Leadership Theories, Essay Example

Introduction

There are many different reasons as to why people become leaders (Sarros, & Cooper, 2006). These include reasons which may be because they develop a certain talent, charisma, passion. It may also be because of their wealth, job title and even family. Others may become leaders because they have great ideas and intelligent minds, or that they have the ability to take charge in a room full of people. Some people may have found their leadership role in a situation or circumstance purely out of change. However, no matter how an individual becomes a leader, he or she did not get there without having followers (Schneider, 2002). Managers may act like bullies at time, power-tripping on their subordinates and using their rank to force their own will on people; this is not what leadership is about. Leadership is more of a moral relationship between people; it is not a person or a position (Sarros, & Cooper, 2006). Leadership is about ethics, and a good leader has this.

Today, one can say that we live in a time where world leaders can be morally unethical. It is the increase in information, and the emergence of scandals which increases the confusion about leadership (Hornett, & Fredricks, 2005). Great leaders in time have been probed of their ethical short-comings, and it’s very hard in today’s day and age to have heroes when everything about their lives is so public. Ethics and leadership focus on two things, these are: integrity and honesty. Ethics is located in the heart of leadership, and they are not two separate things. The study of ethics is generally being able to tell right from wrong, knowing virtue, one’s duty and obligations, etc (Resick, Hanges, Dickson, & Mitchelson, 2006). Leadership entails certain kinds of moral problems in connection with human relationships. The goal of leadership ethics studies is to try to understand how the leadership-follower relationship works (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006).

Without the emphasis on contiguous commitment and the right modeling of leadership standards, business ethics cannot be achieved in an organization (Schneider, 2002). The ethics of leadership, no matter how the leader carries it, will reverberate in the workplace, and will directly influence choices and decisions make by workers or the leader’s followers. Leadership is what sets the tone to shape the working environment in an organization (Schneider, 2002). When a leader influences the actions of his or her followers through modeling and reinforcement, the leader has succeeded in reproducing his certain behavior, characteristics or habits (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006). The question as to whether the behavior, characteristics or habits is ethical or morally correct is not the focus. The fact that followers do reflect on leaders is the key, this is why we need leaders who are ethical. Ethics, or ethical thinking begins within a person, it involves free will (Resick, Hanges, Dickson, & Mitchelson, 2006). Ethics is generally reflective conduct; it is when one knows what is morally right, to what is wrong.

The followers of leaders reflect their conduct on what they witness, however it does not mean that they do not have responsibility over their own actions. Leaders and their followers are accountable for their conduct in an organization (Schneider, 2002). It is the workers or the followers of the leaders who communicate the ethics of their leaders through their performance; it is the followers who establish their desired expectations or standards in accordance to what the leaders demand (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006). Workers directly absorb and reflect the manners and morals of a workplace; they are affected by the modeling standards set by leaders. In turn, work reflects on how one spends his or her life, it generally contributes to lessons one learns, and it adds a large portion to one’s development and moral perspectives.

Ethics is very communal, it does not focus on one person, it is a web of interlaying relationships. Because ethics does not focus on the individual, it is about the rights and obligations we share with others. In a business, an organization cannot run without the help of others (Schneider, 2002). Individuals need other people to thrive and survive. Ethics in a business is the ongoing need to find justice, equity and fair play. Work is not detached from human life, and ethics in business focuses on the people you work for and work with. This makes the people in your organizational environment a big part of your life (Resick, Hanges, Dickson, & Mitchelson, 2006). The question is now, what should we do in regards with others?

Ethics is said to be pluralistic and non-egotistic. The evaluation of the self in relation to others is said to be its primary paradigm. An individual must always take into account his or her actions (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006). When the actions of that individual come into conflict with the interests of those around him or her, the individual should go into reflection and maybe even suspend or modify his or her actions. This is because ethics requires us to act on behalf of others. In order to pursue our best interests, we must first take into account the interests of those around us (Schneider, 2002).

The importance and qualities of the leader-follower relationship stems from unity (Hornett, & Fredricks, 2005). A large piece of the leader-follower relationship is how the leader perceives himself or herself in relation to his or her followers, and vice-versa. The self-other perception is important to ethics because it is an issue concerning how workers are involved, and this can be used to evaluate the leader if he or she is abusing his or her power and other issues (Sarros, & Cooper, 2006). Looking at it from this perspective, followers may seem to be manipulable and compliant to their leaders. An abuse of power contradicts the idea of mutual dependency in the working environment, and it takes away the value of maintaining one’s personal dignity (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006). Coercing you will onto an individual is not the best way to get their best performance, this type of abuse depraves a leader from the honesty and judgment he can receive from his subordinates. However, leadership is still seen as power over others, rather than service towards others.

Leadership does come with its ethical failures, this is seen in immoral decisions, actions, etc (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006). This is seen a lot with leaders across the globe, throughout many businesses and organizations. When ethical leadership is exposed to others, we tend to look for an explanation for the leader’s immoral acts, instead of trying to analyze the moral status of his action. Sometimes, people are too preoccupied with the immoral act, that there are questions which are left unanswered. To be able to locate an answer to these questions, we must look at the features of decisions and what make them right or wrong (Resick, Hanges, Dickson, & Mitchelson, 2006). The point in defining an action if moral or not is to direct leaders into knowing how to behave morally given a clear-cut definition of the characters of ethical success. This shifts the view of people on leaders from how they act, to why they should act that way.

Much of what causes leadership failure in terms of morality and ethics, is said to be caused by human nature (Resick, Hanges, Dickson, & Mitchelson, 2006). This is because as humans, we are naturally egotistic. This contradicts what was discussed above, saying that ethics in the workplace should be non-egocentric, and the focus should be on an individual’s relationship towards others. Thus, leadership failure is not directly because of moral principles, it is in connection with self-interest, and fulfilling it (Sarros, & Cooper, 2006). It is assumed that when there is immoral behavior, no matter the severity, there will be consequences.  Fortunately, there are many effective ways in which society makes it possible for self-interest to come together with morality. This in-turn does not come into conflict with the individual’s relationship towards others. When one does not conform to such requirements of moral standards, others will withhold their cooperation, making the leader a failure in the organization (Waldman, de Luque, Washburn, & House, 2006).

Conclusion

Leadership refers not to the position or power of a person; it is a particular person’s relationship with his or her followers/workers. Ethics is not focused on the individual; it is about an individual’s relationship with the people around him or her. Therefore, leadership ethics relies on the web of relationships within the workplace. Workers or followers will conduct their behavior based on what the leader shows them. The leader is the one who sets the standards in an organization, and his actions directly impact all those around him or her, creating the mood set in the workplace. This suggests that a leader’s actions are very crucial to an organization, and he or she must act in a way to benefit others as well as the organization. This entails leadership to be non-egocentric. Because leadership is seen as not focused on the individual, leadership failures come around when one pursues his or her self-interest above others. When there is failure in terms of leadership on a moral or ethical standpoint, there are consequences to follow. Thus, it is best if a leader, or a company best define what ethics and morals are so that a leader may incorporate this in his or her behavior.

References

Hornett, A., & Fredricks, S. (2005). An empirical and theoretical exploration of disconnections between leadership and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(3), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25123556

Resick, C.J., Hanges, P.J., Dickson, M.W., & Mitchelson, J.K. (2006). A cross-cultural examination of the endorsement of ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(4), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25123717

Schneider, M. (2002). A stakeholder model of organizational leadership. Organization Science, 13(2), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3085994

Sarros, J.C., & Cooper, B.K. (2006). Building character: a leadership essential. Journal of Business and Pychology, 21(1), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2543467

Waldman, D.A., de Luque, M.S., Washburn, N., & House, R.J. (2006). Cultural and leadership predictors of corporate social responsibility of top management: a globe study of 15 countries. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4540386