What Is The More Important Personality Trait For A Good Pm? Ethics Or Management Skills

[thailandlover]

I read the recent post on Thai visa news that most Thais felt that Abhisit was more ethical than Thaksin. Do you think having ethical behavior is more important or business management skills?

Please note that I am not saying that I think good business management skills necessarily make for good political management skills.

[wolfmanjack]

Ethics.

[noahvail]

I think both are rather nebulous qualities. To be able to categorize, define, and prioritize those qualities would be a bit like trying to eat Jello neatly using only your fingers. But if held down to it, I would choose business qualities because people skills are so important in both business and politics. I bet a simple poll on this would get a lot of responses!

[Harcourt]

Definitely ethical.

If the leader does not have both qualities, only one or the other, then ethics has to be the most preferable, for the sake of the nation.

If the man (or woman) at the helm has ethics and is trustworthy, then all will fall into place.

A firm, ethical hand leading, with the details of business and management relegated to the ministers and advisors, has got to be a winning formula.

[cmsally]

I think Thaksin's period in office taught the Thai elite one thing , which was that the Thais like to follow a personality.

Abhisit has been slotted in to fill the "personality cult" gap.

The difference with Thaksin was that he had his finger directly on the "business button". In as such he had more direct power than Abhi over business. I think the flavour of the day is to disperse the business management away from the PM, so I am not sure that is relevant to talk of the issue of ethics vs business acumen.

We are being told that ethics is the flavour of the day regarding the PM, but now that the business has been dispersed I would have thought that the ethics of those around him would of been of much more relevance. Unfortunately with this govt the gleaming figurehead might not be a true reflection of the rusty hull behind it. Time will tell.

[mrtoad]

It has to ethics, but management skills closely follow - there have been number of political leaders who have had great leadership/management skills - but have zero ethics, and the results have not been good.

[mc2]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

[tim armstrong]

It has to ethics, but management skills closely follow - there have been number of political leaders who have had great leadership/management skills - but have zero ethics, and the results have not been good.

Agree, has to be both. The current PM has an almost impossible task. Remember he heads a coalition of 7 parties ! If he can keep them all together until the next election whenever that is, he will be doing well and deserves to be re-elected.

[ballpoint]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

On the contrary, the attributes that make someone a successful businessman do not equate to those making someone a successful PM. A businessman must make decisions for the best of his business, and ultimately himself. The ones who make billions are those who show a ruthless attitude towards the profit line. Useful employees are carried along, less useful ones disposed of. Running a country is not the same as running a business. The aim of running a country is not to make as much money for yourself as possible, not that you'd know this from an observation of SE Asian politics, but to spread the wealth and resources for the good of the people. You can't fire citizens in order to improve the profitablity of the country, although Thaskin clearly had a go at doing so by having thousands of the "less useful" ones murdered. You can't shut down inefficient provinces and cities, or sell them off for their parts. You can't sit at the top and make every single major decision yourself, with no input from those who will be affected by it, and with the only cosideration being what it will do for your personal bottom line. You need to balance the interests of the country as a whole with the individual citizens. If being a billionaire were so conducive to being a good PM or president we'd see Bill Gates or Warren Buffet as President for life in the US. Richard Branson permanantly installed in No 10. Some German industrialist as chancellor. But they're not. Traditionally, top businessmen have not made good leaders of countries. The only current western one I can think of is Berlusconi in Italy, who seems to bumble from one scandal to another, rather in the way Thaksin did when he was PM. No, Thaksin had his chance to show he could be different, a capable leader for the whole country, and he blew it. Why? Because he lacked the ethics and morals necessary for a true leader. I'd say you need someone financially astute, and a little ruthless, on the team, which probably rules out most top businessmen, as they will always want to be on top, but you want the one ultimately making the decisions, based on advice from the whole team, to have the morals and ethics to do what is right for the country.

[mrtoad]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

For your guy - lining one's pockets comes first.

[Moonrakers]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

If you ask me, if either quality is sacrificed then there are serious problems within the system

[mc2]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

If you ask me, if either quality is sacrificed then there are serious problems within the system

its not a question of absence or presence or sacrificing anything, it's a question of importance and priorities

you want to have another go at reading the question ?

[mauGR1]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

IMO,in politics and life in general,a base of solid ethics is most necessary,without ethics soon or later the whole palace will collapse.

[mc2]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

IMO,in politics and life in general,a base of solid ethics is most necessary,without ethics soon or later the whole palace will collapse.

c'mon, people don't vote for PMs because they are virtuous.

just look at history of PMs around the world. scoundrels everywhere.

they vote for the stronger leader, which implies to a large degree, strong management skills.

[Moonrakers]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

If you ask me, if either quality is sacrificed then there are serious problems within the system

its not a question of absence or presence or sacrificing anything, it's a question of importance and priorities

you want to have another go at reading the question ?

Nah.

It's just another loaded question from the red/yellow brigade, clearly designed to funnel opinion towards their favourite side/person.

I have stated what I think and refuse to answer the question either way so as not to humour and/or fuel the ridiculous arguments and statements which will inevitably come from both sides.

This is now just another thread for my ignore list.

[mrtoad]

there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first.

IMO,in politics and life in general,a base of solid ethics is most necessary,without ethics soon or later the whole palace will collapse.

c'mon, people don't vote for PMs because they are virtuous.

just look at history of PMs around the world. scoundrels everywhere.

they vote for the stronger leader, which implies to a large degree, strong management skills.

So you would advocate for Stalin and Hitler then?

[mc2]

So you would advocate for Stalin and Hitler then?

no, would you ?

[ballpoint]

So you would advocate for Stalin and Hitler then?

Well, he advocates Thaksin, which is the same thing. The two reasons Thaksin didn't get to reach the same excesses of those two were Thailand is nowhere near as powerful as their countries were, and the Thai people had the balls to kick him out before he could do too much damage, although any one of the thousands he had murdered would plead otherwise.

Edited August 10, 2009 by ballpoint

[mc2]

despite some strong opinions on this forum, the majority of thais think Thaksin is ethical.

I mean look at these photos Thaksin looks just as trustworthy as Abhisit, if not more.

[Moonrakers]

despite some strong opinions on this forum, the majority of thais think Thaksin is ethical.

I mean look at these photos Thaksin looks just as trustworthy as Abhisit, if not more.

<snip> (photos)

I intended to ignore this thread but this post had to be commented on.

You must be a troll, surely you must be as nobody could actually be serious whilst posting such drivel.

Get back under your bridge, I think you'll find it somewhere in the news clippings section.

[mrtoad]

So you would advocate for Stalin and Hitler then?

no, would you ?

So you have just contradicted your earlier statement.

[mrtoad]

despite some strong opinions on this forum, the majority of thais think Thaksin is ethical.

I mean look at these photos Thaksin looks just as trustworthy as Abhisit, if not more.

<snip> (photos)

I intended to ignore this thread but this post had to be commented on.

You must be a troll, surely you must be as nobody could actually be serious whilst posting such drivel.

Get back under your bridge, I think you'll find it somewhere in the news clippings section.

He's not a troll Moonrakers, he's paid to post.

[mc2]

despite some strong opinions on this forum, the majority of thais think Thaksin is ethical.

I mean look at these photos Thaksin looks just as trustworthy as Abhisit, if not more.

<snip> (photos)

I intended to ignore this thread but this post had to be commented on.

You must be a troll, surely you must be as nobody could actually be serious whilst posting such drivel.

Get back under your bridge, I think you'll find it somewhere in the news clippings section.

there is plenty of scientific evidence to suggest a persons perceived virtue is measured (sometimes solely) on their appearance, face and body language.

or is ad homenium more your debating style?

[mc2]

So you would advocate for Stalin and Hitler then?

no, would you ?

So you have just contradicted your earlier statement.

what statement and how did I "contradict" ?

[mrtoad]

So you would advocate for Stalin and Hitler then?

no, would you ?

So you have just contradicted your earlier statement.

what statement and how did I "contradict" ?

I thought I was on your ignore list?

[mc2]

I thought I was on your ignore list?

a very feeble response indeed, mrtoad.

[mrtoad]

I thought I was on your ignore list?

a very feeble response indeed, mrtoad.

Okay,well why don't you read what you posted a little earlier.

I really shouldn't have to help you.

[Soutpeel]

despite some strong opinions on this forum, the majority of thais think Thaksin is ethical.

I mean look at these photos Thaksin looks just as trustworthy as Abhisit, if not more.

<snip> (photos)

I intended to ignore this thread but this post had to be commented on.

You must be a troll, surely you must be as nobody could actually be serious whilst posting such drivel.

Get back under your bridge, I think you'll find it somewhere in the news clippings section.

Ph.D(Asian Studies), M.Ed, B.A. (Hons), Dip. Appl. Sc...... Troll to boot... ....oh well so much for higher education, to think this guy could be educating one of your kids...

[scorecard]

QUOTE from Mc2:

"there are no mother teresa s in politics, management and leadership comes first. "

QUOTE from mc2:

"....despite some strong opinions on this forum, the majority of thais think Thaksin is ethical.

I mean look at these photos Thaksin looks just as trustworthy as Abhisit, if not more. ....""

<snip> (photos)

Again we see the highly educated mc2 making false/untrue/misleading statements (no ethics), and saying anything which sounds like support for his convicted darling.

Did you, mc2, attend any courses on ethics in your various studies? Pity they didn't have some impact on your thinking.

Ph.D. holders are supposedly the 'thought leaders' who come up with ideas which generate a better society. You fail miserably.

Question: Are you in fact a teacher? If you are then I can promise you that I will not allow my children to ever come near you.

[mc2]

Question: Are you in fact a teacher? If you are then I can promise you that I will not allow my children to ever come near you.

relax, you would probably never be able to afford my tuition fee anyway.

and I am not a teacher, I am a university lecturer.