Elegant Ruthlessness | Jiro Kokuryo, Professor, Faculty of Policy Management / Former Vice-President, Former Dean of the Faculty of Policy Management
2025.03.25
Organizations unable to take risks and innovate will be left behind by the times and perish. Especially for an organization like SFC, situated under unfavorable conditions, survival depends on constantly pioneering new frontiers. On the other hand, taking risks that cannot be covered when they materialize is foolish. Continuing to do so will eventually lead to collapse.
Therefore, the limits of an organization's capabilities are determined by its leader's ability to handle trouble. An incompetent leader, fearful of risks, cannot allow members who want to take on challenges to do what they want. In an organization as full of diverse and talented people as SFC, failing to leverage the abilities of its members is almost criminal.
Complicating matters, innovation almost inevitably deviates from conventional rules. Therefore, leaders must sometimes make policy-based decisions to enable challenges that would not be permitted under existing rules.
The process of making this possible includes formal institutional decision-making procedures. Neglecting this means the administrative organization cannot keep up, and nothing will be accomplished. In a risk-averse Japanese organizational culture, making an institutional decision to grant an exception is a task that requires tremendous effort. There are even times when complex interests necessitate the use of political maneuvering. However, if leaders shy away from this effort and opt to play it safe, members will lose their motivation. This is a slow form of suicide.
Therefore, leaders must not use existing rules or fairness as an excuse to run away. A leader who cannot break out of the shell and pave the way for their members is not just a hindrance but a detriment to the organization.
Conversely, for matters judged to be unviable, leaders must make the final, decisive call to end them, while showing the utmost respect for the effort invested. Otherwise, members left in limbo cannot move on, feeling unfulfilled. If the organization becomes a place where the ghosts of disgruntled members wander, everyone will be unhappy.
It is precisely because ruthlessness is sometimes necessary that there is meaning in electing a leader. The elected leader and their politically appointed aides, backed by a popular mandate, must be resolute and exercise leadership. That said, even the most competent leader has limited capacity, and the organization's ability to cover risks is also finite. Therefore, they have no choice but to be selective about whom they support. This is a very lonely and painful task, but it must be done.
Even when it is painful, a leader must not show it on their face. If the leader looks gloomy, members become anxious, and the organization's vitality declines. If they do not speak of their vision positively and as if with conviction, even when lacking confidence, they will not attract prospective students or donations. Always with a smile, with elegance.
*****
I have served as Dean and Vice-President with these thoughts in mind. I believe that with the help of those who supported me, I have achieved considerable success. However, I also believe that if someone like me stays in the organization and retains influence for too long, I will just become a harmful old relic. That is why I have also thought that I should not take advantage of a system that allows only a select few "useful" faculty members (who were deeply involved in its founding) to remain after retirement age.
And so, I will move on. Thank you for your friendship, despite me being such a difficult person.
I love SFC. Therefore, if there is anything I can do to help in the future, I will do so from the outside, so please do not hesitate to reach out. Lastly, even if the current leaders sometimes seem to push things forward aggressively, please look upon them with generosity. Being just a "good person" is not enough to be a leader.
Goodbye