Does it suffice for leaders to be accountable only to their own followers and not to anyone else? For example, do leaders in the private sector have any responsibility for what happens in the public one? Or are business and government entirely separate?
If they are siloed, then CEOs of major banks are accountable only to their own stakeholders – most obviously their boards, stockholders, and employees. But, does this seem right? That corporate leaders are accountable only to their own – as opposed to having some responsibility for the commonweal more generally.
Was it fine for CEOs of major tobacco companies to fight labels warning that smoking could be bad for our health? Is it fine for CEOs of major oil companies to fight efforts to reduce carbon emissions?
In January the CEO of JPMorgan, Jamie Dimon, surprised many when he suggested that a second Trump presidency might have significant virtues. In an interview with CNBC, he said, “Take a step back, be honest. [Trump] was kind of right about NATO, kind of right about immigration. He grew the economy quite well. Trade reform worked. He was right about some of China.”
In May it was reported that hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman was likely to support Donald Trump in the upcoming election. This meant following in the footsteps of another financial services heavyweight, Blackstone CEO, Stephen Schwartzman, who had already announced that he would “vote for change” by voting for Trump in November.
This month it became clear that leaders such as Dimon, Ackman, and Schwartzman were hardly alone. The Wall Street Journal reported that despite many having previous misgivings, especially in the aftermath of the January 6th attack on the Capitol, America’s “top CEOs are flocking to Trump again.”
Their willingness to cozy up, to toady up, to Trump is curious. It would make sense if they genuinely thought that another four years of Donald Trump would be better for them and their companies than another four years of Joe Biden. But during Biden’s presidency, both have done stunningly well. CEO pay packages have continued to soar, and the stock markets are at or near all-time highs. Corporate profits are up, inflation is down, and so far has been no sign of a recession. It would also make sense if they disbelieved all the warnings about Trump, including those out of his own mouth, that if he becomes president a second time, he will do what he can to edge the country away from democracy and toward autocracy.
Whatever their reasons for supporting Trump, his fanboys in the private sector should be clear: what they do and do not do in the private sector will impact the public sector. Business and politics are irrevocably entwined, as are capitalism in America and democracy in America. Moreover, history testifies that no autocratic leader anywhere at any time became an autocratic leader without the support, explicit or tacit, of many followers – and of many other leaders in many other silos who chose in the end to bend to the wind.
In one of my earlier books, Bad Leadership: What It Is, Why It Happens, How It Matters, I identified seven different types of bad leadership. One of these was Insular Leadership.
Insular Leadership is when the leader and some followers minimize or disregard the health and welfare of “the other” – that is, of those outside the group or organization for which they are directly responsible.