CHAPTER 8

Under What Conditions Can I be Called Up for Suzerainty?

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Understand three postulates regarding the situation in which a suzerain manifests.
2. Understand that the three postulates are both necessary and sufficient conditions for suzerain to appear.
3. Realize that this classification helps in analyzing practical situations.

A Conceptual Base for Studying Suzerainty

It is normal for people to form groups and take on tasks together as teams. In such groups, in order to facilitate collective action, a need is often felt for some members to voice the group’s opinion, coordinate the efforts of the members, motivate members and so on … . All these functions are vital to any group and these are some of the tasks performed by suzerains.

We shall now take up three aspects of the role of suzerains in groups by representing them as three postulates. These postulates dwell on the relationship between suzerains and groups and help in creating a conceptual base for further study of suzerainty and leadership as pursued in this book.

Basic Postulates on the ‘Emergence of Suzerains’

First Postulate: For a Suzerain to Manifest There is Need for a Group

Can a person be a suzerain all by himself—with no one else around …? Does one not need at least one follower …? If there is no follower how does one say that suzerainty is exerted … ? We could discuss about people with ‘potential’ for suzerainty; but suzerainty manifests only in the company of others. In other words, suzerainty is a social function which happens between people.

Therefore, for a suzerain to do his ‘thing’ there is a need for at least two people in the scene … one that is the suzerain and the other that is the subordinate/follower/slave/citizen … .

Then again, what if one is coerced/moved by an idea or dictate that has been left behind by a person long dead and gone; is there not the exertion of suzerainty despite the demise of the suzerain? And the answer is yes … something said or done by someone else, who in turn is no more physically present, may get people to follow … but in any case there are two people here—only that one of them has merely his presence ‘felt’, while being ‘physically absent’.

What then if an inspiring thought is generated within oneself? Could it be said that there is an assertion of suzerainty in this case … ?

Being inspired by a thought that has sprung from within is an interesting case (or triviality, as they say in mathematics) which we have taken up in the first section of this book … . Getting an inspired idea from within holds great value and has been cherished by humans for several millennia now. This is the case of the person listening to the Common Soul. This is leadership … and it is suzerainty in action if it leads the individual, who listens, to act in the interests of any of the groups to which he belongs … . but that again leads to the pre-existence of larger groups.

Therefore, for all practical reasons, it can be said that there is the minimum need of a ‘group’ of at least two people for suzerainty to manifest itself; therefore, the first postulate. We can have born leaders (all people truly are so)… not born suzerains … . Suzerains are operationally defined in groups that come to existence on the earth.

Being born into suzerainty is possible though—these are the silver spoon types.

Second Postulate: For a Suzerain to Appear, The Group Must Share a Common Agenda

At first, let us consider that suzerainty is deeply connected with the agenda that is at hand.

Consider the agenda of independence struggles of various nations. Once independence is achieved the agenda of becoming free ceases to exist, a new agenda of re-building the nation by setting up a government takes its place.… Here, new suzerains may come into play. In India, for example, the grassroot warriors of Gandhiji who were suzerains amongst the Indians during pre-independence days took a relative backseat after elections and ‘elected representatives’ became the new suzerains of India. Another example is where Hitler called his generals as ‘over grown school boys’; in his opinion they would be of ‘no use in times of peace’. Clearly, he perceived that suzerainty for the war agenda and suzerainty for the nation-running agenda was not to be the same.

Another typical example is the turnaround in a company. It is known that a shakeup in the top echelons precedes a genuine attempt at a turnaround. Either the same suzerains radically change their way of functioning or then new suzerains are put in charge. This indicates a shift in agenda—associated with a shift in suzerainty. Therefore, the above examples show that there is a deep link between suzerains and agendas.

But that is not all; existence of agendas precedes the need for a suzerain. For a group of individuals just sitting around, there is no need of any suzerain … . It must occur to the group, as a team, if they want to do/accomplish something together. If there is no common agenda then there is no impulse for team action—a suzerain therefore has no role and need not exist. Meaning that if there is no agenda there is no suzerain.

Consider an example: A team had gathered to build up a place of worship and after a lot of toil it was finally built and inaugurated. With the construction over, the agenda of wanting to build the place of worship thereafter ceased to exist and so also the need for the team. With no agenda and no relevant activities for the team, with no role for suzerains, the need for a suzerain also does not arise. Of course, the erstwhile team can transform itself into something else, like for instance, the administration team for that place of worship or may be even into a campaign team for making a show of their achievement, but that is another agenda and that would have a corresponding team and a corresponding suzerain—the earlier suzerains ‘could’ be carried forward.

Therefore, for the moment we can conclude that ‘for suzerains to manifest there is need for a group of people to have some agenda …’

Third Postulate: For a Suzerain to Manifest the Group must be Actually Working (Acting) on the Agenda

A group merely having an agenda and not willing to ‘do’/act on the agenda makes no sense. There is a need for the group to ‘realize some need to act’ towards achieving the agenda and then they ‘must act’ on it. When they do this, and only when they do this, a suzerain is naturally needed … .

For example, one of the agenda points Indian citizens have as a nation is the aim of removing corruption. But except for a handful, no one seems wanting to do anything about it. Among those that act, suzerains have come to force, but for the rest who want to do nothing the question of them having a suzerain does not arise.

Take the example of a village that holds an ambition/agenda to overcome the neighbouring village in a football match. But no one will come forward to play the game or sponsor the team. So we have a group—the village, we have an agenda—they want to overcome the neighbouring village, but they are not acting on it … . so the question of a suzerain does not arise. Or it can be concluded that it is only when people are ‘acting’ or ‘doing something’ together that a suzerain will manifest. If they just sit around, having great desires and doing nothing, there is no suzerain. Even if they got together and made a plan it would indicate that they have done something and therefore some kind of suzerainty would have been in action … .

Combining the Three Postulates

Therefore, there are three components that come into play when reckoning suzerains … . first is the group next is the agenda which the group has and the third is the fact that they are acting on the agenda. These three considerations help us to propose a hypothesis about suzerainty.

But before we get to that, a word about ‘necessary and sufficient conditions’; it is a phrase used in mathematics.

Consider that in order for being able to purchase something, we need a shop, a shopper, money, need/desire in the shopper, a shopping cart … these can be called ‘conditions’ for shopping to happen. Now, if there is no shopping cart can we still shop? Yes of course … so shopping cart is not a ‘necessary’ condition to shop … . Similarly, if there is a shop, there is money, and the shopper is at the shop … are these conditions sufficient that shopping will take place … ? well, not necessary … the shop should be open—that is another condition—and the shop must have the thing to be shopped and must be priced affordably…when all these add up, we arrive at a situation where these three and the three earlier combine to produce the sufficient condition—shop, money, shopper, open shop, product available and priced affordably. But again, does it take all these necessary conditions for shopping to happen … ? No! … Money can be replaced by credit card or even ‘barter’ … we could shop in the internet and not in a physical shop… It may not be affordable but people may take loans … any way this above discussions will give some idea about conditions for achieving a result, about necessary conditions and about sufficient conditions … now, we move on to a set of conditions that are simultaneously ‘necessary’ and ‘sufficient’ conditions.

1. There may be several conditions leading to a final result. For example, there could be ten different conditions leading to a suzerain emerging from a group. Three of them we have listed above namely a group, an agenda and action-on-agenda.
2. Now suppose there are ‘n’ conditions which, if they are not fulfilled, we will definitely not get the final result. For example, if there is no agenda there is no suzerain; so also with the other two conditions. This minimum number of ‘n’ conditions is called ‘necessary’ conditions … That is, of the three conditions—group, agenda and action—even if one is missing there will be no suzerain. These three are sine qua non—without which a suzerain is not possible; they are necessary conditions for suzerains to emerge.
3. At the same time let us say there are some conditions, ‘x’ in number, if these things happen then the final result will definitely happen. That is, in our case, if there is a group, an agenda and the group is working on it then there will be definitely a suzerain. It means that the three conditions are also sufficient to ensure the final result of there being a suzerain …

We therefore arrive at this proposition about suzerains …

To be a Suzerain

The necessary and sufficient conditions for a position suzerain to manifest are the following:

1. There is need of a group
2. The group must share a common agenda
3. The group must be acting on the agenda …

This hypothesis leads to interesting consequences as follows:

Corollary 1) if there is a suzerain visible then there is a group, an agenda and action

Corollary 2) if there is a group with an agenda on which they are working then there is necessarily a suzerain in it …

Let’s take examples for these. There are a group of people together visibly doing nothing and not having any agenda and still the group considers one of its members as an elder! That is a position of suzerainty, so how could this be? The answer is that the title ‘elder’ results from the agenda of ‘conducive togetherness’ and action involves normal day to day activity in which they live and interact with each other. So, indeed it does add up to say that since the group acknowledges that a suzerain is present, the agenda and action are necessarily there.

In case of the second conclusion, one could consider the example of a group of friends out on a camping trip. They all consider each other equals and no one is designated as suzerain. They are definitely a ‘group’ and they definitely have an ‘agenda’ of enjoying themselves out in the camp—and they are acting on it too. So, where is the question of suzerainty? The answer is that they constantly circulate the role of suzerain as per the requirements of the situation; though of course one or the other may be dominant and be recognized from outside as the ‘suzerain’ of the pack; but within the group they could be practicing transferrable suzerainty. Therefore, in this example too we see that ‘groups’ engaged in an ‘agenda’ based collective ‘activity’ definitely have suzerainty manifested amongst them.

Then there is this concept called as an ‘enlightened anarchy’, in anarchy there is no supposed need for a suzerain, or is there? An enlightened anarchy is just the case of a group of friends with the agenda of having a ‘good time in the world (on earth)’. Even here there is a practice of transferrable suzerainty and each situation will draw out a suzerain; one person may speak for the group, another person may coordinate some commercial activity, another person may take up responsibility of grooming children … . still another person could be delegated responsibility for planning the defence strategy of the group and so on … . Therefore, even in an ‘enlightened anarchy’ suzerains definitely exist.

Why go through this entire process of defining the necessary and sufficient conditions for suzerainty to manifest?

The defining of these conditions helps in getting greater clarity on what I, as a suzerain, may be expected to do, and we shall look into that presently. But, besides that it provides an excellent tool of analysis explaining many facets of human group behaviour.

For example, when a new organization takes birth in a traditional society, the suzerains and the agendas of the erstwhile group must be taken into account. Ignoring this fact may cause problems and we know why. Let’s say a social worker wants to start a women’s cooperative in a village. Such a person may encounter resistance from men or from elderly women or from established headmen of that village—though these others may not be directly involved in the activities of the social worker. In such instances, an understanding of the pre-existing agendas and suzerains will definitely help the social worker chart out a better path of least resistance in achieving a goal among them.

Yet, another example could be in the case of a supervisor taking care of a group of ‘equal’ workers. For all theoretical purposes, he may be considering them equal because he pays them equally, but in truth the group may have some dormant suzerainty arising from other agenda—from blood relationships, or friendships, or village hierarchies or such other. An understanding of that would help him both understand and handle the situation better.

Therefore, the take away from this chapter is to realize that I can be called up to shoulder a suzerain’s responsibility if and only if (1) there is a group, (2) if there is some agenda and (3) if the members of the group are acting on that agenda.

Note: No complete proof is given for this proposition but the given examples are indicative and may be generalized.

Case Studies

1. Actual cases of social workers encountering starting problems and how they overcame them are useful. These can be used to drive home points about inherent, ‘dormant suzerainty arising from other agendas’.
2. Cases of the clash of aspirations of two generations, the first uneducated and the next educated is also an excellent theme to bring out factors of inherent suzerainty.
3. Case studies of turnarounds of companies where the role of consultants and new leaders can be explored to bring out the correspondence between agendas and suzerains.

Exercises

1. The play Admirable Crichton written by J. M. Barrie (1902) can be given as an exercise for study which shows the emergence of suzerains as per situation and therefore agenda. Also discuss why it could possibly be branded as a ‘comic’ play, instead of a ‘serious critique’ about society and suzerainty (in respect of contents of Chapter 2).
2. Carry out a group task with four to seven members in each group where all have to contribute for completion of task. A competition between different teams could add zing to it. After completion of task analyse the activities within the members of the group in terms of the three necessary and sufficient conditions and discuss whether or not there was a suzerain that emerged.