An Introduction to Confucius
Confucius was a Chinese philosopher who lived from 551-479 B.C.E. Though he was born into a noble family, he desired to establish a political hierarchy. This was to contrast the contemporary practice of a hierarchical system based on birth. He lived during a time of consider political disorder, and preferred a society of civil law to a society of martial law. He desired to alter society and institute a government anchored in merit derived from thought and ethics, rather than military might. Confucius had many conversations with his disciples, and it is these conversations that became the book, The Analects of Confucius, after Confucius’s death. The most prominent issues one will find discussed are social transformation, raising the questions of what constitutes merit, how one recognizes it, and how one develops it. Confucius offers an ethical perspective on leadership, something few attempt to do (Confucius Introduction, 1).
The Analects of Confucius
The Analects of Confucius, as mentioned before, is a series of conversations and teachings from Confucius. He is referred to as “the Master” in this book, and was seen as a great teacher. His book is written without rational connection between sayings and no narrative to accompany the sayings. Some suggest that the book was written in this fashion so as to capture a reader’s full concentration for each quote, rather than having the reader skim for overall content. The Analects of Confucius have been used as a guidebook for bureaucrats, politicians, military officers, and other members of organizations for over two thousand years. His teachings were used primarily in Eastern cultures, however, today are permeating Western culture as well (Confucius Leadership Theories and Issues, 24).
An Introduction to Niccolo Machiavelli
Niccolo Machiavelli was born on May 3, 1469. Though he lived approximately two thousand years after Confucius, he too was born to a noble family. He lived in Florence, Italy and his family was troubled with financial problems. His father’s belief in reading and learning resulted in Niccolo receiving a thorough education. Thus, parts his life concentrated on education, as well. During his lifetime, Machiavelli encountered much political strife, as Confucius had. He worked for the government of Florence from 1498 until 1512, when the Spanish and the Pope reinstalled the Medici family. Machiavelli was closely associated with the previous government, and thus encountered many hardships. His book, The Prince, was his attempt to secure a position within the Medici government. He offers unique advice to leaders because he argues a realist position (Machiavelli Introduction, 1).
The Prince
Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince contrasts The Analects of Confucius in several ways. The Prince was written in a chapter format, with logical progression of ideas. Machiavelli wrote this book in hopes of attaining the favor of, and a position within, the Medici government. His motivation for writing the book was his desire for a job, rather than Confucius’s motivations, which were a love of learning and teaching. The book is dedicated to Lorenzo Medici and offers advice on how to rule realistically. This starkly contrasts Confucius’s hopes that men will attempt to rule through ideals and ethics. In his book, Machiavelli criticizes exactly what Confucius was trying to teach. The Prince is a book that argues the position that the perfect qualities of a prince are honesty, mercy, generosity, and good faith. He does not believe that a ruler would be able to maintain his position relying solely on such qualities (Machiavelli Leadership Theories and Issues, 14). The Prince is also a book used by government officials and leaders around the globe. Basically, Niccolo Machiavelli gives a realistic account of human nature and behavior, while Confucius strives to educate man to in an ethical and more idealistic manner.
Virtue
The basic teachings of these two great leaders are obviously different. They have distinct leadership styles and opinions. It is interesting to note, however, that these two men use the same word in their teachings. This word is virtue. The American Heritage Dictionary defines virtue as the following, moral excellence and righteousness; goodness; an example or kind of moral excellence; an effective force or power. Confucius and Niccolo Machiavelli, however, have their own definitions of virtue. These definitions have minor commonalities, but as one may guess, are considerably dissimilar. Confucius defines virtue as a quality that a true “Man of Humanity,” one who has attained all of the ethical and virtuous qualities that a superior man possesses. Through The Analects of Confucius, it is apparent that this is a quality that applies to both a leaders action and their results. All aspects of a leaders goal achievement must be moral, the ends and the means. Niccolo Machiavelli, in his book The Prince, describes virtue to be qualities that a prince, or leader, possesses which enable him to achieve his goals. A Prince’s virtue is seen in his objectives. The objectives of a Prince should be moral, however, the path to achieving those objectives need not be moral. Basically, the ends justify the means.
Confucian Virtue
The Confucian idea of virtue is distinctly different from that of Machiavelli. Confucius uses the word virtue throughout his conversations with his disciples. A man of virtue is seen as one who abides by moral and ethical codes in all realms of leadership. In Book I Chapter One of The Analects of Confucius, The Master says, “‘Is he not a man of complete virtue, who feels no discomposure though men may take no note of him? (Confucius, 3).’” This quote describes the essence of a true leader. A superior leader, in Confucius’s opinion, is one that can lead without requiring people to take notice of his accomplishments. This quote also illustrates the idea that virtue involves being moral in one’s actions. In Chapter Fourteen of Book I, the following conversation is recorded:
“The Master said, ‘He who aims to be a man of complete virtue in his food does not seek to gratify his appetite, nor in his dwelling-place does he seek the appliances of ease; he is earnest in what he is doing, and careful in his speech; he frequents the company of men of principle that he may be rectified: --such a person may be said indeed to love to learn (Confucius, 4).’”
It is obvious to the reader that Confucius believes virtuous leaders are ethical leaders. He believes the best leaders would be those whom do not only think of themselves, rather is conscious of his followers. This type of leader does not act out of ease, but uses decision-making to pursue the best action for all involved. Confucius believes that a superior leader will be careful of what he says, does and with whom he associates himself.
Confucius specifically comments on government and government officials. “The Master said, ‘He who exercises government by means of his virtue may be compared to the north polar star, which keeps its place and all the stars turn towards it (Confucius, 4).’” This references the idea that virtue is an enduring quality. One’s virtue has the ability to establish a long-lasting reputation. Confucius believes that a leader who is virtuous in all spheres of his leadership will be able to maintain his position as a leader. He continues by saying, “‘If they be led by virtue, and uniformity sought to be given them by the rules of propriety, they will have the sense of shame, and moreover will become good (Confucius, 4).’” Confucius further acknowledges that leading with virtue is the most effective way. He trusts that constituents led with virtue will know the feeling of shame and be essentially good people.
Machiavellian Virtue
Chapter six of The Prince is an exceptional example of Machiavelli’s use and conception of the word virtue. The chapter is entitled Of New Principalities That Are Acquired through One’s Own Arms and Virtue:
“For since men always like to walk on paths beaten by others and proceed in their actions by imitation, unable either to stay on the paths of others altogether or to attain the virtue of those whom you imitate, a prudent man should always enter upon the paths beaten by great men, and imitate those who have been most excellent, so that if his own virtue does not reach that far, it is at least the odor of it (Machiavelli, 3).”
A Prince’s virtue is comprised of his objectives and goals. Machiavelli argues that long-term virtue is the only virtue of significance. A leader’s long-term goals must be moral. Short-term virtue, however, can be sacrificed for long as long-term virtue to be achieved. A leader’s tactics for the short term need not be ethical so long as the long-term objective is. Machiavelli suggests that a man use his virtue to capitalize on his fortune, circumstances he cannot control. The virtues of a leader are what give him the ability to use fortune in his favor. If a leader does not have the correct virtue, moral goals or objectives, to assert during the current circumstances, he is rendered useless. Thus, if a man does not have the virtues needed for good leadership he should attempt to imitate the virtue of great leaders who have come before him.
When discussing leaders, such as Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, and Theseus, who have come to power because of their own virtue Machiavelli writes, “Without the opportunity their virtue of spirit would have been eliminated, and without that virtue the opportunity would have come in vain.” This quote illustrates the importance of virtue in great leaders. Their virtue consisted of moral goals and objectives. As long as leaders obtain their moral goals or objectives, their paths to those goals are not important. The ends of a goal justify the means, even if the means are not ethical. The virtue of these leaders aided them in creating a favorable situation, and without this situation their virtue would have gone to waste. These are men that became leaders without the use of fortune. It was their personal characteristics and actions that catapulted them into leadership positions. “Those like these men, who become princes by the paths of virtue, acquire their principality with difficulty but hold it with ease.” This is another indication how virtue is an important leadership trait. Machiavelli implies that if one’s virtue has the ability to gain them a leadership position, then this position will be easily held.
Leadership Theories
There are many leadership theories presented in The Analects of Confucius. Though his conversations and suggestions were not initially intended for leaders alone, one finds leadership wisdom in his words. He emphasizes the blending of theory and practice, and especially learning. More importantly, though, there are four primary leadership theories that can be extracted from The Analects of Confucius: power, motivation, ethics, and the trait theory.
Power
Power is a key component to an effective leader. Merely possessing power, though, does not define a successful leader. A leader must know how to use their power as a potential for influence. An example is given when Confucius comments in Chapter Nineteen of Book II, “A duke Ai asked, saying, ‘What should be done in order to secure the submission of the people?’ Confucius replied, ‘Advance the upright and set aside the crooked, then the people will submit. Advance the crooked ad set aside the upright and the people will not submit (Confucius, 5).’” Leaders have the ability to sway people’s opinions on many topics including, attitudes, values, and behaviors. The understanding that power is necessary to direct adaptive work is vital; yet a good leader also realizes that power cannot be abused and provocation must be modulated (Confucius Leadership Theories and Issues, 28).
Motivation
Motivation is another essential element for effective leadership. Without the ability to motivate followers, a leader is useless. A leader needs to motivate followers so as to further his vision, a fundamental aspect of leadership. Commonly, it is assumed that to motivate leaders should have a positive attitude, exhibit competitiveness and accept challenges, behave in an active and assertive manner, direct the behavior of subordinates, and stand out from the group and assume high visibility. This type of motivation is illustrated when the disciples of Confucius remark in Book IX Chapter Ten:
“1. Yen Yuan, in admiration of the Master’s doctrines, sighed and said, ‘I look up to them, and they seemed to become more high; I tried to penetrate them, and they seemed to become more firm; I looked at them before me, and suddenly they seemed to be behind me.’…3. ‘When I wish to give over the study of his doctrines, I cannot do so, and having exerted all my ability, there seems something to stand right up before me; but though I wish to follow and lay hold of it, I really find no way to do so (Confucius, 13-14).’”
This quote accurately reflects one of Confucius’s followers being motivated to investigate Confucius’s vision, and then ultimately makes Confucius’s vision his own, so much so that he cannot separate himself from it (Confucius, Leadership Theories and Issues, 28).
Ethics
The aspect of leadership that Machiavelli and Confucius most disagree about is ethics. Niccolo Machiavelli saw the need for ethics only when discussing results; the path to the results need not be ethical. Confucius deems ethics to be one, if not the most, important theory in leadership. It is his belief that leaders need a code of ethics with which to use in all facets of leadership. This makes for good leadership because moral decisions are always the right ones, in Confucius’s estimation. Machiavelli, as a realist, would disagree with non-human actors being assigned moral duties, but Confucius believes that the government, for instance, can be a moral agent. In Book II, Chapter Twenty of The Analects of Confucius the following discussion is written:
“Chi K’ang asked how to cause the people to reverence their ruler, to be faithful to him, and go on to nerve themselves to virtue. The Master said, ‘Let him preside over them with gravity;-- then they will reverence him. Let him be filial and kind to all;--then they will be faithful to him. Let him advance the good and teach the incompetent;--then they will eagerly seek to be virtuous (Confucius, 5).’”
If a leader trains to become a ”Man of Humanity,” he will possess all of the qualities necessary for an effective leader. These qualities all stem, in one way or another, from being an ethical and moral person. Leaders who lead ethically, virtuously, will be able to maintain power and lead effectively.
Trait Theory
The last leadership theory presented in The Analects of Confucius is the trait theory. This theory perceives that there are specific personal traits that are associated with an effective leader. These qualities are highly disputed among researchers, but Confucius contends that these qualities are the one’s found in a “Man of Humanity.” These personality traits are based on a code of morals and ethics. Confucius describes a virtuous man in Book VIII Chapter 4:
“3. ‘There are three principles of conduct which the man of high rank should consider specially important:--that in his deportment and manner he keep from violence and heedlessness; that in regulating his countenance he keep near to sincerity; and that in his words and tones he keep far from lowness and impropriety (Confucius, 11).’”
A leader should be calculated and cautious to shy away from unnecessary violence. He should also be sincere and adhere to the laws of propriety. These are some of the ideal traits that a true Confucian leader usually possesses (Confucius Leadership Theories and Issues, 28).
Amoralist View
The first is leadership theory of The Prince the “Amoralist” view of business interactions and business leaders. This theory relates to the Machiavellian idea of short-term virtue. This theory maintains that if a business or businessperson is to be successful they cannot adhere to the moral principles of everyday life. Business morality is different from personal morality in that business morality refers only to the defined goal. This is not saying that businesses disregard the ideals of society, rather that businesses have goals separate from that of the individual. Success and survival for the business are based primarily on profit maximization, and the means to profit maximization are whichever actions are necessary, moral or immoral. The guidelines for behavior are derived from which actions make the most progress towards goal realization. As one can see in Chapter VIII, Machiavelli acknowledges the fact that rulers do not have the ability to always act virtuously if they desire to retain their leadership position. An example of short-term virtue is seen in this quote from Chapter XVIII: In What Faith Should Be Kept by Princes:
“How laudable it is for a prince to keep his faith, and to live with honesty and not by astuteness, everyone understands. Nonetheless ones sees by experience in our time that princes who have done great things are those who have taken little account of faith and have known how to get around men’s brains with their astuteness; and in the end they have overcome those who have founded themselves on loyalty (Machiavelli, 10).”
Ethics have a place in leadership only with reference to the goal being set. The means to that goal need not be ethical ones. Another example that reiterates this point is, “But Since my intent is to write something useful to whoever understands it, it has appeared to me more fitting to go directly to the effectual truth of the thing than the imagination…For a man who wants to make a profession of good in all regards must come to ruin among so many who are not good (Machiavelli, 8).” This, again, illustrates the Machiavellian idea that morals are not always applicable to effective leadership, especially not in the short-term(Machiavelli Leadership Theories and Issues, 20).
Moralist View
The second theory of leadership that one can extract is that of the “Moralist View.” This view of leadership is a contrast to the “Amoralist” view, and can be examined in The Prince. This theory relates to Machiavelli’s long-term virtue. A “Moralist” believes that a leader’s business morals should be found in his objectives. Ideally, business morality and personal morality would be one in the same. They believe that businesses and organizations are bound to the same moral principles that bind human actions. Therefore, leaders must include an ethical code in their decision-making. It is the duty of the leader to protect his constituents, and help solve social problems. Machiavelli uses the “Moralist View” with reference to his theory of long-term virtue. A leader must have a moral or ethical objective in the long run. “Yet one cannot call it virtue to kill one’s citizens, betray one’s friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; these modes can enable one to acquire empire, but not glory (Machiavelli, 5).” It is evident that the long-term goal, in this instance to preserve the empire, is what must be moral. In order to secure the empire, a leader may have to participate in unethical actions, but the moral end is what is of importance (Machiavelli Leadership Theories and Issues, 20).
Prudence
The last leadership theory presented in The Prince is the idea of prudence. According to Machiavelli, a Prince may use whatever means necessary to achieve his goal. To contain this, he introduces the idea of prudence a leader must be careful in his decisions and actions. Virtue must also be defined with reference to prudence. A leader’s virtue may only extend so far as his moral objective. He must be careful not to extend his use of immorality past his objective. After a leader achieves his goal, unethical behavior should no longer be condoned. This theory is seen again in Chapter XXII: Of Those Whom Princes Have as Secretaries, “The choice of ministers is of no small importance to a prince; they are good or not according to the prudence of the prince. And the first conjecture that is to be made of the brain of the lord is to see the men he has around him…(Machiavelli, 11).” In this instance, a prince must use his discretion to surround himself with people who will reflect well upon him. The idea of prudence in a princes daily decisions and actions is of extreme importance. This point is augmented when Machiavelli speaks of how a prince must know how to use the beast:
“Thus since a prince is compelled of necessity to know well how to use the beast, he should pick the fox and the lion, because the lion does not defend itself from snares and the fox does not defend itself from wolves. So one needs to be a fox to recognize snares and a lion to frighten wolves. Thos who stay simply with the lion do not understand this. A prudent lord, therefore, cannot observe faith, nor should he, when such observances turn against him, and the causes that made him promises have been eliminated (Machiavelli, 10).”
This quote refers to a princes need for two distinct personality traits and the knowledge to know when to use each. At times a prince needs to be strong, like the lion to overcome situations such as the threat of invasion. Other times, a prince needs to be astute like the fox. He must use his intellect and slyness to outwit his enemies. Basically, a leader needs to use his discretion, prudence, to assess situations and address them appropriately.
Background Information on Jimmy Carter
Jimmy Carter was born on October 1, 1924 in Plains, Georgia. He attended the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. Upon graduation in 1946, he married Rosalynn Smith. He served as a naval officer for seven years before entering state politics. In 1970, he was elected Governor of Georgia. His main objectives at the time were ecology, government efficiency, and the reduction of racial barriers. These issues gained him recognition around the country, enough so that he narrowly won the 1977 election against President Gerald R Ford, 297 electoral votes to 241 electoral votes.
Leadership Style of Jimmy Carter
Upon examining President Jimmy Carter, one can see that he has the ethics of Confucius, but must deal with the realities of Machiavelli. Jimmy Carter was an advocate of idealistic issues, such as the environment and human rights. He used ethical principles in his leader ship and had a number of successes. During his presidency, Jimmy Carter aimed to make government “competent and compassionate, responsive to the American people and their expectations (White House, 1).” He had a number of successful endeavors domestically. However, most of his foreign affairs initiatives were met with challenges and disapproval.
Domestic
The American economy was plagued by inflation and unemployment, and Carter successfully increased employment by eight million jobs and decreased the budget deficit. This did not come without consequence, though, in the form of a short recession. He also worked to stimulate energy during a shortage by establishing a national energy policy and decontrolling domestic petroleum prices. His reform of civil service and the deregulation of the trucking and airline industries enabled him to advance government efficiency. The environment was of importance to him and he expanded national park protection to one hundred three million acres of Alaskian lands. Carter used the creation of the Department of Education, energizing of the Social Security System, and the appointment of many women and minorities to government positions, to endorse human and social services.
Abroad
Internationally, Carters idealistic enterprises were not met with such favor. He was a champion of global human rights and, needless to say, countries such as the Soviet Union felt that this infringed upon their sovereignty. Carter managed to negotiate the SALT II treaty for nuclear limitation, but ratification was setback due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. After the Carter Administration granted Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi medical asylum the United States Embassy was taken over. Iranian militants held the United States. Embassy staff hostage during the last fourteen months of his administration. In 1980, the thirty-ninth president was defeated (White House, 2).
Carter was, to a certain extent, successful in leading with the use of ethics and Confucian virtue. Some would consider him to be a true “Man of Humanity,” espousing and practicing the characteristics of a virtuous leader. He promoted human rights and many of his projects, such as the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, thrived at home. Internationally, though, Carter was met by the realism Machiavelli wrote about in The Prince. The Iranian militants that overran the United States Embassy used Machiavellian tactics, unethical means, to achieve their goal of international recoignition. His contemporaries abroad used Machiavellian virtue to achieve their goals, which often times left Carter fluttering in the wind.
Leadership Theory Applied
Carter demonstrated some of the leadership theories discussed in the two case studies above. In relation to Confucian leadership, Carter effectively used motivation and ethics to his advantage. He upheld moral principle in his leadership and motivated many other leaders to join his causes; for example his achievements with the Department of Energy and Department of Education. His use of power is questionable. He rarely used dynamic power in his leadership, an example of this is seen when he dealt with the Soviet Union during the SALT II negotiations and then the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan. The use of Trait Theory may or may not apply. President Carter had many good and bad leadership traits, such as enthusiasm and naiveté respectively. With regards to Machiavellian leadership, Jimmy Carter, without a doubt, used the “Moralist” view, as opposed to the “Amoralist view” in his leadership style. His promotion of human rights and the environment are just two examples of ethical leadership programs he installed. His attempt at conflict resolution is also an example of his moralist views. The last leadership theory from Machiavelli is the necessity of prudence. He was most certainly a prudent man, being cautious and wise during his term of office. This is apparent when one examines his policy towards the exiled Shah of Iran Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. He knew that allowing the Shah into the United States would cause upheaval both domestically and internationally. His compromise to afford the Shah temporary medical asylum upheld moral standard, while fulfilling his obligation to humanitarian aid.
Today
Currently, Jimmy Carter is a University Distinguished Professor at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia and founder of the Carter Center. This non-partisan non-profit organization addresses national and international policy issues. They attempt to “resolve conflict, promote democracy, prevent human rights, and prevent disease…Through the Global 2000 program, the Center advances agriculture in the developing world (The Carter Center, 1).” He and his wife are regular volunteers for Habitat for Humanity, they teach Sunday School, and he is a deacon at the Maranatha Baptist Church of Plains (The Carter Center, 1). One can see that, even to this day, Jimmy Carter is participating in moral activities and upholding Confucian moral principle. Jimmy Carter was, and still is a “Man of Humanity,” behaving virtuously to combat Machiavellian realism.
Back to...
Casey's Main Homework Page
Casey's Main Page