Yet another politician, this time Republican Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina publicly confessed his extra-marital affair on television. He has been preceded by a long list of public officials caught in the same situation, such as Republican Senator John Ensign of Nevada and former Democratic Senator and presidential candidate John Edwards, former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, former New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey. This list, sadly, is far from exhaustive!Some argue that politicians are particularly vulnerable because of their lifestyle. They meet many people in diverse circumstances and are thus exposed to multiple temptations. Others believe politicians fall because of their ego. They somehow come to think that they can write their own rules. As McGreevey said on NBC: “You begin to think of yourself as the master of your own universe and (you develop) your own set of ethical structures, your own sense of decision-making.”

One can ask whether a politician can be trusted to honor his oath of office if he betrays his marital vow. It is a valid question that has to be answered individually and specifically. Both President Roosevelt and President Kennedy were known philanderers yet few would claim today that there were not excellent presidents.

Adultery is defined as voluntary and consensual sexual relations between a married individual and someone other than his or her spouse. It has always been considered reprehensible throughout history. The 7th Commandment says: “Thou shall not commit adultery.” In some countries today, it is punishable by death. The common expression of “not casting the first stone” comes from a story in the Gospel when a woman is found in adultery and is about to be stoned. Her accusers, representing the legal authority of the time, asked Jesus whether she should be stoned according to the Law. He replied “Let him who has not sinned cast the first stone.”He then wrote something in the sand. We are not told what was written but somehow, all the accusers, discretely disappeared.

According to most studies on the topic, more than 90% of Americans consider it morally wrong. Yet, according to the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago, more than 25% of men and 17% women commit at least one extramarital affair in their lifetime. This should not surprise us. Most of the time, when we are doing something wrong, we know it is wrong, yet we do it anyway.

Why then is infidelity such a major problem?

I believe it is because it is a violation of trust, a betrayal, the breaking of a promise. Trust is at the basis of any human relationship. We should all be very careful never to betray the trust people have in us.

As Isaac Bashevis Singer once said:

“When you betray somebody else, you also betray yourself.”

Students at Harvard Business School decided this year to pledge to an oath of good ethical business conduct. The MBA Oath was voluntary and student-led. More than half of the 800 students who graduated this year took the oath. The students made the promise to “serve the greater good,” “act with utmost integrity” and shun from “decisions and behavior that advances my own narrow ambitions, but harm the enterprise and the society it serves.”The recent corporate scandals surely must have influenced the proponents of the Oath. Many CEOs of the major financial scandals in recent history graduated from top universities. Furthermore, in recent years, most of Harvard’s MBA students were hired to work on Wall Street.

The concept of oaths is not new. In the Jewish tradition we find that God Himself swears that He will “never again curse the ground because of man.” (Gen: 8:21) In the Greco-Roman tradition, the Athenian statesman and orator Lycurgus in 324 B.C.E said: “It is the oath which holds democracy together.”

Taking an oath is positive because it indicates a determination “to do the right thing” but unless it is adhered to, has no real meaning.

An oath can also have a negative purpose. The SS did take an oath to Adolf Hitler and abided by it, but to do evil.

Today public servants, attorneys and physicians take a public oath. To become a U.S. citizen by naturalization, one has to take an oath of allegiance to the United States. In marriage, couples make a vow of fidelity to each other and that is the cornerstone of their relationship.

Why do oaths play such an important role in society and why are public promises necessary?

We could assume that if one decides to become a physician, it would be to best serve the patients? The same assumption can be made in the legal profession. Someone who decides to become an attorney would want to serve the best interest of his clients at all times.

However we know by experience that such assumptions are not realistic. Dr. Hebert J. Schlesinger, in his book Promises, Oaths and Vow: On the Psychology of Promising believes that “promising can be viewed as additional reinforcement to overcome a wish to undermine the promise.” We are somehow aware when we make a promise that we will be tempted at one time or another in the future to forget our idealism and high principles and fall into the attraction of personal benefit. A public promise can help us stay on the “narrow path.” It helps us remember our commitment, sets standards and makes us accountable to ourselves and to others.

Making and keeping promises is considered one of the highest moral achievements.

As Hannah Arendt once said:
“Every organization of men, be it social or political, ultimately relies on man’s capacity for making promises and keeping them.”

The crash of Air France Flight # 447 was a tragedy. It is impossible to imagine the horror of the last moments of the 228 passengers and the devastating trauma and loss for the families and loved ones of the victims as well as for all the staff at Air France. The investigation to determine what caused the crash is still not completed. I suspect that, as in most catastrophes, some human errors, at one level or another, played a determining role in the disaster. Seventy per cent of planes crashes are due to human error.

Hundreds if not thousands of people were involved in making the flight possible. Manufacturers of the equipment, software developers, Air Traffic controllers and many others each had a role, however minute in the organization of the flight. In the analyses of catastrophes we very often discover that there are multiple players in the chain of events that ultimately led to the disaster and that any one of the players could have avoided the disaster by his or her intervention or action.

The same is true in the corporate world, which has had its share of disasters lately. What may appear to us as a minor mistake can, in a succession of related events, have dire consequences.

We may think of ourselves as minor players in a big game and that our mistakes or errors are insignificant and will not have any major impact. This is not a wise way to think. We do not and can not always see the connection between our actions and the overall success or failure of an enterprise.

As Jim Rohn, author and public speaker once said:

“Failure is not a single, cataclysmic event. You don’t fail overnight. Instead, failure is a few errors in judgment, repeated every day.”

Yet errors are inevitable and are part of life. We even learn from them by “trial and error.”

How can we reduce the numbers of errors we commit?

1. We should first of all admit our errors without giving ourselves excuses.

2. We should then try to understand how and why we made them. There is a difference between an explanation and an excuse. By analyzing our errors thoroughly we will have a better chance to learn from them and not to repeat them.

3. We should also learn as much as we can from other people’s mistakes.

The nomination last week of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court dominated the news. She seemed to be an extraordinary person that would well serve the highest court in the country. Her past life is now under intense scrutiny. Every decision, ruling, opinion she has expressed in the past will be analyzed, debated and judged by both her supporters and detractors. Her private life, I am sure will also be investigated.Could we personally sustain such a scrutiny?

We say that we should not do something we do not want to be on the front page of tomorrow’s paper or posted on YouTube.

But what about the past?

We have all done things that we are not proud of and would rather not see them made public. How do we deal with them?

We sometimes try to forget them but that obviously does not work if we are thinking about them as I write this blog and as you are reading it!

We should first make a fundamental distinction between the misdeeds that caused damaged or hurt to others and those that did not.

In situations where our actions cause damage to ourselves only (and they are rare), the best thing we can do is make a commitment not to repeat them. It is surely the best way to learn from our mistakes. We might even consider sharing those mistakes with others, people we trust. The psychological impact of having “told someone” can be very positive and liberating.

In situations where our misdeeds caused damage to others, the best option is to apologize and offer reparation if possible. I will never forget when David Finn, the Co-founder and Chairman of the company, apologized to me for having raised his voice and expressed slight anger in a moment of hectic preparations for Ruder Finn’s 50th anniversary. My respect and admiration for him and the company took an immense leap. It takes leadership and great self-confidence for someone in high position to apologize to someone in a lesser position.

We should aim at living our lives so that we can sustain any scrutiny and be “above suspicion” because Mark Twain was right when he said:

“When one’s character begins to fall under suspicion and disfavor, how swift, then, is the work of disintegration and destruction”