The organization’s needs take precedence over the reputation of the leader

Season 4, Episode 3 — Click here to download the transcript

If I were to say the name of the famous singer Michael Jackson, what image comes to mind? Opinions are sharply divided between those who celebrate his music and showmanship and those who accuse him of committing various crimes and exhibiting bizarre behavior. In his case, the music has endured and many people separate the music from the person and, for example, happily dance to Thriller each Halloween. But not everyone is so forgiven, and sometimes when we take down a person, we turn our backs on their earlier accomplishments. To what extent is this appropriate? Are there times when we should separate the person from the accomplishment?

Many of us have worked around (occasionally for) leaders who fall from grace, either due to personal misconduct, embarrassing the organization, or something else above and beyond mere poor performance. The leader becomes a pariah. Sometimes that fallen leader did things that made a lasting positive difference in the organization, and the accomplishments may be worth retaining and retelling. Unfortunately because of the leader’s sullied reputation, the accomplishments may be discounted or ignored. It is as though nothing the leader did is valued, despite the possibility that the leader’s errors were unrelated to the accomplishment. And thus, by ignoring the positive story, no one benefits.

Have you experienced this? I have, more than once. And in some cases I had to wait several years until memories of the leader sufficient faded away, before I could tell the good news stories and use them to others’ benefits. Frustrating? Yes. Unfortunate or unnecessary? You be the judge after listening to this episode.

Works Referenced:

Ludwig, D. C., & Longenecker, C. O. (1993). The Bathsheba syndrome: The ethical failure of successful leaders. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(4), 265-273.