1

Douglas F. Morgan and Craig Shinn "Civic Initiative: The Ethics of Leadership" and "Civic Engagement: The Role of Social Institutions" and Leadership for Change Cluster Portland State University

Political and Legal Issues of Ethical Leadership

It is quite possible for a surgeon with impeccable ethical standards in his professional life to be an absolutely irresponsible parent, a compulsive gambler, an incorrigible lecher, and so forth. Unless we are willing to acquiesce in the same possibility for government managers, we shall not make much progress in developing meaningful ethical standards for [public] managers .... John Rohr While public morality thus in part reflects, incorporates, and is influenced by private moralities, in another respect it is sharply distinguished from, and in slight or greater conflict with, private values ....The morality of democratic government in its administrative aspects turns first of all, then, on orientation to the uniquely public interest. Paul Appleby Simple corruption in government ...represents the stuff of popular scandals in the modern state, but it is presumptuous to think that this represents the full range of ethical disorders to which the state is susceptible ...Every political order contains, as a necessary principle of its own integrity and significance, a systematic ethical view ...which consists of the system of public authority that defines right and wrong in the realm of politics. William J. Meyer

AIM AND PURPOSE OF THE COURSE

D. Morgan, M. Banyan & J. Chambers Leadership for Change Winter 2002 Judging right from wrong in political life isnt always an easy task; but is it any more

difficult than judging right from wrong in our private affairs? For example, when is it appropriate to take a loved one off a life support systems? Is it OK to tell a 3 year-old that there is a Santa Claus or tooth fairy? How is this different than withholding information from your parent or your six-year-old daughter that they have only six months to live? All of these examples illustrate the difficulty of drawing lines between acceptable and unacceptable lies. In our private lives most of us accept some version of the notion of white lies- the telling of stories or withholding information because it is seen as serving a larger good without corrupting our souls or the souls of those who are the object of our white lies.

To what extent do these problems of making moral judgments in our private lives find

their parallel in political life? For example, is it OK to tell a band of terrorists holding hostages that if they give up, they will be put on a plane and sent to a country of their choice (without

2

telling them that this applies only to those judged innocent by a jury)? When does ones personal flaws and failings as an individual become relevant for judging their worthiness to hold a position of political trust and leadership?

On first glance, we are all inclined to use our personal standards of ethics to judge the

acts of public officials, expecting perhaps a somewhat higher level of integrity and trust than is applied to non-public persons. But Rohr, Meyer and Appleby argue that we are wrong in failing to distinguish public from private morality. Does such a distinction make sense, and if it does, what are its implications? Perhaps most important of all, what is the basis for distinguishing between public and private ethics? Where do we draw the line between doing what is legal and doing what is right? And how does what is right as a public leader differ from what is right as a private individual? These are the questions that will provide the central focus of concern for this course on Political and Legal Issues of Ethical Leadership.

The course is organized into three sections. In the first section we will explore the

criteria by which we determine whether someone is a leader. We will use these criteria to develop the ethical standards by which their leadership should be judged from an ethical point of view. We will complete section I of the course by developing an Ethical Leadership Diagnostic that we will apply in the second section of the course.

The second section of the course is the longest and consists of case application

presentations by major political leaders who have faced significant ethical dilemmas in their public leadership roles. After spending a session listening to a presentation of the major ethical dilemmas they faced in their leadership career, we will use the following session to diagnose the case problem, using the Ethical Leadership Diagnostic we have developed in the first section of the course.

In the final section of the course, we will synthesize the lessons we have learned from

the readings, class discussions, case presentations and summarize these lessons in a final reflective essay. SUMMARY OF COURSE REQUIREMENTS

1. 20 % - Short Paper on Section I of the Course

2. 30 % - Case Application Diagnostic on Section II of the Course

3. 35% - Final Reflective Essay

4. 15% Quality of Class Participation

5. Optional Case Application Diagnostic for Section II of the Course. You may write additional papers for section II of the course. We will use the highest grade received on the case application exercise for calculating your final grade for the course.

3

1. Short Paper on Section I of the Course - 20% During the first three weeks of the course we will examine various models of political leadership and then use these models to identify the ethical values inherent in each model. Through our collective efforts we will prepare an Ethical Leadership Diagnostic, which you will be asked to use to diagnose the ethical leadership of one (1) of the following individuals:

Hillary Clinton: To what extent should her involvement in the Travelgate and Whitewater scandals affect her worthiness as a political leader?

Abraham Lincoln: To what extent did Lincolns unwillingness to abolish slavery constitute

an ethical failure or ethical success as a political leader? Thomas Jefferson: To what extent should Jeffersons relationship with one of his slaves,

Sally Hemming, and his failure to free his personal slaves affect our judgment about Jeffersons greatness as a leader?

The Reverend Jessie Jackson: To what extent should Jessie Jacksons untrustworthiness as

a husband affect our judgment about his trustworthiness as an ethical political leader? A person of your own choosing and approved by course instructors.

To complete this assignment you need to do the following:

1. Do a web search of the person you have chosen and spend no more than two hours reading materials relevant to the question posed for that person.

2. Use the Ethical Leadership Diagnostic to identify:

(a) The type of leader the person represents. (b) The ethical frameworks) appropriate for judging this type political leader. (c) A summary conclusion of the initial lessons you have drawn thus far about ethics

and political leadership. 2. 30 % - Case Application Diagnostic on Section II of the Course (limited to 1,500

words, approximately 6 pages)

The case application paper requires you to use the Ethical Leadership Diagnostic developed in Section I of the course to analyze one of the live case presentations by a public leader. This paper should be limited to 1,500 words (approximately 6 pages). Use the following guidelines in preparing your case application paper: hftp://www.eli.pdx.edu/Morgan/GuidelinesCaseAppPaper.html The case application paper is due the week following the session you choose for analysis. Turn your case application paper into the instructor in charge for the case presentation session.

4

3. Final Reflective Essay (limited to 3,000 words, approximately 12 pages).

The final paper is a reflective essay that provides you with an opportunity to integrate the class discussion, readings, and case presentation into summary set of lessons learned. Your final essay will be judged on the basis of the following criteria: 1. The quality of writing and organization of your paper. 2. The extent to which the paper demonstrates insightful understanding and application of

the course readings. 3. Your successful understanding and use the Ethical Leadership Diagnostic developed in the

course. 4. 15% Quality of Class Participation

In addition to quantity of your presence in class, we will judge the quality of your presence through your participation in discussions and group exercises.

INSTRUCTOR CONTACT INFORMATION Margaret Banyan: 725-8290; e:banyanm@attbi.com 670-17 URBN Jennifer Chambers: 725-5153; e:chambersj@pdx.edu 780H URBN Douglas Morgan: 725-8217; e:morgandf@pdx.edu; 670N URBN

COURSE SYLLABUS

REQUIRED READINGS The required readings will consist of a combination of materials available through the course instructors and the Web. SECTION I: WHAT IS ETHICAL LEADERSHIP? January 8th

Central Question for Session: What makes a person a leader?

January 10th Central Question for Session: What are the various types of leadership? Required Readings :

James McGregor Burns, Transactional and Transforming Leadership Hersey and Blanchard, Situational Leadership Clayborne Carson, Martin Luther King, Jr.: Charismatic Leadership in a Mass Struggle: The Making of a Citizen Leader Nadler and Tushman, Beyond the Charismatic Leader: Leadership and Organizational Change Marshall Sashkin, Visionary Leadership

5

January 15th Central Question for Session: What is ethical leadership? Required Readings :

Niccolo Machiavelli, How Princes Should Keep the Faith Bill Grace, Ethical Leadership: In Pursuit of the Common Good Kohlberg, Stages of Moral Development http://www.eli.pdx.edu/Morgan/kohlberg.html Benjamin, Martin. Splitting the Difference, Chapters 2-3. (Kansas, 1990)

Rushworth M. Kidder, Universal Human Values: Finding an Ethical Common Ground January 17th Central Question for Session: To what extent do the ethical requirements of leadership change

with ones political role? Required Readings:

William J. Meyer, Political Ethics and Political Authority, Ethics 86 (1975/76), pp. 61-69. Morgan and Shinn, Public Service Leadership Traditions hftp://www.eli.pdx.edu/Morgan/leadershipmodels.PDF

Cheryl Mabey, The Making of a Citizen Leader Richard A. Couto, Defining a Citizen Leader January 22nd Central Question for Session: What are the ethical requirements for different types of

leadership: Preparing an Ethical Leadership Diagnostic Required Readings : Review all readings for previous sessions and prepare a summary of the major types of

leadership that have been identified. January 24th Central Question for Session: Reviewing and applying Ethical Leadership Diagnostic Required Readings: Review all of the readings from previous sessions and prepare a summary of the ethical

criteria you think should be used in judging the various types of leadership.

6

SECTION II: CASE PRESENTATIONS OF ETHICAL DILLEMMAS BY POLITICAL LEADERS

January 29th Ethical Case Presentation by a Public Official Required Readings: Readings will be assigned based on recommendation of case presenter.

January 31st Case Debriefing Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on the nature of the case presented for discussion February 5th Ethical Case Presentation by a Public Official Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on recommendation of case presenter. February 7th Case Debriefing Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on the nature of the case presented for discussion. February 12th Ethical Case Presentation by a Public Official Required Readings: Readings will be assigned based on recommendation of case presenter. February 14th Case Debriefing Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on the nature of the case presented for discussion February 19th Ethical Case Presentation by a Public Official Required Readings: Readings will be assigned based on recommendation of case presenter. February 21st Case Debriefing Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on the nature of the case presented for discussion

7

February 26th Ethical Case Presentation by a Public Official Required Readings: Readings will be assigned based on recommendation of case presenter. February 28th Case Debriefing Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on the nature of the case presented for discussion March 5th Ethical Case Presentation by a Public Official Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on recommendation of case presenter. March 7th Case Debriefing Required Readings : Readings will be assigned based on the nature of the case presented for discussion March 12th

Central Question for Session: What kind of leadership is best for the future of our system of democratic governance?

Required Readings :

A Social Change Model of Leadership Development, Higher Education Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, 1996, pp. 1-69.

James McGregor Burns, Transactional and Transforming Leadership

March 14th

Central Question for Session: What are the central lessons you have learned from this course about political leadership?

Required Readings : A Social Change Model of Leadership Development, Higher Education Research Institute,

University of California, Los Angeles, 1996, pp.1-69. James McGregor Burns, Transactional and Transforming Leadership

8

PROPOSED ETHICAL LEADERSHIP DIAGNOSTIC

ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS FOR JUDGING LEADERS

Leadership Types Personal Virtue Ethical Ethical Social Good/ Relationship to Responsibilities of Justice/ Equity Followers a Given Role

Charismatic Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Points:

Power of persona Ability to communicate

Situational Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Points: Needs of setting, i.e.

people, organization, political situation

Transformational Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Points: Openness of process and goals Mutuality between leaders & followers.

9

PROPOSED ETHICAL LEADERSHIP DIAGNOSTIC (continued)

ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS FOR JUDGING LEADERS

Leadership Types Personal Virtue Ethical Ethical Social Good/ Relationship to Responsibilities of Justice/ Equity Followers a Given Role

Transactional Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions:

Mutuality of benefits, quid pro quo

Visionary Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions: Key Questions:

Shared commitment to common goals

Shared excitement about working together to achieve

10

11

CIVIC INTEREST SYLLABUS

Civic Engagement and Social Institutions PA 410 U Syllabus, Fall, 2001 Instructor: Steve Johnson/Craig Shinn E-mail: steverj@teleport.com Phone: 503-725-4019 Office hours: By appointment Goals: To learn about the role of interest groups in a democratic political system; how to research and create position papers about critical, social, and environmental issues; understand multiple issues and interests of social institutions in a metropolitan region; and how to facilitate group process to reach consensus about difficult and different perspectives Required Textbooks: Jeffry M. Berry, The New Liberalism: The Rising Power of Citizen Groups, Brookings Institute. Barry R. Rubin, A Citizens Guide to Politics in America: How the System Works and How to Work the System, M.E. Sharpe publisher. Class Reader, available from Clean Copy. Textbook on Reserve in Library Kaner, Sam et. al., Facilitators Guide to Participatory Decision-Making, New Society Publishers. Assignments: 1. Group Issue Forums Students will work in groups representing the interests of the member organizations of the community partner for this course, the Coalition for a Livable Future. These issues areas may include: affordable housing, environmental protection, urban design, transportation choices, food security, economic vitality, and faith-based organizing. The groups will be charged with providing information about issues and concerns within each arena and reporting back to the class through several inter-related assignments: reporting on the Dignity Village issue itself; developing a position from the groups perspective about the Dignity Village issue, and then working out a position about the issue that all groups can agree to.

Week Three (10/11/01). Groups will make presentations about the issue(s) they are studying, and the CLF member organizations that are involved in those issues.

12

Week Eight (11/15/01). Groups will participate in a mock CLF membership meeting to discuss the Dignity Village issue. Each group w ill prepare a policy statement and make a formal presentation. Then the issue will be discussed through a facilitated group process. Week Ten (11/29/01). Groups will reconvene to create a policy statement about Dignity Village that all groups can agree to. At end of term each group will submit: (1) summary of issues statement (from week three), (2) policy statement about Dignity village (from week seven), and the class will submit the final agreed to policy statement. Grading: Groups will be given one grade for the project. 40% of grade. 2. Issue Briefing Paper Each student will write a short paper about an issue of importance to the metropolitan region. The paper should be about an issue that is not being investigated through the group project. The paper will follow the format of an issue briefing or position paper. Also students will submit a brief summary of their position paper that might be used for a public affairs announcement or similarly brief summary for public dissemination. Paper format: 6-8 pages, double spaced, 10-12 character size. Proper citations and references. (American Psy. Association standards) Grading: 20% of total grade. Due Date: Week Six (10/01/01) 3. Issue Clipping Scrapbook Each student will create an issues clipping scrapbook containing the news clippings from local news media, including: Oregonian, Portland Tribune, Willamette Week, newsletters, or WWW sources. Each week students should find one clipping in each of the following categories: (1) an item about one of the issues of interest to the CLF, (2) an item describing the work of an interest group (can be CLF member or not), and (3) news about a public hearing or other public forum. Each week students should be prepared to comment on one or more of the items. Since not all students will be called upon each week, students should also provide comment in the scrapbook itself. This can be brief, one paragraph or several bulleted points. The comments may also be in form of a question for discussion.

13

Grading: 20% of total grade Due Date: Week Ten (11/29/01) (Instructor may also request to review the scrapbooks around mid-term) 4. Take Home Final Exam A take home final exam will be distributed on the last class (11/29 /01). The exam will be due the following Tuesday December 4, no later than 4:00 pm. The test will consist of between 4-5 short essay questions, and one case study question. The test will cover material from the assigned textbooks and library reserve readings. Grading: 20% of total grade Course Schedule and Reading Assignments: Week one. Thursday, 9/27/01- introduction Week Two. Thursday, 10/04/01-The relationship between citizens and government Modular Collective Action, in Power in Movement, Sidney Tarrow, Cambridge University Press, 1994, Introduction and Chapter #1, Collective Action and Social Movements, p. 1-27. Democracy in America, Alex De Tocqueville, Book II, Chapters 27-29, and p. 192-202. Kemmis, Daniel (1990). Community and Politics of Place. Chapter 2, Keeping Citizens Apart,, p. 9-25, and Chapter 3, The Descending Horizon, p. 26-34. Pilisuk, Marc, JoAnn McAllister and Jack Rothman, Coming together for action: the challenges of contemporary grassroots organizing, Journal of Social Issues, spring, 1996. V. 52, N. 1, p. 15 (23). Week Three. Thursday, 10/11/01 - Interest Groups. Groups present summaries of groups/issues they represent. Rubin, Chapters 1, 2, 3 Barry, Chapters, 1, 2 Facilitators Guide, Part I, p. 3-p. 37 Week Four. Thursday, 10/18/01 - CLF, metro-politics, context of organizing in metropolitan regions Facilitators Guide, chapters 4-11, p. 41-122

14

From class reader: Connecting Community Building to Metropolitan Solutions, Bruce Katz, Shelterforce Magazine, January/February, 1998. Expanding the Scope of Community Development, Jeremy Nowak, Shelterforce Magazine, January/February, 1998. Growing Together: Linking Regional and Community Development in a Changing Economy, Manuel Pastor, Jr., and Peter Dreier, Eugene Grigsby III, and Marta L-pez-Garza, She lterforce Magazine, January/February, 1998.

Regional Coalition-Building and the Inner Suburbs, Myron Orfield, Shelterforce Magazine,

January/February, 1998. Portlands Greenpeace: At Play in the fields of urban planning, Jay Walljasper, Nation, Oct. 13, 1997, p. 11-15.

Week Five. Thursday, 10/25/01 - Facilitating Group Process Facilitators Guide: Part III: Building Sustainable Agreements, Chapters 12-18, p. 139-237 Week Six. Thursday, 11/1/01 - Issue Framing/Using the Media. Position Papers due. Barry, Chapters 3, 4, 5*, 6, 7* (#5 and #7 optional, but have to be read by week 9) Rubin, Chapters, 4, 5, 6, 7 Week Seven. Thursday, 11/ 8/01 - Lobbying, decision makers, referendums. Rubin, chapters 11, 12 Week Eight. Thursday, 11/15/01-Groups present their policy stands about Dignity Village. Week Nine. Thursday, 22 - Thanksgiving holiday - no class Week Ten. Thursday, 11/29/01-Groups meet in class to develop common policy stand about Dignity Village. Also discussion about Future of democracy and interest groups. Week Eleven. Thursday, 12/6/01 - finals day/no class General operating rules: Class attendance is expected. Role will not be taken, unless instructor notices a trend of high absenteeism. If students have legitimate excuse for not attending, instructor would like to be informed in advance. Please be considerate and thoughtful in calling upon community organizations and government agencies for information and assistance.