Authority and Authoritarianism: Leader, Boss, Tyrant

Authority and Authoritarianism: Leader, Boss, Tyrant
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 16, 2015

Executive Summary: A good mayor should be a leader, rather than a boss, and certainly not a tyrant. Good leaders attract talent, and do not treat them as slaves. Powerful bosses inspire so much fear no one is willing to work for them. Outstanding leaders inspire so much enthusiasm everyone with ability flocks to them. Which course should Ko adopt? That should not be a difficult decision.

Full Text Below; 

Wen-Je Ko publicly excoriated Taipei Xinyi District Police Chief Li Teh-wei. Li responded by applying for early retirement. Wen-Je Ko gave Hsu Li-ming of the National Taiwan University Hospital a promotion, making him Taipei City Chief of Social Services. Ko then threw a temper tantrum and embarrassed him by scolding him in public. Ko abuses his authority. He demands that subordinates attend meetings at 7:30. He demands that they log any dinner engagements not with their families. He referred to Tsai Pi-ru as his "Flying Guillotine". Ko has revealed an autocratic leadership style. Wen-Je Ko will be around for the next four years. Everyone is concerned that he will only become even more insufferable over time.

Wen-Je Ko is a political novice. He feels unconstrained by conventional bureaucratic shackles. This may be exciting for those accustomed to sluggish bureaucracies. A political novice may indeed inject new life into such a system. But we must remind Mayor Ko that in an emergency room the objective is clear. The circumstances are straightforward. An authoritarian command structure may be necessary. But in a multi-faceted democracy, where people must work together, a different sort of leadership is needed.

The Li Teh-wei incident was especially striking. Not because Ko was concerned about Concentric Patriotism Association attacks on Falun Gong. It was striking because Ko publicly dressed down the precinct police chief. The mayor is the boss of the city police. He is also the boss of the Xinyi District Precinct Police Chief. He can of course make demands of his subordinates. But does he really need to humiliate them? After all, the work performed by the city government is far more complex than the work performed in the emergency room at National Taiwan University Hospital. The responsibilities are more complex. The division of labor is more delicate. The employees are more numerous. Within, one must deal with checks and balances from the city council. Without, one must deal with public oversight. On the periphery, one must deal with various interest groups and civic organizations. This is not something a mayor can handle by himself. Therefore the mayor of the capital city should not attempt to be a boss , but instead a leader. Wen-Je Ko must appreciate the difference between a boss and a leader.

Owner-managed transactions are usually simple. The goal is uncomplicated. All one need to is issue instructions, make assessments, and confirm the results. But leadership is not so simple, not so standardized. Being a leader is not a "one-man show." It means leading a team. It requires good morale and a fighting spirit. It requires initiative at all levels, the willingness to assume responsibility and work together to ensure success. It requires the ability to persuade people to work together like a well-oiled machine. That, of course, depends upon the leader's individual ability. But more than that, it depends upon his ability to inspire, delegate, support, and rally his subordinates behind a common cause. This leadership style has no name. In English it is called leadership. By contrast, a boss need not rely on style to mobilize subordinates. The English term “bossy” refers to a tyrannical manner.

A good leader need not have an IQ of 157. But he must not have an EQ lower than necessary. He must be able to persuade people with an IQ of 175 to join a team and work together. A good leader does not demand that his team adopt his own habit of meeting at 7:30. Instead, he respects individual differences. He makes use of each person's strengths. He requires members to meet with each other. When a good leader issues rewards and punishments, he does not dispatch his Flying Guillotine. He does not make his team worry about being humiliated in public. If Ko administration leaders are truly talented individuals, they will have high self-esteem, individual ability, and a solid record of achievements. Ko must show them respect. He cannot afford to cavalierly taunt them.

We do not want to say too much about the Xinyi District precinct police chief incident. But the qualifications for any office, invariably involve comparisons with other candidates with similar qualifications. If word gets around that the boss of a company requires that his vice president get down on his knees before him, then the only people who will apply for vice president, will be sycophants willing to humiliate themselves. Suppose a bureau chief must attend meetings every morning at half past seven, just like a resident physician? Suppose he must work with a Sword of Damocles dangling over his head? Suppose he must log in every dinner he attends? Suppose his decisions can be cavalierly swept aside by the mayor with a wave of his hand? Who then will still want to become a bureau chief? Probably only yes men with no sense of responsibility, self-confidence, or professional dignity. Can one expect such officials to exercise initiative, stay the course, develop the city, and tend to the well-being of the public?

Since Wen-Je Ko took office, he has made a number of encouraging decisions. They including swiftly disconnecting bus lanes on Zhong Xiao West Road, announcing the demolition of hundreds of bootlegged buildings within three months, removing lobbying webpages belonging to city councilmen from the web, protecting trees, and re-evaluating works projects. Some decisions may have been hasty. Some policies may be whimsical. But Mayor Ko appears well-intentioned. Unfortunately, his lack of respect for other people, his insufferable arrogance, and his haste to contradict others, reveal an authoritarian mentality that brooks no dissent. This is probably his greatest weakness as a democratic leader.

A good mayor should be a leader, rather than a boss, and certainly not a tyrant. Good leaders attract talent, and do not treat them as slaves. Powerful bosses inspire so much fear no one is willing to work for them. Outstanding leaders inspire so much enthusiasm everyone with ability flocks to them. Which course should Ko adopt? That should not be a difficult decision.

權威與威權：領袖、老闆、朕
2015-01-16 02:01:39 聯合報 社論

北市信義警分局長李德威遭柯文哲當眾訓斥後，於日前提早申請退休；柯文哲對待自己由台大醫院拔擢至市府的社會局長許立民同樣不假辭色，當眾變臉發飆，給他難堪。諸如此類的官威，包括要求同仁七點半開會、除家人以外的飯局要登錄、稱蔡璧如是他的「血滴子」等等，在在展現了他的強勢領導風格。柯文哲有四年任期，大家都在關注這樣的領導作風將如何發展。

柯文哲是政治素人，不接受官場習氣及制式框架的束縛，對習於迂緩繁縟的官僚體系，當然有正面意義的刺激。但除期待素人新政能帶來清新活潑的風格外，我們也要提醒柯市長：急診室裡的目標清晰、環境單純，威權式的上下指揮或有其必要；但民主政治的考慮多面，更需要眾人協力合作，所需要的領導藝術是截然不同的。

李德威事件之所以引人側目，不是因為柯文哲對於法輪功遭愛國同心會攻擊事件多麼重視，而是他對分局長這個「人」的當眾辱罵。市長是市警局的老闆，也是信義分局長的大老闆，他當然可以對屬下提出要求；但是，似乎不需要用羞辱的方式吧？畢竟，市政府的工作比台大急診部複雜太多，除業務龐雜、分工細膩、員工眾多，內有議會制衡、外有市民監督，周邊更有無數利益團體與公民組合環伺等，這絕非市長一人之力足以應付。因此，首都市長不應該是老闆（boss），而應該是領袖（leader）。而老闆與領袖的差別，正是柯文哲需要體會與酌量的。

老闆管理的事務通常面向單純，目標也不複雜，所以其工作重點不外乎下指令、行考核、驗成果；但做領袖則不這麼簡單，這麼制式。領袖的工作不是一種「個人秀」，而是要帶動一個團隊，使其士氣高昂、鬥志旺盛，各個層級主動發揮、積極負責，願意同心協力以助團隊開創佳績。這種「讓龐大機器協力運轉」的本事，當然與領袖的個人能力有關；但更重要的是，他對團隊要能鼓舞、授權、支持，喚起大家共同的使命感。這種領袖風範無以名狀，英文以抽象的leadership涵蓋。相對地，老闆不太需要靠風範調動下屬的積極性，英文裡bossy這個字就只剩下頤指氣使、跋扈飛揚的老闆架子。

好的領袖未必需要有一五七的高智商，但他們的ＥＱ應該都不低，重點是能夠請到一群智商一七五的人進入團隊，共同發揮功能。好的領袖未必要求團隊配合自己的習慣（七點半開會），而是儘量在尊重個別差異、發揮各人長處的情況下，要求成員彼此配合。好的領袖賞罰分明，但不應該設一個血滴子，讓團隊走在空曠處還得擔心尊嚴受辱。別忘記，柯團隊所延攬的局處首長如果真是人才，便也應該是有自尊、有能力、成就斐然的菁英，尊重猶恐不及，豈能隨便點名管束或言語奚落？

我們不想對信義分局長的事件多做評論，但任何職位所需的條件，都是「相對於這個條件有優勢的人」才會來應聘。因此，如果像坊間傳言，某企業大老闆會要求副總經理當眾下跪，那麼會來應徵副總的，當然多是「視下跪為無物」的膝軟腰輕之輩。如果局處長如住院醫師一般每天早上七點半要開會，不在意頭上籠罩著「血滴子」的陰影，與人吃飯需要報備，自己的決策被市長一句不著邊際的話就輕易否定，那麼甘願就任局處長的，恐怕也多為缺乏專業尊嚴、責任感與自信心的諾諾之輩。這樣的官員，能夠期待他們主動負責，擇善固執，心念城市的發展遠景與廣大市民的福祉嗎？

柯文哲上任至今，做了若干堪稱大快人心的決定，包括速拆忠孝西路公車道、宣示三個月內拆除數百戶頂樓違建、議員關說上網公告、為護樹而重新檢討工程等等。即使一些決策顯得草率反覆，彷彿心血來潮便可決定政策方向，我們對於柯市長的明快作風願給予善意的肯定；但是，他對於人的缺乏尊重，當眾頤指氣使，動不動就否定他人，則露出了其威權、不可挑戰的一面，這恐怕是他最大的民主教養弱點。

好的市長應該是領袖，而非老闆，當然更不是「朕」。好的領袖吸引人才、善用人才，而非使喚奴才。厲害的老闆令「害怕的都不敢來」，但傑出的領袖卻使「有能力的都願意來」。此中高下，應該是不難判斷的。