Love and leadership strategy - go hand in hand

SCIENCE OF BUILDING LEADERS By ROSHAN THIRAN

 Love and leadership go hand in hand

Tweet

“Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable, and it keeps no record of being wronged. It isn't happy when injustice is done, but it is happy with the truth. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance. Love never fails.”
Paul of Tarsus

ON Valentine's Day, when love took centre-stage, my thoughts started to drift to my apartment in Dallas, situated near Love Field, the home of the “love” airline Southwest. The company's NYSE ticker symbol: LUV. The largest and only consistently profitable airline through tumultuous times, Southwest's model of success has inspired countless others, including AirAsia.

Astonishingly, Southwest founder and former leader Herb Kelleher built the entire business on love. I heard Kelleher at the tail-end of his career attributing Southwest's greatness to love, saying, “If you seek long continued success for your business, treat your people as family and lead with love.”

He named Colleen Barrett, who started her career as a legal secretary, his successor, because “she knows how to love people to success”. Barrett claims that she spends 85% of her time on her people. Kelleher adds that “an infusion of love is an essential, but oft overlooked ingredient in any business”.

According to new research, leaders who put love into their work are significantly more successful that those who rule by fear.
 

Interestingly, rarely is love described as a leadership competency. Yet, a lack of love in some form is generally the cause of failed leadership. We want our customers to love us and our products. We want our employees to love their jobs and their company. Yet, when we talk about leadership, we ignore love. Says leadership guru Ken Blanchard: “It might sound slightly bizarre, but one of the keys for effective leadership is to be madly in love with all the people you are leading.”

So, why is love ignored? First, love is synonymous with sex, beauty and its physical form. This makes it dicey to talk about or express love in an organisation. Furthermore, love is intangible, causing leaders to be sceptical. Most leaders fear love, believing it is about group hugs, soft mushy talk or holding hands around a company campfire singing Rasa Sayang.

But what Kelleher meant by “leading with love” means truly caring, serving and loving people both employees and customers. “We've never had layoffs,” he once declared. “Our people know that if they are sick, we will take care of them. If there are occasions or grief or joy, we will be there with them. We value them as people, not just cogs in a machine.”

He really loves his employees and customers, knowing all by name and unselfishly delighting in their well-being.

Although Southwest is a low-cost airline, its salaries is on par with those of other airlines. Its employees' productivity remains the highest, allowing it to price tickets low. Its pilots spent more time flying and less time on the ground. Southwest can turn around an airplane in 20 minutes while others struggle. Its short hauls are more fuel-efficient than most big airlines' long hauls. Because the leaders at Southwest love their employees and have a “love” strategy, their employees always deliver.

Entrepreneur Mark Cuban's love for customers ultimately led him to becoming a billionaire. When it comes to customers, the owner of NBA team Dallas Mavericks, passionately believes that customers should be happy, even if it means working 24 hours a day to please them.

Love strategy for business

According to “love” guru Patch Adams, every organisation needs a “love strategy” as it delivers a better ROI (return on investment) than any other investment. According to new research, leaders who put love into their work are significantly more successful than those who rule by fear.

Great leaders are fuelled by love. They love what they do and they love the people they do it with. Indra Nooyi , CEO of PepsiCo, reinvented Pepsi by caring for people and the planet, pushing PepsiCo into becoming a “green company.”

Most business leaders have a disinclination towards embracing love as a business strategy because they are conditioned to believe leadership means being cutthroat, aggressive and mean. In their eyes, love is for sissies, and by being nice, they risk being viewed as soft and this can result in losing their grip on leadership.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Leaders who love their people are more likely to push their employees to perform at their potential through honest feedback. They raise the bar consistently just as a parent who loves their children do, disciplining them and ensuring the children face difficulties so they can learn and grow.

My yearly performance appraisals with managers who cared were never pleasant but at the end of the day, I knew exactly where I stood. Milton Mayeroff believes love is “the selfless promotion of the growth of others”.

Love is action

Love is not what you say or feel, but what you do. Mahatma Gandhi's leadership was driven by passion and action. He lived humbly because he loved people and wanted to engage with all walks of life.

Love is action. Love leads to positive thoughts, thoughts to words, and words to action. Negative emotions destroy organisations. Biologist Humberto Maturana notes that love is the only human emotion that consistently generates productive and intelligent actions.

Leaders cannot ignore feelings as leadership is emotional, dealing with dreams, passion, inspiration and love.
The opposite of love is hate. Hate manifests itself through fear. Fear restrains behaviour. Love liberates it.

Fear freezes enterprise, suffocates creativity, and deters people from stretching and growing. Fear drives compliance but not commitment. Unfortunately, most of our leadership practices are fear-goaded and insidiously rooted in our work structures and culture.

Love brings success

Basketball coaching legend John Wooden, who won a record 10 NCAA titles, considers love the “most powerful thing there is”. The power of love powered his coaching career. He exclaimed: “Your players must know that you care for them more than just as athletes. Certainly, they understand that they are there because of their athletic ability. But when you have them under your supervision, it's up to you to make sure that they understand that you care for them as individuals. I've never had one I didn't love.”

John must have learnt from Sun Tzu's Art of War “... he who loves them as his own beloved sons and they will stand by him until death”.

Research shows love being more effective in driving organisational cultural shifts than visionary statements or brilliantly worded goals. Even hard-nosed leaders such as Rudy Giuliani believes that “if you don't love people, then don't be a leader”.

In studying successful leaders, we find success driven by the quality of loving relationships within an organisation. These loving relationships are seen through behaviours like compassion, commitment, care, kindness, reflection, intuition, inclusiveness and forgiveness.

Prominent leader John Hope Bryant believes there are four laws of love-based leadership for business:

l Fear fails Leading through fear is antiquated and crippling. Love is the antidote to fear.

l Love makes money Long-term loving relationships with customers and employees make everyone wealthy.

l Vulnerability is power When you open up, people open to you.

l Giving is getting Giving inspires loyalty and confers true wealth. John D. Rockefeller, regarded as the richest man ever, was governed by love and believed it was greater to give than receive. People rallied to him because he gave. He later used his wealth to build universities and fund great causes.

Military love

Surprisingly, we find high levels of trust in military leaders. Most expect fear to be the dominant leadership style but according to retired colonel Scott Snook, it boils down to love, adding “it's a deep abiding love and respect for one's comrades” that matters most in battle.

A study by sociologist Shils and Janowitz attempted to understand why soldiers fought till death and they concluded that a soldier continued to fight well beyond the point when the battle was lost “as long as he gave affection to and received affection from the other members of his squad”.

Soldiers love each other and are willing to lay down their life for each other. If love can be the touchstone of leadership in a vocation as violent as the military, then why not in business?

Snook adds that even during military training at West Point, love is emphasised continuously: Love your country, love your classmates and friends, and love the future officers you will someday serve with and love the soldiers you would someday lead. Great commanders love their troops and put their well-being above theirs.

Final thoughts

Here are some questions you can ask to help you get love into your organisation and start your journey to being a love-based leader:

1. When was the last time you did something unexpectedly nice for someone at work?

2. When was the last time you thanked or recognised someone for a particular special effort for the company?
3. Whom have you not thanked who has done something really nice or been especially helpful to you recently?
4. Who goes the extra mile routinely (for example, working late or doing things technically not part of their job) that you take for granted?
5. What are things you could do regularly to add “love” to your workplace?
6. What are actions that I can take to truly “love” my customers? (Not actions just for marketing reasons)
7. What can I do to bring fun and joy to the workplace?

Decorated army Maj-Gen John Stanford, known for extraordinary loyal troops, claimed that the secret to success is to stay in love. He said: “Staying in love gives you the fire to ignite others. A person who is not in love doesn't feel the kind of excitement that helps them to lead others. I don't know any other thing in life more exhilarating and positive a feeling than love.”

Many of us remember the dizzying joy of being in love. We need to get that energy in the workplace too. Leadership is an affair of the heart.

Love begins with you. So, this weekend, your people need you to take a good long look in the mirror and decide that your people and your organisation deserve a leader who has the courage to stand up and love them.

l Roshan Thiran is CEO of Leaderonomics, a social enterprise passionate about ensuring love permeates across the business landscape. To learn from great leaders from across the world, login to www.leaderonomics.com/theleaderonomicsshow.

Malaysia's Migrant Economy!

Striking a balance in foreign labour

By CECILIA KOK cecilia_kok@thestar.com.my

Tweet

Harbouring the hope of providing a better future for her family, Sutimah left her village in Surabaya, Indonesia 23 years ago and travelled almost 2,000 km by boat to Peninsular Malaysia in search of a better-paying job.

She started work as a housemaid, earning less than RM400 a month. But for Sutimah, that was a sufficient amount that could alleviate the poor living conditions of her family.

“I tried to send as much money home as possible each month so that my family could live more comfortably, and my children could have access to better education,” says the 45-year-old mother of four.

Nor Zahidi Alias says rapid economic development is the primary reason for many countries’ increasing dependence on foreign labour

Sutimah, who has just been granted permanent resident status in Malaysia, is now working as a cleaner with an agency that pays her a monthly salary of RM1,000. She still sends back a big portion of the money that she earns each month, as the financial burden of her family keeps growing, particularly since her husband became paralysed a few years ago and could no longer work as an odd-job labourer.

“I have never thought of going back to Indonesia to work. I couldn't, it's just too difficult to make ends meet and to provide for my family,” she says.

Sutimah's experience, though not representative of all, speaks of a typical factor that drives people to leave their homelands and work in another country. Invariably the migrants will cite poor living conditions and a lack of opportunity for upward social and economic mobility as the main reason in their quest for greener pastures.

Promised land?  For south and southeast Asian economies, especially those that are lagging behind Malaysia, many migrant workers perceive the latter as a land flowing with milk and honey.

Official data show that Malaysia attracts a huge number of migrant workers into the country. According to official record, the number quadrupled from less than 500,000 in 1999 to more than two million, representing about 17% of the country's workforce in 2008.

It is believed that the number has since reduced to less than two million over the last two years as many migrant workers were sent home at the height of the global financial crisis in 2009. As at the end of February 2010, total registered foreign workers stood at 1.8 million, down from 1.9 million at the end of December 2009.

What's more intriguing is the fact that the actual number of migrant workers living in Malaysia could be more than double of what the official data suggest. It is believed many of these migrant workers have entered, or re-entered the country illegally.

While Malaysia cannot claim that it offers the lucrative benefits that many first-world nations have, its relatively better economic prospects and political stability have been the major pull factors.

So, is that a boon or a bane to the Malaysians economy? According to experts, it can be both ways.



“It goes without saying that foreign workers have indeed contributed to the growth of our economy, especially in sectors where we have an acute shortage of workers such as construction,” says the Malaysian Trade Union Congress deputy president Mohd Jafar Abdul Majid.

“But our economy is swamped with foreign workers who are unskilled or have low skill sets that could not contribute meaningfully to Malaysia's aspiration of becoming a high-income economy; and I think we have been too dependent on this group of foreign workers for far too long,” he adds. This is based on the significant increase in the number of unskilled or low-skill migrant workers in the country over the past two decades.

Filling the gap

In the Economic Report 2010/2011 compiled by the Finance Ministry, it was stated that of the 1.8 million registered migrant workers in Malaysia, 38.2% were employed in the manufacturing sector, 16% in the construction and 14.2% in the plantation sectors.

Indonesia accounted for the highest number of registered foreign workers in Malaysia at 50.9% . This was attributable to their country's proximity to Malaysia and its cultural and language similarities with Malaysia.
Bangladesh was second highest, accounting for 17% of the total foreign workers in Malaysia, followed by Nepal at 9.7%, Myanmar, 7.8%, India, 6.3% and Vietnam, 4.2%.

“The high dependency on foreign labour is not a characteristic unique to Malaysia,” says Malaysian Rating Corp Bhd chief economist Nor Zahidi Alias.

He says countries that have been experiencing high growth rates such as Singapore and the Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, are also experiencing the same phenomenon of having to rely on foreign labour in many sectors in their economies.

“Rapid economic development is the primary reason for the countries' increasing dependence on foreign labour,” Zahidi explains.

In general, the rising standard of living and educational levels that usually come in tandem with economic development will to lead to an aversion to the 3D (dirty, demeaning and dangerous) sectors by the local population. The void in these sectors has to be filled by unskilled migrant workers and Malaysia is not spared.

Robust economic growth in the past two decades has led to higher standard of living and improved the literacy rate among the people.

In addition, the sustained boom in economic activities has also led to substantial job creation as employment expanded faster than the labour force.

A tight labour supply situation further fuelled the growing demand for foreign labour, especially in the manufacturing and construction sectors.

Flawed strategy?

Since the 1980s, Malaysia's economy has been driven largely by the export-oriented manufacturing sectors, especially the electrical and electronic segments. The Government, perceiving migrant workers as a cheap source of labour that could enhance the country's export competitiveness had been encouraging the deployment of foreign labour in the 1990s.

As a result, local manufacturers had been able to enjoy a steady supply of cheap labour for the past two decades, and Malaysia has been able to maintain its competitiveness.

Migrant workers have been used as the foundation of the country's rapid-growth strategy. The presence of migrant workers in the country has been more than just filling the gap in the 3D sectors.

But economists are questioning if the huge influx of foreign labour is indeed the right move.
Some economists say it has been a flawed strategy.

Professor Datuk Dr Mohamed Ariff of the Malaysian Institute of Economic Research says the opening of the floodgates for cheap foreign labour in the past is a major mistake that has put Malaysia in the middle-income trap.

“It was a short-sighted growth strategy that attempted to maintain the country's competitiveness based on a low-wage system,” he explains, adding that he firmly believes that if Malaysia had not allowed the massive influx, local manufacturers would have been forced to innovate, automate to boost productivity to maintain their competitiveness so that they could move up the value chain.

Economists concede that the continuous dependence on cheap foreign labour would be a drag to the country's economy, as it would not encourage local corporations to mechanise - the initiatives of which are necessary to push the economy into a high-income level as defined by World Bank.

In addition, the huge number of unskilled or low-skilled foreign workers in the country has also raised concerns of security and incidences of highly contagious diseases in the country.

They are also seen to be putting additional strain on the Government's fiscal position as foreign workers could also have access to subsidised facilities including fuel and medical care.

“Over-reliance on foreign workers can have detrimental consequences, and that is why the Government is looking at ways to reduce dependence on them. The nation's prevailing dependence on low-skilled foreign workers cannot be done away with overnight, as a sudden repatriation of them can have serious repercussions on the economy, especially in sectors like manufacturing, construction and plantation,” he explains.

“Production activities will stall as quick replacements are not readily available. This will inevitably lead to a loss of competitiveness, closures or stagnations of businesses,” Zahidi says, adding that the distinctive roles of foreign labours in the 3D sectors cannot be underestimated.

To lift Malaysia to a higher developmental plane, economists say more incentives should be introduced to spur businesses to become less labour-intensive.

“For certain, it is only when businesses become accustomed to capital-intensive modes of production can their reliance on low-skilled foreign labour be reduced,” Zahidi says.

Skilled foreign labour

Not all foreign workers in Malaysia are unskilled or have low skill sets. A small number of them are highly skilled professionals who play an invaluable role in enhancing the country's productivity and competitiveness.

Generally termed as expatriates, these professionals are considered to be an asset to the country, as they bring with them the knowledge and skills that could enrich the local labour force.

“Inflows of skilled foreign labour should not be discouraged. As demonstrated by other countries such as Singapore and some of the Gulf states where highly skilled foreign labour are critical in the spurring a country's development. There is certainly a positive role that certain classes of foreign workers can play in any economy,” Zahidi says.

According to Economic Report 2010/2011, as at the end of July last year, the number of expatriates in Malaysia stood at 31,371, accounting for less than 2% of the migrant workers in the country.

They were mostly employed in the services (64.8%) and the manufacturing (22.2%) sectors, and they came mostly from India (17.8%), China (10.2%) and Japan (7%).

Under the 10th Malaysia Plan, the Government planned to attract highly-skilled expatriates to promote a knowledge and innovation-based economy, especially in the technical and professional services. Part of this effort is reflected in Talent Corporation Malaysia Bhd, which aims to attract, motivate and retain high-skilled human capital in the country.

Finding the right balance

The Government's effort in reducing the country's dependency on low-skilled foreign workers has been ongoing, as evidenced in the gradual reduction in the number of registered foreign workers over the last two years. Its target is to reduce the number of foreign workers to 1.5 million by 2015.

But this would be a challenging task. “Economic transition has not been easy; neither has the country's policy to reduce its heavy reliance on low-skilled imported labour because the technology base of Malaysia is still relatively low,” says independent consultant Dr Vijayakumari Kanapathy (formerly a senior analyst with the Institute of Strategic and International Studies).

“So, given the structure of Malaysia's economy, the reliance on imported labour in the immediate future is likely to continue,” she adds.

Mohd Jafar concurs, saying: “To be fair, all stakeholders play a role in reducing the country's reliance on migrant workers. Employers need to move away from their dependence on cheap foreign labour and go up the value chain, while policymakers need to implement better regulation and improve on the enforcement part, especially in preventing the illegal immigrants from entering the country.”

Malaysia needs to shift its focus from importing cheap labour to managing labour flow that can maximise growth and facilitate its structural adjustment towards a higher income economy.

This will also minimise the negative social impact brought about by these foreign nationals. But striking a balance between short and long-term needs of the economy will prove to be a complex challenge.

Related Stories:
Remittance business picks up steam
Locals put off by dirty, demeaning and dangerous' low-end jobs

Tiger mother & Chinese dragon

Tweet

 Dialogue Tiger mother & Chinese dragon



Recently, Amy Chua's new book "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" has set off a wave of discussion around the world about parents and children. The book is peppered with funny, self- excoriating scenes of Chua’s extreme mothering. Chua acknowledges she has had doubts, but she never goes so far as to denounce Chinese parenting. Chua’s stated intent is to present the differences between Western and Chinese parenting styles by sharing experiences with her own children. Chua chronicles her battle to rear two American daughters in the traditional Chinese method. Amy Chua’s memoir gives society plenty to debate about raising kids.

Editor:James |Source: CNTV

Sow seeds of responsibility

Putik Lada By H.R. Dipendra

Tweet

Use the Internet and new social media for constructive expression of ideas, views and accountability, not to sow discord, spread lies and divide the population.

PLANS to amend the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) to include online publications have set the online community abuzz, with comments fast and furious on the incredulity of the suggestion.

Notwithstanding the denials issued by the authorities, the question that follows is: What if this should become reality?

The idea was to expand on the rigid requirements of the PPPA to include online publications. This would have a tremendous effect on the online publications that many have come to rely on as daily staple.

Often, in a globalised world, two or even three seemingly unconnected events can have a net effect on each other.

The recent events in the Arab world and the release of swathes of classified correspondence which we all have come to know as the WikiLeaks saga can be viewed disjunctively, but I just wonder if indeed these events spooked the suggestion to expand the PPPA.

Both the Arab world protests and WikiLeaks do not share a clear and obvious connection to each other. However, they both thrived on one common platform i.e. the power of new social media and the Internet.

The Internet, principally through social media networks like Facebook and Twitter, has galvanised people to stand up against corruption and mismanagement. It is a powerful moving force that has brought together all walks of life with a common agenda.

Should there be regulation of the Internet and new social media, whether directly or indirectly? Should we be quick to control what can easily be used to manipulate and overthrow legitimate governments?

No doubt, the Internet and new social media have their critics who simply believe that these cause mischief and mayhem, and by extension regard them as banes of human existence.

Aside from the physical difficulties in censoring and choking the Internet and new social media, where proxy servers are rampant, the huge cost associated with tracking and monitoring comments online makes it difficult for any authority.

By enlarging the scope of the PPPA, it would, over time, have the effect of creating more dissent, and “underground” servers will grow unabated.

In a country which has an Internet penetration of more than 66%, and with Facebook and Twitter growing exponentially, wouldn’t this be seen as a regressive step designed to be exclusionary rather than be inclusionary of the population in a year where many expect an election to be called?

Given the complex design of the Internet, it is impossible to completely control access to information, except in very limited and controlled circumstances. One may be able to control access to a specific site from a home computer, or use a firewall to block certain sites from employees on a workplace network.

The progress of civilisation directly relates to individual expression of new ideas, even if such ideas are unpopular. The principle of freedom of speech is the most important value society can uphold.

The Internet not only provides universal access to free speech, it also promotes the basic concept of freedom of speech.

Justice Olivier Holmes, dissenting in the celebrated case of Abrams v United States, captured it best when he said that “the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas, (and) the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market”.

In essence, there is an inherent value in truth being best decided in a free marketplace of ideas, and consequently it is that ability of the Internet to act as a promoter of free speech that we must all cherish and respect.

I am very sure that all Malaysians will, over time, recognise this as a universal and accepted truth. We cannot be seen to be regressive in an era where the opposite is demanded to help us stamp our mark as a developed nation.

I will be the first to admit that online expression of ideas can sometimes be destructive. It is in our nature as human beings to be destructive, but this is not to mean that we should curb and over-regulate what is commonly perceived as a good thing.

What we need is continuous education and self-regulation. All of us have a role to play in that we must all be vigilant against destructive elements determined to cause chaos and anarchy.

While the authorities on their part must encourage free flow of information, we as members of the public and civil society must repay this “sacrifice” by making sure that the Internet and new social media are used for healthy and constructive expression of ideas, views and accountability.

They cannot be used to sow discord, spread lies and divide the population.

There are many ways to approach the ever growing presence of social media. Often the authorities will maintain a policy of rigidity and tightening of the rules when a more suitable response will be that of flexibility, engagement, concessions and political wisdom.

In a year that promises an election, adopting a position that requires the censorship and over-regulation of online publications will only be counter-productive and detrimental to the civic and mental development of Malay­sia.

> The writer is a member of the National Young Lawyers Committee of the Bar Council. Putik Lada, or pepper buds in Malay, captures the spirit and intention of this column – a platform for young lawyers to articulate their views and aspirations about the law, justice and a civil society. For more information about the young lawyers, visit www.malaysianbar.org.my.

Rescuing democracy from malaise a challenge

Diplomatically Speaking By Dennis Ignatius

Tweet

The tumultuous events that shook Egypt are apparently causing jitters elsewhere. In Malaysia, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak surprisingly saw the need to warn against similar moves here.

Few believe that the conditions that prompted mass demonstrations in Egypt presently exist in Malaysia. For one thing, Malaysians are vastly better off economically than the Egyptians. For the most part, Malaysians enjoy a level of comfort and consumerism that is the envy of most of the developing world.

True, Malaysians have become decidedly unhappy with rising living costs, the concentration of wealth and opportunity in the hands of a few well-connected people, and widespread corruption. For now, however, these concerns are far from the point where they could conceivably find expression in a “day of rage”.

The most important difference, however, that mitigates against an Egyptian-style revolt here is that we already have in place a democratic system that gives the people the power to effect change through the ballot box.
The lessons we must learn from Egypt are of another kind: that democracy is a precious right that people in other nations have had to fight and die for. It must never be taken for granted or allowed to wither through neglect or indifference.

And therein lies the nub of our problem: our democracy, and the key institutions associated with it, has been in slow decline for some years now.

Malaysia is increasingly viewed as a “flawed” democracy. The recent Economist Democracy Index ranked Malaysia 71 out of 167 countries, behind even Indonesia, Namibia, Thailand and Papua New Guinea.

Rescuing our democracy from the malaise that has beset it is a key challenge, and arguably our most important task.

Democracy is more than simply casting a ballot once every few years; it is a way of life, a frame of mind, an attitude of heart, where citizens actively and tangibly participate in the political life of their nation through a myriad of different ways – turning out to vote, engaging political representatives and holding them accountable, participating in dialogue and debate, staying informed on issues and making informed decisions, standing up for fundamental rights, etc.

Passivity is the great enemy of democracy. The people themselves must be the guardians of their own freedom.

Fortunately, Malaysians appear to be increasingly vocal participants in the democratic process. They have not been afraid to take to the streets to peacefully express their displeasure or to support causes they believe in.

They are speaking out and challenging long established taboos. They have shown that they are ready to take a chance on the unknown and even elect political neophytes to office if it will help to improve the overall democratic climate in the country. Civil society groups are also more active, well organised and better supported.

All this augurs well for our democracy, though we still have some way to go. Democracy is, after all, always a work in progress. If our democracy is to prosper, democratic transformation and change must become a priority.

Intrinsic to this is an end to the culture of impunity. For too long, public officials who abuse their position have managed to evade justice. There is a sense that those with privilege and good connections are above the law. This is harmful to democracy.

Citizens of a democracy also need to be on guard against demagoguery and those who pander to narrow racial or religious sentiment. There is already too much of this in Malaysia and it is detrimental to our democracy. Character, principle and dedicated service should matter far more than racial or religious considerations.

As well, citizens of a free nation must be in the forefront of defending the democratic institutions, including a free press, an independent judiciary and a responsive parliament, that give substance to their democracy.

The curtailment of press freedom, for example, has weakened our democracy. Only a free and fearless press can keep governments accountable and citizens well informed. It is not a luxury we can do without; it is necessary for the survival of our democracy.

Our justice system also needs to be overhauled. The reputation of some of our judges has been tarnished and their impartiality questioned. Our police force is plagued by corruption and seen as abusive and disrespectful of the rights of citizens.

Last but not least, our Parliament must be transformed into the true heart of our democracy instead of being little more than a rubber stamp. Many of our elected representatives appear to owe little or no allegiance to the people who voted for them. If we are to give meaning to our democracy, we must demand more of those we elect to represent us.

George Bernard Shaw once quipped that democracy ensures that we shall be governed no better than we deserve. Malaysia deserves better and it is up to the people to ensure that we get it. That is what the people at Liberation Square are discovering.

> Datuk Dennis Ignatius is a 36-year veteran of the Malaysian foreign service. He has served in London, Beijing and Washington and was ambassador to Chile and Argentina. He was twice Undersecretary for American Affairs. He retired as High Commis­sioner to Canada in July 2008.