دانلود رایگان مقاله بررسی مسئولیت معتبر

NTRODUCTION

We have all heard the repeated, urgent calls for leaders to be authentic and responsible in their organizational decisionmaking.Nevertheless,too often executive leadership scandals have dominated the business news. Egregious acts committed by leaders we believe we can trust, e.g., Bernie Madoff’s notorious Ponzi scheme: up to $65 billion in actual and projected losses, Allen Stanford’s misplacement of $8 billion intended for CDs that ended up in high-risk hedge funds, and the unfortunate decision on the part of Lance Armstrong to both use and then lie about his doping habits are only three of many uncovered within organizations and by leaders previously thought to be successful and credible models. Often these ‘‘infractions’’ are seemingly committed with little guilt or remorse . . . dare we say with a naturalness that conveys a sense of authenticity. Recently, researchers Craig Pearce and Charles Manz went so far as to coin the term Corporate Social Ir-responsibility (CSIR) concerning executive behavior that is unethical and disregards the welfare of others, such as when powerful leadersseek personal gain while harming employees, shareholders and even society at large. When applied to leadership, CSIR involves particular destructive potency, since central leaders can shape workplace cultures and role identities for others as they model and essentially condone irresponsibility. In this article, we address challenging and important questions. Is authentic irresponsibility emerging as a new leadership paradigm? And if so, how can this trend be reversed and what advice can be offered to leaders to help them avoid consciously or unconsciously becoming part of the problem? Authentic Irresponsibility — An Oxy

CONCLUSION

There are always going to be more things to say about the concepts of authenticity and responsibility and their relationship to how leaders behave. A hundred years from now, it is likely we will be examining our leaders’ actions and wondering why they are not more authentic and responsible. In large part, we can lay the blame, for good or bad, at the feet of our personalities and our nature as humans. We all fail at times. However, our possibility for growth and evolution lies in our human ability for cognition–—our ability to decide to take one path or another. We can decide to espouse a set of moral codesthat meet or exceed oursocietalstandards and then we can also decide whether or not we actually will behave in alignment with those codes. Or, we can just say we will do something and then go in a different direction. That is not uncommon. As we can see, our examples focus on the effect that leaders’ behavior has on their followers. This is because they both have a clear understanding that their actions, not just their words, really do influence how others behave. They know that the Emerson quote: ‘‘Your actions speak so loudly, I can’t hear what you are saying’’ is a simple, yet powerful summary of the disconnect that leaders have between their words and actions. For some reason, it seems that leaders, to everyone’s detriment, forget this connection. We strongly encourage leaders to remember that their words, particularly the things that they say about responsibility, ethics and values, should also be reflected in their actions and behaviors. This is the essence of authenticity. One ofthe most valuable pieces of advice someone ever passed along wasthatlearning to lead from a boss or other person was just as much aboutlearning ‘‘what not todo’’ as much as‘‘what to do.’’ Seeing someone act irresponsibly or inauthentically and mimicking them is a choice, and holding them responsible for their behavior is all of our responsibilities.