| by Victor Cherubim
( May 15, 2013, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) “Do we develop countries by developing leaders or do we develop leaders to develop our countries.” This issue is bound to crop up more and more as Sri Lanka assumes the role of leading the Commonwealth in the two years after the CHOGM in Colombo in November 2013.
To resolve this debate we need data and particularly experimental data from around the Commonwealth. But this cannot be gathered in isolation as leadership style varies from nation to nation, culture and tradition, history and geography, development and progress among the Commonwealth of 54 Nation States.
The measure of leadership may hinge on the social influence on offer and on the spread of positive social change within. So what kind of people are most influential and who is susceptible to their influence?
A recent study has revealed “People who are influential are less likely to be influenced and people who were more susceptible to influence ended to be less influential.” Measuring influence with susceptibility could be challenging to say the least.
What can President Mahinda Rajapaksa offer the Commonwealth?
Sri Lanka’s President during his numerous visits abroad over the years, has displayed a style of leadership which has been respected abroad. How much moral courage, let alone integrity and honesty has he shown by his leadership will be on display. He will naturally have to showcase his talents. Many will argue that President Rajapaksa has shown that he does engage with most of the people of the nation. He has also shown that he does hope to want to engage with others in their thoughtfulness of the values that make Sri Lanka a nation. Some others would state that he engages with the people for personal gain. But, if that was the case, he appears to have the capacity to bring out the energy that exists naturally among the Sinhala people and perhaps, also a large majority of the population of the nation, for progress. In short, to better themselves.
To lead is to make decisions and allocate resources –human resources included. What matters is what’s measured. To manage the nation, its people and its resources, especially after a prolonged near three decade war, is undoubtedly a big challenge. This engagement has been based on judgment and can last as long as respect is earned and maintained.
Two noticeable features have been evident in his sacred duty to the nation.
President Mahinda Rajapaksa has himself believed in planned development – a necessity after the devastation of war. There has been no shortage of his ideological conviction that this is in the best interests of the nation.
Secondly, he has engaged the world to come to the aid of Sri Lanka. Aid has poured in from China, United States, India, the Western world, including the Commonwealth.
Slowly but surely, the world is President Rajapaksa’s oyster. His many trips abroad have opened up a continuing dialogue and avenues of trade with nations abroad. The irony of failure of forced development has of course been labelled against him. But development up to now has been sensitive and measured to the needs of the nation and confined to the cultural heritage of Sri Lanka.
Outside-in influence is viewed with suspect. Just because some “best practice” works abroad, does not necessarily mean, it will work in Sri Lanka, or for that matter anywhere in the Commonwealth.
In short, what drives leadership whether in Sri Lanka or in the Commonwealth is capacity building, style, behavioural change and essentially integrity of purpose of development?
It appears on the surface that these criteria have been adhered to in Sri Lanka and can be replicated in parts of the Commonwealth. The real test of leadership is seen as “indigenous development,” within both Sri Lanka and the Commonwealth.
 “Do we develop countries by developing leaders or do we develop le...){kind=link}