Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu - Article Example

MACHIAVELLI AND LAO-TZU MACHIAVELLI AND LAO-TZU Thesis and Introduction Leadership is not a staticconcept but an ever changing one. What this means is that as much as possible, the different styles by which leaders lead their people continue to change with time and with the purpose of leadership. This situation makes it very difficult to boldly point out to what may be good or ideal leadership, using the mere argument of the type of leadership style practiced by a leader or a group of leaders. In a practical scenario and example of a workplace leadership experience, it would be noted that the need to practice democratic leadership and authoritarian leadership may keep revolving, depending on the magnitude of decision that needs to be made. Generally, when leaders need to make regular decisions that deal with the day to day running of the organization, they may choose to use democratic leadership to involve their subjects and other subordinates. Where there is the need for most executive and finance based decision to be made also, leaders may keep their cards close to their chest, exercising authoritative leadership. However, judging from the fact that some trend of leadership; not necessarily concerned about leadership style have produced more exemplary results of organizational success than others makes it possible to generally say that one concept of leadership is more effective and relevant than others. In this paper therefore, the works of Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu are compared to argue on which of the two authors offers a more proactive and relevant approach to modern leadership. Relevance and Effectiveness of advice in a Modern day Society To pass judgment on the advice on leadership that is most relevant and effective in a modern day society, it would be important to consider the kind of setting within which each of the two leaders gave out their advice and compare that to the kind of society we have today. Machiavelli wrote “The Prince” from a perspective of authoritarianism, where the prince is seen to be a superior, whose offenses to his subjects must be expected, but cannot be questioned. It is for instance stated specifically that “the prince cannot avoid giving offence to his new subjects, either in respect of the troops he quarters on them” (c. 3). Meanwhile in modern society, democratic practice is hailed in all facets of life, right from an individual level, to organizational level, then to state levels. On the other hand, “Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching” can be said to have been written in a state of general peace and calmness in the land. This notion is exemplified with a quote such as, “The good I meet with goodness; the bad I also meet with goodness. Thus I actualize goodness” (p. 121). Given the fact that modern society is currently backed by several pressure groups, international organizations and non-governmental organizations that champion the course of global peace and goodness as against war and violence, the advice given by Lao-Tzu on the need to embrace all with goodness can be said to be the most relevant and effective in a modern day society. There would be several justifications for pointing to Lao-Tzu’s advice on leadership as the most relevant and effective in modern day society. In the first place, most modern theories of leadership can be seen as directed towards the need for current leaders to raise the next generation of leaders right within their midst and in their presence. But to do this, it is important that followers will see diligence and trust in their leaders. It is for this reason Lao-Tzu states that “Not priding oneself on one’s worth forestalls the people’s envy. Not prizing treasures that are difficult to obtain keeps people from committing theft” (p. 98, line 18-20). That is to say that, leaders must see the need to create value in their followers rather than depending on the values of their worth and treasures. Meanwhile, when the advice of Machiavelli on the establishment of Princedom is utilized, what will be experienced is a state of enemy creation for the leader. This is because in the opinion of Machiavelli, “in this way, you may find that you have enemies in all those whom you have injured in seizing the Princedom” (c. 3). But when subjects are not given room to practice their skill and talent, and be appreciated by their leaders, they never become leaders, good enough to take over from where their substantive leaders would leave them. But with the advice of Lao-Tzu, leaders would always want to be silent facilitators for change rather than visible performers for change. It is for this reason that he wrote in stanza 6 that stanza 6, "When his work is done, the people say, "Amazing: we did it, all by ourselves!"" (25). Specific advice that is not effective Specifically, Machiavelli advises princes to establish their presence among their people so as to gain the fear of their people. The therefore states that “the Prince who acquires it to go and dwell there in person, since this will tend to make his tenure more secure and lasting… and have all the more reason, if disaffected to fear him”. Generally, today’s world sees leadership as a share responsibility rather than an imposed responsibility. What this means is that leader’s in modern times are expected to be chief servants, bringing out ideas and objectives as to where they want the entire organization to be and working together with their people towards the achievement of the ideas and objectives. Indeed, such shared leadership requires that leaders work in a state where their people will find them approachable and interactive. According to Machiavelli, “men are to be kindly treated or utterly crushed… wherefore the injury we do to a man should be of a sort to leave no fears of reprisals”. The question there remains that if leaders are going to utterly crush their followers because of differences in ideologies, how can share responsibility of leadership be attained? Because of the absence of love, the commitment to help the leader will also be absent. Secondly, working with a person who is not loved by you makes cooperation very difficult and sour. This therefore means that if the advice of Machiavelli is applied in modern society, leaders will not be working in a healthy and conducive environment with their subjects. Issuance of additional advice Additional advice would fit into Lao-Tzu’s theory because he is the one whose theory has been considered relevant and effective for modern society. The need for the added advice is to ensure that the theory as proposed by Lao-Tzu will be more considerate of certain key factors and environmental considerations that were missing in the days of Lao-Tzu, for which reason he might not have considered them in his theory at all. This advice has to do with the creation and use of networks in leadership. From all indication, Lao-Tzu believes that leaders must be people who are ready to work for others, whiles working with them. It is for this reason he writes that, “if a Nobleman finds his time, he rises, but if he does not find his time, he drifts like a roving-plant and wanders about.” When this additional advice on the creation and use of networks is incorporated, the leader would not have to drift or wander about because he will certainly find his time and the best people to work with. This will be done through constant reporting to the leader of key information and issues on the ground and among ordinary people that may not reach the leader. In modern times, this form of network creation and use has helped several leaders into becoming more effective and efficient in the delivery of their roles. A very typical example of this networking system of leadership is the kind of intelligence unit that the United States government has as part of its centralized governance system, with which key security issues that could threaten leadership are tapped and nullified. Due to the effect that networks have in leadership, Tao-Tzu would have accepted the additional advice. Conclusion Based on the arguments made in this paper, I can boldly make a case for Lao-Tzu as the leader who offered the most relevant advice. This is because the advice offered by the author was transcending and has been able to transcend into modern times, giving leaders a feel of what ideal leadership could possibly be. What is more, some of the very basic dynamics about how to go about the leadership theory proposed by the author was clearly spelt out in the stanzas of his writing. It is important for modern leaders to take up the advice offered so that the quest for open air show offs in leadership whereby leaders would want to be autocratic lords, whose words and commands are final will be a thing of the past. Perhaps it is time for leaders to do away with the Machiavelli advice, which makes most leaders see themselves as still being in the war field, they their supremacy must be seen by the number of lives that they do away with, in the name of display of power and authority. Cited work Jacobus, Lee. A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers, Fifth Edition, Cage Rage: New York. 1988. Print. Read More