[Vnbiz] Staying to be a leader - The leader in a changing environment

[Tran Dinh Hoanh]

Dear chi Bich Lien, brother Thien & CACC,

Thanks for raising the excellent issue of nhan tri versus phap tri, brother
Thien.  And chi Bich Lien, thanks for being so eloquent and analytical.
Both chi Bich Lien and anh Thien raises a number of very interesting points.
I would like to go over chi Lien's message first, then I will work on the
nhan tri/phai tri issue.

1.  Chi Bich Lien mentions "the context" and reminds us that we need to know
what kind of changes we talk about, business or culture or
politics.  Obviously chi Bich Lien has kindly reminded everyone and me that
I have dumped everything into one pot, without any "context distinction."

The context of an issue is, of course, crucial; otherwise we may get lost in
the discussion.  But I did intentionally dumped everything together and
disregard the context, because I believe that leadership is leadership; the
context of leadership makes very little difference.  Say, if you are a good
leader in a school, chances you would be a good leader in a rice field or in
a people's committee.  Of course, as a teacher, you will now need to know
some techniques of working on the rice field are on the people's committee,
but as far as leadership skills and quality are concerned, they are very
much the same.

Same thing with human attitude regarding changing. Either we want to change
or we don't want to change, either we move fast or move sluggishly.  I am
not sure if there is any fundamental difference between business or culture,
either than the fact that business changes could be on a daily basis and
cultural changes occur much much slower.

I intentionally dump business and culture and everything together, because I
think that keeping them separte may create more confusion and more harm, i.e.,
many people will mistakenly think that the leadership skills in business are
different from leadership skills in culture or in politics.  This is not
just a matter of my theoretical concern.  It is a problem of our society
(and many other societies).  Say, some people are very dishonest and crooked
in business.  They think that is how they have to behave in business, and
they think that they can still be a good father and good husband at home as
long as they keep the business at work and don't bring it home.  Wrong, the
human mind is not a computer when you can just shut off one program and open
another.  A dishonest and crooked businessman has a great chance of being a
bad father, because his crooked and dishonest traits will show at home,
regardless of how he thinks he can hide it, and his kids will learn them
from him.  The human attitude rules the entire human life, be it business or
politics or religion or culture.  In different fields and different
contexts, we may need different techniques of working.  But the atitude is
always the same.  It rules over all aspects of our living.

Having said all that, I recognize that chi Bich Lien's reminder about
context is very well taken.  We all should keep this in mind.  In my
wrtings, I always mention context when I see the importance (such as, "This
is true in politics, but in business, here is this little difference.....").


2.  Chi Bich Lien mentions, "Embracing changes without letting go of your
values."  This is very good advice.  But sometimes this could be a sticky
issue (And that is why I haven't really mentioned it), because sometimes you
have to let go of your values.  Ex:  Chong chua vo toi (husband is the kind,
wife is the slave), if we embrace gender equality we will have to let go the
concept of chong chua vo toi.  That is the reason I have stayed away from
the "value" issue and only mentioned it generally as "roots vervus dead
leaves".  If we know our past and our present well, we will know what values
are the roots and what values are the dead leaves.

Now let me go to the nhan tri versus phap tri issue.  This is the essay
question I anwered many years ago in the admission exam into the master
program at the National School of Public Administration (Truong Quoc Gia
Hanh Chanh) in Saigon.  I can't remember the details of my answer, but the
conclusion, true to my AQ personality :-),  was "I think we need both nhan
tri and phap tri in our government system."  The professors must have liked
my answer, because I ranked 2 in the final result.

I mention this because this nhan tri v. phap tri issue appears to be such a
big issue in our (Vietnamese) society.  Several years ago, when I was in
Vietnam, a friend who is relatively high in the Party and government, raised
that issue with me.  Sometimes I would see this issue again in
some commentary on the newspaper.  And now brother Thien raises it again.  I
guess, this issue deserve some serious consideration.

Phap tri is easy.  It means "rule of law."  Nhan tri is where the confusion
really is.  Many of us understand it as "rule of man."   And the issue is
understood as "rule of law v. rule of man," and it means either you rule by
law or rule by the wimp of the leader (be it the VCP or the President of a
company).

But in Confucianism, Nha^n doesn't simply mean "man."  Ngu~ thu+o+`ng (the
five permanents) are five virtues that a person is supposed to keep
permanently:  Nha^n (human love), Le^~ (respect), Nghi~a (loyalty), Tri'
(wisdom), Ti'n (trustworthiness)  (These are my own translation).  Nha^n
cannot be translated as "man" in this context.  To be correct, nha^n
encompasses all the confucian qualities of a good man (Nguoi quan tu).
But "Love" is the most important quality in the confucian teaching, so I
translate nha^n as "human love" or "human heart"  to capture the essence
of the teaching.  (Most English text books will not translate nha^n into
English and will simply use the term "Ren").

So, to be correct, nhan tri (rule of Ren, or rule of human heart) is a
system of administration that depends greatly on the good qualities of the
leader (nhan le nghia tri tin and all other virtues in Confucianism).  Now
tell me if any system of administration, any company, any country in the
world that doesn't need or doesn't want people with the best qualities in
them?  So you can see that my answer is, nhan tri is ALWAYS a required
element of any management system anywhere in the world.

But Nhan Tri DOES NOT mean "rule by the wimp of the leader," because, even
in the old days when Confucianism ruled, the king could not rule by his own
wimp.  The country had a system of morality (Tam cu+o+ng, ngu~ thu+o+`ng )
and a system of law; the king had to follow the morality norms and the
laws.  If the didn't, his people would had the legitimate right to rise
up against him (the^' thie^n ha`nh - da.o , to stand in place of Heaven to
excercise the Way, meaning, to remove the king from his throne).

But in recent years, the VCP has done a very good job to make the folks in
Vietnam think of nhan tri as "rule by the wimp of VCP and VCP members."  So
when I mention nhan tri, most of the folks I talk to in Vietnam recoil with
horror.

That is nhan tri, now let's get to phap tri, the rule of law.  It is obvious
that in order for things to go smoothly anywhere, we will need a system of
rules and procedures, i.e., the law, for everyone to follow; otherwise
everything will collapse in chaos.  So we need law.  And the law has to be
above everyone and applied equally to everyone, no Party favor :-)  That is
the essence of "rule of law."  So we need rule of law.

But the problem is, we think about nhan tri and phap tri as mutually
exclusive and we have to choose one and exclude the other, which is
something I can't understand.  Do we have to choose man and exclude women,
or choose women and exclude men, instead of having them both? :-)

For any system of adminstration to work well, we need a set of laws that
applies equally to everyone; this is phap tri.  But to apply that set of
laws well, we need to have people with the best human quality, this is nhan
tri.  It is obvious to me that we need both for a system to work well.

Excellent points, Brother Thien and sister Bich Lien.  My God, we are
pushing the quality of our discussions skyhigh all the times.  I am
incredibly amazed at the brainpower we have in this family.

Have a great day!

Hoanh


On 4/29/07, Bui Lien <lien.bb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
>
>
> Chao CACC,
>
> I haven't had the chance to read the book that Thuy Lien mentioned.
> Without reading such book, I'm afraid I don't have a sound understanding
> about the context of our discussion.  I, however, would like to share with
> you some of my thoughts.
> Before I start, pls allow me to have one disclaimer.  As a new member, I
> don't know the style of debate/discussion yet, ie I'm not sure whether it'd
> be proper to send this to everyone.  So, pls ignore my message if it does
> not interest you.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the link below provides references for the book.
>
> http://www.nicholasbrealey.com/uk/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=62&idproduct=156
>
>
> I don't mean to be cynical, but "rethinking" seems to be a "fashionable"
> word in Europe (UK) nowadays.  I'm not very fond of the book title even when
> I don't read it yet.  Rethinking leadership or rethinking competition sound
> fine.  Rethinking the past, the present are ok too. But how can anyone
> "rethink" the future?  Simply because it doesnt happen yet.
>
> It seems to me that the contributors to this book approached changes (or
> adaptation) from a business/corporate context, ie how BUSINESS LEADERS adapt
> to a changing economic enviroinment in order to stay competitive, efficient,
> and successful (let me stress that this is only my guess).  So, when we
> expand the topic to cover issues of cultural change, or personal/individual
> change, or social change (eg change in governance style or the way
> government runs a country), we'll need more guidance and substance for the
> discussion.  In other words, I think it's important to set a context for any
> discussion.  Such context would provide orientation for concrete arguments
> and debates.  Otherwise, we could be easily trapped in the game of "thay boi
> xem voi".
>
> Although I agree with most of Anh Hoanh's arguments, I'm not quite sure if
> it's entirely precise to say that the Vietnamese are relatively
> change-resistant.  Look at the issue of migrant labour - thousands and
> thousands of Vietnamese are leaving their home villages to cities or even
> foreign countries to seek opportunities.  I believe they are making HUGE
> change to their lives/life style, for better or for worse.  So, here it
> comes the question of our approach to change.  I agree with anh Hoanh that
> we should know our roots, but I would also like to add the importance of
> values.  I believe setting up/maintaining a system of values is crucial in
> guiding us through all the changes.  One should know what one wants when
> making the changes.  If I remember correctly, Idian wisdom offers an
> advice to "embrace changes without letting go of your values".
>
> In another message, another member discussed the principle of "rule by
> law" and "rule by man".  I'm not going to make everyone bored by engaging in
> this topic.  I'm not sure if I'm knowledgable enough to talk about it
> either.  What I know is rule of law is a core concept in Western governance
> system.  And because it's associated with/fundamental to the Western system,
> it does not exist in Vietnam yet (of course, lots of efforts are spent in
> adopting this model for Vietnam).  If interested, the below site can be
> helpful in providing some basic ideas.
>
> http://www.users.bigpond.com/smartboard/btof/index18.htm
>
> I agree that emotion can share a fair bit in decision making.  Regardless
> of Americans, Vietnamese, or Europeans, we are all human being, and so we
> are creatures of emotion.  That's why you find some many wirtings in the
> West about emotional quotation, or emotional intelligence and its balance
> against IQ.  However, I'd be reluctant to say that at micro level (or
> institutional, corporate level), an institution/a company can be run by the
> rule of man if it wants to stay successful.  There's certainly a distinction
> between making a business decision merely based on the leaders' personal
> pleasure/preference and the institution/company's benefits.
>
> I hope I'm not over talkertive or making you more confused.
>
> Have a good weekend to all!
>
>
>

-- 
Tran Dinh Hoanh, LLB, JD
Attorney of Law
Washington DC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz/attachments/20070429/4c389fb8/attachment-0001.html