Should we Care?

What is clear is that our great institutions generate enormous amounts of social power, the control of which is predominantly placed in the hands of relatively few of their leaders. Petrick and Quinn remind us of the great responsibilities that come with high office and speak of an "Ethical Awareness" which they define “as the capacity to remain sensitive to moral issues particularly when they have a significant effect upon others”. (1).

For, without doubt, the character of the leader casts a long shadow over his organisation and quite often the character of the leader can determine the character of the organisation itself. What leaders do, how they do it and what they say, or sometimes what they choose not to say, will set the tone for employees and create the boundaries of what is seen as acceptable behaviour.

Elmer and Cook (2) share these sentiments and contend that leaders demonstrating a lack of moral integrity may be detrimental to organisational success by undermining confidence, eroding member's organisational commitment and ultimately damaging the organisational reputation. The greater investment in a moral culture results in more ethical leadership whilst the absence of a moral culture often means leaders can determine their own level of integrity which, in turn, leads to inconsistencies in standards of behaviour.

For what is clear is that high personal standards aren't enough for organisational excellence as there is also a need to be an intolerance of low standards in others. Pritchett identifies this and warns of the need to be vigilant to ensure that the good name of an organisation is never compromised. He says, “If you accommodate questionable practices in others who touch your organisation, you risk soiling its reputation" (3)

Zussman declares that in all areas of public service organisations must strive towards social cohesion which, in essence, he argues, is the ability of people in society to work together in-groups and this ideology is based on shared norms dealing with issues like truthfulness, honesty and reliability. This, he claims, provides the foundations of trust that is essential in making a society work. (4) Consequently, he argues, that the way you treat other people in your professional or personal capacity is an indication of the sort of person you are and whether you can be trusted to stand firm in trying circumstances

Honesty and integrity features prominently in most academic literature seeking to define blue-ribbon leadership yet some people seem to think you can slip it on and off like clothing. They will speak of personal, professional or business integrity as if different suits of honesty can be worn according to the situation. But it is high standards of personal integrity that provides the consistency between what one professes and what one actually does. For those who are dishonourable do not suddenly become honourable when they go into workplace. Quite simply if somebody cheats in private they are cheaters and if somebody tells lies in private they will likely lie in public. Can you really invest your trust, public or private, in somebody who does that? In other words the fundamental question is not "What should I do?" but "What kind of person should I be?"

The leadership imperative is to translate such an understanding into action by doing the hard work of building relationships based on consistently demonstrated trust. Those who make the law and those who dispense it are inextricably implicated in the question of trust and revelations of sexual scandals can violate this trust. Clemmer reminds us that, quite often, it is fear and greed that reveals our true character and how we deal with difficult circumstances when the stakes are high reveals our true selves. He also claims that the choices we make during these intense moments of truth expose the depth of our character. (5)

Therefore Glass recommends that it should be standard practice that every leader faced with a personal decision that is likely to impact upon his professional life should simply ask himself a specific question. "Will my conduct build trust?" Will it build long-term trust? "How might it destroy trust?" (6) Such a simple approach will train the minds of our leaders to encompass all values with one vision and provide the ability to build trust with wholeness. Those who make the law and those who dispense it are inextricably implicated in the question of trust and revelations of scandals can violate this trust.

References


1. Petrick, J A and Quinn, J F. Management Ethics Integrity at Work. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Series in Business Ethics, 1997.

2. Elmers, N and Cook, T. 'Ethics - Why It Matters And Why It Is Difficult To Achieve' quoted in Culture, Corruption and the Endorsement of Ethical Leadership by Christian J et al, Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, USA. Paper presented at the Gallup Leadership Institute Summit. Omaha, Nebraska, 2004.

3. Pritchett, Price, American Psychologist, Writer and Entrepreneur. Quoted from 'The Ethics of Excellence'.

4. HS Zussman, David. 'Confidence in Public Institutions: Restoring Pride to Politics.' An address at Parliament House, Canberra, Australia. Part of the Senate Occasional Lecture Series, February 2001.

5. Clemmer, Jim. 'Integrity-Building: A Foundation of Trust, Honesty and Integrity'. Retrieved from www.clemmer.net/excerpts/honesty integrity. Shtml

6. Glass, Shirley, 'Shattered Vows: Getting Beyond Betrayal'. Psychology Today, July/August 1998.