By Yousuf Awadh Al-Azmi

"A successful administrator is one who can organize matters in a way that work will no longer need his presence".

It is supposed, in the general administration of various entities, to have an administrative mentality and the charisma and tools of a leading personality to be able to manage in the best way possible. Administration begins with the human being managing himself, then managing his close relationships with his parents and brothers, then his management of relations with people such as those near his residence, schoolmates and friends, until we reach marital relations and family members.

In public and private work, we see the same concept, but with greater development, as a relationship is built to achieve the goals of this work, be it in the public or private sectors. Here stages of administrative mentality start with early confrontation of crises, followed by maturity and gaining of experience that qualify for administration.

There is no doubt that there are exceptions with merits, but I am taking about the general framework. It is worth mentioning that for the post of manager or general supervisor, it is not necessary to be specialized in the same field. The most important thing is administrative mentality, and when administrative mentality is innovative, a specialist in general management can run a group of hospitals while not being a doctor, or manage specialized entities dealing with roads or even culture and arts, because what is wanted is a brain that understands how to manage and places the right person in the right place.

Misunderstanding by some occupiers of higher administrative positions creates a problem within the administration. Imagine a minister who has signing routine administrative papers that are considered part of daily work among his responsibilities - is this not wrong? This is the duty of executives. How will he set policies and how will he follow them up? He will hold executives to account, but not as long as he carries out the job himself!

There is, of course, a bad explanation of this phenomenon, which is one of two:

* To keep signatures to himself and freeze executives whose job is supposed to be this, for moral gains such as to build a reputation among people, or to have relations with politicians and parliamentarians to serve interests based on the give and take policy to protect the ministerial chair from any repercussions that may affect him negatively, such as facing a grilling, etc.

* Not to trust his executive assistants and consider them a hindrance, so he does not rely on them!

Likewise in the private sector, the manager, as the most senior figure in the entity, is not supposed to preoccupy himself with jobs any executive can do. He should focus on supervision and development of plans and policies and choose qualified executives in order to achieve the general interest of the entity. Of course, the intention is profits and achieving the highest returns.

To be continued...