Machiavelli Discussion Question

Ashraf Ahmed

Discussion Question #4

Question 1:

Leadership is well known as the action of leading a group of people or an organization. A good leader is someone who leads his followers and the organization ethically and effectively. Joanna B. Ciulla thinks that the relationship between being ethical and being effective as a leader should be used in two different rules. The reason is because, in this generation, it is difficult to find both morally good and technically good in a person. Some people are ethical but not very effective, others are effective, but not very ethical. The distinction between ethics and effectiveness is not always a crisp one. In certain cases, being ethical is being effective and sometimes being effective is being ethical. Business leaders have other sources of power that allow them to be effective, but in some situation acting ethically improves leader’s confidence and their effectiveness. Ciulla explained in her story of an effective leader by talking about a Tylenol company as she stated, “In a Tylenol case, manufacture Johnson and Johnson actually increased sales of Tylenol by pulling the product off the shelves after some Tylenol had been poisoned.”  In this situation, Johnson and Johnson were being effective leader by selling the Tylenol confidently even though, some Tylenol had been poisoned. So, Ciulla thinks that the relationship between ethical and effective as a leader should be used in two different roles because, it is difficult to find an individual with both ethics and effectiveness.  

Question 2:

Machiavelli thinks as a leader, the relationship between being ethical and being effective should be based on whether is it better to be loved rather than feared or feared rather than love. The reason is because, people starts hating on leaders when leaders behave unethically and sometimes even when they behave ethically. Leaders must focus on doing the right things by being ethical and being effective and not trying to please their followers. In this story, Machiavelli talks about a Prince, a leader, who has his army and many soldiers under his command. It is difficult for Prince to lead his team because of how hard it is to keep everything under control. Machiavelli talks about the terms of being loved or feared in Prince story as she started, “I sum up by saying that since his being loved depends upon his subject, a wise Prince should build on what is his own and not on what rests with others.” In this case, Machiavelli is trying to explain that as ethical and effective leader, Prince should do what is best for him. He should maintain and keep control of his army and soldiers and not let soldiers and his army control him. So, Machiavelli thinks that the relationship between being ethical and being effective in leader should be based on whether the leader wants to be feared by his followers or the leader wants to be loved by the followers.

Question 3:

According to Ludwig and Longenecker, Success can make leaders both less ethical and effective on the job in four by product of success: (1) Loss of strategic focus, (2) privilege access, (3) Control of resource and (4) Inflated belief in ability to manipulated outcomes. The loss of strategic focus in when leaders are not doing what they are supposed to do and leaders are not being where they are supposed to be. An example of loss strategic focus would be in King David story that Ludwig and Longenecker described.  David loses his strategic focus in success by not doing what he supposed to do and not being at the right place in right time. Instead of leading his followers, he stayed home and did not really care about leading and doing what he was supposed to do. The privilege access is essential for comprehensive strategic vision. Privilege access benefits success to a leader by, a leader having greater power, increased status, heightened sense of personal achievement, greater records and more personal latitude on the job are all by products that come to a leader who can make things happen in their organization. King David success leads to privilege access by as Ludwig and Longenecker stated in their story, “David’s leisure allowed him the opportunity to literally look around. He was not focused on organizational decisions makings.” King David was just did not care about being a leader and the role that leaders have in term of being successful. The control of resource is when leaders have the increased access to information, people and even things. The control of resource also helps leaders to set their goals and make their workers dream come true. Lastly, the inflated belief in manipulated outcomes is the primary leaders with personal issue. It is deal with leader’s emotion, egos and leaders with fear of failure. In David story, he knew he was wrong at what he was doing as Ludwig and Longenecker stated in their story, “David, in short clause to do something he knew he was clearly wrong in the firm beliefs that through his personal power and control over resource he could come up with.” Ludwig and Longenecker is trying to explain that with all these actions, David’s inability to hand the by product of success left him extremely vulnerable to ethical failure as a leader. So, based on David story that Ludwig and Longenecker described, these four by product of success can make any leader less ethical and effective on the job.