Description

Ethics is not only essential for leaders but, in fact, defines leadership (Ciulla, 1998). The importance of ethics is captured in the practices of responsibility and accountability. Leaders are responsible for ensuring that ethical conduct is practiced and that unethical behaviours, ‗no matter how subtle, no matter how private‘ are not (Penney, 2001).
In 1994, the Joint Military Coordinating Council (JMCC) agreed that the structure and infrastructure of the then South African Defence Force (SADF) would form the basis for the integration of the seven former armed forces into the new South African National Defence Force (SANDF). This implied that the leadership style of the SANDF, i.e. transactional, would be dominant. The transactional leadership style was in contrast to the predominant leadership styles of the other forces which had to be integrated. Officially the new, post-apartheid South African Department of Defence (DOD) comprising the Defence Secretariat and the SANDF came into being on 27 April 1994. The DOD/South African Navy (SAN) has adopted the Transformational Leadership style as the predominant and most effective style of leading its officials (Leadership Philosophy of the DOD, 2008).
According to the SANDF Service Guide for Officers (1997), maladministration and corruption are the most important manifestations of unethical conduct in the public sector. This research is an investigation into the execution of ethical leadership practices within the context of the SAN, as a sector of the SANDF, specifically dealing with how the Admiralty (i.e. the strategic decision makers/leaders) of the SAN without prejudice and/or the influence of politics, religion, and/or culture, on a day-to-day basis leads in ethically sound leadership practices. Further, the role of armed forces in contemporary conduct of warfare, and operations other than war including multifunctional peace operations, has added a new dimension to the role and image of soldiers. Soldiers are now also seen as protectors of humanity.
The main purpose of this research was to highlight areas of ethics and leadership concern to the Admiralty in order to assist the SAN in inculcating ethical practices and ensuring ethical leadership succession in order to secure the SAN‘s future by inspiring the conduct of military professionals toward supererogatory behaviour.
This research was delimited to a sample of Captains; i.e., the Senior Staff Officers (SSOs) which is the feeder pool for promotion to Admiral. The sample comprised 20 Captains, all of whom had held their rank for a period of at least two years. The methodology comprised a questionnaire, administered by means of two rounds of the Delphi technique.
From the findings of the research it is clear that many of the respondents have a common and sophisticated understanding of both ethics and leadership, as reflected. However, irrespective of the respondent‘s previous force affiliation and/or gender, the respondents indicated that the perception exists that the Admiralty is not ethical in their day-to-day conduct. Further, the research revealed that race, tribalism, gender and qualifications (or lack thereof) are worrying aspects seemingly taking precedence over ethics and leadership suitability in promotions to Admiral.
The Admiralty is entrusted to lead and manage the organisation (SAN) ought to be the ‗finest of the finest‘, willing and able, mentally and physically to lead and manage the organisation both in times of economic prosperity, recession, and war (for this is the time that true leaders reveal themselves). This research details various recommendations for the SAN to ensure ethical leadership.
The SA Navy is a national asset to us all. Implementation of the recommendations of this research could go a long way to ensuring that this asset is preserved for generations to come.