Although the 12 Parliament Session has begun, some members of the ruling coalition has yet to stop bickering each other.
The latest was when the former Selangor MB, Khir Toyo told reporters that the Hindu Temple demolition, alleged to be one of the major factors for Selangor BN dismal performance in the last GE, was MIC President, Samy Velu's idea. Read full report here and here. Samy slammed and said 'It is Khir's fault'.
On seeing that this is not good for BN, PM Abdullah Badawi told both leaders to stop it.
And then another headline picked Khir Toyo as saying 'Blame the keris not the broom' for the poor performance.
I had quarrels with my brothers that compelled my parent to stop us from bickering each other. We were children then. Now that we have families of our own, we understood why our parent had to come in between us to resolve our differences. They had gone and we missed them a lot. As leaders, they had indeed taught us to place greater importance on building relationships rather than bickering on each other. Thereafter, we move on to do what we were supposed to do.
Sometime in November - December 2006, I held a series of 12 Management Training sessions for Mayban Fortis. Mayban Fortis, Takaful Malaysia and MNI then were going through a merger process. I had quoted and shared a case story of the Canadian's 1982 Everest Expedition in these sessions.
The 1982 Canadian Everest team had the best climbers from all over the world. The leader knew that even though they had the best people in the entire world at what they did, the trip would not be a success. This was because everyone in the team wants to get to the top for themselves. They did it for the glory of their own country and not for the good of their team. Not only that they never got to the top, at one point these successful climbers were throwing rocks at each other. What was frustrating, was to see them throwing rocks at each other when they were supposed to be in a team. And, what seemed to be even more crazy was that they dare throw rocks at each other when they were just attached to each other by ropes.
The above local news headlines are no different from this case story. More often than not, while leaders claimed they deserved their positions we still see them throwing 'verbal rocks' at people who are supposed to be on their team. Why? Only they can tell the reasons for doing so. But....surely we can learn from the experiences of the Canadian's 1982 Everest Expedition Team. And we too can list the leadership lessons learnt.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
People Follow Stronger Leader
When Dato' Seri Anwar made a statement that there are 30 Sabah MPs who would defect to join PKR and that PKR will be in a position to form the federal government no later than 16 September 2008, Dato' Seri Najib claimed that was part of Anwar's political game. Read The Star full report, here.
But, when Former Finance Minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah said on the possibility of Sabah MPs crossing over to PKR by virture of their background, Najib felt that the threats have to be taken seriously. In Sarawak, when SNAP said they are ready to defect and join PKR, Najib reiterated that Anwar's claim cannot be taken lightly.
While UMNO and BN have not totally resolved their internal issues, Sabah MPs and SNAP politicians are already on the verge of concluding their evaluation on the strengths of their current and future leadership.
Either they remain in BN or defect to join PKR, the leadership lesson learned is that people will follow leaders stronger than themselves. They too follow them out of respect ... and that is quite natural.
But, when Former Finance Minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah said on the possibility of Sabah MPs crossing over to PKR by virture of their background, Najib felt that the threats have to be taken seriously. In Sarawak, when SNAP said they are ready to defect and join PKR, Najib reiterated that Anwar's claim cannot be taken lightly.
While UMNO and BN have not totally resolved their internal issues, Sabah MPs and SNAP politicians are already on the verge of concluding their evaluation on the strengths of their current and future leadership.
Either they remain in BN or defect to join PKR, the leadership lesson learned is that people will follow leaders stronger than themselves. They too follow them out of respect ... and that is quite natural.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Was the Timing Right?
When Parti Keadilan Rakyat advisor and Former Deputy Prime Minister Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim, on his arrival in Sabah told reporters that Pakatan Rakyat is in a position to form the federal government no later than 16 September 2008, he is talking about right timing. The Star Online has the full report, here.
It appears to me that there are relationships between timing, what-to-do (mission) and where-to-go (vision)vis-a-vis leadership, the decisions made before the General Election (GE) and the outcomes of such decisions. Each one of these is equally important.
First, there was this denial on the dissolution of the Malaysian Parliament on the 12 February 2008. Then, in less than 24 hours came the announcement on the dissolution of the parliament on the 13 February 2008. This was followed by the EC Chairman's announcement on the polling date.
So, the decision was made on the GE and the polling date. Thereafter, there were opinions and feedbacks and reactions from both BN component parties and the oppositions. There were also allegations on the non-sensitivity on the part of the government as the Chinese were still celebrating their Chinese New Year.
When the results of the GE were announced, the ruling coalition, BN lost their 2/3 majority. On the other hand the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat set unprecedented victory and formed state governments in four additional states other than Kelantan. They also swept 10 seats out of 11 in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur.
We have observed that the aftermath of GE resulted in calls from members of the ruling coalition especially UMNO, for the top leadership to take full responsibility for the dismal performance in the polls. We have also read in mainstream media instances of 'stone-throwing' among members of the ruling coalition at state leaderships for their poor performance, especially in the four states that had fallen to Pakatan Rakyat.
What can we learn from these unprecedented events?
Leaders recognized that execution is as important as the strategy (how to go to where you and your people want to be). But, effective leaders ensured that when to lead (timing) is as important as what to do (mission) and where to go (vision.)
When a leader decides to make his moves, there are four possible outcomes:
1. Disaster - when a wrong action is executed at a wrong time;
2. Mistakes - when a wrong action is executed at the right time;
3. Resistance to Change - when the right action is executed at the wrong timing;
4. Success - when the right action is executed at the right time.
In my assessment is it apparent that every Malaysian leader is mindful of these outcomes. But, what makes a leader great is his ability to effectively scan his environment, both internal and external and thereafter articulates himself and executes his strategic moves. However, if a leader repeatedly shows poor judgement, even in things regarded as trivial by his followers, then the followers will start to think and believe that having him is a liability.
It appears to me that there are relationships between timing, what-to-do (mission) and where-to-go (vision)vis-a-vis leadership, the decisions made before the General Election (GE) and the outcomes of such decisions. Each one of these is equally important.
First, there was this denial on the dissolution of the Malaysian Parliament on the 12 February 2008. Then, in less than 24 hours came the announcement on the dissolution of the parliament on the 13 February 2008. This was followed by the EC Chairman's announcement on the polling date.
So, the decision was made on the GE and the polling date. Thereafter, there were opinions and feedbacks and reactions from both BN component parties and the oppositions. There were also allegations on the non-sensitivity on the part of the government as the Chinese were still celebrating their Chinese New Year.
When the results of the GE were announced, the ruling coalition, BN lost their 2/3 majority. On the other hand the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat set unprecedented victory and formed state governments in four additional states other than Kelantan. They also swept 10 seats out of 11 in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur.
We have observed that the aftermath of GE resulted in calls from members of the ruling coalition especially UMNO, for the top leadership to take full responsibility for the dismal performance in the polls. We have also read in mainstream media instances of 'stone-throwing' among members of the ruling coalition at state leaderships for their poor performance, especially in the four states that had fallen to Pakatan Rakyat.
What can we learn from these unprecedented events?
Leaders recognized that execution is as important as the strategy (how to go to where you and your people want to be). But, effective leaders ensured that when to lead (timing) is as important as what to do (mission) and where to go (vision.)
When a leader decides to make his moves, there are four possible outcomes:
1. Disaster - when a wrong action is executed at a wrong time;
2. Mistakes - when a wrong action is executed at the right time;
3. Resistance to Change - when the right action is executed at the wrong timing;
4. Success - when the right action is executed at the right time.
In my assessment is it apparent that every Malaysian leader is mindful of these outcomes. But, what makes a leader great is his ability to effectively scan his environment, both internal and external and thereafter articulates himself and executes his strategic moves. However, if a leader repeatedly shows poor judgement, even in things regarded as trivial by his followers, then the followers will start to think and believe that having him is a liability.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
The Power of Buying-In
The results of the 8 March General Election (GE) have changed Malaysia's political landscape. With five states fallen into the hands of Pakatan Rakyat, sooner or later, this change will certainly have some implications - for better or worst - on the society and economy.
In my previous postings, I have delved into some leadership principles and lessons learned. These principles and lessons learned are not necessarily exhaustive. I have also tried to critically analyze the presence of these principles in Malaysian leaders especially in regard to the performance of the recent GE. Through this analysis, I have somehow felt that there is a missing link. And, that missing link could probably explain the 'tsunami' that eventually changed Malaysia's political scenario.
In trying to find this missing link, I have resorted to various sources of information including electronic media - e-newspapers, YouTube video-clips and blogs such as BN Manifesto; PAS Manifesto, here and here; PKR Manifesto, here and here; DAP Campaign, here and here; and Pakatan Rakyat's Mission, here.
My analysis uncovered:
1. That there is a very close relationship between; firstly, the leader - that is centered on leadership attributes and influence, and secondly, the leader's vision - that is the destination the leader wants to take his followers to.
2. That it is quite natural for people to follow leaders that are stronger than themselves.
3. That people will only line-up behind the leader when they have bought-in both the leader as well as his vision.
4. That leaders first need to set a dream (vision) and then find his people.
5. That people first find their leaders and then their dreams.
Given the backdrop on the significance of leaders' attributes and their vision, the recent GE manifested that some leaders were able to not only buy-in but swing the people's support towards them. Others, though still in position, felt that they are slowly loosing the people who traditionally used to support them.These were due to leaders' ability to articulate and then align themselves or otherwise, to the people's dreams and wishes.
Politicians called this 'makkal sakhti', management and leadership gurus refer this as the power of buying-in. In much simpler terms, it is leadership engagement or organizational acceptance.
Perhaps, these video clips (1, 2, 3) give you better impressions of the points discussed above.
In my previous postings, I have delved into some leadership principles and lessons learned. These principles and lessons learned are not necessarily exhaustive. I have also tried to critically analyze the presence of these principles in Malaysian leaders especially in regard to the performance of the recent GE. Through this analysis, I have somehow felt that there is a missing link. And, that missing link could probably explain the 'tsunami' that eventually changed Malaysia's political scenario.
In trying to find this missing link, I have resorted to various sources of information including electronic media - e-newspapers, YouTube video-clips and blogs such as BN Manifesto; PAS Manifesto, here and here; PKR Manifesto, here and here; DAP Campaign, here and here; and Pakatan Rakyat's Mission, here.
My analysis uncovered:
1. That there is a very close relationship between; firstly, the leader - that is centered on leadership attributes and influence, and secondly, the leader's vision - that is the destination the leader wants to take his followers to.
2. That it is quite natural for people to follow leaders that are stronger than themselves.
3. That people will only line-up behind the leader when they have bought-in both the leader as well as his vision.
4. That leaders first need to set a dream (vision) and then find his people.
5. That people first find their leaders and then their dreams.
Given the backdrop on the significance of leaders' attributes and their vision, the recent GE manifested that some leaders were able to not only buy-in but swing the people's support towards them. Others, though still in position, felt that they are slowly loosing the people who traditionally used to support them.These were due to leaders' ability to articulate and then align themselves or otherwise, to the people's dreams and wishes.
Politicians called this 'makkal sakhti', management and leadership gurus refer this as the power of buying-in. In much simpler terms, it is leadership engagement or organizational acceptance.
Perhaps, these video clips (1, 2, 3) give you better impressions of the points discussed above.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Leadership Engagement
My associate and I had an appointment with one of our clients this afternoon. Our agenda was to discuss on strategic planning and develop a framework for implementation. Thereafter, translate the strategic plan into measurable operational terms.
When we go deeper into our discussion, we reckoned neither the process nor the system/technology propel the organization to realize its strategic plan. We came to a consensus that the most important element in an organization is the people behind the organizational processes, systems and technology.
"When we talk about leadership, we can't run away from politics." warned my client. "We should be able to draw a line, read the message in-between-lines and balance the situation." he added. Obviously he was inferring to office politics. We concurred with his observation.
The significance and relevance of visionary leadership and leader-follower engagement in managing and leading knowledge workers surfaced very vividly in our minds.
The brief discourse was indeed an invaluable hands-on experience that we could leverage for our future managerial development programs. Though local in flavor, it reaffirmed General Electric's (GE) advocacy that was shared when both of us attended the Change Acceleration Process (CAP) Seminar way back in mid 90's. In accelerating change, GE advocated leaders to identify what to change and think how to gain organizational acceptance before expecting any breakthrough.
Jimmy Mc Ginty, Washington DC Football Coach (The Replacements. DVD. 2000) when asked how his team could win the second half of the game, after loosing badly in the first half, responded, "You have to have miles and miles of heart to win the game and go to the final." Mc Ginty replaced the arrogant, self-centric quarter-master who played the first-half with Shane Falco, a team-player quarter-master who possessed a strong leader-follower connection. Washington DC won this game, made it to the final and won the championship.
You may wish to analyze this case, this case, this feedback and this coverage in light of the above discussions.
Hence, effective leaders need to know that they have to win the hearts and minds of their people first, before they could ask for their support. Leaders have to touch their (followers') hearts before asking for their hands.
When we go deeper into our discussion, we reckoned neither the process nor the system/technology propel the organization to realize its strategic plan. We came to a consensus that the most important element in an organization is the people behind the organizational processes, systems and technology.
"When we talk about leadership, we can't run away from politics." warned my client. "We should be able to draw a line, read the message in-between-lines and balance the situation." he added. Obviously he was inferring to office politics. We concurred with his observation.
The significance and relevance of visionary leadership and leader-follower engagement in managing and leading knowledge workers surfaced very vividly in our minds.
The brief discourse was indeed an invaluable hands-on experience that we could leverage for our future managerial development programs. Though local in flavor, it reaffirmed General Electric's (GE) advocacy that was shared when both of us attended the Change Acceleration Process (CAP) Seminar way back in mid 90's. In accelerating change, GE advocated leaders to identify what to change and think how to gain organizational acceptance before expecting any breakthrough.
Jimmy Mc Ginty, Washington DC Football Coach (The Replacements. DVD. 2000) when asked how his team could win the second half of the game, after loosing badly in the first half, responded, "You have to have miles and miles of heart to win the game and go to the final." Mc Ginty replaced the arrogant, self-centric quarter-master who played the first-half with Shane Falco, a team-player quarter-master who possessed a strong leader-follower connection. Washington DC won this game, made it to the final and won the championship.
You may wish to analyze this case, this case, this feedback and this coverage in light of the above discussions.
Hence, effective leaders need to know that they have to win the hearts and minds of their people first, before they could ask for their support. Leaders have to touch their (followers') hearts before asking for their hands.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Empowerment
More often than not, most managers feel that there is too much work to do and too little time to spend. They pushed themselves to get things done the best way possible in order to beat deadlines. Confronted with such circumstances, many resort to completing the work themselves. By doing so, they believed they are in control.
"If I delegate, I will end up spending extra time checking through the work to make sure my expectations are met. This is something that I can't afford. I don't have the luxury of time." opined a Vice President of a major Malaysian financial institution who attended my program on " Leading Towards A Positive Work Culture" sometimes in November - January 2006.
"How could I delegate and train others to do my job? If they perform better than I do, I will be displaced." another manager shared.
The above is a common scenario on empowerment, or the lack of it. Most managers shared such belief. Many complained about their stressful work and not few who admitted that they are 'burnt-outs'.
But, why do managers behaved that way? I have thrown similar question during my training sessions. Some of the conclusions that I could draw as barriers to empowerment are:
1. Fear for Job Security. Only weak leader worries if he helps to develop his subordinates, through delegation and trainings, he will be dispensable. The truth is: the only way for a manager to be indispensable is by being dispensable. In short, if a manager is able to continually develop others to take over his job, then he is indispensable to the organization. He is now ready to move on in his career ladder.
2. Complacency. Competency could lead a manager into complacency and lack of trust in his subordinates. Empowerment demands constant change - as it encourages people to grow, be creative and develop. Hence, complacency leads to resistance to change.
3. Lack of Self-esteem. I have touched a bit on this in my previous posting, here. Managerial position is a source of power - legitimate power. On the other hand, influence power is undoubtedly the source of leadership. Managers who have developed self-esteem, regarded change as stimulus. This is because they believe they make the difference and are in a position to influence the outcome. They are not only doers and motivators, but they also empower others.
Hence, managers need to reflect not only on how they have empowered their subordinates, or lack of it, but also examine the impact of their subordinates' possible behaviors on their performance. Managers should remind themselves that their subordinates' capacity to achieve and excel is dependent on their leadership ability to empower. What the subordinates are today, is the result of their previous leadership. May be this explains.
You may want to analyze this case in respect of the above discussions.
"If I delegate, I will end up spending extra time checking through the work to make sure my expectations are met. This is something that I can't afford. I don't have the luxury of time." opined a Vice President of a major Malaysian financial institution who attended my program on " Leading Towards A Positive Work Culture" sometimes in November - January 2006.
"How could I delegate and train others to do my job? If they perform better than I do, I will be displaced." another manager shared.
The above is a common scenario on empowerment, or the lack of it. Most managers shared such belief. Many complained about their stressful work and not few who admitted that they are 'burnt-outs'.
But, why do managers behaved that way? I have thrown similar question during my training sessions. Some of the conclusions that I could draw as barriers to empowerment are:
1. Fear for Job Security. Only weak leader worries if he helps to develop his subordinates, through delegation and trainings, he will be dispensable. The truth is: the only way for a manager to be indispensable is by being dispensable. In short, if a manager is able to continually develop others to take over his job, then he is indispensable to the organization. He is now ready to move on in his career ladder.
2. Complacency. Competency could lead a manager into complacency and lack of trust in his subordinates. Empowerment demands constant change - as it encourages people to grow, be creative and develop. Hence, complacency leads to resistance to change.
3. Lack of Self-esteem. I have touched a bit on this in my previous posting, here. Managerial position is a source of power - legitimate power. On the other hand, influence power is undoubtedly the source of leadership. Managers who have developed self-esteem, regarded change as stimulus. This is because they believe they make the difference and are in a position to influence the outcome. They are not only doers and motivators, but they also empower others.
Hence, managers need to reflect not only on how they have empowered their subordinates, or lack of it, but also examine the impact of their subordinates' possible behaviors on their performance. Managers should remind themselves that their subordinates' capacity to achieve and excel is dependent on their leadership ability to empower. What the subordinates are today, is the result of their previous leadership. May be this explains.
You may want to analyze this case in respect of the above discussions.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Leadership Process: Having An Open Mind
"It is a lot easier said than done." a participants in one of my training sessions remarked.
"Most leadership principles you shared with us seemed to make sense to young executives and managers like us. But, what we saw being practiced by our bosses are totally different." another young manager interjected.
Though sound like sweeping remarks, I understood what were at the back of their minds. I too understood what were brewing in their hearts.
I had to persuade them to envision what they want to be in their career and how they would like to be seen by their subordinates. After all, leadership is about influencing others for, without them, leadership is meaningless. I had also encouraged them to modify the way they see at issues from different perspectives.
The above remarks challenge managers to have an open mind. There are at least two different perspectives in the above situation. One, looking at how leaders' actions speak louder than their words. Second, looking at how one sees himself in relation to his managerial and leadership roles in an organization.
The first perception positions a manager as a follower. This has to do with how a manager conducts his self-talk or neuro-languistic programming (NLP). In this instance, the negative behaviors manifested by his superiors could demotivate him and erode his respect for his superiors. This could be very very stressful.
The second perception enables a manager to remind himself of his roles and responsibilities in regard to the people he leads vis-a-vis the direction of the organization. Then, this enables him to realign his deliverables and more importantly his behavior. In this way, a manager will be able to resolve his internal conflict, stay proactive and be able to garner support from the team members. He takes responsibility as a leader and he moves on.
As much as managers expected from their leaders, subordinates are looking-up at their manager and how he conducts himself. Subordinates do not care how much their manager knows, until they know how much their manager cares for them. Therefore, who a manager gets is not determined by what he wants but it is determined by who he is.
One must be mindful that an effective managerial leader is one who gets others to want to do their work. It is one who is able to get their followers to do their work not because they had to, but because they want to. And, in the long run, the response a manager gets is not necessarily determined by his position but more importantly, his stimuli.
"Most leadership principles you shared with us seemed to make sense to young executives and managers like us. But, what we saw being practiced by our bosses are totally different." another young manager interjected.
Though sound like sweeping remarks, I understood what were at the back of their minds. I too understood what were brewing in their hearts.
I had to persuade them to envision what they want to be in their career and how they would like to be seen by their subordinates. After all, leadership is about influencing others for, without them, leadership is meaningless. I had also encouraged them to modify the way they see at issues from different perspectives.
The above remarks challenge managers to have an open mind. There are at least two different perspectives in the above situation. One, looking at how leaders' actions speak louder than their words. Second, looking at how one sees himself in relation to his managerial and leadership roles in an organization.
The first perception positions a manager as a follower. This has to do with how a manager conducts his self-talk or neuro-languistic programming (NLP). In this instance, the negative behaviors manifested by his superiors could demotivate him and erode his respect for his superiors. This could be very very stressful.
The second perception enables a manager to remind himself of his roles and responsibilities in regard to the people he leads vis-a-vis the direction of the organization. Then, this enables him to realign his deliverables and more importantly his behavior. In this way, a manager will be able to resolve his internal conflict, stay proactive and be able to garner support from the team members. He takes responsibility as a leader and he moves on.
As much as managers expected from their leaders, subordinates are looking-up at their manager and how he conducts himself. Subordinates do not care how much their manager knows, until they know how much their manager cares for them. Therefore, who a manager gets is not determined by what he wants but it is determined by who he is.
One must be mindful that an effective managerial leader is one who gets others to want to do their work. It is one who is able to get their followers to do their work not because they had to, but because they want to. And, in the long run, the response a manager gets is not necessarily determined by his position but more importantly, his stimuli.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Where Do Leaders and Followers Match Up?
The alternative media have provided us with myriad of the most up-to-date information. I have indeed watched most of the video clippings on Malaysian leaders broadcast on YouTube. What attracted me most are video-clippings on how some of our leaders responded (most, however, reacted) to the aftermath of the March 8 General Election.
Two of these videos which I have spent some time are on the former Malaysian Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad and his one-time heir apparent Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
Several questions arose in my mind: What attracted their followers? What qualities or attributes do they offer? Where do they match up with their followers?... and many more.
My analysis on these videos uncovers that each one of them has shared goals vis-a-vis their followers in several key areas: attitude towards their followers; the ability to bridge generation gap - in terms of approaches deployed in managing both age group and mindset; background and common cause for actions; common values, and leadership ability.
In short, who they are is who they attract.
So, if many of us still feel that the people working with us are negative, then it time for us to double-check our own attitude. For, the better leader we are, the better leaders we will attract. And, if we think our followers could do better then ourselves, then it is time for us to further improve ourselves.
"Who you get is not determined by what you want. It is determined by who you are." - J. C. Maxwell
Two of these videos which I have spent some time are on the former Malaysian Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad and his one-time heir apparent Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
Several questions arose in my mind: What attracted their followers? What qualities or attributes do they offer? Where do they match up with their followers?... and many more.
My analysis on these videos uncovers that each one of them has shared goals vis-a-vis their followers in several key areas: attitude towards their followers; the ability to bridge generation gap - in terms of approaches deployed in managing both age group and mindset; background and common cause for actions; common values, and leadership ability.
In short, who they are is who they attract.
So, if many of us still feel that the people working with us are negative, then it time for us to double-check our own attitude. For, the better leader we are, the better leaders we will attract. And, if we think our followers could do better then ourselves, then it is time for us to further improve ourselves.
"Who you get is not determined by what you want. It is determined by who you are." - J. C. Maxwell
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Assertivness and Leadership
Do you often made to feel you are not included, belittled, used etc. by people around you especially in formal gatherings and meetings? You want to speak for yourself but instead think that you may offend others. You wanted to express your ideas but feared being perceived as aggressive?
In my recent posting, you will observe that political leaders manifested their assertions on what they believed to be the best course of action undertaken by some State UMNO chiefs and top UMNO leadership for the huge losses during the 8 March General Election.
But why? Being assertive you will: gain self-esteem; gain confidence and the confidence of the people you lead; stand up for yourself and others when you need to; negotiate productively with others; promote personal growth and fulfillment; adopt self-managed life style; and take responsibility for the quality relationships with others.
If your answers to the above questions are 'yes', your next step is to learn more about how to be assertive.
Request for more information, send your e-mail to: orais.consult@gmail.com
In my recent posting, you will observe that political leaders manifested their assertions on what they believed to be the best course of action undertaken by some State UMNO chiefs and top UMNO leadership for the huge losses during the 8 March General Election.
But why? Being assertive you will: gain self-esteem; gain confidence and the confidence of the people you lead; stand up for yourself and others when you need to; negotiate productively with others; promote personal growth and fulfillment; adopt self-managed life style; and take responsibility for the quality relationships with others.
If your answers to the above questions are 'yes', your next step is to learn more about how to be assertive.
Request for more information, send your e-mail to: orais.consult@gmail.com
Leader Sees Farther Than Others
Two articles published by The Star Online on 15 April 2008, really caught my eyes.
The first article reported a call for a change in Perak’s UMNO leadership with Datuk Seri Tajol Rosli being urged to resign as State UMNO Chief. Datuk Mohd Radzi Manan, Kampar UMNO division chief said Tajol Rosli had failed to give the state any direction since Barisan Nasional suffered huge losses during the March 8 polls.
“Until today, he has not given any signal on what needs to be done or issued any statements on the direction of the party in the state,” said Radzi, the former Tualang Sekah assemblyman.
“Our leaders must be forward-looking, be able to unite everyone and have the ability to move the state machinery,” added Radzi.
The rest of the news is reported here.
The second article, an excerpt from drkhir.blogspot.com reported Datuk Seri Khir Toyo’s call on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to draw up his retirement plan and pass the baton to his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
“Abdullah must draw up an exit plan that should include turning over the party’s and country’s leadership to Najib. This is my humble and personal view,” he said in his April 12 posting.
The full report is here.
These articles reminded me of an episode where the then South African President De Clerk, when confronted by Mandela, denied any knowledge on the involvement of the South African Police Force in the supply of arms to Inkata Freedom Party for them to use against the ANC.
Mandela, in Mandela & De Clerk (DVD 1997), blasted De Clerk:
“Any leader who chooses to remain blind when vision is what our nation needs, is a lost man. A lost man can never lead anywhere.”
Mandela later assumed the Presidency in 1991 after spending 27 years in prison.
"A leader is one who sees more than others see, who sees farther than others see, and who sees before others do." Leroy Eims
The first article reported a call for a change in Perak’s UMNO leadership with Datuk Seri Tajol Rosli being urged to resign as State UMNO Chief. Datuk Mohd Radzi Manan, Kampar UMNO division chief said Tajol Rosli had failed to give the state any direction since Barisan Nasional suffered huge losses during the March 8 polls.
“Until today, he has not given any signal on what needs to be done or issued any statements on the direction of the party in the state,” said Radzi, the former Tualang Sekah assemblyman.
“Our leaders must be forward-looking, be able to unite everyone and have the ability to move the state machinery,” added Radzi.
The rest of the news is reported here.
The second article, an excerpt from drkhir.blogspot.com reported Datuk Seri Khir Toyo’s call on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to draw up his retirement plan and pass the baton to his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
“Abdullah must draw up an exit plan that should include turning over the party’s and country’s leadership to Najib. This is my humble and personal view,” he said in his April 12 posting.
The full report is here.
These articles reminded me of an episode where the then South African President De Clerk, when confronted by Mandela, denied any knowledge on the involvement of the South African Police Force in the supply of arms to Inkata Freedom Party for them to use against the ANC.
Mandela, in Mandela & De Clerk (DVD 1997), blasted De Clerk:
“Any leader who chooses to remain blind when vision is what our nation needs, is a lost man. A lost man can never lead anywhere.”
Mandela later assumed the Presidency in 1991 after spending 27 years in prison.
"A leader is one who sees more than others see, who sees farther than others see, and who sees before others do." Leroy Eims
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
