Selasa, 11 Desember 2012
fotografi
Beda antara kamera ponsel dan ponsel pintar dengan kamera digital SLR sangat tipis. Hasil bidikan dari kedua perangkat itu terkadang bisa dikatakan sama. Bahkan foto yang dihasilkan kamera ponsel sering lebih bagus berkat efek filter dari berbagai macam aplikasi fotografi seperti Instagram dan lainnya.
Minggu, 02 Desember 2012
Charismatic Leadership and Ethics from Gender Perspective.
Charismatic Leadership and Ethics from Gender Perspective.
By: Tuomo Takala & Iiris Aaltio
1. Introduction
In this paper we will explore leadership,
charismatic leadership, gender issues and ethical aspects together. All
these areas have been developed around organization studies on
leadership. There is no doubt that leadership plays a role in
organizational creation and growth. A number of studies are conducted
that have shown its dependency on surrounding cultural context, focused
on special behavioural characteristics, individual features etc.
Charismatic leadership research has developed so far from 1980´s, and
led from individual characters to analyse its nature in the mirror of
media, social environment and various other contextual up-to-date
aspects. In leadership studies gender is nowadays used as a critical
focus to understand its nature, whereas in charismatic leadership
studies gender as a focus is not used so far. We wonder is there are
issues in charismatic leadership that make it gender related and in this
paper we discuss, if the theory of charismatic leadership is gender
neutral, or, laden by features favourable to masculine aspects. We will
also cross issues from leadership theory, charismatic leadership theory
and gender studies to explore the possibility of "feminine charisma". We
use examples from political life to study their "leadership philosophy"
and its charismatic nature, using ethic as a frame. All these examples
of feminine and masculine charisma also reflect ideals about what it
means to be a good or bad leader and we will discuss if these features
also differ between women and men.
Charisma, in terms used by Max Weber (1964), means
literally "the gift of grace". It is used by Weber to characterize
self-appointed leaders followed up by people who are in distress and who
need to follow the leader because they believe him to be
extraordinarily qualified. The role of a follower is to acknowledge this
destiny, and the authority of genuine charisma is derived from the duty
of the followers to recognize the leader. The very nature of
charismatic authority is unstable; this is because the source of
charisma is continuously "moving on". It will never be stable and
unchanging.
Charismatic leader uses power on his followers, but
also the followers use power over the leader. This leads to the
question what is good and what is bad. The study of ethics of
charismatic leadership is related to questions of how to use power, i.e
which ways and in what manner. The aims and vehicles, he/she uses, are
the main objects when one evaluates the ethical behaviour of the
charismatic leader. Gender is a cultural creation instead a feature of
an individual, whether biological or psychological. It is laden with
cultural meanings, and these meanings create the gendered context for
women and men leaders to use their charisma. We discuss the possibility
of "good" or "bad" charisma in terms of gendered leadership behaviour.
While gender is a cultural creation, it is probably woven to
understanding of charisma much more than usually thought.
2. Leadership and gender
In organization studies the complex relationships
between leadership, power and gender became a research topic in 1970's,
when Rosabeth Moss Kanter started the debate on the "blind spots" of
organizational analysis (Kanter, 1977). The aspects of organizational
life that hide gender attributes of leadership and power became topical
in research. The prevailing gender-neutral tradition, particularly in
the US, was broken, and the discourse of organizations as sites where
gender attributes are presumed and reproduced, started to gain foothold
especially in 1990's. The under-representation of women in high-status
roles has been documented by feminist literature (for example Acker,
1992; Auster; 1993; Gherardi; 1995).
In organizations and management, gender segregation
and gender relations occur in roles and organizational positions, like
the (female) secretary is subordinate to the (male) boss (Pringle,
1988), in similar way the supportive wife / mother looks up to the
authoritative husband / father. There are inequalities that favor men on
various criteria including salary and professional grade. Feminist
theory argues that sex roles exist in patriarchal societies and
organizations, which are established by social structures and
relationships that favor men. (Gough, 1998). Gender regime exists and
continues to exist. (Wahl, 1992). Social roles are gendered and
determined by a variety of social, political and economic factors, and
in addition to sex and biological differences between men and women,
there are cultural and historical factors that build them. It is
generally believed that leadership, organizational culture and
communication are constructed with a masculine subtext, and dominant
views on leadership are difficult to integrate with femininity.
(Lipman-Blumen, 1992; Aaltio, 2002).
Earlier management research took it for granted that
managers were men, (see for example Mintzberg, 1973, 1989; Dalton,
1959), and ignored gender issues altogether. The so-called great-man
theory is one of the earliest management theories. It argues that
persons (men) who have influenced Western civilization, have
characteristics that are needed in a good leader.
To give an overview of leadership theories, there
are, rougly, three bodies of theories: trait, behavioural and
contingency theories (Metcalfe & Altman, 2000, 107-111). Early
theory development in 1930's and 1940's usead a trait theory approach
based on the premise that successful leaders would possess
distinguishable characteristics not found in their followers (Weiss,
1996).
Trait approaches link psychological features and
capabilities like intelligence, superior judgement, decisiveness and a
high need for achievement to leadership, and even physical features
characteristics like weight, height, physique and energy were argued to
be needed in affective leadership. This is not surprising thinking the
close link between leadership and military occupations and law
enforcement. There was a subtext in the trait theories that there are
natural reasons that lead to the fact that there are more men than women
as leaders. Instead of intelligence and logic, emotionality and
therefore irrationality suit better, stereotypically, to female traits
than to male, and in body strength they also become the second sex.
There are many interesting pieces of research like
the one by Maddock and Parkin (1993) that highlight how women in
organizations may struggle to convey appropriate female behaviour and
valued management competence. They look to be difficult to combine.
There is even "gentlemen's" culture which acknowledges the special
skills and abilites of women, leading them to "ladies' club" that
supports male management decision making. In locker room cultures there
is exclusion of women from men´s club with sporty male outlook, and
inclusion would mean to attend football matches and partaking male
sexual joking that undermine women, that means, to compromise their
feminine identity. The idealization of masculine features and seeing
them as representations of ideal leadership traits is the outcome of
these cultures.
Behavioral theories focus on managers' behavior.
There are three main types of behavioral theories. One distinguishes
between two types of behavior; task-oriented style and interpersonally
oriented style. Another distinguishes between two types of leadership;
autocratic and democratic. The third type, situational theory, regards
different types of behavior appropriate for various situations. The
behavioral theories implicitly suggest that better managers are either
masculine (i. e. high task / low interpersonal style, autocratic
decision making) or feminine (i. e. low task / high interpersonal style,
democratic decision making). (Powell, 1993), and are gendered as well
as trait theories and great-man theories are.
Behavioral theories are seemingly more
gender-neutral in that they study effective leadership in terms of
leaders help their sub-ordinates to achieve their goals. Usually, the
samples consisted male managers, seeing gender not relevant at all
(Mills, 1988). If gender sometimes was focused, there were found
interesting differences like that identical leadership style may be seen
differently depending on the gender of the manager (Eagly et al.,
1992), or the idea of sex-role spillover that refers to gender-based
expectations for behavior that are irrelevant or inappropriate to work
(discussed in Metcalfe & Altman, 2000, 108-109).
Contingency theories focus on organizational
contexts that make some leadership behaviors or features more effective
than the others. There are some studies that give emphasis on the
situation and its gendered consequences on leadership behavior. Men and
women work differently, like women communicate in a way that exchanges
feelings and creates personal relationships, whereas men communicate to
establish their status and show independence. In addition, men are
socialized to believe that they have the right to influence and the
historical evidence with male dominantly managed organizations supports
this.
3. Charismatic leadership and gender
The basic nature of charismatic leadership is in its
emotional tie between the leaders and the led. Charismatic leadership
takes place within the process between the leader and the subordinates,
which relationship is personalized and intimate and where mutual trust
prevails. Organizational contexts that allow emotionality may trigger
charismatic leadership and followership in organizations. Charismatic
leadership can also lead to bad or good consequences. We can study it
using the threatening examples taken from history, but it is also
possible to adopt a brighter and more everyday understanding of its
nature instead and see it as a commonly shared attribute.
Differences and similarities between female and male managers
Overall, there is some research made using male and
female gender as a critical factor. We now review a few of those studies
where comparisons between female and male managers are made. Powell
(1993) brings forward a modern approach to management theory and claims
that there are three perspectives on the difference between female and
male managers. (1) there are no differences between men and women as
managers, women managers try to become like men and reject the gender
stereotype. (2) men make better managers because their early
socialization experiences differ: they are playing more team sports than
girls do (Hennig and Jardim, 1977). (3) stereotypical differences
between the sexes, where women in managerial roles bring out their
feminine characteristics that tend to be stereotypical.
Feminist researchers, such as Rosener (1990), argue
that female and male leaders differ in accordance with gender
stereotypes. She argues that femininity is particularly needed in
today's work life. Rosener claims, along the same lines as Powell
(1993), Gardiner and Tiggemann (1999), that there are profound
differences between male and female leaders; female leaders concentrate
on the relationships between people whereas men tend to concentrate on
the issues or tasks. Women use more personal power, i. e. power based on
charisma and personal contacts, whereas men tend to use structural
power, i. e. power based on the organizational hierarchy and position.
(Eagly and Johnson, 1990). Lundberg and Frankenhaeuser (1999) in turn
argue that there is no difference between men and women in interpersonal
style of leadership, but that men are more task-oriented than women.
Schein's (1973) classic study concluded that both
female and male executives believed that managers possessed
characteristics that were more associated with men than with women. In
later studies that examined the perceptions of executive women, women
have no longer described successful managers as having only masculine
characteristics. More recent management theories, such as the Managerial
Grid Theory, claim that both masculine and feminine characteristics are
important in a good manager. The Theory suggests that best managers are
androgynous: they combine both (masculine) high task and (feminine)
high interpersonal styles. (Powell 1993). Although the concept of
androgyny has received mixed support, one aspect has been agreed upon:
Leadership is generally conceived in masculine terms (Goktepe and
Schneier, 1988; Kruse and Wintermantel, 1986), but also feminine
features are needed in a manager. Frankenhaeuser et al. (1989) claim
that female managers are psychologically more androgynous than men
suggesting that female managers absorb masculine features, whereas men
stick to the masculine style more.
Some researchers suggest that women should adopt a
masculine style to become accepted as leaders (Sapp, Harrod, and Zhao,
1996). Women in leading positions have shown to be more masculine
(Fagenson, 1990). However, Watson (1988) has indicated that masculine
women's performance level is low, and women choosing such a strategy
often experience role conflicts (Geis, 1993). Baril, Elbert,
Mahar-Potter and Reavy (1989) claim that adopting one's masculine and
feminine behavior to suit each situation separately might be the best
approach. Powell (1993) argues that both feminine managers and
androgynous managers seem to fit in today's work environment. This is
true even if the managerial, masculine favorable subtext still exists.
However, management and leadership are dependent on the local context
and culture where they are practiced, and this makes drawing universal
theories difficult. When overall conclusions are led, the outcome looks
to be that masculine is dominant. When we essentialize the difference,
the implication is that women lead not like men, but are lesser than men
or men with a lack (Oseen, 1997). This is because people hold sex
stereotypical beliefs and attitudes about women and men, and not tend to
see that women as leaders can be as competent as their male colleagues.
About charisma and leadership
Even ancient philosophers like Plato already talked
about charisma, society and leadership. Plato's view of leadership, from
a normative standpoint, was that a leader must be a man of power with a
sincerely truth-seeking vision. According to Plato, a leader must have
charisma, a gift of grace, to be successful in his actions. Without
charisma, a leader is unable to do his job, to head an organization. And
this charisma is something mystical, which cannot be obtained by force
or through training. It is of divine origin. Charisma is based on the
aura of the leader's exceptional quality and deviates from the
prototypical (Weber, 1964, Takala, 1998).
Leadership theories can be divided into
transactional and transformational theories Conger & Kanungo, 1998).
In the transactional approach, leaders are seen as people who motivate
and guide their followers in the direction of established goals by
clarifying their role and their tasks. There is also another type of
leader who inspires his or her followers to transcend their own
self-interests for the good of the organization and who is capable of
having a profound and extraordinary effect on the followers. Among these
leaders, who may be called transformational, are charismatic leaders
such as Mother Teresa and Lee Iacocca. They use their personal abilities
to transform their followers' values by creating a sense of importance
and value to the tasks. The inspirationality of the leadership function
is emphasized in these approaches.
Charismatic leadership in organizations has recently
been the focus of several organizational studies (Steyer, 1998, Gardner
& Avolio, 1998), even though basic conceptual work (Bryman, 1992,
Cogner & Kanungo, 1987, 1998) and empirical work (House, 1977) has
been ongoing in the field from 70´s onwards. Nowadays it is often
studied in relation to organizational contexts (like Aaltio-Marjosola
& Takala, 1999). The interrelationships between the leader's inner
world and its outcomes affect the nature of organizational culture and
even the strategic choices made in the company, as pointed out in
several investigations. Among the outcomes there are also the effects
of the dark sides of the leaders personalities on organizations, as
amphasized in the psychodynamic approaches (Kets de Vries and Miller,
1984).
Charisma is stigmatized by the glory given to a
selected few. Charisma can serve not but personal interests but the
society, and the organization as a whole. The followers must feel the
over-individual, leader-independent targets and visions in charismatic
leader context, in order to commit themselves to their leadership style.
A charismatic leader´s selfisheness and narcissism may together lead to
undesired consequences, whereas the unselfish and sacrificing features
of a charismatic leader may be seen to bring about desired and admirable
consequences. The nature of charisma is not very rational. Charisma
works between the leaders and their followers and is evidently based on
authority given to the leader only because of his or her overwhelming
knowledge or experience, but rather is based on his or her personal
characteristics. The acceptance of charisma, from the follower's point
of view, can be regarded as dubious and showing the tendency to be
easily impressed by others - a sign of weakness and subordination.
Followers may leave space for irrational forces to operate in society
(Aaltio-Marjosola, 1994).
The discussion on charisma in leadership and
organizations takes often a tone of danger. Charisma has sometimes been
interpreted as the politically dubious characteristics of individuals in
society, and it is searched the psychological mechanisms which lead to
the emergence of charismatic leaders and attraction of such leaders to
the people that follow them. Totalitarian aspects of societies and the
truth manipulation practiced by charismatic leaders are negative and
undesired consequences of charismatic leadership, as some gloomy
examples taken from the history show (Aaltio-Marjosola & Takala,
2001)..
Recent developments have brought insights that
emphasize the organizational contexts of charismatic leadership, as well
as its consequences for organizations and followers. It looks as if
charismatic leadership comes into question especially when the visionary
nature, transformational role and emotionality of leadership is
explored. In general, charismatic followership is crucial for
understanding charismatic leadership and the processes by which it takes
place. The legitimacy of charisma and charismatic leadership is
sociologically and psychologically attributed to the belief of the
followers and not so much to the quality of the leader. In this respect,
the leaders are important because they can 'charismatically' evoke this
sense of belief and can thereby demand obedience. At the same time the
nature of charisma is not very rational. Charisma works between the
leaders and their followers, and is evidently not based on authority
given to the leader only because of his or her overwhelming knowledge or
experience, but rather is based on his or her personal characteristics.
The message of sceptical approaches towards charismatic leadership is
that the charisma of leaders together with its acceptance by followers
may leave space for 'irrational' forces to operate in society. This
allows extra space for persuasion and manipulation in charismatic
leadership.
Charismatic leadership is created in the ongoing
process between leaders and followers in which the environment,
different actors and different audiences play their role in defining a
situation and in jointly constructing a charismatic leadership.
Charismatic leaders make efforts to manage their followers' impressions
of themselves by framing, scripting, staging and performing, which
constitute the basic phases in the process.
Charismatic leadership and ethical dimensions
In such processes between the leaders and the led
ethics and emotions are important. Applied business ethics, in its
traditional form, seeks to "say and define" what kind of action Good
Business Life is. A tricky issue is that different ethical theories
state different criteria, and thus give different and occasionally
contradictory solutions to ethical problems. Applied business ethics can
be used in the role of a guardian in evaluating which kind of
charismatic leadership is "good" or "bad", or "right" or "wrong", when
studying its effect on the followers and on society as a whole. But
values are both born socially and they die socially. There is no
objective measure for value, and not only one right way of defining and
explaining charisma. Traditional ethical theories are also rational in
the sense that they imply cutting off emotions and the so-called
irrational elements of the mind, or in general they do not focus on
them. But certainly charismatic leadership involving persuasion and
rhetoric between the leaders is emotionally charged. By contextualizing
it is possible to break the guardianship and explore ethical issues in
the field by showing the multiplicity and complexity in real-life
occurrences of charismatic leadership.
Business ethics is a controversial issue, although
it is seen as a vital part of everyday business life. The importance of
ethics has usually been justified by suggesting that most people want
to live in a society in which justice and charity prevail. Concern for
business ethics is also a matter of practical life when the economic
system is considered. The economic systems can endure only if they
operate in such a way that the majority of the people believe that at
least some degree of justice prevails there. If the system lacks
legitimacy, it is likely to fail. Conger and Kanungo (1998, 213) refer
to Thomas Aquinas, according to whom the moral goodness of behaviors
should be judged on the basis of the objective act itself, the
subjective motive of the actor, and the context in which this act is
performed. Applying this to charismatic leadership, there are three
ethical dimensions: the leader's motives, the leader´s influence
strategies, and the leader's character formation. As further analyzed
by Kanungo and Mendonca (1996), charismatic leadership in its positive
form is altruistic, influences in empowering ways, emphasizes vision by
changing followers' core attitudes, beliefs and values, and manifests
needs that are self-developmental. In negative forms there are egoistic
interests, control strategies, needs for personal power, and emphasis
on compliance behavior and identification with the leader, that makes
the charismatic leadership unethical. We now ask if charismatic theory
with ethical dimensions is gender biased.
4. Discussion on gender differences in charismatic leadership
Often sport teams with coaching give excellent
examples about how to succeed in leadership. Even if the context for
leadership differs in business enterprises and sports, there are similar
issues: there is an intimate contact between the leader and the
followers and the creation of team spirit. One example of charismatic
sport leadership comes from Curt Lindström (Aaltio-Marjosola &
Takala, 2000), who successfully coached the Finnish ice-hockey team in
1993-94 into World Championship. As a personality C.L. was not an
extravert character, but rather resembled the Finnish "deep charisma"
with humility, humbleness and silence. There is a lot of dramatics and
theatre in Curre's behavior as well, and even impression management
style looks to appear. Charisma will emerge, ripen, and fall down,
which was also true with C.L. Paradoxically, there are no examples
until now of female coaches who would be given the label of charisma;
even in theatres, orchestras and other cultural organizations there
looks to appear more men than women. Overall, leadership charisma with
its strong emphasis on individuality and autonomy looks to apply more to
male character than to women - exactly the same way as there are fewer
women as leaders in top positions of organizations all over the world.
But there are some examples of women who may be
characterized as very charismatic, even in their old meanings of divine
origin. Mother Theresa, who worked in Indian slums, was given the label
of a "good" person because she sacrified her life and made people in
slums see their future lighter. Also Margaret Thatcher was a
charismatic leader, in many ways having a strong impact on her
followers, a strong vision for Britain that she held before the EU
entering by England, and it was argued that her way to lead was very
'male-like', in a negative way, and she got labeled as an Iron Lady, in
fact judged to be very masculine. She was loved and hated at the same
time. In England there were also other ancient strong queens, like the
Bloody Mary from Scotland.
Also a sort of ancient 'military' female leader was
Jeanne D'Arch, a French young, poor shepherd girl who got a divine
vision and led the solders for victories towards British army. She was
later burnt as a witch in England. She happened to express very feminine
characteristics, sensitivity - being able to get the divine vision -
and being able to share her vision with the military forces, becoming a
symbol of French patriotism in those times. There is a somewhat similar
kind of Finnish story about Liisa Eriksdaughter in 1700-1800's, based
on an investigation by Irma Sulkunen (1999). Also Liisa was a young
shepherd girl from Kalanti in 1750's. She started a large-spread
ecstasian movement in Finnish cultural structures. As Sulkunen argues,
those structures are seen in religious revival movements, but as well in
mental and ideological-social practices.
Liisa Eriskdaughter, a shepherd girl became in an
odd way 'hit by God', being alone in Santtio forest with the cattle. She
read the book by Arthur Dent about religious revival. There was a page
telling about sufferings and pains of those driven to hell. Liisa
continued reading and fell a deep sleep, waking up after a while with a
scream. Pain and threat were so real that that Liisa thought to be in
hell. She run, being greatly confused, to a village, and repeated what
she had seen to the village inhabitants. After some time the whole
village started the same scream, wiping and crying, because of their
pagan, unchristian life. 'Madness', said someone, 'women's fancies',
said another. Something like that had happened also before. But now it
became differently. The odd phenomena did nod stop in Santtio but
spread like a wind, felling down people also in other places. There
were similar stories about these outbursts, where mind and body became
confused. Later those women gave religious speeches. Chaotic group
movements spread, and also men joined those separatistic movements.
Later there became new female revivers, some of those also older women
as well, but the process of felling down was very much the same. Later
the church took quite negative attitude towards the movements, and they
moved far to East in Finland. Near the Eastern cost there was built a
group of women revivers, who wandered around Eastern Finland. Later
the atmosphere towards them became very negative. They were labeled as
'hysterical fancy-old-women' who treated the healthy Finnish
Christianity. They should be silenced by men - and it was especially
pointed the Bible messages according to which women should be silent in
the congregation. As in the case of Jeanne D'Arch, also nationalism and
patriotism walked hand in hand with religious revivals, so the treat
for the state power and to male administrators, was multiple. "The
healthy national fundamentals" gave their strict judgment to this turbid
ecstasy, unruly mental behavior, that was breaking down the patriarchal
hierarchy, and first of all, women's stepping down to modern arenas of
powerful, influential positions in political and earlier church
organization arenas. The image of women that these ecstasy movements
pictured also became very opposite to that one built in educated, active
and healthy women's movement that was religious as well. Shamanism was
labeled as bad, a threat to the society and the communities rejected
the ecstasy women, who, however, took their place at the history.
A person with a lot of charisma, but with very
questionable consequences is Osama bin Laden. As a charismatic leader
there are some notions that describe him and his ways to be a leader.
Matters dealing with Osama bin Laden (abbrev.OSB) were considered in
media very often during the last few years. He is called monster, hero,
freak, manipulator and so on. However, there evidently are features that
make it worth believing that he represents a kind of a leader, called
charismatic leader.
Max Weber defined the ideal types of leadership as
follows, bureaucratic, traditional and charismatic. Afghanistan, Osama's
home country, can be defined as traditional society with many tribes
and villages. It has the long tradition of powerful tribe-leaders.
Charismatic leadership emerges at periods of transition in societies.
Those sad happenings in the WTC's towers in Washington were starting
shots for the new coming of Bin Laden as charismatic leader. Charismatic
leaders, to be successful, demand unordinary conditions in the
community.
Magical nature of charismatic leadership is commonly
accepted phenomenon. It has been said that OSB lives in dark gave, and
he has some kind of magical powers. His super natural talents give him
strong possibilities to influence his followers. Leader-follower
relation is in this case very tight. Here comes manipulation in the
picture. The dark side of charisma convinces us the power and ethics of
using power. The leader must have strong sense of personal
responsibility to be a good charismatic leader. There have existed cases
in which fatal consequences are more a rule than an exception.
Charismatic leadership is based on the emotions. It
is irrational, as Weber put it. It is also interactive situation and
relation, leader has power over his followers, but followers have power
over the leader. The power becomes legitimised. The follower will obey
in cases when his/her values are congruent with values of the leader.
This is not coercion, but a voluntary action.
Presenting a vision of better life is one issue in
Osama's agenda. He has a video in order to recruit new members to his
group in which he puts forth some ideas concerning the wholly war.
First, it is told why the whole muslim-world must rise against U.S.
Second, it is told that the duty of every Muslim is to join in this war.
Third, the vision of better life is presented, and the way to that is
Ajihad. The texts of Koran and other writings of the wholly men are used
as legitimize the jihad. In the end, there are showed terrorist
training camps in Afghanistan. These camps offer a potential force for
better world according to Osama's video.
The Latin word terreo means something like
terrorize, or frighten people. The act of terror is messaging. Terrorist
wants leave his message in any means. The purpose is justifying the
means. His own ethical code is seen as suitable inner norm e.g for
killing people if this is necessary to reach the ultimate purpose. This
is a power in question, a power of media. The power rhetoric of media is
based on violent messaging. The victims of terrorists are only means
not purposes to terrorists. The discourse of violence constructs the
subject receiving the message. Terrorist leaves his message, violence
means more power on communication. We can see that this is a kind of
talk, which is aimed to great public. The great public is a very general
audience. The discourse of terrorism demands global audience to be
effective.
To study the ethical dimensions of charismatic
leadership, and roughly place them in four boxes, we can put some of the
figures now in their place.
ETHICAL DIMENSION
GOOD
ERIKSDAUGHTER JEANNE D'ARC |
ERIKSDAUGHTER, JEANNE D'ARC JEESUS CURRE LINDSRÖM |
BLOODY MARY MARGARET THATCHER |
OSAMA BIN LADEN HITLER IVAN THE CRUEL |
BAD
FEMININE "GENDER DIMENSION" MASCULINE
Figure 1. Gender and ethical dimension of charismatic leadership
Female and male characters carry charisma in ways
that may differ. Many characterizations about charisma suit better to
masculine ideals. This difference is not so much about the "real"
differences people hold that means, their physiological differences, or
tested psychological differences concerning mental abilities or
personality issues. As much there are culturally based expectations,
institutional and other that come from the audiences, from the followers
and that have impact what is expected about female charisma. What is
credible, allowed female charismatic leadership, what are the general
stereotypes about essential female behaviour, and how these suit to
charismatic ideals.
In general, stereotypic traits of women and men differ (Rosenkranz, 1968, Brannon, 2002, 165):
Women:
-
- Gentle
- Talkative
- aware of feelings of others
- interested in own appearance
- neat in habits
- strong need for security
- expresses tender feelings
- tactful
- does not use harsh language
- quiet
-
- wordy
- active
- competitive
- dominant
- makes decisions easily
- independent
- logical
- direct
- acts as a leader
- ambitious
- able to separate feelings from ideas
- adventurous
The given stereotypes of men fit much better to
definitions of leadership, especially to notion of transformational
leadership. If we look at charismatic leadership definitions with a
strong impact, often personal, that people make on their followers, the
list, again fits much better to men than women. Women, portrayed as a
passive, traditional, silent sex, fit evidently better for the role of
followers. Mother Theresa might present a typical, accepted female
charisma because she sacrifices for the other, for "higher" targets (to
work for the poor people) with a caring attitude, the special and
honoured feminine characteristics.
From the followers point of view, taking the example
of Liisa Eriksdaughter, she used charisma, but in a very suggestive,
manipulative and emotional way. She became a symbol of extreme female
"inner" nature, features that turned out to be negative and a danger for
the ruling class. She was a charismatic "witch" that created feelings
on her followers, but she also led them wrongly, to wrong directions.
The vision she held was important, but only for a while, and not led to
remarkable social movements. Also Jeanne D'Arch was burnt as a witch,
after leading the French solders with a dream, vision for France, that
she got while sleeping.
To be a "bad" charismatic leader would mean to
manipulate followers, being egoistic, aggressive, to lead a group of
followers for evil consequences (Osama bin Laden). Female charisma
(like Jeanne D'Arch) might work in another way, leading people (in this
case men) to wrong direction in a chaotic way, manipulate, lead with
uncontrolled emotions, making people to follow without their own
consideration. The ruling class (British, USA and the unmuslim world)
sees the charisma of Jeanne D'Arch and OBL in a negative light. They
are charismatic leaders, but only to their own followers - for the
others they become enemies with evil acts and consequences. From
relational point of view "good" and "bad" charisma are much more
difficult to separate than it first looks. Sport coach like Curt
Lindström is working in a way that does not cause any harm for the
followers, he is neutral in that way.
There are much fewer female leaders than men, and
there are much fewer charismatic female leaders than male ones. The
whole idea that leaders use power, fit better to male ideals compared to
female ones. Transformational leadership, part of any charismatic
leadership with a strong, visionary and change agent- type of leading
style fits better to male stereotypes than to female ones (look the
earlier picture). Again the bad consequences of charismatic leadership
style look to be gendered again: men's actions lead to warring, women´s
to chaos and manipulation that threatens the ruling class ways that are
suggestive. They both use the magic, the divine vision and the holy
truth with divine origin, but end with bad consequences: killing people
or rising patriotism that leads to war. A bad female charismatic leader
might look as a witch, and a bad male charismatic leader as a devil,
the sins they commit with, differs. A good charismatic leader is
portrayed as self-sacrifying, inegoistic, and visionary in a sense that
does not hurt anybody else, but works for other, more commonly shared
and accepted targets, the holy mother and the humble saint would be the
examples.
REFERENCES
Aaltio I. (2002) Interviewing Female Managers:
Presentations of Gendered Selves in Contexts. In I. Aaltio & A. J.
Mills (2002) Gender, Identity and the Culture of Organizations. (pp.
201-219). London: Routledge.
Aaltio-Marjosola, I. (1994) Gender Stereotypes as
Cultural Products of the Organization. The Scandinavian Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 10, No 2, 147-162.
Aaltio-Marjosola I. & Takala T. (2000)
Charismatic Leadership, Manipulation and the Complexity of
Organizational Life. The Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 12, Issue
4, 2000, 146-159.
Aaltio-Marjosola I. & Takala T.: Bakom den stora framgången - karisma sedd I sitt sammanhang. Ledmotiv,
2/2001, pp. 19-29.
Acker, J. (1992). Gendering Organizational Theory.
In A. Mills and P. Tancred (Eds.), Gendering Organizational Theory.
(pp.248-260). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Auster, E. R. (1993). Demystifying the Glass Ceiling: Organizational and Interpersonal Dynamics of Gender
Bias. Business and the Contemporary World, Summer 1993, 47-68.
Baril, G. L., Elbert, N., Mahar-Potter, S. and
Reavy, G. C. (1989). Are Androgynous Managers Really More Effective?.
Group and Organization Studies, 14, 234-249.
Brannon, Linda. (2002). Gender: Psychological Perspectives. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bryman A. (1992) Charisma and Leadership in Organizations. Sage, London.
Cogner J. & Kanungo R. (1998) Charismatic Leadership in Organizations. Sage, London.
Dalton, M. (1959). Men Who Manage. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Eagly, A. H. and Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and Leadership Style: A Meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233-256.
Fagenson, E. A. (1990). Perceived Masculine and
Feminine Attributes Examined as a Function of Individuals' Sex and Level
in the Organizational Power Hierarchy: A Test of Four Theoretical
Perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 204-211.
Frankenhaeuser, M., Lundberg, U., Fredrikson, M.,
Melin, B., Tuomisto, M., Myrsten, A., Hedman, M., Bergman-Losman, B. and
Wallin, L. (1989). Stress On and Off the Job As Related to Sex and
Occupational Status in White-collar Workers. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 10, 321-346.
Gardiner, M. and Tiggemann, M. (1999). Gender
Differences in Leadership Style, Job Stress and Mental Health in Male-
and Female-dominated Industries. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 72, 301-315.
Gardner W. & Avolio B. (1998) The Charismatic
Relation: a Dramaturgical Perspective. Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 1, 32-58.
Geis, F. L. (1993). Self-fulfilling Prophecies: A
Social Psychological View of Gender. In A. E. Beall and R. J. Sternberg
(Eds), The Psychology of Gender (pp. 9-54). New York: Guilford.
Gherardi, S. (1995). Gender Symbolism and Organizational Cultures. London: Sage.
Goktepe, J. R. and Schneier, C. E. (1988). Sex and
Gender Effects in Evaluating Emergent Leaders in Small Groups. Sex
Roles, 19, 29-36.
Gough B. (1998) Roles and Discource. In K. Trew and J. Kremer (Eds.) Gender & Psychology. (pp. 15-27) London: Arnold.
House R. J. (1977) A 1976 Theory of Charismatic
Leadership. In J.G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (eds.) Leadership: The
Cutting Edge. Carbondale: Southern Illinoisis University Press. 189-207.
Hennig, M. and Jardim, A. (1977). The Managerial Woman. London: Pan Books.
Kanter R. M. (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation. Anchor Press, New York.
Kanungo R.N. & Mendonca M. (1996) Ethical Dimensions of Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kauppinen K. & Aaltio I.: Leadership, Power
and Gender. In Encyclopedia of Sex and Gender, ed. by C. Ember, Yale
University (forthcoming).
Kets de Vries M. & Miller D. (1984) Neurotic Organizations.
Kruse, L. and Wintermantel, M. (1986). Leadership
ms.-qualified: The gender bias in everyday and scientific thinking. In
C. F. Graumann and S. Moscovici (Eds.), Changing conceptions of
leadership (pp. 171-197). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Lundberg, U. and Frankenhaeuser, M. (1999). Stress
and Workload of Men and Women in High-ranking Positions. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 142-151.
Maddock S. & Parkin D. (1993) Gender
Cultures: Women's Choices and Strategies at Work. Women in Management
Review, 2 (2), 3-9.
Metcalfe B. & Altman Y. (2001) Leadership. In
"Organizational Behaviour Reassessed. The Impact of Gender", ed. by E.
Wilson, Sage, London, 104-129.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Prentice Hall.
Mintzberg, H. (1989). Mintzberg on Management. New York: Macmillan.
Oseen C. (1997) Luce Irigaray, Sexual Difference
and Theorizing Leaders and Leadership. Gender, Work and Organization, 4
(3), 170-84.
Powell, G. N. (1993). Women and Men in Management. 2nd ed. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Lipman-Blumen J. (1992) Connective Leadership:
Female Leadership Styles in the 21st Century Workplace. Sociological
Perspectives, 35 (1), pp. 183-203.
Pringle, R. (1988). Secretaries Talk Sexuality, Power and Work. London: Verso.
Mills A. (1988) Organization, Gender and Culture. Organizations Studies, 9, 351-69.
Rosener J. (1990) Ways Women Lead. Harvard Business Review, November-December, 119-125.
Sapp, S. G., Harrod, W. J. and Zhao, L. (1996).
Leadership Emergence in Task Groups with Egalitarian Gender-role
Expectations. Sex Roles, 34, 65-80.
Schein, V. E. (1973). The Relationship Between
Sex-role Stereotypes and Requisite Management Characteristics. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 57 / 2, 95-100.
Steyrer J. (1998) Charisma and the Architypes of Leadership. Organization Studies, 19, 5, 807-28.
Takala T. (1988) Social Responsibility of Business
and Strategies to Legitimize it. Working Paper, University of
Jyväskylä, School of Business and Economics, No 83 (in Finnish).
Takala T. (1998) Plato on Leadership. Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 17, 785-98.
Wahl, A. (1992). Könsstrukturer i Organisationer:
Kvinnliga Civilekonomers och Civilingenjörers Karriärutveckling (Gender
Structures in Organizations: Female ?? and Engineer's Career
Development). Stockholm: Fritze.
Weber M. (1964) The Theory of Social Economic Organization. Yhe Free Press, New York.Weiss,
J. W. (1996) Organizational Behaviour & Change. Managing
Diversity, Cross-Cultural Dynamics and Ethics. USA: West Publishing
Company.
Applying virtue ethics to business: The agent-based approach
Applying virtue ethics to business: The agent-based approach
By: John Dobson.
It ca be argued that the presence of what are in a
slightly old-fashioned terminology called virtues in fact plays a
significant role in the operation of the economic system.
- Kenneth Arrow
- Kenneth Arrow
Introduction
There are two basic approaches to integrating ethics
in business: the action-based approach, and the agent-based approach.
The traditional approach is action-based in that it focusses on
developing rules or guidelines to constrain management's actions. These
rules or guidelines generally manifest themselves in corporate
codes-of-conduct, or codes-of-ethics.
Contrarily, rather than the action-based focus on
rules governing action, the agent-based approach concerns the
fundamental character and motivations of the individual agent. Under the
agent-based approach, moral behavior is not limited to adherence to a
rule or guideline but rather involves the individual rationally pursuing
moral excellence as a goal in and of itself. In essence, ethics becomes
central to the rationality concept as an objective rather than a
constraint: "something positively good, ..something to be sought after"
(Ladd, 1991, p. 82).
Agent-based approaches generally derive their
philosophical foundation from virtue-ethics theory. This theory is
attracting increasing interest from business ethicists. In essence, the
'virtue' in virtue-ethics is defined as some desirable character trait,
such as courage, that lies between two extremes, such as rashness and
cowardice. Thus the 'virtuous' agent is involved in a continual quest to
find balance in decision-making. Such an agent does not apply any
specific 'rules' in making decisions, but rather attempts to make
decisions that are consistent with the pursuit of a particular kind of
excellence that in turn entails exercising sound moral judgement guided
by such 'virtues' as courage, wisdom, temperance, fairness, integrity,
and consistency.
Rather than stepping outside one's professional
role, virtue ethics would have one evaluate an ethically charged
decision from within that role. Ethics becomes contextual and connected
to a given person and situation, rather than separate and abstract to
person and place. This is clearly a very different concept to that of
ethics as adherence to a set of abstract rules, which is so common in
contemporary professional codes of conduct.
For example, a financial accountant may be able to
enhance her company's reported results of operations by crafting a
sale-leaseback arrangement whereby some of the company's assets are
sold, a gain is recorded, all the appropriate accounting pronouncements
are adhered to, and the company still has use of its assets. The intent
of the transaction was never to rid the company of unwanted assets, but
rather to record a gain and thus possibly avoid breaching debt-covenant
agreements or circumvent regulatory requirements.
In order to examine whether or not this example of
creative financial-accounting is unethical, action-based approaches
would have the individual step out of her accounting role and don the
hat of a Kantian (e.g., "does this action violate the rights of users of
the financial statements to fairly presented financial information?"),
or of a utilitarian (e.g., "does this action maximize the welfare of all
stakeholders?"). In this approach, the agent adopts a type of moral
schizophrenia in which being a good professional in the sense of being
an economically effective accountant becomes separable from being a good
professional in the sense of being an ethical accountant. Thus, given
this action-based approach, an accountant could be a 'good' accountant,
in the sense of being very efficient and effective, yet at the same time
not be a 'good' accountant, in the sense of being ethical.
The great strength of virtue ethics is that it
overcomes this moral schizophrenia. Ethics is no longer merely a list of
constraints on behavior. For example, our financial accountant, if she
were virtuous, would not have to weigh the goal of maximizing firm
profits against the constraints of an ethics code. Maximizing firm
profits would simply no longer be her ultimate objective.
Indeed it is this holistic motivational focus,
transcending contextual specificity, that is the great contribution of
virtue-ethics theory. This theory provides an alternative value base
upon which to build a morally sensitive theory of financial economics.
At first blush, however, the virtue-ethics approach
might appear too esoteric for application in business: How could a
financial manager pursue moral excellence through virtue? On closer
scrutiny, however, the focus of virtue-ethics on the fundamental
motivations of the agent actually dovetails rather neatly with the
increasing focus among financial economists on the motivations of agents
in business.
Virtue Ethics: An Overview
Virtue ethics is concerned with pursuing a certain
type of morally inclusive excellence. Aristotle called it eudaimonia,
which can be roughly translated as 'happiness', or 'human flourishing'.
For present purposes, this approach to ethics can be thought of as
exhibiting four basic attributes. Its primary attribute is a strong
emphasis on the importance of certain generally accepted virtues of
character; indeed it is through honing and perfecting these virtues that
an individual becomes truly ethical. Secondly, a strong emphasis is
placed on the existence of an active community that nurtures these
virtues. Thirdly, virtue-ethics theory makes clear that in the moral
life one cannot rely merely on rules or guidelines, in addition an
ability to exercise sound moral judgement is requisite. Finally, the
successful identification and emulation of moral exemplars or role
models is essential for the dissemination of morality within the
aforementioned nurturing community.
The remainder of this article will describe virtue
ethics from these four perspectives: the role of the virtues, the role
of community, the role of moral judgement, and the role of exemplars.
The Role of The Virtues
An essential feature of rationality within virtue
ethics is that, rather than focussing on the material goals of the
agent, it focusses on the character and motivations of the agent, and on
the agent's ability to pursue a certain very particular type of
excellence. A characteristic of this excellence is that its pursuit
necessitates adherence to certain virtues or traits of character.
These virtues place emphasis on the motivation for an action and entail
the exercise of sound judgement. "Virtue lies in the reasons for which
one acts rather than in the type of action one performs" (Annas, 1995,
p. 250). Virtues can be split into two broad categories, namely
self-regarding and other-regarding:
When, furthermore, we look at the whole range
of traits commonly recognized as virtues, we once again see that
self-regarding and other-regarding considerations are both capable of
underlying the kind of high regard that leads us to regard various
traits as virtues. Justice, kindness, probity, and generosity are chiefly admired for what they lead those who possess these traits to do in their relations with other people, but prudence, sagacity, circumspection, equanimity, and fortitude are esteemed primarily under their self-regarding aspect, and still other traits - notably self-control, courage, and (perhaps) wisdom in practical affairs
- are in substantial measure admired both for what they do for their
possessors and for what they lead their possessors to do with regard to
other people. [Slote, 1992, p. 9, emphasis added]
A succinct definition of virtue is supplied by
MacIntyre: "A virtue is an acquired human quality the possession and
exercise of which tends to enable us to achieve those goods which are
internal..." (1984, p. 191). He distinguishes between internal and
external goods as follows:
It is characteristic of what I have called
external goods that when achieved they are always some individual's
property or possession. Moreover characteristically they are such that
the more someone has of them, the less there is for other people.
...External goods are therefore characteristically objects of
competition in which there must be losers as well as winners. Internal
goods are indeed the outcome of competition to excel, but it is
characteristic of them that their achievement is a good for the whole
community who participate in the practice. [1984, pp.190-191; emphasis
added]
The pursuit of external goods, therefore, is no
longer recognized as the ultimate end of human endeavor, but rather as a
means to the achievement of excellence. Martha Nussbaum defines this
excellence as "the end of all desires, the final reason why we do
whatever we do; and it is thus inclusive of everything that has
intrinsic worth [i.e., internal goods], lacking in nothing that would
make a life more valuable or more complete" (1991, p. 38).
A central feature of virtue ethics is its concept of
professional development as fundamentally a moral process; "one cannot
be practically rational without being just - or indeed without the other
central virtues" (MacIntyre, 1988, p. 137). Thus rather than being some
peripheral appendage or constraint on a substance-based rationality
concept, this approach places morality at center stage. In a business
context, Kenneth Goodpaster lists five key virtues:
- (1) Prudence - neither too short-term nor too long-term in time horizon; (2) Temperance - neither too narrowly materialistic (want-driven) nor too broadly dispassionate (idea-driven); (3) Courage - neither reckless nor too risk-averse; (4) Justice - neither too anarchic regarding law nor too compliant; (5) Loyalty
- neither too shareholder-driven (private sector thinking) nor too
driven by other stakeholders (public sector thinking). [1994, pp. 54-55]
Clearly, to achieve excellence through the exercise
of these virtues of character requires a sense of moderation. Thus
managers who are said to be 'weathering the storm' or 'sticking to their
guns' may well be exercising the virtue of courage. But so might a
manager who 'knows when to call it quits'. It is the reason or judgement
underlying the action that will determine whether the agent is truly
courageous. Thus a virtue is not a maximum or a minimum. Unlike
rationality in the finance paradigm, practical rationality concerns
moderation and balance.
The crucial difference, therefore, between
traditional approaches to business ethics and the approach adopted in
virtue-ethics theory is that the latter focusses on the character and
motivations of the agent, and on the agent's ability to pursue
excellence through virtuous acts. As mentioned earlier, Klein succinctly
distinguishes between the traditional approach to business ethics and
the new virtue-ethics approach by labelling them as "action-based" and
"agent-based" respectively: the former tending to focus on moral rules
that can be generally applied to contractual situations (e.g. Kantianism
and utilitarianism), whereas virtue ethics concerns the aspirations of
the agent, and the agent's ability to exercise the moral 'virtues'.
Klein describes a similar individual in his analysis of Cervantes's Don Quixote:
The ideal of craftsmanship is to create that
which has quality or excellence; personal satisfaction, pride in
accomplishment, and a sense of dignity derived from the consequent
self-development are the motivations. In an 'excellent' company it is
this ideal that permeates the firm, and management should provide the
moral example of such an ideal; a business management craftsman attempts
to create a quality organization, and quality products and services are
the result of such an organization. [1998, p. 55]
Klein's managers recognize their business universe
as essentially one of chaotic disorder and unpredictability where rules
of logic and rationality will never fit comfortably. These managers
endeavor to achieve some sort of balance and harmony in their chaotic
environment. In this endeavor they are not quixotic, but rather are
guided by conceptions of quality, excellence, the Good, Aristotelian
eudaimonia, and by conceptions of desirable character traits -- virtues
-- that may lead to these ideals. The acquisition of these character
traits and the concomitant pursuit of these ideals is not achieved
simply by the application of certain rules of logic, or of rationality.
Indeed the whole pursuit is characterized by a marked absence of rules
and set goals.
The Role of Community
Virtue ethics theory also has implications for the
role of the firm or professional organization. For the virtues to
flourish requires a conducive infrastructure; "one cannot think for
oneself if one thinks entirely by oneself, .. it is only by
participation in a rational practice-based community that one becomes
rational .." (MacIntyre, 1988, p. 396). MacIntyre defines a practice as ...
- .. any coherent and complex form of
socially established cooperative human activity through which goods
internal to that form of activity are realized in the course of trying
to achieve those standards of excellence which are appropriate to, and
partially definitive of, that form of activity, with the result that
human powers to achieve excellence, and human conceptions of the ends
and goods involved, are systematically extended. [1984, p. 187]
Thus rationality in virtue ethics is a shared
rationality with a shared conception of what is ultimately desirable in
all human endeavor. This shared conception must be supported by, and
indeed be the raison d'être of, the organizations and institutions that
control and direct human activity. This infrastructure is an aspect of
what was known in the city-states of ancient Greece as the polis: "the
form of social order whose shared mode of life already expresses the
collective answer or answers of its citizens to the question 'What is
the best mode of life for human beings?'" (ibid., p.133). Such an
infrastructure is essential for virtue ethics:
- Aristotle is articulating at the level of
theoretical enquiry a thought inherited from the poets when he argues in
Book I of the Politics (1252b28-1253a39) that a human being separated from the polis
is thereby deprived of some of the essential attributes of a human
being. .. A human being stands to the polis as a part to its whole. ..
For the polis is human community perfected and completed by achieving its telos. [Ibid., p.96-97]
The virtue-ethics approach thus casts the firm or
professional organization in a role that is far more active and
intrusive than merely what Jensen and Meckling call a "contractual
nexus" (1976) or what Miller describes as a "wealth creating machine"
(1986). The firm becomes a nurturing community, a polis. "Corporations
are real communities, ..and therefore the perfect place to start
understanding the nature of the virtues" (Solomon, 1992, p.325). Solomon
emphasizes the link between virtue-ethics and this expanded role of the
firm as a nurturing community: "It [virtue-ethics] is an Aristotelian
ethics precisely because it is membership in a community, a community
with collective goals and a stated mission - to produce quality goods
and/or services and to make a profit for the stockholders" (Solomon,
1992, p.321). Within the rubric of virtue-ethics theory, therefore, the
goals and aspirations of the individual are nurtured and directed by the
business organizations and institutions of which that individual forms a
part.
The Role of Moral Judgment
Another significant aspect of virtue ethics is its
rejection of a rule-based approach to moral education. Acting ethically
in a given situation is less a function of rule adherence and more a
function of exercising sound moral judgement. MacIntyre makes this very
clear:
- What can never be done is to reduce what
has to be learned in order to excel at such a type of activity to the
application of rules. There will of course at any particular stage in
the historical development of such a form of activity be a stock of
maxims which are used to characterize what is taken at that stage to be
the best practice so far. But knowing how to apply these maxims is
itself a capacity which cannot be specified by further rules, and the
greatest achievements in each area at each stage always exhibit a
freedom to violate the present established maxims, so that achievement
proceeds both by rule-keeping and by rule-breaking. And there are never
any rules to prescribe when it is the one rather than the other that we
must do if we are to pursue excellence. [1984, p. 31]
This does not mean that, for example, derivatives
traders should ignore exchange standards or codes of conduct, but rather
that these should be viewed - not as the entire professional ethic -
but as the foundation from which to pursue the professional ideal in
this activity. This professional ideal will be defined in terms of the
internal goods specific to the practice of derivatives trading, but more
on this later.
The Role of Moral Exemplars
The role of exemplars is critical for the
application of virtue ethics because it is from these individuals that
the virtues are disseminated throughout the profession. Thus, in virtue
ethics, ethics is something which is learnt through observation
of others' behavior. For example, in his article on "Good Works",
Michael Pritchard concludes that "beyond discussing codes of ethics,
principles of right and wrong, dilemmas ... and moral disaster stories,
we need stories of a different sort - stories of good professionals whose lives might inspire emulation"
(p. 170, emphasis added). A resurgence in recognition of the critical
importance of moral exemplars is supplied by cognitive science in its
invocation of "exemplar theory". Alvin Goldman summarizes the theory as
follows:
- Moral theorists often assume that people's
usage of moral terms is underpinned by some sort of rules or principles
they learn to associate with those terms: rules governing honesty, for
example, or fairness. The exemplar theory suggests, however, that what
moral learning consists in may not be (primarily) the learning of rules
but the acquisition of pertinent exemplars or examples. This would
accord with the observable fact that people, especially children, have
an easier time assimilating the import of parables, myths, and fables
than abstract principles. A morally suitable role model may be
didactically more effective than a set of behavioral maxims. [1993, p.
341]
In summary, what this overview of virtue-ethics
theory makes clear is that an individual, whether finance professional
or otherwise, cannot be ethical in a vacuum. The individual must be
educated in the virtues by a nurturing community, and by the guidance of
exemplars. This approach takes ethics far deeper than merely a credo or
code of conduct. Ethics becomes integral to the professional's whole
conception of what it is he or she is about. Rather than the opportunist
of financial agency theory, the virtuous agent adopts a different
notion of substantive rationality: Practical Rationality.
Virtuous behavior: Practical Rationality
A chess championship recently took place in London
between the reigning champion, Gary Kasparov, and a British challenger,
Nigel Short. The winner of the tournament was to receive some $2 million
in prize money. Imagine that one of the players, say Kasparov, is
'rational' in the economic sense as invoked by the finance paradigm,
while the other player, Short, is 'rational' in the sense of
Aristotelian practical rationality as invoked by virtue-ethics theory. How, exactly, would these two individuals differ in their approach to the chess tournament?
Clearly the actions of the two agents may be
indistinguishable. They would both be playing chess to the best of their
ability, and would both be playing to win. Clearly, also, either player
could win. The difference between the two players would likely rest
entirely on their respective motivations for winning. Kasparov's
motivation would derive from the external goods to be gained from
playing chess, namely the $2 million prize money and perhaps also the
fame and power that comes from being 'the champion'. Contrarily, Short's
motivation would derive from the internal goods to be gained
from playing chess. These goods are less easily identified. They are, as
MacIntyre notes, "those goods specific to chess, .. the achievement of a
certain highly particular kind of analytical skill, strategic
imagination and competitive intensity .." (1984, p. 188).
In essence, Kasparov views chess as a means to an
end, where the end is wealth, fame, and power. Short, on the other hand,
views chess as an end in itself. To the practically-rational Mr. Short
chess is a "practice"; indeed an understanding of the concept of a
practice is central to an understanding of practical rationality.
What the rationality embedded in virtue-ethics makes very clear is that excellence within a practice is in and of itself
a moral excellence; the pursuit of excellence in a practice
necessitates the exercise of the virtues. "A virtue tends to enable us
to achieve those goods which are internal to practices and the
lack of which essentially prevents us from achieving any such goods"
(1984, p. 191, emphasis added). Thus a practically rational financial
manager would be one who views financial management as a practice, with
goods internal to the activity itself. Contrarily an economically
rational financial manager is one who views financial management
primarily as a means to the attainment of external goods. This latter
financial manager or agent is the one who currently populates the models
of agency theory.
Both types of financial manager will pursue what
they perceive as their self interest. In the case of practical
rationality, however, the agent's self interest is defined in terms of
the pursuit of excellence within the practice. Furthermore this pursuit
will be undertaken through the exercise of the virtues within a
community (the polis).
Thus practical rationality is an interactive or
connected rationality. A practically rational agent pursues happiness
or excellence (what Aristotle termed eudaimonia) while realizing
that this pursuit cannot be successfully undertaken opportunistically:
the achievement of happiness requires the exercise of the moral virtues
such as honesty in dealings with others.
Acid-Test: Derivatives Trading
Many outside observers view derivatives trading --
as undertaken by hedge funds such as the George Soros fund, or Long-term
Capital Management (LTCM) -- as the epitome of the ugly face of global
capitalism: it appears to be an activity premised purely on the
short-term acquisition of material wealth through the creation of
complex and artificial financial instruments. But, as is usually the
case, on closer scrutiny things are not so simple.
Although outright speculation undoubtedly explains
much derivatives trading activity, it does not explain the whole market.
Take, for example, two of the most popular trading strategies employing
derivatives, namely portfolio insurance and index arbitrage. Without
getting into the technicalities, the essential objective behind
portfolio insurance is -- as the name implies -- to insure a portfolio
against heavy losses. This is generally achieved by entering into
derivatives positions that become profitable if the portfolio to be
insured loses value. Similarly, the objective behind index arbitrage is
not to maximize profits ad infinitum but rather to lock in a
modest risk-free return. This is achieved by exploiting the 'spread'
between the value of a futures contract and the corresponding spot
value.
Rather than simple wealth maximization, therefore,
such strategies are better described as risk management. Furthermore,
they involve the application of a substantial body of sophisticated
knowledge that evolves through time. There is an excellence to pursue
here, namely the development of a trading strategy that successfully
meets some risk-management goal. The activity is also communal: traders
work in various groups that pursue certain common goals. For example,
the traders in a 'pit' on the
London-International-Financial-Futures-Exchange (LIFFE) share the common
goal of maintaining as liquid a market as possible for their particular
contract; or the traders in a trading room of a financial institution
share the common goal of meeting performance targets and designing
contracts that meet the risk-management needs of clients. But could this
activity be reasonably viewed as what MacIntyre defines as a practice?
There are three basic characteristics of derivatives trading that define it as a practice within virtue ethics:
- First, it establishes its own standards of
excellence in the design and successful implementation of the various
trading strategies summarized above.
- Second, there are particular internal goods
specific to derivatives trading. As always with the concept of internal
goods it is hard to find words to define them. In After Virtue, in the
context of chess, MacIntyre defines the internal goods as analytical
skill, strategic imagination and competitive intensity. All these would
seem to be eminently applicable to derivatives trading.
- Third, derivatives trading is undoubtedly
organic. These markets are continually changing as new strategies and
contracts are being developed all the time.
In short, there is no reason why the tenets of a
practice-based community cannot be applied to even the most
cold-bloodedly technical of business activities, namely derivatives
trading. Such a derivatives trading organization would be one in which
its members viewed themselves as engaged in the pursuit of the internal
goods unique to the practice of derivatives trading; e.g., the
successful application of the theoretical tools of option-pricing
theory, or the ability to design a portfolio insurance strategy that
meets as closely as possible the stated risk-management objectives.
Conclusion
For the virtues to be successfully applied to
business, business activity must be viewed as a 'practice' as defined
above. Whether or not any business activity qualifies as a practice
depends less on the type of activity, and more on the character and
motivations of the people engaged in it. The challenge that any
organization faces, therefore, is to educate managers as to the
desirability of virtue-based behavior.
As a 'true professional', the good manager strives
to achieve a certain specific type of morally inclusive excellence. One
critical feature of this excellence is that its achievement entails
adherence to certain 'virtues' of character, such as honesty, fairness,
prudence, and courage. The excellence pursued by the true professional,
therefore, is not something that can be measured in strictly material
terms, it is a moral as well as an economic excellence. Albeit hard to
quantify, individuals or 'exemplars' who have achieved this excellence
are generally identifiable by their predisposition to place personal
integrity over and above any material considerations.
References
Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press (1991 ed.).
Aristotle, The Politics, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press (1991 ed.).
Arrow, Kenneth; 1975 "Gifts and Exchanges" in
Phelps, E. S. (ed.) Atruism, Morality, and Economic Theory (New York:
Russell Sage Foundation)
Arrow, Kenneth; 1984 "The Economics of Agency" Stanford University: unpublished research paper.
Dees, Gregory J.; 1982 "Principals, Agents, and
Ethics" in Ethics and Agency Theory ed. Norman E. Bowie and R. Edward
Freeman (New York: Oxford University Press).
DeGeorge, Richard T.; 1990, Business Ethics 3d ed. (Macmillan, New York).
De George, Richard T.; 1993 Competing With Integrity in International Business, New York: Oxford University Press.
Gilligan, Carol: 1982, In a different voice (Harvard University Press, Cambridge).
Goodpaster, Kenneth E; 1991 "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis" Business Ethics Quarterly 1:54-73
____________________; 1994 "Work, Spirituality and
the Moral Point of View" International Journal of Value-Based Management
7, No. 1, 49-62.
MacIntyre, Alasdair: 1966 A Brief History of Ethics, Macmillan, New York.
___________________: 1984, After Virtue, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame; 2nd ed.
___________________: 1988, Whose Justice? Which Rationality? University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame.
Nussbaum, Martha C; 1991 "The Chill of Virtue" The New Republic September 16 & 23, 34-40.
Schwartz, Barry; 1990 "King Midas in America", in
Enhancing Business Ethics edited by Clarence C. Walton: New York,
Plennum Press.
Sen, Amartya: 1987 On Ethics and Economics New York: Basil Blackwell
Simon, H. A.; 1986 "Rationality in Psychology and Economics" Journal of Business 59, pp. S209-S224.
Slote, Michael, 1992 From Morality to Virtue, New York: Oxford University press
Solomon, Robert C.; 1992 "Corporate Roles, Personal
Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach to Business Ethics" Business Ethics
Quarterly 2, 317-339.
__________________; 1994 The New World of Business, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Inc.
Tavris, Carol; 1992 The Mismeasure of Women. New York: Touchstone.
Taylor, Richard; 1991 Virtue Ethics: An Introduction (New York: Linden Books)
Thaler, Richard H.: 1992 The Winner's Curse: Paradoxes and Anomolies of Economic Life, The Free Press, New York.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)