It has only been a couple of years since business leaders were called—and would prove willing—to speak up on a host of challenges in the public square: climate, certainly, but also racism, and human and civil rights. The absence of business leaders in this moment is a constant refrain. Their silence can be disconcerting, even deafening. Or at least defining.
Business executives have pulled back for many good reasons. Keeping the enterprise afloat is challenging enough given the massive shifts in policy incentives, market signals and consumer demand. Does the CEO really need to speak out on questions that divide both the workforce and the wider public?
Lily Mae Lazarus, in this piece in Fortune, references Oxford University business professor Karthik Ramanna, author of The Age of Outrage: How to Lead in a Polarized World. Lazarus references Stoicism, the mindset and philosophy that guided statesmen like Marcus Aurelius and Seneca in ancient times:
“At its core, Stoicism champions self-control, resilience, and rationality—not to suppress emotion but to act with intentionality and integrity. Leaders can’t control geopolitical turmoil, economic cycles, or any other political discord. But they can control their response. In business, that means keeping composure under pressure, choosing ethics over expedience, and maintaining clarity when the stakes are high.”
Intentionality and Integrity. That sounds good to me.
Lazarus names executives who practice this mindset today, and cites Warren Buffett for his adherence to “humility, long-term focus, and simplicity.” Is this the right approach for executives faced with outsized challenges that rebound to the health of the enterprise?
The call for executives to speak up also recalls the time that three female executives blew the whistle on their respective organizations—Enron, the FBI and WorldCom—in response to corrupt practices and head-in-the-sand behavior that put their organizations at risk. Time Magazine featured the trio in 2002 for the annual Person of the Year cover story. They were celebrated for their courage, but the damage was done. Enron failed, taking Arthur Andersen down in its wake. WorldCom no longer exists.
Speaking up on controversial issues is always hard. Giving Voice to Values, a curriculum launched by Dr. Mary Gentile and now in use in business schools around the globe, recognizes the importance of taking a stand, but goes further.
What is required to truly change the conversation? To approach values conflicts with sufficient curiosity and staying power to get to a different outcome? The Giving Voice to Values approach suggests that what’s needed is “moral competence.”
The thinking goes that when we are more skillful and practiced at difficult conversations, the need for herculean levels of courage is no longer so prevalent.
And what about when collective action is called for? We don’t solve the most important problems—be it climate, human rights, or the principles of democracy at risk—one enterprise at a time.
When collective action is needed, it is natural to turn to the institution with the deepest pockets. Kudos to the President of Harvard who bet the university’s substantial endowment to stand up for academic freedom, and enabled a coalition to build in support of institutions that will continue to be targeted.
Harvard’s place in higher education is singular, but President Garber’s stance proved to be catalytic. He may have been bolstered by other University Presidents who spoke up first, but his leadership offered real shade to other institutions and leaders.
That doesn’t mean Harvard doesn’t also bear real risk.
Mary reminds us of this simple truth, a core principle of Giving Voice to Values: We are not alone in our concerns—but we can’t know that we are not alone until we start to give them Voice.
Some environments make it easier for people to speak up, but ultimately, it’s less about culture, and more about developing the “muscle” for voicing one’s values—about being prepared. It means practicing one’s response despite the frequently heard rationalizations for staying quiet. Instead of asking, “what is the right thing to do?” the question becomes, “how can you get it done effectively?”
Which brings us full circle: “the more I believe it’s possible,” Mary writes, “the more likely I will be to do this.”
Resources and information about Giving Voice to Values:
- Introduction: Starting Assumptions for Giving Voice to Values
- Giving Voice to Values – How to Speak Your Mind When You Know What’s Right
- GVV Curriculum and How Business Schools and Faculty Can Use the Giving Voice to Values Curriculum
- Giving Voice to Values: How to Speak your Mind When you Know What’s Right
- Free to audit at Coursera: Ethical Leadership Through Giving Voice to Values
This blog post was originally published on LinkedIn. Follow Judy Samuelson for more insights on business and society.