Share
oftentimes excusing of a fault doth make the fault the worse by the excuse." - William Shakespeare. Imagine that you became the decision maker who is held accountable to a higher authority, and having unlimited authorities to relieve, keep, select or reshuffle seniors in the place you were appointed to -how will your behavior be? What will your mind ask you to do? Let us pause here with your mind, and wonder will your mind lead you or another authority which dictates the decision to you; your heart for example!
Why your heart?! Because in your heart lies your hidden personal wishes that speak about keeping the post, and how to remain in the post, and is selecting leaders who are loyal to your wishes. Look deeply at this term - "your wishes". I did not say the right leader for the post, and the difference is huge between the emotional wish and the wish for hard work, as the person who will deal according to the fear for the chair, their wishes will be different from the one who deals according to professional administrative rules.
I here without a doubt, am talking about dealing with leaders in government authorities, especially when we are dealing at this time with continued news about resignations of several senior officials in several state entities, and I do not know, as many others, is it actually the seniors who submitted their resignations as announced or is there a certain arrangement that led to the resignations, as we are in front of two important points: The first is that we are accustomed to the leader clinging to his post until "Allah might accomplish a matter already destined" (8-44), or be forced out.
The general view indicates the second probability, but let it be against his wish. Also, let us be with the right, which is more deserving to be followed, and leave it for those who have the authority. I wonder: Is what is going on is only changing faces or change for the better and appointing competent individuals who are better able to manage? The answer will be in the hands of the future, which will reveal what is behind this and what follows.
Let us leave the above and speak about a different matter. Even if it is somehow linked with what we spoke about, and before anything and before questioning, I will pose another question: Had every appointed senior official realistically passed the managing ability tests, and was it made sure about his competence, and if he is suitable for the post, or if the issue is out of this realistic domain?
It is realistically supposed, and we are still with logic, that no senior official is appointed except according to objective rules related to ability, competence, interaction, achievement, cleanliness and honesty. The official is the main representative of the area he works in. Also, be sure that any leader that keep all signatures to him and monopolizes their authority is a leader that is not fit even to clean dustbins, because he may be corrupt or afraid of the subordinate senior officials under him.
In this case, we face two things - either the leader himself is a failure, not fit and a narcissist who keeps the decision to himself alone, which is of course not good for leadership and good management, or the senior officials under him are not good and he cannot replace them, and in both cases the situation is miserable and is not good at all! A piece of advice: If you do not trust your colleagues, the solution is either to replace them, and if you cannot, it is you who should leave. The continuation of an unhealthy situation is a shame on a competent and active leader.
[email protected]
