Image is an Adjective, Leadership is a Verb

Image is an Adjective, Leadership is a Verb
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 28, 2009

When President Ma Ying-jeou won the presidential election, he received 7,650,000 votes. The day before yesterday, when he won the KMT Party Chairmanship, he received 285,000 votes.
Why hasn't 7,650,000 votes enabled Ma Ying-jeou to successfully lead the country? The 7,650,000 votes Ma received during the presidential election was a shot in the arm. Are the 285,000 party member votes a sign that the shot is wearing off?

Ma Ying-jeou is assuming the party chairmanship in order to address a crisis in leadership. Before that, his leadership of Siew, Liu, Wu, and Wang was not a success. Now he will be a "full spectrum leader" for both the party and the government. What are his chances for success?

Ma Ying-jeou's advantage is his image. But his problem is his leadership. Image does not equal leadership. Leadership is a verb. Image must not remain an adjective. Ma Ying-jeou's image is not merely an adjective. His integrity and rectitude are rare character attributes and commendable social values. Ma's problem is how to lead his administration and the country as a whole. Leadership is of course, a verb, not an adjective.

Emperors of old spoke of being lonely at the top. It may have been an affectation, but it was also true. The most important attribute of a leader in a democratic society is leadership. A leader cannot stand atop the summit, concerned only about maintaining his Teflon image. A capable leader may be able to lead even without assuming the party chairmanship. An incapable leader may not be able to lead even if he does.

President Ma, now Chairman Ma, hopes to rebuild effective leadership. He has a million ways to go about it. But the most important and fundamental factors are talent and organization.

The first key to leadership is to recognize talent and make good use of it. For the Ma administration, recognizing and making good use of talent is a major problem. At the cabinet and party level, many officials can't even maintain their own public image, let alone make sound decisions and defend administration policy. On the one hand, the Ma administration fears change. On the other hand, it probably can't find qualified replacements. The result is incompetent officials sit idle, squandering the opportunity for reform and undermining the image of the administration. In terms of local talent, Taipei County Executive Chou Hsi-wei continues to "bring up the rear." Chou has undermined the administration at the national level. In Yunlin County an unqualified father is running for office "on behalf of his son." In Hualien and Taitung County, candidates of dubious talent have hijacked the nomination process. This has led to an even bigger shortfall between public expectations and political reality. If the Ma administration cannot resolve these problems relating to talent, it will not be able to improve its image and performance. If the Ma administration cannot improve its image and performance, it will find it all the more difficult to persuade people with talent to join the administration. The result will be a vicious circle.

In terms of organization, the biggest advantage of large organizations is their collective policy-making power. Through the wisdom of collective decision-making, and the power of organization, they are able to implement the best policies. The Ministry of Economic Affairs is huge. But when it was promoting ECFA, it produced policy pamphlets rife with errors. Clearly such an organization has problems. A handful of legislators on the legislative caucus manipulated and tampered with the Civil Service Neutrality Act. From the very beginning, a handful of legislators have monopolized the role of party spokesperson. The organization of the legislative caucus is also a problem.

Successful leadership must be based on the right talent and effective organization. In terms of talent, some officials occupying key positions have already "risen to the level of their incompetence." If these clearly unqualified officials are kept on, it will be a disservice to the nation. Put more plainly, the Ma administration's kindness towards these officials, amounts to cruelty toward the people. In terms of organization, those unable to contribute to organizational effectiveness must be eliminated. If the organization cannot correct and regulate itself, then feel-good governance will lead to national disaster.

Leadership does not mean Ma Ying-jeou must personally attend to everything. It means that he must recognize talent and make good use of it. He must oversee the performance of the organization as a whole. Alas, Ma Ying-jeou's Teflon mindset makes it difficult for him to adopt such an approach. He finds it easier to play it safe. Once party officials, government officials, or party cadres are found to be unqualified, the entire organization will it difficult to do their jobs. This may be one reason for its current difficulties. The talent lacks talent. The organization lacks organization. Add to this Ma Ying-jeou's Teflon mindset, and any problems will be difficult to remedy.

This is the crux of the matter. It is not a problem that can be solved by assuming the party chairmanship. Conduct a comprehensive review of party and government officials. Determine who should be removed from office. Only this will address the fundamental problems.

形象是形容詞，領導是動詞
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.07.28 04:51 am

在總統大選中贏得七六五萬張選票的馬英九總統，前天獲得二十八萬五千張黨員選票，當選國民黨主席。

為何七六五萬張公民選票還不夠讓馬英九成功地領導國家？總統大選的七六五萬張選票如果是一鼓作氣，則如今這二十八萬五千張黨員選票會不會是再而衰、三而竭？

馬英九是因出現「領導危機」才要兼任黨主席。此前，他「領導」蕭、劉、吳、王四人並不成功；現在他將「全面領導」黨政機構，勝算如何？

馬英九的優勢是「形象」，但問題卻在「領導」。「形象」不等於「領導」；「領導」是動詞，「形象」不能停留在只是形容詞。馬英九的形象，未必只是形容詞；他的「清」與「正」，皆是難能可貴的倫理品格及社會價值。問題卻在：他如何能夠「領導」起他的執政團隊，進而「領導」起整個國家；領導當然是動詞，而不是形容詞。

昔者帝王稱孤道寡，雖是謙抑，卻亦甚寫實；但在民主社會的國家元首，最重要的能力就是「領導」，不能成為只是佇立在孤峰頂上的不沾鍋。能領導者，不兼黨主席或許也能領導；無領導能力者，即使兼黨主席亦未必能領導。

馬總統（主席）欲重建其領導效能，經緯萬端；但最重要亦最根本者是在「人才」與「組織」。

「領導」的第一要領即在識才善任。馬團隊的「人才問題」是個大問題。在內閣及黨部的層次，有些首長連自己的社會形象都無力維護，更遑論準確決策及為政策辯護；但是，馬團隊一方面畏懼變動，另一方面大概是覓無替代人選，遂令這些不稱職者坐在那裡繼續損耗興革時機及政府聲譽。另就地方人才而言，台北縣「吊車瑋」幾乎牽動了國家全局，雲林縣「代子出征」，花蓮、台東皆被有爭議的縣長參選人挾持，更見其青黃不接的窘境。馬政府倘若不能在人才問題上得到解決，執政團隊的形象及績效即不易改善；而倘若執政團隊的形象及績效不能改善，就更難覓得優秀人才加入執政團隊。這將形成惡性循環的領導困境。

再論組織。組織的最大優勢是在「群策群力」；經由組織的智慧產生最佳的決策，並經由組織的力量完成最佳的執行。倘若一個偌大的經濟部，就ＥＣＦＡ卻竟搬出「一哥」與「發嫂」那種水準的政策說帖，這個「組織」顯然是有問題的；倘若立院黨團竟由少數幾名立委的左右而竄改通過了《公務人員行政中立法》，且始終由少數幾名立委襲奪了黨團的社會溝通角色，這個黨團的「組織」也是有問題的。

成功的領導必須建立在「適當的人才」與「有效能的組織」之上。就人才言，如今據要津者，皆已呈現出其才能的極限；若再留用那些明顯不適任者，就是誤國。說得簡白些，馬團隊對這些首長仁慈，即是對人民的殘忍。就組織言，對於那些不能產生「組織效益」的組織，也要使之上緊發條。如果組織不能產生「自我校正」、「自我完善」的機能，反會因「自我感覺良好」而成為國家治理的禍源。

所謂「領導」，應當不是要馬英九凡事親力親為；而主要在識才善任，體現組織的效能。但馬英九「不沾鍋」的風格，使他覓才的門路難以開闊，且易趨保守；一旦所選黨政首長或幹部不適任，整個組織亦難有表現。這可能正是形成當前困境的主因：當「人才」不勝任，「組織」效能低落，再加上馬英九的謹守分際「不沾鍋」，事情就難以收拾。

倘若這才是癥結所在，則恐非兼任黨主席就能解決問題；重新全面檢討黨政骨幹人事的去留，才是諸多根本要圖之一。