STARBIZ YESTERDAY - WHY LEADER-MANAGERS MUST CULTIVATE RESPECTFUL FEAR

 

DEAR CAPTAINS of Industry and Public Institutions,

The work of a Leader-Manager, especially that of a Chief Executive, is never easy.

Our foremost responsibility is to ensure that everyone in the organisation moves together toward a shared goal, aligned in direction, synchronised in pace, and advancing at a speed that outperforms the competition.

Balancing the strengths and weaknesses of each department while ensuring all divisions move in sync is demanding work. There is no permanent formula. The landscape shifts constantly. Every day requires recalibration. It is meaningless for sales to excel if production cannot fulfil orders. It is futile for marketing to win awards if operations and delivery systems fail. True leadership lies in orchestrating the whole, not celebrating isolated excellence. This is the burden and privilege of the Chief Executive.

One of the most important leadership traits we must cultivate is what I call respectful fear. Respectful fear is the internal reluctance to violate standards set by a leader who is trusted, consistent, and morally serious.

It is also the awareness that disappointing such a leader carries consequences, even if they are rarely displayed. It arises from an authority that is real but seldom exercised. Power exists, but it rarely needs to be used. This form of fear is rooted in moral authority and consistency, not title alone. It produces self-regulation and voluntary restraint. People act correctly not because they are monitored, but because they take the leader, the role, and the organisation seriously.

When respectful fear is present, the need for constant supervision declines. Micromanagement reduces. Decision-making accelerates because expectations are already understood. Leaders spend less time correcting basic behaviour and more time ensuring that work moves in the right direction and at the right pace. The organisation gains speed and coherence without increasing control.

More importantly, respectful fear lifts ethical and professional standards across the organisation. It creates strong culture without heavy enforcement. Trust is high, but so are expectations. This is not leadership that avoids discomfort or lowers standards in the name of harmony. It is leadership that is taken seriously.

Targets, KPIs, incentives, and policies remain necessary. Organisations will always rely on them. However, they work best when they sit beneath something stronger. Respectful fear operates at a higher level because effective leaders move organisations through internalised discipline. When this is present, systems reinforce behaviour rather than struggle to correct it.

Respectful fear gives rise to silent authority, power that does not need to announce itself. Authority is felt rather than asserted. Because standards and consequences are understood, leaders do not need constant reminders or visible enforcement. Influence operates consistently across the organisation.

At the level of task execution, silent authority ensures that shortcuts feel wrong. Quality is protected without inspection. Work is done properly even in the leader’s absence. For example, in a manufacturing firm, a production supervisor notices a minor deviation that could speed up output but risks compromising specifications. No one is watching. There is no audit scheduled. Yet he corrects it immediately because he knows the CEO’s standards on quality are non-negotiable. Not because of punishment, but because compromising that standard carries weight. The inspection department becomes a verification layer, not the primary safeguard.

At the level of team behaviour, culture replaces policing. Peer regulation emerges, and team members correct one another before issues escalate to management. Teams align themselves to goals, not merely to instructions. Consider a sales team where a sales team member begins to overpromise delivery timelines to secure deals. Before the issue reaches management, a colleague pulls him aside and says, “That is not how we operate here.” The correction happens horizontally, not vertically. The team protects the organisation’s credibility because the leader’s expectations are already internalised. Culture acts before compliance mechanisms are triggered.

At the level of individual performance, the internal bar rises. Motivation becomes intrinsic. Effort is driven by pride, responsibility, and ownership rather than pressure. Individuals move faster and more cleanly toward outcomes because they are self-directed. An analyst working independently on research that will drive execution decisions knows that flawed numbers will cascade into flawed action. No one is supervising. Yet he re-checks the data, tests the assumptions, and validates the findings before submission. He understands that credibility, once compromised, affects more than a spreadsheet. His discipline is not enforced. It is internal.

This is the leadership mechanism at work. Silent authority converts external control into internal commitment. When commitment is internal, performance scales without increasing supervision, and influence endures even in the leader’s absence. There can be no silent authority without respectful fear.

How then do Leader-Managers cultivate it?

One useful lens comes from a Chinese concept often referred to colloquially as “sat”, known in Cantonese as saat hei and in Mandarin as shā qì. It refers to a presence or aura that is immediately felt. People often describe it simply as, “He doesn’t have to say much, but the room quiets when he enters.” Sat expresses respectable fear. It is seriousness without theatrics, authority without noise, power without display.

This presence is not performed. It is built over time. It begins with authenticity and consistency between words and action. Leaders must be willing to make hard decisions and stand by them. Emotional control matters. Calm judgment carries more weight than volatility. Respectful fear is strengthened through a clear track record of consequences applied fairly and predictably. Above all, it requires moral seriousness rather than charm.

Dear Captains, Confucius captured this idea simply when he observed that a leader who governs by virtue is like the North Star, steady in its place, while others naturally align themselves around it. Respectful fear works in the same way. It is not imposed. It is earned. When leaders cultivate moral seriousness, consistency, and restraint, organisations align naturally. Speed increases without noise. Discipline holds even in the leader’s absence.

This is the true strength of the Leader-Manager: to build respectful fear that sustains performance long after authority leaves the room.

Peace.

Anas Zubedy

For previous articles go here - https://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2026/02/from-worklife-balance-to-worklife.html

 

ARE WOMEN INFERIOR? SHAH VERSUS AYATOLLAH

 

Many around the world, Malaysians included, have distorted, Western-influenced views of Iran and its leadership. Many are not willing to put in the effort to study deeper or seek information from balanced, non-partisan sources. Some naively accept propaganda from one side, while others adopt equally biased views from the other.

One common but often unexamined belief is that the Shah had a better position on women compared to the Ayatollah.

However, in a 1973 interview with Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci, the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, expressed views that reflected a clear belief in male superiority. While he acknowledged that women could be equal under the law, he argued that they were not equal in ability. He also emphasised that a woman’s value lay in being beautiful, graceful, and maintaining femininity.

In short, his remarks suggest that he saw women’s primary role as tied to appearance and charm rather than leadership or intellectual influence, revealing a deeply patriarchal outlook, if not implying women’s inferiority, despite his government’s broader modernising facade.

Watch the attached video to hear what the Ayatollah’s position was.

More importantly, we need to look at measurable data and facts. We must look at real outcomes.

Under the Shah, women’s education remained limited and uneven. Female literacy was only around 24% to 35%, meaning that over 60% of women were still illiterate, especially in rural areas. Even at higher levels, access was restricted, with women making up only about 28% of university students. This shows that while opportunities existed, they largely benefited urban and elite groups rather than the wider population. We must also remember that during the Shah’s time, no economic sanctions were imposed by the international community.

Under the Islamic Republic, including the Ayatollah’s leadership, education expanded dramatically across society. Female literacy rose to around 80% to 90% and above, with primary education completion reaching about 99% for girls. University participation saw an even sharper rise, increasing from about 3% in 1978 to around 59% and above, with women forming the majority of students in some years. This reflects a shift from limited access to mass education for women across the country. These achievements were made under strict international sanctions, with far fewer resources.

It is unfortunate that discussions are often reduced to dress codes, overshadowing more important issues. Focusing only on this is limiting and narrow. I have written about this before. If interested, you can read it here:
https://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-best-way-to-dress-quranic-point-of.html

We need to look at the larger picture.

Peace.

Anas

 

THE PROBLEM WITH WAR – Children Die

 

War must always be avoided, and fighting should only ever be for defence.

Each time I watch a video of a place being bombed, my first fear is this: innocent children are dying. In Gaza, thousands have died or are wounded for life, not just since October 7th, but for decades. At the start of the illegal war the US and Israel imposed on Iran, 66 boys and 54 girls aged 7 to 12 perished. Since then, we can be sure many more have. Innocent children in Iran, Lebanon and Israel. Yes, Israel too.

As far as I am concerned, the children of Israel are innocent. We cannot blame them for the amathia and distorted beliefs of their adults. These children are moulded into what they later become by the Zionist regime. They began innocent. They are shaped, conditioned, and taught to see ideas like Amalek as a God-given right.

We must remember that this is not new. It is a wicked approach used by many. Take Idi Amin in Uganda. Power was sustained not just by force, but by shaping the minds of those who carried it out. He drew in young, vulnerable recruits, cut them off from moral anchors, and made loyalty to him their only compass.

Brutality was not always formally taught as a “right,” but it was clearly rewarded and protected. Over time, this eroded all sense of right and wrong, turning violence into a tool of belonging and survival. When authority removes accountability and reshapes values, ordinary people can be conditioned to commit extraordinary harm.

War is for the uncivilised. Benjamin Netanyahu and his comrades are barbaric savages, especially those who go as far as invoking Amalek, are acting with a dangerous moral blindness. Coupled with a “bodoh sombong” US President Donald Trump, who appears to act from misguided certainty or willful ignorance, we have a potent formula for senseless war, needless destruction, and catastrophic loss of human life.

The problem with war is simple.

Children die.

Peace.

Anas

 

OUR PORTS: SAY NO TO US WARSHIPS

 

Malaysia stands for neutrality, justice, and international law. Hosting US warships now sends the wrong signal and risks being seen as tacit support. I disagree.

We cannot be seen, even indirectly, as facilitating a war monger. We must stand firm for peace and the protection of innocent lives.

What are our leaders thinking, allowing this?

Peace.

IRAN: ROUND 2

 

I am of the opinion, and currently working on a paper, that Iran’s bold move in standing up to the USA and, by extension, the quest for a Greater Israel, and outsmarting them thus far, will have a profound impact on Muslims all over the world, especially the youth. The impact in Malaysia will be deep as well. I have been suggesting and writing about this for many decades.

I titled this entry IRAN: Round 2, as Round 1 was Iran’s Revolution in 1979. The 1979 Iranian Revolution had a profound impact on the Islamic world by demonstrating, for the first time in the modern era, that a Western-backed secular regime could be overthrown and replaced with an Islamic system of governance. This inspired a surge of confidence in Islamic identity and political Islam across many Muslim societies, including Malaysia, encouraging movements to frame politics, resistance, and social justice in Islamic terms. It energized both Shi’a and Sunni groups, sparked Islamic activism and, in some cases, uprisings across the region, while also intensifying debates about the role of Islam in state and society.

In an article I posted at 5 pm on May 5, 2013, polling day of GE13, I stressed and predicted that PAS would do much better. In that article, I wrote:

“That Malaysia will turn more and more ‘Islamic’ is a foregone conclusion. I will share two main reasons for this; one being local while the other, global.

In Malaysia today, the Muslim majority are giving birth more than the rest. Owing to this rate, by 2050 Muslims should make up about 70% of Malaysia, compared to the current 60%. A survey on young Muslims aged 15 to 25 years old in Malaysia, published on the Merdeka Centre website, reports that more than 70% of them aspire to adopt the Islamic way of life and desire to see society move forward in the same manner. These statistics are more than just numbers; they indicate where Malaysians are heading and how that journey is reshaping our nation.

At the global front, while by the 80s and early 90s communism and nationalism, two of the forces obstructing world dominance by the USA, were no longer in a position to pose any challenge to Washington, the Iranian Revolution of 1979 thrust Islam to the fore in both national and international politics. A decade later, in 1989, the Mujahideen’s victory over Soviet Russia in Afghanistan showed that a small, organised, determined, and united group of Muslims could resist and defeat a superpower.

A new kind of confidence and consciousness was injected into the Muslim world. Muslim revivalism, which began in the nineteenth century, experienced renewed vitality. Muslims, especially the youth, rethought, reflected, and revived their rich and often forgotten history, bringing it into present memory and rekindling the spirit of their own golden era.

Furthermore, events in the Middle East, especially the treatment of Palestinians by Israel and its allies, and what is perceived as double standards by the West towards Muslim nations, continue to fuel this growing consciousness. Muslims today increasingly see Islam as a possible alternative framework for managing society and the nation. Malaysian Muslims share these ideals.”

You can read the full article here:
https://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2013/05/a-stronger-islamic-flavour-after-ge13.html

In a recent research paper by Syaza Shukri, “Why Young Malay Voters in Malaysia Are ‘Turning Green’,” this position is further reinforced.

Syaza's paper was written before the current conflict in the Middle East. I have strong conviction that IRAN: Round 2 will create an impact and momentum that has yet to be fully realised, not only among Muslims in Malaysia but across the world.

I look forward to sharing my full article with you after Raya, God willing.

Peace.

 

Have a Meaningful Aidilfitri - EDUCATION: Are we being honest with our children?

 

EDUCATION: Are we being honest with our children?

This is an uncomfortable question. Yet it is one we must ask.

While thousands of Malaysian students score A’s every year, our PISA rankings remain around the middle of the global table. Countries with far fewer straight-A students often outperform us. The number of our top performers rises each year, yet our global standing does not.

Are we making examinations easier or inflating grades? This may create a feel-good moment in the short term, where parents are happy, students feel good, teachers feel proud, and politicians point to the results as proof that everything is working.

But if the standards are lower than the world outside our borders, we risk sending our children into a more competitive world less prepared than they think.

That is not kindness. That is not fairness. And most importantly, that is not honesty.

The world our children will enter is global, demanding and competitive. To prepare them well, we must be brave enough to measure ourselves honestly.

This Hari Raya, let us reflect and set azam baharu.

Perhaps one of the most meaningful gifts we can give the next generation is not easier marks, but stronger education and the ability to know where we truly stand. We cannot move forward if we begin without knowing.

Because loving our children also means preparing them for the real world.

Let us add add value,

Have a Meaningful Aidilfitri

 

Peace, anas

 

Photo caption

“The purpose of education in Islam is to produce a good man.” - Royal Professor Tan Sri Dr Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas (1931–2026) was a renowned Malaysian Muslim philosopher and scholar of Islamic thought and education.

 

HINDUTVA VS HINDUISM

 

When Malaysians do not understand the difference between Hindutva and Hinduism, they often end up making ridiculous claims and accusations.

Hinduism is a religion and a spiritual tradition that is thousands of years old. It includes philosophy, rituals, temples, festivals and a rich diversity of beliefs.

Hindutva, on the other hand, is a modern political ideology that emerged in the 20th century and is associated with certain nationalist movements in India.

Confusing the two is like confusing Judaism with Zionism. Judaism is an ancient religion with spiritual teachings and traditions, while Zionism is a modern political movement. One is a faith; the other is a political ideology.

When we fail to make this distinction, discussions become emotional, unfair, intellectually careless and, at times, insulting to intelligence.

These behaviours are alien to Muslim traditions and in direct contrast to the scholars of Islam’s Golden Age. Al-Biruni (973–1048), whom serious historians consider his book Kitab al-Hind to be one of the earliest works of comparative religion and anthropology in history, was extraordinary in how he studied Hinduism. Instead of relying on second-hand accounts, Al-Biruni learned Sanskrit so he could read Hindu texts directly.

His approach was extremely rare in the 11th century. Most scholars wrote about other religions without studying their original texts. He even criticised Muslim writers who misrepresented Hindu beliefs. Personally, I follow his approach. A scholar, he stressed, must present the beliefs of a people as they themselves believe them, not as critics portray them. Al-Biruni’s method teaches an important lesson: before criticising another religion or civilisation, we must first understand it deeply and fairly.

Another Muslim scholar of the Golden Age worth emulating is Al-Shahrastani (1086–1153), who wrote one of the most famous early works on comparative religion. His most important book is Kitab al-Milal wa al-Nihal (The Book of Religions and Sects), which examined belief systems including Islam and its various sects, Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Greek philosophy and Indian religions, including Hindu philosophical traditions. Like Al-Biruni, he stated clearly that a scholar should describe religions as their followers understand them, not through polemics or ridicule.

Al-Biruni and Al-Shahrastani are scholars who helped establish what we would today call the academic study of religion. Malaysia, which has people of many faiths as fellow citizens, should teach about them and their approach in schools so that by the time we become adults and leaders, we are mature in dealing with inter-religious issues.

Coming back to Hindutva and Hinduism, if we want mature conversations in a multi-religious country like Malaysia, we must first understand what we are talking about. It is naïve to think that the already very fragmented minority community of Malaysian Indians would consider using Hindutva politics in Malaysia.

Peace.
Anas Zubedy
Penang