families and larger 
					social collectives.  
					
					Once again, in the context 
					of TCU’s mission statement, the ethical leader is focused 
					not only on local and regional communities but on wider 
					regional and international communities. She or he should 
					therefore embody a worldmindedness – a sense of history and 
					breadth that is not only other-oriented but beckons us all 
					toward unity with all of humanity.  
					
					On a national level, 
					worldmindedness implies that an ethical leader will inspire 
					us to participate in our own polis. In our 
					increasingly pluralistic society – where people of different 
					races, ethnicities, languages – frequently come into contact 
					– ethical leaders are those who prompt cross-cultural 
					encounters with difference. I would argue that ethics only 
					really begins when we are pulled by others of different 
					classes, races and worldviews to new ethical perspectives.
					 
					
					Christine Riordan 
					Associate Dean for 
					External Relations and the 
					Luther Henderson 
					University Chair in Leadership 
					Neeley School of Business 
					
					Ethical leadership is the 
					lifelong journey of the decisions and choices we make when 
					we encounter difficult situations. Every one of us has the 
					capacity to make decisions and engage in actions that we 
					deeply regret. So how do we prevent our lives from taking a 
					tragic course, from hurting our family, hurting our friends, 
					hurting our colleagues and businesses?  
					
					Why do people engage in 
					unethical behaviors? I submit to you that there are traps 
					that we often fall into along the way.  
					
					First, we crave success and 
					attention. We all love accolades. We love being successful. 
					I have never met anyone who has not wanted to be rewarded 
					with more pay for being successful. But are we falling trap 
					to success, being driven by ambition, that we do so at the 
					expense of other people or the organizations we work for?
					 
					
					A second trap is the 
					shooting star syndrome. People who are successful early in 
					their careers and move up through the ranks quickly 
					sometimes believe they are invincible. They have rarely have 
					had an opportunity to learn from their mistakes because they 
					move into new roles and don’t have to live with the 
					consequences of their decisions. Shooting starts also become 
					blinded by their own success. They will continue their 
					momentum at all costs.  
					
					A third trap is our own 
					unbridled self-interest – the me syndrome. When we only 
					think about ourselves, our own goals, our own wealth, our 
					own achievements, we are not considering how our actions can 
					damage other people. That does not constitute ethical 
					leadership. An interesting study was conducted in 1992 of 
					executives that found that one in eight is at high risk for 
					integrity problems, reflecting a lack of concern for other 
					people. 
					
					A fourth trap is related. 
					Some believe that rules do not apply to them. We see those 
					who are moving up in a corporation that they’re above the 
					rules, and because of their position or track record, they 
					can get away with it.  
					
					A fifth is showing a lack of 
					courage, not standing up for what is right. This fall, I was 
					in a meeting with executives from a major corporation, and 
					the topic of conversation was that one of them was going to 
					have to fire four people who had engaged in a cheating 
					scandal. In essence, a manager had asked one of her junior 
					employees to help two other employees cheat on a financial 
					certification exam. The manager had 30 years of experience. 
					The junior employee had one. All four employees were fired, 
					but when the junior employee was asked why she did it, she 
					answered, “Because my boss asked me to.” If we don’t have 
					the courage to make hard decisions and stand up for what is 
					right, we’re going to fall prey to unethical situations.
					 
					
					A sixth trap is the fear of 
					failure. When we want to achieve so badly that we will do 
					anything to succeed, we make very different decisions. We 
					make them in fear. I have talked to students about why they 
					might cheat in class, and the response I most often here is 
					that they are afraid to fail. They don’t want to look bad. 
					They don’t want to disappoint their parents. They don’t want 
					to lose their scholarship. They begin to operate from a 
					point of failure, and it leads them to the wrong kinds of 
					decisions.  
					
					A seventh trap we fall into 
					is rationalizing away information or signals that might be 
					telling us to do something else. Often times, people who are 
					confronted on failures will look for scapegoats or someone 
					to blame their problems, or they will justify actions they 
					know are wrong. I have had a student plagiarize a personal 
					leadership action plan. My first question to him was, “How 
					can you plagiarize a personal leadership action plan? It’s 
					about you!” His rationalization was, “Everything that guy 
					said applies to me, so I didn’t see any point in rewriting 
					it.”  
					
					The last trap we fall into 
					is failing to look in the mirror. We lose touch with 
					reality. We surround ourselves with people who tell us what 
					we want to hear. We don’t recognize our own personal 
					shortcomings and we don’t allow others to tell us about 
					them.  
					
					So when you think about what 
					ethical leadership means, how does one prevent oneself from 
					falling into these traps?  
					
					Good leaders ask themselves, 
					“What is the purpose of my leadership?” Why do you want to 
					lead? Why do you want to achieve that position? The moment 
					that other people leaves your answer is the moment you’re on 
					the path to engaging in unethical leadership behaviors.
					 
					
					What are your core values? 
					What are the principles in which you really believe? Very 
					few people can articulate the principles that guide their 
					actions and behaviors. How are you going to know if you’re 
					acting unethically if you have not really thought about what 
					values are guiding your behavior? Values impact the way you 
					perceive other people. They impact how you perceive the 
					world and situations. They impact your choices and your 
					actions. They impact how you manage other people. 
					 
					
					It’s important to focus 
					inward, not in a self-interested way, but one that asks what 
					type of person am I becoming through the choices I have 
					made. If you don’t like what you see, stop. Leadership is 
					about other people. It’s about being a steward of others. 
					It’s not about you. 
					
					Build a network of support 
					and accountability. The most successful leaders don’t do it 
					alone, and they don’t surround themselves with “yes”-people. 
					They have people that they can turn to for advice. One of 
					the things that scares me the most is I don’t know what I 
					don’t know. I have a fear that I will make a decision that 
					will impact someone, so I have an advice network that can 
					give me counsel.    
					
					Have the courage to stand up 
					for what you know is right. Have the courage to say no. Have 
					the courage to fail. 
							Comment at
							tcumagazine@tcu.edu 
				  |