Politicians seeking higher office this year will need two things to be effective leaders: moral principles and common sense notions of right and wrong. The theory comes from scholars who research the guiding principles of leadership. Americans, sickened by failures of leadership like those exposed by the recent corporate fraud and Catholic Church sex abuse scandals, could hardly disagree.

“Leadership without morality is empty and meaningless,” says professional management consultant John Di Frances. If voters want “real, honorable, humble leadership, then we have to value and promote people who exhibit those characteristics.”

According to Di Frances, author of Reclaiming the Ethical High Ground: Developing Organizations of Character, “We have, without a doubt, been suffering a global leadership crisis.” The answer, he says, is “nothing short of a top-down commitment to excellent character as an organizational imperative because no organization or society will ever successfully change its behaviors until its senior leadership adopts and upholds ethical attitudes.”

He’s probably right, but isn’t that putting the cart before the horse? Don’t we first need to get the right leaders elected? And if we are going to form more perfect unions, don’t we then have to be as involved in leadership as the leaders we empower?

Yes, says Frederick Gibson, director of the Pioneer Leadership Program at the University of Denver. “Leadership is everyone’s responsibility. While we do not all have to be ‘in charge of’ groups, businesses, churches, or governments, we all have an obligation to make a difference, to contribute actively to a community, and to work in the public sphere to create greater capacity, confidence, and continuity.”

The most important role of an engaged follower, of course, is to select a leader. That means voting, and voting wisely. For Gibson, this involves being aware of the idiosyncrasies and flaws of our election and selection processes.

For one thing, “some of the best leaders do not run for office because they do not want to subject themselves to the attendant circus and attacks,” Gibson says. The first danger this poses is the emergence of weak leaders. The second is the election, by unenlightened followers, of leaders who “do not have the worldview, values, attitudes, or virtues to be effective,” says Gibson. “They survive grueling campaigns with a dull edge that deflects blows, rather than a sharp intellect that cuts through distraction to realize vision.”

And the “vision to do what is right—what is just or what is in the collective best interest—even though it is unpopular in the short run or not always in the leader’s personal interest” is the mark of a transforming leader, says Massachusetts Institute of Technology political science professor and elections expert Stephen Ansolabehere.

A “transforming leader,” as Gibson defines one, is a leader who seeks “uplifting goals.” Transforming leadership “ultimately becomes moral in that it raises the level of human conduct and ethical aspirations of both leader and follower, and thus has a transforming effect on both,” he explains.

He presents Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Pope John XXIII as examples, saying: “My guess is that most everyone would tell you there is a difference between Hitler and Gandhi—that Gandhi was a better leader. Why? Both individuals had similar skills, and both might be seen as charismatic, but only one was concerned with what are generally agreed upon as uplifting goals.”

 Going forward, the constant cycle of elections requires that citizens become engaged, define their goals, and monitor their leaders. Apathetic followers end up with an environment where accountability is sorely lacking. And it is a culture of accountability that, in the end, provides power to the people.

“Followers need to be strong enough to speak up when the leader, or the group, is not headed in the right direction,” Gibson says. “Whistleblowers are often vilified or worse, and so it unfortunately sometimes takes a hero, or heroic effort, to hold leaders accountable. We need to say that it is OK to do so, and to back up the brave citizens who do.”