“Good” leadership combines efficiency and ethics. In many cases, we know the effectiveness, which is easily measurable, but we don't know the ethics on which it is based, which is a more invisible part. This less visible part is important for making a final assessment of the leaders. We generally do not have access to the “lunar side” of leaders, to their negative parts, known only to a more restricted and intimate circle, or even hidden from everyone. We have broad access to the public side of the leader, supported by the marketing of his image, internal or external to the organization. Unlike the other elements of an organization, the lunar side of leaders is a hidden side, impenetrable in most cases. This fact has several implications for how we view leaders and leadership.

1. Don't give a leader blank checks

First, in most cases it is not possible to truly evaluate a leader until we know his lunar side. There are famous business leaders who managed to acquire their initial competitive advantage (which later gives them continued cumulative advantages) legitimately, others, illegitimately and unethically. The result and public image are the same, but leaders are people of different worth. There are managers and politicians who focus on providing short-term gains that are easier to measure, sometimes consciously creating long-term costs that are difficult to associate with them. There are leaders who are utterly insufferable on a personal level, using the power of their position to get away with it. It is the balance of positive and negative that allows evaluating a leader. But in most cases, the person evaluating is the victim of a huge informational asymmetry. So, beware of appearances and blank checks.

2. For security, prefer leaders guided by internal values

Second, in this context, people guided mainly by external values, such as “acceptance and social image” need to have their lunar side more scrutinized than people guided by internal values, that is, their own conscience. The primary objective of being socially recognized can lead to undesirable concessions on the lunar side, which slip away due to being invisible to others and not having self-control. On the other hand, the goal of being true to oneself leads to greater control of the lunar side by oneself, despite being invisible to others. Recruitment and continued support of leaders should take this dimension into account.

3. Leader detox strategies
and organizations are needed

Third, if we assume that there are no perfect people, or even perfect situations, leadership development should not stop at the positive qualities of a leader, but should also identify and work on his lunar side. Leaders can be seen as those drugs that cure or control a disease, but that bring associated some degree of toxicity. Some drugs are very effective but very toxic, others less effective but less toxic. Still others are effective and without toxicity (rare). It depends on the organization, the moment and the followers the suitability of the type of medicine/leader. Just as medicine evolves to reduce or eliminate drug toxicity, a leader's toxicity should not automatically disqualify him, but be seen as something that has to be worked on, reduced and, if possible, eliminated. If we recognize that the lunar side of leadership is a fundamental part of evaluating leadership, one of the paths to be developed is to reinforce the ability to detoxify leaders and organizations and transform toxicity into opportunity.

4. The information society exposes the lunar side
and change the leadership

Fourth, the information society, characterized by the democratization of access to information, will make it increasingly difficult to hide the lunar side of leadership. This fact implies the growing desacralization of leadership and leaders, who will be seen less and less as the superman leader and more and more as fallible, authentic people, who are not automatically superior for being leaders, but people who are also servants of the group, organization or society and who need the involvement and support of followers to play their role to everyone's advantage.

This more realistic approach imposes a leadership style that is less commanding and more co-opting, and a style of followers that is less childish and more responsible for their actions and choices.

Is the growing recognition of the moon side of leaders and the increasing shedding of light on this hidden side of leadership going to challenge our perception of leaders and make leadership evolve more maturely and with greater responsibility for all – leaders and followers alike?