Wednesday, 3 December 2014, 11:28
On Monday, I witnessed 2 different kind of leaders. Even though going down the lane was a troublesome and an annoying one, but I am glad that I did on behalf of a colleague who was on course.
All this while, I have been learning theoretically about leadership. No doubt it seems easy and doable. But I guess, it is not. It takes experience and open-mindedness to be one.
The first leader that I encountered apparently was full of force and had no room for negotiations at all, which basically wants to do his job with ease. I was totally pissed. Even the new colleague felt like giving a slap across his face.
No doubt there were gaps in our finding and I admitted the mistake our team did. However, that doesn't mean the end of the tunnel. I tried giving a suggestion, looking at the urgency but it was totally mocked by him... with reason that it'll be too rushing for him to proceed. So much for being a HEAD. If given opportunity, I would have used my HAND to break his HEAD instead! We tried to bargain and keep on bargaining and in the end, all he could say was..... "It's not up to me to decide." Apparently his job was to recommend the penalty, which his recommendation was totally differs from ours. Not only that, his minute filled with killer words that seemingly wanted to kill us! What a bugger! Of cos, I had to rebut! Well, he told us to check his minute first before he proceeds to get the concurrence. And that, I guess I had the right to oppose... and keep on opposing. Oh, what do I care!
Seeing my obstinance (i think), he eventually told us to follow him for the concurrence. Fear. I was initially told by the group leader that we would be told to wait when the bugger asks for concurrence. Fear engulfed thinking that we would be barked at, especially seeing the obvious gaps in the finding. lol.
However, my prediction was wrong and it turned out otherwise instead. I am unsure of the seniority he possesses but definitely higher that the bugger, since concurrence is needed from him. Firstly, he tried describing the brief summary, to check if he got the facts right. Secondly, he asked whether if we would want to recommend any penalties on the C subject. (Luckily I was brief in-detailed about the statement of facts or I would have died from silence there instantly, tsk!) Yes, I tried using my answer to revenge the bugger who was sitting next to him. Spite him with words.. Well, I believe that's the least I could do to avenge my anger!
I replied saying that no doubt the C subject had obviously done wrong despite the deny. And then I added that, in order to charge the subject, I believe we couldnt just issue stern warn to the B subject, which means we plan to go all out on the C subject. Lol.
Well while answering, I was thinking that after the stern warn, B subject would definitely be repatriated and if C subject were to claim trial... how on earth would the trial be proceeded without B subject. And on top of that, I coudnt say that we're not gonna recommend anything for the C subject since we all know he's wrong. I donno how right my thinking was but I saw rational in it and I just poured it out. LOL. At that instant, i was feeling.. Damn, why on earth am I here?! I had to speak for myself since no seniors were with me and ALL i have was to say with confidence.. like macam paham! zzz. (Yes yes, at that point of time, I was actually sumpah seranah the team leader for asking me to replace the colleague LOL). So I thought that my mission to spite the bugger with my explanation failed big time. zzz.
But I guess I was lucky when he smiled as said he saw my point. And then, he continued....
In summary of what he said: In life, we have to think far ahead. Whatever our decision now, lies whether if there are consequences or benefits later. We have to foresee the future upcoming and always expect the worst scenario. Only then, if things don't go the right way, we know that we still have contingent planning to overcome the disaster.
Well, he then added, that goes the same as the recorded finding. For the matter, the thing that can help us, should either parties claim trial is the their own signatures. That is a way to proof the evidence. We cannot only depend on the verbal statement which we penned it down on paper. There would be a high possibility that the subject would deny the facts she earlier said and may even try to manipulate it. He continued that he is agreeable with the bugger's recommendation to stern warn due to the finding gaps. But, it is all still depend on us to lead the direction.. for the wrong and right is obviously laying before us.
I noted the mistake we did. And then, he asked for our suggestion if we have anything in mind. I gave the suggestion I suggested to the bugger earlier (which was mocked at!). And guess what! Before I was given a reply for my suggestion, the bugger interfered and said how I initially wanted a concurrent. Wah, I seriously felt like strangling him with my gigantic-man-like hands!
Oh, the other man then replied saying that looking at the technology we have now, it is possible especially looking at the urgency of the matter and the time period we have. We can make use of whatsapp and send the further information while they will send us the concurrence minute there after....only that, it is not a proper channel to follow. (wah, power la the man!) In the end, he was alright with my suggestion but it was rebutted again by the bugger, which his reason was.... it will be too rushing for them.. TSK. but I guess we were lucky that the man countered and said "if they rush, we will rush too" AWWWWW.... I guess, I pissed the bugger that day.. on Monday.
Came again the next day with the colleague who was on course previously. The colleague was pissed at him too. And i believe, he was pissed by the colleague's spite-R words. hohoho.
Basically, there is such a biggggggggg different in the way how the 2 leaders work.
1st leader (bugger): He was so irrational as he kept on saying that it will be too rushing for him. Thus, he would rather go the easy path knowing that it's wrong.. i mean OBVIOUSLY wrong. There IS time to mend things right but he chose to stubbornly and purposely oversee the ray of light... just so he could rest well for the day and night. (okay, feel like Im doing a poem here lol) Next, he mocked at us and kept on nailing us with our mistake. Well, hello. A mistake is already done.... and it cant be undone, duh! The only thing is to think of suggestion to overcome it, no?
2nd leader: He was the opposite. He dont nail our mistake right through our face. But he let us think whether if we had done a mistake and explain how serious this mistake may lead us to. He not only help us to see the picture but also guide us through an important lesson not only can be used for this matter but to other situation as well. Throughout his 'lesson', he was very calm and knowledgeable which inadvertently inspire us to improve and better our productivity and effectiveness.
With this, I believe I wont regret if I were to ever being kicked out from the workplace... as the takeaways I got from there is priceless :) Heh heh.
I guess, i should thank the group leader who told me to replace the colleague that day. lol.
