Name:-Abhijit Anil Pawar
College: - PGMCOE, PUNE (Undergraduate student)
What Does Moral Leadership Mean to You?
Leader is dominantly inspiring and precisely influencing word which determines the fate and future of those who are directly or indirectly related. The term leadership has been part of human civilization through its progress and its failures. Moral leadership has different aura and history has proved it, moral leadership is not just hypothetical term which intimates its followers.
Human history is fascinating and it teaches to deal with minute purposeful or instant changes. Leader and leadership may have their existence from homo-sapiens or before that period. Animals also develop leaders within their herds and groups as the future as well as present depend on the abilities of leader. Morality has changed with time it doesn’t only mean beliefs about what is right or wrong through people behavior but it also means right or wrong for better tomorrow of large community.
During earlier centuries military was the base for leadership. The leader or commander used to motivate his soldiers to fight against the invaders or to invade enemies. Such leader and leadership gained fame. Their immorality in history is beyond doubt. Where this kind of leadership moral? That period of human history was about constructing boundaries. Human with their audacious leaders where keen to extend their respective civilization and thus prominent leadership were emerged and nourished.
Alexander the great is one such leader whose notorious quest to achieve the world gained him popularity. His leadership showed that leaders are not just decision makers but dauntless, intrepid warriors. The leadership of Alexander may be influential or at sometimes autocratic but was respected within his followers. The leadership quest of Alexander destroyed many cities and small civilization. The leadership was definitely influential but was it moral? In recent times such leadership are ignored but can’t be avoided. The leaders like Julian Creaser marked their way in pages of history as they changed the way human used to think and live. But such leadership had an affirmative effect only on their pupils.
Potential leadership emerged through Trait approach of leadership where it was believed that physical, mental and personality traits in the person were inbred. According to this theory great man were born to great ancestors. The Mughals once where dominate power in the world, approached this kind of leadership. Akbar one of well known leader and King of Mughal dynasty was praised for his adorable policies towards his subjects though it had many flaws. This was time in history when moral leadership was necessarily required but leadership was lost in dynastical approach.
When we think of moral leadership and dynastical approach we may find it difficult and in many cases inappropriate to compare moral leadership with dynastic leadership. Better and moral leadership grow from soil and build through hardship. It’s not the dynastical approach have never gave good leadership. It has more or less given impetus for human progress in difficult times of history.
Napoleon Bonaparte arguably greatest military strategist and leader known for Napoleonic wars was indeed the great leader and great administrator. The Napoleonic codes and civil laws are determining evidence of his administrative abilities. Such leadership according to that period and century may be considered as moral. When humans were self obsessed about their own community, people and boundaries. The term global ethics were not yet gained any kind of recognition. The leader attitude towards their followers and other people started to change. The leadership styles changed and more participative leadership style emerged, consultative leaders and democratic leaders were impacting the course of human civilization and progress. The honesty and persistence were assumed as the main pillar of moral leadership.
Abraham Lincoln the leader who change the view of people towards equality and prosperity. Honesty of his leadership gave him power and appreciation. Persistence, determination and courage he showed definitely points towards his moral leadership. The feeling of equality and brotherly affection were induced through his leadership.
Leader of world politics stated to influence people to conquer different fields. The 20th century saw many leaders who tried to seed moral ethics within their followers. The non-violence and resilience gained popularity, courage was redefined. Mahatma Gandhi known for his non-violent movement for freedom struggle of India implanted ethical thinking in politics. Leaders were diverted towards his views of administration and leadership. Leadership of Gandhi is considered as moral leadership.
The 21st century has different prospective and challenges towards future. The human capabilities have reached to its extreme and rate of its hungry to achieve unpredictable is intensified. Now not just political leaders but corporate and scientific leadership determines civic behavior and its track towards future. Various leaders who marked their presence in corporate world have directionized authorities and life styles. Bill gates, Jeff bezos, Howard Schultz, warren buffet and Steve jobs are some path changers who gained respect for their hardship and work. Business world is breaking all boundaries which enhance the progress of human race. The leadership in this trait are influencing and motivating. Moral leadership in business is not just about thinking of the progress and opportunities but also considering the welfare of the living and non living aspects which are directly or indirectly related to the business venture.
The moral leadership has its own specification of behavior and its codes which claim to stress on future of many related. The story of king Midas in which he wished for the prosperity and wealth without hard work. Destruction is ultimate result if the leader achieves success with its greed. The leader should be capable to hold the success and failures. The leader of sport team can revise their future and lead them to success but maintaining it is difficult. Moral leadership is the one which not only turns things shiny as gold but do so with hardship and determinative courage.
The greed of a leadership can destroy many around it as what was done by Nazi Germany. Leaders are constructor but certain amount of greed and hatred may destroy the future of the civilization based on respective leadership. The recent uprising in Middle East and other parts of world has showed that tolerance towards leadership has decreased at drastic pace. The people are more vocal towards their rights and views towards leaders. Agitation and coup are more frequently seen towards certain leadership. The moral leadership views are lost in situations due to feelings like hatred and revenge. The hope is still there to induce moral leadership as some leaders are capable to change world for its betterment.
Nelson Mandela leader with moral ethics suffered for his whole life due to political reasons. But when he gained power, he never stood with the feelings of hatred and revenge instead he blossomed equality and integrity within people. The feeling of hatred and revenge are weapon of destruction for leadership.
Moral leadership according to me is altruist leadership. The leadership should not only consider the future of its followers it must also have willingness of betterment of world, Peaceful and glorious future of world where living and non living aspects of environment are intact and unharmed. The Moral leadership is the one which brings courage within for living not for destruction. The world would be better place with Altruist leadership.
“World is full of peace and charm,
Demagogues try around to destroy to harm,
Moral leaders are true altruist, never they try for plunder or heist
They are infact magnanimous secular priest”
This is what moral leadership mean to me.