A few months ago a world leader was forced to resign for failing to appropriately respond to credible allegations of misconduct.
Archbishop Justin Welby, symbolic head of the 85 million member Anglican Communion, and known more popularly as the cleric who presided at the royal wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, was forced to step down because of his mishandling of an abuse case.
A commissioned report detailed the failures that enabled the abuse to go unaddressed for so long and there was one surprising word that was repeated eight times: curiosity. More specifically, a distinct lack of curiosity.
Many know from personal experience what this looks like. A supervisor sees or hears something suspicious, and says, “I don’t want to know.” The obvious questions are never asked because the obvious answers would have required costly action. This studied ignorance provides the leader plausible deniability, but only at the expense of the vulnerable.
Furthermore, when a team sees the boss look the other way, it has a corrosive impact on the organizational culture. Like salt slowly eating away at the frame of a car, the deterioration is immediate even if the crash may be months or years away.
The resignation of the Archbishop of Canterbury is part of a healthy shift in leadership expectations. It is no longer “good enough” to handle well documented allegations with competency. It is becoming expected that even an awareness of strange and concerning facts should spark curiosity and a commitment to seeking the uncomfortable truth. Anything less is to corrode trust and risk an abrupt conclusion to one’s career. The standards of integrity have not changed. What has changed is our determination as a society to hold leaders to that standard.
The bar for leadership in many organizations is rising, and that is profoundly encouraging.