The recent lesson on servant leadership has caused an epiphany in me. Ethical behavior and integrity are not heavily discussed in most of the theories and approaches that we have learned so far, but it seems to be a necessary component of the functionality of any successful leadership. According to our lesson, servant leadership is the only theory that emphasizes ethical behavior as a crucial component (PSU WC, 2021). Even those that seemingly rely on a leader’s overall intentions do not include ethicality as a major component of the theory. This bit of information made me think of my own opinions of integrity. Before digging into this information, I was under the impression that integrity is a trait. Either you have it or you don’t. In my workplace we have quarterly performance ratings. Among the many items being rated, integrity is included and rated on a number scale. I always question my supervisors, how does one rate integrity on a number scale? How can someone be somewhat integrous? If one behaves in a way that reduces their integrity, doesn’t that mean that they no loner have integrity? Similarly, I felt similarly about ethical behavior. While learning about traits compared to behaviors and skills, I am more open to the possibility that these attributes can be learned, and that one can learn the importance of ethical behavior after being educated to its benefits. I do still believe, however, that it is a committed attribute. Servant leadership, as well as other leadership theories, seem to suggest that the qualities that make a leader successful are not limited to the workplace. Leaders are not awarded the luxury of escaping from their leadership behaviors, because values are qualities that we instill in ourselves. Leaders are required to uphold their ethical behavior that reflects on them both inside and outside of the organization in which they lead. In fact, some leadership approaches are specifically more appropriately applied in settings that are not workplaces, such as transformational leadership. I use the terms of integrity and ethicality interchangeably, as both relate to one’s moral principles. Ethics is specifically defined as “relating to moral principles” while integrity is “the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles” (Oxford University Press, 2021). Upon considering leadership attributes such as ethical behavior, I wonder if a leader can only become their most successful when they ‘practice what they preach’, when they integrate their leadership qualities into every other aspect of their lives.
Servant leadership stresses that in order to effectively elevate and empower their followers, leaders must be strong in their ethical standards (Northouse, 2019). They do not sacrifice their integrity for their own benefit, but rather maintain it in the face of opportunity to do otherwise. This is a practice that should be maintained in a leader’s social life, for violations of ethical behavior can reflect on the overall perception of a leader. President Clinton is notable for making this mistake when he lied about his involvement with Monica Lewinski. While he may have been an ethical leader in his role as president, his reputation was tarnished anyway by the discovery of infidelity (which he worsened by attempting to lie about the scandal, thus losing his job). There are many other qualities that encompass a servant leader; listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth and building community (Northouse, 2019). In order to maintain uncorrupted principles, one would have to integrate most of these qualities into their lives outside of the organization. Empathy relates to the ability to see the world from someone else’s point of view, healing involves caring about the wellbeing of others, and stewardship advises that one takes responsibility for the leadership role (Northouse, 2019). Additionally, commitment to growth specifically suggests that leaders are committed to both the personal and professional growth of followers (Northouse, 2019). In order to perform these behaviors, a servant leader must adopt these qualities into their personality. Like ethical behavior and integrity, I do not believe that a leader could successfully be empathetic, caring and committed during organizational operating hours only. Northouse (2019) advises that servant leadership is altruistic, and one cannot be altruistic only half of the time. Lumpkin and Achen (2018) advise that within servant leadership theory, values are important for building trust and personal strengths including integrity and authenticity are qualities that define a good servant leader. This is a consistent emotional exchange between followership and leader.
Let’s imagine that we have a leader at work who engages in servant leadership qualities. We grow to believe that this leader has our best interests in mind and we trust our personal and professional wellbeing with this person. One day, this leader is arrested after being busted in a sting operation for participating in underage human trafficking. We find out that he has frequented underground massage parlors where young women under the age of 18 are providing sexual services. As the case progresses, we find out that the girls working at this establishment are victims of trafficking. This would be a violation of our opinion of this leader, even though at work he never engaged in any kind of unethical behavior. Trust and respect would be lost and the leader’s behaviors, both present and future, would be questioned. This is an extreme example but not one that is entirely unlikely to happen in the real world. The point I want to convey is that these values and qualities that uphold leadership are a full-time job.
Transformational leadership, like servant leadership, is concerned with values and ethics (Northouse, 2019). What separates transformational leaders from servant leaders is the leadership goal. Servant leaders focus on the individual goals of their followers, while transformational leaders focus on uplifting followers to better reach the organizational goal (Northouse, 2019). The value of ethics and integrity in transformational leadership is not hard to find. Transformational leadership’s cousin, pseudotransformational leadership, involves the leadership without the ethics. Qualities that include strong moral values, inspirational motivation and intellectual situation are replaced with self-consumption, exploitation and ‘warped’ moral values (Northouse, 2019). Poor transformational leaders build followership through their charismatic behaviors, with the ultimate intention of using the followership to eventually fulfill a goal that would otherwise be impossible without the leader-followership dynamic. According to Mills and Boardley (2017) transformational leaders must commit to follower development, are required to transcend their own egoistic desires and also must consider the values of their followers. Northouse (2019) credits pesudotransformational leadership for the success of Adolf Hitler. Had he acted on his own, there is no way that he would be successful in implementing the genocide of the Jewish population in Germany. His personal values, to eliminate an entire population through murder, is not one that would otherwise be consistent with his followership. The only way to accomplish this goal would be to do so through a powerful, authoritative position with a silent followership. The only way that he would attain a followership is to first build trust through his charismatic qualities. Hitler initially displayed strong moral values (we find out later that they were strong, but warped), self-confidence, and a desire to influence (Northouse, 2019). Due to a lack of ethical leadership behaviors, Hitler was able to transform his leadership into one that was used to commit international crimes. Ethical behavior and integrity are arguably the foundation of transformational leadership. Authentic transformational leaders are morally virtuous, empowering and of integrity (Mill & Boardley, 2017) Pseudotransformational leaders, on the other hand, have an inherent need for power, promote dependency and generally lack integrity (Mill & Boardley, 2017).
Failure to be consistent in one’s leadership qualities can lead to the uncovering of self-destructive behaviors that cause a leader to fall from grace. Billy Graham, a subject whose leadership journey I studied for a group assignment, is a good example of what can happen when one doesn’t fully integrate their own moral principles. Graham sacrificed his ethicality to a degree in his desire to become a spiritual advisor and an influence in the political realm. When the President Nixon Watergate tapes were released, he was discovered to have made harsh, derogatory statements towards the Jewish population in private phone calls with the President (Colt, 2021). This sparked a downward spiral for Graham’s reputation, after which he receded out of the limelight. Arguments could be made for Graham as a servant leader and as a transformational leader, which is interesting, considering both rely on the consistent maintenance of ethical behavior in one’s life. As a servant leader, Graham certainly committed his life to influencing his followers to be the best version of his organization’s idea of a Christian. He participated in many of the qualities that make a servant leader, such as healing, listening and persuasion (Northouse, 2019). As a transformational leader, he developed new leadership goals and consistently nurtured his followership so that these goals could be met. During the Nixon scandal, Graham faltered in his applications of empathy and altruism. He failed to incorporate these behaviors into his personal life, behind closed doors, at the opportunity to keep favor of a fellow leader in a power role. This violation of his integrity, his own personal values, resulted in a leadership failure. This exposure was particularly harmful, given that Graham was one of the first notable pastors to desegregate his sermons. He built his credibility on inclusivity, and then violated that value through his statements about the Jewish population (Colt, 2021). Weather one believes that Graham is servant or transformational, or maybe a combination of both, ultimately both theories rely on the existence of strong values and ethics.
What is ethical and what is not is generally decided by societal norms on moral appropriateness (Northouse, 2019). The aforementioned behaviors of Graham and Hitler are perceived as unethical because society generally believes that murder and communicating prejudice are harmful behaviors. Should ethics be taken more seriously within leadership roles? There may be some organizational settings were the leadership role is more authoritative, and followers do not generally seek inspiration in the workplace. For example; a low-paying job that attracts young students looking for part-time work, such as a local restaurant, expects high turnover and puts their focus on task completion rather than long-term processes of career-building through interpersonal relationships. Ethics and integrity won’t make as much of an impact here, as there is low stakes for the employees involved. In organizations where followers put stake and emotional involvement into the organizational goal, a leader becomes responsible for how their leadership effect’s followers’ lives (Northouse, 2019). Approaches that emphasize influence, such as transformational and servant leadership, require incorporation of utilitarianism or altruism (Northouse, 2019). A commitment to ethics and integrity in leadership is important due to the possibility of destructive leadership developing and having catastrophic affects. Destructive leaders find cultural opportunities, such as instability and shifting cultural values, to gain and exploit followership (Northouse, 2019). In its worst form, we get Hitler. In slightly less serious cases of a failure to maintain one’s own values for personal gain, we get Graham. Ultimately, in some capacity leaders are obligated to serve their followers. A supervisor can supervise, a manager can manage, and their task-oriented behaviors help to reach organization goals. A true leader in a leadership role must be prepared to accept that their overall behaviors must be tailored to provide the outcomes for the followership. The idea of a leader functioning as a steward to the followership is relatively new in the world of leadership research. Most research on this theory comes from the 1990’s (Northouse, 2019). There is a need to develop the ethical leadership approach as it applies to all other theories and approaches. The idea of leadership ethics should blanket the subject. Northouse (2019) advises that there is not a large amount of training and development revolving around ethical leadership, even though we now understand that one cannot be a successful leader without being concerned with values. Hopefully, along with our progressive society and our concern for inclusivity and wellness, leadership experts will focus on ethics and integrity, resulting in a new generation of exceptional leaders.
References:
Colt, S. (Director) & Dobrowski, H. (Producer) (2021). Billy Graham; Prayer, Politics, Power. American Experience. United States; A Sarah Colt Productions Film for American Experience. https://www.pbs.org/video/billy-graham-tp3vqn/
Lumpkin, A., & Achen, R. M. (2018). Explicating the Synergies of Self-Determination Theory, Ethical Leadership, Servant Leadership, and Emotional Intelligence. Journal of Leadership Studies, 12(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21554
Mills, J. P., & Boardley, I. D. (2017). Development and initial validation of an indirect measure of transformational leadership integrity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 32, 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.05.005
Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (Eighth Edition). SAGE Publications.
Oxford University Press. (2021). Please wait… Oxford English Dictionary. https://www-oed-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/view/Entry/97366?redirectedFrom=integrity#eid.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2021a). PSYCH 485 | Lesson 11: Servant Leadership https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2137573/modules/items/32271473