The Roles of Vertical and Shared Leadership in the Enactment of Executive Corruption: Implications for Research and Practice Report

Advocating for Shared Leadership

Summary of the article

The authors create a strong impression that shared leadership provides a method of reducing corruption. Shared leadership refers to the organizational structure that allows different individuals to exercise their independence in running their work station without constant influence from the top. It is similar to devolved authority. A system of checks and balances ought to be provided by the board of directors.

In most cases, the board of directors has been weakened by having the CEO as the chairman or top management team members forming an influential part of the board. The authors imply that vertical leadership and leadership concentrated on a single individual are likely to increase corruption, especially where the leader has a low responsibility disposition.

Responsibility disposition refers to the leader’s mindset towards upholding integrity and ensuring ethical behavior. Moreover, the article argues that leaders influence the behavior of the subordinates. The leader’s ethical behavior is likely to influence ethical behavior in the entire organization.

Alternatively, his unethical behavior is also influential. In the implications and the conclusion parts, the authors suggest that shared leadership may solve the problem of corruption at the executive level. The findings should be subjected to further research.

Key learning points from the article

• Literature that discussed the potential for corrupt behavior from centralized power existed even before the downfall of major corporations.
• Leadership corruption may take many forms such as deception, theft, and other counterproductive behaviors.
• Leaders have a greater role to play in influencing ethical behavior among subordinates and its integration in the organizational culture.
• Leaders with concentrated power and leaders who seek to build their personal image have a strong affinity to authorize corruption.
• Responsibility disposition refers to the tendency of a leader to feel obliged to do the right thing for the welfare of the majority.
• Shared leadership or socialized leadership refers to authority that has been distributed to multiple centers.
• A non-corrupt leader can create a shared leadership by encouraging leadership from below.
• A corrupt leader may find it necessary to act in a manner that concentrates power and authority around him. He limits the independence of other centers of power and seeks unchecked authority.
• The board of directors ought to provide an option in creating checks and balances for the top leaders.
• Leaders should devolve authority. There should be a balance between independence and interdependence.
• Some individual leaders may have a high responsibility disposition. As a result, they may not engage in corruption even when they vertically centralize the power.
• Organizations should seek to recruit leaders with a high responsibility disposition through their selection process.
• Training and development of leadership skills should target the entire workforce instead of focusing on the current leaders only.
• Further research is needed to enlarge the knowledge available on how to select leaders with a higher responsibility disposition.
• Further research is needed on the effectiveness of training and development programs on reducing corrupt leadership.

Four statements I agree with

Pearce, Manz and Sims Jr. state that “the framing of leadership as a role that is held by a single individual designated as the leader potentially sets into motion the centralization of power that can plant the seeds of corruption” (357).

The statement indicates that by assigning one individual to play the role of a leader, the organization increases the chances of that the individual will try to concentrate power around him. It supports the discussion where the single individual seeks to become chairman of the board after becoming the CEO. The individual will also seek to recruit employees who support his methods and aspirations.

The concentration of power creates desire for corruption. Lipman-Blumen explains that “even non-toxic leaders who hang too long commonly go from good to bad” (228). They go from good to bad by trying to focus more power on themselves. They set higher goals and are increasingly inclined to achieve them.

Concentration of power may have a different impact on the political context when the leader seeks to improve the welfare of the majority. Pearce, Manz and Sims Jr. (353) point out that personal gain is a motivator in corrupt leadership. On the other hand, concentrated power may have positive results, in corrupt contexts, when the leader has concern for the welfare of the majority.

Neal and Tansey (34) use Rafik Hariri as an example of an effective corrupt leader. He served as Lebanon’s Prime Minister from 1992 to 2005. He produced great welfare results for his people. On the other hand, he could not avoid engaging in corrupt acts because he operated in a corrupt context. The leader associated himself with religious morality to centralize his power vertically (Neal and Tansey 39).

His case indicates that centralized power may be effective if the leader is driven by making better results for all the stakeholders. It is not surprising that Rafik Hariri was blamed for vast accumulation of personal wealth. It is a common feature of centralized power.

In addition, the statement indicates that an organization’s authority should not be put in hands of a single leader. There should be multiple centers of power. Every leader holds a significant level and helps the organization to achieve its goal through that level, such as a division or department.

When there are many leadership positions in an organization, it reduces the potential of a heroic leader using corrupt means to create personal fame.

The reason is that there will be many individuals who will be given credit for the good performance of the organization when authority is devolved. The integrity of the firm will not rely on a single individual. It will depend collectively on all individuals in leadership positions and all the employees.

Pearce, Manz and Sims Jr. (357) suggest that corporations should recruit leaders with high responsibility disposition. Lipman-Blumen (230) suggests that organizations will continue to recruit leaders with low responsibility disposition unless they change the selection process. Mayer, Kuenzi and Greenbaum (13) propose that organizations should develop selection tools that recognize integrity and moral standards.

Organizations that recruit leaders with higher responsibility disposition quality are less vulnerable to corrupt leadership. Such leaders will uphold integrity and ethical behavior in their pursuit for excellence. They believe in achieving high performance using acceptable means and standards.

A challenge arises from the fact that existing literature does not provide an approach to select leaders that have a high responsibility disposition. Each organization will be forced to form its own approach. One of the approaches will be to recruit leaders from within the organization based on their moral values.

Another approach will be to recruit from other organizations after a long-term scrutiny. Heroic leaders’ success may be unlikely to last in the long run. It can be used to distinguish a charismatic leader who succeeds in the short run from the revolutionary charismatic leader.

Pearce, Manz and Sims Jr. (356) say that narcissistic leaders will have a tendency to centralize power vertically because of their desire to create popularity for themselves. Pearce, Manz and Sims Jr. claim that “individuals have different propensities to engage in corrupt behavior” (355).

The theory supports the approach that organizations should look for individuals who are unlikely to be corrupt, even when they hold positions with vertically centralized power. However, Lipman-Blumen (228) suggests that the desire to cling to power may corrupt the individuals that were once considered moderate.

Pearce, Manz, and Sims Jr. (2008, p. 357) support the “falling dominoes effect”. It is a situation that occurs when the leader’s behavior is imitated by the subordinate employees. Neubert et al. (157) explain that leaders shape the collective character of an organization and the way it responds to challenges, either corruptly or virtuously.

One of the approaches of eliminating unethical behaviors in an organization is through integrating an ethical climate in the organizational culture. The organizational culture cannot be strongly influential if the employees perceive their leaders to proclaim ethics, but act in a different manner. Neubert et al. (157) argue that leaders are responsible for creating an ethical climate in their organizations.

Trevino and Brown explain that “leaders who engage in unethical behavior will create a context that supports parallel deviance” (72). Employees can learn to avoid corruption by observing the ethical behavior of their leaders. Mayer, Kuenzi and Greenbaum (13) explain that an ethical climate reduces the occurrence of employee misconduct.

Pearce, Manz, and Sims Jr. (357) imply that training and development can be used to create an organization that conforms to ethical behavior. Training the entire workforce can be an effective approach to building an organizational culture that does not tolerate corrupt leadership.

It can be more effective, especially when firms develop leaders from within the organization. Mayer et al. (13) propose training employees on ethics as a step towards creating an ethical climate.

Contrary to the above statement, Deresiewicz (par. 21) discusses that the training system needs an overhaul to produce leaders that can engage in free thinking. He claims that the current system largely produces individuals who cannot think for themselves. Lipman-Blumen (253) proposes a democracy where workers are no longer passive and obedient followers of a single leader.

These individuals should be trained to achieve, by any means possible, the objectives of the organization. They should be trained to carry out the routine without deviations. Deresiewicz (par. 4) suggests that there is a need to separate leadership and other factors, such as excellence, aptitude, and achievement.

Lipman-Blumen (257) explains that workers should be trained to avoid the illusion that one person can deliver the organization’s goals during times of crises single-handed.

A non-toxic leader will seek to remove the illusion of a heroic leader. Deresiewicz (par. 22) supports a leadership style that allows independence of mind and creative thinking. One should be able to express his ideas freely and support them with facts or the rationale behind them (Deresiewicz par. 27).

Critical analysis of the article

Title

The article has a good title because it captures the information in a few words. It may appear to be a long one, when the additional part “Implications for research and practice” is included. An individual is able to picture what the paper is about from that title. However, some weakness emerges from the terms used in it. They may need deeper thought before one captures what they imply.

Literature review

The literature has been progressively formed from definitions into an argument. The authors have built their argument on existing literature. They have provided a definition of corruption, responsibility disposition, shared leadership, vertically centralized leadership, and anticitizenship behavior among others. The reader is able to understand the literature properly based on the explanation of the terms.

The authors have used a wide range of literatures. Thy intended to show that literature on the corrupt leadership existed even before the downfall of large corporations. They have used multiple resources that were produced in the1990s.

Most people would consider the topic to have been motivated by the unethical behavior of leaders in the last decade, however, the authors have also used recent data to show that the increased study of the subject matter, in recent years, is as a result of the increased occurrence of unethical behavior in organizations.

The literature review incorporates findings from surveys, which makes the literature review stronger. The authors refer to findings that were presented from three surveys conducted in the U.S. on teamwork and individual performance. The authors examine multiple works that relate the influence of corrupt leaders to the unethical behavior of employees.

Methodology

The methodology used is a qualitative research study based on secondary resources to support its argument. The argument draws from several findings of previous studies to conclude that shared leadership can be used as a buffer against corrupt leadership.

Findings

The findings are labeled as P1, P2, and P3. The reader can easily find out the conclusion from every piece of argument. The findings are related, and as a result, they are built progressively from one point to another. For example, empowering leadership may signal shared leadership at the top management. If there is shared leadership, corruption will be reduced.

Lastly, shared leadership is linked to moderating responsibility disposition. There are three levels of relationship between the factors. The authors provide what their studies imply for today’s organizations and parts that need to be covered in future research.

References

The authors have used a combination of recent references and classical references. Recent references are within a period of five years. There are concerns that new findings may make old explanations obsolete, except for classical works. Classical references are studies that are universal because they pioneered in providing evidence for the subject matter. The author has used a few articles published in the 1970s and 1980s to elaborate on the importance of the study. The large number of academic articles used enhances the quality of the study. Journals are considered quality resources.

Application of the subject matter to the UAE context

The UAE national culture on leadership involves a case of vertically centralized power. Large power distances and wealth inequality have been accepted as a form of cultural heritage (Butler par. 7).

The action of individuals is directed by the Muslim faith, which advocates for honesty and high moral standards. A vertically concentrated power creates a desire to engage in corruption. Even good managers are affected by the influence of concentrated power, which makes it necessary to advocate for shared leadership.

As a corporate leader in the UAE, I should identify shared leadership as a method of moderating power and the affinity to engage in corrupt behavior. Another method of reducing the occurrence of corrupt behavior among employees and leaders is to develop an ethical climate. Employees will receive signals and cues from the ethical climate to avoid unethical practices.

The process of building an organizational culture that motivates ethical behavior starts with the CEO. It becomes necessary to alter the recruitment process when selecting CEOs. There is a need to adopt selection tools that identify required traits for high responsibility disposition.

As for a political leader in the UAE, concentration of power should offer me an opportunity to serve the interests of the majority. It will depend on the individual high responsibility disposition of the leaders, which makes it necessary for a selection tool that recognizes good leaders.

Honesty and integrity will be essential as required by the Muslim faith. However, political leaders, such as Rafik Hariri of Lebanon, portrayed himself as an adherent of the Muslim faith to concentrate his power (Neal and Tansey 39). Leaders will need to lead through modeling as Trevino and Brown (72) describe under the social learning and the social exchange titles.

Lesson learnt

The main lesson learnt is that vertically concentrated center of power creates desire for leaders to engage in corruption. Shared leadership can be used as a moderator in reducing the desire to engage in unethical conduct. The ethical climate of an organization can make employees reduce unethical behavior. It requires the leader to play the role of a model in promoting ethical practices.

Organizations need to change their selection tools used in the recruitment process to identify leaders with high responsibility disposition. Most scholars support an organizational culture that allows independent thinking.

Works Cited

Butler, Patty. United Arab Emirates Business Etiquette & Culture. n.d. Web.

Deresiewicz, William. Solitude and Leadership. 2009. Web.

Lipman-Blumen, Jean. The Allure of Toxic Leaders: Why We Follow Destructive Bosses and Corrupt Politicians – and How We Can Survive, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print.

Mayer, David, Maribeth Kuenzi and Rebecca Greenbaum. “Examining the Link between Ethical Leadership and Employee Misconduct: The Mediating Role of Ethical Climate.” Journal of Business Ethics. 95.1 (2010): 7-16. Web.

Neal, Mark, and Richard Tansey. “The Dynamics of Effective Corrupt Leadership: Lessons from Rafik Hariri’s Political Career in Lebanon.” The Leadership Quarterly 21 (2010): 33-49. Print.

Neubert, Mitchell, Dawn Carlson, Michele Kacmar, James Roberts and Lawrence Chonko. “The Virtuous Influence of Ethical Leadership Behavior: Evidence from the Field.” Journal of Business Ethics. 90.2 (2009): 157-170. Web.

Pearce, Craig, Charles Manz, and Henry Sims Jr. “The Roles of Vertical and Shared Leadership in the Enactment of Executive Corruption: Implications for Research and Practice.” The Leadership Quarterly 19 (2008): 353-359. Print.

Trevino, Linda, and Michael Brown. The Role of Leaders in Influencing Unethical Behavior in the Workplace. 2004. Web.