Describe a specific situation in which leadership might involve keeping silent. Discuss what you think determines whether a leader should speak out or keep silent.

Like any technology, the technology of natural language is both creative and destructive. Speech can heal or harm. A leader must strike a balance between disclosure (ethics) and nondisclosure (aesthetics). 

Cautious discretion is advised when human or organizational dignity are on the line. The burdens of office include expectations on the rightful usage of speech to achieve organizational and personal aims. The power to speak from a position of leadership has its source in liberty, not license.

It is not enough to obey the letter of privacy laws. My university enshrines this lesson in its motto, “Leges sine moribus vanae” (Laws without morals [moral taste] are vain). Compassionate leadership demands the use of speech to shape and synchronize the taste, and thereby the norms and code of conduct, within an organization.

Keeping silent is not an option when conscientious respect for the rights of others or oneself demands disclosure.  When the defense of human dignity runs against the requirements of the organization, an empathic leader must defend beings from non-beings, and treat all beings as equally deserving of dignity. This involves goal- and standard setting and feedback design that measure the value of the organization through the promotion of human dignity, and not the value of human dignity through the promotion of the organization.