How philosophy influences and transforms corporate leadership

Focusing solely on technical skills for managers and leaders in the business world is no longer enough. Leading an organisation to success and innovation requires a leadership style and an understanding of the deeper complexity that takes into account the purpose and values that each reality expresses. In this context, it is philosophy, with its capacity for deep reflection and critical analysis, that provides a powerful and incisive tool. It is not enough for a leader to be aware of the purpose and values of their company. They need to internalise them and translate them into real action, inspiring their team and helping to create a corporate culture that promotes consistency and authenticity.

This is where philosophical skills come into play: philosophy helps people to think critically about their role, decisions, and the impact they have on the organisation and society. The changing role of the leader and manager in recent years, as well as the extraordinary potential of philosophy as a support tool, are at the centre of the studies of Professor Roberto Mordacci, Full Professor of Moral Philosophy at the Faculty of Philosophy of the Vita-Salute San Raffaele University. In the third module of the Executive Course in Philosophy for Management, entitled "The Philosophy of Leadership", Professor Mordacci explores how philosophy can influence and transform corporate leadership.

What does leadership mean in this historical, but also the industrial/technological context?

Every social order is organised around a form of leadership. This could be a person, but also a group, an idea or an organisational model. The impetus which leads us to think there's unity of action only if there is a “strong” leader is produced solely in the darkest moments of history. The most long-lasting leaderships are participatory and are defined by the rules in which they recognise themselves, not by the leader. An authoritarian manager, like a totalitarian head of state, lasts for twenty years at most. Then their entire world collapses miserably. The enduring republics and empires, like the Roman one, were constituted by their laws and the civil body: the leaders change, but the law and being a cives romanus remain. This is no different in an industrial society. Digital media generate leaders who are just as “constructed” or fictitious as those of ancient and modern societies. An edict, a rumour or the action of the press have always generated shifts in public opinion. Our idea that technology creates new eras of humanity shows how little we have understood about technology and especially about human social dynamics.

Are leaders born or made?

At birth, we are not really anything determined: a whole host of biological potential that will take an unpredictable form influenced by experiences, context, relationships, genuine possibilities and chance. Genetics is not a deterministic science and above all, we “are” not our genes. So no one is born a leader, because in general, no one is born for one role or another. In the role, whatever it may be, we shape and express a set of predispositions, but the combination that decides on success or defeat is complex: it can happen that a person who you do not feel fit for a certain role is driven to perform it effectively by a sense of responsibility, by the will to do well what they do – whatever it may be. Ancient Stoicism expressed this idea with the notion of kathekon, or officium, a ‘role-related duty’. Both Epictetus, a freed slave, and Marcus Aurelius, the Roman emperor, measured their existence on whether they were equal to the role that life had assigned them, examining this every day. Neither was born to be a slave or an emperor.

What are the skills of a modern leader?

There are managerial skills and personal skills. The “soft” or “humanistic” skills are managerial, not personal. The latter relate to character: I may be lazy, erratic, short-tempered or, on the contrary, active, tenacious and calm, but this has nothing to do with my skills as a manager. Of these, those which are absolutely essential today concern a broad background culture, a certain curiosity for historical events, a good knowledge of the fundamental ideas of philosophy and science, and a healthy interest in social issues. A manager who lives in isolation with exclusively economic-management skills is a bad manager, who will not be able to do good for the company. The era of “technical” managers must end, because it expresses a reductive mentality, which is now out of the story. Managers are, by definition, humanistic figures: they are not scientists, not mechanics, not computer scientists, nor chemists. They see an organisation as a network of interpersonal relationships and try to ensure that these are good and satisfying relationships, also (but not only) in terms of the results achieved.

The leader as a catalyst for change

The modern leader is no longer a detached manager but a catalyst for change, capable of communicating a meaningful purpose and inspiring trust and commitment. In this context, philosophical skills become essential for addressing complex issues such as the ethics of power, social responsibility, and sustainability. What emerges is that the leadership of the future cannot ignore philosophical reflection. Only a leader who reflects deeply on his or her values and the company’s purpose will be able to generate a lasting and positive impact. Philosophy, with its ability to question and give meaning, provides leaders with the tools to grow and direct their organisations towards an ethical and sustainable future. For this reason, the Executive Course in Philosophy for Management was created, with the aim of training leaders who are aware and capable of guiding their companies in a responsible and far-sighted manner.