To be frank, I likely would have reconsidered attending the second Leadership and Ethics training had I not been making a C at the time.  (My motivations aside, I have legitimate reasons for critiquing the quality of the lecture content.)

The second training taught me that learning to become a leader means straying from empathy.  I sat through what was perhaps the furthest thing from a lecture on ethics. I distinctly remember one panelist saying that being a leader means being strong.  He defined weakness as the inability to tolerate not-PC talk.  One student said:  "As a leader, shouldn't one be concerned with hurting feelings--especially if one is straying from the political correct way of speaking to others?"  (The context of the question was that the panelist had said:  I don't care if I say something that is hurtful or politically incorrect.  People that are strong and powerful--like the people I hire--can tolerate failure and being hurt."  I am no advocate of straight PC talk, as what is PC is defined by one's values.  And we all know that white slave owners values at the time may have been PC, but they weren't right.  However, I have to say, I was on the verge of walking out of the lecture when this one particular panelist gave his two cents on leadership.  He said that he had been a successful business person since he was 14.  And that the reason he was so successful was not because he was empathetic or PC, but because he was tough.  He could take abuse.  He said what was on his mind and disregarded how his word/actions affected others.  This, he says, was the key to successful leadership.  He further described leadership as the ability to wear a perfect mask.  Nobody is perfect, he says, but leaders wear "perfect masks."  To me, this is ridiculous.  I have had the most success as an organizer and human being (and growing leader?) when I am candid and readily admit when I am wrong.

As someone who also speaks her mind, I diametrically oppose this panelist's leadership style.  I know that being a leader means you will piss people off.  But this does not long mean that you have to strip yourself of empathy, as he implies.  I do not doubt that the success of a CEO and powerful politician is measured by their ability to "wear a perfect mask" or not care to hold people's hands.  But I thought the point of becoming an ethical leader was precisely that--being ethical.  Powerful business people are in my opinion the furthest thing from ethical.  They, indeed, put on a perfect facade.  But this is also the reason we have the problem of deceit and white collar crime and lies and watergate anyone?  Anyway, the point is, I am profoundly disturbed that this is what I am supposed to be learning.