Embedded Files
THE LGU LEADER IN THE LEADERSHIP PROCESS: HOW VALUES, BELIEFS, AND PRINCIPLES INFLUENCE DECISIONS AND CHOICES - A TWIN CASE STUDY OF MARIKINA AND SAN JUAN CITY MAYORS
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Local government unit (LGU) leaders in the Philippines whether they be the executive head of the barangay, municipality, city, or province, are assumed to have ideas of what it takes to lead and run the affairs at the barangay hall, town hall, city hall, or provincial capitol. They must have either their own or, as suggested by others, ideas of what knowledge, skills and other attributes that they must acquire if they must function effectively as a leader. They must have ideas of what their staff, supporters, and constituents want from them, they being the elected public servants of the community. Furthermore, they must have ideas of how to effectively communicate to the members of their respective communities, for example, how to organize messages for information to be easily understood and appreciated by the community. Finally, they must have ideas of which factors in the existing situation, context, circumstances, or conditions in the community need to be tapped given their potential in influencing the leadership process.
The above is the ideal conception of the leader and his central role in the leadership process. The leaders themselves have these ideals in their heads, for these are everybody’s standard expectations of what an LGU head should be doing to his constituents.
More often than not, what actually happens is different however. Some LGU heads, even if they know about the ideal bases for effective leadership, having gone to many seminar-workshops before, relegate their stock theories to the sidelines and apply instead principles based on self-interest or politically-motivated agenda According to Conger (2008: 437-438), “unsuccessful leaders fail due to the inclusion of their personal aims in the organizational goals…leaders substitute personal goals for shared organizational goals…leaders’ needs diverge from those of the constituents.” As a result, their leadership is not effective, efficient, responsible, transparent, nor accountable, as demonstrated in the ineffective and inefficient or even non-delivery of essential services to their constituents.
Indeed, one article that gave inspiration to this study was that written by Stephen Young (2006: 188) who stressed the need for principles-based leadership due to the frequency of bad leadership around. The need is to “look into the values-base and the principles that guide leaders’ action. The calling of a leader must necessarily call into question the substance of the principles he or she lives by.” Young pointed out that traditional research is value-free but practical experience tells another story. Much of leadership constitutes normative work of the leader who has to choose and articulate norms in social settings. Often, they face decision-making situations where there is no clear right or wrong to an ethical dilemma. They have to decide based on good judgment and moral principles.
The Philippines may have a lot of these bad leaders around. Thanks to some other LGU executives who have remained true to their public servant’s calling. There are such LGU heads who have assumed command of the political leadership in their respective communities. They threw their hat into the political ring because they did not like how their local government had been run by predecessors. That is why the moment they got elected into office as town mayor, or city mayor, or provincial governor, they immediately set about doing their tasks on the basis of sound philosophies or principles of leadership.
Other LGU executives in the country entered politics to continue their predecessors’ commitments. They wanted to sustain the achievements that have already begun to bear fruit in the administration or administrations to which they succeeded.
Among the crop of these conscientious and pro-community LGU heads were the former mayors of Marikina City and of San Juan City, Marides Fernando and JV Ejercito, respectively. Both leaders founded their leadership on the basis o their personal values, beliefs, and principles. Because of their commitment to these principles, the two ex-city mayors turned around their respective city governments into LGUs with a lot of successful city government programs and projects, specifically basic services programs. As they finished their full three-year terms, from 2001 to 2009, their reputation as responsible, service-oriented city mayors may go down as among the finest administrations in the history of their respective city governments, one for the books, so to speak.
Indeed, any LGU leader is judged on the basis of his performance mainly in the aspect of services delivery to the people – to the residents of the city in this case. These basic services include, for the most part, cleanliness, greening, and beautification of all city areas. This service is not just confined to the streets but also cover the market, the city hall, the plaza, the sports center, and other public structures. Then there are the basic services of livelihood enterprises through knowledge sharing of soap-making, candle-making, cooperative capability-building, market fairs – all of which aim to provide employment and income generation to the poor sectors of the city. Other basic services of the city government relate to infrastructure build-up and repair or rehabilitation, such as the construction of streets, widening of streets, feeder roads to connect remote barangays to the urban area, bridges, school buildings, public toilets, among others. Services of the city government also include its health, sanitation, and nutrition programs; education programs from the pre-school up to the tertiary level especially in terms of scholarships to poor, deserving pupils and students; and peace and order maintenance, wherein the city is transformed from a crime-ridden city to one that has almost eliminated it from the city streets and in which the city residents feel safe and secure in their homes.
The above basic services have been responded to by ex-city mayor Fernando and ex-city mayor Ejercito in their respective city governments during their terms of office, as can be seen demonstrably in the improvements of their respective cities, or as reported by observers and the media (Dulay 2011; Fernando, B, 2006; Gonzales, 2009; Zamora, 2007), and as seen in the number of awards both have received from award-giving bodies. The inference is that they ran their city governments on the basis of certain sound and values-based leadership that resulted in achievements of the city mayor and of the city government as well.
Statement of the Problem
It would be interesting then to find out and to ask the following questions:
1. How may the leadership process be described in terms of the leader’s values, beliefs, and principles and their interaction with his decisions and choices, using the two cases of Marides Fernando and JV Ejercito?
2. How may the influence of these two leader’s values, beliefs, and principles on their decisions and choices be explained and analyzed?
3. How may the extent of influence of these leaders’ values, beliefs, and principles on their decisions and choices be described, explained, and analyzed in terms of the success of the city government’s services programs?
4. What insights can be gained and lessons leaned from the two cases that may be of importance to public administration and governance as well as to leadership inquiry in general?
Objectives of the Study
In response to the problems raised, the study aims to achieve the following corresponding objectives:
1. To examine and to shed light on the leadership process from the vantage point of the LGU leader (the city mayor) whose own personal values, beliefs, and principles affect and influence his decisions ad choices concerning the design, plan, and implementation of the city government’s services programs,
2. To describe, explain, and analyze the reasons behind the decisions made by the two ex-city mayors,
3. To describe, explain, and analyze the extent to which the leader’s values, beliefs, and principles influence the success of the city government’s programs, and
4. To draw valuable insights and lessons learned from the study as a way of consolidating findings on values-based or principles-based local government leadership on program success.
Significance of the Study
This is a case study of two ex-city mayors, Marides Fernando of Marikina City, and JV Ejercito of San Juan City, focusing on their own values, beliefs, and leadership principles which may be assumed as having inspired and guided them in their conceptualization and implementation, and eventual success of their city services programs. It uses the cases of ex-city mayor Marides Fernando of Marikina City and ex-city mayor JV Ejercito of San Juan City to demonstrate and to support the claim that values-based or principles-based leadership does wonders in public administration and governance. There is indeed much to be learned from the way these two mayors successfully implemented their city services programs. Their values, beliefs, and principles must have shaped the way they directed and moved their city services programs to success.
Knowledge on the guiding principles on leadership by two successful and achieving ex-city mayors would comprise a most valuable learning model for LGUs and their leaders. What former city mayors Marides Fernando and JV Ejercito followed as guiding principles in the leadership of their respective city governments would also add or strengthen similar other guiding leadership principles used by LGU executives in other Philippine towns, cities and provinces. This case study would thus confirm or validate the findings in other case studies about Philippine LGU leaders. The accumulation of these case study experiences in time is hoped to make way for a Philippine leadership model in the near future.
The study would also support findings in psychology especially on the cognitive approach or human information processing approach regarding how human beings use or process information and convert it to a valuable input for decision-making. In this case, an overarching theory useful across several disciplines may evolve and the psychological cognitive or human information processing approach may be harnessed as a useful theoretical foundation in such an applied area as public administration.
Furthermore, the case study draws attention to the remarkably close relationship between principles, ideals, standards, values, beliefs, attitudes, habits, and the like and the successful conceptualization and implementation of a program, project, or activity. A program, project or activity guided by principles grounded on honesty, commitment, service, responsibility, accountability, and transparency would have a better chance for success than does another program, project, or activity that is not grounded on the above principles but on principles motivated by selfish motives.
To public administration students and scholars, the case study gives additional proof that it is not structure nor resources nor the other factors in the situation that are crucial in the success of a government program or project, but the beliefs, values and principles that can even move plans and programs to success even with meagre or the least resources in hand. The case study refutes the usual claims of leaders that they cannot succeed in their programs and project because of lack of resources. An LGU leader with less resources can do wonders with just the will of his beliefs and principles to push his plan and programs and achieve their objectives successfully.
Scope and Delimitations
The study only relies on two cases. Hence, findings may be limited and not generalizable to all city mayors, or even to all LGU heads. What can only be highlighted is that the ex-city mayors under study are accomplished mayors, doers in some sense, and have brought success, good image, pride and honor to their respective cities. These mayors in their own terms achieved much for their city governments. As a result, write-ups about their accomplishments for the city have been reported in the media and in time awards were handed out to them for their accomplishments.
The twin case studies cover the terms of two ex-city mayors, Marides Fernando of Marikina City and JV Ejercito of San Juan City. They were elected to the city mayor’s post from 2001 to 2010, a span of nine years governing their respective cities. From just these two cases, the study shares with fellow LGU leaders and public administration scholars findings about values, beliefs, and principles as influential sources in their leadership decisions and choices. The values, beliefs, and principles on which both city government leaders base their leadership and success in governing the city, which may be attributed to the guidance of these principles, is what the study is all about.
For manageability, the study may not be able to cover all city government programs. It will only focus on the decisions and choices of the two ex-city mayors regarding the conceptualization, planning, implementation, and evaluation of the basic services programs. This may include such basic services programs as garbage collection, health and nutrition, education, cleanliness and beautification, and enterprise development.
The selection of the two ex-city mayors coincided with the start and completion of their terms. This may be a blessing for it rules out other factors brought about by different time frames. Their being Metro Manila executives also confines the study to circumstances within the Metro Manila area. This also rules out other factors due to being in different locations, one inside and the other outside Metro Manila. This is a blessing to the researcher as constraints due to distance, travel time, and costs are reduced to a minimum.
On the other hand, the LGU heads under study are only two exemplary individuals among the many LGU executives and leaders in the Philippines. Of course, there are other LGU leaders who are of the same mind and heart as Marides Fernando and JV Ejercito. The case study, however, cannot attempt to include all of these LGU heads due to constraints of time and place.
CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE
The literature on leadership is abundant. In this chapter, only leadership literature that includes content on values, beliefs, principles, attitudes, and leader character are reviewed.
I. Foreign Literature
Past Leadership Theories
From the tangle of traits theory, leadership style theory, leadership behavior theory, contingency and situational approach theory, and other theories on leadership, only a few in the past literature touched on the important leadership component, which is the leader’s philosophy, views, perspectives, values, beliefs, attitudes, principles, and other mental categories of inspirational guides motivating a leader to pursue certain activities. Fortunately, this has been addressed to only in recently published literature.
The first to point out the importance of such mental categories was Robert Greenleaf (1977) who proposed the Servant Leadership theory. Servant leadership is based on the desire to serve the needs of other people. Great leaders serve others. Greenleaf identifies the servant leader from his distinction between strong natural leaders and strong natural servants. The former takes charge, makes decisions, and gives orders while the latter are driven by the need to serve a cause. To him, only natural servants should take the lead. The servant leader is servant first. According to him, it begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings him to aspire to lead. Servant leaders help followers develop their own values that support the organization in its mission. The test of servant leadership is whether those served become healthier, wiser, freer, and more autonomous.
If ever, some leadership theories pay indirect attention to the guiding philosophy, principles, perspectives, views, and other mental maps of the leader. For example, leadership style theory classified leaders according to a concern for tasks versus a concern for people. Those with a concern for tasks equated with “initiating structure” while those with a concern for others or people were inclined to “consideration.” (Gill, 2006: 42). The style in which directiveness, goal facilitation, and task-related feedback were observed was said to be “initiating structure,” whereas the use of interpersonal warmth, concern for the feelings of subordinates, and the use of participative two-way communication was labeled “consideration” (Chemers, 1995: 85). On closer analysis, the concern for others is nothing but the outward manifestation of a leader’s belief in, say, respect for the dignity of the human person. The unfortunate thing is that scholars often prefer to study a measurable variable over a variable (especially mental categories) which are difficult to measure.
In addition, Selznick (1957: 37) said that the leader’s function is to define the ends of group existence, to design an enterprise adapted to these ends, and to see that the design becomes a living reality. To Hollander & Julian (2008: 17), the leader sets the basis for relationships within groups. He initiates structure by affecting the process which occurs within that structure.
Murphy (2008: 12-14) stressed the importance of the leader in the leadership situation. The leader is the instrumental factor through which the situation is brought to a solution. Leadership comes when an individual releases in the situation of which he is a part certain ideas and tendencies which are accepted by the group because the indicate solution of needs. The situation is that there is a leader with his abilities and drives, and that there are the group, the material resources, viewpoints, desires, and needs – and a condition of readiness for leadership.
In this regard, scholars have failed to bank on the brilliant analysis of educational philosopher John Stuart Mill in 1987. According to Mill, intentions or reasons for an act tell us about the morality of an action.
Transformational leaders have strong values. They are concerned with end values like liberty, justice, and equality. Indeed, values that reflect concern for others are the mark of transforming leaders. The impact of transformational leadership is reflected in motivation, empowerment, and morality. In Bass and Avolio’s (1997, in Gill, 206: 52-53) model of transformational leadership, the leaders use one or more of the four “Is,” namely: individual consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and idealized influence. Individualized consideration is listening actively, identifying individuals’ personal concerns and needs, providing matching challenges and opportunities to learn in a supportive environment, delegating to people as a way of developing them, giving developmental feedback, and coaching them. Intellectual stimulation is reflected in questioning the status quo, presenting new ideas to followers and challenging them to think, encouraging imagination and creativity in rethinking old assumptions and old ways of doing things, and not publicly criticizing errors of followers. Inspirational motivation is communicating a clear vision of the possible future, aligning organizational goals and personal goals, treating threats and problems as opportunities to learn, and providing meaning and challenge to the work of their followers. Finally, idealized influence which is closely related to charisma, is expressing confidence in the vision, taking personal responsibility for actions, displaying a sense of purpose, determination, persistence, and trust in other people, and emphasizing accomplishments rather than failures.
Visionary leadership involves transforming an organizational culture in line with the leader’s vision of the organization’s future (Sashkin, 1988, in Avery, 2004: 54). Visionary leadership may also be termed charismatic or inspirational leadership. Many in history can be called visionaries: Jesus Christ, Buddha or Mohammad, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, among others. Despite being idealized in the literature, visionary leaders often employ coercive tactics. Visions may be developed and proclaimed by the leader but may also emerge from the organizational members. Certain aspects of visionary leadership appear to be universally recognized, such as: being trustworthy, just, honest, charismatic, inspirational, encouraging, positive, motivational, confidence building, dynamic, good with teams, excellence-oriented, decisive, intelligent, a win-win problem-solver, and exercising foresight.
But visionary leadership has its limits. Followers often place unrealistic expectations on visionary leaders (Nadler & Tushman, in Avery, 2004: 25). Followers can become dependent on leaders, believing that the leader has everything under control. Also, innovation can be inhibited if people become reluctant to disagree with the visionary leader.
Charismatic leadership theory is also about visionary and transformational leadership. Charisma is a special quality that enables the leader to mobilize and sustain activity within an organization though specific personal actions combined with perceived personal characteristics (Nadler & Tushman, 1995: 108). After some research studies, the resulting approach to studying charismatic leaders are the following patterns of behavior:
1. Envisioning: articulating a compelling vision, setting high expectations, and modeling consistent behaviors.
2. Energizing: demonstrating personal excitement, expressing personal confidence, and seeking, finding, and using success.
3. Enabling: expressing personal support, empathizing, and expressing confidence in people.
Charismatic leadership theory has its limitations. Some of the potential problems include: unrealistic or unattainable expectations which can backfire if the leader cannot live up to the expectations that are created; dependency and counterdependency, reluctance to disagree with the leader, need of continuing magic, potential feelings of betrayal, disenfranchisement of next levels of management, and limitations of range of the individual leader (Nadler & Tushman, 1995: 110-111).
Given these limitations, the authors, Nadler & Tushman, propose the instrumental leadership theory as an alternative. Instrumental leadership behavior involves three elements. One is structuring. The leader invests time in building teams that have the required competence to execute and implement the re-orientation and in creating structures that make it clear what types of behavior are required throughout the organization. This involves setting goals, establishing standards, and defining roles and responsibilities. The second element is controlling or the creation of systems and processes to measure, monitor, and assess both behavior and results and to administer corrective action. The third element is rewarding, which includes the administration of both rewards and punishment contingent upon the degree to which behavior is consistent with the requirements for the change.
Cognitive theories are also applicable to public administration and governance. They liken leadership decision-making, behavior and performance to the human mind’s system of processing information. Human behavior can be described as a consequence of information processing. How people behave in a situation is a product of how the current situation is perceived, what recollections they have of previous related circumstances, and their ability to construct alternatives of behaving that are inferable from these informational inputs. The way people behave is dependent on the information available and a set of processes for operating on that information. The information a leader has to work with at any moment comes from three sources: current circumstances, memory (information about past experiences), and feedback contingent upon action (Bourne, Dominowski, Loftus, & Healy, 1986: 12, 17-18)
The structure of the human mind through its schemas and scripts mediates in the emergence of behavior. That is why the human mind is constrained by the historical and social constraints that operate on a particular culture or class, and the specific life experiences of the individual. In other words, to know something and to act on the basis of that knowledge, one has to know its relationship to other events and propositions that form part of an individual’s past experiences (Mandler, 1975).
According to Lord & Maher (1993: 19-25), there are four models of human information processing. One is the rational model. This assumes that the individual is able to process information through rational means, and to be able to discover the truth of the world on a perfect, one-to-one correspondence. The next model is the limited-capacity processing model. Unlike the rational model, this model admits of the imperfections of the brain system to process data from the environment. The third model is the expert model. It contrasts the way experts and non-experts or novices process information. Experts have heuristic-driven capabilities different from novices. Experts also encode information by responding to situations that contain problem representation scripts. Novices do not have such advantage. Experts are highly efficient processors of information but only in their specific domain.
The cybernetic model of information processing is on-line processing, that is the individual continually updates his information. Past social information, for example, is intermixed over time with planning future activities and executing current behaviors. However, this works only when feedback is available and initial mistakes are not costly. In situations in which the above limitations occur, people become cybernetic information processors (Lord & Maher, 1993: 24-25).
Beach & Connolly (2005: 5-6; 16, 19) are innovative in that they integrated many of the concepts that also worked in the social constructivist cognitive theory. Their approach focuses on the ways in which decision-makers use information for their decisions using the framework Diagnosis-Action selection-Implementation. In diagnosis, the person puts events in the environment in proper context to give them meaning. This is framing which allows him to draw on previous experience to decide on what to do. Framing is embedding observed events in a context that gives them meaning. The frame of the situation is the decision-maker’s cognitive image of that particular situation.
In this vein, the work of Zhang & Sternberg (2006: 3) about intellectual styles is much related. One who is genuinely interested in the task at hand is using a creativity-generating style. Adaptive styles are value-laden as they value innovation.
In Jago’s (1982) Process Leadership theory, the skills and knowledge possessed by the leader are subject to the influence of his attributes or traits, such as beliefs, values, ethics, and character. Knowledge and skills contribute directly to the process of leadership, but the other attributes give the leader certain characteristics that make him unique. Together, skills, knowledge, and attributes make the leader, which is one of the four factors of leadership (U.S. Army, 1983).
Bernard Bass (1990: 906), in Bass & Stogdill (1990) looked forward to a model of ethical analysis that “determines the connection between moral reasoning and moral behavior and how each depends on the issue involved.” Bass defined ethics as a creative searching for human fulfillment and choosing it as good and beautiful.
Even the concept of “organizational climate” is influenced by the leader, thus admitting the primacy of the leader in the leadership process or situation. According to Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson (2007), organizational climate is directly related to the leadership and management style of the leader, based on the values, attributes, skills, and actions as well as the priorities of the leader. The behavior or character of the leader is the most important factor that impacts the climate. Thus, some of the more important question to focus in any organizational climate inquiry are: How well does the leader clarify the priorities and goals of the organization? How competent are the leaders? Are leaders free to make decisions? What does the leader expect of its employees? What will happen if the leader makes a mistake?
Even new areas of inquiry, baptized as the New Public Management (NPM), banked on leader’s beliefs and values. Of Bovaird & Loffler’s (2003: 17) seven elements of NPM, one related to the leader’s beliefs or principles. This one element was “more responsiveness to users and other customers in public services.” Forbes, Hill, & Lynn (2006: 260-261) categorized three important public management constructs to understand and to examine, namely: administrative structures, managerial tools, and managerial values and strategies. The last category acknowledged the leader’s philosophy and principles. Managerial values and strategies reflect managerial choices with respect to goals, missions, priorities, and adaptations to the environment local or international. In addition, the concern for quality and quality of service or service quality provided by public agencies demands certain capacities from public service leaders.
The New Public Service (NPS), a concept put forth by Janet Denhardt and Robert Denhardt (2003), was a reaction to NPM, as worked out by Osborne & Gaebler (1992). In NPS, the focus was on the mission of the government and how to determine the collective pubic interest. The authors believed that there were considerations that should come before cost and efficiency, and that citizen participation should be a major factor in decisions. They saw the role of the administrator as very complex: synthesizing the needs of citizens, interest groups, elected representatives, etc. NPS offered a synthesis of the ideas that were opposed to NPM.
New Leadership Theories: More and More Values-based
Only recently, the theories on leadership have gone back to the leader’s values, beliefs, and philosophies. This is because of all the factors that go into the phenomenon called leadership, the most important is the leader and his principles, values and beliefs. The coming out of new publications about the leader’s character and his responsibility to the people all point out to this admission of the importance of the leader and his values and beliefs in any leadership inquiry.
The values, principles, beliefs, and philosophies of the leader have been enlightening the leadership concept. This implies that all other factors in leadership can only be reduced to one: the leader’s principles, beliefs which spell out his virtue and character. They are the building blocks of moral life.
Way back in Ancient Greek times, Aristotle already wrote about virtue, that specific human excellence found in a person’s actions, habits and character. The leader’s character was the controlling factor. He was convincing only if he displayed practical wisdom, good will, and virtue (Sison, 2006: 108). Kouzes & Posner (1993: 255) said something to the same effect: that all human decisions have a moral dimension, and that moral attributes such as honesty, integrity, credibility, and trustworthiness are the qualities most desired by people in their leaders.
Robert Solomon (1998: 98, 101, 105) proposed trust as the basis of ethical leadership. Without trust, no dialogue, understanding, cooperation, or community will take place. Trust lowers transaction costs, facilitates entrepreneurial initiatives, and boosts economic competitiveness. Virtue, which is excellence of character, is the source of trust. Virtue could also be expressed by the word “integrity,” suggesting wholeness and stability in a person on whom others can rely. Virtue is a kind of moral capital, which makes a person good as a human being (Sison, 2003).
Excellence of character also depends on cultivating the right habits. Virtuous habits result from the repetition of virtuous actions, and virtuous action spring from a person’s having nurtured suitable inclinations in accordance with his nature. Actions arise from a person’s inclinations (Sison, 2006: 112).
Herbert & Klatt (2001: 55) viewed values as silently giving direction to the hundreds of decisions made at all levels of the organization daily. Organizational values “encourage and set standards for ethical behavior; provide constant guideline or touchstone for decision-making,” encourage personal effectiveness by creating guidelines; and help attract and retain people who are prepared to support and work within the stated values.
Schraa-Liu & Trompenaars (2006) talked about responsible leadership and asked: where does the path of responsible leadership start? They answered their own question that it starts from the very core of the leader himself. Responsible leadership is built on the foundation of a leader’s inner urge to serve and enable others, accompanied by human empathy and compassion. Citing Greenleaf (1977, 2002), the crucial point is humanness, the leader as a thoroughly humane person The sense of responsible leadership originates from a deep sense and recognition of unity with all living beings and the external environment. It is the belief that all are alike in human heart, soul and feeling. The responsible leader views people as beings to be trusted, believed in, loved and served, rather than as objects to be used, judged, or against whom people compete.
In this regard, to serve others, leaders need to understand and know themselves. They must understand their impulses, drives, and motives, and be conscious of how the self is steering their actions and choices. It also implies being aware of one’s ideal – a goal with a higher purpose, a set of value systems and a clarity regarding life’s purpose. Responsible leadership can be acquired through understanding of one’s innate nature and temperament, one’s outer self and inner being, one’s various layers of self and ego (the mind, heart, soul), one’s limitations and aspects that need to be transformed, one’s various mental models and lenses on life and the world established over the year of life experiences (Schraa-Liu & Trompenaars, 2006: 149-150).
Maak & Pless (2006: 152) also proposed ethical intelligence for responsible leaders. This is understood as “recognizing and reflecting on one’s own and others’ values, norms, interests, situations, behavior, etc. from an ethical point of view, distinguishing between right and wrong, being able to cope with grey areas an using this information to derive ethically appropriate behavior.” Responsible leadership starts from the leader: he leads from within based on regular introspection, leading his life consciously, truthfully as a result of cultivating his heart and personality with self-discipline; walking the talk and embodying the truth responsibly on his own life.
Ciulla (2006) said that while ethics occupies a central role in leadership, it is least systematically treated as a subject by scholars. A scientific study of leadership is inadequate if it neglected the moral dimension. Scholars minimize, however, the fact that the leader has to ct according to duty and with the greatest good in mind. This is because people often separate the inner person (intentions) from the outer person (behavior). But in ethics, what one is and what he does is basically one and the same. Responsible or principled leadership is ethics. It examines issues of right and wrong, good and evil, virtue, duty, obligation, rights, justice, fairness, and so on in human relationships with each other. He cited, for example, the finding in Yukl (1989) that considerate leaders usually have more satisfied followers.
Citing Kanungo & Mendonea (1996: 15), Ciulla (2006: 25-27) said that leaders would only be effective when motivated by a concern for others, when actions are guided by the criteria of the benefit to others even if it results in some cost to oneself. Good leadership is the result of leaders who do things right and do the right thing. Ciulla exhorted scholars to fully explore the interface between the knowledge and skills of leadership and the moral capacities needed for responsible leadership. He ended by posing again the question, for emphasis, even if he had already answered and explained it well, what sort of person should lead?
Pruzan & Miller (2006: 68-69) presented a responsible leadership framework which they called spiritual-based leadership. To them, spirituality can provide a powerful foundation for responsibility and individual/organizational success. Leaders with spirituality naturally behave responsibly on behalf of themselves and of their communities. Leading by values is at the core of their management philosophy. Both authors give a definition of what a responsible person does, a definition to which this researcher fully subscribes: “expected or obligated to account for something or to someone involving duties, able to distinguish right and wrong, is trustworthy, dependable, and reliable” (p. 72).
Pruzan & Miller (pp. 75-77) also grounded spiritual-based leadership on two philosophical pillars: the humanist perspective and the holistic perspective. The humanist perspective is based on the empathy argument. Humans have a capacity to sympathize and empathize. Empathy leads to intuitive, spontaneous, heroically responsible leadership behavior where a leader now rationalizes with logical arguments for why he acted as he did. The holistic perspective is based on the argument that people are interdependent and this implies a duty to respect the rights of others. Support for this perspective can be found in religious norms. Thus, having a developed spiritual self-awareness, the leader naturally exercises it in some form of service beyond self-interest.
Paine (2006: 57-60) woed the lack of ethical analysis in business decision-making. Managers and leaders must have the skill of ethically-informed decision-making. Of course, ethics is strongly associated with code of conduct, value statements or lists of moral imperatives. A leader who goes through an ethical analysis will have to process in his mind the following:
1. Purpose. Will this action serve a worthwhile purpose? What am I trying to accomplish? What are my short- and long-term goals? Are these goals worthwhile? How do they contribute to people’s lives? Will the course of action that I am considering contribute to achieving these goals?
2. Principle. Is this action consistent with relevant principles? What norms of conduct are relevant to this situation? What are my duties under these standards? What are the best practices under these standards? Is the proposed action aligned with the applicable standards? Is the proposed action consistent with my own espoused standards and ideals?
3. People. Does this action respect the legitimate claims of the people likely to be affected? Who is likely to be affected, directly and indirectly, by the proposed action? How will they be affected? What are these parties’ rights, interest, expectations and concerns? Does the plan respect the legitimate claims of affected parties? What are to be done to compensate for this infringement? Have I mitigated unnecessary harms/damages?
4. Power. Do I have the power to take this action? What is the scope of my legitimate authority in view of relevant laws, agreements, understandings, and stakeholder expectations? Am I within my rights to pursue the proposed course of action? If not, have I secured the necessary approvals or consent from the relevant authorities? Do I have the resources, including knowledge and skills as well as tangible resources required to carry out the proposed action?
Paine continued that without a framework like the decision making compass to inject the moral point of view, decision makers are vulnerable to the blind spots and biases inherent in many commonly used frameworks. Cost-benefit analysis, for example, tends to focus on monetary costs and benefits. Gains and losses that are not readily priced can be easily overlooked. He advises that leaders cannot navigate with financial perspectives alone, and that the moral point of view needs to be integrated into the decision-making process.
More recently, Clements & Washbush (2008: 432-433), in their analysis of what is now called “the dark side of leadership,” pointed out that people often ignore what’s going on inside themselves. Training programs, for example, focus on skills to manipulate the external world rather than on the skills necessary to go within and make the spiritual journey. The message to this study is that one either projects light – when the good values are the ones motivating or guiding – or he projects shadow, if the dark values are the ones motivating.
The above foreign literature shows how and to what extent leadership studies can be made more meaningful by the inclusion of the leader’s values in the leadership process. The literature points out the importance of the leader in this leadership process because it is from him that the process starts; it is from his mind – his values, beliefs, and principles that the whole leadership phenomenon starts.
II. Local Literature
The local literature is dominated by the prescriptions of what a leader’s values should be. The rest are case studies of leadership styles and behavior, as well as life histories published as biographies or autobiographies. A few ones classified leadership in the Philippine setting.
As a backgrounder on Philippine values, the Filipino value system is based on the ideologies, moral codes, ethical practices, etiquette, and cultural values handed down to the present since primeval times, crucially mediated for 333 years by Spanish colonial rule influences in addition to 43 years of American colonial rule influences. Thus, Jocano identified two models of the Filipino value system. One is the foreign or exogenous model. The second is the indigenous model. The foreign model is legal and formal while the indigenous model is traditional, deeply embedded in the subconscious of the Filipinos.
Filipino indigenous values are centered on maintaining social harmony, motivated primarily by the desire to be accepted within a group. Social approval, acceptance by a group, and belonging to a group are major concerns. Caring about what others will think, say or do, are strong influences on social behavior among Filipinos (Mercado, 1980). The key element of the Filipino value system are: optimism about the future, pessimism with the present, concern and care for other people, friendship and friendliness, hospitability, religiousity, respect to self and others, and fear of God., among others (Talisayon, 1986).
A syntheses of writing on Filipino values would have the following common values: family-centredness, politeness, hospitality, gratitude, shame, flexibility or adaptability or creativity, loyalty, hard work and industry, and resignation (Gorospe, 1988; Quito, 1994).
Talisayon and Ramirez (n.d., in Alfiler & Nicolas, 1997: 95) mentioned the values of local Filipino leaders: makatao mapagkalinga, may kagandahang loob (caring and humane), matapat, matuwid, makaDiyos, may moralidad (God-centered, with integrity), malakas ang loob (courageous and strong-willed), makatarungan, demokratiko, pantay-pantay ang tingin sa lahat (fair and just), and magaling, marunong (intelligent and capable). As can be noticed, the moral and ethical values are stressed more than the intellectual-rational qualities. The Talisayon & Ramirez study precisely jibed with the study of Pilar (1989: 15) wherein the career executives in public agencies pointed out the qualities necessary for effective executive leadership, namely: integrity, honesty, dedication, ability to lead, decisiveness, and competence. Major qualities considered were implicated to values and to ability and competence.
Villacorta (1994: 73, 87) attributed the inability of the Philippines to achieve a strong state to the country’s colonial history which has only produced unjust social structures such as an oligarchy with its wealth based on land and exports of agriculture, the elite’s oligopolistic hold on the economy, authoritarian rule and more insurgency, social disorder, and political instability. Villacorta analyzed that it is the oligarchic control of the state which is the basic problem. To deal with these realities, a leader with a vision and a determination to achieve the vision is needed. The leadership must be rooted in personal credibility and one which can excite and inspire a people. With the support of the majority of the people, the leader can ward off the pressures of big politicians and oligarchs. The leader who can battle against these odds must possess the resolve to detach himself from the age-old system of patronage and to break up the oligopolies.
Salazar (1997, in de la Torre, 1997: 22), a historian, cited in his article, “Limang panahon ng pamumunong bayan sa kasaysayan ng Pilipinas,” that Filipino leaders must be evaluated on six criteria: 1) do their goals truly promote national interest?, 2) are their actions supportive of public welfare?, 3) are they known as persons of unquestionable integrity?, 4) are they not identified with other interests which may conflict with public interest?, 5) do they sincerely and willingly accept the tasks of being a leader?, and 6) do they communicate with the people in a language through which the people can freely express their ideas, concepts, and explain what is meaningful to them?
Along the same line, Constantino (1967: 8-10), in his book, A Leadership for Filipinos, listed the criteria of a Filipino leader in terms of how he may respond to the country’s ills such as poverty, cultural stagnation, and political backwardness. The leader must 1) discover the wishes of the people and works with the people to blaze new paths, 2) involve the people in the restructuring of society, 3) recognize that leadership is a process and not an end and the leader sets in motion an “educative force,” 4) have deep confidence in the people and never to underestimate their wisdom, and 5) acknowledge unity with the people as the true foundation of leadership.
Miranda (n.d., in Alfiler & Nicolas: 98-99) roughly says the same thing as Villacorta that a strong and effective leadership can organize groups towards consensus assuring stability and keeping conflicts within manageable limits. Political leadership must strengthen the state and its political institutions to make them more responsive to citizens’ demands. Historically, however, power in the country has served oligarchic interests that have been responsible for the uneven distribution of political and economic power in the Philippines.
A group of studies dwelt on the management/leadership styles of individual high-ranking government officials. Endriga (1982) looked at the leadership role of Francisco Tantuico while he was the Commission on Audit (COA) head while he was pushing for administrative reforms to professionalize COA. Varela (1996) also discussed the role of leadership in creating and changing the administrative culture in the Civil Service Commission, the National Power Corporation, the Department of Public Works and Highways, the Department of Health, Bureau of Customs, and the Commission on Immigration and Deportation. D. Reyes (n.d., in Alfiler & Nicolas, 1997: 103) wrote full case studies on the executive leadership styles of Roilo Golez as head of the Bureau of Posts, Jose Alcuaz of the National Telecommunications Commission, Judge Remedios Fernando of the Land Transportation and Regulation Board (LTFRB), and Elfren Cruz of the Metro Manila Commission. Other high government officials’ administrator role also found their way into academic papers of graduate students. These included Patricia Sto. Tomas as CSC chairperson, Corazon Alma de Leon as DSWD Secretary, Salvador Escudero III as Secretary of Agriculture, Pura Ferrer Calleja as Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations, among others (Alfiler & Nicolas, 1997: 103).
A study of Agpalo (1988: 3-5) classified Filipino leaders using two dimensions: organization and ideology. His four types of Filipino leaders are: 1) the Supremo as exemplified by Andres Bonifacio who had a strong organization in the Katipunan and an ideology contained in the Decalogue, 2) the Visionary as the leader who has an ideology but a weak organization to which Jose Rizal is an example, 3) the Organization Man as the leader with a strong organization but without an ideology (Gen. Fabian Ver represents this type), and 4) the Paradux, a term which applies to traditional Filipino politicians elected to Congress who do not have ideology and a strong organization. Agpalo sees the Supremo type as the most effective leader, the best of the four types. He fits former president, Ferdinand Marcos’ leadership as of the Supremo type, while Corazon Aquino would be classified under the Paradux type.
Legaspi (2007) looked at the profiles of political leaders at the local government level. She calls the framework that she used as interactional in the sense that the leader influences both the follower and the organization and vice versa. She included in her framework leadership traits and leadership style behaviors. Her book analyzed the leadership of the municipal mayors of Pangil, Laguna and of Goa, Camarines Sur; the city mayors of Quezon City and of Naga City; and the provincial governor of Bulacan.
. Tadena (1970) pointed out efforts of the government to insure efficient public service. As early as 1971, public administration in the Philippines availed of concepts and practices from the private sector and of certain management techniques to accelerate development. These techniques included PERT/CPM, operations research, data processing, sensitivity training, and other forms of group dynamics, cost accounting, performance budgeting, etc. (Ramos, 1970).
Jose D. Lina, former DILG Secretary, advocated the possibility of developing some kind of performance standards for local governments that would serve as some kind of International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (Brillantes, 2001). There are also suggestions to the effect that public administration should adjust to the emerging globalization of the world’s economic and political scene. Globalization has served to reshape the topography of public administration dynamics, particularly in policy-making and service delivery systems. It has rendered public administration sensitive to the formation of public administrative systems compatible with the demands and pressures of transitional interplay (Reyes, 2000).
A more recently published book is Reinventing Government; The Experience of Makati, which is edited by A.B. Brillantes, Jr., et al (2011). It is all about the governance of the City of Makati, as now Vice President Jejomar Binay led it during his time. Binay built a reputation as a hard-nosed local executive whose results-driven populist orientation is examined in great detail in the book, which uses the Reinventing Government framework by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler. The book is a good template for replicating a city’s success in transformation leadership. "This compilation of experiences and initiatives brings to the fore the compelling challenge for us and all government leaders and communities "especially on matters of transparency and accountability," former Senator Aquilino Pimentel wrote in the foreword. Local governments work best when led by dedicated men and women who, in good conscience, apply the principles of good governance.
Finally, Alampay (2002: 64)) viewed leadership as a phenomenon that involves values. Of the eleven characteristics of the twenty-first century leader that he listed, some three or four relate to values, such as focus on people, inspiring trust, and doing the right thing. One’s personhood is influenced by values. Values shape how people act and behave (p. 107). Transformational leadership is based on the leader’s values and needs (p. 69).
The local literature on leader’s values similarly agrees with foreign literature that values, value systems, and belief systems of the Filipinos and of Filipino leaders specifically influence the decisions of the leader. The local culture provides the local content of what values figure out in the minds of leaders.
The Theoretical Framework
The study derives its framework from a combination of ideas frequently asserted in the literature that has just been reviewed. Three stand out as framing the study’s view of the leadership process, the primacy and central role of the leader in this process, and by implication, how his personal values, beliefs, and principles may be considered as the influence his decisions and choices; the quality and direction of those decisions or himself, for the group or the organization to which he belongs, and the city community which he leads.
In this regard, the first idea that grounds and frames the study, as this is supported in the literature, is that the leadership process is a phenomenon that originates with the leader. This view of the leadership process defines leadership as the initiation of structure. Stogdill (1959) took this view when he said that leadership is “the initiation and maintenance of structure in expectation and interaction.” This approach looks at leadership as a behavior with initiating structure serving as the crucial behavior. By claiming this view, it denies that any other element or factor can trigger the leadership process other than the leader.
Such view of the leadership process is very much supported in the literature. Even way back in ancient Greek times, Aristotle (cited in Sison, 2006) already said that the leader’s character was the controlling factor. Selznick (1957) stated that the leader defines the ends of his group and designs an enterprise adapted to those ends. Nadler & Tushman (1995) pointed out that leaders envision, energize, and enable. In other words, everything about leadership process starts from leaders. Both authors also add that the leader’s values make way for structure and control in the leadership process. Forbes, Hill & Lyman (2006) wrote that the manager’s values and strategies affect choices. Maak & Pless (2006) stressed that responsible leadership starts from the leader. Hollander & Julian (2008) said the same thing as the rest: that the leader sets the basis for relationships within groups; he initiates structure affecting the process.
It can be strongly contended then that the process of leadership starts and ends with the leader. The verbs used by researchers to equate with leadership include: initiating, controlling, defining, designing, envisioning, enabling, setting the basis. Such verbs connote no less than that the leader occupies the central role in triggering the leadership process, then its sustaining of this process, and the completing or closure of the leadership process. The leader is the strongest element that has the greater potential to influence the process more than any other element or ingredient that may go into the leadership process equation from start to finish.
The implication of these related statements is that the most interesting aspect in the leadership phenomenon to study is all about the leader. It may even be already sufficient to study leadership by just studying the leader. This does not deny though that other elements in the leadership equation cannot be factored in. They are still included but indirectly – from the lens of the leader. They do not come as independent factors directly affecting the leadership process, but as indirect factors only considered because it so happens that the leader gave them importance in his decisions.
From the above premise, the second statement central in this study’s theoretical framework is that the leadership process can thus be mainly studied from the angle of the leader’s decisions and choices. The leadership process consists of many inter-connected processes that start from the leader main decisions. A complete leadership inquiry would be worthwhile but the most important part is an inquiry about the leader’s decisions and choices. Being the leader, it is important to look at the origins of the influences on the leader’s decisions. Just studying the origins of the decisions of the leader alone already sheds much light into the succeeding processes or the whole leadership process.
Making decisions is a mental process (cognitive process) resulting in the selection of a course of action among several alternative scenarios. Every decision produces a final choice. The output can be an action or an opinion of choice. One’s values very much determine his goals and outcomes in life. The goals one chooses are the outer expression of his personal values. A person’s values determine how he perceives any particular situation (http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/).
The leader’s decisions mark a gatekeeping process. It only includes what the leader – being the controller, regulator, orchestrator of the process – wants to include in his agenda or priorities. If the leader does not want to include the followers in his program or activity, then the element of followers cannot be considered or is absent in the leadership inquiry. If the leader does not include the situation or the environmental context in his decisions, then that factor is virtually excluded in the leadership process. But if the leader includes them because he thinks it is valuable to do so, given his values, beliefs, and principles, then these other elements do become real factors in the decision making process of the leader. Their role as factors in the leadership process is only indirect however because they are under the control or orchestration of the leader.
The third proposition in the theoretical framework is that the leader’s values, beliefs, principles, philosophies, views, perspectives, and the like, influence the decision outcomes and choices. His decisions are colored by his values, beliefs, and principles, which in turn affect and influence his decisions, choices, and preferences for certain courses of action on how to run successfully the services programs of the city government.
Occupying a privileged role as the leader of the town, it is contended that the city mayor’s values, beliefs, principles, and philosophies likely influence his decisions and choices in the conceptualization, planning, and implementation of the city government’s programs, projects, and other activities. Among the city government’s programs that need to benefit from the light of his decisions are the various basic services to be delivered to the city residents. The LGU leader’s values, beliefs, etc. similarly influence his decisions and choices about the delivery of basic services programs of the city government
The above third proposition is also strongly supported in the literature. Defining value as “a principle, standard, or quality considered worthwhile or desirable” (http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/), the literature says that values underpin all behavior. They count as a major motivating force for people because they categorize how people attach meaning, worth and importance to things. People act in accordance with their values and belief systems, which are organizing systems for individuals among them leaders and organizations (http://www.qassociates.com/). Values give direction to decisions (Herbert & Klatt, 2001). Actions arise from a person’s inclinations (Sison, 2006: 112). Weick (1979, 1983, 1995) claimed that there is a close connection and interaction between action and thinking. Sackmann (2006) pointed out that leaders have models of the world, influencing their thinking, feeling, and doing (acting, behaving).
Further support comes from the electronic literature. Leaders exert influence on the environment in three ways: via the goals and performance standards they establish, via their values, and via the business and people concepts they establish. Values reflect the concern that the leader has for constituents – who are composed of customers, investors, vendors, and the surrounding community. These values define the manner in how government services are to be conducted (http://www.nwlink.com/).
Indeed, values work at a deep level as motivators for people. A person’s identity and personality are held together by his values and beliefs. The goals a leader chooses are the outer expression of his personal values. His decision-making is similarly based upon his core values. Many are only vaguely aware of what their values are, however.
From the combination of the above three propositions, the leadership process of the study focuses on the leader’s decision-making process by looking at how his values, beliefs, and principles affect and influence his decisions and choices. In this vein, the elements that go into consideration in the study may be categorized into four categories, following Jago (1982). These four categories or elements are: 1) the leader, 2) the followers, 3) the communication, and 4) the situation. The following explains briefly each element.
The Leader and His View of Himself
A leader’s values determine how he perceives any particular situation. A leader who values “safety” will approach a situation checking for safety versus danger. One who values “excitement” will have a different perspective on the same situation and will be expecting to have different kinds of experiences. His decisions are organized to ensure that personal values are matched (http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/).
The Leader and His View of the Followers
Smircich & Morgan (1982; 2008) looks at leadership as a process whereby certain individuals (the leaders) attempt to frame or define the reality of others. Members in a group usually attribute leadership to those among them who structure experience in meaningful ways. These leaders frame experience in a way that provides a viable basis for action, by mobilizing meaning, articulating and defining what has been previously remained implicit or unsaid, by inventing images and meanings that provide a focus for new attention, and by consolidating, confronting, or changing prevailing wisdom (Peters, 1978; Pondy, 1976). Leadership involves a process of defining reality in ways that are sensible to the led. The actions and utterances of leaders frame and shape the context of action.
The Leader and His View of Communication
Effective leadership depends upon the extent to which the leader’s definition of the situation serves as a basis for action by others. Effective leadership rests heavily on the framing of the experiences of others, so that action can be guided by common conceptions as to what should occur. The key challenge for a leader is to manage meaning in such a way that followers orient themselves to the achievement of desirable ends. In this case, the leader must rely on his use of language and communication processes and harness these resources to promote the desirable ends. Language may take the form of ritual, drama, stories, myths, and any symbolic construction that makes language a tool in the management of meaning. Through words and images, symbolic actions and gestures, leaders can structure attention and evoke patterns of meaning that give them considerable control of the situation (Smircich & Morgan, 2006: 24).
The Leader and His View of the Situation
Leaders symbolize the organized situation in which they lead. Their actions and utterances provide and shape the imagery in the minds of the led. In this view, the special position and role of the leader is accorded recognition. Leaders, by the nature of their leadership role, are provided with the distinctive opportunity to influence the sense making of others. It is important them for the leader to recognize the nature of his influence and to manage the meaning of situations in a constructive way. The leader is expected to define the situation while others are expected to surrender that right. The leader has the prerogative to define reality, and the led to accept that definition as a frame of reference for orienting their own activity (Smicich & Morgan, 2006: 25).
On the other hand, because the leader knows his prerogative to define the reality for the led, he may actually divert the definition of reality to a wrong perception and end. He may thus block the potentialities of the led for full human development (Smircich & Morgan, 2006: 26).
Assuming that leaders are honest about their role as LGU heads and who look at their duty as basically that of a servant leader, responsible and accountable to the people, then their values and beliefs may lead to the development of potentials of the led, and thus, their plans and programs may be accepted and received by the community residents who will cooperate with them in implementing them successfully.
CHAPTER 3. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In this chapter, the various important concepts relied on in the study are clarified or operationalized for a doable or executable observation.
The first concept is that of the leadership process. This concept can be viewed as encompassing a range composed of various sub-processes from start to finish. It can be conceived that there are leadership processes occurring in what may be called the first stage of the whole leadership process, some in the middle stage, and some at the final stage. They are all leadership processes because the leader is all involved in them and the leader is doing a leading, defining, and direction setting action The first process in the series of processes within the whole leadership process is that of the process in which the leader is trying to make a decision.
As reported earlier, decision making is a mental (cognitive) process resulting in the selection of a course of action among several alternative scenarios. The final choice is an action or an opinion of choice (http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/). In this process, the leader is assumed to be at the center of a field surrounded by certain elements or components that have the potential to enter into the process of decision making by the leader. These elements or components interact with each other in the mind of the leader. They only become an object of importance the moment the leader puts some value or weight to them.
This field of the leader’s decision can be assumed to have the following categories of objects:
1. The leader’s self through his values, beliefs, principles,
2. The followers,
3. The situation, or context, circumstances, conditions surrounding the leadership and the decision and
4. The communication.
Figure 1 below illustrates the leader’s decision field (adapted from Jago, 1982; U.S. Army, 1983):
The leader’s self:
- his values, beliefs, principles
(e.g., honesty, duty, service, respect,
responsibility, transparency,
accountability, love of country)
THE LEADER
The followers The communication
- self-description of how to - language or media used
lead followers; how to - self-description of most
handle followers effective media to use
- political party affiliation - guiding principles in
- political clan communication
- support organizations
The situation
- history of the city
- the city’s social, political, economic status
- the city government and its programs
- problems encountered
Figure 1. The Leadership Process: The Field of the Leader’s Decision
The next set of concepts that need to be defined pertain to values, beliefs, and principles. As already discussed earlier, values are standards or qualities considered worthwhile or desirable (http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/). They are conceptions of the desirable, and “such conceptions influence in some way the choices that individuals make when deciding between different courses of action” (Kluckhohn, 1951: 395). Beliefs are conceived a synonymous with values with the added element that they are considered true and expected to be the truth, the way things are in the eyes, heart, and mind of the person holding the beliefs. Beliefs shape how one sees the world and act in it. They create feelings when passionately held on to as the only way how to see the world or how it should be understood and interpreted. Values are themselves beliefs on how life goes on in reality. Principles are action statements based on beliefs and values (Young, 2006). To Covey who wrote Principle-centered Leadership (1992), principles are “compasses that point us to our true direction. They are objective, unchanging natural laws that are correct and relevant regardless of external circumstances” (http://www.
superbcoaching.com.au/).
Despite the distinction between values, beliefs, and principles, these terms are, for the most part, synonymous. This study considers them all the same mental categories that guide, orient, define, and frame human action, behavior, feeling, and thinking.
In the context of the study, the city mayor has values, beliefs, and principles concerning his role, status, rights, duties, and obligations; about his followers or what the city residents needs and wants are; about what the best communication would be to inform and persuade the residents of the benefits of the services programs; and about the situation or context of why the services programs had to be conceived, planned and implemented in the first place.
The leader knows that the delivery of such services is crucial to his reputation and popularity as city mayor, not only because their efficient, effective, and successful delivery spells out his fate and future as mayor but also because the programs would contribute to the quality of life of the city’s residents. He has to deliver these basic services as efficiently and as effectively as possible.
If the leader’s values do not include or only gives minor importance to, say, service, then his conception of the delivery of basic services to the community residents will be one that is less important for him or the city government to deliver the services according to the usual schedule. Never mind if the services programs are delivered late; it is not important to him to provide the best in cleanliness, nutrition, and livelihood programs; not important for him to maintain peace and order. He is not moved nor motivated to upgrade and repair the pockmarked roads because he does not care about the welfare of the people. His values, beliefs and principles do not include such considerations of service, duty, responsibility, or any related value for that matter.
On the other hand, if his values and beliefs include duty, honesty, service, respect for others, etc., then he will tend to be prompt in services delivery. Not only that. He will provide the best services, say, more nurses and doctors involving themselves in medical missions in the town or city.
There are many values a person can possess, depending on his culture, roup, and socialization experiences. They may be health, pleasure, recognition, safety, integrity, honesty, and achievement (http://www.decision-making-confidence.com); or loyalty, respect, duty, service, honor, integrity, personal courage (U.S. Army, 1983); or discipline, good taste, and excellence (Gonzales, 1999). In the case of LGU executives in thi study, the values may include service, respect, honesty, responsibility, cleanliness, discipline, and civic pride.
Service is putting the welfare of the town or city or province or country before one’s self interests. Service is often equated with selflessness, even doing beyond the call of one’s duty (U.S. Army, 1983). Service is also doing what is right for the city government and for the constituents. As a public servant, the leader must put service at the forefront of his administration. Service components include complete and all-around service to stakeholders, clients, customers, users; quality service which is delivering services completely, fully, and without hitches, delays, or lapses. Making sound and timely decisions would result in complete and quality service. Giving a smile and a heart to program delivery would be a mark of service.
Respect is treating people with dignity like any other human being regardless of gender, educational qualification, income level, religious belief, health status, and other difference category. This value reiterates that people are the most precious resource and that one is bound to treat others with dignity (U.S. Army, 1983). Seeing that sectors of the city community are of diverse backgrounds requires understanding their background, seeing things from their perspective, and appreciating what is important to them.
Honesty is a virtue. An honest person avoids deception and secrecy. To be honest is to open oneself to others. The leader tells the truth and is not afraid to tell it to others. Honesty is demonstrated in various ways: being true to oneself, humility, admitting one’s inadequacies and mistakes, giving complete information and not hiding some truths or untruths about something or someone, avoidance of secret transactions, transparency, and allowing the public to have access to information.
Responsibility is doing what one is required to do because the leader’s top position. When things go wrong, not blaming others is an exercise of responsibility. One is responsible if he analyzes the situation, takes corrective action, and moves on to the next challenges despite the difficulties and the halfway contributions of other people who are supposed to render service in the planning and implementation of a city government program. A responsible leader helps others to develop good character traits that will help them carry out their responsibilities professionally.
Cleanliness is avoidance of dirt, litter, and love for neatness and sanitation. It is caring for one’s surroundings to prevent diseases. It also leads to appreciation of beauty in one’s surroundings.
Discipline is following rules and regulations, standards, and norms. The essence is obedience and respect of the law.
Civic pride is the microcosm of love of country or nationalism. From one’s love for hi town, or city, or province, also springs love of one’s country. Civic pride is being proud of the achievements of the community, its history, the excellence of the people, and the oneness and harmony established among the members of the community.
A new program or activity of the city government, or a reformulation or reconceptualization of an existing program or activity, goes through the leader’s head in a round of what Paine (2006) calls ethical analysis. This mental exercise involves a cycle of reflection on his part within which he thinks of his own needs, values, and beliefs, of his followers, of the situation, and of the communication needed. He would be internally asking certain questions of:
1. Purpose. Will this action serve a worthwhile purpose? What am I trying to accomplish? What are my short- and long-term goals? Are these goals worthwhile? How do they contribute to people’s lives? Will the course of action that I am considering contribute to achieving these goals?
2. Principle. Is this action consistent with relevant principles? What norms of conduct are relevant to this situation? What are my duties under these standards? What are the best practices under these standards? Is the proposed action aligned with the applicable standards? Is the proposed action consistent with my own espoused standards and ideals?
3. People. Does this action respect the legitimate claims of the people likely to be affected? Who is likely to be affected, directly and indirectly, by the proposed action? How will they be affected? What are these parties’ rights, interest, expectations and concerns? Does the plan respect the legitimate claims of affected parties? What are to be done to compensate for this infringement? Have I mitigated unnecessary harms/damages?
4. Power. Do I have the power to take this action? What is the scope of our legitimate authority in view of relevant laws, agreements, understandings, and stakeholder expectations? Am I within my rights to pursue the proposed course of action? If not, have I secured the necessary approvals or consent from the relevant authorities? Do I have the resources, including knowledge and skills as well as tangible resources required to carry out the proposed action?
Having gone through the reflection round on the elements of purpose, principle, people and power in relation to the new program/activity, the leader decides on what he deems as the best course of action or strategy to take to be able to achieve the goals and objectives of such program/activity.
Because the leader based his decisions on ethics-based values and beliefs, he is glad and inspired to deliver the basic services of the LGU to the best of his capability and to the best of the resources of the city government.
In short, a leader who has values and beliefs grounded on honesty, respect for others, integrity, accountability, responsibility, and transparency is moved to effect better services delivery to the people in the community. Such values and beliefs indeed play an important role in moving leaders to maintain an efficient and effective services delivery to the people.
CHAPTER 4. METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design of the study, the respondents and sampling criteria used, the instruments, data gathering processes involved, and the data analysis technique used.
Research Design
The study uses the descriptive or qualitative analytical approach in social science research. The research design most appropriate to the examination of any leader’s value-orientations and their relationship to his decision-making is the case study.
The case study counts as a very relevant research tool in investigations that aim to probe deeply into the dynamics of certain phenomena less amenable to direct observation, such as the human cognition, the human mind’s functioning, and ways in which the mind commits perceived objects, people, and events to memory as well as their easy recall. By in-depth examination of the leader’s values and the process of coming up with a decision about basic services, the origins and development of leadership may be clarified, understood, and elaborated. The assumption of the case study is that the leader being interviewed may be trusted enough to answer and say the true state of things of his value orientations and his performance as a leader.
The investigation makes use of two single case studies about the leadership principles, values and beliefs of both ex-city mayors Marides Fernando of Marikina City and JV Ejercito of San Juan City. Their value-orientations and how these relate to their decision making on the delivery of basic services programs of the city government are examined, described, and analyzed. They are also compared to see patterns of differences as well as similarities.
Choice of Respondents
Local government leaders include the whole range from provincial, city, municipality, to barangay local executives. Of these, only two are selected. They are both ex-city mayors of Metro Manila, namely: the former city mayor of Marikina City, Maria Lourdes (Marides) Fernando, and the former city mayor of San Juan City, Joseph Victor (JVE) Ejercito.
Why city mayors? One reason is their proximity of access to the researcher, in contrast to the distance any researcher must negotiate to get access to governors and municipal mayors. In the case of the Marikina city mayor choice, the researcher resides in Marikina City. The reason in the case of the San Juan city mayor choice is similar party affiliation. In contrast, the researcher knows no kin or political affiliation with other city mayors, governors, and municipal mayors.
The two city mayors selected for case study may be deemed unique and special cases, that is, good representatives for a case study to work on. The two former city mayors are selected, thus, due to the following four criteria:
1. Their popular prestige/status as city mayors who have assumed their posts after the very successful administrations of their immediate relatives. Marides is the wife of Bayani Fernando, former city mayor of Marikina, and who was also designated the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) administrator. JVE is the son of former city mayor of San Juan, Joseph Estrada, who later became the vice president and then the president of the Philippines. They shared the political limelight before their election as city mayors, but once elected both administered their respective city governments in likewise successful performances that reflected in the growth and improvements of Marikina and San Juan cities,
2. Their implementation of significant programs and projects that benefited the city residents,
3. Their being young city mayors who were elected thrice, from their first three-year term, 2001-2004, then the second term, 2004-2007, and the last 2007-2010, and as such, their brand of decision-making needs to be accounted for. They are still around and before anything happens to them, it is better that straight from them, they share their views of how they ran their city governments in their own administrative terms, and
4. Their city governments rank as highly improving and developing cities in Metro Manila. Such improvements and growth may be attributed to their quality of steersmanship as well-meaning city government executives.
The findings from the interviews of the two city mayors are supplemented by data from the questionnaire survey of sectoral representative in the city government. Being few in number, all of these sectoral representatives will be included as respondents of the questionnaire. Among the sectoral representatives in the city government are the youth sector (Kabataang Barangay chair), the labor sector, the business sector, the education sector, the environment sector, and the health and nutrition sector.
Instruments
The study utilizes several instruments in data gathering. One is observation. The next is the interview schedule; the third is the questionnaire; and the fourth is the tape recorder machine.
Observation is the fist instrument. The researcher relies on what he sees and hears about the ex-city mayors. Observation may be either close or distant. What can be observed however may only be limited to the physical appearance of the ex-city mayors. The outcome of observation could be inferences about grooming, cleanliness, and personality. Anyway, there is sometimes a correlation between these aspects and their values and beliefs.
The interview schedule is structured, being divided into three parts (Appendix 1). The first part consists of the socio-economic profile or characteristics of the city mayor. The second part is the main section, which aims to capture the kind of values, beliefs, and philosophies that the ex-city mayors possess. The ex-city mayors are asked to react to a series of essays that present a services problem to the LGU head. The third part, consisting of one item, directly asks the mayor about his stand on good values and successful leadership.
The interview draft completed, the dissertation adviser shall be consulted on the validity, relevance, and the grammatical construction of the statements. Any suggestions from the adviser shall be incorporated in the next draft up to the final draft.
On hand to help the researcher capture the precise verbal exchange during the interview is the tape recording machine. Note-taking during the interview may not capture verbatim what the city mayor respondent may say. In this regard, the tape recorder equipped with high-power reception of sounds shall be of great service. The presence of the tape recorder may bring certain signals to the city mayor respondent, but the researcher shall assure him that delicate data will be treated confidentially and that before the approved final defense draft may be bound, the researcher shall first show to the city mayor for his approval.
It is expected that from the comments of the ex-city mayors to the essays, their own set of values, beliefs, principles, and philosophies will be revealed. Their answers will show their preferences, choices that manifest their inner values and beliefs about themselves, their role as city mayors, the city government, and the city government’s services programs.
The other main instrument used for purposes of confirming and validating the interview schedule is the questionnaire (Appendix 2). This is reserved for perceptions of followers selected on sectoral basis. They will be asked questions on the programs, projects, and other accomplishments of the city mayors under study. A total of eight question items make up the leadership perceptions questionnaire or the sectoral representatives.
Data Gathering
The proposal approved, the researcher shall start the data gathering phase of the investigation. The following are the data gathering activities:
1. Formal letter to be sent to the city mayor respondents requesting for an
interview date with attached note of approval from the researcher’s adviser, as well as copies of the dissertation abstract and the interview schedule. An email may also be sent to the city mayor respondents, assuming the researcher has their email address.
2. Follow-up through the telephone or the email after a wait of a week from the date the letter was sent,
3. Once the city mayor respondent agrees, the interview date, time and venue are agreed on by both interviewer and interviewee,
4. The actual interview. On the agreed date, the researcher goes to the agreed venue bringing with him his interview schedule, notes, tape recorder, and pencils. The researcher asks the questions according to the sequence in the interview schedule, with the tape recorder running to document the verbal exchange between interviewer and interviewee. Simultaneously, the researcher may take down notes selectively (not all the time), writing down his own comments and inferences to the reply of the city mayor respondent to a particular question item asked. The selective note-taking may also reflect the researcher’s personal observations, feelings and attitudes to the replies coming from the interviewee.
5. The researcher may request for extended time if the allotted time for interview does not suffice, but only upon the consent of the city mayor,
6. The interview finished, the researcher may need to clarify with the city mayor that in case some questions not in the interview schedule needed to be asked, he may have to come back for the follow-up interview. If it is only a minor one, the researcher may just have to contact the city mayor by email or telephone or mobile phone, whichever contact mode the latter wants the researcher to use.
7. The documentation from the tape recorder is transcribed and then consolidated together with the researcher’s notes during the interview. Transcription may take a week. Some parts of the transcription may be verbatim, but the minor exchanges may be briefly paraphrased. Any inconsistency shall be decided in favor of the tape recorder’s documentation, unless clarified with the city mayor by any of the contact modes approved by the city mayor.
8. The researcher starts the analysis of the answers of the city mayor to the questions in the interview schedule.
Data gathering for the second instrument proceeds by looking at the list of sectoral representatives at the city hall. The list may only contain a few names and whatever the final number of sectoral representatives, they will be sought out and requested to fill up the questionnaire. The items in the questionnaire are of the multiple choice type based on the Likert scale of Strongly Agree-Agree-Neutral-Disagree-Strongly Disagree.
Data Analysis
The data from the interview schedule and from the transcribed tape recorder a well as from the questionnaire having been consolidated, content analysis follows. The order of analysis may first use the sequence of the eight subsections of the interview schedule. The questionnaire results will be content analyzed.
The resulting narration and description may be “thick” but this is the nature of a qualitative study, reflecting the in-depth investigation of a phenomenon.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alampay, E.G. (2002). Public Administration 111, Management of Organizations. A syllabus. NCPAG: University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City.
Alfiler, Ma. C. P. & Nicolas, E.E. (1997). Leadership studies in the Philippines: A review of the literature. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, Vol. XLI (Nos. 1-4): 93-126.
Andres, T.D. (1989). Positive Filipino values. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.
Augoustinos, M. & Walker, I.(1995). Social cognition; An integrated introduction. London: Sage.
Avery, G.C.(2004). Understanding leadership; Paradigms and cases. London: Sage.
Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.
_______. (1990, Winter). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, (3): 19-31.
_______. (1990). Handbook of leadership; Theory, research and managerial applications. New York: The Free Press.
Bateman, T.S. & Shell, S.A. (2008). Management: Leading and collaborating in a competitive world. Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Beach, L.R. & Connolly, T. (2005). The psychology of decision making; People in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bellamy, C. (2003). Moving to e-government; The role of ICTs in the public sector. In T. Bovaird & E. Loffler (Eds.), Public management and governance (113-125). London: Routledge.
Bouckaert, G. & Van Dooren, W. (2003). Performance measurement and management in public sector organizations. In T. Bovaird & E. Loffler (Eds.), Public management and governance (127-136). London: Routledge.
Bourne, L.E., Jr., Dominowski, R.L., Loftus, E.F., & Healy, A.F. (1986). Cognitive processes. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bovaird, T. & Loffler, E. (Eds.) (2003). Public management and governance. London: Routledge.
Bovaird, T. & Loffler, E. (2003). Quality management in public sector organizations. In T. Bovaird & E. Loffler (Eds.), Public management and governance (137-149). London: Routledge.
Bozeman, B. (1979). Public management and policy analysis. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Brillantes, A.B., Jr. (2001, January-April). Doing things differently: Innovations in local governance in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 45 (1-2): 84-96.
Brillantes, A.B., Jr., Reyes, D.R., Lopos, B.E., & Tiu Sonco, J.O., III (Eds.) (2011). Reinventing a local government in the Philippines; The Makati experience. Quezon City: CLRG, NCPAG, University of the Philippines.
Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Campbell, D.P. (1991). Campbell leadership index manual. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer System.
Cariño, L. & Guiza, E.C. (2001, July). Devolution for democracy: Good practices cases from the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 45 (3): 242-272.
Chemers, M.M. (1995). Contemporary leadership theory. In J.T. Wren (Ed.), The leader’s companion; Insights on leadership through the ages (83-99). New York: The Free Press.
Ciulla, J.B. (2006). Ethics; The heart of leadership. In T. Maak & N.M. Pless (Eds.), Responsible leadership (17-32). London: Routledge.
Cooper, P.J., et al (1997). Public administration for the twenty-first century. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace & Co.
Covey, S.R. (1992). Principle-centered leadership. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Cruz, M. (Ed.) (2003). Information handbook on community policing and police procedures. City Goverment of Marikina.
David, F.R. (2009). Strategic management concepts and cases. Singapore: Pearson.
David, H. (2003). Ethics and standards of conduct.” In T. Bovaird & E. Loffler (Eds.), Public management and governance (213-223). London: Routledge.
De Guzman, R.P. & Reforma , M.A. (1992). Local government: Organization, power and functions, relations with central government. In P. Padilla (Ed.), Strengthening local government administration and accelerating local development. Quezon City: LGC, College of Public Administration, University of the Philippines.
De la Paz, R. S. (2000). Taga-Marikina ka. River City Gazette, 11 (1).
Denhardt, J. & Denhardt, R. (2003). The new public service; Serving, not steering. Armonk, NJ: M.E. Sharpe.
Dessler, G. (2001). Leading people and organizations in the 21st century. Singapore: Pearson Education Asia Pte Ltd.
Dulay, S.C. (2011). The emergence of Marikina way. Http://marikinaideology.
blogspot.com/ Retrieved on April 7, 2011.
Dutton, J.E. & Jackson, S.E. (1987). Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action. Academy of Management Review, 12: 76-90.
Fernando, B. (2009). Disiplina sa bangketa. Makati City: MMDA.
Forbes, M., Hill, C.J., & Lynn, L.E., Jr. (2006). Public management and government performance: An international review. In G.A. Boyne, et al (Eds.), Public service performance; Perspectives on measurement and management (260-273). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Frederickson, H.G. & Smith, K.B. (2003). The public administration theory primer. Colorado: Westview Press.
Gill, R. (2006). Theory and practice of leadership. London: Sage.
Gioia, D.A. & Poole, P.P. (1984). Scripts in organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 9: 449-459.
Gonzalez, D.T. (Ed.) (1999). The will to change; Marikina and its innovations. Marikina City: City Government of Marikina and the Ateneo School of Governance.
Gorospe, V.R. (1988). Filipino values revisited. Manila: National Book Store.
Gozdz, K. (1993). Building community as leadership discipline. In M. Ray & A. Rinzler (Eds.), The new paradigm in business: Emerging strategies for leadership and organizational change (107-119). New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher.
Harrison, M.I. & Shirom, A. (1999). Organizational diagnosis and assessment; Bridging theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Herbert, M. & Klatt, B. (Eds.) (2001). The encyclopedia of leadership. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K.H. (1995). Behavioral theories of leadership. In J.T. Wren (Ed.), The leader’s companion; Insights on leadership through the ages (114-148). New York: The Free Press.
Hollander, E.P. & Julian, J.W. (2008) Contemporary trends in the analysis of leadership processes. In J.L. Pierce & J.W. Newstrom (Eds.), Leaders & the leadership process (15-21). Singapore: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., and Curphy, G.J. (1999). Leadership; Enhancing the lessons and experience. Singapore: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3): 315-336. Retrieved from Http://www.nwlink.com/ February 13, 2012.
Jocano, F.L. (1999). “Filipino value system: A cultural definition.” In Anthropology of the Filipino people. Manila: Punlad Research House, Inc.
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, values, and frames. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kluckhohn, C. (1950). Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification. In T. Parsons & E. Shils (Eds.), Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kotter, J.P. (1995). What leaders really do. In J.T. Wren (Ed.), The leader’s companion; Insights on leadership through the ages (114-123). New York: The Free Press.
Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z. (1987). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Legaspi, P.E. (2007). Profiles of political leaders at the local government level. Quezon City: Center for Leadership and Citizenship Development (CLCD), National College of Public Administration and Governance (NCPAG), University of the Philippines.
Local Government Center, CPA (1994). Report on the administrative capability of the municipal government of San Juan. Quezon City: University of the Philippines.
Loffler, E. (2003). Governance and government; Networking with external stakeholders. In T. Bovaird & E. Loffler (Eds.), Public management and governance (163-174). London: Routledge.
Lord, R.G. & Maher, K.J. (1993). Leadership and information processing; Linking perceptions and performance. London: Routledge.
Lorenzo, C. (Ed.) (2007). Marikina citizens’ factbook; A guide to key government services. City Government of Marikina: PIO.
Lynch, F. (1979). The study of values. In M.R. Hollnsteiner (Ed.), Society, culture, and the Filipino. Manila: Ateneo de Manila University.
Maak, T. & Pless, N.M. (Eds.) (2006). Responsible leadership. London: Routledge.
_______ (2006). Responsible leadership; A relational approach. In T. Maak & N.M. Pless (Eds.), Responsible leadership (33-53). London: Routledge.
Mandler, G. (1975). Mind and body: Psychology of emotion and stress. New York: Norton.
_______ (1985). Cognitive psychology: An essay in cognitive science. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mangahas, J.V. & Leyesa, M.D.L. (1998, July-October). Improving government administration through TQM. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 42 (3-4): 203-235.
Mercado, L.N. (1980). Filipino thought on man and society. Tacloban City: Divine Word University Publications.
Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and Assessment. New York: Wiley. Retrieved from Http://www.nwlink.com/ February 13, 2012.
Murphy, A.J. (2008). A study of the leadership process. In J.L. Pierce & J.W. Newstrom (Eds.), Leaders & the leadership process (12-14). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Nadler, D.A. & Tushman, M.L. (1995). Beyond the charismatic leader; Leadership and organizational change. In J.T. Wren (Ed.), The leader’s companion; Insights on leadership through the ages (108-113). New York: The Free Press.
Neira, E. (1994). Glimpses into the history of San Juan. San Juan, MM: Life Today Publications.
Newstrom, J.W. (2011). Organizational behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Newstrom, J.W. & Davis, K. (1993). Organization behavior: Human behavior at work. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Northouse, G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice. Thousand Oaks/London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Osborne, D. & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government; How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
O’Toole, J. (1996). Leading change: The argument for values-based leadership. Ballantine.
Panganiban, E. (1990). Evolution of theories of local government: Democracy and efficiency, towards a democratic-efficient framework of local government in the Philippines: Some policy criteria. Unpublished dissertation, CPA, University of the Philippines.
Peters, T.J. & Austin, N. (1985). A passion for excellence: The leadership difference. New York: Random House.
Pondy, L.R. (1976). Leadership as a language game. In M. McCall & M. Lambert (Eds.), Leadership: Where else can we go? Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Pruzan, P. & Miller, W.C. (2006). Spirituality as the basis of responsible leaders and responsible companies. In T. Maak & N.M. Pless (Eds.), Responsible leadership (69-92). London: Routledge.
Reyes, D.R. (1994, April). Reinventing government and bureaucracy in the Philippines: Old themes and new image? Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 38 (2): 77-97.
_______ (1998, July-October). Public sector reengineering: Practice, prospects and problems. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 42 (3-4): 184-202.
Robbins, S.P. & Coulter, M. (2004). Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
Robbins, S.P. & Judge, T.A. (2010). Essentials of organizational behavior. Boston: MA: Pearson.
Rost, J.C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger.
Salazar, Z.A. (1997). Limang panahon ng pamumunong bayan sa kasaysayan ng Pilipinas. In E. de la Torre (Ed.), Pamumunong bayan: Karansan, katanungan at kinabukasan (17-26). Quezon City: Education for Life Foundation.
Senge, P. (1993). The art & practice of the learning organization. In M. Ray & A. Rinzler (Eds.), The new paradigm in business: Emerging strategies for leadership and organizational change (125-138). New York: Jeremy P.Tarcher.
Shermerhorn, J. R., Jr., Hunt, J.G., Osborn, R.N., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2011). Organizational behavior. John Wiley & Sons.
Stogdill, R. M.(1989). Stogdill's handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. Bass, B. (ed.) New York: Free Press.
_______. (1995). Personnel factors associated with leadership. In J.T. Wren (Ed.), The leader’s companion; Insights on leadership through the ages (127-132). New York: The Free Press.
Talisayon, S.D. (1986). “Development goals and values for the Philippine future.” In The Philippines at the crossroads (1016-1017). Manila: Center for Research and Communication.
Talisayon, S.D. & Ramirez, M.M. (n.d.). Ang ulirang pamumuno sa mga Pilipino. Quezon City: Asian Center, University of the Philippines.
U.S. Army. (October 1983). Military Leadership (FM 22-100). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from Http://www.nwlink.com/ February 13, 2012.
Villacorta, W.V. (1994, June). The curse of the weak state; Leadership imperatives for the Ramos government. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 16 (1).
Young, S.B. (2006). Pinciples-based leadership; essons rom the caux Round table. In T. Maak & N.M. Pless (Eds.), Responsible leadership (185-201). London: Routledge.
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
Zamora, F.J.M. (2007). Countrywide development fund and the San Juan experience. Quezon City: NCPAG, University o the Philippines.
Zhang, Li-fang & Sternberg, R.F. (2006). The nature of intellectual styles. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Internet:
Book Summary – Principle-Centered Leadership (htttp://www.superbcoaching.com.au/). Retrieved May 1, 2012.
City of San Juan. “Tagumpay ng San Juan.” (http://sanjuandemo.wordpress.com). Retrieved March 7, 2012.
“Comments in support of Marides Fernando.” (http://www.worldmayorcom/). Retrieved March 7, 2012.
Department of Tourism. “Marikina City.” (http://www.visitmyphilippines.com). Retrieved March 6, 2012.
London, Scott (1994). Book review of Reinventing Government. (http://www.scottlondon.com/). Retrieved March 9, 2012.
“Marikina.” (http://en-wikipedia.org). Retrieved March 7, 2012.
San Juan City Government. “The Historic City of San Juan.” (http://www.samjuancitygov.ph/) Retrieved March 6, 2012.
“San Juan City Mayor Accomplishments (2001-2010).” (http://wwwjvejercito.com). Retrieved March 7, 2012.
Appendix 1. The Interview
Name of Interviewee: ________________________________________
Date and time of interview: ___________________________________
Venue of interview: __________________________________________
A Interviewee’s Profile
Date of birth: __________________________
Place of birth: _________________________
Town/Province of origin: __________________________________
Highest educational attainment: ________________________________
Religious affiliation: ________________________
Year of start of residence in the city: ____________
Name of spouse: ________________________________________
Number of children: _________
B. Give your reaction comments after reading each situation essay on the space provided
(if your answer is long please utilize the back part of the paper; do not forget to
number accordingly)
1. The moment you assumed your post as city mayor, what was the first basic services program that you prioritized?
Why did you prioritize it?
What was the objective or goal of this services program that you prioritized?
Did you continue prioritizing this services program throughout your administration? If yes, explain why?
If no, also explain why.
2. Did it happen in your administration that you gave several services programs equal attention? If yes, what were these services programs that you equally paid attention to?
How did you justify your action of equally paying attention to several services program at the same time?
3. There is street flooding in one portion of the city’s barangays due to a leaking
water pipe somewhere under the ground. What must the city government do? Some say it is the work of the water district of the city. Others say that the city government must be answerable to the problem. As the city mayor, what is your stand? Should the city government act or not act on the problem? How should it approach the problem? Should the problem be left to the water district to solve?
4. There are vendors and pedestrians who just throw litter in the market and in the streets any time they want to. Their behavior is contrary to your desire to clean and beautify the city. What solution have you conceived to prevent them from dirtying the streets?
Why do you think cities must be clean?
How did you pursue your cleanliness program knowing that Filipinos do not care about clean streets?
Why do you think Filipinos just throw their candy wrappers and cigarette butts in the streets anytime they want to? Can you volunteer your own reason for such behavior?
Where there some sectors or individuals who opposed or resisted your clean the streets program? How did you manage to silence them?
Did you use some strategies? Were those strategies effective?
5. One barangay has a very low child malnutrition status. What can the city government do?
Why do you think the city government must deliver such a program to that barangay?
6. Unemployment is increasing in the city. What did you do in your term to address this problem?
Why is there unemployment? What are the root causes of unemployment?
Why should a city mayor create a program to employ the unemployed youth? What programs have you created to create the unemployed youth?
7. Certainly, some city government employees were slow in services delivery to the people. How did you minimize such behavior?
Why do you think such behavior – delayed and slow delivery of services – need to be eliminated?
8. Supposing the city council passed a resolution to stop temporarily the
beautification, cleaning and greening of the city because other services programs also need to be financially supported? Would you make a countermove? Or would you just agree to the councilmen?
What is your countermove, if any? Would it be effective if one of the councilmen is a diehard oppositionist?
How do you persuade the councilmen to continue supporting your beautification program and your clean and green program?
9 Some motorists just park their vehicles anywhere they like. This is contrary to your campaign slogan which is discipline. How did you discipline these motorists?
Was it hard during the first stage of implementing your program of disciplining motorists who park anywhere?
Why do you think they do such behavior? What explanation can you offer for such undisciplined behavior?
10 A market is built so that vendors can have the chance to sell inside the market. But once the market is finished, the market vendors leave their stalls inside the inside and occupy the sides of the market outside and even up to the middle of the street. As a result, streets become overcrowded and the poor pedestrians cannot pass without sacrificing comfort and safety. What are you going to do? What program are you going to create to solve this problem?
How do you account for such behavior? Why are many Filipino vendors like that?
How do you persuade the vendors to go back to where their original stalls were?
C. What is your stand about the values, beliefs, and principles of leaders? Do leaders
who have good values result in successful services program delivery and successful leadership?
Appendix 1. The Sectoral Survey
Name of Sectoral Representative to be interviewed: ________________________________________
Date and time of interview: ___________________________________
Venue of interview: __________________________________________
A Interviewee’s Profile
Date of birth: __________________________
Place of birth: _________________________
Town/Province of origin: __________________________________
Highest educational attainment: ________________________________
Religious affiliation: ________________________
Year of start of residence in the city: ____________
Name of spouse: ________________________________________
Number of children: _________
B. Answer on the blank space provided.
1. How do you describe the leadership of ex-city mayor, Marides/JV?
2. What service program is Marides/JV mot remembered of, and why is she/he so remembered?
3. Why does Marides/JV have a good reputation among the people of Marikina/San Juan City
4. What kind of values and principles does Marides/JV possess?
5. What did Marides/JV do to the following services problems in the city?
a. lack of discipline among motorists
b. dirty streets
c. unemployment
d. bad roads
e. sanitation
f. flooding when the heavy rains or typhoons come
g. malnutrition
h. crowded streets due to vendors selling anywhere
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse