A friend of mine recently wrote an excellent blog/article on the value of character in leadership. It is a well written article that makes an excellent point. here is the link: <http://www.linkedin.com/news?viewArticle=&articleID=190883288&gid=2421368&type=member&item=29510796&articleURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwp%2Eme%2FpZiRD-bd&urlhash=gJ8c&goback=%2Egde_2421368_member_29510796>.
INGO has recently changed its rules, banning discussion of certain topics. This is an example of leadership. Many of our discussion threads, especially in this political forum, concern leadership and character. Our ongoing and heated discussions on OC vs. CC, our Second Amendment rights, our response to being stopped by a LEO and asked for our ID (or papers), are all impacted by the interaction of politics, power and character. For this reason, I open the subject here on INGO. My friend argues that character (a general term he uses for integrity, responsibility and other positive traits) is essential to leadership. I argue that it is a desirable trait in a leader, but not essential. This is my rely to my friend's post.
Character is important, but regrettably it is not essential. Recent political leaders have demonstrated that it is possible to lead without character. The Big Lie, told often enough, with the complicity and support of a strong communication team, can overcome truth. In other situations, leaders caught in a lie can simply say, "It was necessary to get elected" or "It was only about sex," and remain powerful leaders. The culture determines if character is essential. If the culture does not honor or value integrity, it becomes less important in a leader. In many cultures, power is more important than character. If a leader has power, i.e. the ability to enforce his/her decisions regardless of follower agreement, character no longer is essential. Many historical leaders have demonstrated this principle. The Caesars of the Roman Empire, the rulers of the Ottoman Empire (especially in its early years), the Mongols, some of the popes of the Middle Ages, demonstrate the principle. Recently, Saddam Hussein exemplifies this. Power consistently trumps character in leadership.
Perhaps the difference is the end result of the leadership. Leaders who generate positive results for their followers, tend to be the ones who have character. On the other hand, leaders who lack character bring negative results on their followers, organizations or nations. Character is the essential leadership trait to limit abuse of power.
So, I open this thread to INGO for consideration: Is integrity essential to leadership? Is it an effective limit on abuse of power? How should evidence of character, or lack of it, influence our voting, our posting on INGO, our marriages? I really am looking forward to your replies.
INGO has recently changed its rules, banning discussion of certain topics. This is an example of leadership. Many of our discussion threads, especially in this political forum, concern leadership and character. Our ongoing and heated discussions on OC vs. CC, our Second Amendment rights, our response to being stopped by a LEO and asked for our ID (or papers), are all impacted by the interaction of politics, power and character. For this reason, I open the subject here on INGO. My friend argues that character (a general term he uses for integrity, responsibility and other positive traits) is essential to leadership. I argue that it is a desirable trait in a leader, but not essential. This is my rely to my friend's post.
Character is important, but regrettably it is not essential. Recent political leaders have demonstrated that it is possible to lead without character. The Big Lie, told often enough, with the complicity and support of a strong communication team, can overcome truth. In other situations, leaders caught in a lie can simply say, "It was necessary to get elected" or "It was only about sex," and remain powerful leaders. The culture determines if character is essential. If the culture does not honor or value integrity, it becomes less important in a leader. In many cultures, power is more important than character. If a leader has power, i.e. the ability to enforce his/her decisions regardless of follower agreement, character no longer is essential. Many historical leaders have demonstrated this principle. The Caesars of the Roman Empire, the rulers of the Ottoman Empire (especially in its early years), the Mongols, some of the popes of the Middle Ages, demonstrate the principle. Recently, Saddam Hussein exemplifies this. Power consistently trumps character in leadership.
Perhaps the difference is the end result of the leadership. Leaders who generate positive results for their followers, tend to be the ones who have character. On the other hand, leaders who lack character bring negative results on their followers, organizations or nations. Character is the essential leadership trait to limit abuse of power.
So, I open this thread to INGO for consideration: Is integrity essential to leadership? Is it an effective limit on abuse of power? How should evidence of character, or lack of it, influence our voting, our posting on INGO, our marriages? I really am looking forward to your replies.
