Wealth and honour are what each person desires. But if they have been obtained in violation of moral principles, they must not be kept. Poverty and humble station are what every person dislikes. But if they can be avoided only in violation of moral principles, they must not be avoided. If a superior person departs from humanity (ren), how can s/he fulfill that name? A superior person never abandons ren, even for the lapse of a single meal. In moments of haste, one acts according to it. In times of difficulty or confusion, one acts according to it.
Confucius
Introduction
A few days ago, I was in discussion with a colleague about the 35 articles I have written so far. I wanted a frank assessment of how he felt about them. His reaction was that no one disputes their contents and that they have so far been factual and well researched. However, there were times when I was too persistent in my criticisms of State institutions. As a result, those who are perhaps sympathetic with the Administration and are supportive of it, perceive me as “anti-government”. He suggested that I intersperse my articles with some that are more neutral in nature.
I accepted my colleague’s assessment but commented on how uncomfortable I am with the perception to which he referred. Given my years of training and experience, I have come to the unstinted belief that broad progress in our national life is hinged on the following: openness and transparency; greater public accountability and probity; high standards of governance; respect for our laws and regulations; high ethical and moral conduct in public life; and, above all, setting aside one’s personal interest in favour of the public interest.
Where in my assessment there are a shortfalls or mismatches, I highlight these in my writings in the sincere hope that those in position of authority will reflect on the issues I have raised and take the necessary corrective action. Regardless of how uncomfortable one feels about my writings, resort to character assassination using State resources is indeed very unfortunate, and by definition, it is a form of corruption. The words of John Donne are a timely reminder for those who indulge in such a practice:
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main…any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the death tolls, it tolls for thee.
And so today, following my colleague’s advice, I have decided to write on a topic that has been the subject of recent discussions, especially in the letter writers’ section in our daily newspapers. It is about leadership. I offer in this article some of the thoughts of leading writers on the subject as well as my own thoughts.
Leadership defined
Despite the vast volumes of literature on the subject, there appears to be a lack of consensus about what leadership is all about in practice. Marcus Buckingham in his book, “One Thing You Need to Know” illustrates this dilemma by referring to a scene in the movie “City Slickers” in which Jack Palance said to his friend “I’ll tell you the secret to life. This one thing. Just this one thing. You stick to that…”
“What’s the one thing?’ the friend asked.
“That’s what you’ve got to figure out”, replied Palance.
Bass and Steidlmeier argue that for many moral analysts leadership is a “many-headed hydra that alternatively shows the faces of Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot as well as the faces of Nelson Mandela and Mother Theresa”. They assert that the ethics of leadership rests upon three pillars: (1) the moral character of the leader; (2) the ethical values embedded in the leader’s vision, articulation, and programme which followers embrace or reject; and (3) the morality of the processes of social ethical choice and action that leaders and followers engage in and collectively pursue.
James Burns characterizes leadership as a process and not a person. He defines leadership as “leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and motivations – the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations – of both leaders and followers”. Burns is of the view that great leadership has moral dimensions in the sense that the subject under review embraces such public values as liberty, justice and equality. One can easily associate the names of Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi and Pope John Paul II with this type of leadership.
In its simplest terms, leadership is about creating opportunities and providing incentives for subordinates to enable them to give of their best. It is about winning hearts and minds, and empowering and motivating people to rise to their full potential in their respective fields of endeavour. It is also about creating and sharing of a vision that is enthusiastically embraced by followers or subordinates with a view towards its realization.
Transformational leadership
Transformational leadership is about people and relationships. Burns coined the term to describe the ideal situation between leaders and followers. He asserts that transformational leadership contains the following: charisma, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration.
Charisma is idealized influence that is envisioning, confident, and sets high standards for emulation. Inspirational motivation, on the other hand, provides followers with challenges and meaning for engaging in shared goals and undertakings. Intellectual stimulation involves helping followers to question assumptions and to generate more creative solutions to problems. Finally, individualized consideration relates to treating each follower as an individual and providing coaching, mentoring and growth opportunities.
Bass and Steidlmeier argue that truly transformational leadership is grounded in moral foundations. Ethical norms and behavoural ideals should not be imposed but freely embraced. The search for truth should also not be stifled but rather questioning, and creativity should be encouraged. In addition, motivation should not be reduced to coercion but grow out of authentic inner commitment.
Further, followers should not be mere means to self-satisfying ends for the leader but should be treated as ends in themselves.
Linked to transformational leadership is the notion of emotional intelligence. It is the ability to relate with people and understand their emotions. In other words, emotional intelligence is about how you and others feel about a particular situation or issue and what to do about it. It is also about perceiving and expressing emotions, understanding emotions, using emotions and managing emotions.
According to Goleman, people with high emotional intelligence tend to display the following:
* Self-awareness: Understanding their strengths, weaknesses, emotions and their impact on others;
* Self-regulation: Displaying maturity and restraint as well as a high level of judgment and control;
* High degree of motivation: Displaying optimism even in the face of disappointments, and are motivated by strong inner drive, instead of material rewards such as money or title;
* Empathy: Possessing compassion and understanding of human nature, and being able to connect emotionally with others; and
* People skills: Ability to be respected by their bosses, peers and employees and to build rapport and trust among those on whom they are dependent.
Goleman further argues that cognitive skills get one through the door but it is the emotional skills that determine whether one stays or not. Research has shown that for star performance, emotional skills matter twice as much as technical and analytical skills.
Another dimension to successful leadership relates to what Michael Maccoby describes as strategic intelligence. The names of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are associated with this type of leadership that has a tendency to display a lesser degree of emotional intelligence. The key competencies involved include:
* Foresight: Sensing a coming wave so that you can ride it;
* Systems thinking: Ability to synthesise or integrate elements rather than breaking them into parts for the purpose of analysis;
* Visioning: Using foresight and systems thinking to design an ideal. It is not only riding a wave into the future but also directing its course;
* Motivating: Ability to get people to embrace a common purpose and to implement the articulated vision; and
* Partnering: Ability to make strategic alliances e.g. partnering with managers who possess emotional intelligence or partnering with other companies to strengthen strategy.
While transformational leadership provides a vision, a sense of direction and guiding light for subordinates and followers, it is unlikely to guarantee results unless it is combined with other forms of leadership.
Transactional leadership
Transactional leadership provides for followers to be motivated by the leader’s promises, praise, and reward, based on what the leader and followers have “transacted” to do. They are also corrected by negative feedback, reproof, threats, or disciplinary actions. Most leaders have a profile of the full range of leadership that includes both transformational and transactional factors.
Indeed, the best of leadership is both transformational and transactional. However, in their defining moments, such leaders are transformational. Transformational leadership augments the effectiveness of transactional leadership; it does not replace transactional leadership.
We conclude today’s article with the following quote from Socrates:
The moral person does not put money or anything else before virtue. Virtue is its own reward. Moral wisdom is the highest prize, and the unexamined life is not worth living for a man.
To be continued
