Content uploaded by Cam Caldwell
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Cam Caldwell on Jul 04, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
REVIEW ARTICLE
LEADING WITH MEANING: USING COVENANTAL LEADERSHIP
TO BUILD A BETTER ORGANIZATION
Cam Caldwell
Leading with Meaning:
Using Covenantal Leadership to Build a Better Organization
Moses Pava
NewYork: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.192 pp. ISBN 1403961328, he, $25
M;
[oses Pava's Leading with
Meaning:
Using Covenantal Leadership to Build a
_ . ABetter Organization offers a distinctly Judaic viewpoint of leadership that fo-
cuses on the sacred nature of individuals and the covenantal duties of organizations.
The key to the "leadership covenant" is to "foster human growth, development, and
the satisfaction of legitimate human needs" within the framework of the organization
(2).
Pava defines the foundation of leadership as one's explicit theory of what it means
to be a human being. He observes that the values that we embrace and "our theory of
being human is inextricably related to how we construct organizations" (18-19).
Covenant and Community
Covenantal leadership, the heart of Pava's philosophy, reflects the Old Testament
theme of a shared community. Implicit in covenantal leadership is the concept that
lives are interconnected and that one's responsibilities extend to a larger society and
contain an array of moral responsibilities. Pava emphasizes that covenants are
• open-ended and emphasize mutual responsibility, but are general rather than
specific;
• long-term in nature, often expected to continue indefinitely;
• respectful of human integrity, and intended to ensure the identity, unique-
ness,
and personhood of the participants.
© 2005. Business Ethics Quarterly, Volume 15, Issue 3. tSSN 1052-150X. pp. 499-505
500 BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY
The intent of a covenantal relationship is to provide people with free agency
within a living community where duties to others are acknowledged yet not always
clearly articulated.
Pava views covenants as offering individuals many paths, a key theme of
his
dis-
cussion of
leadership.
The metaphor of many paths suggests that
1) Leaders pursue a journey that may
have
resting places but that leaders rarely
arrive.
2) There may be multiple leaders, and all who covenant in accordance with
correct principles may be covenantal leaders.
3) Many paths leading to a desired location suggests a pluralistic set of pos-
sibilities with more than one acceptable option.
4) Paths may intersect at many points with the opportunity to share perspec-
tives with others.
5) The
flexibility
of many paths suggests that covenantal leaders do not need
to be imprisoned by prior decisions.
This multiple path approach to leadership acknowledges the complexity of leader-
ship and the obligation of the leader to pursue transforming change that pursues the
collective interests of leaders and followers.
Applying Moral Imagination
The antithesis of covenantal leadership is "idolatry"—the "self-induced illusion of
certainty in the face of uncertainty"
(34).
Arrogance about what one presumes
to
know
results in leaders redefining the covenantal relationship and establishing their own
judgments as
a
rule of
law.
Specific rules and policies cannot apply to every situation
and leaders must ultimately be able to interpret the intent of
the
law in situations that
may be complex and fraught with moral dilemmas. Ultimately, the ability to apply
moral principles to new situations while demonstrating
a
balanced commitment to all
stakeholders is the essence of great moral leadership. Pava suggests that this ability
to resolve conflicted moral situations while clarifying to others the lessons that come
from resolving moral dilemmas integrates the roles of leader as both servant and
teacher. The great leader articulates the application of principles as the community
adapts to the demands of change.
Organizations must ultimately rely upon "moral imagination"—^the ability to fol-
low the fundamental assumptions about human values that undergird the covenantal
relationships of people working together. Pava suggests that ethical rules that are in-
dependent of this value-based human imagination
are
of questionable value in solving
the moral dilemmas of
leadership.
He observes: "To suggest that moral imagination
begins precisely where rules end is not to denigrate rules, but to emphasize that the
usefulness of rules is limited" (73-74). Moral leadership must be based upon a com-
mitment to the welfare, growth, and wholeness of the community and the pursuit of
REVIEW OF LEADING WITH MEANING 501
outcomes that satisfy the higher level needs that optimize the value of human inter-
change at more than the economic level (cf. Kouzes and Posner 2003).
The clash of ideas over ethical questions becomes an opportunity to enlarge the
community and to examine moral choices. Diversity of opinion can become a com-
petitive advantage, yet keeping organizations from "exploding under the weight of a
cacophony of multiple
interests,
multiple goals, and different cultural assumptions" is
not easy (101). Moral imagination includes the ability to "seek out truth everywhere
and encourage all members to do so"—rather than imposing a top-down solution to
decision-making (101). Covenantal leadership is not about getting others to follow
against their
desires.
It
is
about helping everyone in the organization contribute toward
achieving organizational goals, contributing their creativity, and creating a space big
enough for everyone to thrive and grow.
Modeling the
Way
The heart of the covenantal model is the belief that organizations can and should
foster the growth and development of their
members.
Great leaders are the role models
of that growth. Pava explains that in the process of producing the goods and services
of the organization, great leaders lead the way in the attempt to "explore values, to
examine beliefs, to leam new skills,
to
relate to
others,
to be with others, and to enlarge
our understanding of what it means to be human among other human beings"—the
process by which leaders model the search for meaning in organizations (98).
The inevitable conflicts that occur within the context of that growth require the
ability to act with integrity. Moral development in a time of change requires "ethical
improvisation" that must be principle-based and that retums constantly to the funda-
mental valuing of
individuals.
The danger of ethical improvisation is the inability of
growing organizations to respond to individual situations when decisions are made
based upon expediency rather than moral ideals (cf. Selznick 1992). Community, Pava
acknowledges, is "hardly the natural state of human beings" but is the "culmination
of rational beings stmggling and reasoning together in the face of life's difficulties"
(127).
The great moral leader honors the responsibility to leam continually and to
share what is leamed so that the community may continue to grow.
The value of the covenantal model of leadership is its focus on the value of the
individual as the foundation of the moral community. Pava suggests that covenantal
leadership uses "yesterday's language to solve tomorrow's problems" (154).
Placing Pava's Leadership Model
Pava's model of the covenantal leader aligns Pava within the charismatic leader-
ship school. The Greek word for charisma means "divinely inspired gift" (Lussier
and Achua 2004: 340), and Pava's framing of the covenantal leader as contextually
responsive and extraordinarily qualified morally fits easily within the charismatic
school (Conger and Kanungo 1987, 1998; WiUner 1984). Conger and Kanungo
502 BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY
(1987) suggest five behavioral variables of charismatic leadership that seem to apply
to Pava's covenantal leader:
1) A gap between the present situation and the vision advocated.
2) The articulation of
a
vision or direction and role modeling of the leader.
3) The use of unusual or unconventional strategies or paths.
4) An insightful and realistic perception of resources and constraints to achieve
change.
5) The ability to inspire trust in the leader and the vision.
Charismatic leadership also focuses on the vital importance of meaningfulness or
purpose in life (Lussier and Achua
2004:
342). Korotkov
(1998:
52) defined personal
meaning as "the degree to which people's lives make emotional sense and that the de-
mands confronted by them
are
perceived as being worthy of energy and commitment."
It is this search for meaning—this being rather than having—that Pava emphasizes
as the key role of leaders.
Pava's leadership model also
fits
within the framework of transformational leader-
ship,
to the degree that the transformational leader seeks to change the status quo by
articulating a compelling vision of new possibilities (Lussier and Achua 2004: 356).
Both charismatic and transformational leaders rely on the trust, admiration and respect
of followers and seek to obtain organizational citizenship buy-in and commitment.
Just as Pava's covenantal leader creates new moral models for leading change, the
transformational leader seeks to transform or change the basic values, beliefs or fol-
lowers so that they are willing to elevate their performance (Campbell 2000).
There are also clear parallels between the covenantal model of leadership and
"virtue ethics" models (cf. Solomon 1992; Cameron 2003). Solomon creates a
framework of six contemporary virtues for ethics in business: Community, Excel-
lence, Role Identity, Holism, Integrity, and Judgment (Solomon, 1992). Solomon's
six virtues provide a foundation that is conceptually consistent with the factors ofthe
covenantal relationship defined by both Selznick (1992) and Pava. Other scholars,
(Cameron, Dutton, and Quinn 2003) suggest that this virtuous approach to organiza-
tional govemance has not only an inherent connection with the interdependent duties
of
a
community but has strong applicability to the modem business organization. The
heart of the covenantal approach is its dependence upon values—to provide for "the
interpretation of life's meanings in order to help foster human growth, development,
and the satisfaction of legitimate human needs" (Pava
2003:
2).
Pava's analysis can also be usefully paired with CoUins's (2001) concept of Level
5 Leadership, the combination of humility and fearlessness that Collins noted as the
leadership style ofthe CEOs in
fifteen
outstanding corporations that
he
studied exten-
sively. Collins (2001:21) noted that "Level
5
leaders channel their
ego
needs away from
themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company. It's not that Level 5
leaders have no ego or self-interest. Indeed, they are incredibly ambitious—but their
ambition
is
first
andforemostfor
the
institution,
no
themselves"
(italics in the original).
The covenantal leader's perspective also puts the organization over self-interest, a
REVIEW OF LEADING WITH MEANING 503
concept that Block (1996) identified as the fundamental quality of "stewardship" in
his leadership
model.
Although Pava sought to distinguish his covenantal leader from
the "servant leader" model of Depree (1989) and Greenleaf
(1977),
both Depree and
Greenleaf incorporate the leader as inspired teacher and role model.
The Practicality of Pava's Model
Perhaps the greatest weakness ofthe covenantal model
is
that organizational leaders
who focus on instrumental outcomes and efficiency-based models of management may
infer that the nomiative nature of covenantal leadership is too "touchy-feely" for their
personal styles. The religious framework that accompanies Pava's descriptions and
examples may also be an uncomfortable value set for companies that do not operate
within a ludeo-Christian context.
Traditional management thinking
is
critical of approaches that
do
not pursue bottom
line
results.
Yet
corporations are increasingly recognizing that their obligations are not
one-dimensional, prompting McCoy to conclude that the paramount task of leader-
ship in organizations is the management of instrumental organizational objectives and
normative values (McCoy 1983). As Hosmer (1996) has suggested, the managerial
dilemma of govemance lies in the conflict between economic and social perfonnance.
Hosmer argues that we must extend the stewardship responsibility of management to
long-term issues and to all stakeholders because the moral problems of management
have 1) extended consequences, 2) multiple altematives, 3) mixed outcomes, 4) un-
certain consequences, and 5) personal implications for the parties involved (Hosmer
1996:
10-11). Pava's covenantal model is not, therefore, far removed from manage-
ment thinking that would have us look beyond the short-term bottom line.
A growing body of literature (cf. Collins and Porras 1994; Cameron, Dutton, and
Quinn
2003;
Pfeffer 1998; Collins 2001) has found that organizations that seek to
develop a defining set of core values that encompass treating employees as valued
participants in the management process can also eam superior profits. But despite such
findings, a covenantal approach to organizational leadership will seem threatening to
many corporate leaders, especially those who possess "a control-focused paradigm
for corporate govemance that tends to treat employees either patemalistically or with
little regard for their long-term welfare" (Caldwell and Karri, In Press: 24). Given
the real economic and psychological benefits associated with treating employees as
valued members of a team, one can only hope that the work being done by Pava and
others to move us away from this control-focused paradigm will begin to take hold
during the coming decade.
Although Pava's leadership model may well
find
itself criticized
as
"too conceptual"
and "too idealistic," the servant leader (Depree 1989) and stewardship (Block 1996)
models—as well
as
Covey's (1990) "principle-centered
leadership"
model—have been
tarred by a similar broad brush of accusation and have nonetheless become respected
for their insights about leadership and organizations. A retrospective view of recent
business history confirms that the lack of a value-based leadership model was at the
504 BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY
core of the demise of Enron, Worldcom, and other highly publicized recent business
debacles (Caldwell and Clapham 2003).
As Pava
notes,
although the covenantal leadership model is not
new,
its application
to modem business is worth closely examining. A growing body of literature advo-
cates that the covenantal model can increase employee commitment and long-term
organizational wealth (Bamett and Schubert 2002; Caldwell,
Bischoff,
and Kani,
2002;
Caldwell and Karri, In Press). In context with the failure of today's leaders to
make ethical choices that build organizational trust, Pava's covenantal model offers
useful and practical lessons that merit thoughtful assessment.
References
Bamett,
T, and E.
Schubert. 2002. "Perceptions
of
the Ethical Work Climate
and Cov-
enantal Relationships." Joumal of Business Ethics 36(3): 279-90.
Block,
P.
1996. Stewardship: Choosing Service over Self-interest. San Francisco: Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
Caldwell,
C, S. J.
Bischoff,
and R.
Karri. 2002.
"The
Four Umpires:
A
Paradigm
for
Ethical Leadership," Joumal of Business Ethics 36(1/2): 153-63.
Caldwell,
C, and S.
Clapham.
2003.
"Organizational Trustworthiness:
An
Intemational
Perspective." Joumal of Business Ethics 47(4): 349-64.
Caldwell,
C, and R.
Karri.
In
Press. "Organizational Govemance
and
Ethical Systems:
A Covenantal Approach
to
Building Trust." Paper accepted
for
publication
by the
Journal of Business Ethics.
Cameron, K.
S.
2003.
"Ethics, Virtuousness, and Constant Change."
In
The Ethical Chal-
lenge:
How to
Lead with Unyielding Integrity,
ed. N. M.
Tichy
and
A. McGill.
San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 186-94.
Cameron, K. S., J. E. Dutton, and R. E. Quinn.
2003.
Positive Organizational Scholarship.
San Francisco: Eerrett-Koehler.
Campbell,
D.
J. 2000. "The Proactive
Employee:
Managing Workplace Imtiative!' Academy
of Management Executive 14(3): 52-66.
Colhns,
J. C.
2001. Good to Great. NewYork: Harper Business.
Collins,
J. C, and J. I.
Porras. 1994. Built
to
Last: Successful Habits
of
Visionary Com-
panies. New York: HarperCollins.
Covey, Stephen R. 1990. Seven Habits of Highly Effective
People:
Restoring the Character
Ethic. New
York:
Simon
&
Schuster.
Conger,
J. A., and R. N.
Kanungo. 1987. "Toward
a
Behavioral Theory
of
Charismatic
Leadership
in
Organizational Settings." Academy
of
Management Review 12(4):
637-47.
1998.
Charismatic Leaders
in
Organizations. Thousand Oaks,
Calif.:
Sage.
Depree,
M.
1989. Leadership
Is
an Art. NewYork: Dell Publishing.
Greenleaf,
R. K.
1977.
Servant Leadership: A Joumey into the Nature of Legitimate Power
and Greatness. New
York:
Paulist Press.
Hosmer,
L.
T. 1996. The Ethics of Management. Chicago: Irwin.
REVIEW OE LEADING WITH MEANING 505
Korotkov, D. 1998. "The Sense of Coherence: Making Sense Out of Chaos." In The Hu-
man Quest for Meaning: A Handbook of Psychological and Clinical Application, ed.
P T.
P.
Wong and R S. Fry. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum, 51-70.
Kouzes, J. M., and B. Z. Posner.
2003.
Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, and
Why People Demand It, revised edition. San Francisco: lossey-Bass.
Lussier, R. N., and C. F. Achua. 2004. Leadership: Theory, Application, Skill Develop-
ment, 2nd edition. Eagan, Minn.: South-Westem.
McCoy, B. H. 1983. "The Parable of the Sadhu." Harvard Business Review 65(5):
103-08.
Pfeffer, J. 1998. The Human Equation: Building Profits by Putting People First. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
Selznick, P. 1992 The Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and The Promise of Com-
munity. Berkeley,
Calif.:
University of Califomia Press.
Solomon, R. C. 1992. Ethics and Excellence: Cooperation and Integrity in Business. New
York: Oxford University Press.
WiUner, A. R., 1984. The Spellbinders: Charismatic Political Leadership. New Haven,
Conn.: Yale University Press.
