The Buck Stops Here

By Rosalind Wright CB QC

Rosalind Wright is Chairman of the Fraud Advisory Panel; former Director of the Serious Fraud Office; and a Vice Chair of JABE.

According to Rudy Giuliani, the former Mayor of New York, the two words that summarise his leadership philosophy is "I'm responsible." I realised the indisputable truth of Giuliani's maxim when I assumed responsibility for leading several organisations in the private and public sectors. They ranged from the group of five pan-European "national experts" whom I chaired in the Supervisory Committee of the European Anti-Fraud Office ("OLAF"), to the multi-disciplinary Government Department investigating and prosecuting cases of the most serious and complex financial crime - the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).

Leadership involves setting the "tone from the top", in every aspect of the work and life of the organisation you lead. The business is judged by the imprint you put on it, whether it is risk averse, or run on a wing and a prayer; whether morale is high or dispirited; whether the outfit is seen as decent and honest, or one that cuts corners and rides roughshod over the opposition. More than anything else, a business is judged on success, none more so than the SFO, which has had a chequered career over its 22 years. But what really counts as a successful business? Obviously, the bottom line, or, in my case, the number of convictions we achieved, is important. But the common factor is the ethical dimension.

Decision-making is often a matter of compromises. At the SFO, I had to bear in mind professional considerations such as the sufficiency and availability of evidence and the strength of the defence case. But the overriding consideration I always had at the forefront of my mind when deciding whether or not to go ahead with a case was "Is this the right thing to do?" In other words, was it in the public interest to proceed, or, conversely, to drop a case? Various factors contribute to deciding what is in the public interest: the seriousness of the allegations; the amount alleged to have been defrauded; the impact on the losers or on the public purse; and the age and health of the defendant. This is essentially an ethical decision-making process, looking at how the decision I had to make affected others - the public at large, the defendant himself, and potential defendants who might be deterred by a successful prosecution and conviction in this case.

The people I led looked to me to guide them, motivate them and get the most out of them. Ethical leadership implies having regard, at all time, for the consequences of one's actions. It can mean doing all you can to rehabilitate a staff member who has made an isolated mistake, as much as acting with determination and letting go another whose actions have severely compromised the integrity or success of the organisation.

Reverting to Rudy Giuliani, it is said of him that "he was quick to sack people who warranted it, but he would never let the press decide his team makeup." While he was often criticised as being slow to sack staff at the first whiff of scandal, Giuliani believed that his backing provided his team with the confidence to walk boldly when others might be tempted to tread on eggshells. He tended to think more of his staff than he did of the opinions of outsiders, and generally his staff reciprocated."

That is ethical leadership.