By
conventional standards of measurement, leadership is about 2 main things: task management
and people management. However, I think there is a third crucial element to
leadership, which may have often been overlooked ---
expectation management. In most cases, the expectations that a leader has to manage are
encompassed within the task itself such as hitting certain performance targets,
expanding the organisation to a certain level etc. However, such clean-cut
assessment of a leader no longer holds true when the organisation involved is
one built upon certain moral values and is thus heavily bounded by public
expectations. This invariably complicates the assessment of an effective
leader, because whether the leader conducts himself/herself in a way that meets public expectation becomes a determining factor of his/her effectiveness.
Former CEO
of NKF, TT Durai would most likely have been shortlisted under the league of
effective leaders by conventional standards. It is unfortunate, yet unavoidably
realistic that the assessment of effectiveness is often contextual-based. In
Durai's case, the contentious point being the organisation that Durai is leading
is not any profit-making corporation, but a charitable organisation that
operates on public funding.
Assessing
TT Durai purely from a normal leadership perspective, he is no doubt highly
effective. At an international level, his NKF dialysis program was so
successful that other countries such as Bangladesh, China, India, Malaysia and
Pakistan have sought the expertise of NKF. At a national level, he has
transformed the originally barely surviving NKF into Singapore’s largest and
most well-known charity, helping a substantial number of poor kidney patients.
At an organisational level, his innovative fund-raising tactics has brought in
a steady stream of funding for NKF and built up a strong reserve. Lastly, even
at a personal level, Durai has shown himself to be a highly-motivating and
endearing leader when despite public backlash, he received unwavering support
from staff who reacted with emotional outburst and tears upon hearing his
resignation announcement.
Unfortunately,
Durai was not just leading any company, but a charity that demands high moral
accountability, which means public expectation forces are at play. Public not only demands the leader of a
charitable organisation to run the organisation well, but also to conduct
himself morally, and in line with what the organisation stands for, in this
instance, behave charitably. Flying first-class on business trips and having elaborate
renovation in the office, while is likely a norm that will not lead to any
batting of eyelid in the commercial world, instantly becomes a behavior that is
highly unbefitting when scrutinised under the charity lens. This situation was
especially apparent in the case of Buddhist monk Shi Ming Yi, former CEO of
another charitable organisation, Renci Hospital who suffered a dramatic
downfall like Durai due to misuse of funds. Like Durai, Ming Yi’s extravagant
lifestyle attracted strong criticism despite consumerism is not any big sin by
normal human standard, but of course, public does not see Ming Yi as just a
CEO, but a leader of a charity, coupled by his status as a religious leader.
From these
cases, it is apparent that the context (the nature of the organisation) in which the
leader exists cannot be divorced from the assessment of the leadership
effectiveness. In fact, the context decides one of the most important criteria
in assessing a leader; a charitable organisation, a religious
institution and a commercial entity would definitely not have the same set of
criteria to determine an effective leader. Therefore, in the case of Durai, he is an
effective leader, but in my opinion, not an effective leader for NKF.
4 comments:
(Re-posting to add my name, for the Teaching Team's convenience.)
Hi hi,
Your post on TT Durai and Ven Shi Ming Yi set me thinking...
If a leader is liked and respected in his/her organisation but is condemned by others, is he/she a good leader? Conversely, if a leader is admired by many outside of the organisation but is loathed by his/her staff, is he/she a good leader?
My personal view is, in any kind of setting, a leader's stakeholders are not just his/her followers. Like it or not, a leader is also directly or indirectly accountable to external constituents. If a leader only has internal support and is under constant siege by external stakeholders, he/she is unlikely to hold onto the leadership position for long.
I would further contend that by staying as a leader, he/she may be putting the organisation in a vulnerable position. That may not be the most responsible thing to do as a leader.
What do you think?
Shameless publicity: my blog is at http://jing0ism.tumblr.com/ :p
Lim Jing Jing
Post a Comment