Is it simply impossible to lead successfully with kindness, or even with integrity?

It was 3 short months ago when Rishi Sunak pledged to bring integrity and accountability to the office as he became the UK’s newest Prime Minister.  First of all, that pledge speaks volumes as to what he perceived to have been the case under the previous leadership(s) in his own Party.  Secondly, based on what has transpired with Sunak and his Cabinet Ministers during their short 3-month duration, one can only imagine how many fingers he had to have crossed behind his back when he made that pledge.

Then there is the “entertaining” newbie U.S. congressman George Santos.  It has been made clear to his constituents, his fellow congressmen and women, the entire country, and the entire world – beyond the shadow of a doubt – that he is a pathological con artist.  Lies about every single, solitary aspect of his life.  And yet – and yet – his congressional leader will not question this egregious reality … because Santos can give him a vote.

These are just two of the myriad examples that come to mind that make it difficult for us to trust our politicians. It should also make us commiserate with those politicians, definitely including my own representatives at all three levels of government, who are there for the right reasons, trying to support their constituents.  Is it possible to right this ship?

This intriguing and unsettling graph of Global Trust in 2022 shows that those few examples of questionable integrity in politics aren’t one-offs.  Just look at where politicians land on the trustworthiness index … and this is a global survey!

A few months ago an article on BBC Online posed the question: Does kindness get in the way of success? I found the intro somewhat chilling; it seemed to suggest that we’re programmed to think that’s the case.  Why? Because kindness is about putting other’s interests first! Duh. Isn’t that what political and industry leaders (and health and education leaders) are supposed to do?

Ironically now, because of her recent announcement of resignation, New Zealand’s now outgoing PM Jacinda Ardern was this article’s poster child for being an exception.  She was one of a handful of examples this article could think of to show that it is indeed possible to show kindness and empathy and still be a successful leader.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern addresses the 77th session of the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 23. (Julia Nikhinson/AP)

Ardern’s former chief of staff, Neale Jones, spoke of learning from her about the possibility of doing politics differently:

One of the things I learned from her was a different kind of politics.

One of my first memories of working with her as a leader was doing that classic thing where I was the chief of staff and the research unit came to me and said, We found an embarrassing story about one of our adversaries.
And I went and saw them and said, “I’m going to put this out through the media.” And she said, “No, please don’t.”
And I said, “Oh, don’t worry. It won’t have our party’s name on it. We’ll just give it to a journalist and it’ll just go out anonymously.” And she said, “No, I’m not going to do that kind of politics, Neale. I want a different kind of politics.”

This is the first time I’ve heard a politician say: I don’t want to cheaply and negatively attack my opponents. I want to talk about values.

Wow, why isn’t this the way?  Does money and power have to be what it’s all about, at everyone else’s expense?  Is there really no room for integrity and kindness in politics?

There’s one other aspect to Ardern’s decision to resign before her term was up that should be of concern to us all. She didn’t say so, but many others have, all of whom are supportive men.  And that is the fact that she faced increasing vitriol, hate speech, and threats simply because she was a woman.  This is another cause for anger and shame, shame at our human race.  Ardern’s experience in this regard is not dissimilar to what some female politicians in Canada have faced and it is beyond unacceptable. Why is it possible for female politicians to be called bit**es, a particularly vile, demeaning word??? Notice that there’s no true male equivalent.

So, my question to all of you is, how do we start to change this?  How do we support those candidates who speak – and act – with integrity and accountability?  How do we press our representatives to ensure that they are there for us and not for special interest groups, especially for those with buckets of money?  How do we protect female candidates and leaders from egregious acts of vile misogyny?  How do we change our politics so that we have good reason to trust in our political systems?

Good luck coming up with workable answers!  😉

This entry was posted in History and Politics, Just wondering and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to Is it simply impossible to lead successfully with kindness, or even with integrity?

  1. I sometimes had a hard time in my leadership positions, as a female. My values and ways of dealing with staff and suppliers were often at odds with my male colleagues’ views. And I never played the jockeying for position and power and “points” game that most of them did. It was really disheartening over the years to see incompetent men rise in the ranks (while brilliant women were overlooked) just because they were the loudest voice in the room. It might have been easier to become more like them but then I wouldn’t be able to face myself in the mirror. I really feel for Jacinda Arden because I had to deal with some of her issues (albeit on a miniscule scale, compared to her). I don’t know what the answer is, other than to get more females in positions of power and trust (and hope they didn’t lose their souls along the way).

    Deb

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Thanks so much for sharing your experiences, Deb. I think this is not at all uncommon and quite discouraging. I was fortunate in my leadership roles (in which there were far more men than women), I think because it didn’t cross my mind not to speak up whenever I felt it necessary, regardless. And also because I was just plain lucky to live and work where I did. I know many women in leadership roles who felt invisible. And women who are considered too aggressive – in other words, act more like her male colleagues – are given a hard time, too. It’s hard for women to find the right path for effectiveness and success in leadership. That shouldn’t be the case.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Food for thought after the snow storm. Stinkers wouldn’t win if we—and I mean this broadly—if we didn’t elect them. But stinkers do appeal to a sizable minority, so all it takes is apathy on the part of the majority for the stinkers to win. In the United States, both sides are not the same, and it is important to keep that in mind. Not sure if this really answers the question, but it’s a start.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. You ask great questions Jane. “Is there really no room for integrity and kindness in politics?” I really hope there is. I too think the answer lies with us, with what we demand from our representatives, demanding more than a five second answer that looks great on TV, but really digging into how it helps and hurts common folks. I think too it’s getting back to valuing collegiality and cooperation. Unfortunately, no easy answers. Thanks for raising the questions Jane!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Thanks for giving it some thought, Brian. As you say, there are no easy answers, to say the least. But I agree with you, remembering the value to ALL of problem solving through cooperation and collegiality is essential. Sigh.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Margaret says:

    I couldn’t agree more Jane and I like your emphasis on ‘speaking integrity AND acting it’.
    Workable answers sadly seem scarce don’t they?
    The sad thing is that all the s##t gets thrown at those politicians who are trying to do a good job along with being empathetic and compassionate.
    This only exaggerates the “they’re all the same” brigade (and of course they’re not!) along with a growing despondency and lack of interest in politics – understandable. But we all know the dangers of apathy!
    A sad, depressing state of affairs.
    We need more Jacinda Ardens and dare I say I’d be quite happy with Justin Trudeau too!! ☺️

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Thanks, Margaret. I so agree that the complaints don’t apply to all politicians. In Canada I would say it’s the minority, although I might be naïve in that regard. As I mentioned, I strongly believe that the pols representing our wards at each level (federal, provincial, and municipal) are all working hard on behalf of their constituents. Those are the people we need more of. I do understand how tough these jobs are, and the games people play. But I keep wondering, do it really have to be such a “dirty” business? Re Justin, more people than not think it’s time for him to step aside, but compared to the UK Cons in the past few years … 😳

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Joyce Hopewell says:

    That is a thought-provoking post, Jane, and bang on the button. The “how” of getting more integritity into politics/ those who represent us/ traditional institutions has to spread the net wide, as so many aspects of life are bound up in symbiotic relationships – media possibly being close to the beating heart of the establishment; the word spreads from there (I note journalists fall into the lower half of the list). It’s easy to feel powerless, or say nothing, yet it’s so right to call things out, speak up, be a dissenter and activate our own “power of one”, even if it feels like thrashing one’s head against a wall once again when writing to the all-too-often closed ears and eyes of party-faithful MPs. I’d rather stand alone and be kind and considerate than run with the herd anyway.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Deb says:

    Political systems are historically run by men, as are many other systems worldwide. Until we (a true majority) are interested in finding, encouraging and voting in people who identify as other than heterosexual male, meaning females, transgender, gay/lesbian, etc. we are plagued by the system in place. There is and will probably always be, at least in my lifetime, a stranglehold on political power put in place by the ideals that patriarchy is the only way to rule and govern.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Thanks for these observations, Deb. I sure wish I could disagree with them, but I can’t really. And despite having had excellent working relationships with male colleagues and leaders personally, the centuries-long culture/ expectations of patriarchy is clearly present. Even then, as we work to get past the strong hold the culture of male-dominance, almost all the men I have known and worked with have brought fairness and collaboration to the table. Patriarchy doesn’t have to translate to ruthlessness and lack of trustworthiness. We have lots of work to do on many fronts!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Deb says:

        You are correct Jane, and I should not have generalized to *all men* but darn it so many of them seem oblivious to the fact that there are incredibly capable people out there that aren’t them! 😉

        Liked by 1 person

        • Jane Fritz says:

          OMG, that’s so true. And I think one advantage I had was that I happen to like joining in talking about sports (except American football), and that shouldn’t be an advantage! 😳😂

          Liked by 1 person

  7. Wynne Leon says:

    I love your last sentence. You’re right – we need good luck to find those answers. But I think your article is a hint of it – female leadership can often break the mold. And yet, the price for women to lead is often too high as you’ve pointed out with Arden. May we find our way there. Thanks for doing a great job setting up the challenge, Jane!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Many thanks, Wynne. It’s a brutally difficult challenge, but if it matters enough to citizens to have governments that truly have their interests at heart and aren’t just in it for their own self-aggrandizement, power, and money, then we the voters have to get involved and support the right people – and then support them. Boy, this is not an easy ask. Right now, in some govts and with some politicians it’s the influence of lobbyists that rules, not constituents.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. You are so right on and this goes for the lower 48 as well. Who do you trust anymore??? I would like to see our entire government body to be taken out and no one can go in without knowledge and no hidden agendas. Accountability should amount to something more than it does these days!! Integrity should be redefined in our dictionaries!!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Great question for sure and definitely no easy answers.
    I think the first thing that needs to change is the role of money and influence and I will attempt to make a few “pie in the sky” suggestions.
    First, politicians should be financially comfortable with all normal office expenses paid but a smaller salary and benefits package. Secondly, there should be zero political donations and parties supported equally by our tax dollars. Third, lobbyists should be banned from ever meeting with any political figure. Fourth, there should be zero government support for any profit making business. And one more just to be controversial– a flat tax of an appropriate amount on all income above a livable income with no deductions of any kind. I know this would eliminate a huge department and put a lot of people out of work but imagine the savings!
    I do believe most politicians go into the job for the right reason, to serve, but the pressure to conform can be so great it will become almost impossible to resist for a lot of them.
    I fully agree there is a dearth of female politicians but do not think reversing that will automatically fix everything. I fully understand females and males think differently but I am also a strong believer that power can corrupt anyone.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Love it, Wayne, you’ve actually come up with some responsible ideas! I’m pretty sure your flat tax idea wouldn’t fly, but you never know. We’re fortunate here in Canada that there’s very little money involved in campaigning, electioneering, etc. compared to other countries and I do think that’s a huge help in not attracting people to politics for “the money”. The money involved in some places – money that could be used to help citizens in need – is mind-boggling. And I do agree with you that more women just for the sake of it is not the answer. You say it well.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. And yet I see Preston Manning is being hired by the Alberta governmnt to head a Covid task force at a measly $253,000 a year!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. iidorun says:

    Great question and points, Jane! I think we can also wonder about this for heads of industry. One “simple” solution would be if everyone just followed the Golden Rule – treat others as you would want to be treated. Imagine a world where politicians thought, “If I was fleeing from my country because of war or other threats of violence, how would I want to be received?” or even a world where people think, “If someone posted that about me, how would I feel?” Before we can get to integrity and kindness, I think we need to learn empathy and compassion.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Oh yes, leaders of all kinds apparently fall in this questionable category as far as the author of the BBC article is concerned. Irma, wouldn’t it be a truly wonderful world if we all followed the golden rule. Sigh.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. barryh says:

    Great post, Jane. Sometimes it’s tempting to despair at the low state of politics and its corruption by moneyed interests and narcissists. But then along comes Jacinda to remind us of the way, as did many before – Mandela, Gandhi, King… We had our own white knight in a man called Martin Bell, who served as our MP for one term only. In the end, things will improve when good people get involved and make it happen. The battle between good and evil is never fully won, or lost. This is what life is about.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      You’re right, Barry, and we also have white knights (that term is probably falling out of favour!) and shining female stars. But the list needs to be a lot longer, and the rules of the games (including knighthoods for large political donations, for example) have to change. The “incentive” system is set up to encourage the bad over the good in too many places.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Rose says:

    It would be wonderful to have politicians answer these questions for us. Perhaps if we started asking the media to ask these kinds of questions, we’d get better answers and in the long run, better run governments. I’d love to see your article in all the newspapers… I like what some of your other commentors have said, … Irma’s request for empathy and compassion, Wayne’s ‘pie in the sky’ ideas for financial reform, …

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Thanks for sharing your insights, Rose. I love your suggestion that we ask the politicians these questions, and encourage the media to ask these questions. I can just imagine the prevaricating, but it would be revealing to see which politicians give honest answers and which ones spew the “communications” lines. I do like this idea!

      Like

  14. I sure don’t have a definitive answer, but I believe it starts with teaching respect and kindness starting in the home and in daycare, and schools. It’s a long process and there has to be strong will and policies in place. Equality isn’t being practiced, especially in corporate America, and certainly not among certain politicians, so when you’re not leading by example, you get a room full of Santos types, or as someone called him, The Untalented Mr. Ripley. The low trust rating politicians receive is deserved, with a few rare exceptions. They created their own mess. The problem is they get to foist it on us, so as voters we need to make better choices. I feel for Arden. When you have a heart and a conscience that job must be totally demoralizing and draining. You can only fend off sharks for so long before you want to swim away, and good for her for doing so. Still, it’s a shame she’s going.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Bernie says:

    Look at how our current PM, who set out to be gender equal, ended up with so many woman struck aside for reasons of their integrity. Kudos to them for sticking to their beliefs. But it shouldn’t be so hard for all politicians to do the right thing regardless of their sex.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Roy McCarthy says:

    Integrity, kindness, decency. It can’t happen Jane, not in established political empires. If you’re an aspiring politician you don’t even get to first base unless you’re prepared to at least compromise your principles. Even the apparent exceptions such as Ardern have to box clever with many compromises along the way, or they’ll be devoured by the pack.
    As to misogyny, it leaves me baffled. It’s a phenomenon that I have rarely or ever come across in my own day-to-day life. It’s something I only read about, and it is beyond disturbing. It seems embedded in certain institutions – just now we have the London Metropolitan Police (again), and the Welsh Rugby Union. The small group of guys I have a few beers with on a Sunday night are no saints but none of us would dream of disrespecting girls or women – if they did they’d be pulled up on it sharpish.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      I’m afraid you’re 100% correct about politicians having to compromise at least some of their principles. Perhaps we should give credit to those who go no farther than that. Your reasoning does a good job of explaining what my late cousin really meant when he said to me when we were ‘disagreeing’ about politics 12 years ago, “Janie, they’re all bastards.” Re misogyny, thank you for your encouraging comment, Roy.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Dr. John Persico Jr. says:

    Well written and very thoughtful Jane. I am glad to see you adding to the chorus on the political struggles we all face. I think raising questions is a good way to get people to think more about the issues. Did you know that the salary of a US House Representative is 174,000 dollars a year? I wonder if anyone could write a job description for someone holding this job? I am even less certain whether or not any of us would think it was worth the price tag of 174,000 dollars. Your chart shows politicians at the bottom. They are at the top of my list of 24 carat scum-bags followed in second place by lawyers. Interesting that so many pols are also lawyers. I can’t think of a solution to these problems. I am still wondering what the causes are. I somehow think it is corporate capitalism which has taken control of too many countries and perhaps the world. It was said that people get the government they deserve. I have less and less doubt that this is true. Somehow the system is all tied together up with greed and money and stuff. Until people want less stuff and are less greedy, nothing will change IMHO. The corporations spend billions on advertising to keep people buying and buying and buying. How can we stop that? John

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      It seems like there are precious few good answers, John, except for everyone to vote. Even then, what another blogger appropriately called the “political empire” seems to attract too many candidates who are in it for the wrong reasons but are very good at raising money and saying what people want to hear. And it’s not just capitalist societies. The ranking of trust is a worldwide one, and politicians come in last overall globally (or top on your scale!). Politicians in authoritarian govts certainly aren’t more accountable to their constituents! Many of our politicians do enter politics for the right reasons, but to succeed in the “system” they find that compromising their principles are sometimes necessary. It can’t be easy for those people. Re the salary, you’re never going to attract the best people for less than that. Greed and unbridled capitalism needs to be reined in, but it seems to be the nature of the beast. Good luck!

      Like

      • Dr. John Persico Jr. says:

        Jane, it seems somewhat interesting that you say “We can’t attract the best people for less than that.” Do you think the people we are attracting now are the “best” people? I would say they are the worst people and I mean that sincerely. I would rather put politicians in like we do with the jury system. Potential candidates must meet certain qualifications. They would then be put in a pool by state to serve a term of six years. No more, no less. All politicians would be selected from the pool at random. If we can select juries this way, I see no reason we cannot select politicians the same way. Can’t be any worse than the system we have now and it would totally destroy the two party system. The only way you can get out of serving would be by hardship or health or some predesignated disqualifier. John

        Like

        • Jane Fritz says:

          You are speaking about your experience in your country. I won’t agree or disagree without being a citizen, but I would like to think that some of the people who step forward to become candidates are stepping forward for the right reasons. Also, despite the extraordinary (shameful) amounts of money and length of time involved in running in the U.S., as opposed to any other country, you will not attract good potential candidates without at least adequate salaries, so I don’t think that’s really your issue. You’ve hit on another U.S. specific challenge and that’s the restrictions imposed by your two-party system. Thanks but no thanks. In fact, I think we work best both provincially and federally inCanada when we end up with minority govts; then Parties have to get along and find compromises in order to get things done. So your issues are strictly with what has become of your form of govt and with unbridled capitalism. I should not presume to comment further in that regard except to say, I hear you! 😏

          Like

        • Dr. John Persico Jr. says:

          Thanks Jane, as usual you make some very good points. As I am talking about the government in the USA, I think your comments are very astute. I do not doubt that some of our politicians are good intentioned but as Deming said about putting a good person in a bad system. It is the same with policing in this country today. Perhaps most cops are good people in a bad system. That is why, I propose some radical solutions. I do not think run of the mill changes like higher salaries, performance incentive etc., will fix what is wrong with the systems in the USA. But is it good to be reminded that you are much more satisfied with your system than we are with ours. BTW, I have lots of neighbors down here in Arizona City that are snowbirds from Canada. In addition, my experience with Canadians includes working with INCO for seven years, Dominion Bridge for three and Petro Canada for two. I always found Canadians to be friendlier and more civil than most anyplace I have been in the USA. I have worked on every Canadian Province and 49 US states. I miss the world of consulting. It was challenging but much more rationale than politics. Thanks for all the great comments and insights. John

          Liked by 1 person

        • Jane Fritz says:

          Thanks for these insights, John. I remember you on a previous occasion mentioning your work in Canada. I don’t think I wrote the response I was thinking at the time, a further coincidence we share. My first job after graduating from McGill in 1967 was with Dominion Bridge in Lachine. That was my first programming job. We moved to London the next year for a 2 year stint, where I worked at IBM.

          Liked by 1 person

  18. debscarey says:

    Great post Jane. In the UK, one particular problem is the terror of socialism and left-leaning thinking, being driven by a belief that “they” will take away all that every hard-working individual has amassed. Our politicians and media is drawn from a privileged background who peddle this message – a message being swallowed whole by those who cannot see that they are not only being taken for a ride by these swindlers, but being treated with utter distain by them.

    It is distressing to realise just how many voters are easily manipulated, selfish, willfully ignorant, or think the whole think is a joke, without thinking (or caring) that the joke backfires on real people (and that one day, it will do so on them too). We, the voting public, need to ask ourselves the tough questions. Until more of us do so, the procession of morally bankrupt politicians will continue.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Very interesting observations, Debs. They’re a privileged class, all right. And making themselves even more privileged by handing each other peerages and finding money under every stone. But I hadn’t realized that there exists in the UK the same fear of “socialism” that prevails in the U.S. It’s almost pathological there and, as you say, the people who need help (and “leveling up”) the most buy into this message being sold by those who “have”. It’s hard to understand, but it seems to work. Incredible … and so sad.

      Liked by 1 person

      • debscarey says:

        The difference in the UK from the US is that the fear isn’t about “reds under the bed” and McCarthyism, but is born from the fact that the middle class have levelled up, and many from what was considered working class have done likewise. In the past, it was only the toffs (or the upper class) who had money, land and privilege, whereas with the growth in home ownership, people have more to loose. This allowed for a suspicion to grow that anyone receiving government funded financial support was getting handouts from “our” money. Whilst there are clearly those who have manipulated the benefits system, they were (and are) in the minority, but allowed for the demonisation of all in need.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to Jane Fritz Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.