Starratt, Robert J. (2004) Ethical leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Pp. ix + 157
$20 ISBN 0-7879-6564-2
Reviewed by Daniel J. Torlone
University of Saint Francis
November 22, 2004
Characters not usually encountered in standard education administration preparation texts—such as, an overburdened principal in the midst of an existential crisis and a university professor in the role of moral analyst—place Ethical Leadership among the atypical resources in the field of educational administration. Robert J. Starratt’s third book provides a framework of “foundational ethics [for] educational leaders when they attempt to lead” (p. 5) (author’s italics), supplying ample grist for the mills of practicing administrators, those aspiring to lead, and those who teach leadership. Starratt’s work is not a “how to” book, but a book of “how to think about” effecting transformation in school’s.
At its best, Ethical Leadership distills leadership—in all of its organizational, philosophical, psychological, spiritual complexities—down to its simplest essence: that is, as a moral force in society, leadership must be transformational not only for those “who attempt to lead” (p. 5), but for those who are led, and for the organization they are charged with leading. Early on in this brief 157 page book, Starratt presses the reader to think. Ethical leadership, argues the author, begins with the formation of a sound framework, one requiring leaders to undertake an often arduous and frank “analysis of what principles, beliefs, values, and virtues constitute a moral life” (p. 45). Ethical leadership—the mental construct—challenges one to live, and work, as a moral leader. Moral leadership—the enacted process—honors personal integrity and responds to the needs of others in promoting justice as well as preventing harm. In sum, ethical leadership as conceptual structure engenders moral leadership as practical action.
Wisely, Ethical Leadership avoids prescription. Its readers, who typically find administration texts and journals presenting simplistic dichotomies filled with nostrums of “do versus don’t” and “good versus bad” practice, will find in this powerful little book another route for potentially resolving the challenges posed by seemingly perpetual efforts to reform U.S. education. The author adds to the body of professional literature that casts leadership as evolutionary, as a process maturing from one of reactive prescriptive actions into one anchored in responsive transformational thinking.
Three conceptual components frame the idea of ethical leadership—responsibility, authenticity, and presence—in essence, the building blocks in crafting a strategy for change, both personal and institutional. Starratt opens with “Becoming Moral,” a chapter briefly distinguishing ethics from morals, and then follows with the introduction of a “composite” middle school principal, Al Auther. Constructing the conceptual structure of ethical leadership often begins with self-doubt and internal dissonance. Mr. Auther, who represents the stereotypical caring leader beset with a moral dilemma concerning the disadvantaged populations in his school, seeks solace and counsel in the person of his former university professor. In the subsequent three chapters Starratt methodically constructs an ethical framework for moral leadership in terminology to which harried leaders, habituated to the language of quick-fix professional literature, might be unaccustomed. Vignettes featuring Principal Mr. Auther, however, ground Ethical Leadership in the realities of public schooling, without miring it the vernacular of “educationese.” Additionally, several well-positioned graphics also help the reader visually organize the book’s concepts.
Among the three components of ethical leadership, it is the last, presence, which empowers leaders to be, and act, with genuine responsibility and authenticity. Presence, “being wide awake to what’s in front of you” (p. 86), tightly links leaders to their subordinates, colleagues, and superiors in the quest to produce “good” (p. 91). Leaders committed to “capacity building,” in the words of Adams and Kirst (1999), are present to possibilities for incorporating the authenticity of others in the institution, thereby enabling responses (Starratt’s notion of responsibility) for the potential betterment of the order.
For academic heft, Starratt amply cites leaders in the fields of educational leadership, (Sergiovanni, Argyris, and Duigan), organizational development (Weber, Senge, and Fullan), psychology (Taylor), and, finally, the morality of leadership (Cooper, Jonsen). (See Excerpts from Bibliography below for the works cited.)
It is the absence of one citation, however, that perplexes this reviewer. Starratt does not cite a giant of twentieth-century philosophy, John Dewey, whose ideas of civic responsibility reverberate throughout Starratt’s notion of co-production. Can the reader surmise that Dewey, often the philosopher of choice among instruction-curriculum reform advocates, falls outside the purview of contemporary discourse on leadership? Furthermore, albeit a minor issue, Ethical Leadership, at times, suffers from the overuse of exhortative “shoulds,” especially in the chapter on responsibility, running the risk of desensitizing the reader to the book’s central lessons.
While reading Ethical Leadership this reviewer often dialogued with the author, referencing personal school leadership experiences, and raising objections: “What if the board or superintendent simply refuse to budge?” “What if I am confronted with a recalcitrant faculty?” At one point, I decided Starratt had conveniently ignored the complex political and emotional realities of the principalship. I am was happy to be proven wrong. To wit, two-thirds into Ethical Leadership Starratt states outright that failure on the part of others to participate in co-production “may lead to a request that the teacher leave the school” (p. 98) or, faced with an impasse, leaders themselves may need to “move on” to another institution.
Ethical Leadership can either be a quick and neat informative read or a slow, thoughtful one. For those who genuinely aspire to personal-professional transformation, Ethical Leadership requires a time-intensive investment of individual self-questioning. Lucky are those readers who have the opportunity to complement self-questioning with intensive dialogue in collective venues, such as university classes (post-graduate seminars first come to mind) or peer discussion groups. On a macro political-policy scale, Ethical Leadership is especially timely, providing a non-strident voice that may help counter calls for endless standardized testing and other well-intended, yet ill-conceived, panaceas proposed for public education reform.
Perhaps no one more qualified than Robert J. Starratt could tackle the world of ethics in leadership in U.S. schools. As a former high school teacher (of both mathematics and English, no less), consultant, college professor of educational administration, and, above all, principal of two secondary schools, the author has lived and labored the world he posits in Ethical Leadership, earning the “stripes of battle” that lend credibility to his arguments. In words sometimes reminiscent of a Zen-master, Starratt counsels the reader that moral leadership is neither absolute, nor permanent, nor a state to be attained. Rather, moral leadership is to be lived as a reality demanding existential meaning-making on the part of leaders. Educators, whether or not they consider themselves “official” leaders, can only hope that Starratt’s approach to leadership will be seriously heeded by everyone across the spectrum of public service and private enterprise who aspires to assume the mantle of authority.
Reference
Adams, J.E. & Kirst, M.W. (1999). New demands and concepts for educational accountability: Striving for results in an era of excellence. In J. Murphy and K.S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on education administration (2nd ed., pp. 463-489). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Excerpts from Starratt’s Bibliography
Argyris, C. (1977). Double-loop learning in organizations, Harvard Business Review, 55(5), 115-125.
Cooper, T.L. (1991). An ethic of citizenship for public administration. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Cooper, T.L. (1998). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for the administrative role (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Duigan, P. (2003a, August). Authenticity in leadership: Encouraging the heart, celebrating the spirit. Paper presented at the National Conference of Lutheran Principals, Canberra, Australia.
Duigan, P. (2003b, September). Formation of capable, influential, and authentic leaders for times of uncertainty. Paper presented at the National Conference of Australian Primary Principals’ Association, Adelaide.
Duigan, P., Burford, C., Cresp, M. d’Arbon, T., Fagan, M., & Frangoulis, M. (2003). Executive summary. In Contemporary challenges and implications for leaders in frontline human service organizations. Strathfield, NSW: The SOLAR Project, Australian Catholic University.
Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Jonsen, A. (1968). Responsibility in modern religious ethics. Washington, DC: Corpus Books.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday.
Sergiovanni, T.J. & Starratt, R.J. (2002). Supervision: A redefinition (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Taylor, C. (1991). Theethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant sects and the spirit of capitalism. In H.H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 302-332). New York: Oxford University Press.
About the Reviewer
Daniel J. Torlone, Ed.D.
University of Saint Francis
Fort Wayne, Indiana
~
ER home |
Reseņas Educativas |
Resenhas Educativas ~
~
overview | reviews | editors | submit | guidelines | announcements
~