Ethics can be defined as ones character and how they behave (Northouse, 2016, p.330). We should try to look at all leaders from some form of ethical point of view because, we need to understand who leaders are and what they do. Which is exactly what ethical leadership focuses on (Northouse, 2016, p.330). Burns made valid observations about about ethics within leadership. Ultimately he argued that, a leader who has good ethical leadership skills will be able to work with their followers to overcome different circumstances, and through that improve moral for both parties (Northouse, 2016, p.338). Other good ethics in leadership focus on how important the influence of a leader can be. Since leaders have the capabilities of reaching out to people, they can influence their behaviors. That is why it is important for a leader to take this responsibility seriously if they want to promote positive change (Northouse, 2016, p.336-337). To get an overall view of all the qualities surrounding important leadership ethics, a leader must openly; respect others, maintain honesty, help the community, and serve others (Northouse, 2016, p. 341). What happens if a leader does not follow these rules of ethics?
Pablo Escobar is a name most people will probably recognize because, he was at one point the largest drug supplier to the United States (Biography Editors, 2014). Reaching those levels of drug trafficking, placed Escobar in a controversial leadership position. His role as the founder and head of the Medellin Cartel can easily be associated with what is known as, “The dark side of leadership” (Northouse, 2016, p.339). As you can assume by the name, this is typically when a leader is destructive, self-centered, charismatic, and having little concern over human rights (Northouse, 2016, p.339-340).
From a young age Escobar was confident and ambitious, he began committing small crimes as a teenager and realized he was good at what he was doing (Biography Editors, 2014). This probably contributed to the confidence he had in himself. Escobar is known mostly for the bad things that he did, yet most people from Columbia have a more positive view of him, he worked hard for people to like him (Crime Museum, 2020). Some things he was known for include; building churches, and parks, and helping the locals financially, some would call him “Robin Hood” (Crime Museum, 2020). This is an example of how he used his charisma to gain approval for the actions he was committing, even though they may not have been legal. Do not let his limited acts of kindness to the community cloud your understanding though. He had absolutely no regard for human life, being known for “plata o plomo” (Crime Museum, 2020), which translates to bribe or death, because if you did not take his bribe he would kill you. Where are the human rights in this instance?
From an ethical standing looking at Pablo Escobar he fits the dark side of leadership. The Toxic Triangle developed by, Padilla Hogan and Kaiser (2007), helps create a better understanding of the various dynamics at play when a leader such as Escobar takes control. I illustrated above how he aligns within the description of a destructive leader, through lack of concern over life, like-ability, and self generated confidence ( Northouse, 2016, p.340). There are still two other pieces to this triangle that had to work in order for him to gain the power he had as a leader. Those were his followers and the environment at the time. According to the toxic triangle his followers needed to have low-self esteem, unmet needs, similar world views, and vulnerability (Northouse, 2016, p.340). The people of Columbia were very poor and when he provided them with money to expand programs, and to help the poor, he was also fulfilling an unmet need for many people. The economic and political environments were unstable during this period and laid out an opportune moment for Escobar to gain power in the drug trade. He was able to gain a role in the Columbian government for a brief time, where he was able to push many of his agendas through using the threat of violence (Crime Museum, 2020). A conductive environment is one that is unstable, giving the leader more authority and power (Northouse, 2016, p.340). The assistance he provided for the Columbian people and the political standing he was in, created the perfect climate for him to gain followers and give him an ideal environment to thrive in because it was so unstable. The only problem is that he thrived by abusing ethical principals and acting for selfish reasons with no care for who he hurt in the process.
We see how Escobar fits into the example of bad ethical leadership. He was a destructive leader, had vulnerable followers, and he had an unstable environment in which he could emerge into and take control. This is why it is important for todays leaders to hold themselves to higher standards. We must take our roles seriously in order to achieve positive results as a leader. Ultimately Pablo Escobar died trying to outrun the police on the rooftops in a local neighborhood (Biography Editors, 2014). A leader can not be selfish and careless like Escobar. A leader must be compassionate, selfless and always put their followers needs first (Northouse, 2016 p.342).
An example of ethical leadership today could be taken from Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany. Her handeling of the Coronavirus outbreak there has led Germany to have one of the lowest mortality rates in Europe with only a 3.1% mortality rate, compared to Italy with an 11.2%, United Kingdom with 9% , and France with a 5.1% mortality rate (John Hopkinns University of Medicine, 2020). She used good communication and scientific interpretation for the entire nation which aided in awareness and understanding. She offered mental health support, and easy access to health care (Farr, 2020). Then she followed up with an increased effort in testing, and began developing contact tracing apps for people to use (Farr, 2020). This gave her followers what they needed to be successiful in combating this disease. These are only a few examples of how Angela Merkel can be seen as ethical. Through her response to coronavirus alone we see the importance of human life to her, and communication. She respects her followers, and serves them, she is honest, and dedicated to helping not only her own people but those around her as well. This places her within the definition of what ethical leadership should look like. Notice the difference between Pablo Escobar and Angela Merkel? Both of these leaders had power and obstacles to overcome, but their decisions as leaders based on their values sent them in different paths. Angela Merkel is one of many who can be viewed as ethical, and Pablo Escobar is one of many who can be seen as an example of the “dark side of leadership”
References
– Northouse, Peter. (2016). Leadership Theory and Practice. (7th Edition).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
-Biography Editors. (2014). Pablo Escobar biography. A&E Television Netoworks. Retrieved from: https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/pablo-escobar
-Crime Museum Editors. (2020) Pablo Escobar. Retrieved from: https://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/drugs/pablo-escobar/
-John Hopkins University of Medicine (2020). Mortality Analysis. Coronavirus Resource Center. Retrieved from: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
-Farr, Christina (2020). Germany;s coronavirus response is a master class in science communication. CNBC. Retrieved from : https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/21/germanys-coronavirus-response-masterful-science-communication.html
I liked the ideas behind your post and also that it was written in a way that kept me reading. It seemed like a good balance of facts mixed with a true story that was pretty interesting. Sometimes it gets a little boring if a post is only focused on theories and other times a post can be mostly conjecture and personal stories which makes it seem much less credible or informative. Yours was a good mix.
Pablo Escobar reminds me of the model by Kohlberg that measured the stages of moral development. While Kohlberg tested children and found that their moral nature changed over time, it seems like Escobar was stalled in stage two with individualism and exchange where people are only doing things that could be seen as “good” if they get something in return (Northouse, 2016). This wouldn’t surprise me since he apparently formed his sense of right and wrong as a kid when he was busy committing crimes and realized he was good at getting away with things as you mentioned. In the second stage of moral development the individual is only concerned with self-interest such as things being just if the outcome serves the person (Northouse, 2016). Certainly this was at least part of the driving force behind his unethical decisions. I say this because much of what he did was only done with the thought that it would come back to benefit him. As you mentioned, he would build churches and help the economy and so on because he knew it was needed and thus would give him more power and influence. He was not concerned with anyone’s well-being as only acted upon self-interest.
Escobar also seems to operate as someone who is highly motivated by ethical egoism, which is high in self-interest and low in concern for others (Northouse, 2016). We can see this by his desire to do things that only serve himself, while he hides behind the façade of caring for others. This is a view point that focuses on things being right if the outcome of an action creates the most good for the person involved (Northouse, 2016). You are certainly right in relating Escobar to someone who is a prime example of the dark side of leadership, especially considering the toxic triangle. He was definitely a person who was narcissistic and self-absorbed, used power and coercion for personal gain, and his viewpoints could be traced to childhood events since that is when he began his life of crime (Northouse, 2016). It would also seem that he did have the right type of followers, conformers and colluders. The conformers would be those who have low self-esteem and unmet needs, and the colluders are those who have bad values and similar interests in self-gain (Northouse, 2016). The conformers were the people he pretended to help who saw him as a “robin hood” type since he gave them purpose and things that they lacked such as money. The colluders were the members of his cartel and those who did business with him in the drug trade as high-rollers themselves, and saw nothing wrong with bribery or death as a way to rise to the top.
Your post was a good way to study someone who was clearly unethical, yet somehow was viewed as ethical by some, and had a vast amount of followers. It has always interested me how someone can be clearly hateful and unethical yet convince many that they are just and somehow command a cult following. Adolf Hitler is someone who comes to mind with this. These types of leaders usually seem to flourish due to actions and thoughts being hidden behind a façade of just behavior that is meant for the good of a group of people. Hitler could be viewed as a sort of consequentialist in that he believed that the consequences of not persecuting Jews and not going to war, would be worse for his group, the German people, than going to war and doing what he did. Using this logic he certainly viewed his actions as moral, and by hiding behind fake ideals that he was only trying to do what was best for his people, his plans and ideas were able to be spun in such a way that gained him a mass following. It is very good to learn from this sort of thing and I think the topic of your post is something that is important to learn about so things are not repeated.
Reference:
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice. [MBS Direct]. Retrieved from https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483317540/