What Makes Leadership ‘Ethical’?

Educational systems are becoming increasingly diverse, yet global inequities in knowledge production and exchange persist (Czerniewicz, 2013). Massification of higher education, immigration and movement of war and climate refugees and expansion of internationalization efforts in the post-secondary sector demand that educational leaders adopt more culturally responsive and critical intercultural practices (Killick, 2018). This is particularly necessary as we collaborate across cultural groups to solve complex problems.

The impetus for this book is a hope that educators can teach and students can learn in educational systems centred on ethical decision-making, where diverse perspectives and ethical epistemic lenses are considered and valued. Our research was driven by a desire to better understand how education, ethics, and leadership are interconnected. Specifically, we sought to investigate the following questions:

• What makes educational leadership ‘ethical’?
• How do leaders determine what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’?
• As leaders, how do we ensure that equity and ethical decisions are achieved within a pluralistic democratic society?
• How do various forms of discrimination and privilege intersect to shape our understanding of ethical decisions?

In this chapter, we define ‘ethical educational leadership’ and the relationship between ethics, morals, leadership, and social systems.

Ethics

Early attempts at defining ethics are often attributed to Plato (427–347 BC), who argued that ethics are what we ought to do or how we ought to live our lives. Confucious (551–479 BC) was also concerned with teaching moral values and ethics. His moral education was based on empathy and deepening one’s understanding of others (Hue, 2007). In ancient India (3000 BC–1200 AD), Vedic and Buddhist traditions similarly focused on teaching ethics and cultivating humility, truthfulness, discipline, self-reliance, and respect for all creations of the world (Ghonge et al., 2020). In fact, if we extend our vision beyond Western philosophies, we see that ethical teachings and moral practices have deep roots in cultures and educational systems around the world, such as those outlined in the St’at’imc Nation’s Seven Laws of Life (Bull, in press).

Dewey (1902) defined ethics as “the science that deals with conduct… considered to be right or wrong, good or bad.” Similarly, Hosmer (1987) defined ethics as “the study of proper thought and conduct.” Later, Ciulla (2003) defined the study of ethics as “what we should do and what we should be” (p. xi). In the context of educational leadership, Starrett (2004) explained that ethics is “the study of what constitutes a moral life” (p. 5).

The study of ethics involves such questions as:

• What is right?
• What is wrong?
• How should I operate in this situation?

Ethics, then, encompasses the standards and behaviours that tell leaders how they ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves. Wood and Navarez (2014) argued that “Without an ethical foundation, leadership is nothing more than meaningless political posturing” (p. 17).

There is no universal definition of what is deemed ethical. Perceptions of ethics vary and are influenced by one’s political ideology, culture, religion, lived experiences, and other contextual factors. Yet educational leaders are often confronted with the demand to provide a one-size-fits-all answer to complex problems. Ethical dilemmas emerge when leaders are forced to choose among competing sets of principles, values, beliefs, or ideas.

From our perspective, ‘ethics’ is a broad field that deals with what is morally ‘right’ and ‘wrong.’ In this book, we will introduce eight different ethical lenses that can be used to help leaders determine what is right or wrong depending upon the context that they find themselves in.

Ethical Dilemmas

Ethical dilemmas refer to issues that involve conflicting moral principles. It is sometimes easy to determine what is ‘wrong’; for example, corruption, fraud, abuse of power, and deception would be considered unethical by many people, yet they occur frequently throughout the world by established leaders. But even these concepts are subjective, and some will argue that if the outcome is good, then the process to get to that outcome is inconsequential. In other words, the ends justify the means.

The most challenging dilemmas occur when leaders are faced with ‘right versus right’ dilemmas. These types of dilemmas are characterized as either/or situations where there exists a clear opportunity cost resulting from whatever action is not pursued. There are even ‘wrong versus wrong’ dilemmas that leaders must navigate (Somantri & Sardin, 2017).

Ethical judgement, argued Frick et al. (2013), should be an iterative and dynamic process, where leaders draw on multiple sources of evidence, consider differing moral guideposts, and engage in conversations with others to come to a well-rounded conclusion. Importantly, leaders must be cognizant that every action taken, or any decision made can have an immediate and long-lasting impact on the lives of people and it is important to analyze and estimate the impact of decisions (Lapointe et al., 2005).

Leadership

Leadership is second only to classroom teaching in its impact on student learning. — Leithwood et al. (2006, p. 4)

Higher education leaders are facing increased scrutiny with heightened awareness of corruption, academic misconduct, harassment, and fraud, as well as other unethical behaviours regularly reported in the global media. As a result, there is a stronger demand for accountability and transparency and calls for more ethical leadership.

Langlois and Lapointe (2007) argued that ethical leadership is linked to moral leadership and “constitutes the highest level in the development of knowledge and skills in postmodern leadership” (p. 249).

Ethical leadership is the pursuit of justice. Starratt (1991) posited that “We govern ourselves by observing justice” (p. 193). Yet injustice persists. McKerrow and Bullerdieck (2006) explained that there are three reasons for the continued prevalence of injustice:

• Justice simply means different things to different people depending upon their particular perspective.
• Everyone understands, rightly or wrongly, that some perspectives are privileged.
• The extent to which the privileged perspective usurps others and dominates the organizational culture is the extent to which injustice is likely to be ignored. (p. 200)

To address this, critical scholars have called for more distributed forms of leadership, arguing that “those who are vitally affected by decisions should stand in some meaningful relation to the decision-making process” (Sarason, 1999, p. 63).

Although there is no standard definition of ethics, ethicists agree that it is about relationships (Somantri & Sardin, 2017) and that these relationships are contextual. As Singer (1994) opined, “It is a set of rules, principles or ways of thinking that guide, or claim authority to guide, the actions of a particular group” (p. 4).

While we often associate leadership in higher education with positional authority — i.e., presidents, provosts, and deans — we argue that leadership can arise from any position within an institution. From our perspective, leadership signifies an action or practice that inspires change, which is available to formal and informal leaders alike. When one combines the words ‘ethics’ and ‘leadership,’ there is an assumption that one is fulfilling their personal ethical standards and professional codes of conduct and adhering to community values through the practice of leadership. In other words, “ethical leadership is the practice of inspiring others towards a desired outcome while exemplifying an established standard of moral living” (Wood & Navarez, 2014, p. 18). It requires that leaders act in moral ways and encourage morality among others.

To develop the requisite attitudes, knowledge, and skills to be an ethical leader requires a high degree of self-awareness. It requires that leaders interrogate their own biases, values, and principles that guide their decision-making and reflect upon what they deem as ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and how they have come to these assumptions. Ethical leaders thus place a strong emphasis on being self-critical. Somantri and Sardin (2017) described a critical, self-reflective practice as one in which leaders:

• adopt an attitude of skepticism
• question the quality of their own and others’ knowledge
• scrutinize claims
• respect others
• be open-minded (p. 988)

Social Systems

All social institutions (i.e., schools, colleges, and universities) serve as sites for the reproduction of social stratification and relations (Wood & Navarez, 2014). From a social justice perspective, educational leaders’ main objective is to identify structural inequities within their institutions and the false principles and assumptions perpetuated within them.

Ethical leaders must consider the various forms of social stratification, such as race, class, gender, sexuality, and ability, and how they intersect and overlap to create complex and interconnected systems of discrimination or privilege. Viewing leadership through multiple epistemic lenses forces leaders to consider how different aspects of their own and others’ identity can interact to shape their experiences of oppression or privilege (Crenshaw, 1989), as well as their beliefs about what is right and wrong.

Leaders who incorporate multiple lenses into their decision-making — whether that involves interrogating systems rather than individuals, considering equity data, or investigating the root causes of a particular dilemma — recognize and address these interconnected systems of oppression to promote more inclusive and equitable learning environments. This multi-dimensional viewpoint emphasizes the importance of considering how various forms of discrimination and privilege intersect to shape individuals’ experiences and access to educational opportunities.

Multi-Dimensional Moral Compass

While ethical decision-making is what leaders strive for, morality is ethics in action. Morality involves adhering to one’s ethical standards through one’s behaviours, thoughts, and decisions. Starratt (2004) argued that “morality is the living, the acting out of ethical beliefs and commitments” (p. 5); therefore, leaders need a moral compass to help them resolve ethical dilemmas. Wood and Navarez (2014) described a moral compass as “a personal framework of rules, principles, and virtues that guide one’s actions, beliefs, and decision-making” (p. 17). In this textbook, we expand upon Wood and Navarez’s compass by describing eight lenses through which leaders can view the world around themself.

The approach outlined in this textbook, which draws readers’ attention to multiple epistemic lenses that should be considered when making decisions, provides a framework for more culturally responsive and socially just decision-making. In Part I of this textbook, we introduce eight ethical paradigms, which can be used to strengthen readers’ ability to untangle ethical dilemmas — major problems and issues that confront us all. We then combine these lenses into a conceptual framework to show the intersections, connections, and diversions from the centre through which the leader looks out into the world. In Part II of this textbook, we provide readers with real-world case studies of ethical dilemmas in higher education and demonstrate how the multi-dimensional framework can be applied. We welcome readers to comment, critique, and imagine alternate futures to those proposed.

References

Bull, R. (in press). The St’at’imc Seven Laws of Life as Rylee Bull. Knowledge Makers Journal, 9(1). https://knowledgemakers.trubox.ca/knowledge-makers/the-journal/previous-volumes/

Czerniewicz, L. (2013). Inequitable power dynamics of global knowledge production and exchange must be confronted head on. In Open at the Margins. https://press.rebus.community/openatthemargins/chapter/repost-inequitable-power-knowledge/

Ghonge, M. M., Bag, R., & Singh, A. (2020). Indian education: Ancient, medieval, and modern. In S. Waller, L. Waller, V. Mpofu, & M. Kurebwa, Education at the intersection of globalization and technology. Intech Open. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93420

Hue, M. T. (2007). The influence of classic Chinese philosophy of Confucianism, Taoism and legalism on classroom discipline in Hong Kong Junior secondary schools. Pastoral Care in Education, 25(2), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0122.2007.00406.x

Killick, D. (2018) Critical intercultural practice: learning in and for a multicultural globalizing world. Journal of International Students, 8(3), 1422–1439. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1254605

Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2006). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. National College for School Leadership.

Somantri, C. & Sardin, S. (2017). “I” at the centre of ethics and ethical dilemmas in educational leadership. 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences, 2, 432–443. http://dx.doi.org/10.5220/0007052009810992