Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 265–273 | Cite as

The Bathsheba Syndrome: The ethical failure of successful leaders

  • Dean C. Ludwig
  • Clinton O. Longenecker
Article

Abstract

Reports of ethical violations by upper level managers continue to multiply despite increasing attention being given to ethics by firms and business schools. Much of the analysis of these violations focuses on either these managers'lack of operational principles or their willingness to abandon principles in the face ofcompetitive pressures. Much of the attention by firms and business schools focuses either on the articulation of operational principles (a deontological approach) or on the training of managers to sort their way through subtle ethical dilemmas in the face of competitive pressure (a utilitarian approach). While valuable, these approaches alone are incomplete.

This paper suggests that many ethical violations by upper managers are the by-product ofsuccess — not of competitive pressures. Our research suggests that many managers are poorly prepared to deal with success. First, success often allows managers to becomecomplacent and to lose focus, diverting attention to things other than the management of their business. Second, success, whether personal or organizational, often leads toprivileged access to information, people or objects. Third, with success usually comes increasinglyunrestrained control of organizational resources. And fourth, success can inflate a manager's belief in his or her personalability to manipulate outcomes. Even individuals with a highly developed moral sense can be challenged (tempted?) by the “opportunities” resulting from the convergence of these dynamics. We label the inability to cope with and respond to the by-products of success “the Bathsheba Syndrome,” based on the account of the good King David (a story familiar in a variety of traditions). Recognition of this phenomenon implies that we change or broaden our approach to the teaching of business ethics. It also implies that organizations must re-evaluate and change structures, procedures, and practices which enhance the likelihood of managers falling victim to the Bathsheba Syndrome.

Keywords

Economic Growth Business Ethic Business School Ethical Dilemma Level Manager 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrews, K. R.: 1989 (Sept.–Oct.) ‘Ethics in Practice’,Harvard Business Review, pp. 99–104.Google Scholar
  2. Arthur, E. E.: 1987, ‘The Ethics of Corporate Governance’,Journal of Business Ethics 6, pp. 59–70.Google Scholar
  3. Baxter, G. D. and C. A. Rarick: 1987, ‘Education for the Moral Development of Managers: Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development and Integrative Education’,Journal of Business Ethics 6, pp. 243–248.Google Scholar
  4. Berglas, S.: 1986,The Success Syndrome: Hitting Bottom When you Reach the Top (Plenum Press, New York).Google Scholar
  5. Bird, F. and J. A. Waters: 1987, ‘The Nature of Managerial Moral Standards’,Journal of Business Ethics 6, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
  6. Blotnick, S.: 1987,Ambitious Men: Their Desires, Delusions, and Dreams (Viking, New York).Google Scholar
  7. Boatright, J. R.: 1988, ‘Ethics and the Role of the Manager’,Journal of Business Ethics 7, pp. 303–312.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, M.: 1984, ‘Ethics and Management Style’,Journal of Business Ethics 3, pp. 207–214.Google Scholar
  9. Carr, A. Z.: 1970 (July–Aug.), ‘Can an Executive Afford a Conscience?’,Harvard Business Review, pp. 58–64.Google Scholar
  10. Duncan, W. J.: 1986, ‘Ethical Issues in the Development and Application of Business and Management Knowledge’,Journal of Business Ethics 5, pp. 391–400.Google Scholar
  11. Gellerman, S. W.: 1986 (July–Aug.), ‘Why ‘Good’ Managers Make Bad Ethical Choices’,Harvard Business Review, pp. 85–90.Google Scholar
  12. Hosmer, L. T.: 1987, ‘The Institutionalization of Unethical Behavior’,Journal of Business Ethics, pp. 439–447.Google Scholar
  13. Kelly, C. M.: 1988,The Destructive Achiever (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
  14. Kets de Vries, M. F.: 1989, ‘Leaders Who Self-Destruct: The Causes and Cures’,Organizational Dynamics, pp. 5–17.Google Scholar
  15. Konrad, A. R.: 1982, ‘Business Managers and Moral Sanctuaries’,Journal of Business Ethics 1, pp. 195–200.Google Scholar
  16. La Bier, D.: 1986,Modern Madness: The Emotional Fallout of Success (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
  17. Levinson, H.: 1988, ‘To Thine Own Self Be True: Coping with the Dilemmas of Integrity’, in S. Strivastva and Assoc. (eds.),Executive Integrity (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
  18. Longenecker, J. G.: 1985, ‘Management Priorities and Management Ethics’,Journal of Business Ethics 4, pp. 65–70.Google Scholar
  19. Molander, E.: 1987, ‘A Paradigm for Design, Promulgation and Enforcement of Ethical Codes’,Journal of Business Ethics 6, pp. 619–631.Google Scholar
  20. Nielsen, R. P.: 1987, ‘What Can Managers Do about Unethical Management?’,Journal of Business Ethics 6, pp. 309–320.Google Scholar
  21. Pastin, M.: 1984, ‘Ethics as an Integrating Force in Management’,Journal of Business Ethics 3, pp. 293–304.Google Scholar
  22. Pitt, L. F. and R. Abratt: 1986, ‘Corruption in Business — Are Management Attitudes Right?’,Journal of Business Ethics 5, pp. 39–44.Google Scholar
  23. Posner, B. Z. and W. H. Schmidt: 1987, ‘Ethics in American Companies: A Managerial Perspective’,Journal of Business Ethics 6, pp. 383–391.Google Scholar
  24. Roberts IV, D. Roberts: 1986, ‘Moral Managers and Business Sanctuaries’,Journal of Business Ethics 5, pp. 203–208.Google Scholar
  25. Waters, J. A., F. Bird and P. D. Chant: 1986, ‘Everyday Moral Issues Experienced by Managers’,Journal of Business Ethics 5, pp. 373–384.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dean C. Ludwig
    • 1
  • Clinton O. Longenecker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ManagementUniversity of ToledoToledoUSA

Personalised recommendations