ABSTRACT
Unlike the leaders discussed in earlier chapters, it could be argued that Mahathir of Malaysia and Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore are leaders whose significance is limited to their own country, or at most to the region of southeast Asia – rather than having truly global influence. However, for purposes of comparison it is vital to consider leaders who have successfully challenged western global dominance in the pursuit of modernity. The emergence of countries such as Singapore and Malaysia, Japan and Korea is not because of their association with particular ideologies – capitalist, communist or Islamic – but because of their success in adapting to, and creating, modernity without sacrificing traditions. In many ‘Asian’ societies the ‘western’ version of modernity – with its emphasis on individual selfexpression, human rights and freedom of the press – is perceived as culturally restricted. Many belonging to Malaysia and Singapore’s three distinct ethnic groups – the Malay, Chinese and Indian – share a religious view on life and a close attachment to the family. They typically follow traditional values – returning home during religious festivals for ‘open house’ and showing respect to the elders; the religious festivals of each group are also public holidays. There is a collectivist orientation, a preference for compromise and negotiation over competition and conflict, a concern with maintaining face and an importance on age.1 I will consider the design of leadership style in these Asian cultural settings by analysing Mahathir in this chapter and Lee Kuan Yew in the following one.
