I guess the classic answer would be it depends….Sounds like a cop out, but
really different leadership style would be required for different situations and
thus the term “situational leadership” may be an appropriate term. To be an
effective leader, you must not only know your own strengths but the strengths
of the people you lead. You must be ready to adapt your style to suit the
varying conditions or face extinction.
There are a few types of leaders, one
who tells or directs his people without caring much about feelings, relationships,
etc. This may be effective in a crisis where quick actions are needed. Then there
is the persuasive leader who is able to shift mindsets and set directions. But
regardless of the type, a truly effective leader must be honest which gives
him credibility which is a critical quality. They must “Say what they Mean
and Mean what they Say”. They must also lead by example and not practice double
standards. Also a leader must not be afraid to make mistakes and more importantly
be open to admit that he/she has made them. They must also trust and value their
people and be prepared to get their hands dirty.
Some examples of effective leaders …….
Most will agree that Lee Kuan Yew was
an effective leader. His leadership transformed Singapore to achieve its global
city status. Others would include Winston Churchill, Mother Teresa and the list
goes on……These leaders had the will and determination and made things happen through
their sheer perseverance.
Well in the initial years when was at
the helm of the National kidney Foundation (NKF), many will agree that he was
the prolific CEO who transformed
the NKF from a small foundation into Singapore’s largest charity. During his
term, NKF’s revenue grew from $17 million to a staggering $116 million.
The problem started to brew when TT
Durai in the name of protecting the reputation of the NKF started to sue
individuals who made allegations against him, his staff or the organization. He
was successful in some of these suits and public apologies were made to clear
the name of the charity. Amongst these allegations were that TT Durai flew
first class when he travelled on business trips.
The turning point was the “Golden Tap”
issue. On 19 Apr 2004, an article was published in the Straits Times which
essentially revealed that Durai had installed a “Golden Tap” in his office
private bathroom.
Yes you
are right, Durai sued the Straits Times for defamation. During the trial, surprising
information was revealed about Durai’s pay package which included super high bonuses.
The whole issue of transparency was played out in court as NKF had failed to provide
the public with open information on how public funds were spent. Now comes the
interesting issue which makes this case special. NKF is a charitable organization
and not a profit making company. Its revenue was raised through charity drives
and public donations. Like wild fire, the public outcry on misuse of public
funds was brought into the lime light. The public were outraged that the CEO of
a charity had to be paid such a high salary and given such luxurious perks, e.g.
1st class travel, fleet of luxury cars and not to mention the gold
tap didn’t help at all. To top it off, this man had the audacity to sue others
when allegations were made against him. This was really something the ordinary
citizens found hard to accept and left them feeling totally resentful.
Further lapses on financial procedures
were also revealed during the court proceeding and TT Durai was also alleged to
have committed corruption offences. In the end, TT Durai and his entire board
members were all required to step down. Durai was also sentenced to 3 months
imprisonment for the corruption charges.
The case received widespread media
coverage and the charity saw its donations plummet. The wife of a prominent
politician who was also on board of NKF was drawn into media spot light when
she passed a remark that the $60000 paid
to TT Durai was peanuts. This insinuated much unhappiness amongst the
people for the insensitive remark made on his salary. This episode highlights
the point that words once uttered cannot be undone without repercussion. Obama
too draws reference to this important point that words matter.
So where is TT Durai now….. The last it was heard that he had secured
$25,000-a-month CEO job in Abu Dhabi.
The verdict : TT Durai was an effective leader but he failed to
realize the type organization he was leading, a charity as opposed to a
profit making private company. If he had been the CEO of a private company, all
his extravagances would not have been blown out of proportion.
Like him, many others too have failed and have bounced back. See
below.
My putting shot : If you have never failed you have never lived.
I like your ‘putting shot’. I think that is the least hypocritical thing for anyone to say.
ReplyDeleteAnd don’t get me wrong- I’d argue with you all the way on why I think the man deserved the punishment prescribed by law. It’s just that I think some people may be missing the bigger point- Yes the man’s done some bad deeds but he’s already served his imprisonment term so why do we still want to condemn him? This man had helped to grow the foundation and for all you know, he’s a changed man and has retained all the fine qualities of a CEO.
Also, I believe one cannot be absolutely sure that he will not do what Durai had done. The line is very thin here. If he’s on top of the hierarchy and he knows he can get away with doing any wrong (in relation to misuse of funds), what makes him so sure he wont do it? The test here is whether he can resist the temptation to succumb to greed if ‘he does not have to bear the responsibility later on’. So, it may be a tad too early to be this confident, unless of course you are like me a student of Dr JM on leadership…
The blog highlighted several interesting points about effective leadership. I particularly like the point on “say what you mean and mean what you say” as well as being honest to engender credibility. I also agree that Durai was indeed an effective leader insofar as task management and relationship management are concerned.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I have a different perspective on a point made in the blog that Durai had failed to realize the type organization he was leading. I reckon that it is quite inconceivable to think that Durai had failed to realize that he was leading a charity organization as opposed to a profit-making enterprise. After all, the man had served 37 years with the NKF, and arguably no one else would be more familiar with the mission of NKF. So, Durai’s behaviour must be rooted in some other reasons.
One plausible explanation that I could think of is the effects of narcissism in leadership. Durai, since his younger days, has always had a larger-than-life persona, and he essentially had all the necessary ‘ingredients’ of narcissism. Research on narcissism in leadership has suggested that narcissistic leaders are often a source of great strength to an organization operating under tumultuous conditions, and this was exactly what happened to NKF when Durai was appointed as its CEO in 1992. Since taking office, Durai was able to leverage on his narcissistic leadership to great effects and adroitly adapted the organization to the changes in operating circumstances.
When confronted with the trying conditions that the NFK faced, Durai was not afraid of implementing significant reforms at NKF and not fearful of the concomitant risk involved. Under Durai’s leadership, NKF rolled out a series of weighty reforms that turned the financial situation around. Durai single-handedly inspired scores of followers from within and outside of the NKF, and these factions indubitably played a vital role in realizing the transformation efforts that made NKF so successful in the early 2000s.
However, as NKF became remarkably successful, and when Durai consecutively won the defamation suits that were filed against him, the seeds of his downfall were inherently sown. As the literature suggests, a narcissistic leader like Durai would develop a sense of invulnerability in him after gaining adulation and success. When this happens, the narcissistic leader could ‘self-destruct’ by becoming overly combative and develop a pernicious perception of being unassailable and unbeatable in his doings. In the case of Durai, he pushed his excessiveness (flying first-class, golden taps, and disproportionate remuneration) literally unabated, and this eventually led to him to the grave mistake of taking on the Singapore Press Holdings in the Susan Long defamation suit.
In gist, if we were to look at Durai’s case from the lens of narcissism in leadership, there is a useful insight that one can gain. When NKF was down and out, a narcissistic leader like Durai provided a source of great strength. Poignantly, when NKF had ridden out of the storm and was doing well, the narcissistic leader’s penchant for disruptive changes and his overly-inflated ego and perilous sense of invulnerability steered the organization down a deleterious path.
So, my take on the matter is that Durai was never ever ignorant of the fact that he was leading a charity organization. It was narcissism in his leadership that caused his iniquitous behaviour.