The Good and Ethical Leader: Charisma, Trust, and Moral Decision-Making

Leadership vs. Management: Defining the Distinction

The verb "to lead" means to direct and to guide along a path. In many ways this definition seems to imply a skill like driving. It is my belief that anyone can become proficient with a new skill like driving; however, I also believe that when it comes to leadership, something more than just practice is required. True leaders are in many ways born as much as they are made. It is very similar to the analogy of being good at driving a car, but let us take driving to its extreme, as it is in the Formula 1 world. In Formula 1, there are many good drivers, but to be a top driver, something extra is needed. Looking at leadership as a form of top-level race-car driving reminds me that we see this "hard to describe" dynamic in a great many aspects of life, from the workplace all the way to a country such as Italy, where I am from. The lesson is the same: the skill of a boss can be acquired over time, but to become a leader, certain skills must be inherent.

First, I want to discuss what a leader actually is. There are substantial differences between bosses and leaders in my view. This is evident in a leader's ability to direct or guide followers by making decisions that are both collective and welcomed. It is this ability to guide by creating agreement rather than forcing an issue that I find most fascinating about good leaders. When I see a good leader, I see someone who is not operating in a "boss-subordinate relationship." Rather, there is a "leader-follower relationship," which may look similar on the surface but in a great many ways is fundamentally different.

Descriptions of true leaders in articles, books, and media often highlight common characteristics such as an innate ability to captivate listeners and skill to motivate groups and inspire everyone to work toward the same goal. I have read papers declaring that "everyone has what it takes to be a leader"; however, when I reflect on the above descriptions, I feel compelled to disagree. This might be true of a chess club or even an average Formula 1 race car driver, but it is not true in situations in which what is really needed is "leadership" as a central driving force.

The Essential Qualities of True Leaders

Furthermore, in my life I have noticed that even the above descriptions of a leader are not always accurate. My experience has demonstrated that there are no firm and fast rules for being a good leader. There are laissez-faire leaders, dictatorial leaders, democratic leaders, and many others. However, what all successful leaders undoubtedly have in common is some sort of internal charisma. Charisma, in my opinion, involves projecting a sense of self and confidence, engendering real trust amongst people who are trying to reach a common goal, and lastly showing a genuine interest in the needs and concerns of the people being led. Furthermore, charisma requires the ability to act strategically for the interests of a whole group and the ability to attract and align people toward similar visions. Whether "good or bad," the leader has the ability to fascinate their followers and represent themselves as role models; they have to be, at least in some way, our "stars."

The above said, however, I do not think we have hit the whole story, as two real-life examples of mine will show. Descriptions of leaders could fill several books, but what happens when leaders are needed in moments of great stress or moments prone to corruptibility? Recently, Italy, my home country, experienced a leadership dilemma under stress. Two Italian aid workers were kidnapped in Syria by a group of terrorists who, in exchange for freeing them, demanded a ransom. At this point, a decision had to be made: save the lives of the hostages by paying the ransom but risk setting a dangerous precedent, or resort to force and jeopardize their safety? A decision was made to pay the ransom, but there was a failure to prevent this information from being leaked, which created a diplomatic issue in the process.

Decision-Making Under Pressure: The Italian Ransom Case

I believe this was a clear example of poor leadership, not because of the decision's outcome—however questionable—but mainly because of how the situation was handled: a lack of clarity, poor decision-making, and widespread confusion. Italy has suffered from years of being deprived of a true leader. There has been no one with enough courage to make decisions that risk making them unpopular. A true leader does not make decisions in order to be accepted; the true leader is accepted as a result of the decisions he or she makes. Regardless of the decisions a leader makes, it is vital that he or she wins the trust of followers to avoid creating insecurity amongst the group. Decisions are extremely important, and their basic components are crucial. Equally important, however, is how they are made, how they are approached, and the way in which they are presented.

My family-run business also experienced a case of leadership dilemma firsthand. A few years ago, a longstanding employee suffered a nervous breakdown as a result of family problems and was no longer able to perform his duties. The high level of risk involved in my family business's industry sector meant that his role required a degree of focus. His state of mind had the potential to endanger not only his own safety but that of his colleagues too. A quick decision had to be made: either to dismiss him, disregarding his years of honorable service and leaving his family to fend for itself, or to continue his employment and run the risk not only of ongoing discontent among the remaining workforce but also of possible accidents in the workplace.

Ethical Leadership in Practice: A Family Business Example

In choosing the former, we would have been seen as unscrupulous bosses, prepared to dispense with workers at the first signs of difficulty. In choosing the latter, the workers could have resented the fact that their colleague would not only be a source of danger but would be receiving the same salary without taking on the same workload. Following an in-depth analysis of the situation, a third option was settled upon. For years, part of our revenue had been given to charitable associations working in the community. We contacted these associations and discussed whether they might have a role that our employee could perform. As a result, he was redeployed to a job that suited his physical and mental state.

The decision was welcomed by all: the workers saw our commitment to redeploying their colleague as an act of generosity and realized that in a time of need, they too would be able to count on us. The worker was redeployed to a role in which he would once again have a sense of purpose, and we had removed the risk of an accident resulting from the situation.

Unfortunately, however, decisions are not always this popular. A leader often has to make decisions for the good of the group even when the group itself may fail to see this initially. This leads to resentment building, which can, at times, be harmful. Assuming that leaders should take decisions conscientiously and without being unduly influenced by the reaction of the group, a true leader is one that can involve the group in order to influence them such that they believe they themselves have made the decision. This skill is something that should be used for the good of the group and not for the leader's benefit alone.

The Dangers of Influence Without Ethics: The Berlusconi Example

So from the above we find that a degree of influence over the opinions of followers is important to leadership; however, I want to point out that this too is not a clear-cut formula. In fact, in one more Italian example, such influence can be seen to create the opposite of leadership, as occurred when Berlusconi governed Italy. Berlusconi had a tremendous capacity to influence popular thought through his three television networks and several newspapers. This theme was explored in the film "Citizen Kane" by Orson Welles. His power was for years a subject of debate in Italy, and it was often argued that his power was good in that it had the potential to be used in a profitable way, allowing him to take necessary and hitherto unpopular decisions to move the country forward. But, unfortunately, those in power are not always enlightened and are often blinded by a thirst for success, which means they lose sight of the ethics called for by their role, and the value of their influence becomes a curse to those that follow.

For years, Berlusconi used his immense media power for personal gain, neglecting the priority issues faced throughout Italy. Although it is clear that on the surface he did promote reforms that seemed to be for the betterment of Italy, if we look at his decisions in detail, they were, for the most part, simply directed at his own personal gains. Furthermore, what seriously damaged Italy during those years was not just action but rather inaction. The leaders of Italy were, by majority, all busy achieving their own personal goals and forgot the true purpose of their roles. Because of this, they led many parts of Italy to ruin.

A true leader's goal therefore, in my opinion, must also contain the idea of the group's success. In fact, to state it plainly, I feel there are no winning leaders with losing teams, because to be a winning leader implies that you have led something other than just yourself to success.