Opinion: Elected Leaders Judged by Their Charitable Giving

Typical leadership qualities include intelligence, charisma, and experience, but an opinion article by a Syracuse University professor makes the case for charitable largess as a key component for being elected to public office, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Arthur C. Brooks cites a 2006 study conducted by British researchers that found that participants who willingly shared money they were given with a larger group were far more likely to be chosen as leaders. Those who did not share their wealth were mostly passed over for jobs and considered selfish.

Writes Mr. Brooks: “Isn’t it somehow less than altruistic to give publicly, especially when our giving benefits us by winning the approbation of others? Perhaps. But it is worth keeping in mind that giving openly also provokes mimicry by others, and thus a public gift can multiply itself. In this way, giving abundantly and openly — giving like a leader — benefits everyone.”

Read The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s profile of Mr. Brooks and his recent book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.

(A paid subscription is required to view the Journal article, and a paid subscription or short-term pass is required to view the Chronicle article.)