Leadership today, once anchored in integrity and a relentless pursuit of excellence, faces unsettling erosion. Instead of setting high standards and leading with conviction, some leaders have resorted to using legality as a shield. Statements like, “We didn’t break any laws,” are becoming the default defense—an alarming trend that reveals a gap between legality, ethics, and true integrity.
This shift is particularly troubling because leadership is about more than following the rules; it involves moral responsibility, personal accountability, and inspiring others by setting an example worth following. When leaders prioritize what is legal over what is right, the impact is far-reaching, affecting not just businesses and institutions but also trust within society at large.
Legal Compliance vs. Ethical Leadership vs. Integrity
While laws provide a basic framework for societal functioning, they only set minimum standards. Ethical behavior goes a step further, demanding that leaders align their actions with moral principles. Integrity, meanwhile, requires leaders to consistently adhere to their values, regardless of external pressure, personal gain, or legal obligations.
Legal Threshold: Defines what is permissible within the boundaries of the law.
Ethics: Focuses on doing what is right according to broader societal or cultural values, even when it’s not legally required.
Integrity: Involves unwavering consistency in behavior that reflects personal and professional values, setting an example others can respect and trust.
A leader driven by integrity asks, “Is this the right thing to do?” rather than, “Can I get away with this?” Unfortunately, in today’s climate, too many fall short by fixating on the latter.
I can't help but marvel at the profound hypocrisy of leaders rationalizing being justified in doing the absolute bare minimum to stay out of jail while demanding their employees strictly abide by much higher standards. Imagine a store manager bragging of having a great day because "I didn't kill anyone!" Or treating customers horribly, verbally berating them and acting abusively, only to defend themselves when called out for it by saying, "I didn't break any laws!"
The Accountability Crisis: Avoidance Tactics
In recent years, corporate and political leaders have repeatedly shown how deflecting responsibility has become the norm. Here are a few cases that illustrate the decline in leadership standards:
Wells Fargo CEO Resignation (2016): After the bank created millions of unauthorized customer accounts, top executives initially deflected responsibility, claiming they were unaware of the unethical practices. Although CEO John Stumpf ultimately resigned, his reluctance to admit full accountability until public outrage mounted exemplified how some leaders choose reputation management over immediate transparency.
Volkswagen Emissions Scandal: The company knowingly manipulated emissions tests, misleading regulators and customers for years. Instead of admitting wrongdoing early on, the leadership team only responded once the fraud was uncovered. Their excuse—that they were following “unwritten rules” of competition—underscored how some leaders justify unethical actions by bending the truth.
Political Leaders Dodging Consequences: In politics, leaders frequently distance themselves from responsibility by pointing to legal technicalities. For instance, during the Watergate scandal, Richard Nixon repeatedly insisted he had done nothing illegal, but it was his lack of integrity that led to his downfall and resignation. Sadly, by comparison, Nixon was an Eagle Scout contrasted to today's politicians who have repeatedly refused to resign even after being convicted of felonies, not just ethical lapses. Modern parallels are visible in various governments worldwide, where elected officials avoid accountability by hiding behind legal loopholes rather than demonstrating moral leadership.
These examples reveal a pattern: some leaders act only when forced and opt to protect themselves through legal arguments rather than exhibiting the humility and honesty that integrity demands.
The Fallout: Loss of Trust and Engagement
The consequences of deteriorating leadership standards are profound. Employees, customers, and citizens lose faith when leaders fail to meet ethical expectations. Trust is a cornerstone of effective leadership, and without it, engagement erodes. For example:
Employee Disengagement: Research shows that workers are less motivated when their leaders fail to embody the values they preach. A 2022 Gallup report found that employee disengagement rose significantly in organizations where employees perceived a lack of accountability at the top levels.
Public Disillusionment with Governance: When leaders in government prioritize legal defense and self-interest over ethical behavior, it alienates citizens and fosters cynicism. Public trust erodes, and the divide between leaders and the people they serve grows wider, resulting in political instability and voter apathy.
Shifting the Leadership Paradigm Back to Integrity
To reverse the decline in leadership standards, leaders must embrace a mindset shift:
Transparency: Leaders must be forthcoming about challenges and mistakes, setting an example that mistakes are opportunities for growth rather than sources of shame.
Accountability: Owning up to actions—even when they are legally permissible but ethically questionable—builds trust and sets a precedent for others to follow.
Setting Higher Standards: Instead of asking, “Is this legal?” leaders should ask, “How will this decision reflect on my character and organization?”
One positive example of integrity in leadership is Arvind Krishna, CEO of IBM, who publicly committed to phasing out technology that could support mass surveillance, even though it was legally permissible to continue selling it. His proactive stance showed that companies could take the lead on ethical issues rather than waiting for regulations to force their hand.
Another is New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who voluntarily resigned from office in 2023, citing burnout and recognizing that she no longer had the energy to lead effectively. Rather than clinging to power, she modeled self-awareness and responsibility, demonstrating that leadership includes knowing when to step down for the greater good.
Conclusion
The growing tendency to prioritize legality over integrity presents a serious challenge to the future of leadership. Leaders must move beyond the narrow confines of legal compliance and embrace a higher standard, one rooted in ethics and integrity. Those in positions of power should inspire trust not because they follow the law, but because they exemplify honesty, accountability, and moral courage.
By returning to these principles, leaders can rebuild trust, foster engagement, and restore the credibility that leadership once commanded.
Supporting Quotes
Jim Collins, Author of Good to Great: “Greatness is not a function of circumstance. Greatness, it turns out, is largely a matter of conscious choice.”
Peter Drucker, Management Consultant and Author: “Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.”
John Wooden, Basketball Coach: “The true test of a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching.”
Comments