Having power and control over your environment, or at the very least perceiving that you have that power and control, is important. Those who feel as though they have little control over their status, aspirations and wealth are prone to depression. On the other hand, those who feel that they have too much control are at risk of grandiosity, delusion and greed. Nonetheless, the striving for control is a healthy human drive, and power hierarchies are a fundamental feature of any social organization. The fact remains, however, that the more power one person has, the less power others have. The implications of this should not be understated, especially when it comes to fostering creativity and bringing out the best in the greatest amount of people.
Power relates to the ability to influence others. People can acquire power through climbing the ladder or possessing valuable cultural capital, such as knowledge and expertise. Power literally changes the way you see the world around you, influencing the way you perceive and act in the world. Powerful people process information more abstractly and flexibly, are less influenced by situational cues, take more risks, act more swiftly when facing a challenging obstacle, behave in a more goal-consistent manner and are more approach-oriented. Having power frees one from the influence from others and leads to feelings of safety and security. Because being powerful feels so good, powerful people think and act so as to maintain and increase their power.
Powerless individuals, on the other hand, tend to think and act to protect against possible threats. Powerless people avoid risky situations, focus on potential losses and tend to have a narrow attentional focus. The implications here for creativity should become obvious. The mindset of those in power promotes cognitive flexibility, set-breaking and abstract thinking. Therefore, powerful individuals also are more likely to be creative than their less powerful counterparts, who are left with little incentive to be creative.
"Unfortunately there can be no doubt that man is, on the whole, less good than he imagines himself or wants to be. Everyone carries a shadow, and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the
blacker and denser it is. If an inferiority is conscious, one always has a chance to correct it. Furthermore, it is constantly in contact with other interests, so that it is continually subjected to modifications. But if it is repressed and isolated from consciousness, it never gets corrected." --Jung1
that Muhyiddin Yassin as the No. 2 man in Malaysia says that Umno will not forgo its principles. But pray tell, what are the Umno principles? It’s not just “fight for the Malay cause” anymore. People want to know more because they want to be convinced and they want to believe in Umno’s cause.
The Umno people I asked around don’t seem able to lay down the principles other than muttering the usual stuff about Malay survival. Perhaps Muhyiddin has read a book which no others have. I hope he will share his knowledge of the principles with the rest of us. Otherwise, as a blogger friend told me once, Umno’s principle is to have NO principles.
It’s very important for Muhyiddin and other thinking Umno leaders to say what Umno principles are. We know Umno was formed as a vehicle to provide forceful political expression and representation to Malay causes. In the past, Umno hasn’t had a serious competitor to its claim as a representative of Malay causes. It could get away with almost anything. Then, it could just say we fight for Malay interests and every Malay would cling on to every word Umno says. Not anymore.
Now it has serious competitors to the claim of representing Malay causes. Now, it has to show why it can represent Malay causes BETTER that its competitors so that upon judgment and reflection, it deserves more support from the people. It simply has to build a better mousetrap.
Just as people can’t rest on their laurels of past achievements (most of them not debated anyway), so is Umno subjected to the same reminder. Sure, everyone remembers it was Umno which mobilised the Malay masses to rise up against the tendentious idea of a Malayan Union. Malayan Union wasn’t just about bringing about more democratic principles, better governance, transparency, system of laws, etc. I don’t think Malays are averse to that. Malayan Union would have worked if Malays were given prominence right from the start.The main problem back then was this. Malay leaders saw Malayan Union more as an attempt to black-hole them into insignificance. The condescending perception that Malay leaders are good only at managing their own religious and cultural affairs, qualified only as peons and thambys consigned forever to go around with bowl in hand,
pleading for succour and charity wasn’t lost on the minds of Malays. Fears such as these were greatly amplified by the growing emergence to dominance of recently arrived ethnic groups. As these grew to prominence, the Malays faded into insignificance.Yes, Umno put a stop to Malayan Union. Malays are indebted to that. But you can’t hold people captive to this idea for an indeterminate time. People are gratified yes, but soon people realise that gratification doesn’t feed families or put roofs over the heads and gratification doesn’t mean unqualified surrender of rights to question or to chart a different course or take up causes different from Umno.
People just don’t buy unqualified statements and sloganeering anymore. If Muhyiddin or anyone else says Umno will never abandon its principles and by that I understand to mean, the principles it lives by in giving political voice to Malay causes, then say so in explicit terms. Don’t force us to fill in the gaps.We have no unified document outlining the principles of Umno. Umno people say Umno hasn’t got an ideology. Umno leaders make them up as they move along. Some people say there is a pattern in madness of things. We can almost also say our principles are like case-based laws. Judges makes new laws through cases.
Let me try though. Even though they are not codified, the Umno principles can be culled up from Umno’s history. Our starting point must be 1946.
What moved the first generation Umno leaders and people? The principles if I recall correctly are summed up by the letters Alif, Ba and Ta. These stand for Agama, Bangsa and Tanah Air.
They don’t represent any racist supremacist idea at all. Let me begin with the imperative bangsa. It means Umno must begin with charity at home. We don’t mind sharing with others. But the Malays must be given their dues.
In a way, Umno stood for Malayland Uber Alles. Malays before anyone else. When I say this, it doesn’t in any way import any Nazi-like exhortations as western commentators are wont to say about the original anthem Deutschland uber alles.
The poet who wrote the anthem was himself a fugitive and when he wrote the lines Deutschland, Deutschland über alles, über alles in der Welt, he did not mean literally “over all,” as in Germany “ruling over all in the world,” but more of a “before all others.”
The call for Agama, Bangsa dan Tanah Air was a rallying urging to the Malays in the 1940s to put national unity above local loyalties and petty rivalries over religion and regionalism. To stop thinking of themselves as Malays from different parts of the country and to start thinking as Malays one and all.So let us remind Muhyiddin what it means to put Malays before all others.When leaders talk about Malay interests, their pronouncements will probably be met with sarcasm. Because people know they are just fudging the issue when in reality, they and big Chinese business interest are like the skin and nail. People now see the call for Malays before all others as a sham.
When Umno talks about development, people no longer believe them because the portion of development enjoyed by the people is minuscule. So small that simple development needs such as decent roads to villages, provision of affordable housing, schooling facilities CAN be provided by ANY government in power. People know Umno leaders are more interested in milking the latest multi-billion projects and making hay while the sun shines.
Hence even while the PM speaks of his big business ideas — ETP, NEM, EPP, NKRA, PDP whatever — the ever so nameless and faceless people, but real people anyway, don’t really give a dam. The JKKK if led by capable people bring and understand people’s needs better than high-handed government officers.
Will water supply be uninterrupted? Will the bridges be built and repaired? Can we get a multipurpose hall? Can we have new suraus and mosques? Can we get welfare assistance? Will our children get educational financial aid?
People know the PM is talking to big businesses. The business of small people can be tackled by ANY government.
So I hope when Muhyiddin offers a broad-brush description of Umno principles, because he is Malay first and Malaysian second, he will be the first to understand what being Malay is all about. You can tolerate sham and hypocrisy up to a level only.
I hope Muhyiddin will further remind himself about what Malayland uber alles means in light of what he went through when visiting China. See whether the claim Malays before everyone else applies or not.
Part of his itinerary to China was to negotiate with Chinese political and business leaders and decide the rules of the game as it were when selecting the contractors for a rail double-tracking project to Johor. He found himself bushwhacked when a parallel negotiation of the project took place wheeled and dealt with by the honourable porn actor from MCA. The porn actor came highly recommended by the golfing buddy of the PM.
So the first principle that Muhyiddin must establish is to tell all Umno leaders not to be duplicitous and double faced when they deal with people. Don’t brag about fighting for Malay causes and interests when what you actually do is horse around with Chinese cukongs. — sakmongkol.blogspot.com
Having power and control over your environment, or at the very least perceiving that you have that power and control, is important. Those who feel as though they have little control over their status, aspirations and wealth are prone to depression. On the other hand, those who feel that they have too much control are at risk of grandiosity, delusion and greed. Nonetheless, the striving for control is a healthy human drive, and power hierarchies are a fundamental feature of any social organization. The fact remains, however, that the more power one person has, the less power others have. The implications of this should not be understated, especially when it comes to fostering creativity and bringing out the best in the greatest amount of people.
Power relates to the ability to influence others. People can acquire power through climbing the ladder or possessing valuable cultural capital, such as knowledge and expertise. Power literally changes the way you see the world around you, influencing the way you perceive and act in the world. Powerful people process information more abstractly and flexibly, are less influenced by situational cues, take more risks, act more swiftly when facing a challenging obstacle, behave in a more goal-consistent manner and are more approach-oriented. Having power frees one from the influence from others and leads to feelings of safety and security. Because being powerful feels so good, powerful people think and act so as to maintain and increase their power.
Powerless individuals, on the other hand, tend to think and act to protect against possible threats. Powerless people avoid risky situations, focus on potential losses and tend to have a narrow attentional focus. The implications here for creativity should become obvious. The mindset of those in power promotes cognitive flexibility, set-breaking and abstract thinking. Therefore, powerful individuals also are more likely to be creative than their less powerful counterparts, who are left with little incentive to be creative.
The relationship between power and creativity may depend, however, on both the stability of the power hierarchy and the potential payoff for those exerting creative effort. In an environment with an unstable power hierarchy, those with low power might become more creative when being creative is conducive to moving up the ladder. Powerful people, on the other hand, may display the highest creativity levels under conditions where creativity allows them to maintain or increase their power.
This is exactly what a recent research study conducted by Daniel Sligte and his colleagues found. Participants were told that they would engage in a task in which they had to work with another participant. Participants were told that the higher-power person would be in charge of the division of labor, monitor progress and assess the performance of the lower-power individual after completion of the task and that the rewards of the lower-power person would be based on this assessment.
Participants were then randomly assigned to a position of power or a position of subordinance. They were also randomly assigned to a stable power condition or an unstable power condition. In the stable power condition, participants were told that power positions were randomly assigned and power positions would remain unchanged. In theunstable power condition, the participants were told that power positions might be switched at some point during the experience. Before participating in the group task, subjects took a test of creativity and were told either that the test was relevant to effective functioning in a high-power position or it was not.
When power was stable, high-power individuals were more creative than lower-power individuals. The effects were particularly pronounced when creativity was relevant to maintaining power. When power was unstable, however, the pattern was reversed: low-power individuals were more flexible thinkers, were less avoidant and had a global attentional focus compared to higher-power individuals, particularly when performance was relevant to achieving power. This global attentional focus, in turn, led to higher creativity.
These results have important implications for boosting creativity and productivity in the workforce, education and society. Creativity is not just a trait that people either have or don't have; motivation plays a huge role in whether someone will apply their brainpower or not. (Recent recent suggests that IQ test performance is also a function of both ability and motivation.)
This research suggests that when we give people the possibility to gain power, they will show a boost in creativity if we make it explicit that there is a reason to be more creative. This works best in unstable power hierarchies, where it's clear that there isn't just one dominant force and everyone else is doomed to a life of subservience. As the researchers note:
For low power individuals, power instability is empowering, leading them to act and behave as high power individuals... Having unstable low power leads to feelings of confidence and self-efficacy, especially when low power individuals can gain power by being creative. They may be more confident about their abilities and also perceive that they have the "power" to change their situation.
The way most businesses and schools are currently structured in the United States, where those not in power are pressured to follow instructions from managers or teachers, and creativity is not valued or shown to be relevant to gaining power, is not allowing us to reach our maximum creative potential as a country. Educators and business leaders may want to re-think how they structure their environment so as to keep people motivated.
The danger with power hierarchies is that they are self-reinforcing. Powerful individuals are more likely to act forcefully and confidently, take more risks, display more creativity, use ideology more frequently (such as stereotyping and legitimizing myths), and choose jobs that forward their own interests -- and all of these behaviors allow powerful individuals to acquire even more resources and influence. Taken to the extreme, power hierarchies can result in an environment where everyone else is left feeling powerless.
The important question is whether this sort of "winner takes all" environment brings out the best in most people. The research is clear that it does not. As for how to motivate creativity in everyone, including leaders, it might be possible to design structures where those in power feel as though their creativity will allow them to maintain their position while at the same time allowing those not in power to feel as though they, too, can eventually gain power through their creativity. There may be many different ways to implement such a system, but however it is done, the researchers make one thing clear: "when the power hierarchy is unstable, those lacking power hold the power to creativity."
No comments:
Post a Comment