In recent times, it has become fashionable to adapt so-called “stoic” strategies to cope with personal and collective challenges. The underlying principle is that we should let go of things we cannot control. Whether it’s ignoring them, shaking them off, or even accepting them, the idea is to prevent external factors from affecting us. However, according to Ole Fogh Kirkeby, a professor emeritus at CBS and teacher at the Master of Public Governance (MPG), this approach is not only misguided but also potentially harmful.
Issues such as layoffs, increased work pace, and heightened conflict levels persist even when we dismiss them. Just as poor market conditions, heightened political scrutiny, and reduced work hours continue to impact us.
“But,” Kirkeby emphasises, “such attitudes have little to do with true stoicism. What’s worse is that in organisations where employees don’t collectively resist, stress management often resorts to individualising problems. Each person is held responsible for collective calamities. Unfortunately, this approach leads to nothing but resignation. And that, in turn, takes a toll on our well-being.”
Together with Ole S. Rasmussen, the occupational health and safety manager at Nuuday, Kirkeby has co-authored the book "Velvilje. Ledelse og filosofi mod stress” (“Goodwill: Leadership and Philosophy for Stress Management”, available in Danish). Their goal is to present an alternative to conventional stress management methods. This alternative lies in philosophy.
“Ultimately,” Kirkeby asserts, “stress is about self-awareness. It’s a classic philosophical question: Who am I? Philosophy provides insights that prevent external circumstances from taking control. It’s about analysing our self-perception, understanding our own culpability. It’s not about automatically blaming others but rather examining the reasons why we feel like we’re losing our grip. These reasons manifest in interactions with others, arising from what is said untruthfully and what is kept silent – and I am also among those who speak and remain silent," he explains.
We must not individualise stress
According to Ole Fogh Kirkeby, philosophy surpasses psychology in this regard. He emphasizes that while the intentions have been good, as a society, we have not managed to alleviate the problem of stress despite nearly five decades of research and effort; in fact, the issue has been exacerbated. Therefore, it is crucial to view stress and stress management as a philosophical discipline. The consequences will be evident if we fail to do so,” he asserts.
“Along the way, there is a risk of excessively individualising stress, which is the worst approach. It is the collective responsibility of organisations and leadership,” says Ole Fogh Kirkeby, elaborating further:
“A leader who takes responsibility for what happens within their organisation or department promptly fosters a sense of community. This shared purpose always centers around the other person. Combatting stress involves developing a practice that prioritises the well-being of clients, colleagues, employees, and the community. We have a succinct term for this: ethics.”
"Velvilje" (Goodwill) from the book’s title is a translation of what ethics signifies:
“Ethics falls under philosophy, and its fundamental rule is the commandment to love one’s neighbour as oneself. When ethics is realised as an attitude that governs an individual’s and an organisation’s atmosphere, it can be called goodwill—a concept developed and thoroughly analysed by Stoics like Seneca. Where we meet in shared goodwill, stress does not enter. The benevolent leader is a gift to the community. Stress, in the realm of its derivative effects, is related to the work environment. However, stress is fundamentally about human relationships and the way we are allowed to be ourselves. But we can only be ourselves in the company of others and those who support us,” says Ole Fogh Kirkeby.
Furthermore, he believes that leading upward is crucial—for oneself, employees, and colleagues.
“To combat stress, one must articulate their concerns, uncertainties, or criticisms using value-based language. Instead of pointing upward in the system and saying, ‘You’re doing something wrong,’ it should be framed as, ‘What you’re doing is inconsistent with the organisation’s values.’ It’s all about power, and if power is not legitimised, it becomes either arbitrary or imposed. To legitimise power, it must align with values. There is no other way.”
If you want to strengthen your ability to lead based on ethical and value-oriented principles, consider learning more about the MPG course "Personligt lederskab og transformative dialoger". Ole Fogh Kirkeby is among the teachers.
