4.5: Leadership Addressing Corruption

The two basic types of ethical systems are deontological ethical system-intent of the act will determine whether an act was good or bad and teleological ethical system which judges the outcome of the act or end justifies the means (Pollock, 2010). The transformational leader practices the former along with his/her vision the creation of values for the organization. There are three core themes to vision construction through values and they are: High performance standards; caring about people in the organization; and a sense of uniqueness and pride (Kouzes & Posner, 2007).

Hitler was of the teleological view that the end justified the means and was willing to sacrifice all German people to save his own portrait in history. Hitler is the antithesis of the definition of character. Character is about doing good rather than harm to others whether the harm is intentional or not (Zigarmi, Blanchard, O'Conner, & and Edeburn, 2005). Although Hitler possessed many of the traits that you may recognize in respected leaders, his motives were ill conceived. Leaders of a transformational style are able to influence members to achieve the goals and vision of the organization but do so with benevolent intent rather than malignant malfeasance.

The personality traits of the Transformational Leader strikes me as the over-all style fitting for most situations, but having said that I must preface remaining remarks with the fact I feel successful leaders have co-existing styles and draw on them dependent upon the context. The transformational style is capable of producing higher level of performance than previously thought possible and by expressing personal standards are able to achieve change and unite followers (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987).

An innovative organization engages everyone and the leader must create the atmosphere for change and develop middle management for the challenge (Behn, 1995). Different leaders can accomplish similar purposes with different strategies and styles. The preceding is intertwined with the Constructive Theory that leaders emerged from personal experience and their social and interpersonal environments is how they approach leading (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987). The constructionist and the transformational leader are similarly situated and often in an ongoing learning experience and must be willing and fortified with the ability to subject the experience to the correct ethical approach.

A socio-psychological profile designed to afford a person of strengths and weaknesses is Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness (DISC). A self-analysis profile that provides the learner of strengths and weakness as is in my case. DISC is fashioned to arm the leader with a better understanding of his/her strengths and weaknesses. DISC is a personality assessment with regard to leadership styles. DISC provides the opportunity for leaders to become more efficient. Leaders today may be efficient with things, but they must be effective with people, particularly in a very labor intensive environment such as the CJ system. Motivation and influence of members is the key as police officers won’t tolerate autocratic management style (ACJS, 1984). The leader that is better armed is better prepared to accept responsibility of leadership and to understand those he may lead.

An example of the DISC profile I offer myself. As a result of taking this profile on more than one occasion, I have been dubbed the Promoter Pattern. I found agreement with the majority of the analysis. What I have learned as a Transformational Leader and from frequent DISC self-analysis that my style does not fit every person I come in contact or the situation. If a leader understands self and can understand which pattern or preference the membership is situated he/she can better lead armed with this knowledge. Leadership development is self- development (Kouzes & Posner, 2007).

Personality is a combination of life experiences, a behavior manifestation of “who you Are”, (Zigarmi et. al., 2004). DISC is a self-analysis that provides an opportunity to develop strengths and overcome weaknesses. The transformational leader motivates and influences members to take on the difficult and accomplish tough goals (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987). Not every leader has developed the necessary traits to make this happen and again DISC is most helpful to further a leader’s development. I find this particularly true in an ever changing environment in police leadership. Police officers will not tolerate autocratic management style (ACJS, 1984), therefore a police leader today must be cajoling, influential and a motivator. Behavioral adaptability is not selling your soul or losing your identity, but rather willingness and ability to use behaviors not necessarily characteristic to your preference bias (Zigarmi et. al., 2004).

Your personal traits, how you as a leader can massage them and overcome weakness develop your personal style. I am of the firm belief that no one style is a standalone style but they co-exist and if not by choice then from necessity to meet each differing situation. Leaders learn to lead by understanding what is important to them (Kouzes & Posner, 2007). Thereby as a transformational leader attaches moral importance to a deontological approach, but does not necessarily prevent a quick trip to the consequentialist side for a brief stay. The successful leader may cross over to the teleological approach and move back into the deontological before it is noticed.

Police work has a broad definition. Police organizations must deal with crisis both internal and external. Contemporary organizations often are described as hostile, complex, uncertain, and changeable. The leadership that develops from crisis situations is better suited to overcome a singular crisis and how the organization prepares for the next crisis. The leader guides the internal dynamics of the group to include motivation, and communication patterns; specifically the flexible and participative leader appears more effective (Jin, Sun, & Kim, 2010). Leadership may be defined in terms of facilitation, vision, motivation, authenticity and advocacy, and encouragement of others. Role modeling is critical for the development of future leaders and the profession (Gibson, Dollarhide, and McCallum, 2010).

Assuming the reader agrees with the preceding then it should not be difficult to connect the dots between the importance of leadership style, ethical approaches, flexibility within the leader and her/his style and the ability to celebrate crises as a learning experience to build upon the next. Regardless of the type of CJ practice one may find them self. Then might one’s life as well as leadership style require the ability to move back and forth between ethical approaches from time to time?

As provided in the opening salvo, History has not provided a clear straight line from our beginning to this juncture in time. Again as previously discussed in previous sections, Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle produced in their works a philosophy that has passed the test of time. Mills, Bentham, and Locke have added to the discussion that has supplemented the original works. Certainly time has demanded the bar be raised in leadership and consistently sought characteristics desirable in a leader that is beyond what general society is willing or capable of living up to and they are willing to criticize a leader when their personal life goes awry.

Embedded throughout our discussions to this point is the fact that ethics, virtue, morality, and character are obvious in the written word of our Constitution. The founding fathers did not provide an article or section stating that the document is designed to make your life easier. However what is crystal clear is that the document provided a pathway that permits all citizens to be part of the debate. Have United States citizens demonstrated the personal and ethical courage to maintain their role in the debate?