CHAPTER 9

Who Ends Up Becoming the Suzerain?

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Get an over all view of the seven factors that play a role in the selection of a Suzerain.
2. Have a broad framework to analyze how a particular organization is doing in its selection process.
3. Systematically introspect into self and other personalities in order to prepare for future Suzerain roles.

Certain Factors Up the Chance for Becoming a Suzerain

If a group has picked up an agenda and has begun to act on it then the three necessary conditions for the appearance of a suzerain are satisfied; a suzerain must appear … who will that suzerain be?

There are several factors that will decide this and they will be taken up for discussion in this chapter. These factors are not deterministic in the selection of the suzerain; it is not that if so-and-so factor is there in a person then he will be suzerain. The selection of a suzerain can be truly deterministic only in an organization that has laid down clear rules for selection and elevation of suzerains and if the organization abides by those rules (and if the existing equilibrium is not disturbed by an ‘act of nature’).

The factors should be treated as force fields, each of them seeking to raise the probability of suzerainty being transferred to ‘preferred’ candidates according to that factor. Beginning from the point, where all are equal, if a particular person is blessed by a certain factor then that particular factor raises his chance of occupying a suzerainty position. So the final emergence of a suzerain will be an outcome of a combination of those ‘forces’ or factors. These can be categorized as under.

Dormant Suzerainty

Given a collection of individuals, suzerainty could pre-exist depending on agendas which that collection of individuals may covertly or overtly already have.

For example, consider a group of school children, who are of the same age. The group is given an academic project to execute—which incidentally requires application of mind. Their teacher asks them to select a ‘leader’ to represent them. Clearly, the group has an agenda of executing the project. Prior to getting this agenda they were equal as classmates but with unequal physical and academic strength. There was one person among them who was notorious for his brute force. This characteristic was ‘dormant’ at that moment of ‘no agenda and no action’. But when the time came to choose a suzerain, the sheer terror of this particular boy made them select him to be the suzerain for the project—even though he may be low on ideas and may not be acknowledged as relatively and academically brilliant. Therefore, it can be said that ‘suzerainty based on brute force’ was a dormant suzerainty in the group and came to fore when the selection of suzerain became necessary on the basis of some totally un-related agenda.

Similarly, there can be many characteristics on the basis of which dormant suzerainty can come into play. For example: age, tribal relations, family structure, educational status, income status, wealth, caste structure, previous achievements of individuals, power … No two people are identical, so whatever be the characteristic one chooses to reckon, there will always be some tangible way by which people can be ranked. If the characteristic is quantifiable then there are objective scales on the basis of which hierarchies are established among candidates … for example weight (in kgs) or height (in meters) or academic degrees (in marks) or bank balance (in cash terms). In such instances it is easy to establish who is bigger. In the case of other characteristics which are not quantifiable, therefore a tangible comparison can be made using a simple show of hands. Take this example: ‘how gracious is the person?’ for such a question, individual perceptions matter and while a person ‘B’ may rate another person ‘A’ as ‘very gracious’ another person ‘C’ may say ‘good gracious’ … the measure is subjective and not quantifiable. In such instances, a person who has more ayes in a show of hands can be considered to be ranked higher in respect of that characteristic—graciousness.

Therefore, all kinds of personal characteristics offer the possibility of dormant suzerainty. Owing to the existence of such natural gradations pre-existing in a group, some people have a greater chance/probability of emerging as suzerains. When a new agenda arises, chances are that the group may find it convenient to elevate one of the dormant suzerains into positions of suzerainty even for the new agenda.

The Exact Nature of the Agenda and the Members of the Group Competent in that Particular Agenda

When an agenda appears before a group, the agenda itself could demand some expertise in terms of knowledge and skills required to handle it. In such a case, the one that has the relevant knowledge and skills finds himself endowed with increased probability of making it as the suzerain.

Take for example the fact that a group is on a tour to a new place. Incidentally, a particular member in the group has already been there and knows the place well. In such a situation the chance that this particular individual would end up in a position of suzerainty improves remarkably—at least as long as the visit is under consideration.

Similarly, in MBA schools it is fashionable to take finance as a specialization because finance people (along with marketing people), seem to have some advantage over the rest when it comes to rising to the top.

In the case of a university it is more likely that a professor will be preferred over a non-academic administrator for selection as a Vice Chancellor provided that they are considered equal in all other respects. The university would first look amongst academically successful professors to find out if there is someone who can take on the responsibility of administration without blotching things up.

Therefore, depending on what the agenda of a particular organization is, certain persons, based on their expertise in such relevant field, have a decided advantage over others for being considered to be suzerains.

Skilled and Experienced Administrators and Managers

It is not sufficient that one is an expert in the agenda governing that particular field. For an organization to operate effectively there is a need for proper coordination, planning and execution of tasks. So also the communication that happens within the group and that which the group makes with people outside must be effective. Such tasks involve skills and those with the relevant skills, knowledge, experience and track record are preferred choices for suzerains.

The Preferred Organizational Structure for Meeting that Agenda and the Suzerainty Style of the Suzerain

For a particular agenda, certain organizational structures are preferred over others. For example, in armed forces a unitary organization is preferred. In a priestly congregation it is a flatter structure that matters. Still again, in a marketing agency it is better to function in small independent groups. For each of these a different style of suzerainty is preferable. When it is an educational or research type of organization, a democratic and scholarly leader is preferable. While in a situation that requires executive action, suzerains who display a fair degree of authoritarianism are preferred. Marketing requires people with greater ‘driver’ tendencies … .

Also, the characteristics of pioneers (of companies) are known to be distinctly different from those who ‘manage’ later on, who in turn are preferred for ‘sustaining’ an organization. Pioneers are known to be high risk takers; they may have great drive and could be termed as ‘geniuses’. They generally have an authoritarian (most likely benevolent dictators) attitude and are very effective in directing almost all functions of a small organization. When the organization grows, however there is a need of a bureaucracy and at such stage the style of functioning of the suzerains needs to change considerably for effective functioning of the organization.

Therefore, the nature and size of organization and its position in the organizational/company life cycle can all have an impact on who eventually makes it to the position of suzerainty.

Selection and Promotion Systems Established within Groups

This is probably the single most significant factor that decides as to who will become a suzerain. While formal organizations usually have clear rules on who must be selected and who must be elevated, even informal groups have their methods of selecting suzerains. All it takes is for aspirants to crack these tests/competitions.

Typically, all armed forces in the world have highly standardized systems for selecting officers and for promoting them. So also is the case of the bureaucracies of the world. Even companies have distinct selection and promotion policies; the domain human resources primarily deals with this.

The systems developed could be based on aptitudes, abilities, physical characteristics, psychological factors, sociological factors, skill levels, etc. Similarly, promotion systems could depend, apart from inherent basic abilities of individuals, on the history of their ‘performance’ and on the ‘recommendation’ of erstwhile suzerains. And these decide who will be suzerains. Even birth could be a criterion to decide who will be a suzerain—inheritance of kingship for instance.

Even tribes have their own ways of dealing with matters concerning suzerainty and it varies from tribe to tribe; very sophisticated practices are seen sometimes. In fact even in the animal kingdom there are seemingly established systems to decide as to which particular animal becomes the suzerain of the group. A group of hens have a pecking order for instance. In some mammals, there is a ‘fight’ for the alpha male position, etc. (More or less the criterion is brute force).

This concept of formalized selection and elevation in groups brings forth an important consideration in suzerainty. A group generally has a constitution in which selection and elevation rules are just a part. The constitution may be an elaborate formal arrangement as it is in governments or an informal ‘agreed’ kind of thing—among friends for instance. Such a constitution also imposes discipline on its members which may include things like one must obey the suzerains/elders, one must treat juniors well, one must write down all communications and ensure that it is filed or that all expenditures are to be accompanied with bills … these come in the form of rules, traditions and practices of the respective groups/organizations. Therefore, an organization is like a huge machine where people play their small roles and each role is assigned with the requisite amount of ‘power’, ‘perks’ and ‘responsibilities’.

The idea of climbing up the ladder to occupy positions of suzerainty is treated by some unscrupulous elements which is all about laying hands on the ‘power’ and ‘perks’ of the respective positions—the responsibilities being the hard one is obliged to undertake. Such as these attempt to crack the ‘suzerainty tests’ and may succeed in becoming suzerains at very high levels. And there are examples of those who have done this to orchestrate terrible deeds ultimately.

A typical example of this was Hitler. Power came into his hands through taking over the highest governing body in the land … . the process of taking power was not entirely legitimate. But once having reached there, the organizational powers were used effectively to reinforce one’s position and the same time to alter the constitution and power structure in order to cater to new and diabolic aims.

The important point here is to note that every group is well advised to set up and run its systems for selection and elevation of suzerains with great care and deliberation, for it has great impact on the functioning of a group.

And even as important as it is for the group to set up good selection and elevation systems, it is important that the best people in the organization do what it takes to gain eligibility and rise up in an organization through legitimate means. Austerity and renunciation at this place is nonsense and must be considered as disloyalty to the organization—if anything, it must be considered as an incompetence or unwillingness to shoulder the ‘responsibilities’ that are there at the higher echelons. The unscrupulous may be focused on ‘powers and perks’ willing to bear with the ‘responsibilities’ … why should not the righteous be focused on the ‘responsibilities’, willing to bear with the ‘powers and perks’?

The Presence of True Leaders in the Group

People with charisma, presence of mind, calm disposition, learned, wise, etc., have a natural tendency for ending up as suzerains. It almost happens as if so-and-so person is naturally the one that must take over. People are comfortable with them, negative feelings tend to evaporate in their presence, and one seems to get this element of fun and spiritual elevation while working with them … some kind of induction ensures that work does not seem like drudgery any more … such persons form a great asset to organizations.

What is this magic trait … ? we call it ‘leadership’ and we have tried to define how it works in the earlier chapters. Leaders who take to Yogyathwa and respond to the needs of the Common Soul are a blessing to a team in more than one way and we shall see more of this as we go along.

The Actual Dynamics and Drama of the Situation at Hand

This can be considered as the ‘accident’ factor in the rise of suzerains.

There is this cauldron of the ‘present moment’ in which all the six factors, which we discussed earlier, meet. It is about these forces ultimately coming together and forming a force-field and the present moment can simply throw up surprises. There is serendipity; there could be drama, some eventualities that pitchfork a certain person or certain persons as preferred choices in positions of suzerainty.

In such an instance, the ‘presence of mind’ and ‘strategic positioning’ of prospective suzerains might be the only thing that can be in their control else it may end up being a toss-up in which anyone can emerge as suzerain.

Needless to say, with high perks being available to those who are position suzerains in organizations, there are many who seek, envy and desire such positions. Such as these will be involved in some way in the dynamics of a situation in organizations constantly trying to pick brownie points in order to rise in the suzerainty scale … people, who are suzerains by other standards, though not relevant to the agenda at hand, may also be staking claim … .

Then there could be traditions specific to the group, or external and internal factors of influence; even the quorum at a particular meeting; the ‘mood’ of certain authorities in the group that select a suzerain … . all can play a role in ‘fixing’ someone as a suzerain.

Positions of suzerainty could also be attained in certain groups by just outlasting others—age being a criterion for example … . but then again, though age and education may form a guideline, this may be overlooked when a specific agenda may come into focus and owing to other factors; suzerainty could accordingly manifest in an under aged and unqualified candidates too.

All such things together create a dynamics which finally touches the point of the uncertainty of tomorrow—no one knows … . anyone could qualify and be accepted as the suzerain. And this can be called the seventh factor … . the serendipity factor or the accident factor.

There are two elements that one can take note of in such instance. First is that, there will be people who always point out the ‘accident’ factor which is being responsible for someone’s elevation. But many times, the truth could be that the elevation was based on the merit factors that one cannot able to identify on account of unawareness … . as Henry Wadsworth Longfellow puts it:

‘The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained by sudden flight, but they, while their companions slept, were toiling upward in the night.’

A person must therefore develop himself in the factors that constitute the force field for suzerainty so as to raise his chances and then remain alert when critical moments arise.

The other factor is that in many instances when one or the other person emerges as a suzerain, that particular person may immediately get great advantages that help him peel away from his peers/competitors thus further consolidating that position. Opportunities come his way which help to further strengthen those attributes that would make a group prefer him as a suzerain: ‘experience’ is one example.

Take for instance, any president of the United States; cracking it the first time is relatively harder than doing it the second time because unless one blotches it up badly, people tend to go along with the president who has been a ‘president’ as compared to the other who has been lesser than a ‘president’.

It is not surprising therefore that Pandit Nehru was able to dominate the Indian national scene for close to fifteen years. Or for instance, there have been many dictators, including Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi, who were difficult to dislodge once they got into position.

Having considered these factors, it becomes clear that organizations must heavily invest in the processes that are designed for the selection of leaders. Serendipity must not result in the wrong kind of persons being filtered up into suzerain positions. It must be made difficult for the unscrupulous to crack the relevant tests … it is a challenge for any organization.

Case Studies

1. HR policies of certain companies pertaining to selection and promotion may be distributed as cases and it is analysed using the above seven factors as benchmarks. How do they deal with all seven aspects dealing with the rise of suzerains?

Exercises

1. Debate on the following topic: ‘In a democracy, the citizen is morally bound to either facilitate the political process with his time and resources and/or participate in elections directly so as to hold positions of responsibility’.
2. Consider the life story of various leaders and find out what factors were responsible in pitchforking them into positions of responsibility as analysed using the seven factors discussed in the chapter.
3. Consider each of the seven factors and find out in respect of a given organization (company, army, academic organization, etc.) as to what attributes one must develop in order to rise to positions of suzerainty.
4. Self-analysis: Evaluate one’s own position vis-à-vis the seven factors, in respect of the present or prospective area of work one has chosen. While the seventh will be hypothetical, still one can endeavour to list out factors that could create a ‘situation’ in the future. Use the seven areas in a SWOT analysis.