Charisma, Harmony, Unity Building, and Respect: Lessons from the Leadership of Sukarno, Indonesia

Abstract

The leadership of Sukarno, the first President of post-colonialized Indonesia, stands at the center of this paper. It is commonly accepted that Sukarno played an important role in liberating Indonesia from Dutch colonialism. He was distinguished statesman and respected leader, a “magical verbalizer” and a modern millenarian figure in the Indonesian political cultural context. My purpose in this paper, then, is to analyze Sukarno’s major elements of leadership in order to learn from his biography how educational leaders could manage their educational institution more effectively, particularly in traditional developing nations. A biographical analysis of Sukarno’s leadership reveals four major elements in his leadership: charisma, harmony, and an open-minded view of reality, unity building, guided democracy, and respect. Practical implications for leadership development programs in education are suggested at the end of the paper.

1. Introduction

Sukarno, the first president of Indonesia after its independence, was described by one of his biographers as “the father of the fatherland, the symbol of Indonesia, the Moses who led his people out of captivity” (Penders, 1974, p. 198). He was born in eastern Java in 1901 to a Javanese Muslim father and a Balinese Hindu mother. His single name, typical of Javanese custom, was derived from—according to Sukarno himself (Sukarno, 1965)—Karna, a warrior hero in the Mahabharata.

According to his informal biographer, van der Kroef (1973), although his parents have been relatively poor, he belonged to the class of nobility who manned the administration both before and under the Dutch colonialized regime. This may explain his access to education in early life; he enrolled in the village school at the age of six. In 1916, his father arranged for him to attend Dutch secondary school and to stay with Haji Umar Said Tjokroaminoto, Chairman of Sarekat Islam (Islamic Association) in his home at Surabaya who also paid the costs of his education. Sukarno enrolled in the Hooger Burger School (Urban High School), largely reserved for children of Dutchmen and of senior Indonesian officials (Palmier, 1957). Nevertheless, by 1921, when Sukarno left for technical college in Bandung, he joined the Communist Party (PKI) and several years later became one of its outstanding leaders.

Like many local leaders in the era of colonialism in Asia and Africa, Sukarno was arrested in 1928 by the Dutch authorities following an unsuccessful revolt against these authorities by the PKI. Sukarno’s organizational activities as the Chairman of the Indonesian National Association were perceived as a threat by Dutch authorities and he was alleged to have planned a rebellion. He was imprisoned for two years and again in 1933 and was sent into exile on the island of Flores without a trial. Dahm (1969) refers to this period in Sukarno’s life as “The Islamic Phase,” because he became a strong believer in God and in Islam during this period.

After Japan was defeated, Sukarno and Muhammad Hatta declared Indonesia’s independence on 17 August 1945, and Sukarno was elected the first president. He managed Indonesia’s resistance against Dutch attempts to re-colonize the country through diplomatic and military means until the Netherlands recognized Indonesia’s independence in 1949. For this reason, according to Andyta et al. (2025), he was given the title “Father of Proclamation.”

During the days after the proclamation of independence, President Sukarno had become the central and necessary figure of the country. Sukarno was even perceived as the symbol of a united nation in a situation of potential anarchy. In fact, as Legge (1972, p. 209) indicated, “Sukarno became the one unquestioned focus of authority.” Tiyanto and Sarsito (2012) elaborated on the special position of Sukarno in that period:

“…Sukarno, who was popularly called Bung Karno, was a hero of proclamation who had taken part in very important roles in establishing the unitary republic of Indonesia as well as digging and formulating Pancasila which was then stipulated as the state basis and philosophy of the country”.

(p. 205)

At the initial years of Sukarno’s leadership, Indonesia faced a severe crisis due to military and economic pressures from allies and internal separatisms. But, Sukarno succeeded in bringing Indonesia out of the crisis, and the new country was acknowledged as a sovereign state by the United Nation.

Unfortunately, due some poor decisions made by Sukarno (outlined below) his governance came to an end in 1966. According to some scholars, despite his huge contribution to his country, his ideological standpoints had little order and coherence (van der Kroef, 1973), especially in later years when he limited the freedom of the press and of opposing political parties (Oey, 1971). Furthermore, although Sukarno was regarded as a unifying leader, it was claimed that he was also a source of division and political violence (van der Kroef, 1964). The protests of students against Sukarno reflect broader discontent among the young people in those years (Alisjahbana, 1966).

Despite later criticisms against Sukarno’s leadership, it is commonly accepted that he was a statesman and leader who played an important role in liberating Indonesia from Dutch colonialism (Olson & Simerson, 2015). According to Bishku (1992), Sukarno was a brilliant orator, a good leader and strategist, and the right person for a multicultural society like Indonesia. Kristiyantoa et al. (2021) depicted his personality and perspective:

“Sukarno really understood the psychological aspects of his nation which was well known for its formulation of the nation’s philosophy as well as the Indonesian perspective (weltanchaung) for the world, so called ‘Pancasila’. For Sukarno, Pancasila was the soul of the Indonesian nation, which was extracted from its Indonesian ground. Pancasila is the essence of the history of Indonesian civilization”.

(p. 3465)

Similarly, for Legge (1972), Sukarno is to be appreciated in significant measure as a latter day “magical verbalizer” and as a modern millenarian figure in the Indonesian political cultural context. Despite the criticism against many of his activities, he was passionate and determined “to make of Indonesia the winning team in the global struggle of peoples?” (cited in van der Kroef, 1973, p. 269).

Given the central role Sukarno played in Indonesia and his unique leadership, my purpose in this paper is to analyze Sukarno’s major elements of leadership in order to learn from his biography how educational leaders could manage their educational institution more effectively, particularly in traditional developing nations. More specifically, in order to help train prospective educational leaders in developing countries based on local constructs and concepts of leadership, I analyze Sukarno’s leadership, which reflected highly contextualized elements of leadership, as I show in the rest of this paper.

2. Methodology: The Biographical Approach

Historical analysis is critical for understanding the complexities of non-Western societies and the leadership behavior of their leaders, because historical sources can unearth analogues and metaphors relevant to leadership formation and the shaping of followership.

The biographical approach—the methodology I chose to analyze the leadership of Sukarno—is a form of narrative inquiry that transfers meaning from life experiences (Ospina & Dodge, 2005). It aims to provide answers to questions such as ‘whys and hows’ and focus on one case, i.e., a leader in action (Lambright & Quinn, 2011). The biographer who narrates the life course of another person may skim the surface to connect the events that occurred during the person’s life and trace the cultural, social, political, and organizational aspects that molded his/her career development. A biography is usually about a leader whose vision and leadership traits had considerable impact on his/her society/organization (Peeler, 2012). According to Bryman (2004), biographical research involves sensitivity to

“…The connections in people’s accounts of past, present and future events and states of affairs; people’s sense of their place within those events and states of affairs; the stories they generate about them; and the significance of context for the unfolding of events and people’s sense of their role within them. It is the ways that people organize and forge connections between events and the sense they make of those connections that provides the raw material of narrative analysis”.

(p. 412)

Thus, biographical research enables researchers to explore the lived experiences of leaders and probe into the chronological nature of their experiences and changes over time in the self and representations of the self. It also enables researchers tracing common strategies used by leaders in the past to cope with a wide variety of crisis events as well as exploring the salient role of leaders in directing their societies or organizations to success or failure.

According to Ciulla (2016), a thorough analysis of biographical studies of leaders may inform leadership theory because it entails the identification of the qualities of leaders and their interesting irregularities. Lambright and Quinn (2011) illuminate the benefits of biographical research to the field of public administration as follows:

“An intrinsic strength of the biographical approach, done well, is that it connects scholarship to reality, theory with practice. This is of cardinal importance to public management. If one views public administration as an applied …then [area of study]… it behooves scholars to draw knowledge from practitioners”.

(p. 783)

However, despite the benefits of the biographical research to our understanding of educational leadership, its weakness is in its focus on the leader per se. To confront this shortcoming, Theakston (1997) indicated that it is critical for the researcher to analyze the leader’s views and actions within their respective contexts on the grounds that leadership is usually a collective and interactive process and because an individual’s input to collective activities (e.g., decision-making) may be almost impossible to capture.

To cope with the limitations of biographical research, when analyzing the leadership of Sukarno, I posed several questions to help me focus on his life and leadership and on the context in which his leadership took place. These questions are as follows:

What was the nature of the situation he faced in making a decision?

What did he do to impact on the Indonesian society, rather than simply being influenced by circumstances?

What were Sukarno’s achievements versus failures?

How did the personality/traits/experiences of Sukarno influence the situation in his nation?

What were the forces shaping Sukarno’s biography and his leadership style?

How did Sukarno apply skills and strategies to his role?

How do the roles of Sukarno’s assistants or teams matter?

Who were the others with whom Sukarno consulted?

These are only some examples of questions, but I am aware that each biography needs its own particular set of questions in the process of analysis. I hope, nevertheless, that I present a balanced biography of Sukarno that is replete with contexts, occurrences, experiences, dilemmas, strategies, successes, failures, and so forth.

3. Major Leadership and Lessons

An analysis of Sukarno’s leadership reveals five major elements: charisma, harmony and an open-minded view of reality, unity building, ‘guided democracy,’ and respect.

3.1. Charisma: An Emotional Bonding with Followers

In the period of colonialization and independence, Sukarno was perceived as a national hero, a common man, and a charismatic leader by the Indonesian populace (van der Kroef, 1960). His major role in the independence movement and his high rhetorical skills contributed considerably to his image as a national hero and a leader with extraordinary traits. The Indonesian people’s belief in Sukarno’s capabilities, coupled with local traditional beliefs and cultural values, reinforced his charismatic image and shaped public perception of Sukarno as a leader with superhuman qualities.

In Sukarno’s view, he saw himself as a representative of the Indonesian people, motivated by their struggles and aspirations (Pauker, 1958). In his writings and speeches, Sukarno highlighted his connection with the ordinary people, arguing to be the “Tongue of the Indonesian People.” He also believed in the importance of “undivided command” during the revolutionary period, rooted in Javanese traditions and originated in his sense of destiny.

In fact, the charismatic leadership demonstrated by Sukarno was compatible with the need to overcome the problem of national disintegration. Sukarno’s speech excerpts reflected Sukarno’s leadership ability in motivating his followers to strive to become an independent nation:

“We are not living in the full moonlight yet, we are still living in the transition period. We are excited about the eagle”.

(cited in Asmawi & Fulazzaky, 2022, p. 3)

“Don’t think that all of us have done enough with the triangular color. As long as there is weeping in the huts, our work is done! Keep on fighting with sweat as much as you can”.

(cited in Asmawi & Fulazzaky, 2022, p. 3)

At this point, we can conclude that educational leaders in new school settings should bear in mind the importance of integrating teachers under a common educational vision or ideology and demonstrating some kind of charisma, with the main purpose of inspiring teachers to work together in building the new school as a single, coherent entity. Consistent with the charismatic leadership of Sukarno in the post-independence era, the educational leader should provide teachers with hope and optimism for a better future for the new school and its students and their parents. This is consistent with models of transformational leadership in education that place much emphasis on vision-building and individual consideration (e.g., Berkovich & Eyal, 2021; Gkolia et al., 2018). Similarly, educational leaders should adopt Sukarno’s leadership in times of crisis when teachers feel high levels of fear and anxiety about the future, as I indicated elsewhere (Oplatka, 2023).

Sukarno’s rise as a charismatic leader was influenced by a wide variety of socio-political factors in Indonesia, such as the decline in traditional authority and the search for a new type of leadership. The Indonesian people’s frustrations after the revolution have kept their hopes alive for Sukarno’s leadership (Koe & Kuliang, 1963). Hence, when a new educational leader is appointed to lead the school, the leadership of the previous principal has much influence on the induction process of his or her successor (Oplatka & Ben-Or, 2020). If most of the teachers are happy that the previous principal left, they are more likely to seek a new type of principalship and, therefore, the new educational leader should learn from Sukarno on how to inculcate hope for a better future in appropriate spaces such as the teacher’s lounge.

A charismatic leader’s long-term success, both in maintaining his authority and in maintaining his legacy, depends largely upon rationalizing and/or traditionalizing authority. Unfortunately, as Bishku (1992) concluded, Sukarno is a good example of a leader who failed to routinize his charismatic authority and maintain a strong connection with the people in the long run. Similarly, Sukarno was, according to Mujani et al. (2012), a transformational leader who transformed Indonesia from one phase (colonialism) to another (independence), at least in part by using his charismatic connections with the masses. But, these patterns of his leadership disappeared in later years.

The lesson for the educational leader is transparent; charismatic authority cannot last forever and must be replaced by other types of authority (e.g., expertise-based authority) or models of leadership (e.g., distributed leadership, leadership for social justice). Thunderous speeches and strong oratorical skills cannot replace practices of instructional leadership, for example. After the induction stage, the educational leader is expected to lead school improvement and be involved directly in classroom activities in order to inspire a positive school climate. Sukarno’s case warns us of sticking to charisma instead of distributing the leader’s power to the teachers in order to develop collective responsibility in the school, as Ritchie and Woods (2007) indicated.

3.2. Harmony and an Open-Minded View of Reality

Sukarno was not a leader of one ideology or identity; rather, he fully synthesized the three currents which had influenced him in his political development: nationalism, Islam, and Marxism. In an article entitled “Sukarno—by Sukarno Himself,” he wrote:

“There are men who say Sukarno is a nationalist; others say he is no longer a nationalist but a Moslem; and others, again, say he is neither nationalist nor Moslem but a Marxist; and finally there are still others who say he is no nationalist, no Moslem, and no Marxist, that he is a man with his own opinions… What is this Sukarno? Is he a nationalist? A Moslem? A Marxist? Readers, Sukarno is a mixture of all these ‘isms’”.

(cited in Dahm, 1969, p. 200)

An Indonesian who knew Sukarno intimately for a long time, Ahmad Subardjo Djojoadisurjo, mentioned Sukarno’s multiple perspectives in his memories:

“His [Sukarno’s] training as an architect at the technical faculty in Bandung had made him conversant with the exact sciences which had undoubtedly given him a sharp sense of realism. But unlike those who spent many years in Western countries for higher education and general experience…Sukarno’s world had been largely determined by the cultural heritage of Bali and Java which is a syncretism of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam and animism. He received much inspiration from the essential teaching of Islam and from the code of behavior of the heroic and symbolic figures from the Hindu epics Mahabharata and Ramayana”.

(cited in Bishku, 1992, pp. 102–103)

Several weeks before the Second World War ended, when Indonesia was still under Japanese occupation, Sukarno gave a speech known as “The Birth of Pancasila.” In this June 1945 address, he pronounced his five principles for the new state: (1) nationalism; (2) inter-nationalism (or humanitarianism); (3) democracy (not of the Western variety, but rather “unanimity arising out of deliberation amongst representatives”); (4) social justice (or economic well-being à la Ratu Adii, a legendary Javanese messiah); and (5) belief in God (Legge, 1972, p. 54). He further claimed that these principles were not his own creation but were ‘dug’ by him from Indonesian soil.

Transferring his speech (i.e., view) to our educational systems, it is possible to emphasize the salient role of flexibility (and open-minded attitudes) in educational leadership, on one hand, and the importance of harmony and social justice, on the other. If asked, Sukarno would recommend educational leaders to avoid adopting one educational ideology or one teaching method empathically and avoid insisting on its advantages without considering other options.

In addition, educational leaders who are open to various educational ideologies and teaching methods and who integrate them into the schooling process should work to avoid conflicts caused by disagreement among teachers applying these ideologies or methods. When educational leaders follow “The birth of Pancasila”, they not only increase harmony but also encourage the staff to consider a wide variety of educational ideologies and discuss their relevance to their work under special circumstances. Nevertheless, educational leaders should not adhere to one ideology and avoid alienating teachers who think in a different way from them. This application from Sukarno’s leadership is congruent with the model of instructional leadership and especially with the work of Robinson et al. (2008). The researchers found that practices related to classroom teaching such as developing “a learning climate free of disruption, a system of clear teaching objectives, and high teacher expectations for students” (p. 638) were considered as instructional leadership, whereas those relating to whole-school development such as devising “a common vision … and developing its capacity to work collaboratively to overcome challenges” (p. 639) were grouped under transformational leadership.

Two points in Sukarno’s leadership need further highlighting. First, although Sukarno was ready to accept different beliefs and perspectives, he personally had always put his nationalism before his religion. In 1953, he said, “If we erect a state based on Islam, many regions whose people are not Muslim will secede, for example: the Moluccas, Bali, Flores, Timor, Kai, Celebes…” (cited in Palmier, 1957, p. 111). His insight should be applied by educational leaders worldwide: if a leader insists on drawing on one educational perspective or on one teaching method, he or she may alienate teachers whose perspective is different. In doing so, the leader might lose highly talented teachers due to their decision to move to other schools in which they could fulfil their educational ideology or teach in a teaching method which they feel is most convenient.

Second, by being open to different ideologies and religions, Sukarno sought to cultivate harmony and unity (van der Kroef, 1973). Similarly, educational leaders who remain open-minded and foster different views of teaching and learning are more likely to increase harmony and unity in the staff’s room. Harmony is critical to preventing severe conflicts that could divert teachers’ efforts and energy away from school improvement and teaching effectiveness towards conflict resolution. Harmony is also one of the implicit consequences of leadership for social justice that encourages teachers to pay attention to the moral implications of their practices, and particularly to their plausible negative influence on students from marginalized communities (Arar et al., 2019).

3.3. Unity Building

During Sukarno’s studies in Bandung, he was influenced significantly by Dr. Tjipto Mangunkusumo and others who campaigned for complete independence from the Dutch. But independence alone was not his ultimate goal. He called for a close cooperation between advocates of different political groups (e.g., nationalists, Marxists, Islamists) in the fight against colonialism. Separation and disintegration were perceived as weakening the national struggle for independence, according to (Sukarno, 1965).

For Sukarno, however, the preservation of a national unity is above all an economic necessity because Indonesia is composed of many islands, some of which are wealthier in terms of resources than the others, and coordination among them is therefore vital to prevent high levels of inequality in the country (van der Kroef, 1958). Interestingly, the geographical structure of Indonesia resembles the structure of the school as an organization, i.e., many classrooms differing from each other in terms of achievements, capabilities, skills, and physical setting. Coordination is vital in our schools to prevent inconsistencies in the schooling process; however, instructional leaders struggle to coordinate between classrooms (Robinson et al., 2008).

What Sukarno desired most of all, as he declared in his famous Pancasila speech in 1945, was “to establish a state ‘all for all,’ neither for a single individual, nor for one group…” (Cited in Bishku, 1992, p. 108). Kristiyantoa et al. (2021) explained Sukarno’s aspiration to unify Indonesia after its independence:

“With the legitimacy of this leadership, Sukarno then ordered Prime Minister Djuand to issue the Djuanda Declaration on 13 December 1957. The Djuanda Declaration emphasizes that Indonesia is an archipelagic country, where all the islands are joined together by the sea. Indonesia is a maritime country dotted with islands, stretching out as the Emerald Equator”.

(Sukarno, 1965, p. 3467)

Dahm (1969) described Sukarno as the great unifier, forever concerned with finding “a common denominator for different movements” (p. 26i). This concern was rooted in the concept of Tata, the Sanskrit term for the traditional mystical harmony central to old Javanese cosmology. In fact, Sukarno’s leadership was characterized by his oratory skills and ability to unite diverse political factions (Tiyanto & Sarsito, 2012). To this end, Sukarno and Djuanda were determined to crush—by all possible military action—the recent proclamation of the establishment of a rival “Republic of Indonesia” in Sumatra (van der Kroef, 1958).

What does unity mean in a school context? Do educational leaders need to generate harmony at the expense of the autonomous units in the school? Is unity possible in educational institutions? In the school context, teaching and learning cannot be unified, because teaching is a craft rather than a profession and lacks clear, universal ways to achieve its goals. In fact, teachers should diversify their teaching methods in order to meet the special needs of each student.

Yet, as an organization, the school needs some kind of unity. Educational leaders, especially as instructional leaders and leaders for social justice, should build a vision around which teachers share similar educational values and practices. The leaders have to encourage the staff to collaborate in order to create a coherent rather than fragmented entity. However, due to the high significance attached to teacher autonomy, unity in education does not mean the unification of opinions, methods, perspectives, and so forth. Unity should be limited to major perspectives and visions, but teachers should live and work in ‘separated islands’ (i.e., educational spaces) to be able to meet the needs of their students distinctively. No doubt, Sukarno’s leadership evokes an interesting and illuminating debate about teacher autonomy vs. institutional unity.

Yet, consistent with Sukarno’s attempts to build national awareness in Indonesia subsequent to its independence, and due to its long history of colonialism and its unique geographical characteristics (i.e., many remote islands), educational leaders should increase the institutional awareness of teachers and students. To this end, Sukarno promoted a ‘National Geist’, a national spirit; National Will, or national ideals; and National Daad, or national action (Kristiyantoa et al., 2021). Similarly, educational leaders can adopt forms of distributed leadership (Ritchie & Woods, 2007) and encourage the establishment of units with the name of their school as an adjective and glorify the particular characteristics of their school in its community. In this way, they may increase teachers’ sense of team spirit, a sense of belonging, and organizational commitment. Sukarno would propel them to struggle for some sort of unity in the school in spite of the obstacles they may face along the way.

3.4. Guided Democracy

The aspiration for unity led Sukarno, among other things, to adopt a policy of ‘guided democracy.’ After a short era of parliamentary democracy, Sukarno established an autocratic system called ‘guided Democracy’ in 1959 (Andyta et al., 2025). In Sukarno’s vision of democracy, it should be grounded in the traditional politics of Indonesia before the colonialization period and Indonesia be based on cultural practices of mutual discussion and agreement, rejecting Western-style democracy (Maga, 1990). Thus, in his view, Indonesia should have some kind of moderate collectivism, described as ‘guided democracy’ or “gotong rojong (mutual co-operation) government,” under which all major political groups, nationalists, communists, and religious parties collaborate toward the common good under the leadership of some kind of executive agency or national council (van der Kroef, 1958). He assumed that strong leadership was necessary for Indonesia to navigate the Cold War and maintain national integrity (Maga, 1990). However, his governance style led to political instability and a rebellion in 1958, emphasizing the challenges of his political view (Denoon, 1971). In addition, Sukarno’s view of the ‘right’ governance included suspending party politics and promoting unity among various factions, including communists (Maga, 1990). This element teaches us what educational leaders must not do.

Undoubtedly, in the name of integration and unity, educational leaders might claim for more centralized power in their role. But, this is wrong and contradicts current conceptualizations of shared leadership and distributed leadership in education. ‘guided democracy’ contrasts the forms of shared governance we need in order to improve our schools, because it tends to impose one opinion, one perspective, and one ideology, while our schools need a wide variety of educational ideologies and teaching methods to face current challenges in our heterogenous world. Our students are different from each other and, consequently, need particular care.

While I am fully aware of the need to fit a leadership style to the local cultural and social contexts in traditional and developing societies (Oplatka, 2019), even Sukarno himself drew his ‘guided democracy’ concept on democracy-like political lives in pre-colonized Indonesia, as Maga (1990) explained:

“According to Sukarno, the concept lived on in the ancient village practices of musjawarah and mufakat (mutual discussion and mutual agreement). During village discussions, everyone’s voice was welcome, he pointed out. Agreements, acceptable to the village whole, were made without voting. The village elder, or leader, would resolve disagreements. Likening himself to a village spokesman, Sukarno often noted that democracy was a means, not an end. Consequently, his Provisional People’s Congress, cabinet, and other government mechanisms had no voting power.”.

(p. 92)

Thus, while village people sought for shared decision-making with some privilege endowed to the wise old men, Sukarno’s ‘guided democracy’ cannot be applied into our schools because it obviates open and critical discussions in the staff’s room and glorifies the educational leader as the hero. In fact, the educational leader, according to models such as instructional leadership, shared leadership, and moral leadership, is seen as the head of the teachers who guides, supports, and is attentive, but in no way is he or she considered to be superior to other school members. ‘Guided democracy’, which disproportionately places greater power on the “President”, i.e., Sukarno, would prevent many talented teachers from sharing their ideas or publicly highlighting shortcomings in the schooling process.

What would happen if educational leaders applied the concept of ‘guided democracy’ in schools? Most likely, the educational leader has his or her own management team but only those he or she favors can join this team. Therefore, the team is likely to consist of people who think like the leader, obey his or her authority blindly, and refrain from criticizing any decision made by the leader. Instead of a real and authentic administration as well as critical instructional debates within the team, we would observe one dominant view or opinion that is shared by every team member uncritically. In the case of Sukarno, ‘guided democracy’ ended with a military coup and the transition of the power from Sukarno to General Suharto, while in the case of schools, this seemingly shared decision-making might result in teacher dropout, low student achievements, and poor school climate.

3.5. Respect

Unlike the Indonesian leaders who were educated abroad, in Sukarno’s formative years, he often perceived Westerners as arrogant. Consequently, he dealt with the need of every person to be deemed an equal citizen and combined the term ‘respect’ not only into his definition of nationalism, but also into his concept of democracy (van der Kroef, 1973).

Sukarno believed that the Indonesian people should be respected. In one of his speeches, he declared,

“[Nationalism]… means the rebuilding of our nation, it means the effort to provide esteem for our peoples … [it] is the love of country and the determination to improve it…”.

(cited in Palmier, 1957, p. 108)

At the state dinner in Washington on 6 May 1956, he said, “I am a brown man, an Indonesian, an Asiatic. I am the son of poor parents and the son of a nation only recently emerged into the world of national existence. Nationalist democracy?” And again, speaking to Congress, “Democracy, when all is said and done, is the introduction of equal opportunity in human activities among the indigenous peoples themselves…” (Palmier, 1957, p. 108). Here, Sukarno connects between social justice, equity, and respect, which are major elements in educational leadership for social justice (Arar et al., 2019).

According to Tiyanto and Sarsito (2012, p. 210), Sukarno’s ambition to unite all existing elements of the Indonesian society under the concept of ‘NASAKOM’ (Nationalist, Religious, and Communist) despite their differing ideological backgrounds was a realization of Javanese culture, which always aspired a life on the basis of ‘urmat’ (respect) and ‘rukun’ (harmony). In other words, while respect is a major element in a host of traditional societies (Oplatka & Arar, 2016), Sukarno unconsciously connects between shared leadership and the respect that is given to each of the school members. Although he deviated from this harmony by declaring the ‘guided democracy’ policy, his emphasis on respect is critical in our educational systems worldwide. A respected teacher is more likely to teach effectively, respect their students, and “go the extra mile” than his or her counterparts who are not respected. To this end, educational leaders should respect teachers’ expertise, autonomy, and discretion and establish forms of transparent communication in schools.

4. Implications for Leadership Development Programs

Five practical implications for leadership development programs (LDPs) are discussed in the last section of this paper. See

Table 1. The relationships between Sukarno’s leadership, educational practices, and competency-based leadership training.

Sukarno’s Elements of Leadership	Educational Practices	Competency-Based Leadership Training
Charisma	Vision-building Creating a sense of destiny Thunderous speeches	Charismatic relations with teachers Strategic skills Oratorical skills Vision communication
Harmony	Open-minded attitudes Increasing harmony Conflict avoidance	Creating harmony Critical thinking Conflict resolution
Unity	Increasing institutional awareness Coordination and collaboration Building a shared vision	Unity building Balancing institutional identity with teacher autonomy Team building
Guided democracy (the opposite)	Authentic shared decision-making Collaboration Managerial team building	Avoidance of centralized authority Democratic management
Respect	Respecting autonomy Valuing expertise Transparent communication	Empathy display Trust building Active listening Valuing differences

.

First, principal-candidates should learn to think like heroes who leave a legacy through a big change in the school’s context and performance. When new leaders articulate a compelling vision for a school or initiate significant changes in the educational process, they are more likely to create charismatic relationships with talented teachers who may follow the leader’s vision, subsequently improving their work effectiveness and experience a sense of self-fulfillment. Professors in LDPs should help their students devise an educational vision that is based on their educational ideology and that may be suitable for adoption in schools within their society or country. A sense of destiny is required in educational leadership, however. A training module should include discussions about varied educational ideologies, the importance of vision-building, contextual influences on educational visions, and the implications of false visions for teacher well-being and student achievement.

Second, principal-candidates should develop rhetorical and oratorical skills required to motivate the staff and encourage school members, particularly in times of crisis or distress. However, professors should emphasize the temporary role of charisma (through rhetorical speeches) and the need to move from charismatic authority to expertise-based authority in the long run. Future educational leaders should be exposed to real-life events in schools through which they will develop empathy and compassion towards teachers, students, and parents in distress. For example, students can engage in simulations concerning principal–teacher relations. One simulation may include a leader’s impassioned speech about the importance of high student achievement, while the participants analyze the potential positive and negative influences of this speech on teacher performance and well-being.

Third, professors should encourage principal-candidates to study different educational ideologies and engage in devising varied school visions to increase their openness to and acceptance of different worldviews which, in turn, prevent closed minded approaches. The students should learn through role-playing how to enable teachers to engage in open dialogues about educational ideologies and alternative teaching methods as part of their open-minded approach to leading the school. Likewise, the importance of harmony should be illuminated through competencies such as conflict resolution. However, at the same time, professors should encourage principal-candidates to learn how to balance between harmony and critical debates in the school. Role playing can be of much assistance; each pair of prospective students should play contradictory roles. While the first is seeking for harmony at all costs, the second is contrasting current realities. Both students are required to analyze their feelings and thoughts during these exercises.

Forth, as unity has a key role in establishing a coherent organizational identity, principal-candidates should probe into the strategies used to increase organizational unity, particularly around an accepted school’s vision. In this sense, they should learn how to build teams and encourage collaboration in the teacher’s lounge effectively through simulation exercises. Furthermore, they should learn how to balance between organizational unity and teacher autonomy due to the great significance of the latter to student achievement. After all, future principals ought to be aware of the danger in centralizing authority in educational organizations, despite the temptation to do so in the early stages of a career in education.

Finally, Sukarno taught us about the need for educational leaders to respect teachers, students, and parents. Therefore, principal-candidates should discuss the cultural and social meanings and sources of respect in their society and analyze cases in which respect and disrespect are combined into the interactions between the leader and other school members or stakeholders. Emotions such as caring, empathy, sympathy, and the like should be internalized through role-playing and case studies. Competencies such as valuing diversity and inclusion or active listening should be emphasized through role-playing and simulations. Students, for example, should analyze patterns of respect and disrespect in principal–teacher interactions and consider their impacts on teacher performance, the schooling process, and teacher well-being.