Addressing The Crisis Of Leadership Character

In the four decades I have worked in strategic leadership, I don’t recall seeing such an intensely divisive time, with blogs and posts casting leaders as either villains or heroes, renewing questions about what makes effective leadership. It is eerily like the run-up to the 2008 global financial crisis in which people sensed an impending crisis but couldn’t stop the train wreck from happening. That leadership crisis prompted my colleagues and I to put “Leadership on Trial” in 2009 to understand what went wrong. The Leadership on Trial study and the subsequent research established that effective leadership is a combination of character, competence, and commitment. Despite the clear evidence of character’s crucial role in judgment and well-being, as detailed in our 2023 book The Character Compass, skepticism persists, particularly in this unsettled environment. People highlight counterexamples of leaders who they see as having obvious character flaws. They often ask: If character is so important, how do these leaders rise to power? Why are they successful and wealthy? What can we do about it? These questions must be addressed to overcome disillusionment and skepticism about the value of character.

Why Do We Have Leaders With Obvious Character Flaws?

Building on the shoulders of giants in philosophy and psychology, a team of researchers at the Ivey Business School developed a framework of leader character with 11 interconnected dimensions. A key underpinning is that strength in any dimension, when not supported by the others leads to unbalanced character. It is these character imbalances that manifest as character flaws. Understanding the architecture of the interconnected dimensions of character is essential to identifying and diagnosing character imbalances. Without this clarity, it’s easy to get confused about how these dimensions operate in deficient and excessive vice states. Lacking a clear framework and definition of what character truly entails is akin to the classic story where different people describe different parts of an elephant based on their limited perspectives. Like the elephant, most people think they understand character but only see certain parts. The ongoing neglect of certain dimensions, like humility, often stems from a lack of understanding of character’s architecture and how deficiencies in humility can seriously impair judgment and overall well-being. Moreover, failing to recognize how character influences judgment and well-being can make individuals uncertain about its value.

We tend to glorify certain aspects of character, such as drive and courage, while neglecting others, like humility, humanity, temperance, and transcendence. Failing to understand character means perpetuating problems of character imbalances in organizations and society. Such confusion leads to selecting and promoting leaders with character imbalances, as discussed in my article Make Character Count in Hiring and Promotion. Organizations, boards of directors, and regulatory bodies rarely pay attention to character, often only after a breach of conduct. This lack of oversight is one of the reasons that leaders with character imbalances endure.

It is important to reinforce that strength of character isn’t about avoiding tough or courageous decisions that may be unpopular. Arguably, such difficult decisions are not the primary source of disillusionment. It is who leaders are when they make tough decisions, which is reflected in how they do it. When leaders make and implement decisions in a disrespectful, arrogant, inhumane, and belligerent manner, there is good reason to question their character-based judgment. Every action we take and how we take it is a stitch in the fabric of our culture and society. Trying to excuse those actions by claiming good intentions, or conversely that we didn’t mean it, saying it isn’t personal, or just a negotiating tactic, does not absolve the action or negate the stitch. I have adapted an unattributed quote that captures these ideas, relaying the micro-moments of character that shape our destiny.

Be mindful of your thoughts, for they become your words.

Be mindful of your words, for they become your actions.

Be mindful of your actions, for they become your habits.

Be mindful of your habits, for they become your character.

Be mindful of your character, for it becomes your destiny.

Why Are Leaders With Significant Character Imbalances Successful?

There are many examples of leaders operating with character imbalances, both in organizations and on the world stage. Although there are many potential areas of imbalance within the 11 character dimensions, the pattern of imbalance that often emerges is akin to leaders with high drive and courage and low humility – usually referred to as an inflated ego. Forbes Councils Member Jonathan Westover provides examples of how an inflated sense of self undermines leadership, such as Apple under Steve Jobs. As Westover writes: “Jobs refused constructive criticism and ousted talented executives who challenged his authority, weakening Apple when he left.”

Because of the lack of oversight and understanding of character, it tends to go unchecked, with character imbalances further exacerbated by power. Power in its many forms, including economic wealth and positions of power, can erode character, as described by Dacher Keltner. Keltner describes that “people in positions of corporate power are three times as likely as those at the lower rungs of the ladder to interrupt coworkers, multitask during meetings, raise their voices, and say insulting things at the office. And people who’ve just moved into senior roles are particularly vulnerable to losing their virtues.”

Power imbalances accentuate the problem, as described by sociologist Philip Zimbardo in his book The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. Systems of power explain how immoral acts can be carried out by otherwise moral people, as revealed in his Stanford Prison Experiments, where randomly assigned students who took on roles as guards began to abuse the students in prisoner roles within five days. He famously said that if you put good apples into bad barrels, they will become bad apples, drawing attention to the need for better barrel makers. Although Zimbardo did not use the language of character, he noted that in all instances of moral demise, there were outliers who did not succumb to the system. A significant test of the strength of character is whether it holds up in contexts that typically undermine it, such as having power or being in a “bad barrel.”

Although there are obvious “bad barrels,” as described by Zimbardo with the example of American soldiers abusing prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq in 2003, there are less obvious ways in which we tend to construct bad barrels. We create bad barrels when we continue to select, promote, and elect leaders with character imbalances due to misconceptions about character. These leaders reinforce the system of character imbalances, hiring and promoting in their likeness. The system becomes reinforced because people often confuse their perception of character with tangible results. They may also question the importance of character when they see leaders with imbalanced character achieving success. In both cases, they overlook the potential “ticking time bomb” hidden in these results. Instances like Enron, Volkswagen, Wells Fargo, and General Electric demonstrate how apparent success can mask underlying issues that are eventually exposed with serious, if not catastrophic, consequences.

Recognizing that leaders with character imbalances have blind spots that will affect their judgment requires examining decision-making episodes. For example, while Elon Musk’s launch of SpaceX is described as visionary with a relentless pursuit of innovation by Forbes Councils Member Steve Taplin, his leadership style in acquiring Twitter is described by Forbes Contributor Bryan Robinson as “bad for business.” The mistake we make is focusing on leadership style instead of the strengths and weaknesses of character dimensions that inform judgment. Imbalances create blind spots, like those in driving, that, if not checked, can be an accident waiting to happen. The crucial question is whether a leader, once aware of their blind spots, is willing to make the necessary changes.

What Can Be Done About Character?

What can be done about character depends on one of four archetypes. A person who is weak in the various character dimensions, although not likely to be in a position of power, can develop them. Recognizing that character is a habit of behavior that can be developed, there is significant potential for anyone to strengthen their character. Indeed, it is critical when operating in toxic systems. My co-authored article, Cracking the Code, provides some practical approaches.

Alternatively, a person could be strong in all character dimensions, which is the aim, but it is rare given the inadequate attention to character and its development. Few individuals will be strong on all dimensions given the prevalent lack of attention to character development and because we tend to underestimate the needed strength of character so that it holds across contexts such as time pressure, stress, financial incentives, unpopular positions, “speaking truth to power,” and the list goes on.

Most leaders will be in one of two types of unbalanced character. The first is when the leader is aware of the imbalance and actively works to strengthen weaker dimensions to support the stronger ones. This archetype is likely where most leaders reside since character development is a lifelong journey in which imbalances arise even as a person strengthens a character dimension. One of the many challenges is strengthening the character dimensions to hold up, even in “bad barrels.” However, this is not the category where the most toxic leaders reside.

The destructive archetype is what we refer to as compromised character, where a leader has character imbalances that they can’t see or are unwilling to work on. These leaders pose a significant risk, disillusion us the most, and undercut the argument that character is essential to success.

In my experience working with thousands of leaders, most display character imbalances and are keen to work on developing weaker dimensions. Few would have understood their character was not in balance without the clarity provided by considering the 11 character dimensions and their associated behaviors in their virtuous and vice states. With a straightforward approach to developing character by shifting daily habits, they experience personal and professional benefits. A motivating factor is realizing they don’t need to diminish a strength. As one leader described, she had always been advised to tone down her drive, and it wasn’t until she understood the architecture of character that she realized she didn’t need to tone down her drive but strengthen other dimensions like humility, humanity, and temperance to ensure her drive was operating in an optimal state. In organizations seeking to elevate character alongside competence, such leaders would be the norm, and character imbalances can be readily identified, addressed, and managed. As leaders, we can consciously work to activate and develop our weaker dimensions, and others can support the effort.

The more vexing challenge is the compromised character category – someone with imbalances they don’t recognize or won’t change. If they are in a position of power, it is critical not to exacerbate the imbalance, which will introduce greater risk into decision-making. Knowing their character imbalances means that you can predict what the person will do. We call this behavioral forecasting based on character. Hoping they will change or expecting more of their character is where disillusionment sets in. Recognizing they have blind spots that will affect their judgment means doing the equivalent of shoulder checks to identify the risks in decision-making episodes. Ideally, there are checks and balances within the system that put up guard rails to reduce the likelihood such people will be destructive and hold or retain power. However, the reality is that the lack of attention to character has allowed and often enabled the imbalances.

People’s skepticism about character is understandable. Compromised character becomes evident, and disillusionment sets in when it is allowed to persist. History shows it can persist, and while it does, there is an even greater need to lean into character as an antidote. Overcoming disillusionment is not just about educating ourselves on what character is and working to make better barrels founded on character leadership, but it is primarily about starting with our own character development to navigate this very complex and challenging world. Returning to my opening comment that these are challenging times. I am grateful for the work I do on developing character because it provides me with the roadmap to strengthen my own character to navigate the challenges. Adapting Gandhi’s famous quote, strengthening our character is about “becoming” the change we want to see in the world.