Introduction
This essay examines the influence of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia’s longest-serving Prime Minister, on the concept of power within the context of management principles. Power, as a central theme in management, refers to the ability to influence others and achieve organisational or national goals (Robbins and Judge, 2019). Dr. Mahathir’s leadership style, spanning over two terms (1981-2003 and 2018-2020), offers a compelling case study for understanding how power is wielded in political and managerial contexts. This discussion will explore his use of authority, visionary strategies, and centralised decision-making, critically analysing their implications for effective management. By drawing on academic sources, this essay aims to highlight the relevance and limitations of his approach to power, particularly in inspiring organisational leadership.
The Nature of Power in Dr. Mahathir’s Leadership
In management theory, power is often categorised into formal (legitimate, coercive, and reward) and personal (expert and referent) bases (French and Raven, 1959). Dr. Mahathir predominantly exercised legitimate power derived from his position as Prime Minister, which granted him formal authority to direct national policies. For instance, his role in shaping Malaysia’s Vision 2020—a blueprint for transforming Malaysia into a developed nation—demonstrates how positional power can be leveraged to align a country’s trajectory with long-term goals (Mohamad, 1991). However, his approach often extended beyond formal authority, incorporating coercive power through strict policies and control over dissent, which arguably limited collaborative engagement—a key aspect of modern management (Yukl, 2013).
Visionary Influence and Expert Power
Dr. Mahathir’s influence also stemmed from personal power, particularly his expertise and visionary outlook. His background as a medical doctor and his deep understanding of economic challenges positioned him as a credible leader, inspiring trust among followers (Bass, 1990). His push for industrialisation through initiatives like the Proton car project showcased how expert power could drive innovation, mirroring how managers in organisations use specialised knowledge to influence teams. Nevertheless, while his vision was transformative, it occasionally overlooked broader consultation, reflecting a top-down style that may stifle creativity in contemporary management settings (Robbins and Judge, 2019). This highlights a limitation: power concentrated in a single figure can risk alienating key stakeholders.
Centralised Decision-Making and Its Implications
A defining feature of Dr. Mahathir’s leadership was centralised decision-making, which, while effective in crisis management—such as during the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis—often restricted participatory governance. During the crisis, his unilateral imposition of capital controls defied international norms but stabilised the economy, demonstrating decisive use of power (Yukl, 2013). In management terms, this mirrors how leaders in high-pressure environments may prioritise control over consensus. However, this approach raises questions about sustainability, as over-reliance on centralised power can hinder adaptability and employee empowerment, both critical in modern organisations (Bass, 1990). Indeed, while effective in specific contexts, such a style may not suit environments requiring flexibility and innovation.
Conclusion
In summary, Tun Dr. Mahathir’s influence on power offers valuable insights for management principles, particularly in the strategic use of formal and personal power to achieve ambitious goals. His visionary leadership and decisive actions, such as Vision 2020 and crisis management, underscore the potential of authority to drive transformation. However, limitations in his centralised approach highlight the importance of balancing power with collaboration—a lesson for managers aiming to foster inclusive environments. Ultimately, studying his leadership reveals that while power can be a tool for progress, its application must adapt to context, ensuring both effectiveness and stakeholder engagement. This analysis not only enriches our understanding of power in management but also prompts reflection on how leaders can navigate authority in dynamic settings.
References
- Bass, B.M. (1990) Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications. Free Press.
- French, J.R.P. and Raven, B. (1959) ‘The Bases of Social Power’, in Cartwright, D. (ed.) Studies in Social Power. Institute for Social Research.
- Mohamad, M. (1991) ‘Malaysia: The Way Forward (Vision 2020)’. Working Paper presented at the Malaysian Business Council.
- Robbins, S.P. and Judge, T.A. (2019) Organizational Behavior. 18th edn. Pearson.
- Yukl, G. (2013) Leadership in Organizations. 8th edn. Pearson.
