For years some of us warned against the perils of an economy driven exclusively by self-interest (made evident by the financial disaster of 2008) and vigorously argued for management, like other professional disciplines, to require its members to accept a code of conduct and make a public commitment to do no harm. We even went as far as to propose various versions of such a code of conduct, and now some of these codes have actually been adopted by MBA students (e.g. the MBA Oath started at Harvard), business schools (e.g. Thunderbird), and international associations (e.g. the Forum of Young Global Leaders). The Oath Project was established last year, as well, to propose a universal professional code of conduct for managers, the current draft of which has been endorsed by organizations such as the United Nations Global Compact, the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders, Net Impact, and the Aspen Institute.
But perhaps the message we have yet to convey in a compelling enough way is that a commitment to serve the public good not only benefits society but also is a vital element of effective leadership and a precondition for organizational success.
Research by my colleagues Mary Sully de Luque and Nathan Washburn shows that CEOs who frame decisions in pure economic terms tend to be perceived as more autocratic and less visionary than leaders who express concern for a broader set of stakeholders through, for example, a commitment to public good. And the more visionary a leader is perceived to be, the more willing employees are to go the extra mile and consequently deliver higher performance.
To lead is to influence others without coercion. To follow is to take a leap of faith and put your future into someone else's hands.
Before taking this risk, followers seek out proof that a leader's values are solid and compatible with their own. Above all, they look for evidence that a leader is not driven exclusively by self-interest and will take others into consideration when making decisions.
In the modern corporation, the motives driving a leader may not always be perceived as trustworthy because significant personal gain in the form of power, status, and monetary compensation is inevitably at stake. The higher the position in the organization — and the greater the sphere of influence a leader commands — the higher the stakes become and the more questionable the leader's motives can appear to would-be followers.
Corporations may have "no body to kick and no soul to damn" as the old adage goes. But their leaders do. In fact, it is followers' perceptions of a leader's "soul" that can make or break the deal. One of the greatest challenges of any corporate leader is to convince everyone else that they will not compromise the interest of the corporation, if not society, for their own benefit.
Taking a public oath to safeguard the interest of the corporation above one's own and to refrain from practices that are harmful to society is not the only way to earn the trust necessary to lead effectively. But it can be a terrific place to start.
Ángel Cabrera is president of Thunderbird School of Global Management and co-founder of The Oath Project.
(Editor's note: This post is part of a six-week blog series on how leadership might look in the future. The conversations generated by these posts will help shape the agenda of a symposium on the topic in June 2010, hosted by HBS's Nitin Nohria, Rakesh Khurana, and Scott Snook. This week's focus: values.)
source: http://blogs.hbr.org/imagining-the-future-of-leadership/2010/05/the-soul-of-leadership.html
But perhaps the message we have yet to convey in a compelling enough way is that a commitment to serve the public good not only benefits society but also is a vital element of effective leadership and a precondition for organizational success.
Research by my colleagues Mary Sully de Luque and Nathan Washburn shows that CEOs who frame decisions in pure economic terms tend to be perceived as more autocratic and less visionary than leaders who express concern for a broader set of stakeholders through, for example, a commitment to public good. And the more visionary a leader is perceived to be, the more willing employees are to go the extra mile and consequently deliver higher performance.
To lead is to influence others without coercion. To follow is to take a leap of faith and put your future into someone else's hands.
Before taking this risk, followers seek out proof that a leader's values are solid and compatible with their own. Above all, they look for evidence that a leader is not driven exclusively by self-interest and will take others into consideration when making decisions.
In the modern corporation, the motives driving a leader may not always be perceived as trustworthy because significant personal gain in the form of power, status, and monetary compensation is inevitably at stake. The higher the position in the organization — and the greater the sphere of influence a leader commands — the higher the stakes become and the more questionable the leader's motives can appear to would-be followers.
Corporations may have "no body to kick and no soul to damn" as the old adage goes. But their leaders do. In fact, it is followers' perceptions of a leader's "soul" that can make or break the deal. One of the greatest challenges of any corporate leader is to convince everyone else that they will not compromise the interest of the corporation, if not society, for their own benefit.
Taking a public oath to safeguard the interest of the corporation above one's own and to refrain from practices that are harmful to society is not the only way to earn the trust necessary to lead effectively. But it can be a terrific place to start.
Ángel Cabrera is president of Thunderbird School of Global Management and co-founder of The Oath Project.
(Editor's note: This post is part of a six-week blog series on how leadership might look in the future. The conversations generated by these posts will help shape the agenda of a symposium on the topic in June 2010, hosted by HBS's Nitin Nohria, Rakesh Khurana, and Scott Snook. This week's focus: values.)
source: http://blogs.hbr.org/imagining-the-future-of-leadership/2010/05/the-soul-of-leadership.html
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment