Ethics, a must for academic leadership

The success of any organisation, small or big, largely depends on its leaders. There are leaders who have transformed organisations from the brink through their innovative leadership skills founded on ethical principles. On the contrary, organisations have also died owing to the lack of such skills in leaders.

Choosing the appropriate type of leader that may best be suitable for an academic organisation becomes tricky. This task has become even tougher in contemporary times as newer forms of leadership continue to emerge periodically.

In the past, the ones that held sway in many leadership seminars and conferences were transformational, steward or servant types. Today, seldom do we hear these terms. Instead, we get to hear increasingly of newly evolved styles such as coaching, lean, and resonant leadership.

Newer leaderships

In fact, there is a steady influx of newer forms and styles of leadership into the body of knowledge, which never ceases to keep the leaders including the aspiring ones constantly engaged and on tenterhooks at the same time. However, the question that looms large is how different are the new ones from the earlier ones?

In fact, all types of leadership have shared attributes, the only difference being that each of them prioritises a few specific characteristics over others. The most important learning as one pores over the copious literature available on leadership styles is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to issues faced at any organisation.

A mature leader would choose a model or a combination of models after a thorough analysis of the prevailing conditions at the workplace along with keeping the organisation’s aims, objectives and philosophy in mind.

Almost all styles of leadership include ethical principles. So, would focusing on ethics help leaders choose the right model? Perhaps! But, sadly, in many organisations non-ethical or even unethical factors tend to override ethical considerations. The Covid pandemic has further accentuated this undesirable trend.

Preaching and practising

Honest scrutiny would reveal that such situations arise because often organisations fail to practise what they preach. The vision and mission statements are lofty but remain so only on paper. As a result, they allow the demands of the market to dominate.

Often, the reason cited by institutions for this lacuna, particularly the private ones, is the lack of funds or/and support from the government. Yes, there’s an element of truth in it. Successive governments in India have been vigorously encouraging privatisation. As a result, over the last few decades, governments have drastically reduced funding to public and private institutions forcing them to fend for themselves.

All the same, the question is, aren’t academic leaders obligated to the society and therefore shouldn’t they seriously evaluate the negative consequences of assigning undue emphasis on monetary factors? Sadly, even experienced academic heads have failed, not having understood why the completely market-driven model is totally antithetical to the idea of education itself.

It is in such context that ethics must be put to good use. Ethics is the binding force that helps all communities and societies to run well. For educational institutions, in particular, ethics should serve as a beacon that defines the institutional philosophy, determining the future course of action. Leaders in general, and especially academic leaders cannot be indifferent to moral responsibility. As a matter of fact, they must go beyond symbolism and verbal rhetoric to establish systems that effectively foster ethical leadership in their institutions.

Types of ethics

So, what type of ethics may be suitable for an educational institution? Deontological ethics propagated by Immanuel Kant or the teleological advocated by Plato and Aristotle? In fact, both are significant. Deontological ethics lays its primacy on duty and obligation, aspects crucial to education. Results don’t matter as long as one fulfils their duties, whereas teleological ethics insists on the importance of goals and results of actions.

The prime motive of the leaders of the first type is the display of genuine altruism, and concern for others even at the cost of personal sacrifices. Teleology on the other hand places emphasis on reciprocity: there is importance on the Self as well as the Other. All of these characteristics are central to academic engagements.

So, a judicious blend of the two types may be beneficial, especially now, as heads of institutions are forced to devise guidelines and strategies to combat the aftermath of the post-Covid conundrum. The glue that binds an educational institution is the idea of interdependence. Recognising its value and appreciating symbiotic relationships will go a long way in establishing campuses that are ethic-conscious.

The well-being of all stakeholders of education is crucial for holistic development. Academic leaders must therefore develop a sense of ethics that combines prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance-all important attributes of ethical leadership. Most importantly, they must often engage in self-criticality. This will help them stay grounded and yet surmount all obstacles even in times of extreme adversities.

(The author is the dean and professor, Christ (Deemed-to-be University), Bengaluru)