Proces Leaders And Followers Have Interaction

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

1. Introduction

1.1 Leadership

Leadership can be defined as the conducting the proper example or role model in order to bring differences in other lives although the action may not be a great deals (Ayres, 2004). Leadership means the process where the leaders and followers have interaction that involves influence (Northouse, 2012). Through interaction between leader and followers, leaders able to deliver the value and affect followers by bring differences towards their own lifestyle as well as their perceived values. Since leadership able to influences ones live, it is important for the leader to practice good leadership skills.

Good leadership able to develop concepts, such as self-awareness and social interactive skills, among team members and bring good influence towards achieving objectives or goals (Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000). By providing positive influence, the whole team would able to achieve their objectives in a desired spirit. Northhouse (2012) stated that the key for good team chemistry is good leadership skills. It would boast the outcome of the work of the team and reduce negative issues, such as team conflicts. Therefore, true leader will understand their desire, high self-awareness level and consists of moral leadership (Ladkin & Taylor, 2010). Besides of having the characteristic mentioned by Ladkin and Taylor (2010) another researcher, Wills (1994), mentioned that there was an existence of a list of the leader’s characteristics such as determination, focus, a clear goal, a sense of priorities, and so on.

Peters and Waterman (2004) mentioned that the real role of leadership is to manage the values of an organization. All leadership is value-laden and whether good or bad leadership is moral leadership either at the descriptive or the normative level. One of the thing must be clear is leaders and followers are worked in a common enterprise is they are dependent on each other, their property rise and drop together (Burns, 1978). The leader and their followers must have common goal or target, and they worked together in order to achieve it under the instruction or coordination from the leader. It is important to have many people corporate in a desired manner since not all people suits with the leadership style.

Leadership styles are different from one another because leaders adopt their leadership styles based on the culture from their origin (Nahavandi, 2006). Different culture brings different value to the individual, so goes to their ability in handling a team. Nahavandi (2006) mentioned that the power distance between leader and follower are high in Eastern countries compared to Western countries due to their perspective culture. Therefore the style of management and leadership used are different among one another. Bass (1998) and Burns (1978) mentioned that leadership have many perspectives and can come in many different disciplines, such as sociology, political science, and psychology. Transformational leadership and transactional leadership both are differences type of leadership. The differences of both leaderships can be proved by using the ethics of justice and the ethics of care (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2010).

1.2 Types of Leadership

There are three common correlated leadership theories to ethical leadership was reviewed by Plinio, Young and Lavery (2010) which is transforming leadership, servant leadership, and authentic leadership. Transforming leadership is a first classical leadership theory that the link with ethical leadership (Burns, 1978). This theory increase the level of human conduct and ethical aspiration of both leader and led, and thus it has a transforming effect on both and ultimately becomes moral (Burns, 1978). Transforming leadership bring major impact to a team, where the leader will increase the morale among his team members, improve their performance, being the role model, and etc. The next theory is servant leadership which dedicates oneself to the ethical development of followers and emphasizes the need to assist the followers (Burns, 1978). The leader of the team would provide aid and help other team members who are weaker in order to improve their team chemistry. Lastly, the nature of ethics is being true to oneself and authentic was noted by Phinio, Young, and Lavery (2010) in the authentic leadership theory. Authentic leadership obtained four components, which are self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency, that required by a leader to show good ethical climate for their followers (Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing, & Peterson, 2008).

1.2.1 Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership theory is depending on transactions or exchange between leaders and subordinates (Shu, 2011). In order to achieve or reach expected goal, a team leader own the power to lead and use rewards or punishment to motivate his or her team member. Shu (2011) states that, employees are willing to obey on their leader in accomplishing a prearranged goal in exchange of something as return. According to Burns (1978), transactional leadership takes place when people take the initiative in making contact with another for the sake of an exchange of desired things. Leaders have authorities over their subordinates that will form an interaction between leaders and subordinates.

1.2.2 Servant Leadership

According to Burns’s (1978) theory, transforming leadership is rests on a form of moral assumptions about the relationship between leaders and followers. Furthermore, transformation leadership is a process that the leader raises their followers to achieve the highest standard of morality and motivation (Patzer & Voegtlin, 2010). Transformational leaders create significant changes to people and organization as they inspire and help subordinates to develop a vision and create opportunities for them to show their full potential. Hence, transformation leaders are people builders because they focus on enhancing quality of their subordinate and help people grow (Shu, 2011).

1.2.3 Authentic Leadership

Walumba et al. (2008) stated that authentic leadership is where leadership is based on the personal self-concept and how those concepts relate to the leader’s action. Authentic leadership may be formed by the experience of the leader and it requires the followers to support their leader’s correctness. Since authentic leadership style is totally refers to the leader personally, the decisions made by the leaders are based on their own value and opinion (Walumba et al., 2008). Therefore it also can be perceived as genuine leadership and it is hard to be copy since everyone has different beliefs and opinions.

1.3 Ethical Leadership

Leadership and ethics both are important criteria of education for social responsibilities (Baley, 2004). Ethical leadership emphasizes the virtues of "prudence, courage, justice and temperance (Takala, 1998). In large organization, ethical leadership means an individual who have the positive value (Freeman & Stewart, 2006). The explanation on ethical leadership has a strong focus on character and therefore is determined by virtue ethics (Knights & O’Leary, 2006). Ethics also can conduct an image, a perspective, and a corporate self-understanding as well (Gabriele, 2011). Not only in organization, ethics leadership also played an important role in academic, professional and so goes to personal life (Gabriele, 2011). Leadership is importantly needed in order to create global ethics for global business (O’ Brien, 2009). Leaders have to be ethical and wary due to their position will affect one’s lives with their power and influence (Schminke, Ambrose, & Neubaum, 2005).

The ethics of leadership defines as no matter they are good or bad, positive or negative also will affect the ethos of the workplace and thus help to form decisions of the workers and ethical choices in the workplace (Gini, 1998). According to Brown & Trevino (2006), there are two dimensions on ethical leadership theory. First of all, leader act as moral person who possess positive characteristics and value, such as, being trustworthy and honest, fair in decision making and cares someone else. Second, leader act as moral manager which mean leader hold the positive role morality that promote ethical conduct among his or her followers and disciplines unethical behaviour. In addition, ethical leadership is a descriptive and prescriptive method that tries to explain and examine the special focus on ethical behaviour on influence process between leader and followers and emphasizing virtues such as trustworthiness, honesty, or fairness (Patzer & Voegtlin, 2010).

Ethical leaders are people who will promote honesty and display their action through values and beliefs (Yukl, 2002). Ethical leaders normally had higher chance to reach higher senior leadership role play compared with those who are not categories as unethical leaders, (Northouse, 2012). Ethical leadership can be shown through interpersonal relationship and personal actions, during a two-way communication or decision-making process (Brown & Trevino, 2006). Ethical leaders can be reflected during their decision-making process (Monahan, 2012). The required of ethics in leadership had been focused by many knowledgeable people, from both Eastern and Western cultures (Hofstede & Bond, 1988). Strong moral and ethics within a character will bring him the key to leadership, as well as wealth (Ciulla, 2003). Nekoranec (2009) stated that an ethical leader would have three characteristics, such as "personifies espoused values", "builds relationships for harmony and purposes" and "works for mutually beneficial solutions".

2. Content

2.1 The origin of Leadership

According to Humphreys (2005), leadership has existed start from the first connection between people. The term "leadership" is originated in Greek and Latin on dates back to 800 Common Era (Grace, 2003). The meaning "lead" was determined as reason or things done individually or takes along a person or animal to a place and it included a differentiation between leading and execution. The difference between "leading" and "execution" is that knowing what to do and doing it are two different things. In the year 1828, the concepts of applying an influence and exercising authority were introduced to the definition of "leading" (Grace, 2003).

Leaders are superior to followers and those in subordinate position (Barnard,1938; Zaleznik, 1977; Burns, 1978; Bennis & Nanus, 1985; Horner, 1997; Kotter, 2001; Novicevic & Davis & Dorn & Buckley & Brown, 2005; Von Krosigk, 2007). The verbal meaning of "leadership" is refer to categorization of people according to ability and includes the relationship between leader and followers.

2.1 Sociology and Leadership

The social study of the originated in leadership had changed since Rost (1991) claims that from 1900’s to late-1980’s, many literatures had failed to define clear, concise, understandable, researchable, persuasive and practically relevant with the term of leadership although Burn (1978) had stated 130 definitions of the term have been presented.

Moreover, according to Selznick’s (1957) sociology writing, leadership is best understood not as one comprehensive definition statement, but elements and functions of it which includes multiple forms of leadership such as creative, institutional and interpersonal. He concerned on leadership’s adaptive changes to organizational forms and leaders respond to social forces within and without the organization. He also stressed on myths, rituals and symbols as important role for leadership.

According to Baker (2002), who had reviewed all definitions and conclude that leadership consists of only two main things which is process and behaviours and not the first attempt to study whole of leadership as (Rost, 1993) revised the leadership definitions. The purpose is same with the social science research as he determined his work with a five-point definition of leadership. We can understand leadership differently as there are new findings occur in leadership research. But currently, the definitions has used up to date enable us understand the whole of leadership (Winston & Petterson, 2006).

All types of association such as laws of the primary structures and functions would not have large impact on the social science (Mumford, 1906). Social psychology can explain on the facts stated in terms of formation of social habits or specific and associations through the adaptive processes. Social conditions can come through understanding of the laws by which institutions are formed, perpetuated and changed. This is because of an interest in investigation of the evolution of leadership.

People can improve specific skills and their capability in handle situation through leadership that perceived as social process of influence (Bolden, 2004). There is a complex interaction when developments and consequences of leadership remain socially implant between multitude of factors such as time, place and culture. In this the 21st Century, leadership are more stress on its revolving towards the moral, social and ethical responsibilities of leaders. Hence, leaders apply on a positional power basis and potential indirect effect within and between communities as the corporations gradually powerful.

2.2 Psychology and leaderships

Leadership is one of the most discussed issues in the social science (Avolio, Sosik, Jung, and Berson, 2003; Bass, 1990; Bennis, 2007). The psychological theory of active coping is used to determine the theoretical link between personality structure and effective leadership (Shanan, 1990).

Research has revealed that followers who perceive a leader to be similar to them cause stronger identification with the leader and give that leader more favourable appraisals (Engle, & Lord, 1997; Liden, Wayne, & Stilwell, 1993; Turban & Jones, 1988). It has been claimed that social learning through observing moral exemplars will enhance observers’ moral perceptions and their moral courage. (Walker & Henning, 2004). Exemplary leader behaviour is important because leaders serve as role models for followers and set standards and expectations that effect the judgements and behaviours of followers. (Walker & Henning, 2004). Collected research has shown that leaders have a powerful influence on followers’ self-systems, with Prime Avenue of impact being through social learning. (Bandura, 2001). In few numbers of studies conducted by researchers, leaders and followers were associated on various measures of psychological traits believe to be linked with successful leadership. Measures ranged from extraversion, intelligence, physical appearance, and dominance (Pratch & Jacobowitz, 1997). Few studies have mentioned that individual characteristics such as personality traits, demographics, and capabilities to predict leadership effectiveness (Judge, Colbert, & Ilies, 2004). However, some studies focus on dyadic-level relationships, organizational performance, and teamwork performance. A large body of research showed that hypothesis of interpersonal actions and decisions are a function in which events are interpreted in the minds of leaders and followers (Binning, Zaba, & Whattam, 1986; Lord, 1985). Certain individual factors may bring impact on ethical leadership such as personality traits, a leader’s locus of control, Machiavellianism, and moral development (Brown and Trevino, 2006).

Reliable leaders are perceived by followers which are high in moral viewpoint, self-awareness, fair decision making, honesty, and transparency (Avolio & Luthans, 2006). Ethical leaders include traits such as trustworthiness, honesty, and integrity. They shows concern for their subordinates and treat each of them equally, act morally on their actions and do the right thing at the right time, and take fully responsibility for their actions as well as decisions. Some research suggests that ethical leadership is vital for ethical behaviour improvement and performing greater outcome in an organization. Morrison (2001) says that integrity of leaders is important to sustain global leadership, without integrity, leaders will never generate goodwill and trust. According to Werhane (1999), leaders with greater levels of moral value are more deeply and broadly when opposed with ethical challenges.

2.3 Behavioural and leaderships

On contrary to leadership inborn traits, behavioural theory believes that leaders can be trained into effective leadership to achieve the greatest outcome. Behavioural of leadership are based on the effort that leaders are made, not born to be. According to this theory, people can learn to become a good leader through training and teaching. Analysis of the leader trait model encouraged researchers to investigate on leader traits and study how leaders’ behaviours predicted effectiveness (Jenkins, 1947; Mann, 1959; Stogdill, 1948). Not only the leader behaviour model deliver the foundation for new theory, but statistical analysis results from different studies also proposes that leader behaviours are important predictors of leadership effectiveness (Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Judge, Piccolo, & Illies, 2004). According to Van Iddekinge, Ferris & Heffner (2009), leader behaviours are nearest to the act of leadership than traits, thus, it will be more predictive of leadership. According to Senge (2006), leaders are superior people who are properly equipped to set a direction and make important decisions to lead their followers.

Bass and Bass (2008) stated that transactional leadership emphasis on task-oriented leader behaviours, while transformational leadership focus on relational-oriented leader behaviours. The leadership behaviours can be divided into four categories: task-oriented behaviours, change-oriented behaviours, relational-oriented behaviours, and passive leadership behaviours (Derue, Nahrgang, Wellman, and Humphrey, 2011). According to Derue et al. (2011), task-oriented behaviours describes as defining job roles, managing group members’ actions, determining standard of task performance, and ensuring group members perform better.

Ethical leaders help their followers feel a better sense of autonomy which leads to improvements in job performance and willingness to put more effort on jobs. On the other hands, leaders with high relational-oriented behaviours are show more respect and concern for every group members, friendly and open-minded, and treat all group members as colleagues (Bass, 1990). Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey (2007) claims that leadership no longer defined in terms of authority and position, but it is an developing, interactive dynamic between leaders and followers. According to Yukl, Gordon, & Taber (2002), change-oriented leader behaviours involve actions such as developing a vision for change, risk taking, and encouraging innovation thinking. Leaders are willing to change the goals and direction of an organization, encourage their subordinates to concentrate on research & development to become first-mover in the market.

Passive leadership refer to inactive leaders, when a problem does not exist then the leader does not actively get involved in task (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999). With respect to passive leader behaviours, it is clear that there is a negative relationship between passive leader behaviours and leadership effectiveness (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Passive leadership behaviours do not take any action on organization’s goal and objectives, they do not have integrity with their followers, and it can lead to the failure on an organization.

2.5 Theories

There are several theories that explain how ethical leaders are influence their subordinates’ attitude and behaviour, which involve social learning theory and social exchange theory (Mayer, Kuenzi, Greenbaum, Bardes, & Salvador, 2009).

2.5.1 Social Learning Theory

According to Bandura (1977, 1986) study, social learning theory clarifies the impact of ethical leadership on follower moral identity. Besides that, leader influence their follower by modelling process. Basically, modelling process can be explained as the idea that individuals learn by paying attention to and imitate the attitudes, behaviour, and value of attractive and believable role models. Refer to above, individuals learn and use the behaviour from leaders which they perceived that the leader’s ethical behaviour suits their moral perspective.

In an organization, leader play an important role in communicates the organization ethics, because peoples just can understand the expectation on them and behave themselves (not only learn from experience, but also observing others) (Bandura, 1977, 1986). Besides, social learning theory also explained the underlying influence mechanism through which perspectives affects by ethical leadership (Zhu, 2008). According to social learning theory, followers will be morally transformed by ethical leaders and they will be considered credible role models.

Social Learning Theory’s major premise that is people learn by observing others was renamed as Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986). According to social cognitive theory, followers look to their leaders’ ethical guidance (Kohlberg, 1969; Trevino, 1986). As mentioned above, ethical leaders can be considered as a source to guide the followers due to their attractiveness and credibility matched their modelled behaviour.

According to Brown, Trevino, and Harrison (2005); Trevino, Hartman, and Brown (2000), ethical leader manipulates their followers’ acts in ethical in two ways.

Firstly, to the degree that decision making and the action of leaders are noticeable by others in organization. Thus, leaders display in ethical behaviour, meanwhile provide an example of ethical behaviour for followers to imitate. In addition, ethical leaders appear with high ethical role of models and through observation to the leader, followers can learn and establish their own internal set of moral principles and moral action from the ethical leader. Secondly, the power of leaders in making decision about reward (ethical behaviour) or punish (unethical behaviours), that will influence followers to behave in ethical or unethical ways. If the followers accept that positive behaviours are rewarded and negative behaviours are punished, then they will engage in positive behaviour to avoid punishments (Brown eth al., 2005; Trevino et al., 2000). From the outcome which may inform the follower (observers) about the positive effect of modelled ethical behaviour is better than negative effects of modelled inappropriate behaviour.

From the theory of social leaning, it explained that due to the leaders’ role of modelled and the power of reward and punish, followers will notice to and imitate their leaders behaviour. Besides that, followers will engage themselves with the action which will get reward and avoid doing something which will get punishment. By doing these, the followers can observe how others action in an organization are rewarded and punished.

2.5.2 Social Exchange Theory

Ethical leadership will be influenced the followers through social exchange theory social, exchange theory able to provide understanding about how ethical leaders influence an organization outcome (Blau, 1964). In addition, social exchange theory entail unspecified future obligation and it is "based on the norm of reciprocity" (Gouldner, 1960), which assumes that if one party does something beneficial or valuable for other party, that will generates a responsibility to exchange good faith behaviour (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005).

According to Blau (1964), there are two distinction of social exchange theory, which is transactional (exchange in economic term, such as money or resources) and socio-emotional (exchange in interpersonal treatment, such as fairness and trust); it is important to know how ethical leadership is related to social exchange theory. Ethical leadership is likely to influence the behaviours of followers in a work group via socio-emotional exchange because ethical leader is expected to create high level of trust and fairness to employees (Brown & Trevino, 2006). Hence, followers willing to exchange the treat by behaving in the ways that will benefit to the entire work group if the ethical leaders treat employee in the fair manner (Mayer et al., 2009).

In the early stage of leader-subordinate relationships is based on economic exchanges which portrayed by low trust and tight control, however over time, the outcome of positive experiences resulting from mutual risk-taking (Mayer et al., 2009; Brower, Schoorman, & Tan, 2000). Therefore, social exchange relationships can ultimately develop, created by high levels of trust, lower level of control, and long term obligation (Hansen, Dunford, Boss, Boss, & Angermeier, 2011). Namely, when the followers believe or trust on their leader then they will engage voluntary behaviour and bring benefits to company such as with better performance. In contrast, if the followers do not trust on their leader then they will bring the undesired morality behaviour which damages the company. Furthermore, social exchange relationship are extremely related to ethical leadership, since social exchange require an important level of trust on the exchanging parties (Brown & Trevino, 2006; Brown et al., 2005; Mayer et al., 2009).

As mentioned earlier, it is important of perceived fairness for expansion of a social exchange relationship, especially within the relationship between leaders and subordinates (Pillai, Schriesheim, & Williams, 1999). It is similar as trust, when the followers perceived that they are treated fairly then they are more stimulated to put more effort on their works which support their organization. On the other hand, if the followers perceived that they are treated unfairly then unethical behaviour will be created. Hence, fair treatment to the followers will generate satisfaction and loyalty among followers, whereas, unfair treatment will develop the followers negative feedback.

Last but not least, leader-member exchange relationship considers as one of the social exchange theory and it determined on the importance of high-quality relationships between leader and employees (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975; Graen & Cashman, 1975). High-quality relationship defines as the employees are liking and admiration towards their leader (Schriesheim, Castro, & Cogliser, 1999). It can be explained by, when employees like or admire to their leaders then will reduce counterattack in an organization. However, when the employees dislike their leaders, they will show in action which may harm to the organization.

From the view of social exchange theory, it argues that social exchange theory distinct into transactional and social emotional. In the earlier stage, leader-subordinate relationship is based on the transactional which means, the relationship is rely on the reward and resources. However, it does not work at the later stage because now people cares more about trust in supervisor, perceived fairness, and liking and affection for supervisor.

2.6 Effects on society and organizations

In the working organization, the main role play of a leader is to attract useful talent to the organization and utilize those talent, skills and abilities of the employees to work the business (Collins, 2001). Collins (2001) also mentioned that this responsibility also brings effect to the organizational culture, because employees will take their leader as their guide and mentor. In order to make an ethical choice, a leader should always able to identify goods and evil and make a decision that will bring long-term positive results (O’Brien, 2009). Bennett and Robinson (2000) and Dunlop and Lee (2004) stated that unethical behaviour lead destruction on moral causing productivity level drops. However, the ethical behaviour shown by employee in their working routine would enable the organizations enjoy preferable working chemistry and increase productivity (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000).

Based on the national survey by Shaw (1996) 68% of the surveyed believed that the main cause of decline in business standards, productivity, and success is the unethical behaviour of executives. Moreover, another survey completed by Plinio, Young, and Lavery (2010) found that one of the most serious problem that organizations today facing is the poor ethical behaviour and extinct of ethical leadership. Green and Odom (2003) mention that the lacks of ethical leadership will endangers thousands of employees, reduce consumer confidence in the financial industry and government needs to implement greater effort in regulation. The perceived of low ethical standards of the executive class causes the workers feel justified in responding in kind –through indifference, stealing money, absenteeism, and a generally poor performance on their job (Robin & Reidenbach, 1989; Shaw, 1996; Maremont & Barnathan, 1995; Morin, 1995; Hartman, 1996; Jones, 1997). Moreover, unethical leadership in an organization form the horrible rises in misconduct by employees at all a level. Without any proper constraint or modelling of leadership in an organization will cause an organization unable to achieve a high business ethic standard (Al Gini, 1997).

No matter how effective or persuasive formal communications of ethics is, the greatest influence to an organization will always be the actions of corporate leadership. Action of workers in an organization is depending on how leaders utilize their great potential to influence employees and the organization (Thoms, 2008). While Graff (2005) stresses that an organization’s staff will take personal interest in take care of the organization’s reputation if their leaders can bring them the message about the importance of ethics in the organization more effectively. Moreover, if the reputation of the organizations was damaged, they make involve in the risk of individual prosecution and a potential in losing their customers. Thus, all these impact would result in a raised price to clients (Rosenfeld, 1985).

Referring to Sison (2005) the close relationship between devolution of a corporate and leadership failure affected a lot of cases of organization breakdown within the world of business. Sison argues that the main key to the long-term success of business is the moral capital, and that "without moral capital, all other forms of capital could easily turn from the source of a firm’s advantage to the cause of its downfall’ (2004, p.42). In the other words, without ethics in an organization will cause others leaders or employees misconduct the resources of company for self-benefits and bring the company to a bankruptcy stage. Therefore, leader’s self-performance are interrelated to an organization because they are playing a role in encouraging ethical practices, solve conflicts among stakeholders or even develop trust and respect among their followers (Yuki, 2001).

However, ethical failure in leadership not just affected the organizations but also become the main reason in causing panic and serious issues in human society. This was supported by Kanungi and Mendonca (1996), whenever there is an ethical failure in leadership, either the leader’s reputation damage or the leader’s achievement decline; they also put human society in a state of danger. For instance, Nigeria was ranked as one of the top 20 poorest countries due to widespread of corruption among business leaders and political caused severe regional violence (Ling, 2008) and there was damaged of agricultural products worth US$ 88 million caused by Thai political leader’s inhumane closure of the Bangkok International Airport (Praiwan, 2008). Thus, either leaders involve in an organization or politic, any actions or decisions they make will greatly impact to the society.

3. Conclusion

Leadership is no more a new issue since it has been exist since there are connection between humans and being introduced during 800 CE. Past research shows that leadership played an important role play and it is undeniable. Even though leadership can be related to many concepts, but the relationship between leadership and ethic remains unclear as the researchers (Rost, 1991) failed to validate the relationship between these two concepts through their researches. The reasons behind this phenomenon are clear as the relationship between leadership and ethics are reciprocal in nature.

Leadership appears related to ethical behaviour of individuals and ethics itself, and being known as ethical leadership (Gini, 1998). The underpinning assumption of ethics is that it evolves through time, space, and context. Leadership is just a perceived value of managing and controlling of a group of individual. The entangled relationship has create smokescreen towards the understanding on how exactly these two distinct constructs works in a social phenomenon.

Social exchange theory attempts to link the entire relationship between these two dimensions namely integrity and ethics. However, this theory is still way behind to explain the relationship. Leadership may be in various forms since the origin of the leader influence the leadership manner. It is hard to prove the relationship between leadership and ethics among the theorists (Gouldner, 1960; Blau, 1964). Therefore it leads to more arguments towards these two concepts. Social learning theory try to prove that ethic can influence the follower via socio-emotional exchange due to the high level of trust from the leader. However it only brings effect during early stage and the effect will turn weaker and even get immune by the follower.

Social learning theory try to be used to prove there is a relationship between leadership and ethics. It states that ethics can be transfer from the leader to followers through modelling process, which include observation and physically actions (Bandura, 1986). Followers can observe and learn ethic possess by their leader through their action and adopt it. However, it may not work on every individual who have strong own principles and belief. Social learning theory is insufficient to prove there is a linkage between leadership and ethics as well.

The concept of ethic leadership no doubt important is the current society. The society believes that ethical leadership lead the decision maker conclude a decision which would not bring much damage one’s interest. It would lead to a win-win situation where both parties can increase their interest from the decision. The reason for leaders to practice ethical leadership is to protect their interest and hoping the other parties doing that too (Sison, 2005). Suppose, for an example, you’re competing with your competitors in a tendering and you would like to get the information from your competitors through your competitor’s staff. You would not do so and reply: "No, it is because I would not hope my staff did the same thing for my competitors as well."