59185 04p

Chapter 4. Combating Evil

The Faces of Evil

Recognizing the presence of evil is an important first step.

Contemporary Western definitions of evil emphasize its destructiveness.

Evildoers do excessive harm, going well beyond what is needed to achieve their objectives.

Evil destroys self-esteem, physical and emotional well-being, relationships, communities, and nations.

© 2015 SAGE Publications, Inc.

The Faces of Evil

Perspectives on Evil

1. Evil as Dreadful Pleasure 2. Evil as Exclusion 3. Evil as Deception 4. Evil as Bureaucracy 5. Evil as a Choice 6. Evil as Ordinary


The Faces of Evil

Evil as Dreadful Pleasure

University of Maryland political science professor C. Fred Alford defines evil as a combination of dread and pleasure.

He discovered that people experience evil as a deep sense of uneasiness, “the dread of being human, vulnerable, alone in the universe and doomed to die.”

Evil can also be a product of chronic boredom. Ordinary distractions such as television, movies,

surfing the Internet, shopping, and sports don’t fill the void, so people turn to evil instead.


The Faces of Evil

Evil as Exclusion In moral exclusion, group members draw a mental circle. Those inside the circle (called the moral community or

scope of justice) are treated with respect Those outside the circle, on the other hand, are seen as

undeserving or expendable Mild forms of exclusion are part of daily life and include,

for example, making sexist comments, applying double standards when judging the behavior of different groups, and making unflattering comparisons to appear superior to others.

In extreme forms of exclusion evils such as human rights violations, torture, murder and genocide can occur.


Evil as Exclusion

Dispute resolution expert Susan Opotow believes that moral exclusion progresses through five states or elements that reinforce one another and can become a vicious cycle:

1. Conflicts of interest are salient. 2. Group categorizations are salient. 3. Moral justifications are prominent. 4. Unjust procedures are described as expedient. 5. Harmful outcomes occur.


The Faces of Evil

Evil as Deception

Psychiatrist Scott Peck identifies evil as a form of narcissism or self-absorption.

Evil people refuse to submit and try to control others instead.

Evil people are consumed with keeping up appearances.

Peck believes that truly evil people are more likely to live in our neighborhoods than in our jails.


The Faces of Evil

Evil as Bureaucracy

According to public administration professors Guy Adams and Danny Balfour, the combination of science and technology made the 1900s so destructive.

In administrative evil, organizational members commit heinous crimes while carrying out their daily tasks.

Balfour and Adams argue that the true nature of administrative evil is masked or hidden from participants.


The Faces of Evil

Evil as Sanctioned Destruction

Social scientists Nevitt Sanford and Craig Comstock believe that widespread evil occurs when victimizers are given permission or sanction to attack groups that have been devalued or dehumanized.

Sanctions can be overt or disguised. After the sanction is given it opens the door to

oppression because targeted groups no longer enjoy the protections given to the rest of society.


The Faces of Evil

Evil as a Choice A number of scholars argue that we become good or

evil through a series of small, incremental decisions. Throughout our lives we face many decisions where

we need to decide which path to choose. We cannot correct poor decisions by continuing on

that path. We must return to the fork in the road and choose the other path.

An illustration for what happens when a leader makes a series of evil choices: Moses repeatedly asks Pharaoh to let his people go,

but the Egyptian ruler turns down every request. Eventually the king’s heart is “hardened,” and he and his army are destroyed.


The Faces of Evil

Evil as Ordinary

The evil-as-ordinary perspective focuses on the situational factors that cause otherwise ordinary or normal people to become evildoers.

Case Example: Stanford Prison Experiment Evil is likely to continue when others fail to

intervene to stop it.


Leadership Ethics at the Movies: Beyond the Gates

Discussion Questions:

What forms of evil do you see in the film? Evaluate the actions of the United Nations

commander. Should he have disobeyed orders and fired upon the killers outside the

gate? Refused to withdraw? Shot the refugees as they requested?

Why was Father Christopher able to forgive his killers?


Facing Evil

We need to be aware of how our activities contribute to good or evil.

Language is one of the evildoers’ most powerful tools.

Evil as a choice puts the ethical burden squarely on our shoulders.

Every moral decision, no matter how insignificant it seems at the time, has lasting consequences.

The perspective of evil as ordinary reminds us that we all have the potential to be evildoers.


Making a Case for Forgiveness

Breaking the Cycle of Evil A growing number of social scientists believe that

forgiving instead of retaliating can prevent or break cycles of evil.

In a cycle of evil, aggressive acts provoke retaliation followed by more aggression.

Forgiving evildoers is controversial. Because of this skeptics worry about the following: 1. That guilty parties will get off without acknowledging they

have done wrong or paying for their crimes 2. Forgiveness will be a sign of weakness 3. Forgiveness is impossible in some situations 4. Forgiveness cannot be offered until the offender asks for it 5. No leader has the right to offer forgiveness on behalf of

the victim



The Forgiveness Process

According to Robert Enright, professor of educational psychology and president of the International Forgiveness Institute at the University of Wisconsin, forgiveness is not the following: Forgetting past wrongs to “move on” Excusing or condoning bad, damaging behavior Reconciliation or coming together again (forgiveness opens

the way to reconciliation, but the other person must change or desire to reconcile)

Reducing the severity of offenses Offering a legal pardon Pretending to forgive in order to wield power over another

person Ignoring the offender Dropping our anger and becoming emotionally neutral



4 Stage Model of Forgiveness 1. Uncovering: the victim may deny the problem exists;

the person does acknowledge the hurt, and may experience intense feelings of anger, shame and betrayal

2. Decision: the injured party realizes that he/she is paying a high price for dwelling on the injury considers the possibility of forgiveness and commits to forgiving

3. Work: forgiveness is accomplished in this stage; attempts to understand the victim’s background; may experience empathy; absorbing the pain is the key in this stage

4. Deepening: this stage describes the outcomes of forgiveness; the person offering the forgiveness may develop a new purpose in life and find peace



4 strands to explain how warring groups can overcome their mutual hatred and bind together to restore fractured relationships 1. Moral Truth: forgiveness starts with recalling the

past and rendering a moral judgment 2. Forbearance: forbearance means rejecting

revenge in favor of restraint 3. Empathy: empathy doesn’t excuse wrongs but

acknowledges that offender and offended share much in common

4. Commitment: to restore the broken relationship


Seeking Forgiveness

Just as we need to offer forgiveness, we need to seek forgiveness; some call this the “Age of Apology”

Nearly every week there seems to be a prominent figure offering an apology for his or her misdeeds.

Political apologies appear to be more commonBusinesses and religious groups, too, are officially

apologizing for past wrongs. Apologies can be highly beneficial. They help

restore the dignity of victims and promote healing.


Seeking Forgiveness

Apologies Many apologies (pseudo- on inauthentic apologies)

come up short. Inauthentic apologies are frequently vague (“I

apologize for whatever I did.. .”), use the passive voice (“Mistakes have been made. . . ”); make the offense conditional (“If mistakes were

made.. .”); question whether the victim was damaged (“If anyone

was hurt.. . .); or minimize the damage (“There’s really nothing (or very

little) to apologize for. . . “).


Seeking Forgiveness

5 R model for evaluating the apologies of others:

Recognition: identifying the specific offenses committed

Responsibility: take personal responsibility for the offenses; avoid blaming others

Remorse: “I’m sorry” or “I apologize” or “I regret” should be part of admission of responsibility

Restitution: take concrete steps to aid the victim; may be pay, or intangibles like community service

Repetition: signal your commitment to not repeat the offensive behavior


Spirituality and Leadership

A great number of leaders turn to spirituality to equip themselves as they make choices and attempt to forgive by reshaping our thoughts, emotions and behaviors.

More and more academics are studying the link between spiritual values and practices and organizational performance.

Downsizing, restructuring, rapid change, and information overload have generated fear and uncertainty in the workplace, which prompts us to seek stability and to reexamine our lives.



Investigators have discovered that spirituality enhances the following:

Commitment to mission, core values, and ethical standards Organizational learning and creativity Morale Productivity and profitability Collaboration Loyalty Willingness to mentor others Job effort Job satisfaction Social support Sensitivity to ethical issues



Donde Ashmos Plowman and Dennis Duchon define workplace spirituality as “the recognition that employees have an inner life that nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes place in the context of community.” The inner life refers to the fact that employees have

spiritual needs (their core identity and values) just as they have emotional, physical, and intellectual wants, and they bring the whole person to work.

Meaningful work describes the fact that workers typically are motivated by more than material rewards.

Community refers to the fact that organization members desire connection to others.



Belief systems found in leaders who engage in common spiritual practices:

Demonstrating respect for others’ values Treating others fairly Expression of caring and concern Listening responsively Appreciating the contributions of others Engaging in reflective practice



Spiritual leadership begins with the inner life of the leader. Leaders who engage in spiritual practices develop: (1) hope and faith in a vision of service to others, and (2) a commitment to altruistic love.

After the initial excitement of discovering the benefits of spirituality, individuals and organizations will typically hit obstacles—frustration, financial challenges, feelings of emptiness



Framework that can be used to measure the spiritual climate of a workplace (to determine your organization’s spiritual progress):

Benevolence: kindness toward others; desire to promote the happiness and prosperity of employees.

Generativity: long-term focus; concern about future consequences of actions for this and future generations.

Humanism: policies and practices that respect the dignity and worth of every employee; opportunity for personal growth when working toward organizational goals.



Spiritual Framework (cont’d)

Integrity: adherence to a code of conduct; honesty; sincerity; candor.

Justice: even-handed treatment of employees; impartiality; unbiased rewards and punishments.

Mutuality: employees feel interconnected and mutually dependent; work together to complete projects and achieve goals.

Receptivity: flexible thinking; open-mindedness; take calculated risks; reward creativity.



Spiritual Framework (cont’d)

Respect: treat employees with esteem and value; show consideration and concern.

Responsibility: members independently follow through on goals despite obstacles; are concerned with what is right.

Trust: members and outsiders have confidence in the character and truthfulness of the organization and its representatives.



The Dark Side of Spiritual Leadership

Some leaders view spirituality solely as a tool for increasing follower commitment (obedience) and productivity, losing sight of the fact that spirituality has value in and of itself.

Other leaders try to impose their particular religious and spiritual views on followers.

In the worst-case scenario, authoritarian leaders engage in spiritual abuse.



Common spiritual abuse tactics:

Overemphasizing spiritual authority and forbidding challenges from followers

Demanding unquestioning obedience as a sign of follower loyalty, which takes away the right of subordinates to make their own choices

Keeping members apart from outsiders and dismissing external critics while, at the same time, hiding character flaws and unethical practices from the public



Common spiritual abuse tactics (cont’d)

Insisting on rigid beliefs and behavior while demanding conformity and perfection

Suppressing follower dissent through humiliation, deprivation, and other means

Using nearly absolute power to engage in fraud, sexual immorality, and other unethical practices


Case Study: Oppression in the Hermit State

Discussion Questions: Should preventing North Korea from developing nuclear

weapons take priority over efforts to stop the country’s human rights abuses?

Should the international community provide food aid if it is diverted to the military and government officials as it has been in the past?

What, if anything, can the international community do to stop the abuses in North Korea?

Should the United States risk its relationship with China to stop the murder and human rights violations in North Korea?

What faces of evil do you see reflected in this case?


Case Study: Evil in the Basement: The Attack on Columbine High

Discussion Questions: What, if anything, do you remember about the Columbine

attack? Why do you think it has inspired other school shooters?

What forms of evil do you see reflected in the Columbine murders?

What steps could parents and authorities have taken to prevent Harris and Klebold from evolving into killers?

How do we keep from being deceived by evildoers? Should Harris and Klebold be forgiven for their assault on

Columbine High School? Should their parents be forgiven for not stopping the attack?

What leadership ethics lessons do you take from this case?


Case Study: Lance Armstrong Comes Clean (or Does He?)

Discussion Question:

Did Lance Armstrong offer an effective apology for his actions? Why or why not?


59185 04p

Education

faces of evil evil

evil people

forms of evil

widespread evil

presence of evil

faces of evil perspectives

series of evil choices

sage publications