Picturing an ethical leader

By Suzanne (Suzi) Ross

This article was published in Living Ethics: issue 62 summer 2005

During the 1970s values clarification and self-reflection exercises were popular in schools, training programs and self-growth courses. One such exercise involved imagining oneself as something else, such as a tree, an animal or a colour. It was common to be asked, “If you were a colour, what colour would you be?”.

A core aspect of my work at St James Ethics Centre is conducting programs in ethics and ethical decision-making for leaders and managers. Whilst preparing an Integrity Weekend for Fellows completing their Vincent Fairfax Ethics in Leadership program, I started to wonder what colour would an ethical leader be?

After deciding the answer was 'true-blue’, I turned my attention to the question: “If an ethical leader was a tree, what sort would it be?” The tree metaphor had some resonance. Earlier this year during a Train the Ethics Guide program, I asked the participants to draw their organisation's values and principles in relationship to each other – five of the six groups drew trees.

Energised by the idea that the tree metaphor had validity, driven by my belief that I should not ask others to do an exercise I hadn't done myself, and delighted by the thought of recycling a 1970s exercise, I proceeded to design my Ethical Leader Tree. Defining ‘leader’ and ‘ethics’ seemed a good place to start.

© Suzanne Ross, St James Ethics Centre

Standard dictionary definitions of leader include: one who leads or guides; one who inspires; and also the concept of one who has power or influence. Leading, as it is generally understood, involves going first (leading the way) and in the positive sense, means showing the way in the form of a good role model or mentor.

Now for defining ethics. Ethics for me is about creating 'the good society’, embracing the concept of the examined life, engaging with Socrates’ practical question, “what ought one to do?” when finding oneself amidst the complexity and uncertainty of the ethical dimension.

Ethics is the branch of philosophy which asks questions like: “what is goodness?”; “how is one to lead a good life?”; and “what is a good society and how is it to be achieved?” Whilst most ethicists would be occupied with these questions, there is considerable variance in their responses – among them, the deontological, teleological and virtue perspectives.

To give a flavour to these perspectives – deontology (from the Greek deon meaning ‘duty’) involves duties which can be derived from universal principles; teleology (from the Greek telos meaning ‘end’ or ‘goal’) involves the consequences and purposes of one's actions; and the concept of virtue is derived from the Greek areté which means ‘excellence’ and is related to reaching one's highest human potential.

When I applied these perspectives to my Ethical Leader Tree, the teleological was a natural fit with the leaves of the tree (the goal and purpose that an ethical leader would aim to leave behind them – that is, their way of ‘making a difference’). I decided the teleological foliage (or output) was: considering the greater good; creating a better world; the mentoring or growing of future leaders; reflections leading to new thoughts and insights; the building of the good society; and exemplifying planetary citizenship.

Similarly, the deontological perspective seemed a natural fit with the roots of the tree. ‘Mother Earth’ provides the vital water and nutrients which the tree sources through its roots. The roots share this common ground. Hence the concept of universal principles is an apt one. This shared resource could be likened to Jung's collective unconscious and so the drawing of archetypal wisdom is also available to the roots.

My next task, having established the deontological roots, was to name them. I started with the duty to “Know Thyself”. This famous Greek maxim is often attributed to Socrates. An alternative suggestion is that it was first inscribed on the Sun God Apollo's Oracle of Delphi temple in ancient Greece.

In today's society, I would suggest that knowing oneself is not enough, as we have very sophisticated ways of defending against this knowing.

In the September 2005 issue of the Harvard Business Review, Kets de Vries wrote an article titled ‘The Dangers of Feeling like a Fake’ in which he suggests that many of our executive leaders feel they are impostors waiting to be discovered. Given this, I suggest we have another deontological root, that is, the duty to “Own Oneself”.

Having accepted the duty to know oneself and own oneself, it would seem obvious that the next duty for an ethical leader would be to nurture their own growth and development – that is, the duty to “Grow Oneself”. Many leaders falter along the way due to stress, burnout, illness or simply being overwhelmed by the enormity of the tasks that they set for themselves.

An ethical leader, one could argue, has a duty to protect and nourish their wellbeing including heart, mind, body and spirit, or put more simply, there is a duty to “Refresh and Sustain Oneself”. And finally, the ethical leader is, as previously stated, concerned with creating the good society, which is underpinned by a duty to “Look Beyond Oneself”.

I see the trunk of the tree as being the link between the teleological foliage and the deontological roots. The trunk represents the day-to-day life of the ethical leader as it manifests in the daily tests, challenges and calls on their character. Character is usually linked to leading the virtuous or ‘good’ life. As Aristotle wrote, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” Aristotle emphasised the concept of flourishing, in other words, living and practising the virtues that we feel are important – attempting to be our highest self.

Although there is a vast array of literature and opinions on the important virtues, it is surprising how little the lists of virtues differ. The virtues I chose for the trunk (throughput) were lightness, integrity, courage, wisdom and spirit. Whilst there are dictionary definitions of these words, we all infuse them with meaning.

This is what they mean for me:

• Lightness encompasses humour: laughing at oneself and with others at our human foibles; not taking oneself too seriously; showing up for life and fully living it ‘with lightness of touch’.
• Integrity is a word whose meaning has changed so much over time. Originally it meant ‘whole’ as in integrated with no aspect missing, which fits well with knowing and owning one's whole self and Aristotle's concept of flourishing. The meaning moved to include soundness, then moral soundness and finally living one's values. I used it to include all these interpretations including genuine-ness, authenticity and candour.
• Courage, and particularly moral courage, is about being fully present: speaking, deciding and acting in line with your principles in the service of your teleological intentions and being prepared to take the ‘bearable’ cost of so doing. It is about venturing, persevering and withstanding the consequences whilst also fulfilling one's duty of self sustainability.
• Spirit, or being filled with spirit and aiming to be one's highest-‘possible in the moment’-self, encompasses passion, commitment, dedication and deep caring about our goals and our society. Spirit also includes compassion, love, respect, empathy and deep caring about people and our planet.
• Wisdom, so much more than intelligence, encompasses insight, foresight, common sense, the ability to discern what is true and right and the capability to learn from experience.
• Humility is a vital component in the growing of wisdom.

The feedback loop in the diagram involves sustainability and regeneration. The leaves return to the earth, compost, and are available in renewed form for the planet in general and the roots of the ethical leader tree.

During the Vincent Fairfax Ethics in Leadership Integrity Weekend, one group named two leaves as ‘wonderings’ and ‘learnings from risks and mistakes’. One of the Fellows, Chris Emzin, reminded us of the Mark Twain quote: “Good judgement comes from experience. And where does experience come from? Experience comes from poor judgement.”