Democracy demands change in business leadership<\/p>\n
Eric E. Hallett, Head, Business English Center,
\nPrasetiya Mulya Business School, Jakarta, Indonesia,
\neric@pmulya.ac.id<\/p>\n
Every once in awhile I hear a friend or colleague murmuring
\ntheir desire to return to the \"good old days\" in Indonesia when
\nPak Harto led the country. The cost-of-living was cheaper, there
\nwere more jobs and more security, and everyone just seemed to be
\nhappier with life. They mention things they now miss like
\nopportunity, stability, and hope among other things. Yet, I
\nwonder if there is more to their need to return to yesteryear
\nthan just comfort and convenience. Perhaps what these people are
\nreally missing is a sense of leadership.<\/p>\n
Democracy does funny things to a society. Once our thirst for
\nparticipation in how we are governed is quenched it changes the
\nway we view our relationship to authority at many levels
\nincluding the workplace. At the national level we can no longer
\ntolerate the unquestioned demands of an authoritarian. We also
\nfind that without the authoritarian we are left groping for
\ndirection, stability, someone who will act as an anchor to our
\nhopes and dreams. Ultimately, we sense a collective emotional
\nvacuum. Where is our father?<\/p>\n
This is also true in business. Business leaders in Indonesia
\ntoday must grapple with a general change in perception towards
\nleadership and the accompanying shift in emotional needs among
\npeers and subordinates. They can no longer rely on just being
\niron-fisted decision-makers among increasingly critical
\nemployees. When leadership styles change from authoritarian to
\nparticipative, both in politics and in business, a sense of
\nwandering or lack of direction follows. Workers and the
\npopulation in general still need to be led, but from a different
\nperspective.<\/p>\n
The dilemma that our business leaders face today is this: How
\ncan they successfully lead a company or organization where
\nworkers are becoming increasingly familiar with being involved in
\nnew ways and less comfortable with simply following commands?
\nWhat can they do to minimize discontent as \"authoritarianism\"
\ngradually falls out of style and psychological needs for
\nfulfillment increase?<\/p>\n
First, our leaders must realize that, as authoritarian methods
\nof leadership become less desirable and psychological needs
\nchange, new leadership styles must be adopted at the same time.
\nThey must recognize that they are the source of direction for
\ntheir business or organization and develop their role at the
\nforefront of the business as emotional leaders, not just
\ndecision-makers.<\/p>\n
Second, as emotional leaders, executives must inspire and
\nmotivate those around them to \"buy-in\" to their ideas and plans
\nfor the business, not to just accept commands. Instead of
\ninsisting on loyalty, they must invite loyalty by sharing a
\nvision for the future that excites people and attracts them to
\nparticipate in a joint effort together.<\/p>\n
Third, successful business leaders in Indonesia's new
\npolitical climate must communicate in new ways that require them
\nto come out from behind closed doors and into the center of
\nactivity. If executives need \"buy-in\" from those around them,
\nthey're going to have to talk about more than the latest company
\ndata.<\/p>\n
The amount of communication we have with people and the depths
\nat which we communicate with them determine our level of
\nintimacy. If we are intimate with people they will do almost
\nanything for us. Think about your family.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, if we are distant with people they will
\nrarely do anything for us. As leaders who are transitioning from
\nauthoritarian or reclusive roles in the workplace to more open,
\nsharing roles we have no choice but to share our dreams, hopes,
\nsuccesses, and failures if we are to be successful -- even if
\nthis means increasing our level of vulnerability.<\/p>\n
Examples of powerful leaders who were also great communicators
\nabound throughout history. Their success is correlated with their
\nability to share their values, goals, and passions, and to win
\nthe support of their constituents.<\/p>\n
Yet, even with such numerous examples of effective leadership
\nto convince us, it may be difficult to shift our leadership style
\nfrom closed and authoritarian to open and participative because
\nour leadership style is deeply rooted within the values of our
\nculture. The wise leader recognizes this and is prepared to make
\nchanges in his\/her leadership style as society's sense of values
\nand even the national culture itself changes side-by-side with
\nchanges in the political process.<\/p>\n
I believe that what my friends and colleagues pine for when
\nthey reminisce about yesteryear is more than just leadership
\nitself. Ask any of them to think closely about returning to those
\ndays and hesitations arise.<\/p>\n
What they are really missing is something that must come with
\na new style of democratic leadership in Indonesia -- collective
\ngoals, plans, ideas, and hopes for the future.<\/p>\n
What they really need is leadership that organizes and shares
\nthese goals, plans, ideas, and hopes through vision for the
\nfuture that is communicated. They desire leadership which compels
\nand motivates them by asking them to make a choice, to believe,
\nand to act -- both in business and in politics.<\/p>\n
The writer is also a lecturer in International Comparative
\nManagement.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/democracy-demands-change-in-business-leadership-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}