Ethical Leadership Principles

Los Angeles Apparel features the faces of the workers behind each garment on its tags. Each garment includes a tag with a photograph of a worker who helped make it, along with a short bio. One tag introduces Rosa, who came to Los Angeles from El Salvador at 27 to pursue her passion for sewing. When she’s not working, she enjoys shopping and taking walks with her dogs. Other tags feature stories like Oscar, who has 30 years of experience and came to Los Angeles from Guatemala after a heartbreak. His tag reads, “current employee, future shareholder.” Each tag gives space for a new story to come to light. The brand has built its reputation around ethical fashion and domestic manufacturing. Every garment is designed, cut, sewn, and dyed in the company’s South-Central LA factory. The company describes itself as sweatshop-free and operates in a safe, ethically managed environment. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝘀: → For customers, the tags create a human point of connection at the moment of purchase, turning an everyday garment into something much more personal. → For workers, their faces and stories travel with the product itself, extending recognition beyond the factory floor and into the life of the customer. → For the brand, transparency is made tangible, embedded directly into the product in a way that’s difficult to replicate. The advantage here is replacing abstraction with specificity. “Ethical manufacturing” is abstract. Rosa and Oscar aren’t. Naming people, sharing their experience, and showing their faces collapses that distance. Great work 👏

Leaders think that global #diversity, #equity, and #inclusion work means imposing the same one-size-fits-all programs onto everyone and calling that progress. This couldn't be more wrong. Global work done right means ensuring the same HIGH STANDARDS for everyone, achieved by uniquely understanding the contexts different audiences operate in. Your workers in Mumbai should feel just as much a sense of fairness at work as your workers in Stockholm, Austin, and Lisbon do, even though their contexts couldn't be more different. Your workers in Perth should feel the same high level of respect at work as your workers in Istanbul, Osaka, and São Paulo do, even though their contexts couldn't be more different. How can any global organization achieve this? The answer is certainly not what most do at present, where "global DEI work" most often takes the form of a single centrally-produced event or program, often recorded in the US or occasionally the UK or EU, that later gets shared with other regions after the fact with subtitles in the corresponding language (if that). As if a US-based speaker talking about US issues could remove the unique barriers to equity and inclusion in a Latin American context, or offer guidance that meshes with East Asian workplace norms. Global organizations that do DEI work right set their goals from the top, then push decision making down into each region to solve their unique challenges in their unique contexts. The barriers to fairness in Mumbai are not the same barriers to fairness in Stockholm, Austin, and Lisbon. The barriers to respect in Perth are not the same barriers to respect in Istanbul, Osaka, and São Paulo. To remove those barriers and achieve high standards of thriving, success, and wellbeing, global companies MUST place the power and autonomy into leaders with expertise and skill creating change in their respective contexts, and embolden them to solve problems — even if their solutions may not appear to make sense at first glance to an outsider. The role of global leaders is not to prescribe solutions, but to articulate shared goals, craft a shared narrative for their importance to the business, and coordinate regional leadership to ensure that even as solutions might diverge, the focus on achieving high standards, and doing so according to the organization's values, does not waver. As it turns out, the most critical talent when it comes to global DEI work is NOT a brilliant global leader who understands a little bit about DEI work in every region, but instead many, many brilliant local leaders who understand everything there is to know about DEI work in their specific context. With the proper resourcing and support, it's these local leaders who will solve problems and reimagine workplaces in ways global executives could never imagine. The odds that your global organization has recognized this are low, and that needs to change.

After listening to over one hundred senior HR leaders in recent workshops, one message came through crystal clear: the difference between aspirational HR agendas and sustainable impact isn't just about knowing what to do, it's about having the courage to actually do it. While we've made tremendous progress identifying the critical human capability agendas of our time (talent acquisition, leadership development, organizational transformation, and HR evolution), I've observed that without personal courage, these remain wishful thinking rather than transformative reality. The HR professionals who truly create stakeholder value are those who overcome fear with confidence, challenge the status quo, and turn their values into daily behaviors. In my latest article, I explore courage not just as a timeless virtue, but as an essential HR competency for today's disruptive workplace. I break down the "why, what, and how" of courage: from understanding it as an emerging agenda, to developing the mindset, to mastering seven specific skills that help navigate the paradoxes every HR leader faces. The seven skills particularly fascinate me because they're about learning when to take informed risks versus practicing restraint, when to challenge versus confirm, and when to be vulnerable versus confident. These aren't contradictions. They're the nuanced judgments that separate good HR professionals from great ones. I'm curious about your experience: What role has courage played in your most significant HR wins? When have you seen the absence of courage limit an organization's human capability potential? And which of the courage paradoxes do you find most challenging to navigate in your current role?

Accountability Nearly every organization I work with at the moment is focused on some version of creating a "high-performance" culture. Alongside this goal is a push for greater speed of decision-making, efficiency, and accountability. However, a common mistake many organizations make is treating accountability as a binary attribute—individuals are either seen as accountable or not. In reality, accountability is more nuanced. Understanding accountability as a spectrum is critical for cultivating a high-performance culture. The Accountability Ladder illustrates this concept by mapping out various levels at which individuals engage with their responsibilities, ranging from unaware or indifferent to becoming proactive and inspiring others. Those familiar with the Leadership Circle Profile will note that accountability transforms as leaders pivot from an external to an internal locus of control. This move from a Reactive to Creative mindset is a critical prerequisite. Here is a summary of each step on the ladder: Unaware: At this level, individuals are not aware of the issues or their responsibilities. They lack the knowledge necessary to understand what needs to be done. Blaming Others: Individuals recognize the issue but choose to blame others rather than taking any responsibility. They see the problem as someone else's fault. Excuses: At this step, individuals acknowledge the problem but offer excuses for why they can't address or resolve it. They often cite external factors or limitations. Wait and Hope: Individuals here are aware of the problem and hope it gets resolved by itself or that someone else will take care of it. There is recognition but no action. Acknowledge Reality: This is a turning point on the ladder. Individuals acknowledge the reality of the situation and their role in it but have not yet begun to take corrective action. Own It: Individuals take ownership of the problem and accept their responsibility for dealing with it. They start to commit to resolving the issue. Find Solutions: At this step, individuals not only take ownership but also actively seek solutions. They explore various options to resolve the problem. Take Action: Individuals implement the solutions they have identified. They take concrete steps to resolve the issue. Make It Happen: Individuals not only take action but also follow through to ensure that the solutions are effective. They monitor progress and make adjustments as necessary. Inspire Others: Leaders inspire and encourage others to take accountability, creating a proactive problem-solving culture. As a team exercise, try writing the steps of the accountability ladder on a whiteboard and ask: What level of accountability do we see across the organization? What level do we exhibit as a team (to each other and our stakeholders)? And finally, where would I place myself?

In the West, trust often begins with capability: “Show me what you can do, and I’ll believe in you.” But in Japan, it starts with character: “Let me understand who you are, then I’ll trust what you do.” At monoya, we’ve felt this difference deeply. When we first started engaging with Japanese partners, we expected our portfolio and success stories to do the talking. They didn’t. Meetings were polite but reserved. Decisions moved slowly. Then we shifted gears—less pitching, more listening. We invested in relationships. We showed up consistently. We respected silence and patience. Over time, trust started to build—not because we talked about our work, but because we shared our values. One moment that stands out: a partner told us, “What mattered wasn’t your proposal—it was how you carried yourself.” That stuck with us. In Japan, trust isn’t built in the boardroom—it’s built in the in-between moments: over dinner, during shared silences, through consistent follow-ups. It’s relational, not transactional. For global teams entering Japan, remember: trust here is earned slowly, but it’s rock-solid once it’s there. Have you experienced this cultural shift in trust-building? I’d love to hear your thoughts. #Trust #JapanBusiness #CulturalInsights #monoya #CrossCulturalLeadership

Companies spend millions on antibias training each year in hopes of creating more-inclusive—and thereby innovative and effective—workforces. Studies show that well-managed diverse groups perform better and are more committed, have higher collective intelligence, and excel at making decisions and solving problems. But research also shows that bias-prevention programs rarely deliver. So what can you, as an individual leader, do to ensure that your team is including and making the most of diverse voices. Although bias itself is devilishly hard to change, it is not as difficult to interrupt. The authors have identified several practices that managers can use to counter bias (and avoid its negative effects) without spending a lot of time or political capital. In hiring, leaders should insist on a diverse pool, precommit to objective criteria, limit referral hiring, and structure interviews around skills-based questions. Day to day, they should ensure that high- and low-value work is assigned evenly and run meetings in a way that guarantees all voices are heard. In evaluating and developing people, they should clarify criteria for positive reviews and promotions, stick to those rules, and separate potential from performance and personality from skill sets

When I first started working with organizations on ethics, I was struck by something Serina Vash, a former federal prosecutor, once said: the people making the worst ethical choices often aren’t “bad” people—they’re ordinarily good people who’ve been put in impossible situations. Too often, companies think ethics is about compliance policies or an annual signature on a Values Statement. But policies alone won’t stop misconduct. Pressure to hit unrealistic goals, conflicting objectives, fear of speaking up, and even small signals from leaders can push well-intentioned employees to compromise their values. Creating an ethical workplace isn’t a once-a-year exercise. It’s a daily practice, shaped by the examples leaders set and the environments they create. Every decision, every interaction, every expectation sends a message. And if you want ethics to be the norm, you have to make sure that message is clear. Read more about how ordinary people make extraordinary ethical mistakes—and what leaders can do to prevent them in my Harvard Business Review article: https://lnkd.in/gcPxVgJ #Leadership #Ethics #OrganizationalCulture #CorporateResponsibility #EthicalLeadership #BusinessEthics #HRLeadership

Stop wasting meetings! Too many meetings leave people unheard, disengaged, or overwhelmed. The best teams know that inclusion isn’t accidental—it’s designed. 🔹 Here are 6 simple but powerful practices to transform your meetings: 💡 Silent Brainstorm Before discussion begins, have participants write down their ideas privately (on sticky notes, a shared document, or an online board). This prevents groupthink, ensures introverted team members have space to contribute, and brings out more original ideas. 💡 Perspective Swap Assign participants a different stakeholder’s viewpoint (e.g., a customer, a frontline employee, or an opposing team). Challenge them to argue from that perspective, helping teams step outside their biases and build empathy-driven solutions. 💡 Pause and Reflect Instead of jumping into responses, introduce intentional pauses in the discussion. Give people 30-60 seconds of silence before answering a question or making a decision. This allows for deeper thinking, more thoughtful contributions, and space for those who need time to process. 💡 Step Up/Step Back Before starting, set an expectation: those who usually talk a lot should "step back," and quieter voices should "step up." You can track participation or invite people directly, helping create a more balanced conversation. 💡 What’s Missing? At the end of the discussion, ask: "Whose perspective have we not considered?" This simple question challenges blind spots, uncovers overlooked insights, and reinforces the importance of diverse viewpoints in decision-making. 💡 Constructive Dissent Voting Instead of just asking for agreement, give participants colored cards or digital indicators to show their stance: 🟢 Green – I fully agree 🟡 Yellow – I have concerns/questions 🔴 Red – I disagree Focus discussion on yellow and red responses, ensuring that dissenting voices are explored rather than silenced. This builds a culture where challenging ideas is seen as valuable, not risky. Which one would you like to try in your next meeting?  Let me know in the comments! 🔔 Follow me to learn more about building inclusive, high-performing teams. __________________________ 🌟 Hi there! I’m Susanna, an accredited Fearless Organization Scan Practitioner with 10+ years of experience in workplace inclusion. I help companies build inclusive cultures where diverse, high-performing teams thrive with psychological safety. Let’s unlock your team’s full potential together!

Flo Health is the world's first femtech unicorn (yay) but it's also founded and funded by men (hmm) It's great that women's health is gaining more recognition, given the vast inequality in funding, research, and focus... BUT It also exposes a huge problem with the startup ecosystem. → Just 2% of global VC funding goes to women (WEF) → Women's presence on pitches is *neutral at best* and becomes negative when women don't embody typically female traits (Harvard) → Investors prefer pitches presented by men - when presented with two identical pitches, 68% funded the startup pitched by a man and 31% funded the exact same startup pitched by a woman (Harvard) → 83% of investment committees have no female members (British Business Bank) Women are discriminated against at all stages of the investment process. → Women are asked more negative questions around risk and worst-case scenarios, whereas men are asked about opportunity and opportunity (Harvard) → Women have to fight against preconceptions, we are judged more frequently, and held to higher standards (Yale) Ultimately, people with the most privilege raise the most money, and I count myself in that bucket as I am a white, privately educated female. → Just 0.5% of funding goes to black founders (WEF) → 79% of VC Seed funding for diverse founders (which is a tiny amount) goes to white women (BBG Ventures) There is SO much inequality in the startup world, and it's talked about but never taken seriously. Instead, female founders are assumed to be running businesses that aren't VC-backable, or that there just aren't enough of us. This is an uncomfortable topic, but the only way we can improve this system is to educate people about the huge inequality that exists in a sector awash with bonkers amounts of capital. Flexa #Startups #Fundraising #Inequality

Some case studies in leadership stay with you long after you’ve read them because beyond showcasing strategy, they reveal character. When the aviation industry came to a standstill after 9/11, most airlines responded with layoffs and cost-cutting. Southwest Airlines chose a different path. They kept every single employee on their payroll. They even provided profit-sharing. At a time when panic could have dictated decisions, they leaned into trust. They treated everyone: from cabin crew to ground staff to stranded passengers as essential to the recovery. That choice wasn’t just an act of kindness. It was leadership in its truest sense. Because leadership is tested not when things are easy, but when storms hit. It’s about reminding people that they matter, that they belong, and that they are trusted to help steer the ship through turbulence. The result? Loyalty deepened. Morale strengthened. And the company emerged more resilient than ever. Southwest’s story is a reminder: leadership is not simply about managing through crisis; it’s about choosing humanity when it would be easier not to.