Tension Between Leadership, Ethics Tests Politicians, Businesspeople, Other Leaders; Obama No Exception, Scholar-Author Says

Newswise — President Barack Obama's nomination of Timothy Geithner for treasury secretary demonstrates that leaders can feel justified in breaking rules, and followers sometimes allow it to happen.

So says Terry Price, a professor in the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond and author of the new book, "Leadership Ethics: An Introduction." The Geithner nomination reveals the tension that exists between leadership and ethics, Price explains.

Geithner's failure to pay taxes did not prevent Obama from nominating him as head of the agency that includes the IRS " or Congress from confirming him. Price says Obama made an exception because Geithner has the best mind for fixing the country's economic crisis. The president justified breaking his own expectations for ethical government to achieve a central goal of his administration. Congress and the public accepted his reasoning.

"We expect problems to be solved "¦ and we're willing to sacrifice rules or morality as long as leaders get the job done," says Price. Followers view leaders as unethical only when they are selfish or try to maintain power, he explains. People forgive unethical actions done for their benefit, and they expect leaders to be responsible for their interests. Price argues that acting for the benefit of others can still be immoral and unjustifiable.

"There's a moral theory called utilitarianism which says the right action is the action that maximizes overall utility," he says. Such theories are often used to support leaders' justifications for breaking rules, but Price maintains they rarely work. Leaders cannot make ethical exceptions of themselves.

"There is a tension between the things we expect leaders to do — keep their promises and do things for the greater good — and on the other hand, the rules," he says. "Good leaders and bad leaders are all playing with that tension."

Unethical behavior is a recurring problem in politics, business and any other environment in which there are leaders, Price says. Former President George W. Bush's justification for the Patriot Act is another example. While Bush's intent was to fight terrorism, he broke rules regarding privacy and allowed government to closely monitor citizens. After 9/11, Congress and many other Americans accepted his reasoning, despite the ethical problems. Leaders must protect the group, Price explains, but they still have an obligation to respect limits on what can be done to individuals.

Price admits there could be extreme cases when leaders are justified in breaking rules, such as when lives are at stake. However, he distinguishes between world and local community leaders.

"We find ourselves in leadership positions where we have goals to achieve, but normally we're not trying to fight terrorists—for example, we're trying to get employees to perform. Breaking rules is rarely acceptable at that level," he says.

Leaders in everyday situations struggle with the tension between leadership and ethics for reasons other than greed, he argues. They feel entitled to certain liberties because of their position.

"When you single people out to lead and tell them, 'You're special,' you shouldn't be surprised if they come to think they're special," Price says. "There's something cognitive there, the way they think about themselves and their place in the world."

Price's goal is to remind leaders they are not special.