Responsible Leadership: Grounded on a Relational and Ethical Emphasis

The concept of Responsible Leadership (RL) marks a notable departure from traditional leadership models, which typically centre on the dyadic relationship between leaders and followers. Instead, RL broadens this scope to include a wider range of stakeholders, encompassing not only employees but also external actors such as communities and environmental interests. This paradigm shift aligns with stakeholder theory, diverging significantly from neoclassical economic models like agency theory, which primarily focus on maximising shareholder value.

Expansion of the Leader–Follower Relationship

In traditional leadership frameworks, the focus has often been on the direct influence of leaders over their followers. However, RL extends this interaction to a broader stakeholder environment. Maak and Pless (2006) define RL as a "social-relational and ethical phenomenon," highlighting its emergence within networks of flattened hierarchies and multicultural contexts. By decentralising authority, RL promotes direct communication, collaboration, and flexibility, elements crucial in today’s dynamic business environment. This decentralisation contrasts with hierarchical models where decision-making is concentrated at the top, limiting input from diverse voices and potentially overlooking the broader social implications of business decisions.

Moreover, RL recognises the complex, adaptive systems in which modern leadership operates. This complexity is characterised by "wicked problems"—issues that are difficult to define and solve due to their interconnected and evolving nature. In acknowledging these complexities, RL requires leaders to engage with diverse stakeholders, whose interests and values may sometimes conflict. This demands a high level of ethical consideration, moving beyond mere profit maximisation to address broader social and environmental objectives, which are integral to sustainable value creation.

Normative Leadership and Ethical Considerations

RL is inherently a normative approach, emphasising the creation of sustainable value through social and environmental targets. Miska and Mendenhall (2018) underscore this focus on positive change, setting RL apart from other leadership theories that are predominantly internally focused. The inclusion of external stakeholders in the leadership framework broadens the ethical scope of decision-making, compelling leaders to consider the impact of their actions on various constituencies beyond the immediate organisational boundaries.

This ethical foundation of RL is rooted in stakeholder theory, which challenges the traditional, profit-centric views of agency theory. Stakeholder theory posits that businesses have responsibilities towards all stakeholders, including employees, communities, and the environment. This stands in stark contrast to neoclassical economic theories, such as transaction cost economics, which prioritise financial efficiency and shareholder interests. The ethical underpinnings of RL thus call for a shift towards a more holistic consideration of business impacts, integrating economic, social, and environmental dimensions.

Divergent Perspectives on Responsible Leadership

Despite the foundational work of Maak and Pless (2006), other scholars have proposed alternative views on RL. Waldman and Galvin (2008), for instance, examined RL from both economic and stakeholder perspectives. Their findings suggest a preference for the stakeholder approach, given its broader and more sustainable orientation. However, Waldman and Siegel (2008) advocate for an integrative perspective that bridges the gap between economic imperatives and ethical considerations. This integrative approach aims to align business leaders' values and motives with strategic objectives, encapsulated in the notion of "doing well by doing good."

This debate underscores a critical tension in the conceptualisation of RL: the balance between economic objectives and broader social responsibilities. While stakeholder theory offers a more inclusive framework, its practical application often clashes with the profit-driven motives emphasised in traditional business models. This tension reflects a fundamental challenge in modern leadership: reconciling the demands of diverse stakeholders with the financial imperatives of business operations.

Theoretical Perspectives: Stakeholder, Agent, and Converging Views

Miska et al. (2014) identify three key theoretical perspectives in RL research: stakeholder views, agent views, and converging views. Stakeholder views, aligned with Maak and Pless’s (2006) model, focus on ethical considerations and the inclusion of a wide range of stakeholders. In contrast, agent views are grounded in neoclassical economics, prioritising shareholder value and financial returns. Converging views attempt to integrate these perspectives, proposing a model where economic success and social responsibility are mutually reinforcing.

This convergence represents an attempt to navigate the inherent conflict between stakeholder theory and agency theory. By framing RL as an approach that harmonises profit motives with ethical responsibilities, proponents of converging views advocate for a more holistic understanding of leadership. However, this synthesis is not without its challenges. It requires leaders to possess a complex set of skills and competencies, enabling them to balance competing interests and make decisions that are both ethically sound and economically viable.

Behavioural Complexity and Ethical Leadership

The practical application of RL requires leaders to mirror the relational complexity of their environments through a range of behavioural roles. Burman (2018) suggests that RL involves not only avoiding harm but also actively doing good, reflecting virtuous character traits. This behavioural complexity includes normative roles (e.g., citizen, steward), relational roles (e.g., servant, boundary spanner), and operational roles (e.g., change agent, coach). These overlapping roles form a "gestalt," a holistic approach to leadership where different roles are enacted depending on the context and needs of stakeholders.

This model of behavioural complexity underscores the importance of ethical leadership. Leaders are expected to engage broadly with stakeholders, fostering dialogue and encouraging feedback. This engagement is characterised by transparency, empathy, and self-awareness—qualities essential for building trust and maintaining ethical integrity. Moreover, RL cautions against "ethical fading," a phenomenon where legal but ethically dubious decisions are rationalised, often leading to a slippery slope of compromised values.

---

Responsible Leadership represents a transformative approach that broadens the traditional leader–follower dynamic to include a diverse array of stakeholders. Grounded in ethical and relational considerations, RL challenges the profit-centric focus of neoclassical economic theories, advocating for a more inclusive and sustainable model of leadership. Despite divergent views and ongoing debates, the essence of RL lies in its commitment to balancing economic success with social and environmental responsibilities. This approach demands a high level of behavioural complexity from leaders, who must navigate the intricate web of stakeholder interests with integrity and strategic intent.

In practice, the application of RL requires a shift in leadership mindset—moving from a focus on short-term financial gains to a broader perspective that values long-term sustainability and ethical considerations. As such, RL offers a promising framework for addressing the complex challenges of modern business, particularly in an era marked by globalisation, cultural diversity, and increasing demands for corporate social responsibility.