Leadership and Management: Lee Kuan Yew
... also feel collectivist in their nature that is they are in something together, just as they all follow the one leader. It is not essential to talk about masculinity here to make the argument that the traits demonstrated and documented by Hofstede in Singapore seem to suggest that the family culture would be the most suitable way to manage the people of Singapore. This is relevant when assessing Lee’s management style discussed later in this document. Lee Kuan Yew’s Leadership Lee Kuan Yew brought Singapore up from a small, unknown fishing village in Asia into a multicultural, vibrant, dynamic and prosperous nation with one of the highest Gross Domestic Products (GDP) per capita in the world. He had a vision: ‘To lead the country towards sustainable development.’ Singapore has come a long way from a ramshackle city to a wealthy and confident nation. Lee Kuan Yew established the socialist People’s Action Party (PAP) in 1954. Lee had certain core values for government to be: ‘honest, effective and efficient in protecting its people and allowing opportunity for all (Website: http://www.asiaweek.com/Asia_week/95/20greats/lky.html, 2004). Lee Kuan Yew had brought Singapore up in a Confucian manner leading to a society that is committed to high moral standards in governance, emphasizes scholarships and cherishes the family as its “building block” (Website: http://www.asiaweek.com/Asia week/95/20greats/lky.html, 2004). Strict legal rules were enforced to govern the people. He had dealt with civil unrest among the Chinese between 1961 and 1964 and issued stern warnings to the public about where loyalties must lie. He had zero tolerance for shoddy behavior and crime was dealt with an ‘iron fist.’ Triad gangs had been eliminated and even foreigners are not spared from the severe punishments for crime (Website: http://www.asiaweek.com/Asia week/95/20greats/lky.html, 2004). For example, Michael Fay, an American teenager had been caned for stealing road signs and doing vandalism. Had it not been for the then American president Bill Clinton, his sentence would have been heavier. The dealing of such events has ensured the safety of foreigners in Singapore, thus giving Singapore the upper edge. Political opponents have been sued for issues like defamation and unbecoming conduct. For example, Tang Liang Hong and Francis Chia, opposition leaders from the now defunct Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) had been ‘under fire’ from Lee Kuan Yew causing Francis Chia to leave the country to go to the United States and Tang Liang Hong, Malaysia. Lee’s tough stance against criticism and political opponents ensured his tenure as Prime Minister of Singapore. Indeed the frustration of those aligned against him politically must have been intense at times with Lee proving to be an unstoppable force. In his book, From Third World to First (2000), Lee writes: “Everyone knows if I say I am going in a certain direction and if you decide to block me, I will take a bulldozer and clear the obstruction.” Life, Actions, Outcomes Lee Kuan Yew has overcome countless obstacles and made many critical decisions which have shaped the Singaporean nation. His personal management style can be attributed as being one of the primary reasons for Singapore’s success over the last 40 years. Thought must be given to the developments in Lee Kuan Yew’s life, which have contributed to the makeup of his own unique management style. Lee Kuan Yew was born in Singapore on January 23rd 1923 and attended Raffles Institution. His keen intellect and extraordinarily motivated persona led to many successes during his schooling days and he won the Anderson Scholarship to Raffles College when he came first in Singapore and Malaysia in Senior Cambridge exams. Perhaps one of the most influential periods on Lee Kuan Yew’s life began with the invasion of Singapore by the Japanese. Lee was personally witness to incidents of brutality and cruelty on behalf of the Japanese soldiers and was shocked by the way they treated their fellow Asian man. It is difficult to draw a direct link between this volatile time and Lee Kuan Yew’s subsequent period of leadership but it can be assumed that witnessing the Japanese soldiers firsthand gave Lee an understanding of the way in which human beings adapt to superior force and the way social structures crumble (Website: http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/singapore/government/leekuanyew/chron.html, 2004). Perhaps the most formative period of the development of Lee Kuan Yew’s personal leadership style came while studying law at Cambridge (Lee, 2000). It was here that he was introduced to politics, law, and his future wife Kwa Geok Choo. The latter is undoubtedly one of the most influential forces in Lee’s life and it is interesting that they met whilst so young and are still presenting a united front today. It was also while in England that Lee came to the realization that Singapore must get rid of British Colonial rule. It was the early 1950’s when Lee Kuan Yew returned to Singapore determined and riding a wave of anti-colonialism sentiment that was washing over the South-East Asian region. Independence proved difficult to achieve and it wasn’t until 1963 that Singapore finally reached this milestone. Lee realized that the city state was vulnerable being an island with few resources and surrounded by countries that, during the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, were following active nation-oriented expansionary policies. Lee Kuan Yew was the motivating force behind the merger of Singapore, Malaya, Sarawak and Sabah to form what we know now as Malaysia. Unfortunately racial issues came to the fore and within 3 years Singapore had left the Malaysian union and struck out on its own. It was after 1963 that Lee Kuan Yew became more discretionary in his role in the development of Singapore (Lee, 2000). Lee Kuan Yew has faced many challenges and difficult decisions during his tenure as Prime Minister of Singapore. However throughout his life he has worked through the face of adversity and succeeded. Indeed Lee Kuan Yew can almost be seen as the personification of the Singaporean development story himself (Website: http://www.library.uwa.edu.au/elecres/asianstudies/profile/lky.html, 2004). Characteristics and Weaknesses of Lee Kuan Yew Lee Kuan Yew is essentially a realistic man governs by logic not emotions. His pragmatic approach to problems, refusal to act emotionally without practical considerations provides him with good decision-making skills. His realism is evident with the way he handled the Japanese blood debt issue in 1963. Singaporeans, including Lee had bitter memories towards the Japanese, and the people’s hatred grew even more with the discovery of a new cache of bodies massacred during the Japanese invasion. It was sometime after Singapore became newly independent and plans for oil refineries were to be set up by Japanese companies. Lee understood the people’s anger and bitterness at that time, but was more concerned with the future than the past. He did not want to damage Singapore’s plans to industrialize and urged the people to be patient and realistic. He informed them of the need for Japanese participation in Singapore’s industrialization program (Josey, 1980). Knowing that Japan was likely to continue as Asia’s most industrialized and technologically sophisticated society for some time, he welcome Sato’s initiative to visit the smaller capitals of Asia and formally sealed Singapore’s friendship with Japan in 1969 with a formal visit to Tokyo (Pearson, 1985). This ability to perceive long-term issues and address them in the present day is one of Lee Kuan Yew’s strengths. Lee Kuan Yew handles problems in a very aggressive, frank and confrontational way. He has an admixture of aggression and wary defense and in 1963, his public speeches showed his strong fighting spirit. “I am prepared to meet you, anywhere, anytime,” he said. “I’ll fix you” he threatened. To many, this shows Lee’s physical and intellectual courage, “You have got to face these things, you can’t run away”, he said (Pearson, 1985). In his Memoirs of a Mendicant Professor, Professor D. J. Enright agreed that the record of Lee’s government is excellent. He also pointed out Lee’s method of teaching people to stand on their own feet is to knock them down to begin with, then pull them up into sturdy independence (Pearson, 1985). Lee’s strict and aggressive nature is again shown in the way he persuaded the school council to move all the university staff and students of Nanyang University into campus of University of Singapore in 1978, to force them to use English as the main language in teaching and studying (Landow, 1999). William Hartley of the Wall Street Journal once interviewed Lee Kuan Yew. He asked for Lee’s thoughts to being called brusque, ruthless and intolerant by many and a dictator by some, to which Lee replied that he did not care what others think of him. “I have a job which has to be done, and I do it with the best of my ability. The final test was at the end of the day, when my job is done, leave the people better off, or have I made things worse” (Pearson, 1985). This statement portrays Lee’s direct, practical and aggressive nature. Lee Kuan Yew is also a man with a clear and brilliant mind. He is blessed with great insight and vision. When he first started, Singapore was nothing more than an island set against a background of political instability and communist insurgency. Lee saw the potential of this strategically placed island, an important crossroad between the northern and southern hemispheres, and the East and West. With economic viability as his top priority, his strategy was to turn Singapore, a third world island, into a first-world oasis, by establishing up-to-date facilities in communications and transportation. He courted multinational investors to upgrade the economy from mass manufacturing to high-tech industry and built the region's finest infrastructure of airport, port, roads and communications networks, as well as developed Asia's best health and education systems (Website: http://www.time.com/time/asia/asia/magazine, 2004). Thus, Singapore experienced remarkable economic growth and diversification. It enhanced its position as a world trade centre, developed powerful financial and industrial sectors and the most advanced economy in Southeast Asia. It also ranks as the ninth richest country in per capita terms today (Website: http://www.geocities.com/rajeevgm/lky.html, 2004). Singapore’s success can be directly attributed to Lee’s foresight. A further example of his brilliant mind is his understand...