Addressing the UN General Assembly on the report of the Secretary-General on the work of the organisation on October 3, 2006, the Ambassador of Pakistan to the United Nation Munir Akram stressed that "the world needs a United Nation which does not always mirror the harsh and unequal power realities. The world needs a United Nation which acts with the moral authority and credibility".
The Ambassador very rightly highlighted the value of much ignored practices of moral authority in today's world, which is now dominated by the excessive use of formal authority. However, the said concept is not relevant to United Nation only, but to the government organisations private sector companies, businessmen, and each and very other individual. This is, therefore, very important that we do understand the value of moral authority in our personal as well as public life in order to play a more effective role.
We live in interdependent society, where we need the help of our relatives, friends, for a healthy living, we work in socially intricate organisations, where we need the help not only of our subordinates but of colleagues, superiors, and outsiders to accomplish our goals.
This often leaves us in a "power gap" because we must depend on people, over whom we have little or no explicit control. Moral authority guides us as to how can we exercise the power and influence to get the things done through others, when our responsibilities exceed our formal authority. This is particularly important in today's complex world, where things no longer get done simply because some one issues an order and someone else follows it.
Authority is defined as right to command, the right or power to enforce rules or give orders. Formal authority is the power that comes with the position one holds; being able to ask (or tell) someone to do something, expecting it will be done. No matter what position, job, title or role we may hold, all of us possess some formal measures of authority associated with that position.
Depending on our level of preparation, as well as our chosen actions and motivations, formal authority can cause us to help or hinder; ask or aggravate; inform or infuriate.
During the course of working, every one of us makes dozens of decision. In positions of formal authority we are accustomed to advise, instruct, even dictate others to perform certain activity in the designated manner or otherwise prohibit to perform another kind of action, work etc, expecting them to do exactly as instructed. Because of repetitive nature of the work, instructions flow past our lips without need for much conscious thought or consideration. We have learned that in the most cases, the appropriate use of formal authority guarantees successful completion of the work and allow the time to progress smoothly. Consciously or unconsciously, we begin to realise that formal authority, the power to influence or command thought, opinion or behaviour can be a really good thing.
Gradually, we can easily become enamoured with the power of our positions. Having people do, what we tell them to do and when we tell them to do, can have an intoxicating effect. This is how authority "goes to our heads" and when it happens so, it becomes very easy to disregard, or overlook entirely, critical input, we might otherwise receive from peers, superiors, subordinates, friends and relatives. We are all familiar with such behaviours and more often face the attitude, which negatively affects the relationship.
On the other hand, there is a second type of authority to be considered "informal authority", the personal influential power that results from others voluntarily granting their support. We have encountered certain individuals of low profile, having insignificant position or no position at all yet playing a very critical role, very quietly and consistently.
They perform their duties diligently and selflessly as a token of their belief in the principles of hard work, growth and justice without expecting any reward in return. These seemingly "powerless" individuals make a difference despite their obvious lack of formal authority. They do so, by committing themselves to help others, working hard, compliment other's weaknesses, and try to minimise the suffering of the fellow persons. They help peers by offering their assistance, support and encouragement.
They offer loyalty, commitment and a professional attitude. They tend to offer information, reassurance and personal comfort to those who need it.
This is not difficult to find such persons who have challenged the destructiveness of formal authority from a deep moral sense. Quaid-a-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Allama Iqbal, Dalai Lama, Amnesty International, Mother Theresa, Mohammad Younas are the few examples among the many others as well.
Like a good parent or teacher, what such people have shared, has been a desire to help others develop into self-directed and self-sustaining individuals. They have set examples from which others could learn. They have also offered to their neighbours a sense of companionship in a world in which people often feel alienated from one another. There is strength of courage that comes from realising that others share your sense of what is right and wrong with the world.
"Informal authority," the personal influential power provides brilliant insight into the true nature of mankind. Those who believe in exercising the informal authority are the people, who are more self-aware regarding their own degree of proactivity. They focus their efforts in the Circle of Influence.
They work on the things, they can do something about. The nature of their energy is positive, enlarging and magnifying, causing their Circle of Influence to increase.
In the present world in which the lure of political power has seriously infected the minds of the majority of people, it is impossible to discover the voices that transcend ambitions for human dominations. Only in the absence of coercive power can one have moral influence. Coercive power operates as a magnet for division and conflict, as contentious interests compete for the control of its tools of force.
At this stage, we need to understand the relationship between the formal authority and informal authority. Formal authority is about asking (dictating) others to perform certain work with the help of power whereas moral authority is about inspiring others to perform certain work voluntarily.
A combination of formal and moral authority is used in our day to day life, and the use of one type of authority affects & the use of other, ie, excessive use of formal authority reduces the use of moral authority and vice versa. We can see Mohammad Younas, the winner of Nobel Prize did not hold any formal authority at the time of launching micro credit in Bangladesh, yet he managed to launch the scheme throughout the country. This was such a marvellous concept that about 100 countries implemented the same scheme on similar grounds.
Developing the personal influential power is the essence of true leadership which is common in all the leaders around the world. We all believe that a leadership gap exists in Pakistan, and no single leader is capable enough to unite the nation on one agenda point. Lack of informal authority is one of the major reasons for non existence of such leaders in Pakistan. The political leaders have neither courage nor desire to inspire the people of Pakistan.
This is pertinent to mention here that on the one side, where an ambassador of Pakistan is pursuing an international organisation to deal with the issues with moral authority, our present government on the other hand strongly believes in the use of formal authority and considers it necessary to keep hold of formal authority as long as desired with the expectation that this will enable them to inspire the people as well.
Inspiring - the true leading - is not an easy going short cut to formal leadership. This is rather a long journey and demands power of character of the individual to deal with the obstacles in the way of leadership.
The political leaders, even during the election, try to use the formal authority of being economically strong, and heads of certain sect, to get votes from the people. Consequently majority of the people cast their votes under the influence of formal authority and are unaware the meaning and value of their actions.
Similar situation exists in the government/private institutions where people believe in exercising formal authority at all levels to get the day to day work done by their subordinates.
The supervisors do not believe in being the role model for the subordinates, to whom others would like to follow and idealise. The personal character and day to day works are treated as two different things, that is why, the subordinates are not influenced by their supervisors and ultimately the supervisors hold formal authority but no moral authority.
If we further narrow down our analysis, we shall come to know that we bring up our children more with the help of formal authority and less with the help of moral authority. We instruct them, mostly; to do certain work such as study, games and refrain from certain things such as moving out, watching television.
Although our children follow our instructions, yet we have never realised if they agree with our instructions or not. The fruit of our instructions may be seen quietly by watching the behaviours of our children at a time when they are alone and free to do as they desire. That is how we shall be able to see the weakness of exercising the formal authority and realise the need of inspiring our children.
There is another downside of the use of formal authority, that it reduces our ability to influence others the moral authority. More we will more toward formal authority, more we shall be away from moral authority. Ultimately this will enlarge our circle of concern and reduce our circle of influence. We shall expect more and invest less, focus more on the behaviours of others and less on ourselves, more concerned about the environment and circumstance and less about personal efforts and contributions, more reacting and less proactive, more negative and less positive, more expecting and less working. We shall therefore, empower things/others to control our actions with the help of their behaviours and attitudes.
Those individuals as well as institutions, who express moral authority may be subject to serious criticism for certain actions pertaining to them.
Their point of view regarding certain issue may be controversial and under heated argumentation, which may damage their reputation. Such situation may weaken their moral authority on such matters, however the same may be compensated with the reservoirs already built on the other issues. Under such circumstance, this is important to weigh in as the reservoir of moral authority is deep enough to overcome the damage brought by such action or controversy.
If not then it is essential to re-establish such moral authority up to the level which is required by the role assumed by such person.
At the work place one can develop sufficient resources of "unofficial" power and influence with the help of moral authority to achieve goals, steer clear of conflicts, foster, creative, team behaviour, and gain the co-operation and support required from subordinates, co-workers, superiors, even people outside the department or organisation.
Moral authority is essential for the top managers who need to overcome the infighting, foot-dragging, and politicking, that can destroy both morale and profits of the companies, for middle managers who don't want their careers side-tracked by unproductive power struggles, for professionals hindered by bureaucratic obstacles and deadline delays, and for staff workers who have to "manage the bosses all the time in their day to day activities."
Comments
Comments are closed.