Critiquing Voegtlin's propositions on responsible leadership and organizational ethics

Ethical Theory Through a Global Lens

Today, organizational leaders are confronted with a bewildering array of unprecedented ethical dilemmas that demand a comprehensive understanding of the relevant theoretical issues that are involved in an increasingly complex and diverse global context (Lund-Thomsen & Lindgreen, 2014; Thompson, 2010; Voegtlin, Patzer, and Scherer, 2012). To help develop new insights into these issues, this paper selects three of the eight propositions for ethical leadership proposed in an opinion article by Voegtlin et al. (2012) to develop corresponding critiques of their likely outcomes at various levels. In addition, a discussion concerning the unanswered questions that scholars should address to further understand these leadership propositions is followed by a summary of the research and important findings concerning these issues in the conclusion.

Review and Discussion

The three propositions proposed by Voegtlin et al. (2012) selected for this analysis are presented below, followed by a critique of their likely outcomes at various levels:

Proposition No. 1: Responsible leadership helps to build and maintain the legitimacy of an organization

Of the eight propositions proposed by Voegtlin et al. (2012), this is by far the most straightforward and easily supported. For instance, according to Nwagbara (2013), one of the hallmarks of a legitimate organization is responsible leadership that takes into account the views of all stakeholders. Likewise, Zaccaro and Klimoski (2009) emphasize the need for responsible leadership to promote the legitimacy of organizations of all sizes and types in both the public and private sectors. At the local level, it is reasonable to suggest that higher levels of responsible leadership would help improve public relations with the communities in which private sector organizations compete, while public sector organizations would experience improved relationships with their constituents.

Similarly, because many private sector organizations compete nationally by virtue of commercial Web sites, responsible leadership would help ensure that these enterprises were perceived by consumers as being a legitimate brand that deserves their trust and business. In the public sector, responsible leadership could help improve the perception among the general public that the government was performing its mandates in accord with the public will and the law of the land. Finally, at the international level, responsible leadership is an essential element of overcoming the fundamental cross-cultural differences that challenge relations with other countries, even those with comparable histories, cultures and values.

Proposition No. 4: Responsible leaders can gradually change the ethical culture of an organization over time. Responsible leadership will thereby encourage a culture of discursive conflict resolution and deliberative practices.

To their credit, Voegtlin et al. (2012) concede that changing the ethical culture of any organization represents a challenging enterprise that requires time, but they are less clear concerning how best to make these changes, even on a gradual basis. Nevertheless, their recommendation to encourage a "culture of discursive conflict resolution" draws on the Socratic tradition that "truth emerges from debate" (Barber, 1994, p. 45). The recommendation to implement "deliberative practices" to gradually change the ethical culture of an organization over time is also congruent with the guidance provided by Tait and Hansen (2013) who emphasize this need to promote improved relations between organizations and the communities in which they operate at the local and regional levels. This guidance mirrors Voegtlin et al.'s (2012) call for enhanced corporate social responsibility activities at all levels. At the international level, deliberative practices such as the ISO series can help promote trust with trading partners in the private sector while deliberative practices by the federal government can help assure allies and belligerent nations that a country follows an established process in formulating foreign policy rather than relying on the knee-jerk reactions of a few hot-headed politicians.

Proposition No. 7: Responsible leadership contributes directly and indirectly to the performance of an organization under the caveat of ethical or moral means.

On its face, this proposition appears to be so nebulous as to defy disagreement, and Voegtlin et al. (2012) make a good argument in its support. In more concrete terms, this proposition means that responsible leaders serve as a role model for their followers to emulate in their day-to-day work practices, thereby inculcating an ethical organizational culture. This process can also support the discursive conflict resolution practices recommended in proposition no. 3 above. In this regard Voegtlin et al. (2012) point out that: