EMMANUEL LEVINAS AND THE ETHICAL QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP

Rhodes, C

EMMANUEL LEVINAS AND THE ETHICAL QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP

Rhodes, C

Permalink

Publisher:: Taylor & Francis
Publication Type:: Chapter
Citation:: Organizational Change, Leadership And Ethics: Leading Organizations Towards Sustainability, 2nd Edition, 2023, pp. 67-82
Issue Date:: 2023-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	10.4324_9781003036395-6_chapterpdf.pdf		165.92 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Rhodes, C https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6571-2872
dc.date.accessioned	2023-12-04T04:49:09Z
dc.date.available	2023-12-04T04:49:09Z
dc.date.issued	2023-01-01
dc.identifier.citation	Organizational Change, Leadership And Ethics: Leading Organizations Towards Sustainability, 2nd Edition, 2023, pp. 67-82
dc.identifier.isbn	9780367477493
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/173659
dc.description.abstract	The chapter begins with a review and critique of existing approaches to how the relationship between leadership and justice is theorized. Two main points of contention are raised. First, that research into justice and leadership tends to assume that justice involves leaders treating others fairly, but that those others are solely motivated by self-interest. Second, that while just leaders are proposed as being focussed on the interests of others (i.e. other employees), those interests are ultimately assumed to align with corporate or organizational interests. These two issues, it is argued, reflects an unquestioned managerialism that while speaking the language of ethics and justice, considers justice largely from an instrumental perspective. Justice, by this account, is good, because it is good for business and as a result remains self- rather than other-centered. The second part of the chapter responds to these critiques by outlining the possibilities of an other-centered justice for leadership, taking inspiration from the ethical philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas (1969, 1985, 1998, 2006). It is argued that the multiple ethical demands faced by organizations put leaders in a position where ethical attention to those they lead is always divided, and hence compromised. Justice is here not so much a matter of ‘effectiveness’ but instead a persistent demand that is endemic to the very nature of leadership. As a result, the challenge for leadership is not to assert the value of its own just-ness, but to grapple with the aporia between the ethical necessity for justice and its own inevitable participation in injustice to others. Justice is not here regarded as a ‘goal’ that can be achieved through particular leadership or change management practices, but is an ongoing condition, the response to which defines the ethical quality of leadership.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	Taylor & Francis
dc.relation.ispartof	Organizational Change, Leadership And Ethics: Leading Organizations Towards Sustainability, 2nd Edition
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.4324/9781003036395-6
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.title	EMMANUEL LEVINAS AND THE ETHICAL QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP
dc.type	Chapter
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2023-12-04T04:49:08Z
pubs.publication-status	Published

Abstract:

The chapter begins with a review and critique of existing approaches to how the relationship between leadership and justice is theorized. Two main points of contention are raised. First, that research into justice and leadership tends to assume that justice involves leaders treating others fairly, but that those others are solely motivated by self-interest. Second, that while just leaders are proposed as being focussed on the interests of others (i.e. other employees), those interests are ultimately assumed to align with corporate or organizational interests. These two issues, it is argued, reflects an unquestioned managerialism that while speaking the language of ethics and justice, considers justice largely from an instrumental perspective. Justice, by this account, is good, because it is good for business and as a result remains self- rather than other-centered. The second part of the chapter responds to these critiques by outlining the possibilities of an other-centered justice for leadership, taking inspiration from the ethical philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas (1969, 1985, 1998, 2006). It is argued that the multiple ethical demands faced by organizations put leaders in a position where ethical attention to those they lead is always divided, and hence compromised. Justice is here not so much a matter of ‘effectiveness’ but instead a persistent demand that is endemic to the very nature of leadership. As a result, the challenge for leadership is not to assert the value of its own just-ness, but to grapple with the aporia between the ethical necessity for justice and its own inevitable participation in injustice to others. Justice is not here regarded as a ‘goal’ that can be achieved through particular leadership or change management practices, but is an ongoing condition, the response to which defines the ethical quality of leadership.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/173659