Divorced from ethics, leadership is reduced to management and politics to

mere technique.

- James Macgregor Burns

Today‘s leadership has been challenged by immoral or unethical behaviour in

business, politics, and in the world. Peter Drucker (1993) Drucker(?) defines
leadership as a calling with very high ethical standards for those that chose to
lead. Character traps like losing sight of why you are leading, selfishness and the
abuse of power often derails leaders. Morals and ethics refer to personal or
cultural values, the codes of conduct that distinguish between right and wrong in
our society. If morality is the answer to the question 'how ought we to live' at the
individual level, politics can be seen as addressing the same question at the
social level. It is therefore unsurprising that evidence has been found of a
relationship between attitudes in morality and politics.

Ethical factors include the moral character of the leader, ethical values
embedded in the leader’s vision, articulation, and program which followers either
embrace or reject; and the morality of the processes of social ethical choice and
action that leaders and followers engage in and collectively pursue. These form
the pillars of Political ethics and provide a framework for evaluating choices and
making a decision based on fairness and reasonable behaviour.

Ciulla(1995) has argued that leadership need to include both technical

competencies and moral capacities. Unethical leaders are not acceptable even
though they may be effective. In present times, there have been numerous
cases of technically capable but morally deficient leaders in politics and
corporate world. Many corporate and political leaders’ actions may comply with
the law but are not proper from an ethical perspective. For example, the british
members of parliament may not have broken the law when they used expense
accounts to bill tax payers for pecks like moat cleaning, the upkeep of expensive
second homes, or the rental of adult movies. But surely this kind of behaviour
was ethically incorrect.

Recently, the Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has been alleged that he
had sex with an underage prostitute. His political life has been entwined with a
series of conflict-of-interest cases that would not be tolerated in any other
Western democracy. Berlusconi also controls his party structure and
parliamentary party. Silvio Berlusconi a dominant figure with a dominant style of
leadership built a business empire out of construction and media interests in his
native Milan. Mr Berlusconi launched his political career during the corruption
inquiries of 1994, which paralysed the established parties. Its government was
not able to meet its economic targets, and narrowly lost power in 2006. In 2009,
Mr Berlusconi came under pressure over a series of allegations about his sex life,
including allegedly spending a night with an under aged escort and the
publication of pictures of topless women at his residence. Between August and
December 2010, Mr Berlusconi survived four no-confidence votes brought as
concerns mounted over scandals in his personal life and the corruption
allegations against him. In February 2011, a Milan judge ordered that he should
stand trial on 6 April on charges of abuse of power and paying a minor for sex.

Despite being dogged by allegations of embezzlement, tax fraud and false

accounting, corruption and links with the mafia, verbal gaffes and accusations of
affairs with women decades younger than him, Mr Berlusconi has demonstrated
remarkable political longevity in a country known for its fractured politics and
short-lived governments. Mr Berlusconi is Italy’s longest serving post-war
prime minister and one of the richest men in Italy. According to a BBC report,
“... a number of cases have come to trial. In some cases he has been acquitted.
In others, he has been convicted, but the verdict was overturned on appeal. In
others still, the statute of limitations has expired before the case could reach its
conclusion” (BBC News Europe -15 Feb 2011)

Will it then be right to assume ethics and morals do not affect our performance
as a leader or is it that the world expectation of leadership has lost value, such
that it is no longer about leaders we deserve but leaders that is available. How
do our personal morals affect how we view ‘good’ morale? Are good morals a
leadership requirement? If so, who defines the standard of good morality?
Although this is an extreme case, is Mr Berlusconi considered a good leader?

A good leader should exhibit both their values and their ethics in their leadership
style and actions. Ethical theories on leadership, talk about two main things: The
actions and behaviour of leaders and the personality and character of leader’s.
They must show dignity, serve others and not abuse its authority, justice and be
honest. It is essential to note that leadership is all about values, and it is
impossible to be a leader if you lack the awareness and concern for your own
personal values. These ethics define leadership.

Ciulla, J.B. (1995) ‘Leadership ethics: mapping the territory’ , Business Ethics
Quarterly 5(1): 6-28

Drucker P. (1993) Innovation and Entrepreneurship, New York, NY: Harper Collins

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11981754

Many leaders, develop a kind of “king of the universe” mentality. They have success where
others failed, or perhaps like the real superstars in any sector (business, entertainment,
politics, etc) they’ve had monstrous success that is way beyond those of mere mortals.
They’ve achieved and done things that most others tried and failed. At some emotional and
not intellectual level they start to believe they are bulletproof and cannot fail.