An attempt to define moral leadership becomes an uphill task when what is considered to be moral differs across diverse perspectives or is determined by the society. Thus, what is considered to be moral in one society can be considered to be immoral in another. For example, polygamy is morally accepted in some communities while other communities consider it to be morally unacceptable.
In any case, to define what moral leadership is, I’m of the opinion that we must explore the universal principles that cut across every group, society and culture. Thus, I see the terms ‘moral’ as doing what is good and right and ‘leadership’ as influencing others toward a commonly defined goal. Therefore, moral leadership to me, is the act of influencing others rightly toward a commonly defined goal. To elaborate this definition, I could say it is a process of influencing others toward a commonly defined goal by doing what is right and generally acceptable.
Moral leadership is “influence”
Some say leadership is social influence while others describe it as intentional influence. Even as I would love to agree with these assertions, I believe that moral leadership transcends social and intentional influence.
A moral leader is one who influences and can also be influenced by others. As a result, the arbitrary use and abuse of power is checked. This is what I call ‘influential power’. Such power makes one to step into leadership and then create an enabling environment for others to equally step in and participate. It is opposed to absolute power which is synonymous with tyranny. Thus the phrase ‘leadership is power’ should be substituted with ‘leadership is influential power’. The former connotes application of force to lead while the latter implies use of persuasion and interaction to achieving a common goal.
A moral leader knows that he has been empowered by the whole for the betterment of the whole. So he is to represent others and not manipulate them for selfish aims or for individual interest.
Moral leadership and vision
The Bible says, ‘where there is no vision the people perish’. Moral leadership commands a clear vision, a destination where the whole are headed. Therefore, a moral leader must be able to transmit the vision to his followers, otherwise his inability to do this is in itself immoral.
Human beings are not animals goaded to the market place to be sold or to an abattoirto be slaughtered against their will. A leader’s selflessness and people-oriented vision is tested by his ability to transmit his vision to others in clear terms for their possible acceptance and support.
It is one thing to have a clear, transmissible vision but it’s another to define in clear terms a feasible process and timeframe to achieving the vision. Of what good is it when a leader gives a vision and a timeframe that would transcend his term in office? This is the reason why we have abandoned projects in governance. When a leader does this, the chances are that he really does not intend to fulfil such promises.
During the short reign of President Yar’Adua, his seven-point agenda were made clear to all Nigerians. It was even translated into different indigenous languages. And in clear terms, the process and the timeframe to achieve these goals were stated. This is what I refer to as good leadership. Howbeit, that the cold arms of death did not allow him to finish the good work he started.
Moral leadership as being exemplaryMoral leadership entails making the choice to create desired changes in one’s environment by looking inwardly to exercise the innate and acquired abilitiesthat would bring about such changes. Mahatma Ghandi puts it this way, ‘Be the change you want to see in the world’.
When people see the change they desire in us, then following us comes trustworthily and admirably. Moral leaders know it all starts with them. They lead by example. They also educate others to take their destiny in their hands and join in the process of change by sensitising them on what needs to be done differently to achieve a better result. They do this by appealing to their deepest moral consciousness so as to awaken the will to make that change and to take conscious steps to actualise it.
We must bear in mind that moral leadership is about our inner awareness of good and evil and of the fact that our choice does not require a fire brigade approach but our gradual and conscious effort in the right direction, while envisaging new challenges on the way calling for new approaches to their resolution.
Moral leadership and sacrifice
Being a leader myself, I see sacrifice as an integral part of moral leadership which distinguishes it from other forms of leadership. The moral role of a good leader is coated in the sacrificial service he renders to his followers. Mandela sacrificed 27 years of his life for the cause of freedom. It is unlikely that any sane individual would rather not follow such a seasoned, courageous leader.
Mandela even turned down his right to rule for a second term in office as a mark of his undoubted integrity. Other African leaders who fought in vain for a third term in office and yet others who have manoeuvered their way into being declared life presidents are too numerous to mention. Yet we can’t see significant changes in their society. The fact remains that a good leader doesn’t need a lifetime to make desired changes.
Sacrifice affords a leader the influential power to carry the whole along. He is naturally exposed to two dichotomies: the desire to uphold his own desire even to the detriment of others and the choice to be of service to others in a sacrificial way.
My favourite spiritual and moral leader who was impeccably practical is Jesus Christ, who said “I am the Good Shepherd”. The Good Shepherd puts the sheep before himself, sacrifices himself if necessary. A hired man is not a real shepherd. The sheep means nothing to him... He’s only in it for the money. The sheep don’t matter to him. I don’t think there is any better way to express what the role of sacrifice is in moral leadership than this.
Moral leadership by responsibility
One of the most important substances that makes moral leadership desirable is taking care of responsibility, i.e. being accountable to the whole for one’s actions and decisions. Thus, it becomes disheartening when leaders refuse to accept their faults butwould pass the blame on the opposition.
Responsibility means supporting the whole. It is speaking up for those who are oppressed and can’t speak for themselves. It is influencing others by showing a sincere care for them. As the saying goes, “people don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care”.
Responsibility in moral leadership is birthed in the desire to step into leadership with the motive to serve others. Anything short of this cannot be considered to be moral. Unless we are committed to thinking about others, we’ll be caught up in the web of self-indulgence and prejudice, none of which are ingredients for good leadership.
A good example of what is meant by taking responsibility can be seen in the action of the young boy in the famous Dutch story, who saved his entire country by putting his finger into a dike. His action was an obvious selfless service to others.
Integration in moral leadership
Integration in moral leadership is about seeking to unite the different factions of the whole. It is opposed to fractional politics where equity, natural justice and good conscience are relegated to the background.
A moral leader seeks to make decisions that will bring every member of the group to seeingoneanother as one people with one vision and one purpose. He doesn’t make decisions to favour his admirers alone to the detriment of those who do not admire him.
What I call a good example of integration is what the leadership in Ghana did to integrate Ghanaians under the leadership of President Kufuor. Every item that shows their differences was removed from their forms and documents. The only thing that was left was nationality. After a while, they all saw themselves as Ghanaians because that was the only thing that mattered.
Also, when I became president of my association, I noticed some rivalry between members. To resolve this, I decided to introduce some activities that will help us to see one another more complementarily than competitively. During these activities there were times when we had disagreements and misunderstandings but we always resolved them internally. In doing this, we almost unconsciously strengthened our bonds through a process of pleasant and unpleasant experiences in reciprocity. And they were made to understand that these experiences are what will make us different from others who we will unavoidably meet for the first time. Apparently, there was a core value implanted in them by that very initiative. This is interestingly the basis of a good human resource management skill which every “moral leader” should unconditionally possess.
