The Unraveling Thread
Reclaiming True North in Leadership, Society, and Our Lives
A shadow lengthens over our institutions and, indeed, the very fabric of our society. It’s not the passive darkness of nightfall, but a looming consequence of fractured systems, eroded ethics, and a troubling drift away from the moral and philosophical principles that once anchored our civilization. The shadow signals not just dysfunction, but danger—a crisis of identity, direction, and trust.
Recent empirical research underscores that declining institutional trust and moral decay are not random phenomena but rather symptoms of long-term systemic failures (Putnam, 2000; Fukuyama, 2014). Surveys by organizations such as Transparency International also reveal that corruption and ethical slippage in both public and private sectors corrode social capital, directly impacting the collective well-being of society (Inglehart & Norris, 2016).
As Andrew Witty, CEO of UnitedHealth Group, solemnly remarked after the devastating murder of executive Brian Thompson and ensuing threats to his colleagues, “We know the health system does not work as well as it should.” This statement, though made in a moment of corporate reckoning, echoes far beyond one industry. It speaks to a societal illness, one in which systems designed to heal and protect instead reflect the symptoms of deeper wounds—disillusionment, disconnection, and despair.
Witty’s acknowledgment mirrors findings in business ethics research; even technologically advanced and resource-rich sectors can experience critical ethical lapses when leadership loses its moral moorings (Treviño & Nelson, 2016; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002).
This breakdown is not isolated. Rather, it mirrors a wider cultural disintegration, one that normalizes dysfunction and celebrates transgression. Consider the disturbing cultural trend elevating the criminal to the status of hero—an inversion of values that, as one document urgently states, “threatens to unravel the very foundations of our values.”
Political analysts and sociologists have long warned that when societal narratives shift to glorify transgression over integrity, the implications reach far beyond isolated incidents, seeping into the collective moral fabric and undermining the standards upon which communities are built (Smith & Johnson, 2021).
When a figure convicted of 34 felony charges—such as former President Donald Trump—is not only tolerated but heralded as a potential “Person of the Year,” we must ask with grave seriousness: What message are we sending—not just to voters, but to our children, to the world, to history? This is not about partisanship; it is a moral litmus test for society itself. It suggests we may be dangerously close to accepting charisma over character, spectacle over substance, and ambition over accountability. When truth is negotiable and virtue is expendable, we do more than erode institutions—we undermine the soul of our civilization.
Studies on the politicization of controversy have observed that the elevation of polarizing figures can recalibrate public discourse in ways that diminish accountability and promote an ethos where image eclipses substance (Ike, D., 2024).
The Leader’s Moral Compass: True North or Magnetic Distraction?
At the fulcrum of every flourishing society lies a timeless force: leadership. But leadership, when stripped of principle, becomes perilous. It is not enough to lead; one must ask, by what compass?
The metaphor of “True North” is not merely poetic—it is profoundly practical. True North symbolizes an unwavering commitment to ethical integrity, resilience, and purpose. It stands in stark contrast to “Magnetic North,” which, like the pull of opportunism and expediency, shifts in response to external forces—political pressure, social media trends, or short-term gain.
Research in ethical leadership confirms that leaders anchored in steadfast moral values are better equipped to anticipate crises and foster trust, both within and beyond their organizations (Brown & Treviño, 2006; Schaubroeck et al., 2012). Leaders who operate from a core of principled values make decisions that are less reactive to fleeting trends and more aligned with long-term societal benefit (Goleman et al., 2002).
A leader guided by True North—embodied in thinkers like Nelson Mandela or modern voices like Bill George—does not simply respond to crises; they anticipate them, prepare for them, and rise above them with dignity and resolve. They make decisions grounded in transparency, trust, and timeless values. They don’t ask what is popular—they ask what is right.
In contrast, the leader governed by Magnetic North is a chameleon: ever-adapting, ever-surviving, yet never truly grounded. Such leadership breeds ethical drift, institutional fragility, and, eventually, a loss of public trust that no PR campaign can restore. In a world oversaturated with noise, misinformation, and cynicism, True North is not a luxury—it is a survival mechanism for society itself.
Simon Sinek’s rallying cry to “Start with Why,” Brené Brown’s call for vulnerable and authentic leadership, and Peter Drucker’s belief in results grounded in principle all converge here: real leadership is not about being followed, but about being trusted. Recent studies have empirically linked consistent ethical leadership with improved organizational performance and sustained employee trust (Schaubroeck et al., 2012).
The Organizational Crucible: Navigating Individuality and Conformity
The crisis of leadership inevitably reverberates into the culture of organizations, which are increasingly asked to walk a tightrope between two competing ideals: conformity and individuality. This is not a new dilemma, but in today’s hyper-diverse, hyper-visible, and hyper-polarized environments, the stakes are exponentially higher.
The “Paradox of Individuality” illustrates the delicate dance between shared purpose and personal expression. Cultures that crush individuality in favor of rigid conformity do not produce unity—they produce compliance, stagnation, and fear. This is the breeding ground of groupthink, ethical oversight, and catastrophic failure—Enron, Theranos, and Boeing serve as stark reminders.
Classic studies on group dynamics have shown that safety to dissent and a balance between collaboration and independent thinking are essential for innovation and sound decision-making (Edmondson, 1999; Janis, 1982). The collapses of Enron (Healy & Palepu, 2003) and Theranos (Carreyrou, 2018), as well as the recent challenges at Boeing (Gelles, 2019), exemplify how dysfunction in balancing individuality with collective oversight can have disastrous outcomes.
On the flip side, cultures that enforce individualism to the point of isolation create fragmented ecosystems where collaboration falters, teams fracture, and accountability disappears. Here, innovation might spark, but it rarely sustains. Decisions become paralyzed by competing egos, and quieter but crucial voices are often drowned out.
The path forward is a delicate synthesis—a culture that celebrates individual uniqueness while anchoring everyone to a shared vision. Research underscores this: psychological safety, values-driven communication, transparent decision-making, and respect for dissent are not “soft skills”; they are organizational imperatives (Edmondson, 1999). When Oprah Winfrey speaks of building a life of intention and connection, she invites us to understand leadership not as dominance but as service grounded in empathy and authenticity.
The Tangled Web: When Flaws Cascade and Trust Erodes
A single leadership flaw—unchecked—rarely remains isolated. Rather, it ripples outward, becoming part of a “Tangled Web” of dysfunction that permeates the culture. Micromanagement, narcissism, miscommunication, or a lack of integrity are not just bad habits—they are contagious forces that shape behaviors, attitudes, and outcomes across entire ecosystems.
Scholars have demonstrated that even small ethical lapses can cascade into a full-scale erosion of trust, catalyzing systemic organizational failures (Simons, 2000). In contemporary analyses, toxic leadership styles—ranging from micromanagement to narcissistic or overly self-serving behavior—have been linked to widespread declines in employee morale and institutional stability (Skibińska, E., & Karaszewski, R., 2024).
And followers are never neutral. They either enable toxic patterns through silence, participate in ethical erosion, or rise as whistleblowers, dissenters, and reformers. Each role matters, and each response has consequences.
A poignant and disturbing example is the rise of unjust dismissals, cynically referred to as being “Doge-ed”—a modern form of Employment at Will 2.0 where employees are discarded without process or justice. It’s a symptom of deeper dysfunction: fear-based leadership, bureaucratic detachment, and the death of institutional loyalty. When systems discard individuals like expendable parts, we risk not only human damage but an irreversible loss of collective wisdom, morale, and public trust.
Seeking Resolution: Beyond Retribution to Redemption
In the face of such failings, our instinct may be to punish—to seek retribution. And sometimes, justice demands it. But justice divorced from compassion can devolve into vengeance masquerading as virtue. The deeper question becomes: What kind of world are we trying to build?
Restitution, as articulated by Howard Zehr and other restorative justice pioneers, offers a more healing approach—acknowledging harm, restoring dignity, and making tangible amends (Zehr, 2002). Yet perhaps the most radical and redemptive path is that of forgiveness and transformation.
Viktor Frankl, forged in the fires of unimaginable suffering, spoke of meaning as the antidote to despair (Frankl, 2006). Nelson Mandela, in choosing reconciliation over retaliation, changed the fate of a nation (Mandela, 1994). Desmond Tutu and Bryan Stevenson have both modeled a form of justice that integrates accountability with humanity, emphasizing that redemption is not about forgetting, but about growing (Tutu, 2011; Stevenson, 2014).
The ideal leader, then, is not one who merely punishes wrongdoing, but one who facilitates a process where truth, justice, and mercy can coexist.
Cultivating the Foundations: Protection, Skills, and Shared Responsibility
To truly reclaim True North in our institutions and social systems, we must address not only the visible dysfunctions but also the foundational deficiencies that allow these issues to persist and metastasize. A healthy, ethical society doesn’t merely depend on charismatic or well-intentioned leaders—it requires structures that protect, empower, and sustain ethical behavior at every level.
1. Protection: Safeguarding the Vulnerable and the Virtuous
In an era marked by the erosion of job security and the normalization of arbitrary dismissals, the need for worker protections has never been more urgent. “Employment at will,” while designed to provide flexibility, often functions as a tool for silencing dissent and undermining trust. We must consider modern solutions that align with the dignity and complexity of today’s workforce.
Proposals such as “employee insurance” for wrongful dismissal, robust whistleblower protections, and transparent grievance processes are not luxuries—they are necessities. Research in organizational justice has shown that secure, equitable working conditions yield higher employee trust and organizational resilience (Colquitt et al., 2001; Budd & Birnbaum, 1999). Protected classes, already at a disproportionate risk of unjust termination, deserve legal mechanisms that prevent retribution and promote equity.
But protection must extend beyond the legal. It must live in organizational culture—in the rituals, values, and everyday decisions that signal whether people matter or are merely expendable assets. Cultures that genuinely protect their people are cultures that retain loyalty, encourage innovation, and foster resilience.
2. Skills: Equipping for Ethical Agency and Resilient Growth
Protection is only one piece. A truly flourishing society and organization must also invest in skills—both technical and humanistic—that empower individuals to navigate complexity with confidence and integrity.
This means rethinking leadership development. Too often, leadership training centers on productivity, operational metrics, and conflict management in the narrowest sense. Instead, we must foreground emotional intelligence, moral reasoning, empathy, and systems thinking. Such competencies are fundamental to crafting leaders who are resilient and adaptive in volatile environments (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002).
We also must expand access to these skills across all levels of an organization, not just the C-suite. Middle managers, front-line workers, and support staff often serve as the moral pulse of an institution. Equipping them with the tools to communicate clearly, intervene ethically, and advocate constructively is foundational to institutional health.
Moreover, embracing lifelong learning as a civic value can democratize access to education in ethics, civics, environmental responsibility, and historical literacy, ensuring that informed citizenship becomes the norm rather than the exception.
3. Shared Responsibility: From Spectators to Stakeholders
Perhaps most importantly, we must replace the illusion of separateness with a culture of shared responsibility. The Polish proverb, “Not my monkey, not my circus,” is a tempting refrain in a fragmented world. But it is a dangerous one. We are all in the same circus. Global challenges—from the climate crisis to economic inequality and political polarization—demand that we collectively shoulder responsibility. Detachment is not neutrality—it is complicity.
Scholars have argued that cultivating a culture of shared accountability and multidisciplinary collaboration is key to overcoming today’s structural challenges (Senge, 2006; Porter & Kramer, 2011). Schools, religious communities, local governments, and nonprofits must break out of their silos to become interconnected ethical ecosystems that reinforce compassionate norms and truth.
Finally, we must redefine what success means. Beyond GDP or quarterly profit, there is a growing consensus among researchers and policymakers that metrics such as trust in institutions, civic participation, mental health, environmental stewardship, and substantive justice are far more indicative of true societal progress (Porter & Kramer, 2011).
The Path Forward: A Call to Courage, Humility, and Collective Action
The unraveling thread of our current moment can still be rewoven into a stronger fabric—but it requires a new social covenant, one that binds us not through fear or utility, but through shared purpose and moral clarity.
Leaders must undergo a transformation of character, not just competency. This means rejecting performative allyship and embracing deep accountability. It means acknowledging past failings not with defensive justification, but with courageous introspection. It means modeling what moral courage looks like—not in grand speeches, but in everyday decisions.
Contemporary research on transformational leadership demonstrates that leaders who act with humility and moral courage inspire greater engagement and drive systemic innovation (Bass & Riggio, 2006). When leaders prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term disruption, they set a course for organizations—and by extension, society—that is built on ethical sustainability, human dignity, and ecological responsibility.
Organizations must stop fetishizing disruption and start investing in sustainability. This means turning away from exploitative labor practices, extractive economic models, and superficial diversity initiatives. Instead, it calls for transparent equity metrics, distributed leadership models, and a genuine investment in the full humanity of all stakeholders.
And each of us, regardless of title, background, or ideology, must choose to live as stewards of the future—not merely as beneficiaries of the present. We must ask ourselves: What am I willing to sacrifice for a more just, resilient, and compassionate world? Where do I see moral compromise, and what am I doing about it? How can I use my voice, my work, my vote, and my values to restore integrity where it has been lost?
Reclaiming Heroism: Everyday Ethics in an Age of Spectacle
In a world that often glorifies the dramatic, the viral, and the violent, it is easy to forget that true heroism often looks quiet, humble, and steady.
It is the healthcare worker who stays after their shift to comfort a grieving family.
It is the teacher who refuses to give up on a struggling student.
It is the manager who admits their mistake and takes responsibility.
It is the employee who risks their job to speak truth to power.
It is the citizen who listens deeply across lines of difference and dares to build bridges, not walls.
This is the heroism we need. It is not built on spectacle, but on substance. It is not fueled by ego, but by empathy. It is not about individual glory, but about collective healing.
Social research has confirmed that everyday acts of integrity—from the small gestures to courageous decisions—form the backbone of resilient communities (Putnam, 2000; Batt & Valcour, 2003). By shifting the narrative from sensationalism to substance, societies can nurture a culture that prizes ethical behavior over showmanship.
Conclusion: Stitching the Thread Back Together
The unraveling we face—of leadership, of trust, of shared values—is profound. But it is not irreversible. With vision, courage, and community, the torn thread of our shared social fabric can be stitched into something stronger than before. Not by pretending the damage didn’t happen, but by confronting it with honesty, hope, and commitment.
A host of interdisciplinary studies has shown that restoring trust in our institutions requires coordinated policy interventions, leadership reform, and an engaged citizenry (Fukuyama, 2014). By redefining success to include metrics of ethical behavior, wellbeing, and shared responsibility rather than only economic indexes, we can choose the harder path—the path of principle over popularity, responsibility over reaction, and purpose over pride.
This is our shared work. And it is urgent. Let us begin again with True North as our guide—a call to rebuild, reconnect, and reaffirm the values that have long sustained us.
References
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.
• https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617095
• https://www.amazon.com/Transformational-Leadership-Bernard-M-Bass/dp/0805847626
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.
• https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-22770-006
• https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004
Budd, J. W., & Birnbaum, M. L. (1999). Employment‐at‐will: Then and now. Minnesota Law Review, 83, 1005–1062.
• https://jbudd.csom.umn.edu/RESEARCH/buddbhave.pdf
Carreyrou, J. (2018). Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup. Knopf.
• https://books.google.com/books/about/Bad_Blood.html?id=CcJFDwAAQBAJ
• https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Blood-Secrets-Silicon-Startup/dp/152473165X
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445.
• https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
• https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
• https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1999-03028-001
Fukuyama, F. (2014). Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• https://www.amazon.com/Political-Order-Decay-Industrial-Globalisation/dp/1846684374
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence. Harvard Business School Press.
• https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-00650-000
• https://www.amazon.com/Primal-Leadership-Realizing-Emotional-Intelligence/dp/1559277440
Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2003). The Fall of Enron. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(2), 3–26.
• Verified via DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/089533003765888403
Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2016). Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash. Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Research Working Paper Series.
• https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/trump-brexit-and-rise-populism-economic-have-nots-and-cultural-backlash
• https://ssrn.com/abstract=2818659
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin.
• https://archive.org/details/groupthinkpsycho00jani/
Skibińska, E., & Karaszewski, R. (2024). The Devastating Impact of Toxic Leadership on Health-Care Organizations. Journal of Health Policy & Outcomes Research, 2024(1), 67 – 77.
• https://www.jhpor.com/article/2381-the-devastating-impact-of-toxic-leadership-on-health-care-organizations
Mandela, N. (1994). Long Walk to Freedom: The Autobiography of Nelson Mandela. Little, Brown and Company.
• Verified via Google Books: https://books.google.com/books/about/Long_Walk_to_Freedom.html?id=RHwLqVrnXgIC
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77.
• https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=39071
• https://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-value
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster.
• https://books.google.com/books/about/Bowling_Alone.html?id=rd2ibodep7UC
Schaubroeck, J. M., Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Lord, R. G., Treviño, L. K., Peng, A. C. (2012). Embedding Ethical Leadership within and across Organization Levels. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1053–1078.
• https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0064
Senge, P. M. (2006). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. Broadway Business.
• https://www.amazon.com/Fifth-Discipline-Practice-Learning-Organization/dp/0385517254
Stevenson, B. (2014). Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. Spiegel & Grau.
• https://www.amazon.com/Just-Mercy-Story-Justice-Redemption/dp/081298496X
Tutu, D. (2011). No Future Without Forgiveness. Doubleday.
• https://books.google.com/books/about/No_Future_Without_Forgiveness.html?id=nMHYAAAAMAAJ
Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2016). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk About How to Do It Right. John Wiley & Sons.
• https://www.amazon.com/Managing-Business-Ethics-Straight-talk-about/dp/1119711002
Zehr, H. (2002). The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Good Books.
• https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Little_Book_of_Restorative_Justice.html?id=zF2CDwAAQBAJ
Batt, R., & Valcour, P. M. (2003). Human Resources Practices as Predictors of Work-Family Outcomes and Employee Turnover. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy & Society, 42(2), 189–220.
• https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-232X.00287
Ike, D. (2024). Populism and its Impact on Democratic Institutions. International Journal of Political Science Studies, 1(1), 36–45.
• https://forthworthjournals.org/journals/index.php/IJPSS/article/view/19
Thank you very much for your kind words. I agree with you concern, but one thing that I know for sure is that if we do not try, then we shall surely fail.
Very well written. I’m just not so sure we can ‘wake up’ a critical mass of our citizenry in time.