Unknown to many, the late Corazon Aquino was cited as an example of virtuous leadership by a European expert on leadership. She was in a short list of outstanding leaders which included Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, Lech Walesa, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Robert Schuman and Francois Michelin. The author of the book is Alexander Havard who is the Director of the European Center for Leadership Development (www.ecld.org) and resides in Moscow. His email address is havard@ecld.org. While I was rereading the book entitled Virtuous Leadership: An Agenda for Personal Excellence, it crossed my mind to ask the question: to what extent has her son Noynoy imbibed the style of leadership attributed to Cory?

Havard quotes Cory Aquino on collegiality in decision making in politics: "The ability to work well with others, to listen to different points of view, to credit such views with a sincerity equal to one's own, and to have the flexibility to accommodate the valid concerns of others: this is an important quality for anyone who wishes to serve the people. It is an expression of the spirit of service. Indeed, how can anyone claim to have a genuine spirit of solidarity with the people in general, if he is incapable of an operational solidarity with those he must work with closely?"

These words of the late President of the Philippines struck a strong cord in me because I strongly believe in collegiate government. In every organization I have worked for as part of the management team, I have always tried to foster collegiality in decision making. As Havard writes, collegiality is the virtue of prudence in action: five people working together see farther and more deeply than one person working alone. It is also a manifestation of the humility of the leader who is aware of his own limitations and desires to serve his colleagues by developing in each of them a sense of freedom and a sense of personal responsibility. All members of the management team participate in making decisions.

Collegial government is very much part of what is known as Management by Missions as developed by IESE Business School Professor Pablo Cardona. The leader focuses the attention of management team on the mission of the organization. He is a servant of his team, as a collective, and of each one of its members, as individuals. He does everything in his power to deepen the commitment of the team members to their shared mission. He does not demand personal loyalty. He motivates everyone to own the corporate mission.

In team meetings, he encourages colleagues to voice (even critical) opinions, to cut short pointless digressions, to see the positive side of every proposal, to come up with solutions rather than waste time bemoaning problems, and always to question received, majority opinion. The leader is a mentor and coach to every member of the team. He helps each one improve professionally and personally. For example, he draws out a shy person in the team, moderates those who talk too much, reminds the opinionated to listen to the views of others, and helps the pessimists to see the glass as half-filled. In building a team culture through collegial decision making, the leader succeeds in getting colleagues to see that more benefits flow when there is a team spirit than when it is "every man for himself."

It does take humility on the part of the leader to truly practise collegial government because he must be ready to renounce his judgements (unless principles are at stake) when the group decides against his position. The test of his humility is even greater in the event the group decision leads to disaster. The leader does not say, "I told you so. This wouldn't have happened if you had listened to me." He participates enthusiastically in the implementation of all decisions and shares personal responsibility for them with his colleagues.

What collegial government avoids is dictatorship, which always stems from pride. The dictatorial manager thinks wrongly that he is master of all he surveys. He overestimates his professional and moral capabilities and underestimates those of others. He is hard to deal with because he is over-sensitive and tends to mistrust others. One-man-rule is inefficient and ineffective: co-workers learn nothing of the art of governance and fail to develop a sense of freedom and responsibility.

There are very few exceptional cases when one-man rule is called for. These are always situations of extreme hardship and emergency. This style should be adopted very briefly. Extended periods of autocracy can hinder the formation of mature decision-makers. It may be argued that Singapore in the 1960s was in a situation of extreme hardship and warranted the existence of one-man rule. Thanks to the commitment of Lee Kuan Yew to the common good, collegial government is now the predominant style of leadership in this most economically successful Southeast Asian country. The situation in the Philippines today is far from requiring one-man rule. Those who are seriously campaigning for Noynoy Aquino to be the next President of the Philippines should make sure that he has learned the collegial style of Government from his late mother.

For comments, my email address is bvillegas@uap.edu.ph.