During the latter half of the 18th century, while the American colonies were vying for independence from the crown, England was also working on their governmental structure. Specifically, the virtues of a two-party system. England was wary at first of any sort of opposition to the status-quo, desiring stability over the right to oppose. Then Lord Bolingbroke and Edmond Burke came onto the scene and touted the benefits of opposing parties. Eventually, the political atmosphere reached a climax that allowed the parties to exist. (Burns, 2007)
When considering how to relate this tidbit from history to my major area of study (accounting), I thought of the connection between governmental and managerial leadership changes. In business as well as in politics, the ideas in power naturally don’t want to be challenged. This could be a company policy that some of the leadership views as unjust, or maybe a questionable business deal that isn’t being questioned. The right to oppose the status quo is essential to improving said status. It takes a leader willing to stick their neck out and challenge the institutional leadership in order to make a change for the better.
The Bible encourages challenge on a personal level when it teaches that “iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another” (Proverbs 27:17). When driven by moral values and elevated principles, friendly opposition between peers will refine each to be the best that they can be (Burns, 2007).
In leadership roles, it is wise to question the norms. Good policies will only be purified from the interrogation while bad policies will be ‘perplexed’ (Burns, 2007, p. 124).
References
Burns, James MacGregor (2007-12-01). Transforming Leadership (p. 125). Grove/Atlantic, Inc.. Kindle Edition.
christy•walter 