The "good chef" in Indonesia

The legitimacy of a leader in Indonesia

Among the aspects of management for which we study the influence of culture is the question of management “styles” which would characterize each country. This article is more interested in what makes a leader legitimate in Indonesian society.

From 2003 to 2007, as part of my thesis research, I interviewed nearly fifty Indonesians, most of them working in the Total oil group, in Jakarta and Paris, but also a few -some, in other foreign companies. This research allowed me to retrospectively understand eleven years spent in the Indonesian business world.

The Indonesian situation

To understand how organizations operate in Indonesia, it seems important to me to take into account three factors:

• The legacy of Soeharto's authoritarian regime (1966 to 1998)

The functioning of administrations is still often marked by a concept in which the subordinate waits for the instructions of his superior and carries them out, without daring to discuss them. This is not necessarily what we observe in the business world.

• Colonial heritage

Indonesia is a creation of Dutch colonialism. The colonial government had established an administration which independent Indonesia inherited. The place and role of this administration were not called into question by the Soeharto regime and were on the contrary strengthened. It is only since Soeharto's resignation in 1998 that Indonesia has attempted to reform its administrative functioning to make it democratic. Today we see many elected officials: governors, prefects, mayors of large cities, who practice democratic functioning.

• The influence of Westerners

The domination of the world since the end of the 15th century by Europeans and their American avatars continues to mark non-European minds. This is even clearer in a formerly colonized country like Indonesia. Citizens of a developing country, Indonesians are building ways of making modern organizations work, drawing inspiration from developed countries, that is to say, in fact, American models.

Expectations of the chef in Indonesia

1. Competence

A first expectation of the leader is that he or she is competent and knowledgeable. However, what competence and knowledge are unconsciously associated with is not necessarily the same thing from one context to another. For example, in France, the hierarchy, “to be legitimate, must be technically competent” ¹. From a French point of view, the superior must know more than his subordinates, particularly because in the event of a dispute between his subordinates, he will have the legitimacy to decide as a “competent arbiter of daily conflicts” ². In Indonesia, a first reason for the importance of the leader's competence is that he can help his subordinate to solve his problems.

A second reason is that competence is seen as guaranteeing consistency. Different interviews tell the leader that he must “give direction”. The Indonesian word for "direction", arah, has a purely spatial meaning and is in no way associated with the notion of command as in French. It should be borne in mind that Indonesia is a maritime world. However, “giving direction” is not enough. From an Indonesian point of view, it is important to “[not] change it all the time”, as expressed by an engineer stationed in Paris. This expectation contrasts with the French context, where a decision taken can be questioned in the name of reason.

A third reason why knowledge is required from the superior is that the latter is also there to teach things to the subordinate. Different interviews show a concern for the “development” of the individual from an Indonesian point of view.

2. Clarity

Many interviews combine clarity and direction. We thus see an association emerge, from an Indonesian point of view, between competence, coherence and clarity.

This association differs from that observed for example in the American context, where the objectives that a leader sets for his subordinate “must be defined by dotting the i’s[ clearly spelled out]” ³. Philippe d'Iribarne shows that from an American point of view, clarity makes it possible to ward off the unconscious fear of "being at the mercy of others" and to give the feeling that one is "master of one's destiny" ⁴.

3. Proximity, warmth and kindness

Another expectation is that of a close, pleasant and caring boss. The challenge is to grasp what, unconsciously, is the basis of this aspiration. The enlightening comment comes from the assistant to the director of the Indonesian subsidiary of Rabobank, who explains that her Dutch bosses are called by their first name, which is “nicer and closer”. In contrast, she had to address her French bosses in the LCL subsidiary where she previously worked and call them “Monsieur”. In particular, his description of his first boss “really like a guard, a jailer” is one of the elements that allowed me to understand a “specific Indonesian fear”: that of being confronted with something perceived as “closed” .

4. Being able to discuss

Several interviews positively mention the leader with whom “we can talk”. Here again, it was the words of the Rabobank assistant that enlightened me, when she explains why she appreciates the fact that her boss is “close”: “I have more ideas, I can be a lot more opento talk, I can express what I feel.” The word “open” in fact explains many of the ways in which other interviews talk about different things, and which seem to “ward off” the “specific fear” of being confronted with something closed.

5. Control

The lack of reference to “control” in the interviews, which are free-form and open-ended, suggests another characteristic of the good leader from the Indonesian perspective. A young engineer in Jakarta explains simply: “[English or American chefs] give us freedomas long as we have the same intention, […] as long as we have the same understanding. » The only interview in which the word “control” is mentioned is that with a sales engineer who works at the headquarters of a company in Paris. When I ask him if there is someone who gives him instructions and controls him (so it's me who says the word), he answers: “There are tools for control. […] It is the system that controls. So… I do indeed have a boss, but for me the boss is more the system, the value [of the project]. And where I report is my boss […]. If things don’t work out with my boss, we open up, “the system is like that.” » It is possible that the control is associated with the “jailer” denounced by the Rabobank assistant. But I can only formulate a hypothesis .

6. The bad boss

The description of a “bad leader” from an Indonesian point of view can shed light on the concept of a “good leader”. A listener in Jakarta, speaking of the French chefs she had, explains that “the bad chef, the bad Frenchman, is [...] the one who doesn't try to know why. […] Who does not want to understand that there is perhaps, in the person who communicates or makes something known, who does not give this person the possibility of making it known how it is in reality. » She concludes: “The bad [leader] is the one who doesn't open the door. » The Rabobank employee explains that her first boss was like a “jailer” because “his face was that of someone who doesn't want to be disturbed. » The bad leader is associated with something “closed”.

Conclusion

“In every society, the opposition between two experiences holds a central place,” writes Philippe d’Iribarne. “On the one hand, a particular peril is perceived as seriously threatening everyone […] leading to a catastrophic state. On the other hand, ways of salvation are seen as making it possible to ward off this peril” ⁵.

In the Indonesian context, this “particular peril” is being confronted with something “closed”. The smile that Indonesians wear quite easily is, most of the time, not an expression of happiness or contentment, but simply an unconscious way of saying that we are not “closed”. This fear of what is “closed” has other implications and can in particular translate into a fear of being “excluded”. The “paths to salvation” can then be a certain conformism, but also a search for “egalitarianism” in the group. In the world of work, this means that the leader is expected to be close to his men, clear in his instructions and perceived as available.

¹ Philippe d’Iribarne, « Comment s’accorder », Cultures et mondialisation :gérer par-delà les frontières, p. 103

² Sylvie Chevrier, « Le solide contre l’ingénieux », ibid., p. 162

³ Philippe d’Iribarne, La logique de l’honneur (1989)

⁴ Philippe d’Iribarne, Penser la diversité du monde (2008)

⁵ Philippe d'Iribarne, Penser la diversité du monde (2008)