The dot-com fiasco caused a severe drop in the stock market, but the dot-coms are largely behind us now. So why do we continue to see stock market woes?

What nags at many of us is a loss of confidence in our corporate leaders. It's the Enrons, Global Crossings and numerous other examples of unethical or illegal activities that disturb us. Evidences of corporate malfeasance continue and suggest that more trouble is in store. Consequently, we don't know where to put our investment money.

The federal government has taken the stance that corporate leaders should be punished for their unethical and illegal activities. The government also laid blame on those who should have strongly advised the corporate leaders that they were engaging in wrongful acts. Hence, the Enron executives have been indicted and so have the Arthur Andersen accountants.

Recently, a proposed ruling from the Securities and Exchange Commission seeks to hold corporate lawyers responsible for not taking a stronger position on these illegal and unethical activities. The SEC says that the lawyers should have told the leaders not to do the illegal and unethical activities. If not listened to, the lawyers should have resigned. In essence the SEC is suggesting that it will be mandatory that those who should give dissenting views do so.

I saw first-hand the value of listening to dissenting voices when I worked for Hardie Irrigation, a company that used plastics extrusion and injection molding to make products for the drip irrigation market. I was hired as the technical director but became president of the company within a few months. The company was in chaos and was losing about $1 million a year. We needed a major revision in the way the company was being run, and, because I had never had CEO experience before, I assembled a team with four strong vice presidents to help me.

One of those vice presidents, Jack Langa, was responsible for new-product development. He had invented the principal product of the company when he worked as an agricultural engineer in Hawaii. He knew the products from the viewpoint of the customer. He was also a strong voice of dissent whenever we made decisions that he considered to not be in the interest of the customers.

For instance, sometimes a warranty problem would be fuzzy. The product may have had some problems, but the customer clearly also had done something wrong. Nevertheless, Jack made sure that the customer's views were always represented. Over several years, Jack was a voice of dissent in my ear.

One day he came in and said to me, "I know I am a bur under your saddle. I also know that you won't always do what I say, but I always appreciate that you will listen to what I say."

We had a great management team, and the company was very successful under our guidance. All five of the management team became good friends, and we remain so today. We didn't always agree; in fact, we rarely did. But we valued each other's strengths and opinions. We all agree that our time together was a highlight in our corporate lives.

I believe that dissent is a critical, necessary element in creativity. Dissent leads to questioning the status quo, and that leads to finding better ways to do something. Individual and collective progress is tied to the ability to listen to and evaluate dissent. A good leader will be able to allow the dissent and then use that openness to build passion for the mission of the organization. Emotional involvement of that type comes with being respected and valued. These are fostered by openness and will go a long way toward building confidence in employees, management, customers and investors.