Obama’s Pledge to Reform Ethics Faces an Early Test
President Obama has been faced with many tasks that he has vowed to complete that will eventually by the end of his term dramatically affect our government in the US and indefinitely affect the American people and their trust in this administration and those of the future. In the article linked below, there is discussion of President Obama’s intentions as president to fill important political positions with well informed and talented individuals that had previously broken the law or have significant biases toward specific goals in leadership. Is this ethically advisable? No. Is this an ethical dilemma? In my opinion yes.
I would like to start from the beginning of our ethics teachings in class and suggest that legitimate power has given President Obama the authority to permit well qualified individuals that have make unethical decisions in the past to lead this country into the future. I feel that this is the primary unethical platform for future unethical decisions. Logic would dictate that any individual who has been convicted of breaking law in any way, shape, or form should not hold a position that allows him or her to make decisions in a position in which they were previously unlawful. I feel that if it were not for legitimate power, our president would not be able to appoint these individuals to specific positions in our national government.
I feel that opportunism also may play a role in these decisions. The president has the luxury of using impoverished management to his advantage, he can be hands off when leading certain members of his administration and let them admit their inadequacies while in the process of resignation, ultimately letting mistakes in their personal lives outweigh his initial mistake of appointing these individuals in the first place. Opportunism comes into play when he has to use an authority-compliance relationship with the individual to force them to step down for the good of the country and those that are affected by a particular portion of the government.
I also feel that path goal theory does certainly play a role in these unethical developments. President Obama has initially set goals during his campaign and ultimately during his first presidential address. The public has certain expectations of him and his staff that directly affect his ratings as our national leader. Mr. Obama has clarified his path in many addresses across the U.S., but fails to take into consideration the obstacles that he will face due to his initial unethical decisions. The president now has to remove these obstables to provide to support to the rest of the staff and the American people. This sense of removal, often of staff by a forced resignation, allows some sense of productivity as an end result; but we must take into consideration that the goal of achievement in this case has outweighed ethical behavior on President Obama’s behalf.
LMX theory may also play a role in these leadership decisions. President Obama’s in group has certainly reaped the benefits of his unethical decisions much more than the out group. As this theory entails, the individuals in the in group are more likely to receive special treatment and more authority (in this case the opportunity to obtain a position of authority). Though many do criticize the theory for suggesting that individuals are separated in the work place by an in group and out group, I feel that this example is very applicable. Many of these individuals, due to past convictions, should have no ethical reason to participate and make decisions on behalf of our country and its citizens, but they were given this opportunity because they were in an in-group of sorts.
Finally, I feel that authentic leadership is certainly worth discussing based on the findings in this article. From an intrapersonal perspective, authentic leaders base their actions on their values. I feel that if President Obama’s actions represent his values in these circumstances mentioned in the article; he has acted in an unethical manner. Though I do feel that he is a genuine leader who does have faults, he is original and does lead from conviction.
No comments:
Post a Comment