how long must this go on?

The recent news of the slip of University Malaya in the Times Higher Education Supplement ranking from the 89th place last year to the 169th place this year is nothing but shocking and highly embarassing.

One wonders how an institution which was once regarded as one of the top universities - if not in the world - but in Asia could have slipped lowly in the short span of 1 year.

The fact that the UM is the country's premier university makes this drop in ranking even more troubling. If such a 'renown' academia was ranked so badly globally, what hopes are there for the other less 'renown' universities and colleges in Malaysia? How would they compare to other universities overseas?

And what does it say about the quality of the graduates these institutions produces? What kind of signals are we sending to the parents who sent their children to these institutions for their further studies about the quality of the education which they are receiving? Are they going to be well-equipped to face the challenges of the increasingly borderless world?

More importantly, how does this reflect on the graduates from these institutions which are supposed to be the next generation of the country's leaders, thinkers, movers and shakers? What does it bid for the future of Malaysia?

What puzzles me even more is the seemingly lack of appropriate response from the government leaders concerning this matter; the Prime Minister said he was "very sad" over the news and - true to the typical Malaysian way - immediately after that he added that "sometimes, the criteria used in the rankings may differ from what we have set for our own institutions of higher learning" and that ours are "mainly focused on human resource development".

How could the Prime Minister only felt "very sad" upon hearing this news; the lack of indignant and fiery emotions the Malaysian public are normally treated to whenever the issues concerning the political, social and economic position of the Malays cropped up were sorely lacking this time round.

Why aren't the same urgency in the efforts to revive the NEP trumpeted during the previous UMNO General Assembly are exhibited here to root out the main causes of the drop in rankings? Why aren't the UMNO Youths shouting their usual brand of rhetorics to ask the government to stem this decay of our public educational institution?

The Deputy Education Minister was even more andamant when he said that "there is obviously some inconsistency in the ranking criteria" and claimed that the drop in UM rankings is "inconceivable."

These are all hardly comforting words for the Malaysian public especially for those who wished for a radical and complete overhaul of our slowly decaying education system.

Why are we quicker to dismiss the rankings as irrelevant to our country's aims rather than to examine the rankings carefully and used it to reflect on our educational standards?

Granted, Malaysians are generally more inclined to reject any comments or criticisms which came from the West but is the West really bent on wrecking havoc with our political, economic and social affairs?

It is not beneficial to us in the long run to continue to label everything with a Western tag on it as attempts to destabilize our country and a threat to national security and racial harmony. What kind of national security or racial harmony are we talking about? And for that matter, whose security and harmony are we referring to?

I believe that there have never been a documented case of constructive criticisms causing severe physical harm to anyone. If there is, then I believe it is not the fault of the criticism but due to the defficiency of those on the receiving end to openly accept and thoroughly examine the contents of the criticisms.

Besides, whatever happens to "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me?"

As for his argument that we may have our own standards, criterias and aims for our universities and that we are focusing more on human resource development, I think the ranking is not so myopic so as to list the university based solely on its technological prowess.

A university can only be as excellent as the people studying and working within it and those governing it; they are the prime driving force to propel the university to greater heights.

And if the rankings used that as a measure of a university's position, then doesn't it apply to all countries? Therefore, issue whether the criterion used is suitable in the Malaysian context should not have arisen in the first place because wherever you might be, a dilligent, resourceful and creative workforce is a common denominator by which we could judge all institutions of higher learning.

In this era of intense of globalization, we cannot afford to produce graduates only to fit our Malaysian political, economic and social moulds, as pressing as the need might be to us. To do so will greatly put us at a disadvantage to other nations as they prepare to embrace the waves of globalization.

To still cling on to the mentality of a "jaguh kampung" or a "big fish in a large pond" only serves to satisfy our ego but does not produce any practical results.

It is a common fallacy among Malaysians to expect that universities with greater technological facilities will automatically fare better than those without. It is also a common fallacy among Malaysians to think that rankings, awards, reports derived from the West are always insidious and contains hidden agendas of recolonization.

Of course, we always need to be on our feet and be mindful of Western maneuveres but we need not turn it into a habit which eventually becomes a knee-jerk reflex reaction because when we are so consumed in trying to read between the lines, we may end up missing the whole story.

And in the end, we might risk being left in the dust.

getting (and keeping) the house in order

What do you do when you felt that you are biting more than you can chew?

What happens when you begin to loose grip on the pace and the intricacies of your daily routine?

Have you ever felt as if you are being shoved into a situation you cannot even begin to comprehend?

What do you do when something that is supposed to nourish and comfort you becomes your greatest fear and nightmare?

Is it more painful to bear with the incompetencies of others rather than coming to terms with your own?

Do you always immediately reach for the reset button when you feel that a sizeable amount of your life is no longer within your control and consideration?

Or is it possible to go on with your lives pretending that you will pull through even when it means that you will have to rough it?

As much as we like to think that most of the things in our lives are beyond our control, I believe that each one of us yearns for some form of control or comprehension into a small aspect of their lives.

Because life is not always about getting through it to the best of your abilities but also about making the right decisions and selecting the best choice.

I think the reason that some people are inclined to attribute their troubles to 'unforeseeable circumstances' is because they lack the moral stamina to make and see through their choices;

After all, your burdens will be significantly lighter if you're not the one carrying it.

But like any other things that gets passed around, sooner or later it will be your turn again; besides, what goes around comes around right?

I think we need to remember that we are not expected to be - or at least appear to be - strong all the time; we are not obliged to put up brave face to the public all the time.

We need to know that being brave is not about never being afraid or insecure, but having the strength and determination to share, confront and overcome those fears.

We need to realize that it is not a sign of weakness to be reasonably scared or insecure or to be wrong - rather it is a sign that we are only human after all.

And once that has been clarified, perhaps we will be a lot more willing to be accountable for our actions, mistakes and decisions.

This and coupled with a sustained and concerted effort to get our house in order, hopefully our troubles will go away - for now.

the nation mourns...

The Prime Minister's wife, Endon Mahmood, has returned to Rahmatullah at 07:55hr (Malaysian time) this morning.

My deepest condolences to Pak Lah and his family - Al-Fatihah...

Death is not extinguishing the light; it is putting out the lamp

because dawn has come.

the thing about being a leader is...

Several events in the past few weeks have made thinking about leaders, leaderships and its relationship with members of an organization. Below are some of my observations:

I believe that it is crucial for any organization to have a strong and decisive leader. But one must remember that being a strong leader does not necessarily translate into being autocratic; it just mean that one have to have a certain degree of authority over the other members in the organization.

One must be able to mobilize the entire organization to work towards a singular aim, one must be able to convince the rest of the them that it is of utmost importance that all of them should work together to realize a particular goal.

And one can achieve all that without resorting to dictatorial tactics - one just have to be firm and readily engage the members of the organization. Indeed, one must be well-versed in the arts of persuasion so much so that it seemed effortless.

I think this is especially true when the people you are leading have more or less equal intellectual standing as compared to yourself. Indeed, they are not mindless automatons - each of them have the ability to think for themselves, to evaluate your decisions and actions and draw conclusions about their feasibility and practicalities.

I think that's the main problem with some of the leaders today - they underestimates the intellectual capacity of the people they are leading thinking that the masses could be easily hoodwinked by their eloquent recitations and grandiose plans.

It may be so back in the feudal ages but the current circumstances are different as people have greater access to information and the increasing proliferation of varied viewpoints.

Therefore, a leader must be aware of the different perceptions people have towards his leadership - from glowing praises to damning criticisms. Of course, one also needs to know how to distinguish between the comments worth looking into and those which are not.

However, I think it is a lot more important for a leader to be open and welcoming to other people's opinions about him rather than busily deciding whether a particular opinion should be taken seriously or not.

In short, as a leader, everybody's opinions matters and requires equal amounts of your unwavering attention.

But then again, it all goes back to the question of how 'in touch' the leader is to his or her charges. Certain leaders believe that they can lead an organization from him desk, giving out orders to his staff regularly without actually engaging them.

Certain leaders prefers to relegate all his duties to his staff allowing them to decide on every small matter which arises in the organization.

I once read a quotation which goes something like 'An empire can be conquered but not governed from a horseback'; the same applies to governing an organization.

To arrogantly call the shots will not guarantee your popularity among your charges but to simply try to leave all the decision-making process to the rest of your committee will only downgrade your importance in the organization. The former will be labeled autocratic while the latter will be called weak.

I guess to which side one is more inclined to go to depends partly on the kind of people you choose to surround yourself with.

Some leaders are paralyzed exactly because of the people they are surrounded with; even if you have noble intentions or plans, if you cannot get it past through your advisors, your plans will be crippled. You cannot initiate any changes and maintain the momentum to sustain them; they are trapped and helpless.

If nearly half of your advisors are your close buddies, chances are that you too will be ultimately cut-off from the demands and realities of the external segment of the organization.

You will not be able to effectively detect any problems, complications or dissatisfactions in your organization because your attention to the organization as a whole will be gradually shifted to the small circle advisors or friends which you normally keep in contact with. Any decisions you make will only take into account the repercussions it will have on your select group of friends.

Ultimately, your sensitivities to the finer needs of the members of the organization will be numbed. I guess that's what you get when you allow nepotism and cronyism to creep into your organization.

But the scenario outlined above are simplistic at best; the patterns in leadership are not always so mechanistic. They are 'hidden hands' at work in any organization or political structure; external factors which are beyond your control.

However, to attribute your inability to act due to external, uncontrollable factors is a lame attempt to shift the blame to others. As a leader, you are given the power and authority to run the organization in the best way you see fit; good leaders often knows how to utilize these powers granted to them to plan and craft their organizations.

You cannot be as helpless as you claimed to be because you are the top leader - and with it comes some form of authority and means to get yourself out of it.

I have to admit that it is not always easy to be a good and competent leader. One will always be subjected to intense scrutiny, people will always read into your decisions, your words and your gestures. Indeed, It felt as if one is living in a glass house.

When you think about it, it is kinda cruel for people to try and measure a leader with respect to a certain standard because each leader is different in a sense that each of them have their own unique 'leadership styles'. But what do they exactly mean by that?

I believe that there are set of common qualities which all leaders should posses, by which we could fairly judge one's competence as a leader - something fundamental shared by all leaders at all levels.

Therefore, to suggest for instance, that a leader should be excused for his lack of sensitivity towards the needs of his charges by calling that his 'leadership style' is an irresponsible misuse of the phrase.

Besides, most people does not make any distinction between the two; for them, incompetence is still incompetence whatever you call it - a leadership style or quality. Whatever one chooses to call it, one thing for sure is that incompetence and insensitivity in leaders are not easily forgiven by the masses.

And the scrutiny begins from the moment you take up the leadership position.

Therefore, one should always be on the guard because in such things, perception is sometimes more substantial, more lasting and more fatal than reality.

bring out the old, bring in the new

I wanted to give a huge thanks to everyone who wished me 'Happy Birthday' today.

I also wanted to make it known that I'm only turning 21 - not 22 yet like some of you have incorrectly assumed; as much as I am honored to be bestowed with all the surely admirable qualities of old age, I assure you that I am not in that much of a hurry.

Still, it was extremely heartwarming to receive birthday wishes and greetings from those closest to you.

Not that I place much importance to such things but it really makes you feel grateful for the efforts which other people put even to remember your birthday, especially when I am bad with dates myself.

It also reinforces my notion that memories are one of those things that could truly and easily transcend the innumerable boundaries of space and time.

It is the one thing that could make you feel right at home in a foreign land, make you see familiar faces among an unfamiliar crowd or call up inherently recognizable smells, sights and sounds.

And even though it fades gradually with time, I believe that if you hold on to it hard enough, you can never lose it. Indeed, our capacity to remember and retain things from times long gone by must have evolved or given to us to serve some purpose.

By holding on to some cherished memories, we are able to move forward in the future with greater confidence, hopes and determination.

I mean, there are some people who desperately clings to their golden past and stubbornly refuses to move; on the other end of the spectrum, they are those who feel compelled to exonerate themselves completely from any association to their past.

Even if the memories are too painful or dreadful to be properly recalled, I believe that one cannot simply push it to the corners of one's mind hoping that it will go away as time passes by.

It needs to be confronted and dealt with for shoving it aside can only provide you with a short respite from it, if any.

Besides, repressed memories have a nasty habit of cropping up when you least expected it and its impact might be a lot worse the second time round.

No memories deserve to be forgotten - it is intrixicably linked to our character, it is what makes us who we are.

One cannot make a clean-cut escape from it; there will always be some 'residual' memories left and you may find yourself in a situation which those 'residual' memories will be triggered.

In George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, there is a party slogan which goes 'Those who controls the past controls the present; those who controls the present controls the future.'

I believe that validity and the truth of the core message of the slogan is blindingly obvious - if one could ignore the political totalitarian inclinations of the slogan for a while - one could not selectively chooses to only look forward to one's future whilst happily ignoring one's past or vice versa.

Therefore, on my birthday I wanted to thank God for the gift of insight, wisdom, knowledge and self in reasonable amounts to me, the gift of unconditional love, trust and support from my family, the gift of excellent and caring company of my friends and lastly the gift of hope, optimism and determination in facing the challenges of life.

It is fitting that my birthday falls on my first normal day in college; I pray that my hopes and desires for my birthday and the new academic year runs parallel and promises a whole new year of greater opportunities, thorough insights and closer collaborations.

It certainly feels good to get back to work and be 21 at the same time.

Dance one year in, kiss one good-bye; another chance, another start;

so many dreams to tease the heart.

seasons of love

The responses have been mixed - some expressed their sadness and dissapoinment, some expressed their disbelief and skeptcism, some expressed their pity and sympathy.

Whatever their reactions may be, one thing for certain in all instances is that most of them have not been expecting this at all; it was highly irregular, highly unlikely and highly unbelievable.

For me personally, what disturbs me most is that I have not a clearest idea of the sequence of events which had transpired which ultimately resulted in his discontinuation for Imperial College.

Indeed, for most of us the first question to have crossed our minds after hearing about it was why and how did it happened.

Could it be reduced to a single cause or was it caused by a confluence of different factors? Was it solely due to internal, personal reasons or external, social reasons? Were the reasons unique to him or common to all of us? Was it a result of personal neglect or circumstances beyond our control?

I believe it is natural for us to ask these questions as it is natural for us to fear the unknown or unforseeable.

I guess whenever we ponder at his predicament, at the back of our minds, we can't helped but to wonder that the same thing could have happened to us - it could have easily been any one of us in his place, facing those troubles and complications.

We want to know whether our futures too will take us down his path; whether the circumstances will work against our favour and thrust us into the midst of the same problem he is facing now.

In short, whenever we think about his situation, it made us reflect on our own position, our own efforts and our own achievements.

We see a faint reflection of our own situation and wonder whether our situation is anywhere near as precarious or fragile as his.

Added to this is the sheer proximity of the situation to all of us - the fact that it happened to one of our closest friends. It does not have the measure of distance which normally shields us from the full emotional impact of the such emotionally devastating situations.

Apart from the fear for our own sake, we also can't help feeling a little guilty over the whole situation: have we done enough to prevent this from happening? Were we so ignorant so as to not identify the initial symptoms of the problem? Did we fail him as his friends by letting things to become this bad?

Each of us will surely give a varying degree of responses but the truth is that only we will know the answers to these questions for ourselves.

It is often said that only the purest and brightest of lights could penetrate the deepest and the darkest of corners.

And judging from the turn out of tonight's gathering - which was called on a rather short notice - I am beginning to understand the full meaning of that statement.

It is heartwarming to see all of us coming together again - either just to catch up with others or to show our support and concern or just to share a few laughs amongst ourselves.

Whatever the reasons might be, it is comforting to see that all of us can readily and willingly come to the rescue and offer him a few moments of happiness and hope, especially under such a despairing situation he is in.

It is a true and sure sign of the strength of bonds and connections which runs deep among all of us even after all these years that we openly give everything we have to help him get through his complications.

The sense of warmth, reassurance and solace serves as a device where all of us could anchor our emotions into, providing some form of stability and brief normalcy to the turbulent and chaotic times we had for the past few days.

Even the autumn breeze doesn't feel too chilly tonight.

lament for a friend

So the cat is finally out of the bag; most of my classmates ultimately knew about Hyree's impending return to Malaysia and the circumstances which lead to this turn of events.

I can only imagine how difficult it is for him to muster enough courage and calmness to tell the rest of us about it; indeed there is a certain amount of coolness in his tone of voice, a non-chalant expression upon his face, an uneasy gesture of his body, all of which seemed to conceal a deeper, more profound sense of dissapoinment and regret within him.

Indeed, the seemingly laidback nature through which the news was conveyed to my ex-classmates struck some of them to be highly unnatural and that took them completely by surprise.

For some of them, the casual nature through which the annoucement was made did not befit the emotional gravity or weight of the news; I guess they were expecting a thorough, a slightly drawn-out and solemn account of his predicaments - something which a few lines of text messages will never do justice.

Personally, I do not ask for anything than that from Hyree; that is not to imply any serious shortcomings on his behalf. But I felt that that is how Hyree normally deals with stuffs of this nature - he have this urgent desire to get such things done and over with as quickly as normal courtesy allows.

I mean, he can and will beat himself over the situation if he wished too but I guess at one point, he realized that there are other more pressing and practical repercussions which needs to be taken care of.

I think one needs to realized that worrying and drowning yourself in self-pity does not really provide you with the much needed comfort one normally needs in such situations; it may keep your mind occupied but it does not really get you anywhere.

Therefore, it is better for one to focus on other practical matters which one could pursue, other opportunities which might be available to one; it is better for one to work on something more 'substantial' and would deliver results which could effectively boost one's morale.

That is not to say that it is not proper at all for one to exhibit any emotional response to the situation, but I guess one need not lose one's head and always be aware of the limits of doing so.

Keeping a cool head and maintaining your perspective are crucial to ensure that you will be able to rough the storm safely.

Of course, to expect that you will escape it unharmed or unscathed is highly idealistic; but when everything around you seemed to fall apart, the last thing you want to happen is to fall apart yourself.

After all, human character, self-esteem and reputation are fragile things; once broken, it may be some time before it becomes whole again - if ever that is.

Thus, as offended as some of us might be to receive the news about Hyree's predicament on such a short notice, we need to realize that in such situations, one's own well-being takes far greater precedence over the well-being of others.

For once, being 'selfish' is not a question of giving oneself an edge over the others, but rather a question of one's survival and sustainability.

of trust and personal censorships

Two of my closest friends each made a rather huge revelation over the summer holidays; friend A announced that he will be discontinuing his studies at his current university and restart his first year in another university while friend B said that there is a high probability that he will stop studying at his current university because his first year grades didn't meet the required
standards.

What struck me most wasn't the gravity of the announcements themselves; rather it was the way, the tone in which those announcements were made.

I sensed that friend A tried to inject some humor into his announcement in an effort to give it a slight tone of light heartedness - though I thought that it was obvious that the subject was anything but humorous to him.

It felt as if he is trying his best to conceal his true feelings towards the matter by showing that he is not nearly as affected by the matter as he ought to be; he wanted people to think that the matter is not really a big deal to him, and it should be so too for others.

I don't pretend to be expert in reading other people's true intentions or thoughts, but I think I am sufficiently able enough to tell whether someone is trying to hide something from me, having being their friend for the past two years.

In my opinion, friend A's effort to conceal his true thoughts rings hollow through and through; it lacks the sincerity of emotions one would come to normally expect from the announcements of such nature.

I admit that everyone is entitled to select or filter the emotions and thoughts which one want others to accept or perceive - there are plenty of other less self-centered reasons for doing so. But where should line be drawn between self-censorship and trust?

I suppose the criteria for deciding between the two are of personal nature and it should be left entirely to the discretion of that individual.

But isn't the whole issue about censorship of any kind is that it breeds mistrust and animosity between the one enforcing the censorship and the target audience?

I believe a reasonable amount of censorship necessitated by a sincere and thoroughly insightful motivation are healthful in the long run; the interests and well-being of the audience should be given the utmost priority whenever such censorships are planned.

However, when the censorships are imposed solely to protect the interests and position of the censors themselves that it ceases to be an indispensable mechanism to protect and preserve and becomes a ruthless mechanism to subdue and stiffle.

And when that happens, the imposition of censorships will start to work against the interests of the censors themselves; indeed it will be detrimental to the censor's original cause of putting those censorships in the first place.

Those who underestimates the resourcefulness and ingenuity of their charges will come to realize that doing so will greatly compromise the long term stability and security of their position.

Their actions achieve nothing except create enemies out of their own audience or charges.

Like most things, one's initially noble and admirable intentions might eventually be perceived as self-centered and opportunistic once personal gains start to take precedence over the interests of others.

In short, those who think that they can have the cake and eat it as well are only hastening their exit or demise.

Therefore, in the case of friend A, I felt that it would have been kinder if he is able to tell his complications the way it really is without any need to glaze over the emotional repercussions.

That is not say that he should bear himself out entirely to others but at the very least allow others to emphatize and share his disappoinments or lingering regrets rather than putting a stoic and impersonal face to the world.

It is not bravery when one have to interchange between two diametric emotions to suit different circumstances; if one can hold one's head high in one situation, then being brave dictates that one should be able to do the same in all situations.

Multiplicity is not a sign of bravery; it is a sign of fear.

Of course, I am not accusing him of being a liar; but I sort of wished that he could realized that telling the matter the way it is and sharing his true emotions with me would not make me think any less of him.

I just wanted people to know that for once, I will refrain from being too critical or judgemental towards them; I want people to be able to tell me something without any fear of being rebuked.

If friend A hesitated to bear his true emotions to others, then friend B must certainly lie at the end of the spectrum.

I was taken aback by his calm composure when he told me about his unfortunate situation; he seemed so practical when he talked about it, always looking forward and never showed any wish to dwell on the issue much longer.

Unlike friend A, he didn't make an effort to lighten the matter up - he spoke of the matter as the way it really is. He explained the string of events which lead to this situation, any further actions he have taken and his own thoughts about the matter.

His concerns at the moment are mostly practical rather than sentimental in nature; he seemed eager to get over the matter and start something new as soon as possible.

I guess that is one way to cope - to always look ahead, keep moving and never pausing for a bit; for I think he is afraid that he might remain stationary indefinitely if he were to allow himself to think too much about it.

I admire his steadfastness and his courage to bring himself to tell others about his circumstances and I appreciate his efforts to inform me about it.

When you think about the issue as a whole, it is amazing how deceptively simple it is to either inspire or destroy one's confidence and faith in someone; one way is to make people think that you are coping well with it while the other is to set out the facts of the situation and allow the goodwill of others to decide for themselves.

It is true that one should be given the liberty to decide how one should reflect about our own circumstances; whether one should feel good or bad about it or the things one should continually tell oneself in order to cope with it.

But I believe to expect other people to feel the same way about it by carefully potraying the situation so that it would elicit that particular response in others is nothing but a lame effort to protect one's ego and image rather than to seek true empathy from others.

In such situations where I personally believe that the concern of others are most desperately needed, doing so will only sow further doubts and mistrusts.

Isn't that too much trouble to inflict upon oneself on top of all the dissapoinments and regrets one already have to bear with?