In every as aspect of our life we want to have leaders who have a vision and want us to develop. Be it our home, where we idolize or look for guidance of our parents, at work, where we wish to work for managers who not only have a strong vision to help the team grow, but would also respect individual growth goals. Similarly, the world of politics is always in search of leaders who would help make the world that you live in a better place to live.
Recently, I was attending a local Basketball Championship when I got to know that the functioning head of the Local Basketball Federation was made to resign from his post through agreement of the other members of the Committee. It came as a surprise, as the head was the most active personality in the Committee and he had been leading the Committee for more than a decade now. He was ousted because he was found to have conducted financial irregularities with the Federation funds. My view about him was an autocratic and manipulative person combined with strong networking and entrepreneurial skills. These were the reasons that possibly helped him hold his position for so long.
His removal immediately left the top spot open which was decided to be jointly headed by his former colleagues. Though the group of members seemed to have a receptive mindset for the betterment of the sports in the region, they lacked the basic qualities of efficient networking and a lack of understanding of the whole ecosystem. It seemed as a bunch of rookies trying to run the show who were completely missing the plot. They themselves couldn't agree on a decision, let alone convincing the members they were supposed to lead.
Though it was good to witness a change and bid farewell to the autocratic method of leadership, the new team, even with its more open to suggestions policy didn't fulfill the goals of betterment for the sport. This is a situation that might be faced by the political systems of many countries, let alone sports federations. How could you actually look for a better situation through such leadership?
Recently, I was attending a local Basketball Championship when I got to know that the functioning head of the Local Basketball Federation was made to resign from his post through agreement of the other members of the Committee. It came as a surprise, as the head was the most active personality in the Committee and he had been leading the Committee for more than a decade now. He was ousted because he was found to have conducted financial irregularities with the Federation funds. My view about him was an autocratic and manipulative person combined with strong networking and entrepreneurial skills. These were the reasons that possibly helped him hold his position for so long.
His removal immediately left the top spot open which was decided to be jointly headed by his former colleagues. Though the group of members seemed to have a receptive mindset for the betterment of the sports in the region, they lacked the basic qualities of efficient networking and a lack of understanding of the whole ecosystem. It seemed as a bunch of rookies trying to run the show who were completely missing the plot. They themselves couldn't agree on a decision, let alone convincing the members they were supposed to lead.
Though it was good to witness a change and bid farewell to the autocratic method of leadership, the new team, even with its more open to suggestions policy didn't fulfill the goals of betterment for the sport. This is a situation that might be faced by the political systems of many countries, let alone sports federations. How could you actually look for a better situation through such leadership?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Psychosis is godly next to neurosis; the former dissolves F(x), the ladder's ego forms f(X)