ABSTRACT

This thematic paper has two objectives : (1) to study leadership principles of  Buddhism and the idea of Stephen  R. Covey; and (2) to compare the leadership of Buddhism and the idea of Stephen  R. Covey.  This is qualitative and document-style research.

From the study, it is found that the state if being a leader in accordance with Buddhist principles, the leader and the state of being a leader have different meanings.  The leader means a person while the state of being a leader means a state of an abstract for example the ability or the influence in leading, etc.  The origin of the Buddhist style of leader came from the need of human beings in having people who had such knowledge, abilities, moralities and virtues to rule them.  Later on, this had led the words of ‘pretending crowds’ and ‘kings’.  The characteristics of the Buddhist leader consists of having the principles of Dhammas in being a leader; i.e. self-care principle with the Fivefold Virtue, ruling people with Brahmavihāra (the Divine States) and working by having vision and wisdom. There are still a lot more of Dhamma principles in Buddhism for being a good leader.  Some principles are brought to be used in this research namely: the Twelve Chakkawadhiwatts; Dasarājadhamma  (the Tenfold Virtue or duty of the king); Rajasanghavatthudhamma (the 4 principles of kindly treatment); the Four Bias to be refrained; the Four Brahmavihāra (the 4 Divine States); the Six Sārānฺiyadhamma (the 6 virtues for fraternal living); and the Three Sovereignties, especially the Dhamma Sovereignty that helps the leader to view the objectives and the means for a good coordination between the people and the works by having the state of being a leader in accordance with the principles of the Seven Sappurisa-dhamma  (the 7 qualities of a good man) and the Seven Aparihāniyadhamma (the 7 conditions of  welfare).  Somehow, the leader should have the power of Pārami (stages of spiritual perfection) with the supportive Dhammas; for instance, the Four Bala (the 4 energies; i.e. wisdom Bala).   The leader who has the principles of Dhammas accordingly, will be able to be a good leader in Buddhism leading groups of people or teams to the pure prosperities.  It is also found that the leader of Stephen  R. Covey’s view should have clear wisdom, vision and objectives; including being in the justice by not taking sides, knowing how to reinforce and improve himself   in the fields of body and mind, societies, emotions, and wisdom.   He then will be able to be the leader who could lead the organization to the prosperous progresses.      

In comparison, I as the researcher, compared the leader in views of the two theories among the seven areas: 1) the definitions; 2) the objectives; 3) the characteristics of a leader; 4) the behaviors; 5) the roles; 6) the qualifications; and 7) the Dhamma principles. From comparison, it is found that both the theories in Buddhism and of Stephen R. Covey’s are the same in the aspect of the leader: the leader is the one who helps people to reach their goals; and is the greatest one in the group or team.  The different view of the leader: the Buddhist Dhamma principles lead to the free from sorrows; while Covey’s theories are for the success of the organization.   In view of reaching the objectives as planned, the theories in both Buddhism and of Covey’s are the same.  But in Buddhism, it emphasizes virtues and the pureness; while  Covey  emphasizes the success of business.  In view of the characteristics of a leader, both Buddhism and Covey’s agree that the leader must wisdom and vision.  While the difference is that Buddhism emphasizes the giving and sacrificing; Covey’s does on win-win situation for both sides.  In the aspect of behaviors, both Buddhism and of Covey’s are the same in that they are good models and conducts in accordance with the principles of the causes and effects, and having good temperament.  While the difference is that Buddhism emphasizes the self-conduct for moderation but Covey’s does the searching of the new innovations.  Buddhism also emphasizes moralities while Covey’s does the law and social values.  In the aspect of the roles, both Buddhism and Covey’s are the same at the point of  having self-leadership; while the different one is that Buddhism aims the development of the mind; but Covey aims for business instead.  In the aspect of the qualifications, Buddhism and Covey’s are the same in that the leader must have such abilities to resolve the conflicts; while the difference is that the leader in Buddhism  is selected by the people in societies; while of Covey’s is selected by the organization.  Lastly in the aspect of the Dhamma principles, the likeness is being in justice; while the difference is that Buddhism aims the Dhamma usage as the tool for self-conducting development; while Covey’s does not target the usage of it as the tool, just only mentions about the development.