Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Why do we fail to challenge?

A leader plays a pivotal role in a cooperative setup.If he has sufficient clout & inherent assets,he is even more powerful.It is only by challenging the leader that we can keep the whole setup dynamic and favorable for all stakeholders.When your leader accepts your challenges and delivers on them,things can’t be better.But what if YOU fail to challenge him?Why do the weak and the meek not speak out?What stops them from expressing discontent?Is it so difficult to challenge authority?If our ‘not-challenging-the-leader’ attitude persists,then in the long run, aren’t we ALL dead?
[30093]

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

many dont challenge the leader due to strong hold or the power, leader is holding or exhibiting in group. he may be marginalised to any extent as desired by the leader if he is in an authoritative mode and influence the behaviour of the group as a whole. one more instance could be ignoring the facts put forth by the member against the leader and non-acceptance by the other group members due to the influence of the leader..

KESHAV K RANJAN(IRMA-30017) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

The weak and the meek will not challenge because
1.they lack the means.
2.Some exploitations are so institutionalised and deeply ingrained in society, a person wouldnt even realise.

Its okay when the meek dont spek out.
It becomes really dangerous for the existence and progress of the society when the educated choose to observe dead silence.
More often, such society disintegrate.

Jubi 30015 said...

Humans have a strong yearning-for being shown the direction-the right way to do the right things. Very few can set goals for themselves, most can follow easily. "Leaders" are those who take this initiative, create the vision and path for others to walk on.
Thus to challenge a leader becomes difficult for the people. To defy somebody whom they follow, is not something that everybody can do. But the leaders can be challenged, provided the followers perform a collective action. The strength lies in numbers..

Mahima said...

We don't challenge the leader may be because we may think that challenging the leader may be challenging ourselves as we have elected the leader and had agreed to his thoughts. And to challenge our own decision will create a ego problem.
However we forget that nobody is perfect and expressing our discontent is necessary for proper functioning as a leader.

Anonymous said...

@Zubi
One challenger suffices if she succeeds in mobilising enough suppport of the masses. The one "Devil's Advocate" is indispensible and sufficient.
@Mahima
Electing a leader in the democratic traditions is not equivalent to choosing a king. Mandate just means that the leader can represent the interests of the people in the best way. The people have to choose their best interests thamselves.
Questioning is important.

Ritesh Kewlani(p30034) said...

One reason of not challenging the leader is the lack of another suitable leader. Once a leader gives up or resigns then the void has to be filled up by a competent leader. Also this might create a snowballing effect wherein many other leaders start resigning. Taking an example from "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, where the important men start disappearing leaving the people on their own.

Mahima said...

@Uphar
i think this is where the question of who takes the initiative of expressing comes as opposing involves risk. The majority let go the concern thinking who will take the pain and thinking why should i initiate in fear? however if one does there may be support of many coming up.

KESHAV K RANJAN(IRMA-30017) said...

@Uphar,

"The lion and other beasts formed a party to go out hunting.After they had killed a fat stag,the lion nominated himself to divide the stag into three parts.Taking the best piece for himself,he said,"This is mine in view of my official role as king,and the second I will take as my own personal share just for participating in the hunt.As far as third part is concerned,let him take it who dares."(Aesop's Fables).
Lion can't be challanged by monkeys.Only lion or some other mighty creature can do that.
So,it is always difficult for replacing the leader by common people.

Mahima said...

I am reminded of an incident during social audit where when we asked the villagers to come to the gram sabha and express their discontent with the NREGA works , they replied that we cannot come because if we come we will be recognized and will be beaten, YOU will not be here to protect us against any harm that will be caused to us by the powerful!

Archit Gupta (30067) said...

Challenging a leader may also be seen as unimportant if the poor people do not even have means to make ends meet. As long as they are able to get something in return of their efforts, questioning or challenging a giant may not seem too appealing to them. They may be so busy in trying to survive, that challenging authority or mismanagement may not find any priority in their fight for existence. Probably, when such unchallenged leadership attacks their very basic need for survival, some of them feel the need to challenge as well.

Anonymous said...

@Keshav
Kanshiram famously said:Even a caged lion can roar many goats to death.
Its is when the goats are systematically trained to hear the lion and not spare much thought that they can co-exist freely.
He was proved right when BSP sweeped polls in Uttar Pradeshin the last Vidhan Sabha elections.
His protege Mayawati has many a so called "lion" stooges at her disposal today.