Leadership and Moral Individualism
I am a regular reader of Ryan Burge’s Graphs About Religion blog, and recently he posted a piece on American moral values that got me thinking about individualism. Based on data from the General Social Survey, he reported a marked decrease over the past twenty years in the number of people who indicated a belief that it is always wrong for “a married person to have sexual relations with someone other than the marriage partner.” As I thought about it, it made sense to me that more people in our time would waffle about whether anything was “always wrong.”
In the past, cultures shaped by Christian beliefs judged things to be right or wrong largely on the basis of what the Bible teaches about them. Something was wrong or sinful based on whether it was pleasing to God or offensive to God’s holiness. In today’s post-Christian America, behaviors are judged to be right or wrong based on individualistic priorities—whether they are right or wrong for me. For example, a person might be trapped in a failed marriage where sexual relations had long ago died and in such a case, they might not judge adultery as “wrong” if it felt “right.” (We’ve all heard the adulterous songs in many genres that say something can’t be wrong when it feels so right.)
Such a morality springs from the radical individualism of today’s culture. In the past, people not only felt a need to reckon with biblical or religious teaching but also with the social consequences of any particular action. It mattered whether a particular behavior provided a good example to others, as most people felt a responsibility to be good role models for others—especially to young people. Such a communitarian way of judging between right and wrong started dying with the sexual revolution of the 1950s, when many people who had made great personal sacrifices for the good of society during the Great Depression and World War II began to assert their own wishes and desires in an existentialist revolt against conformity to society’s norms and needs. Over time, in such a society of radical individuals, morality lost its social dimension and became a mere act of self-expression.
What does this discussion have to do with leadership? Leadership is ultimately a social, interpersonal category. While “self-leadership” is certainly the foundation of any social leadership, the minute the leading of one’s own life begins to influence others, it becomes a social category. When leaders live self-centered lives, they influence others to live the same way, and their leadership serves to dissolve society and organizations, becoming a kind of anti-leadership. Previous generations understood that the personal moral life of leaders mattered, with strong moral character contributing to a united, powerful organization or society made up of disciplined people dedicated to the common good.
I recently rewatched the 2018 NCAA Division 1 football championship game and marveled again at the selflessness of the winning coach, Nick Saban. Asked how he felt about winning his sixth national championship and tying the record set by Paul “Bear” Bryant, he steadfastly focused on his happiness for the fans and players and refused to take any credit for the achievement. He would go on to win a seventh championship soon enough. Football, like any team sport, depends on teambuilding and selflessness. Organizations and societies achieve greatness through unity and determination and personal sacrifice for the good of the group.
Leaders who adopt today’s self-determined, self-driven morality will fail to build enduring organizations. Moral reasoning has to consider not only what is right for the individual, but also what is best for others—for the organization, for the society—and ultimately, they must consider what God, the ultimate judge, sees as righteous. In the short term, society will judge the results of our moral behavior, condemning the bad fruit from branches the society may have even called good. Organizational performance will also render its judgment on the behaviors of leaders. Since judgment will inevitably come, leaders should judge themselves strictly, living by the highest moral standards.