Application of theory to leadership

Plato: Application of Theory to Leadership

Plato should always be discussed in a conversation that has to do with the theories surrounding leadership, because Plato deals with ethics in many of his writings, and ethics are vital to proper leadership. In particular, his informative dialogues in 'The Republic,' namely 'The Allegory of the Cave' deal with ethics in a rather abstract sense (Peterfreund, White, & Denise, 2007; Giardina, 1999). This writing will be mentioned here, and used to explain how Plato sees human ethics and behaviors, because ethics seem to be dwindling today, and human behaviors appear to be getting more aggravated, more angry, and more complex as the world changes, technology advances, and people find that how they handle leadership (and being led) has to change to meet the times.

According to Plato, the nature and origin of justice is such that men who are able to do wrong to others will often do so, and men who do not have the strength to keep themselves from harm will not do harm to others. What Plato is trying to say is that human nature often makes people get away with what they can, and the people who cannot defend themselves often do not try to harm others because they know that the reciprocal harm they could come to would not be worth what they could gain from harming someone else. This can be a particular problem in a leadership capacity, because people in positions of power often take that power and run with it. This was seen with the Enron scandal, with Bernard Madoff, and with countless other companies and men that were given positions of power over others.

Plato's argument makes people sound as if they are not very nice, but yet that is not entirely what he means. What he actually means is that men who are more able to fend for themselves will not be as concerned about how others perceive their actions. This is not due to a lack of ethics, but rather due to the fact that human nature does not make everyone perceive ethics in the same way -- and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Ethics are also considered in Plato's 'The Allegory of the Cave.' The people who are suddenly released from the cave would not know how to react in the sunlight, because the world that they found themselves in would not seem real to them (Peterfreund, White, & Denise, 2007).

Their ethics would not be the same as those people who have always lived in the sunlight, because their perceptions of the world and how it works would not be the same as other individuals. For someone who has always been in a leadership role, has always had money, or has always been privileged, the life that he lives is not the same kind of life that someone without these things would live. The ethics and morals that are addressed between the two would be conflicting, causing problems for both of them, but mostly for the person who is not in the leadership position.

Plato's Influences

It is highly important to examine Plato's work, because much of what he looked at with ethics and other issues relates to leadership and the way that the issue was handled in the past and is still being handled today. Much of what Plato worked with and where his philosophy came from involved three other philosophers -- Pythagorus, Heraclitus, and Parmenides. These three individuals will be addressed here, briefly, and after they have been discussed Plato's philosophy will be addressed in order to show how the work that they did was taken up by Plato and used in the philosophy that he discussed, and how that philosophy is still important for leaders today, even though so much time has passed.

Pythagorus was the individual who created the Pythagorean Theorem (Kahn, 2004). He was not just a mathematician, however. He was a philosopher, as well. He and his followers believed that everything was cyclical and went in patterns. In other words, everything that happened could be explained by mathematics, and there was nothing mystical about it. Pythagorus had a strong influence on Plato in many ways.

In addition to Pythagorus, Heraclitus also affected Plato. Heraclitus created philosophical statements that were seen to be fragmented, but they also had significance for other philosophers. He believed that opposition brought concord, and harmony came from discord. Plato was both influenced by this statement and others that Heraclitus made, and Plato acknowledged the idea of becoming, which was central to what Heraclitus discussed. Many of the moral values that Heraclitus had, though, were basically designed for what someone would consider to be a closed society and Heraclitus stated that both good and bad were really identical. His philosophy was accepted by some and denounced by others (Kahn, 2004). It would not, however, fit with most modern-day thoughts on leadership.

Parmenides was another philosopher who affected Plato. His philosophy was generally presented in verse form, and he was believed by some to be a philosopher, a magician, and a prophet. His work was esoteric and obscure, as was much of Plato's. The influence that Parmenides had on Plato is obvious, and it changed the entire idea of Western philosophy (Kahn, 2004). Plato even refers to Parmenides in his works, telling others that he should be respected and studied, as many think of him as being the 'grandfather' of Western philosophy. Others, of course, do not agree, and that is often the nature of many of the more philosophical concepts that are still evolving today.

Humanity and Perceptual Differences

Because of the differences in perception that people have, it cannot be said that someone who comes from another place has better ethics, or worse ethics, than someone else. Often, ethics can only be perceived as being different. This does not make a person right or wrong, but only reminds that person that he or she is different from someone else. The main conclusions that Plato comes to in many of his writings are that people perceive ethics differently, and that those who come from other cultures and places are often seen as having different ethical opinions. These are generally because of the way they look at the world. In some ways, this idea ties into the opinions of other philosophers such as Descartes, who believed that perceptions of the world were flawed, based on and inability to rely on one's senses (Taylor, 2001; Guthrie, 1986).

Plato's philosophical statements are hard to argue with. Most of his opinions about human nature and ethics are solid, and they generally still hold true today. What he believes about human nature can be seen by observing all kinds of people and watching what they do in relation to specific events that come into their life (Guthrie, 1986). Because of this, many individuals today agree with what Plato thought, and they think that his beliefs will continue to stand the test of time as they have ever since he chose to make them public. This is true for personal lives and also for business lives, and leadership is part of that equation. People are not just leaders if they run a corporation, they also lead families, groups of their peers, friends, and others by example, and too many people forget that leadership and the qualities that make a person a good leader are important in all facets of life, not just in one or two of them where a person is called upon to lead for a paycheck.

The conclusions that Plato reached have held up all these years because they are true, and because human nature has not really changed that much since Plato's time. Technology and other things have advanced far beyond what Plato could likely have ever imagined, but the intrinsic nature of human beings has remained the same, and will probably continue to do so. This is what makes Plato's musings regarding ethics and morality continue to be studied and believed by many, especially where the leadership of other individuals is concerned and where people are called upon to show others the right way to live.

How People Learn Ethics

Plato also wanted to give a clear explanation of how human beings learned, and "The Allegory of the Cave" is the clearest of all his work in the Republic in that regard. Not only does he discuss education, but also philosophy, political life, and human life overall -- all areas where leadership matters. Much of what Plato pointed out during that time is still accurate today. Many people still do not want to look at other ways of doing things, or seeing things, and they are still content to sit and stare at whatever they are used to seeing. They have no desire to affect real change, but there are some people -- and thankfully also some leaders -- who see the value in change and who will work tirelessly to be the kind of leaders that they want everyone else to be, as well.

Too many leaders today do not see much as necessarily bad or good, and they simply go through their life without realizing there is so much more out there to be done and seen, just like the people in Plato's Cave. They have blinders on -- some of which are part of society, and some of which are self-inflicted. If only they would break out of the chains which enslave them in that Cave they could climb up into the light where they could truly see, and they would be aware of all the beauty and wonder in this world.

Unfortunately, the people in the Cave choose not to make an attempt at going outside, and because they do not strive to see more and to learn more, they do not teach the children to see more and to learn more. The cycle simply perpetuates, and this is the case with most leaders today, as well. They do not strive to do more, and they do not encourage those who work for them to do more, so people remain just where they were, instead of moving forward and accomplishing as much as they can and that they are capable of. If only one person would have believed the man who came back to the Cave and said "Guess what I saw outside? You have to see what's really there!" If only one person would have gone out there with him and taken a look, perhaps they would have told others, and others would have come, and the chains could have finally been broken for everyone (Nails, 2006). The true leader of today should be that 'one person,' but too often he or she is not.

Modern Leadership and Business Ethics

In business, ethics become somewhat clearer than they are when they are simply discussed in a general sense. Addressed here will be information about business ethics, because most of the leadership roles that society values are conducted within the confines of the business world. This also serves as a good example of how leadership generally works today and what people view as being valuable. There are specific rules and regulations that are to be followed where ethics are used in the business world. Because of this some of the more unethical behaviors become much more obvious, where they might have blended into the background of personal life and not been spotted quite as quickly and easily.

Business ethics has two specific aims. Those aims are: (1) to study ethics within a business itself, and (2) to study ethics in a business as it relates to society overall (Lacroix, 1979). This particular approach to ethics is sometimes called total 'political correctness,' which is almost impossible for the average person to conform to on anything like a daily basis. What is politically correct seems to change quite often, as well, so what was acceptable previously might not be acceptable tomorrow or next month. It can leave a leader looking unethical and impolite when he or she meant no harm.

Political correctness has been vastly removed from most of the academic disciplines but it remains strongly entrenched in ethics, and it can make the concept seem very stilted and completely unnatural. There are many things that cannot be said, and people are afraid to speak out, for fear they say something which might offend someone else. While that does keep a lot of individuals out of serious trouble, others are increasingly frustrated and uncomfortable with the idea that they have to be constantly vigilant against the wrong word or an improper phrase. It keeps them from leading in the most effective and appropriate way, because they are continually guarding themselves to avoid even the slightest hint of offense to someone else.

Elements of Ethical Dilemmas

There are six elements that cause most of the ethical dilemmas in business (Donaldson and Gini, 1984). Four of these apply almost exclusively to business, but two of them can also be applied to the life of an average person. Those two are worth mentioning here.

The first of these is the information dilemma. In this dilemma, people try to decide how much information they want or need to give out, and what they can say in order to make themselves look really good without actually lying to the person asking the question. Most people use this in their job interviews, on first dates, and in other meetings that are awkward and in which they want to appear more accomplished or better at something than they really are but do not want to completely lie, so that they do not have to fear getting caught in that lie later on in their dealings with a particular person or company.

The second element is a person's relationships with others. How someone treats other people and whether he or she deals with those people fairly is an important ethical concept. Unfortunately, there are many differing opinions about what is 'fair' and what is not, making this element difficult to narrow down to any kinds of specifics.

Ethics and Decision-Making

Ethics become extremely important when one enters the decision-making process. It can be as simple as deciding whether to tell a car dealer that the trade-in's windshield wipers do not work, to lying on an application for a job or a loan. Decisions made at these points in life, as well as quite a few others, are often somewhat unethical in the strictest sense. The person may really want that new car, or that new job, but lying will generally come back to cause a lot of problems later on. Generally, the larger the lie the larger the problem when it is discovered. Take, for example, the recent case of Bernie Madoff, who lied to his investors about having their money. Many people lost everything they had -- their life savings, and in some cases millions of dollars. It could not possibly be argued that it was an honest mistake on the part of Mr. Madoff. One person's account? Possibly. But all of those accounts, and for that period of time? Completely implausible.

The argument about what is ethical for a person, a position of power, or a society overall is an argument of value, just as it was in Plato's time and just as it will be in the future. If the value of what one stands to receive is high enough to have an extreme level of value, than the unethical behavior is justified to the person committing the unethical behavior. While most people rationalize things out in this way, the truth is that unethical behavior is never justified, no matter what the outcome will be or how much a person stands to gain, and that is especially true in a leadership position where others are place their trust in a person and expecting him or her to take care of them, be honest with them, and keep them safe from harm.