PROFESSOR TAJUDDIN’S MENTAL TRAP

 

PROFESSOR TAJUDDIN’S MENTAL TRAP

One of Malaysia's biggest problems is that we remain trapped in a racial mental model. Professor Tajuddin Rasdi appears to be one example. In his recent article, “A theory on why Malays accept corrupt leaders,” he seems to have fallen into this very trap.

We have become so accustomed to viewing everything through race that even universal human issues such as corruption, integrity, honesty, and accountability are interpreted along ethnic lines.

Instead of asking why people tolerate corruption, he asks why Malays tolerate corruption, as though corruption were a uniquely Malay issue. Rather than examining the political, economic, institutional, and psychological reasons people support leaders accused or convicted of corruption, he frames it as a characteristic of one ethnic community.

Professor Tajuddin cites continued support for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Umno as evidence. But has he forgotten that Chinese, Indian, Sabahan, Sarawakian, and other Malaysians also include people who remember Najib's administration favourably? Some believe, rightly or wrongly, that the economy was better and life more comfortable during his premiership.

And lest he forget, following GE15 in 2022, DAP, a party with a predominantly Chinese support base, agreed to work alongside Umno in the Madani government, an arrangement that continues today. Does that mean DAP and its supporters also tolerate corruption? Or does it demonstrate that political behaviour is more complex than Professor Tajuddin's racial explanation suggests?

This is the danger of the racial mental model. We become selective in what we see and fail to recognise similar behaviours across communities. Extreme bias can make even intelligent people think superficially.

Surely, we should expect greater intellectual rigour from a professor.

Where Is the Economic Evidence?

Take his first argument, taxation. He suggests Malays tolerate corruption because many pay little or no income tax.

But where is the evidence? Does he have official figures showing income tax contributions by ethnicity? I am unaware of any government report providing such a breakdown.

More importantly, has he considered how government revenue works?

Personal income tax is only one source. What about SST, excise duties, corporate taxes, and other taxes borne directly or indirectly by Malaysians?

Given that Malays constitute the largest ethnic community, has he calculated their aggregate contribution through consumption, purchases, and other economic transactions, including taxes passed on to consumers?

Even if Malays, on average, pay less personal income tax because of lower average incomes, how does that establish that they are less concerned about corruption? Are lower-income Malaysians somehow less affected when public money is stolen or misused?

These are basic economic and logical questions that should be addressed before advancing such a theory. An academic argument should rest on evidence, not coffee-shop assumptions dressed up as intellectual analysis.

What Happened During GE15?

Lest Professor Tajuddin forget, corruption and integrity were prominent issues during Malaysia's 15th General Election in 2022.

Both Pakatan Harapan and Perikatan Nasional presented themselves as alternatives to the corruption controversies surrounding Barisan Nasional.

A substantial number of Malay voters rejected Barisan Nasional. Electoral researcher Bridget Welsh estimated that Perikatan Nasional secured the majority -approximately 54% of the Malay vote in Peninsular Malaysia - while others supported Pakatan Harapan and other parties.

While corruption was not the only consideration, economic concerns, religion, political identity, and leadership also influenced voting behaviour.

Nevertheless, GE15 demonstrated that Malay voters were neither politically uniform nor automatically loyal to Umno. Many were prepared to abandon a party they had supported for generations in an election where corruption featured prominently.

How then can we so casually conclude that Malays accept corruption?

What About Islamic Education and Friday Sermons?

Professor Tajuddin also claims that Islamic education largely avoids corruption and that, despite reviewing thousands of Friday sermons, he found none explaining how public money finances government salaries and development.

Perhaps he is unaware of what was happening in mosques across Malaysia in the months leading up to GE15. My work takes me to different states, including Penang, Kedah, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan, Johor, and Selangor/Kuala Lumpur. I regularly attend Friday prayers wherever I happen to be.

During those months, I personally heard repeated sermons strongly condemning rasuah, explaining why corruption is wrong, and reminding Muslims of their responsibility to reject it. Friends attending prayers elsewhere shared similar experiences.

These were not isolated occasions. The message was repeated over many Fridays and across different states. There appeared to be a concerted effort by religious authorities nationwide to make corruption a major moral concern before the election.

There are documented examples:

• On 7 January 2022, a Friday sermon in Selangor addressed corruption. The following day, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah publicly reinforced its message, describing corruption as a grave danger that must be eradicated.
• In September 2022, Sultan Nazrin Shah of Perak delivered a major address condemning corruption at the launch of Korupsi dan Kemunafikan dalam Politik Melayu.
• On 11 November, mosques across the Federal Territories delivered a sermon titled Integriti Teras Kesejahteraan Keluarga dan Masyarakat.
• Most strikingly, on 18 November 2022, just one day before GE15, the official Friday sermon in Perak explicitly urged Muslims to reject candidates associated with corruption and refuse monetary inducements intended to influence their votes. It even explained that ballot papers were financed by taxpayers' money.

These were direct messages connecting Islamic moral responsibilities with corruption, public funds, leadership, and electoral choices.

Of course, not every Friday sermon addressed corruption, nor does this establish that all religious institutions were equally effective. But surely these examples raise serious questions about Professor Tajuddin's sweeping portrayal of Islamic education.

To Fight Corruption, Let Us First Rise Above Race

If we are serious about fighting corruption, perhaps the first thing we must do is free ourselves from the racial mental model.

Corruption is not a Malay, Chinese, Indian, Sabahan, or Sarawakian problem. It is a Malaysian problem and, more importantly, a universal human problem.

Personally, I believe GE15 was a significant moment in our political history. For perhaps the first time in a very long time, I saw Malaysians across racial and religious backgrounds rallying around a common concern: corruption.

Many went to the ballot box determined to demand greater integrity from their leaders. Although race, religion, and other considerations remained influential, corruption had become a major national agenda cutting across communities.

For me, that was among the most encouraging aspects of GE15. It showed that Malaysians could recognise a common enemy beyond their differences.

We should build on that spirit, not retreat into the old racial mental model.

If Professor Tajuddin is serious about fighting corruption, perhaps he should begin by examining his own assumptions and biases rather than framing corruption as a problem peculiar to Malays. This applies equally to how we discuss economics, politics, education, and other social issues.

We all have biases. The challenge is to recognise them, question them, and prevent them from distorting our judgement. When we become overly attached to a race, religion, or political party, we risk seeing only what confirms our beliefs while ignoring evidence that challenges them.

Even intelligent and highly educated people can fall into this trap.

Malaysia will make greater progress against corruption when we stop asking which race tolerates it and start asking why anyone tolerates it.

That is the mental shift we need. And it must begin with ourselves.

“O you who believe! Stand firmly for Allah as witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness.”  -  Quran 5:8

Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Kuala Lumpur

 

NIRMALAH THURAI

 

NIRMALAH THURAI

Today is Nirmalah’s birthday.

Since I was 27 years old, almost 35 years ago, I have never failed to wish Nirmalah a happy birthday. Her birthday, 8 October, falls on the same day as my second sister’s birthday. It has always been a date I remember.

I first got to know Nirmalah when we were working at Nestlé. I was then a young executive in the Nescafé team, while Nirmalah was our Market Research Manager.

She was one of the smartest people I have ever met. Exceptionally brilliant, yet generous with her knowledge and nurturing towards those who wanted to learn.

I quickly recognised that I had someone special to learn from, and I took the opportunity to make her my mentor and teacher.

Almost every week, I would try to steal an hour of her time to learn about market research. For nearly two years, while I was based at the head office, I benefited enormously from her generosity in teaching me, sharing books and showing me how to understand, interpret and write research reports.

She taught me so much about market research, from Usage and Attitude (U&A) studies and focus group interviews to understanding both qualitative and quantitative research. She guided me on how to write good research briefs, the dos and don’ts of interpreting research findings, and how to critically evaluate what research agencies presented to us. Most importantly, she taught me never to rely solely on executive summaries, but to dig into the raw data, study the details, identify patterns, question assumptions and draw my own conclusions. She taught me not just how to read research, but how to think like a researcher.

Nirmalah was always willing to teach. But there was one thing you had to remember: she was a stickler for time. If we agreed to meet at 12 noon, I had better be there at 12 noon!

But Nirmalah was much more than a brilliant market research specialist. She had all the qualities of a great leader and was clearly Managing Director material.

In fact, at one point in her career, despite already being a senior manager, she deliberately took several steps down to learn sales from the ground up, taking on the responsibilities of a sales executive covering a territory. That was Nirmalah. She was never afraid to start again, learn something new and challenge herself. She eventually rose through the ranks to become a Country Manager.

Nirmalah had that rare ability to see the big picture while understanding how all the little details fitted together. She understood people, knew how to manage them and, more importantly, how to bring out the best in them.

She was exceptionally organised, disciplined and never wasted time. She spoke very fast, but always with clarity and conviction. Her mind was constantly working, asking questions, challenging assumptions and exploring different ways of looking at things.

And her energy was infectious! The zest, enthusiasm and passion with which she spoke could make even an ordinary conversation exciting. She had a way of making you want to think harder, aim higher and get things done.

That was Nirmalah. Not just someone who was exceptionally intelligent, but someone who could inspire others to become better versions of themselves.

I am certainly not alone in seeing Nirmalah this way. Many who knew her, worked with her or had the privilege of calling her a friend would attest to this. In fact, I am sure many have even more wonderful stories to tell about her. Beyond her exceptional intelligence, sharp wit and clarity of thought, Nirmalah was also funny, warm and great company. Even an ordinary conversation with her could be both intellectually stimulating and full of laughter.

For me, Nirmalah was never just a former colleague or a friend. She was my mentor, my teacher and someone who inspired me in so many ways. Much of what I learned from her all those years ago has stayed with me to this day.

In fact, throughout the years, I have often shared Nirmalah’s story in my classes when teaching leaders, managers and young talents. I have always cited her as a role model, especially her willingness to take a few steps down in her career so that she could move further ahead. Her story is one of my favourite examples of how sometimes, to move forward in life, we must first be willing to take a step back. It takes humility, courage and the willingness to learn. Nirmalah demonstrated all three, and I continue to use her example to inspire others.

Nirmalah passed away last month, and I will miss her dearly. Especially on 8 October, a day when, for almost 35 years, I would make it a point to be among the first to send her a birthday greeting.

Today, for the first time in all those years, I can no longer send her that message.

Happy birthday, Nirmalah.

We will miss you.

Love, peace.

Anas Zubedy

 

TOP 10 CHURCHES AND MOSQUES ATTACKED OR DESTROYED BY ISRAEL

 

TOP 10 CHURCHES AND MOSQUES ATTACKED OR DESTROYED BY ISRAEL

There is a tendency to see what is happening in Palestine and Lebanon simply as a conflict between Muslims and Zionists.

It is not.

Muslims form the majority of the population suffering the destruction, particularly in Gaza and southern Lebanon. But these lands are also home to some of the oldest Christian communities in the world.

For the vast majority of their history spanning hundreds of years, Muslims, Christians and Jews lived in these lands in peace - sharing the same towns, streets, markets and sacred geography. While conflicts did flare up from time to time, they were the exception rather than the rule; peaceful coexistence was the enduring baseline of daily life.

In fact, many may not realise that even today, Lebanon offers a remarkable example of Christian-Muslim power-sharing. By convention, its President is a Maronite Christian, its Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, and its Speaker of Parliament a Shia Muslim. Parliamentary seats are divided equally between Christians and Muslims, ensuring that Lebanon's major communities share responsibility rather than allowing one to dominate.

This shared history is important because when a land is attacked, occupied or its people displaced, it is not only one religious community that suffers. The homes, neighbourhoods, institutions and places of worship built by generations of different communities are caught in the destruction too.

Churches have been attacked. Mosques have been destroyed. Ancient religious buildings have been damaged. Christian communities have been displaced alongside Muslim communities.

This conflict must therefore be understood beyond religion alone. At its heart are questions of land, occupation, displacement, settlements, security, sovereignty and ultimately who controls the territory.

The destruction of religious heritage allows us to see another dimension of what is being lost. Some of these buildings have stood for hundreds of years. Some belong to traditions stretching back almost two millennia.

Here are 10 important Christian sites and 10 important Muslim sites in Palestine and Lebanon that have been attacked, damaged or destroyed during Israeli military operations in recent years.

TOP 10 CHRISTIAN HERITAGE SITES

1. Saint Porphyrios Greek Orthodox Church - Gaza City, Palestine

One of Gaza's oldest active churches, tracing its Christian history to the fifth century. An Israeli strike in October 2023 hit a compound building where displaced Christians were sheltering, killing at least 17 people. Israel stated its target was nearby Hamas infrastructure.

2. Saint George Melkite Catholic Church - Derdghaya, Lebanon

This historic church in southern Lebanon was devastated during Israeli attacks in October 2024, badly damaging the complex and surrounding facilities.

3. Saint George Melkite Catholic Church - Yaroun, Lebanon

Part of southern Lebanon's longstanding Christian presence, this heritage-listed church was destroyed during Israeli military operations in 2024.

4. Salvatorian Sisters' Convent - Yaroun, Lebanon

This Catholic complex included a convent and former school. Israeli forces destroyed the complex in 2026. Israel alleged Hezbollah military activity there, a claim strongly rejected by Catholic authorities.

5. Melkite Greek Catholic Church - Tyre, Lebanon

Tyre is one of Christianity's ancient centres in the Levant. The UN Human Rights Office reported that a Melkite Greek Catholic church there was destroyed or severely damaged during Israeli operations.

6. Our Lady of the Assumption Church - Nabatieh, Lebanon

Serving Nabatieh's longstanding Christian community, this Melkite Catholic church and its parish buildings suffered significant damage from Israeli strikes.

7. Holy Family Catholic Church - Gaza City, Palestine

Gaza's only Roman Catholic parish became a refuge for hundreds of civilians. An Israeli tank strike in July 2025 killed three people and injured others, including its parish priest. Israel said the strike was accidental.

8. Gaza Baptist Church - Gaza City, Palestine

Partially destroyed in earlier bombardment and damaged again during Israeli bombing in late 2023, this church represents Gaza's small, diverse Palestinian Christian community.

9. Saint John the Baptist Church - Sarda, Lebanon

This church was badly affected during Israeli military operations and demolitions around the village.

10. Christian Church at Alma al-Shaab - Lebanon

Alma al-Shaab is one of southern Lebanon's historic Christian communities near the Israeli border. Its religious property suffered damage amid extensive destruction in the village.

These are not simply buildings. They represent communities whose presence in Palestine and Lebanon predates the modern State of Israel by many centuries.

TOP 10 MUSLIM HERITAGE SITES

The destruction of Muslim religious heritage has been considerably greater numerically, with hundreds of mosques in Gaza alone reportedly damaged or destroyed.

1. Great Omari Mosque - Gaza City, Palestine

Perhaps Gaza's most important historic mosque, its site carries centuries of religious history. Incorporating a former Byzantine and Crusader church, it was expanded under the Mamluks and Ottomans before much of it was destroyed by bombardment.

2. Ibn Uthman Mosque - Gaza City, Palestine

One of Gaza's key historic mosques, principally dating from the Mamluk period. UNESCO has verified damage to the site.

3. Zofor Domri Mosque - Gaza City, Palestine

Another important monument of Gaza's medieval Islamic heritage that has suffered UNESCO-verified damage.

4. Prophet Benjamin Shrine and Mosque - Mhaibib, Lebanon

UN documentation describes this shrine as approximately 2,000 years old. The shrine and adjoining religious structures were destroyed during Israeli operations in 2024.

5. Historic Yaroun Mosque - Lebanon

Approximately 300 years old, this historic mosque was destroyed during Israeli operations, as documented by UN experts.

6. Great Mosque of Bint Jbeil - Lebanon

An important historic mosque in one of southern Lebanon's best-known towns, which suffered severe destruction alongside its surrounding urban area.

7. Shrine of Shimon al-Safa - Chamaa, Lebanon

This unusual site crosses religious traditions, associated locally with Simon Peter or Simon the Zealot. The shrine and historic complex have suffered major damage.

8. Ahel El-Quran Mosque - Dhayra, Lebanon

This mosque was destroyed using manually placed explosives, with Amnesty International verifying the destruction through video and satellite imagery.

9. Noble Messenger Mosque - Dhayra, Lebanon

Described as the village's oldest mosque, it was blown up during Israeli military operations, with Amnesty International verifying video of its destruction.

10. Mosques of Aita Ash-Shaab - Lebanon

Amnesty International's satellite analysis found four mosques destroyed as large sections of Aita Ash-Shaab were razed during operations.

The numbers tell us something important.

This is not simply the destruction of Muslim heritage. It is the destruction of part of the accumulated cultural and religious heritage of the Holy Land and the Levant.

Muslim heritage is being destroyed. Christian heritage is being destroyed. And sites carrying layers of Jewish, Christian and Muslim history are being damaged with them.

Perhaps the three Abrahamic traditions themselves offer us a better way forward.

JUDAISM

The Hebrew Bible says:

"For My House shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples."

 - Isaiah 56:7

God's house does not belong exclusively to one ethnicity or people. It is a house of prayer for all peoples.

CHRISTIANITY

Jesus teaches:

"Blessed are the peacemakers."

-        Matthew 5:9

Christianity does not glorify those who destroy the sacred spaces of others. It elevates those who make peace.

ISLAM

The Quran specifically names the places of worship of different religions:

"Had Allah not repelled some people by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is much mentioned, would surely have been demolished."

-        Quran 22:40

The scriptures explain with clarity what we must do. Regardless of faith, we must work together to end Israel's wrongdoing as soon as possible.

Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Kuala Lumpur

 

STARBIZ TODAY - THE HIGHER-ORDER WORK OF LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT

 

THE HIGHER-ORDER WORK OF LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT

Dear Captains,

Much of what we learn about leadership and management focuses on practical skills: setting goals, delegating, developing teams, giving feedback and handling difficult conversations.

These are important. Every leader-manager needs them.

However, the higher we rise, the less sufficient these individual skills become. A chief executive, unit head or leader-manager of a public institution must work above any single task or technique. At this level, we are responsible for the direction, performance and health of the whole organisation.

It is the higher-order work of a leader-manager, understood through five responsibilities.

1. BEING HONEST WITH REALITY

The first responsibility is to be honest with reality. This requires us to define reality clearly, establishing what is and what is not, without allowing our likes, dislikes or emotional attachments to distort what we see.

The higher we rise, the more likely reality reaches us through reports, meetings and people who may filter what they communicate. We may receive plenty of data but still misunderstand what is happening.

Defining reality requires us to distinguish activity from results, symptoms from causes, and temporary disturbances from deeper patterns. We must notice what people are saying, not saying or afraid to say.

We must also look outside. Changes in customers, technology, demographics, regulation and public mood may reshape our future before appearing in our financial statements.

We need to ask: What is really happening? What has changed? Which assumptions are we still carrying? What are we failing to see? Where are the risks and opportunities? What should we keep, abandon or modify?

A leader-manager cannot respond wisely without first being honest with reality.

2. ACT WHILE READING THE SITUATION

Leader-managers do not operate from a distance. We must participate in events while observing what they reveal.

Example, while chairing a meeting, we must notice who is engaged, who has withdrawn, where resistance is developing and whether agreement is genuine or merely polite. We must also read the emotions, relationships and interests influencing the conversation.

We need to be inside the action while mentally stepping outside it to see what is happening.

Every action produces new information. Success may reveal an opportunity. Failure may expose a mistaken assumption. People and circumstances may change.

Plans must guide us without becoming straitjackets. We need check-in points to compare results with expectations, examine assumptions and adjust when necessary.

Leader-managers should listen first and speak last. If the most senior person speaks too early, others may arrange their views around the leader-manager’s position. Important information may never reach the table.

To act while continuing to read and adjust is leadership and management in motion.

3. MANAGE TODAY AND BUILD TOMORROW

Every organisation lives in two time horizons.

We must perform today. Customers must be served, commitments fulfilled, standards maintained, employees supported and problems resolved. Without current performance, there may be no organisation left to inherit the future.

We must also prepare for tomorrow by developing people, renewing capabilities, exploring opportunities and responding to changes that may make today’s successful practices obsolete.

The challenge is not choosing one over the other. It is managing both simultaneously.

Some leader-managers exhaust their people, postpone investment and neglect succession to produce present results. They make today look successful by borrowing from tomorrow.

Others speak about transformation while allowing present performance to deteriorate. But we cannot build tomorrow if we repeatedly fail today.

We must make work productive while developing our people. We must use present strengths while building new ones, and protect what remains valuable while changing what no longer serves us.

Managing today preserves performance. Building tomorrow preserves relevance.

4. MOVE THE WHOLE SYSTEM

Knowledge and good intentions are useful only when translated into coordinated action.

At senior levels, personal effort is no longer enough. We must align people, priorities, structures, information and resources so the whole organisation moves in the intended direction.

An announcement is not execution. Neither is a strategic plan or decision recorded in the minutes.

A decision becomes actionable when people know what must be done, who is responsible, the deadline, and who must be consulted or informed. Without clarity, sensible decisions dissolve into delay and confusion.

Communication is not something we add after a decision. It is part of making the decision work.

Meetings must become working mechanisms rather than rituals. Each should have a clear purpose, the right people and a defined outcome, ending with responsibilities, deadlines and follow-up.

Moving the system also means putting capable people where they can create the greatest value, including major opportunities.

The test is not how hard the leader-manager works. The test is whether people across the organisation understand the direction, accept responsibility and act without continually waiting for the leader-manager.

A strong leader-manager does not merely move people. A strong leader-manager builds an organisation capable of moving.

5. EXERCISE JUDGEMENT

Finally, we come to judgement.

Decision-making is part of judgement, but they are not the same. A decision is the visible choice. Judgement is the deeper capacity to determine what should be chosen, why, when to act and what consequences we are prepared to accept.

Senior leader-managers rarely choose between something clearly right and wrong. More often, we choose between competing priorities, risks and imperfect possibilities.

We must judge what matters most, what can wait, what must change and what should be preserved. We must balance present performance with future capability, speed with consultation and organisational interests with stakeholder needs.

We must judge when to direct, persuade, negotiate, support or step aside, and what to entrust to others. Most importantly, we must ask not only whether an action is legal or profitable, but whether it is right for the organisation.

Good judgement requires the humility to review our decisions. When something fails, we must ask whether the problem lies in implementation or our original judgement.

The most useful questions are: What needs to be done? What is right for the organisation? What are the likely consequences? What will this decision solve, and what new problems might it create?

Judgement comes last because it draws upon all the other responsibilities. We must judge the reality we have faced honestly, the situation while acting within it, the balance between today and tomorrow, and how the whole system should be moved.

THE WORK BENEATH THE WORK

Dear Captains, the higher-order work of leadership and management can be summarised as:

Being Honest With Reality. Act While Reading. Manage Today and Build Tomorrow. Move the Whole System. Exercise Judgement.

These are not separate steps. We move continuously among them. Being honest with reality informs judgement. Action reveals new reality. Today’s performance creates the capacity to build tomorrow. Judgement guides the system, while its response provides new information.

Goal-setting, delegation, coaching, feedback and difficult conversations remain essential. But they are the instruments. The higher-order work determines how, when and why those instruments should be used.

The higher we rise, the more honest we must be with reality, the longer the future we must consider, the larger the system we must move and the more consequential our judgement becomes.

To read the previous article on StarBiz “FOUR LEADERSHIP CHALLENGES CAPTAINS CANNOT IGNORE” click on the link:

STARBIZ TODAY - FOUR LEADERSHIP CHALLENGES CAPTAINS CANNOT IGNORE

 

 

EMPAT CABARAN KEPIMPINAN YANG TIDAK BOLEH DIABAIKAN - Sinar Harian Hari Ini

 

EMPAT CABARAN KEPIMPINAN YANG TIDAK BOLEH DIABAIKAN

Yang dihormati Kapten Industri dan Institut Awam,

Kalau kita teliti merentasi pelbagai industri dan organisasi, ada satu hakikat yang sering berulang dari dekad ke dekad: kebimbangan yang sama mengenai kepimpinan terus timbul. Walaupun keadaan sentiasa berubah, apabila Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif (CEO), Lembaga Pengarah, dan pihak pengurusan kanan berbincangkan cabaran melahirkan pemimpin pelapis, isu yang diketengahkan tetap sama-iaitu berpusat pada empat masalah utama: kegagalan Melihat Gambaran Keseluruhan; kegagalan Menggerakkan Tugas, Pasukan, dan Individu ke arah matlamat korporat; kelemahan Membina Hubungan; serta kegagalan Mengamalkan Sikap Pengikut yang Berkesan (Followership).

Kita sering dihidangkan dengan pelbagai keluhan biasa: pengurus yang cekap dalam fungsi masing-masing tetapi bergelut melihat organisasi secara menyeluruh; pengurus yang mencapai sasaran tetapi menyinggung perasaan orang lain; atau yang membina pasukan kukuh namun secara tidak sengaja mewujudkan wilayah peribadi (turf) serta ketegangan dengan jabatan lain. Tidak kurang juga yang cemerlang menjaga kebajikan warga kerja tetapi enggan menuntut akauntabiliti, atau tahu mengurus pihak atasan tetapi gagal mengurus pihak bawahan mahupun rakan sekerja sama aras. Malah, semakin kerap kita dapati isu pelaksanaan terbantut apabila strategi korporat yang jelas menjadi perlahan, pudar, atau ditentang semasa ia cuba dilaksanakan merentas organisasi.

Ini bukan sekadar isu pembangunan kepimpinan biasa; ia memberi kesan langsung kepada produktiviti, kecekapan, pelaksanaan, kolaborasi, dan perancangan penggantian.

MELIHAT GAMBARAN KESELURUHAN

Cabaran pertama ini mungkin yang paling kerap kita saksikan: mentaliti silo. Kebanyakan orang memulakan kerjaya dengan cemerlang dalam bidang yang spesifik. Jurutera menjadi mahir, profesional kewangan cekap dalam akaun, dan jurujual membina kepakaran pasaran. Organisasi sememangnya memerlukan pakar.

Kesukaran mula timbul apabila tanggungjawab berkembang, namun perspektif tidak berkembang bersama-sama. Ketua jabatan terus memikirkan hal jabatannya semata-mata, manakala pemimpin fungsional melihat isu organisasi berpandukan skop fungsi mereka sahaja. Apa yang dahulu merupakan kekuatan, akhirnya bertukar menjadi batasan.

Apabila tanggungjawab bertambah, persoalan utama mesti berubah. Kita tidak boleh lagi sekadar bertanya: "Apakah yang terbaik untuk jabatan saya?" Sebaliknya, ia mesti beralih kepada: "Apakah yang terbaik untuk organisasi?"

Organisasi adalah sistem yang saling berhubung. Apa yang kelihatan cekap untuk satu jabatan mungkin mewujudkan beban kerja tambahan di tempat lain. Inilah sebabnya pemimpin kanan mesti membina perspektif merentas-seluruh-syarikat (enterprise-wide) untuk memahami keutamaan korporat, mengenali kesalingantungan, dan membuat keputusan berteraskan apa yang memajukan seluruh organisasi. Jika tidak, pengurus yang kompeten mungkin berjaya mengoptimumkan bahagian individu tetapi merugikan keseluruhan organisasi. Peralihan asasnya jelas: Daripada KAWASAN SAYA kepada ORGANISASI KITA.

MENGGERAKKAN TUGAS, PASUKAN, DAN INDIVIDU

Cabaran kedua berkisar tentang cara pengurus memimpin di lapangan. Secara umumnya, terdapat tiga orientasi utama: fokus pada Tugasan, fokus pada Pasukan, dan fokus pada Individu. Setiap satunya mempunyai kekuatan besar, tetapi masalah bermula apabila satu orientasi menjadi terlalu dominan hingga mengetepikan yang lain.

Kita memerlukan pengurus berorientasikan tugas yang komited terhadap sasaran dan tarikh akhir. Namun, apabila orientasi ini keterlaluan, pengurus mencapai matlamat tetapi melukai hati orang di sekeliling, dan mereka sendiri menjadi penghalang (bottleneck) apabila segala-galanya mesti melalui kelulusannya. Cabarannya: Sempurnakan tugasan tanpa menyinggung perasaan warga kerja.

Pengurus berorientasikan pasukan pula mahir memupuk semangat setiakawan, tetapi ia boleh bertukar menjadi perebutan wilayah apabila sumber dikawal ketat dan jabatan lain dianggap pesaing. Cabarannya: Bina pasukan kukuh tanpa mewujudkan wilayah peribadi.

Pengurus berorientasikan individu menekankan sokongan dan kemudahan didekati. Masalah bermula apabila keinginan menjaga kebajikan bertukar menjadi keperluan untuk disukai ramai, menyebabkan mereka mengelakkan perbualan sukar dan bertolak ansur dengan prestasi lemah. Cabarannya: Ambil berat tentang individu tanpa perlu bergantung pada keinginan disukai.

Pemimpin yang berkesan tidak boleh memilih salah satu sahaja; tanggungjawab mereka adalah mengimbang dan menggerakkan ketiga-tiganya serentak ke arah matlamat korporat.

MEMBINA HUBUNGAN

Kita tidak mungkin dapat menggerakkan Tugas, Pasukan, dan Individu dengan berkesan sekiranya gagal membina hubungan. Hubungan dalam organisasi tidak bergerak sehala; pemimpin perlu menguasai seni menguruskan perhubungan dalam empat arah: ke atas (upwards), secara mendatar (sideways), ke bawah (downwards), dan diri sendiri (self).

Sesetengah pengurus cemerlang menguruskan pihak atasan tetapi gagal di peringkat bawahan, atau bergelut berkolaborasi merentas fungsi kerana perbezaan pendapat diheret menjadi isu peribadi. Malah, tidak kurang yang bergelut dengan arah paling kritikal: menguruskan diri sendiri. Ego, perasaan tidak selamat (insecurity), serta emosi yang gagal dikawal akhirnya menjejaskan keputusan profesional.

Kecekapan teknikal mungkin melayakkan pengurus dinaikkan pangkat, tetapi lebih tinggi seseorang mendaki, lebih banyak keputusan bergantung pada keupayaan membina kepercayaan, mengurus diri sendiri, dan bekerja secara berkesan dengan semua pihak-terutamanya mereka yang tiada autoriti rasmi ke atas diri mereka.

MENGAMALKAN PENGIKUT YANG BERKESAN (FOLLOWERSHIP)

Program latihan kepimpinan konvensional banyak menumpukan cara memimpin, tetapi jauh sedikit masa mengajar pemimpin cara menjadi pengikut. Hakikatnya, tiada organisasi boleh berfungsi berkesan jika semua warganya mahu menjadi ketua, tetapi tiada siapa tahu bila dan bagaimana mengikut arahan.

Pada peringkat senior, pengurus berpengalaman tinggi mungkin secara senyap-senyap tidak bersetuju dengan strategi korporat baharu, lalu memperlahankan pelaksanaan atau mentafsir arahan secara pilih kasih. Di peringkat pertengahan pula, pengurus mudah terperangkap menjadi titik halangan di mana strategi menjadi cair, ditafsir mengikut selera sendiri, atau dibiarkan mati secara senyap.

Bahkan di peringkat operasi, pengikut yang bertanggungjawab amat krusial. Pengikut yang baik bukanlah pasif; mereka menyumbangkan idea dan mencabar andaian secara membina. Namun, sebaik sahaja keputusan sah dimuktamadkan, perbincangan mesti berubah menjadi penjajaran (alignment) dan pelaksanaan.

EMPAT CABARAN, SATU ORGANISASI

Kepada para Peneraju sekalian, keempat-empat cabaran ini saling berhubung kait. Pemimpin yang gagal Melihat Gambaran Keseluruhan akan melindungi silo mereka; pemimpin yang gagal Menggerakkan Tugas, Pasukan, dan Individu terperangkap dalam gaya pengurusan sempit; mereka yang gagal Membina Hubungan bergelut melangkaui batas autoriti rasmi; manakala mereka yang gagal mengamalkan Pengikut Berkesan menjadi dinding pemisah di antara hala tuju dan pelaksanaan.

Keupayaan kepimpinan ini jarang sekali berkembang dengan sendirinya hanya kerana faktor tempoh perkhidmatan atau senioriti semata-mata. Ia perlu dibentuk dan diasah secara sengaja melalui program pembangunan pengurusan yang berstruktur, bimbingan (coaching), serta pementoran (mentoring).).

Kita sebagai Peneraju wajar kerap bertanya empat soalan asas: Bolehkah mereka berfikir demi kepentingan seluruh organisasi? Bolehkah mereka menggerakkan Tugas, Pasukan, dan Individu secara serentak? Bolehkah mereka membina hubungan dalam kesemua empat arah? Dan adakah mereka tahu mengamalkan pengikut yang berkesan serta melaksanakannya?

Jika kita tidak berpuas hati dengan jawapan tersebut, inilah bidang yang wajar diberi perhatian dalam menyediakan pemimpin masa depan. Lagipun, kita tidak boleh mensiap-siagakan seseorang untuk tanggungjawab lebih besar hanya dengan memberi mereka gelaran yang lebih besar; kita wajib membina keupayaan mereka. 

Artikel sebelum ini di Sinar Harian “LAPAN BULATAN SEORANG PEMIMPIN-PENGURUS "

Klik di sini: anas zubedy: LAPAN BULATAN SEORANG PEMIMPIN-PENGURUS - Sinar Harian Hari Ini

 

OPEN LETTER TO PARTY LEADERS

 

OPEN LETTER TO PARTY LEADERS

1. Abang Abdul Rahman Zohari Abang Openg (PBB)
2. Abdul Hadi Awang (PAS)
3. Affendi Jeman (SEDAR)
4. Ahmad Jufliz Faizal (PRM)
5. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi (UMNO)
6. Amira Aisya Abd Aziz (MUDA)
7. Anifah Aman (PCS)
8. Anthony Loke Siew Fook (DAP)
9. Anwar Ibrahim (PKR)
10. Arthur Joseph Kurup (PBRS)
11. Bobby William (PBDS)
12. Chin Su Phin (LDP)
13. Dominic Lau Hoe Chai (GERAKAN)
14. Ewon Benedick (UPKO)
15. Hajiji Noor (GAGASAN)
16. Hamzah Zainudin (WAWASAN)
17. Ibrahim Ali (PUTRA)
18. Jeffrey Kitingan (STAR)
19. Jeyakumar Devaraj (PSM)
20. Joachim Gunsalam (PBS)
21. John Sikie Tayai (PRS)
22. Larry Sng Wei Shien (PBM)
23. Liew Yun Fah (PHRS)
24. Lina Soo (ASPIRASI)
25. Mohamad Sabu (AMANAH)
26. Mohd Shafie Apdal (WARISAN)
27. Mukhriz Mahathir (PEJUANG)
28. Muhyiddin Yassin (BERSATU)
29. P. Waytha Moorthy (MAP)
30. Pandikar Amin Mulia (USNO)
31. Priscella Peter (KDM)
32. Punithan Paramsiven (MIPP)
33. Rafizi Ramli (BERSAMA)*
34. Rashid Ka' (ASLI)
35. R. S. Thanenthiran (MAKKAL SAKTI)
36. S. A. Vigneswaran (MIC)
37. Sim Kui Hian (SUPP)
38. Tiong King Sing (PDP)
39. Wee Ka Siong (MCA)
40. Yong Teck Lee (SAPP)
41. Zamani Ibrahim (BERJASA)

Dear Political Party Leaders,

Peace be with you,

Re: WHY MAKE VISION 2057 – MALAYSIA 100 PART OF YOUR GE16 MANIFESTO

Malaysia will turn 100 in 2057.

As we begin thinking about the Malaysia we want to become over the next 30 years, I believe one principle should guide us from the very beginning: we should involve as many Malaysians as possible in shaping Vision 2057 - Malaysia 100.

This should not be a vision created by a small group of people and then presented to the rest of the country. We should democratise the process. And may the best ideas win!

We should hear from Malays, Chinese, Indians, and the many other communities that make up Malaysia. We should hear from the majority as well as our smallest minorities - including, for example, a Kelabit living in Bario whose experience of Malaysia may be different from someone living in Kuala Lumpur. We should hear from Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak, and from our cities, towns, semi-rural communities and kampungs.

We should hear from Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and people of other faiths and traditions. We should hear from different generations - from those who lived through the early decades of Malaysia to young Malaysians who may themselves be senior citizens when Malaysia celebrates its 100th year.

We should hear from businesspeople and workers, teachers and students, academics and professionals, farmers and fishermen, entrepreneurs and civil society. We should also hear from Malaysians whose voices may not always be sufficiently heard, including persons with disabilities. What does Malaysia in 2057 look like to someone who is blind? To someone with limited mobility? What kind of country would they like us to build?

And we should hear from Malaysians with different expertise, experiences and ways of looking at the world. Why? Because no single person, organisation, profession, community or political party has all the answers. This is a project too big to leave to the few.

The more Malaysians we bring into the conversation, the larger the pool of ideas we create. Some ideas will be challenged. Some will not survive serious debate. Others will become stronger because they are challenged. Occasionally, an idea may emerge from somewhere completely unexpected and change the way we think about Malaysia's future.

That is what we should want. We should create the widest possible Malaysian conversation, allow ideas to compete and develop, and draw from it the best and deepest thinking we can find about the Malaysia we want to create by 2057. Vision 2057 should therefore not belong to anyone. It should belong to everyone.

AN INVITATION TO OUR POLITICAL PARTIES

Why start with the political parties?

GE16 is coming and within this larger Malaysian conversation, there is one group I would specifically like to invite through this letter - our political parties and political leaders.

Political parties form a particularly important group of Malaysians. You play a major role in shaping not only our governments and public policies, but also the dynamics, rhythm and culture of our country. You organise Malaysians around ideas, identify issues, develop policies and manifestos, debate what Malaysia should become, and select and develop people who may eventually govern the country.

And importantly, you seek the mandate of Malaysians to lead.

With GE16 approaching, therefore, this is an appropriate time to respectfully invite every political party to participate actively in the Vision 2057 conversation. More specifically, may I invite you to make Vision 2057 - Malaysia 100 part of your GE16 manifesto and part of the national discussion leading up to the election.

Every election manifesto understandably tells Malaysians what a political party intends to do over the next five years. But perhaps GE16 should ask something more.

GE16 will elect a government that will govern during the opening years of our journey towards Malaysia's 100th year. Whoever forms that government cannot determine what Malaysia will be in 2057. There will be many governments, prime ministers and elections between now and then. But the government formed after GE16 can help lay the right foundation.

So perhaps every political party preparing for GE16 should answer a larger question:

What foundations will you put in place during your first five years so that Malaysia has the best possible chance of becoming a great nation by 2057?

THREE KEY QUESTIONS

• Where are we now? Requires honesty. What have we done well over nearly seven decades? What should we preserve, strengthen, or abandon? Where have we fallen short?
• Where do we want to be in 2057? Requires imagination. What kind of Malaysia do we want our children and grandchildren to inherit at our centenary?
• What must we do to get there? Requires action. What must we start or stop doing? What foundations should we build today whose full benefits will only appear decades from now?

USING PESTEL TO START THE CONVERSATION

To structure this toward 2057, we can use PESTEL:

• P – POLITICAL: How do we create a political ecosystem where capable, trustworthy, and effective leadership has the opportunity to rise?
• E – ECONOMIC: How do we build an economic model where prosperity is broadly shared, the rich-poor gap does not grow too wide, and success does not depend on corruption, connections, or patronage?
• S – SOCIAL: How do we develop an education and social system enabling social mobility for the poorest, while building a society anchored in the Federal Constitution where all ethnic, religious, and cultural identities feel equally seen, valued, and appreciated?
• T – TECHNOLOGICAL: How do we become a technologically advanced nation that creates and innovates, while ensuring technology serves humanity, protects dignity, and strengthens human connection?
• E – ENVIRONMENTAL: How do we modernise while wisely balancing development with nature, fostering an environment of peace, safety, and tranquillity where Malaysians can flourish?
• L – LEGAL: How do we ensure that the rule of law remains above those in power and provides certainty and protection for everyone, while being brave enough to examine whether the legal and institutional arrangements we inherited and built since 1957 remain suitable for Malaysia in 2057, and what we may need to preserve, change, abandon or create anew?

LET US START THE CONVERSATION

As you prepare for GE16, please make Vision 2057 part of your manifesto.

Tell Malaysians where our country is today, what future you envision for our centenary, and what your party proposes to do over the next five years to move us there.

Equally, listen beyond your traditional supporters. Listen across regions, races, religions, and generations - because a good idea is never diminished by who shares it. Please help kick-start a grand national conversation on how we shape our country as Malaysia moves toward MALAYSIA100.

Thank you and Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Kuala Lumpur

29th September, 2026