As a sequel to my article two weeks ago titled “Tale of the Stolen Contract,” I am writing this one having been informed of a couple of reactions to it, through e-mail. One in particular stands out. This had to do with a statement of TELOF (Telecommunications Office) Assistant Secretary Lorenzo Formoso, after he had divulged that the National Broadband Network (NBN) contract had been stolen about two months after it had been signed in China. Apparently, Formoso, when questioned during the recess on whether there was a computer copy available, answered, “In the DOTC, the staff cannot even e-mail; how can they upload (or words to that effect)?”
I think the entire crew of staff workers at the DOTC have become respondents to this unnecessary insult. Being the primary communications agency of government, it becomes an even bigger insult. The DOTC is supposed to be a technology-proficient agency of the government and, as such, should have at least computer-literate employees — even technology experts — within its ranks.
And, of course, every staff worker should know how to e-mail, download and upload. To be accused of not having the competence to undertake these chores is, in effect, to charge them with being what is known in the computer world of the US as “vidiots.” I know that the DOTC staff members are, by and large, a competent crew. They may not all be computer experts, but certainly, only an unlucid person can say that “they cannot even e-mail.” In any corporate office, all staff workers are presumed to know how to e-mail in this day and age.
I don’t think Asec. Formoso intended to insult the DOTC personnel. Somebody told me that he may have just been “discombobulated” after he had blurted out, in response to questions from the audience requesting copies of the signed contract documents, that they were “stolen.”
This revelation really caught everyone by surprise, even the number of government functionaries that were present in that classroom-styled environment, where Formoso gave his PowerPoint presentation, in effect defending a lavish broadband network project costing US$330 million — effectively P16 billion — simply because we want to be able to save P4 billion representing the amount per annum that the government spends on telecommunications services.
Just hours after he made this revelation, his boss, DOTC Secretary Leandro Mendoza, made the formal announcement that, in fact, the documents were stolen from the Philippine commercial attaché in China, Emmanuel Ong, and that they were going to institute charges of gross negligence in the custody of official documents against him.
Firstly, why did Sec. Mendoza wait two months before making a formal announcement of the theft? And why will they have to now “reconstitute” the contract? Weren’t there any copies at all — if not computer copies because the DOTC staff “cannot even e-mail”?
From my 19-year experience at the DOTC, I have always known the competence of the staff, especially those belonging to the inner staff of every high official in the DOTC, to be satisfactory. That charge of inability to e-mail, upload and download can never be true.
Many of those that served with me at the DOTC from the time I was an Assistant Minister to the time I became the head of the agency are still there. Quite a number of them are career officials and, like me, are CESOs (Career Executive Service Officers), and should not be insulted in that manner. They cannot be accused of being vidiots, by any means! Why not make them your “Pygmalions” instead, Asec. Formoso? That’s going to be a more constructive and effective way of managing your sectoral office. Insulting your staff and technical crew at the TELOF/DOTC is not, by any means, an ideal strategy in management.
In the book The Leadership Challenge, which became a sensational best seller soon after it was published in 1987 and re-published in 1995, leadership experts Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner advise their readers to be more conscious about realizing that their behavior toward the people they manage for the attainment of the organization’s goals is based upon their expectations of them.
Treating people in a positive fashion and being attentive to their needs — a kind of behavior that reflects a manager’s high expectations of his or her constituents — produces increased performance because this kind of behavior has a favorable effect on their initiative and motivation.
As a government manager, aside from giving every single member of the DOTC workforce — from the utility workers, the drivers and the rank and file — the respect that is their due, I discovered that the words of Kouzes and Posner were so true. In my own words, I’d say, rather than put them down, buoy them up!
It is natural that when you have high expectations of your constituents, you will tend to give them more input, i.e., helpful hints, suggestions and responsive answers to their questions. And, of course, there is the need for a manager to give his constituents more feedback about the results of their efforts. It is important to ensure that the standards of performance are high but realistic, and that they are linked directly to what is important to the success of the organization.
I remember something memorable from the book that had to do with “creating Pygmalions.” Remember the legendary figure in Greek mythology, Pygmalion, who was in love with a statue that he himself had sculpted?
Well, Kouzes and Posner advise all managers, whether their constituency is large or small, to create Pygmalions within their ranks. In other words, managers must lead them toward the same vision and guide them with the highest standards of performance.
Creating Pygmalions, according to the authors, entails developing a winner’s attitude, since only those who envision themselves as winners are likely to work hard, try new actions, and become leaders in their own right.
The leader/manager creates the Pygmalions he deserves. If he finds his workers stupid, he probably is stupid himself.
Make them Pygmalions, not vidiots!
* * *
Thank you for your e-mail sent to: jtl@pldtdsl.net.