Building a Culture of Ethical Leadership

As I write this post, we have just come through Canada’s most recent federal election, a vote that sees the Liberal party led by Prime Minister Mark Carney assume power in a minority government. Here in Alberta, there is a municipal election on the horizon, only a few months away, and the same situation is about to occur in Newfoundland and Labrador,

In all of these cases, humans will be given authority over us in certain areas of our lives. My hope is that these people are visionary, thoughtful, and, most of all, ethical.

A phrase goes like ‘ethics is when you do the right thing even when people aren’t watching’. I think this is correct. People in elected roles can be performative while in public, in a meeting, or on TV, but what are they like when there is nobody else around or when the microphone isn’t in front of their face?

Ethics is pretty obvious when the decision or the process is straightforward, but it gets a bit cloudier when nuance is involved. What is ethical for one person in one circumstance may not be ethical for another person in another circumstance. To me, this is the impact of culture. I work across Canada and see different municipalities operating under various provincial and local rules. These rules set the outline of what is required, and they set the guidelines for what can be considered ethical.

Some things are rather obviously unethical; like accepting gifts or favours in return for voting a certain way, or releasing confidential information to hurt a political opponent or group. Other actions are somewhat less obvious. I recently worked in a municipality where bylaws are routinely given three readings at the same council meeting. When I asked about this, there really wasn’t much pushback on operating this way. In the elected official's eyes, and even those of some members of management, this was a historically appropriate, transparent and ethical process.

To my thinking, this process could be considered to bend the rules of ethics somewhat. I highly doubt any of these people are nefarious or trying to circumvent processes for their benefit, but that’s what is happening. Bylaws are intentionally given three readings for due consideration to be given to the strongest tool a local government has. The readings are intended to be separated by time as a way for the voters–councillors to think about their decision and maybe gather information and input. What seems like a good idea at first reading may not seem that way after a week or two of reflection. It’s not illegal to have all three readings at a single meeting, but I’d suggest it’s not a good practice.

When I provide governance orientations or refreshers, I explore a checklist for ethical decision-making. I walk through it with the group, and we sometimes talk about how this checklist could be adapted to their circumstance. I share that checklist with you now, and I’d be interested in any comments you might have about it.

1. Is this decision legal?

2. Does this action comply with my role?

3. Is this action in the best interests of the municipality as a whole

4. As a decision maker, do I have a conflict of interest?

5. Would I be proud to tell my colleagues or my family about this?

6. Am I doing the right thing?

7. Can I justify my course of action?

   
   

This checklist certainly has nuance, with some of the questions being of the go/no-go sort, while others are more personal. There is much to unpack and explore with the making of ethical decisions, and therefore, providing ethical leadership.

As a bit of a health check, here are some considerations for whether your municipality or other group is set up to make ethical decisions by default:

• Do you have the rules you need, and are they current? These rules can include codes of conduct/ethics, safe workplace statements, intra-council covenants, and council-CAO covenants, among others?

• Does your organization and its members receive training and refreshers on ethics and how they are practiced? Case studies are a good way to do this.

• Do you debate and make decisions in public unless that must occur in private?

• Are members of the organization free to challenge others who may not be following the agreed-upon ethical guidelines, and are members wise enough to avoid weaponizing those rules?

• Are leaders, both elected and appointed, modelling the ethical behaviour they expect in others?

A great deal more can be said about ethical leadership, but that will need to wait for another post.

I would be interested in your ideas of how you see ethical leadership in practice, or where you see it break down.

As always, you can reach me at ian@strategicsteps.ca.