Chief Justice Puno speech on transformational leadership
Click here to load reader
description
Transcript of Chief Justice Puno speech on transformational leadership
Healing the Healers: Doctors as Transformational Leaders*
by
Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno Supreme Court
Allow me first to clear the deck by thanking the Philippine College of
Physicians (PCP), especially Dr. Eugenio Jose F. Ramos, your Vice-
President and overall Chair of the Organizing Committee, for inviting me to
deliver the keynote address on the occasion of PCP’s 39th Annual
Convention. I note that previous speakers for the A.G. Sison Memorial
Lecture consisted of distinguished leaders -- both local and foreign -- and
even included Dr. Peter C. Doherty, the 1996 Nobel Prize winner in
medicine. This illustrious tradition certainly leaves me big shoes to fill, and I
hope that my humble attempt will not disappoint.
I am truly privileged to have been chosen as the A.G. Sison Memorial
Lecturer for 2009, for Dr. Antonio Sison’s accomplishments are nothing
short of extraordinary. He was the personal physician of two Philippine
Presidents, Manuel Quezon and Manuel Roxas. At various points in time, he
was the President of the Philippine Medical Association and the University
of the Philippines. Dr. Sison also served as Dean of the U.P. College of
Medicine. His fourteen-year deanship is, in fact, now remembered as the
“Renaissance Period of Medicine” because of his commitment to the
improvement of medical education. A steadfast nationalist, he was likewise
deeply involved in the affairs of our country. Truly, Dr. Sison may have long
* Delivered before the Philippine College of Physicians, May 5, 2009, 39th Annual Convention, SMX Convention Center.
2
passed on to the next life, but his leviathan reputation -- as accomplished
physician, excellent educator, and man of strong moral fiber -- lives on to
this day.
I note further that Dr. Sison’s family is no stranger to the law. His
daughter-in-law, Teresita Cruz Sison, was the first woman President of the
Philippine Bar Association; and, for seventeen years, was the National
Treasurer of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. More significantly, she
has the distinction of being a three-term Member of the Judicial and Bar
Council, the constitutionally created body that recommends appointees for
vacancies that may arise in the Supreme Court and other lower courts. Just
like her father-in-law, Atty. Cruz Sison is made of strong mettle as to
intellect, honor, and moral constitution.
It is in this light that I commence this address, ever mindful of the
long shadow cast by these individuals. Your invitation came at a time when
my call for a moral force had started to reach the domain of public
consciousness. I have been requested to speak on how you, as doctors, can
find the best fit in the overall scheme of the Moral Force Movement.
Let me proceed from the premise that “moral decadence” is gravely
endangering the country and its institutions – undermining its stability,
threatening its security, preventing its development, and making good
governance very difficult, if not impossible. We cannot shrug off the
sobering statistics of Transparency International’s 2008 Corruption
Perception Index, showing that the Philippines came in 141st among 180
3
countries as among the most corrupt – having the same rank as Iran, Yemen
and Cameroon. Just two days ago, a group from Norway came out with a
study that for year 2008, we earned the dubious distinction of having the
most number of citizens displaced as a consequence of the Moro Islamic
Liberation Front (MILF) rebellion in the South.
These are two sure signs of a state teetering on the brink of failure.
Given this factual backdrop, we called for a moral force to facilitate the
moral formation and transformation of the individuals who make up our
institutions. This moral force intends to make our moral and ethical virtues
as Filipinos the building blocks in rebuilding our country. There cannot be
any argument, no ambivalence, on what these moral virtues are. These are
the moral virtues already cast in stone in our Constitution: dependence on
Almighty God; a government of the people, by the people and for the
people; the rule of law and not the rule of greed; social justice for the poor
and the powerless; and honesty in public and private life, to name a few.
There can be no hedging about these moral virtues because we have
constitutionalized them and we have ratified them as a people.
At the core of the Moral Force Movement is the concept of
transformational leadership, a theory introduced by James McGregor
Burns in 1978, further developed by Bernard Bass in 1985, and expounded
on by several other leadership and management theorists. This is a
leadership that is visionary, inspiring and daring,1 one that challenges the
status quo even if the defenders of the latter’s stench spurn its callers with 1 See http://www.strategosinc.com/leadership_transformational.htm, last retrieved on April 30, 2009.
4
contempt.2 Transformational leaders stimulate followers to view work in
new perspectives, remove the blindfold of apathy, and motivate themselves
to look beyond their own interests towards those that will benefit the
community.3 They bring about change in individuals, institutions and the
country, so as to build a just, humane and prosperous society. They
transcend self-interest for the common good, as opposed to transactional
leaders who appeal to the self-interest of their constituents.
In essence, therefore, transformational leaders practice effective,
empowering, and ethical leadership. Effective, because they are competent,
decisive, proactive. They do not only ask what is wrong; they also suggest
what the answers are, even if these are inconvenient. Inspiring, because they
are participative, engaging, and socially just. They ignite our conscience;
they reject the conspiracy of silence. And ethical, because they are God-
fearing; hence, they count the moral cost of every decision in life. They
promote the rule of law; protect public resources; and fight especially for the
least, the last and the lost. As such, the relationship between a
transformational leader and a follower is that of a partnership characterized
by a reciprocal exchange based on mutual respect.4
The Moral Force Movement is a social movement advocating good
governance through transformational leadership and responsible citizenship.
It is a positive, constructive, nonpartisan, multi-sectoral, unifying and inter-
2 See http://business.inquirer.net/money/features/view/20080928-163466/Transformational_leadership, last retrieved on April 30, 2009. 3 Francisco, J., Transformational Leadership and its Impact on Employee Attitudes, in THE WAY WE WORK: RESEARCHES AND BEST PRACTICES IN PHILIPPINE ORGANIZATIONS 77-78 (Ma. Regina M. Hechanova and Edna P. Franco eds., 2005) 4 Francisco, J., supra note 3.
5
faith force. It is positive, because it aims to be a vehicle for real and lasting
change by promoting goodness and righteousness; it will be driven by the
power of love and not by the love of power; it will promote hope and diffuse
hopelessness. It is constructive, because it will seek to enlighten Filipinos
about the genesis of problems in society; it will stress the moral virtues that
are being compromised by the problems and, most importantly, propose
viable solutions that can be adopted by policymakers and undertaken by
individuals and organizations -- whether from the public or the private
sector. It will not engage in the politics of finger-pointing, but in the politics
of problem-solving. Thus, to begin with, it will recommend doable courses
of action, beginning with the 2010 elections; for one moral virtue that has
been embedded in our Constitution is the recognition of the inviolability of
the voice of the sovereign people in choosing our leaders.
The movement, however, will be nonpartisan, as it is neither pro-
opposition nor anti-administration. It will not endorse any candidate for
election nor be used to pursue partisan political agenda. But nonpartisan
does not mean it will be unconcerned with political issues involving good
government. It also does not mean neutral, as it will take an unyielding
stand against immorality and its various manifestations, such as cheating in
elections. The movement will be multi-sectoral and unifying, as it aims to
consolidate multi-sectoral efforts toward good governance by building a
strong and expansive network of individuals and organizations who share
this cause. And finally, the Movement will be inter-faith and spiritually
guided. It will not be paralyzed by the fear of futility, for while its detractors
6
may have the strength of the 3 Gs -- guns, goons and gold -- it shall be
superior, for it will rely on the omnipotent G -- the God of Love, the God of
Grace, the God of Mercy; and that G will be more than sufficient.
If I may change gear, I note that Section 1 of Article I of the Code of
Ethics of the Medical Profession in the Philippines clearly states that the
primary objective of the practice of medicine is service to mankind
irrespective of race, creed or political affiliation. Since the medical
profession is a public vocation, doctors are duty-bound to burst out from the
limited framework of private interests; they cannot reduce the noble practice
of medicine to a mere transaction, a cold exchange of professional services
and fees. Given the nature of your profession, therefore, it may well be said
that doctors are perfectly positioned to practice effective, empowering, and
ethical leadership. Doctors deal with the patricians and the plebeians of our
society, and they cannot avoid the moral spotlight.
But how, exactly, can doctors be transformational leaders?
Much can be said in answer to the query just posed. The practice of
medicine has not been insulated from the dilemmas that have long plagued
society; in the microcosm of the medical profession, we find illustrations of
the evils that beset the world. We may, for instance, cite the fact that some
of its wayward practitioners do not strictly follow the exacting ethical
standards of the profession. We need only refer to the Cebu canister scandal,
in which an emergency surgery conducted to remove a perfume canister
from the rectum of a homosexual man was videotaped. The video, which
7
showed hospital personnel laughing and making jokes at the patient’s
expense, was subsequently posted on YouTube, a popular video-sharing site.
The endemic presence of vested proprietary interests in the provision
of medical services is another key issue. The almost symbiotic relationship
between doctors and pharmaceutical companies may be harmless under
ordinary circumstances, but can be detrimental to the public if the parties fail
to exercise self-restraint and thus take the relationship to the extreme. We
cannot prolong the reign of greed; we cannot participate in bullying the
vulnerable, for one of our moral virtues ensconced in the Constitution is
social justice -- giving power to the powerless, representation to the
unrepresented and underrepresented.
Sometimes we hear mumblings that doctors are characterized by
apathy and indifference to the problems of our society. Certainly, the
medical profession, some say, thrives whether we have a democratic or an
authoritarian state, a rightist or a leftist leadership, an incorruptible or a
graft-ridden government. After all, some point out, regardless of the socio-
economic state of the country, people do get sick and require the services of
physicians. It is thus not surprising, the critics conclude, that doctors are the
Johnnys-come-lately in social movements that matter.
I do not share this woeful view of the medical profession. Our nation
is our shadow as a people; it can only be as tall as we build ourselves to be.
To facilitate its moral rebirth, each citizen must be a proactive, determined
and staunch defender of what is right and denouncer of what is wrong.
8
Inasmuch as we influence and help our leaders and one another in the noble
task of engineering positive change and transforming our society, we are all
and should be leaders.5
We may not be guaranteed success in the short-term, but this is not
enough justification to evade our duties as citizens. We do this not just for
ourselves or for our children, but for our children’s children, and let us not
make the future disown us for our procastination. As the late American
author Louis L’Amour said, “Victory is won not in miles but in inches. Win
a little now, hold your ground, and later, win a little more.”
When Jesus Christ walked the earth more than two thousand years
ago, healing was a part of His ministry to the masses, work for which He
acquired renown. Even His opponents did not dispute his powers of healing,
although they misrepresented it as having been given by “Beelzebub, the
prince of demons.”6 But while Jesus’ healings in the gospel traditions
included leprosy, blindness, paralysis, deafness and dumbness, among
others, the most significant role He played was being a healer of a society
afflicted with moral decay. I draw this analogy for, as doctors, your duty is
not only to heal the physically sick but, as citizens also, you have the
additional duty to uplift the morally afflicted, the responsibility to raise up
the spiritual paraplegics in our society. In our lives, we all commit mistakes,
but in a society aching for reforms, the greatest mistake is the act of
5 Lowney, C., HEROIC LEADERSHIP 18, 284 (2003). 6 Mark 3:22-27; Matthew 12:22-29; Luke 11:14-23.
9
omission, the act of doing nothing when something is in your hands to make
a difference. The country is sick. Is the doctor in?
Thank you and God bless us all.