.jpg?20250509')
A heartwarming tweet by the UAE Vice-President and Dubai Ruler that there are no failed people but failed states filled me with awe and amazement.
He said humans have an innate and natural motive for success and stressed countries ‘ate’ the ones that create an environment that may break their resolve or allow them to perform miracles.
There are many such examples globally and if we take institutions in our countries, we find that success is primarily due to their good management and the way their work is based on systems and law.
His Highness said the defect lies in the departments that run these institutions, otherwise why do we find the difference between one institution and another in terms of the success of its business and its profitability as well as the loyalty of its employees?
In Bahrain, there are institutions that have loyal and patriotic employees who have contributed to the success and prosperity of their institutions. Some companies, however, have all the capabilities and budgets, but they do not invest in their employees, as a result of which there is no team spirit. These companies lack a good working culture and their business is not successful, not to mention the gulf in the relationship between administrations and workers and in dealing with labour unions.
The managements and leaders of the institutions alone bear responsibility for their failure because they simply do not deal well with their employees, not even providing or creating a healthy work environment and creating a work culture by giving them their rights as well as respecting and appreciating their work.
Many confuse the concepts of management and leadership, and consider that they are the same but in fact there is a big difference between the two. The most important point of difference is what they focus on, as management puts all its focus on output, ie performance results and material components in the organisation while the leadership focuses heavily on the human element and cares about it and developing its skills, capabilities and training to motivate them to perform better.
The leader also keeps pace with the changes that occur in any current situation, and always seeks continuous change, taking the hand of his subordinates for the progress and prosperity of the organisation, and encourages others to change and motivates them in his own way, and does not make them feel that there is a difference in the job title at work.
As for the manager, he is the opposite of the leader in all of the above, as he resorts to get subordinates to perform jobs and achieve the goals of the organisation by relying on a set of procedures and laws drawn up by the senior management.
Also, the manager does not care about making changes but seeks to achieve what the organisation has set without significant progress or growth in the performance of the organisation and thus it remains in its usual form.
ztawfeeqi@gmail.com
&uuid=(email))