Dissertation Abstract: Steven D. Olson
Source: The author.
Written at Emory University, 2007
Advisor: Steven M. Tipton
Dr. Olson received his Ph.D. in Ethics and Society at
Emory University.
"The
Ethics of Leadership: Construction of an Analytical
Framework, with Application to Ken Blanchard's Theories
of Situational and Servant Leadership."
Olson's biography
Chapter 7
International
Leadership Association and free downloads to ILA member
The author argues that every theory of leadership
contains an ethic. The ethic rests upon five elements
that are presupposed in every theory of leadership: (1)
ontology, (2) axiology (theory of values), (3)
anthropology, (4) theory of agency, and (5) theory of
change. He constructs a framework for analyzing the
ethics of a leadership theory by drawing upon four
sources: (1) James G. Hunt’s “modified
historical-contextual superstructure” framework for
categorizing leadership theories, (2) James M.
Gustafson’s framework for analyzing philosophical and
theological ethics, (3) Steven M. Tipton’s interpretive
sociology of styles of ethical evaluation and their
institutional salience, and (4) Brian P. Hall’s theory
of values and human development.
Applying the framework to Ken Blanchard’s theory of
Situational Leadership, the author argues that Blanchard
advances two ethics, an implicit ethic and an explicit
ethic, both of which are utilitarian. The implicit ethic
seeks to control and manipulate human behavior in order
to increase industrial production. The explicit ethic
seeks to uphold the rules of fair competition in market
exchanges. Both ethics support the ethics of
microeconomic theory and its institutional expression
within the modern business corporation. Blanchard,
however, fails to justify ethically his implicit ethic
of controlling and manipulating human behavior to
increase industrial production and, despite claims to
the contrary, his theory of Situational Leadership
contains no coherent account of how leaders change.
These conceptual, ethical and practical problems lead
Blanchard to adopt an explicitly religious theory of
leadership, Servant Leadership. He alters his conception
of ontology, axiology, anthropology, theory of agency,
and theory of change. These new elements give rise to an
authoritative-utilitarian ethic that requires leaders to
undergo a religious conversion and to surrender their
control of human resources to God. Thus, the ethic of
Servant Leadership conflicts with the implicit ethic of
Situational Leadership. Situational Leadership requires
the control and manipulation of human resources, while
Servant Leadership requires the surrender of their
control to God. Blanchard, however, continues to assert
that both theories are true. This contradiction sets up
a new, developmental dynamic within Blanchard’s account
of leadership.
Back to top
|
