The Harder They Fall: A Reflection

 The article The Harder They Fall, is written by Roderick M Kramer, and explains the common pitfalls and ethical shortcoming that fast-rising leaders often face in their career. He speaks to their callous attitude and how “the players in winner-takes-all markets must be extraordinarily aggressive about taking risks” (Kramer, 2003). “As a result, these individuals develop a dangerous s aversion to moderation” (Kramer, 2003). These individuals often think that the ‘rules of the game’ only vaguely apply to them as they work their way to the top of their industries or companies (Kramer, 2003). They often give up responsibilities outside of work or push them to the side because “these sacrifices [are the] price of admission to the top” (Kramer, 2003). 
 
When these people get to the pinnacle of their career, they often fail due to these mindsets and attitudes that still persist in their behavior and treatment of others. Kramer recommends simplicity, consistent reality checks, keeping details at the forefront and self-reflection as ways to be successful at the top (Kramer, 2003).
 
When looking at this type of individual, it seems that there are ethical lines that get blurred in their pursuit of the top of their industries.
 
One example that Kramer uses to explain the lack of respect for rules is the story of David Geffen (Kramer, 2003). At the time of the article, he was worth $3.8 billion (Kramer, 2003). However, early in his career he lied about his credentials and forged documents to claim a degree he didn’t earn. Although he is now highly successful, at the time of this incident, he simply lied. 
 
There are many ways to debate the ethical “rules of lying” as Jean-Gabriel Ganascia calls it. “It is commonplace to say that ethical rules are defaults rules, which means that they tolerate exceptions” (Ganascia, 2007). However, even if the ethical rule is ‘do not lie,’ I do not believe that self-promotion and self-interest should be a tolerated exception to that rule. 
 
Another example that Kramer has in his article is the story of Carolyn Sears, who gave up her custody of her child in order to full devote herself to her career. She said, “It was impossible to be on the promotion track and the mommy track at the same time” (Kramer, 2003). This is obviously an extreme example and without getting into a conversation about inequality or feminism in the workplace, the fact that individuals make sacrifices in their home lives for success in their careers is a common practice. 
 
This thought leads me to the concept of relativism and how the “theory of ethical relativism is motivated by the recognition of historical, cultural and individual diversity” (McDonald, 2010). Or for a parent to abandon a child for self-interested reasons and for an arbitrary pursuit of one’s goals, in most culture would be ‘unethical.’ However, the level of sacrifice in regard to personal relationships can be relative to the person’s culture or community’s values. 
 
For instance, I have moved four times in my five in a half year career. I have given up proximity and physical closeness with family in an effort to promote my career and pursue my own goals within my company. This is deemed admirable in my culture and family. However, I know that as soon as I have a husband or children, this perspective will quickly change. To expand further, even my current level of sacrifice for my career is not something that is fully supported by other people that I know. They believe that I have my priorities in the wrong order due to my time commitments at work and the consequences of these decisions on my relationship with my family. 
 
In essence, Kramer depicts a villainous and yet, cautious tale of how the race to the top of our industries or companies can be detrimental to our ethical values and moral compass. However, at the end of the day, some people could judge the ethical lines crossed on the way up the mountain or simply admire that the person go to the summit. 
 
References:
Kramer, R. M. (2003). The harder they fall. Harvard Business Review, 81(10), 58-136.
 
Ganascia, Jean-Gabriel. (2007). Modelling ethical rules of lying with answer set programming. Ethics and Information Technology, 9(1), 39. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s10676-006-9134-y
 
McDonald, G. (2010). Ethical relativism vs absolutism: Research implications.European Business Review, 22(4), 446-464. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1108/09555341011056203