When role models fail

The steady erosion of role models could have wider social consequences

The past few months, we seem to have been inundated by events that suggest a complete moral breakdown. From politicians to sportspersons, businesspersons to film personalities, public servants to lawyers, there hasn't been a day when the headlines have not put the spotlight on one or the other outrage alleged to have been perpetrated by one or more representatives of these and more groups. Public scepticism has apparently reached a point where even mere allegations are taken as proof of guilt. It is all very well to wring our hands and bemoan the horrendous levels to which the conduct of public figures has fallen. But one has to ask whether these patterns have wider and enduring social consequences beyond mass outrage. I believe they do.

A simple view of social norms and behavioural patterns would suggest that they depend significantly on ideal types, or role models, and imitation. Values are abstractions, but societies need them to function. It is difficult to mass communicate abstract concepts, so some form of embodiment or personification is required. Every society has its mythology, which is, in fact, the most enduring form of dissemination of role models and the norms and behaviour patterns associated with them. The message is that if one wants to be a "good" member of society, then one should assimilate the values upheld by the mythological role models and try and behave as they do. This may be a distant target, unreachable to the average person, but it is something that everybody is encouraged to strive for.

Of course, times and circumstances change, which inevitably means changes in values or norms and socially responsible behaviour patterns. Social stability, then, is the outcome of a society's ability to balance the continuity inherent in "traditional" values, essentially those propagated by the mythology, with the new or "modern" values and behaviours that emerge from changing circumstances. Obviously, societies experiencing rapid change, as a result of accelerating economic growth for example, could find it very challenging to maintain that balance. What is the average person to do in such a situation? Where does one go for guidance about how to find the right balance? What should one retain of the traditional values and assimilate of the modern ones?

Role models play a critical role in this process. Every situation gives rise to a variety of people whose accomplishments make them public figures and whose words and actions provide a blueprint for those of us looking to maintain the balance between different, and often conflicting, sets of values. Unlike their mythological counterparts, who endure as role models because their circumstances are bounded by their stories, real-world role models change with the times. Different circumstances call for different combinations of tradition and modernity. However, from the viewpoint of social stability or non-disruptive change, there has to be a common thread running through the pattern of change. All role models must be widely perceived to align values consistent with social stability with their behaviour and actions.

What are the potential consequences of values and behaviour becoming misaligned? As the cliche goes, actions speak louder than words. Values are abstract; behaviour is visible and tangible. The actions of role models, in a sense, "reveal" their values and beliefs more than anything they say ever can. The fact that they act and behave in certain ways legitimises these actions and behaviours and virtually guarantees that it becomes the norm for the average person.

In effect, the misalignment between professed values and observed behaviour completely undermines the power of moral authority. If, for example, the highest levels of political and bureaucratic leadership are seen to be acting in certain ways, it is virtually certain that such behaviour will be imitated by the lower levels. It may provoke some ethical conflicts within individuals, but "they're doing it and getting away with it, so why not me" is a powerful counter-argument.

A lot of attention has been focused on the economic incentives for corruption among public servants. The need to mobilise resources for funding elections is, of course, a significant driver. The policy implication of this is simple: provide state funding and audit party finances. However, the moral authority argument goes beyond economic incentives and disincentives. It essentially suggests that as long as the highest levels of the system - the role models - are seen to be acting and behaving in certain ways, there is very little prospect that the rest of the system will behave any differently or, for that matter, can be persuaded to do so by arguments based on abstract values.

The same issue arises in other domains as well. If the top management of a company is perceived to run its business in a certain way, no amount of recourse to notions like ethics or governance is going to come in the way of lower tiers imitating their bosses, particularly if such behaviour translates into better financial performance. For that matter, if team managements are seen to be engaging in betting or fixing, why should it come as a surprise when players do the same?

All the groups I mentioned in the opening paragraph are role models, not just in the form of individual members but in a larger sense as professions of high stature. One could argue that the actions of a few members of these groups do not tarnish their reputations and role model status; that the many members of these groups who continue to align their values with their actions help preserve their effectiveness as role models. Perhaps. But then if prominent and successful members of a professional group are perceived to acting in certain ways, imitative behaviour is likely to spread this across the group. Role models could just as easily turn negative, first within the group and then spreading beyond it.

The bottom line is that while resignations, legal actions and severe penalties are all appropriate, they may not be enough to counter the spread of behaviour by imitation and, more importantly, the values associated with that behaviour. As with any complex issue, 360-degree solutions are required. But we must first agree on the proposition that the steady erosion of positive role models does threaten social stability.

The writer is director of research, Brookings India, and former deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of India.

These views are personal