‘Moral leadership? What is that?’

Those sentences were the first thing that came out into my mind when I see the term ‘moral leadership’. As a student who hasn’t experienced the taste of being a leader, I had a hard time on defining the term into my own understanding. Fortunately, after a few times of looking blankly at the dictionary book, I came out on my own definition of moral leadership.

At first, many people, including me, mistook the term ‘moral leadership’ with the term ‘leadership’, which have the definition as the action of leading, guiding or influencing a group of people or an organization. Both have similar complex concept and hard to understand. A lot of people often relate it based on the stereotypes of a leader, which is one step ahead of another, having a full authority over something, able to control people and better than the others. Many people believe this kind of leadership style is disempowering others and often self-serving.

To be honest, I also have the same perception with the other majority of people. Based on my experience, the ‘leaders’ around me are not really reflecting the term ‘leadership’ in the right way. Even though this is only my opinion, I think there are still many ‘leaders’ who are not really cooperative and often take decision based on their own will. Some of them are not even honest and taking opportunities from others without thinking about their rights. A lot of people are suffering from the inappropriate leader behaviors. While from what I believe, a leader is the one who have to be able to guide and able to become an excellent role model because a leader is the one who knows the way, goes the way and shows the way (John Maxwell).

Although we cannot deny the fact the matter of right or wrong is based on someone’s ideology, a leader has to have the ability to choose the right decision for his or her followers. A leader also has to have personal integrity in order to become a good leader. What would our world become if the leaders who lead us have no integrity?

And then I came out with the term ‘moral leadership’. To be honest, I thought both ‘leadership’ and ‘moral leadership’ has the same meaning. However, I tried to break the term into a simpler sentence. Moral is defined as a person’s standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. People with morality know their limit and recognizes the importance of values. They will not make any decision based on their own opinion, but also considering other things that have the possibility to affect the decision that she or he will choose. While leadership, just as I mentioned before, is defined as the action or state of leading a group of people. Therefore, we can define ‘moral leadership’ as the act of leading, guiding or influencing people on the basis of standards that are considered morally and ethically acceptable and recognizing the importance of values and attitudes in decision-making.

Moral leadership is unique. Instead of craving for followers and being followed, people who adapt this kind of leadership would choose to serve. They do not disempower others and showing of their skills or abilities, but also develop the capacities of others. Leaders who adapt moral leadership are different from the others. They know how to manage themselves and know how to act with nobility and rectitude. “Let go ego” is what defines them the most. Moral leaders also have to face a countless numbers of challenges. They have to be strong, but cannot be rude. They have to be kind to others, but they cannot be weak. They have to be bold and thoughtful, but they have to keep themselves from bullying and stay away from being lazy. They are also required to be humble and proud, but they have to forbid themselves from being timid and have to keep their feet on the ground. Isn’t it the hardest job ever?

There are countless numbers of people who has the ability to cope with the term ‘moral leadership’ with unknown names that we do not recognize, but we can set the examples from several big names such as Abraham Lincoln and Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Abraham Lincoln successfully re-united and restored the United States of America after they won the civil war. The emancipation of blacks were achieved thanks to Abraham Lincoln, and although it needs two centuries to make a black man to become a president, we can safely say that Abraham Lincoln’s works and struggle had shown its result gradually.

More known as Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi had shown the world the true meaning of moral leadership. He knew what was the right thing for his followers and his country. He did the non-violence approach on dealing with the colonizer, the British. He was also arrested several times for the accuse of revolting, but he took it all and did not ask his followers to stay in the jail for him. He took the pain all by himself instead. His non-violence approach also shows us that he did not take any decision based on his opinions. He thinks about the consequences for his followers if he took the violence way to fight the British. Can you imagine the possibility of high casualty numbers if he chose to revolt using violence? From this point, we can see that he successfully adapts the moral leadership in his leadership style. His leadership style and his principle, satyagraha (holding on truth) and ahimsa (non-violence towards all living things) really reflect on his commitment to serve, self-sacrifice for love, integrity and making his followers on the top of his priority. He did not just lead and control his followers, but also serve and do not disempower others. His hard work had shown its result, India achieved its independence and he earned his place in the history book, known as a liberator of the Indian nation.

Currently, the world is facing globalization. We are in the state where everything is changing globally. Our world has become an unjust world, where we can see the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer and the inequality is rising gradually. Things are getting uncontrolled, and there’s always a chance that globalization can make things worse. However, is there any chance for us to prevent things from getting worse? Is there anybody who can do something to overcome this problem? Well, with their commitment to serve others, self-sacrifice for love, heart full of integrity and their ability to let go their ego, I’m sure moral leaders can fix this problem and lead our future better.

Name: Tsamara Alifia

School: Sekolah Bogor Raya

16, student, grade 12 (high school)

 

Views: 520

Tags: #definition, #essay, #leadership, #leadershipcontest, #moral, #morale, #moralleadership

Comment

You need to be a member of Global Ethics Network to add comments!

Join Global Ethics Network

Comment by Al LeBlanc on December 7, 2013 at 4:01pm

A pre-requisite for moral leadership is "first and foremost to have a conscience", courage to lead the way and perseverance in belief of your goal i.e., "pickyourselfup&trytryagain.

Comment by Al LeBlanc on December 7, 2013 at 9:30am

Tsamara: Most interesting dissertation. Thanks for creating and sharing your views !

Best Christmas Greetings and Wishes for the New Year !

Al

Comment by Kartika Yana on December 5, 2013 at 1:27am

Nice and interesting essay. The content of your essay is complete and inspiring for us. You're not only explaining about the meaning of moral leadership, but also give good examples of it. 

Comment by Anna Adriana on December 5, 2013 at 1:16am

Your essay is inspiring. You include your experience about leadership even though at first, you said that you didn't know the true meaning of leadership. You also include the current situation and I think its very true that we need a good moral leader today. 

Comment by Novini Gunario on December 5, 2013 at 1:14am

Your essay has an interesting content that makes me want to continue reading your essay. I agree with your example of Gandhi as a true leadership and it's easy to understand that helped me understand more about moral leadership. 

Comment by Tamara Kristin on December 3, 2013 at 4:34am

The content of your essay is well organised and you put the definition and difference well, besides that you put a good example

Comment by Mutiara Simanjuntak on December 3, 2013 at 4:15am
I like how you're being humble in the first pargagraph :) you've done quite good research on your essay, and use famous figures to imply the explanation of your understanding, which helps me understand your essay very well. wishing you good luck in this competition!

Carnegie Council

The Democratic Debate and Competing Narratives

As the Democratic field of presidential candidates narrows, the contenders are beginning to devote more attention to foreign policy and Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev has some important questions: Would Warren and Sanders stand by with their non-interventionist stances if they make it to the White House? Will climate change become a focus for any of the candidates?

Behind AI Decision-Making, with Francesca Rossi

With artificial intelligence embedded into social media, credit card transactions, GPS, and much more, how can we train it to act in an ethical, fair, and unbiased manner? What are the theories and philosophies behind AI systems? IBM Research's Francesca Rossi discusses her work helping to ensure that the technology is "as beneficial as possible for the widest part of the population."

Foreign Policy Narratives in Palm Beach

After an invitation to speak at a gathering of the Palm Beach chapter of the United Nations Association of the United States, U.S. Global Engagement Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev reflects on the current scope and direction of U.S. foreign policy. How will new uncertainties in the international system influence the relationships among the democratic community of nations?

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

VIDEOS

SUPPORT US

GEO-GOVERNANCE MATTERS

© 2020   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.