Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

lokasaMgraha: An Indigenous Construct of Leadership and Its Measure

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Managing by the Bhagavad Gītā

Part of the book series: Management, Change, Strategy and Positive Leadership ((MACHSTPOLE))

Abstract

Western models and constructs have dominated research in leadership. Cross-cultural research in leadership has questioned the validity of western models, but because of its focus on etics or universals, it has not provided much insight to managers in non-western cultures. We need to develop indigenous models of leadership that can provide insights to guide people’s daily behavior in work and social settings. To fill this lacuna, a small step is taken, and an Indian model of leadership is presented. The construct of lokasaMgraha is derived from the bhagavadgItA, and its relevance for leadership is examined. The construct of lokasaMgraha is further analyzed in the context of Indian concept of self, stages of life (varNAzrama dharma), and the four objectives of life (puruSArthas). This approach results in a rich cultural model of leadership. The construct of lokasaMgraha proposes that not only leaders but also their followers should act so that all their actions are for the greater public good. In other words, leadership is about serving others. All actions, thus, are to be performed without hankering after the outcomes or fruits of one’s efforts, which is the doctrine of niSkAma karma proposed in the bhagavadgItA. The model is grounded in the idea that willy-nilly we are all on a spiritual journey. Implications of this model for global psychology and future research are discussed.

Harvard-Kyoto protocol for transliteration for devanAgarI is used for all saMskRtam and hindI words and names, and the first letters of names are not capitalized. All non-English words are italicized.

अ a आ A इ i ई I उ u ऊ U ए e ऐ ai ओ o औ au ऋṛ R ॠṝ RR ऌ lR ॡ lRR अ M अ H क ka ख kha ग ga घ kha ङ Ga च ca छ cha ज ja झ jha ञ Ja ट Ta ठ Tha ड Da ढ Dha ण Na त ta थ tha द da ध dha न na प pa फ pha ब ba भ bha म ma य ya र ra ल la व va श za ष Sa स sa ह ha ʿ kSa तर tra जञ jJa शर zra़.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Verse 3.42: indriyaNi parANyahurindriyebhyaH paraM manaH; manasastu parA budhhiryo buddheH paratastu saH. The five senses are said to be superior to the body, and the manas is superior to the senses. Buddhi is said to be superior to manas, and the Atman is superior to even buddhi.

  2. 2.

    See Bhawuk, 2011a, Chapter 4, for a definition and discussion of manas, buddhi, ahaMkAra, and antaHkaraNa. The closest translation of ahaMkAra would be ego, which comes at the cost of much loss of meaning. People often use mind for manas, which is simply wrong, since manas is the locus of cognition, affect and behavior, whereas mind is only cognitive. And buddhi is closest to the super-ego in Freudian parlance, but without ego, which makes the similarity rather superficial. And antaHkaraNa is the composite internal organ or agent combining manas, buddhi, and ahaMkAra. Adizankara also includes citta in the definition of antaHkaraNa (see Bhawuk,2014 for a discussion of citta).

  3. 3.

    Verse 7.11: balaM balavatAM cAhaM kAmarAgavivarjitaM, dharmAviruddho bhUteSu kAmo’smi bharatarSabha. I am also the strength of the strong who are without desire and attachment. I am the desire in all beings, which is not against the dharma. In this verse, first kRSNa tells arjuna that he (kRSNa himself) is strength of those who are devoid of desire and attachment, which speaks against having desires or attachment to anything. Strength lies in being without desire and attachment alludes to niSkAma karma, or performing actions without desiring the outcomes of the actions, which is the basic tenet of the bhagavadgItA. niSkAma karma is always for lokasaMgraha or common good, and, therefore, without craving for any outcome. Then he further explains that he is kAma or desire that is consistent with dharma. This indicates that desire or pleasure is to be guided by dharma. Thus, the guiding principle for leading one’s life as a gRhastha or householder is to practice niSkAma karma and to follow the dharma.

  4. 4.

    cANakya listed the following eight “don’ts” for students: desire, anger, greed, taste, finery or paying attention to how one looks, pleasure or entertainment (e.g., song, dance, show, spectacle, and so forth), too much sleep, and enjoying anything excessively or immoderately. Only taste, finery and pleasure are acceptable in the householder phase of life. Other don’ts apply to all phases of life.

  5. 5.

    Verse 3.20: karmaNaiva hi saMsiddhimAsthitA janakAdayaH, lokasaGgrahamevApi sampazyankartumarhasi. Adi zaMkara interprets saMsiddhiM as mokSaM gantum (or achieved mokSa), and asthitAH as pravRttA or propelled by.

  6. 6.

    Verse 3.25: saktAH karmaNyavidvAMso yathA kurvanti bhArat, kuryAdvidvAMstathAsaktazcikIrSuloksaGgraham.

  7. 7.

    Verse 12.5: samniyamyendriyagrAmaM sarvatra samabuddhayaH, te prApnuvanu mAmeva sarvabhUtahite ratAH.

  8. 8.

    Verse 2.39: eSA te’bhihitA sAGkhye buddhiyoge tvimAM zriNu; buddhayA yukto yayA PArtha karmabandhaM prahAsyasi.

  9. 9.

    Verse 3.9: yajnArthAtkarmaNo’nyatra loko’yaM karmabandhanaH; tadartha karma Kaunteya muktasaGgaH samAcAra.

  10. 10.

    Verse 9.28: zubhAzubhaphalairevaM mokshyase karmabandhanaiH; sannyAsayogayuktAtma vimukto mAmupaiSyasi.

  11. 11.

    Verse 2.47: karmaNyevAdhikAraste mA phaleSu kadAcana; mA karmaphalaheturbhUrmA te saGgo’stvakarmaNi.

  12. 12.

    Verse 2.48: yogasthaH kuru karmANi saGgaMtyaktvA DhanaJjaya; siddhyaasiddhayoH samo bhUtvA samatvaM yoga ucyate.

  13. 13.

    zankarAcArya explains yogasthaH kuru karmANi saga tyaktva DhanaJjaya in his BhaSya as follows: yogasthaH san kuru karmANi kevalam IzvarArthaM tatra api Izvaro me tuSyatu iti saGga tyaktvA DhanaJjaya!

  14. 14.

    Verse 2.49: dUreNa hyavaraM karma buddhiyogAddhanaJjaya; buddhau zaraNamanviccha kripaNaH phalahetavaH.

  15. 15.

    brihadAranyak 3, 8. 10: Yo vA atadaksharaM GArgyaviditvAsmAllokAtpraiti sa kripaNaH. Cited in ZankarAcArya’s commentary (goyandakA, 2004, p. 62).

  16. 16.

    kenopaniSad 2.5: iha cedavedIdatha satyamasti na cedihAvedInmahatI vinaStiH.

  17. 17.

    Verse 3.42: indriyANi parANyAhurindriyebhyaH paraM manaH; manasastu parA buddhiyor buddheH paratastu saH. The senses are said to be superior to the gross body, and manas is superior to the senses. Buddhi is superior to manas, and atman is superior to buddhi.

  18. 18.

    Verse 10.10: teSAM satatayuktAnAM bhajatAM prItipUrvakaM; dadAmi buddhiyogaM taM yena mAmupayAnti te. I give buddhiyoga to those who are constantly engrossed in me and chant my name with love. With buddhiyoga they achieve me.

  19. 19.

    Verse 18.57: cetasa sarva karmANi mayi saMnyasya matparaH; buddhiyogamupAzritya maccitaH satataM bhava. By surrendering all the karma with your citta or manas (e.g., voluntarily and naturally), surrender yourself completely to me. By taking shelter in buddhiyoga constantly place your citta or manas in me, i.e., become one with me.

  20. 20.

    zankarAcArya also notes two kinds of buddhi in the opening statement of his commentary on the third canto of the Bhagavad-Gita—zAstrasya pravrittinivrittiviSayabhUte dve buddhI bhagavatA nirdiSte, sAGkhye buddhiH yoge buddhiH iti ca. kriSNa enumerates two kinds of buddhi in the bhagavadgItA, a buddhi that is inner bound employed by the jJAnis or those who follow the path of knowledge and a buddhi that is outer bound employed by people pursuing material life (goyandakA, 2004, p. 76).

  21. 21.

    Verse 2.50: buddhiyukto jahAtIha ubhe sukritaduSkrite; tasmAdyogAya yujyasva yogaH karmasu kauzalam.

  22. 22.

    Yogo hi karmasu kauzalaM svadharmAkhyeSu karmasu vartamAnasya yA siddhayasiddhayoH samatvabuddhiH IzvarArpitacetastayA tat kauzalaM kuzalabhAvaH (Goyandaka, 2004, p. 62).

  23. 23.

    Verse 2.51: karmajaM buddhiyuktvA hi phalaM tyaktvA manISiNaH; janmabandhavinirmuktAH padaM gacchantyanAmayam.

  24. 24.

    Verse 3.1: jyAyasI cetkarmaNaste matA buddhirJanardan; tatkiM karmaNi ghore mAM niyojayasi KeZava.

  25. 25.

    Verse 3.3: loke’smindvividhA niSTha purA proktA mayAnagha; jnAnayogena sAGkhyAnAM karmayogena yoginAM.

  26. 26.

    Verse 3.4: na karmaNAmanArambhAnnaiSkarmyaM puriSo’znute;na ca saMnyasanAdeva siddhiM samadhigacchati.

  27. 27.

    Verse 3.5: na hi kazcitksaNamapi jAtu tiSThatyakarmakrit; kAryate hyavazaH karma sarvaH prakitjairguNaiH.

  28. 28.

    Verse 3.6: karmendriyANi saMyamya ya Aste manasA smaran; indriyArthAnvimudhAtma mithyacarH sa ucyate.

  29. 29.

    Verse 3.7: yastvindriyANi manasa niyamyArabhate’rjuna; karmendriyaiH karmayogamasaktaH sa viziSyate.

  30. 30.

    Verse 3.8: niyataM kuru karma tvaM karma jyayo hyakarmaNaH; zrIrayAtrApi ca ten a prasiddhyedakarmaNaH.

  31. 31.

    niyataM nityaM yo yasmin karmaNi adhikritaH phalAya ca azrutaaM tad niyataM (goyandakA, 2004, p. 88).

  32. 32.

    Verse 3.20: karmaNaiva hi saMsidhimAsthitA JanakAdayaH; loksaMgrahamevApi saMpazyankartumarhasi.

  33. 33.

    Verse 4.15: evaM jnAtvA kritaM karma pUrvairapi mumukshubhiH; kuru karmaiva tasmAttvaM pUrvaiH pUrvataraM kritam.

  34. 34.

    Verse 3.21: yadyadAcarati zreSThastattadevetarA janaH; sa yatpramANaM kurute lokstadanuvartate. Verse 3.22: na me ParthAsti kartvyaM triSu lokeSu kiMcana; nAnavAptamavAptavyaM varta eva ca karmaNi.

  35. 35.

    Since God is gender free or can be either male or female, I prefer to use “he and she” when referring to God instead of he or she.

  36. 36.

    Verse 4.14: na maM karmANi limpanti na me karmaphale sprihA; iti mAM yo’bhijanati karmabhirna sa badhyate.

  37. 37.

    Verse 3.25: saktAH karmaNyavidvAMso yathA kurvanti Bharata; kuryAdvidvAMstathAsaktazcikIrSurloksaMgraham.

  38. 38.

    Verse 3.26: na buddhibhedaM janayedajnAnAM karmasaNginAm; joSayetsarvakarmANi vidvAnyuktaH samAcaran.

  39. 39.

    Verse 3.27: prakriteH kriyamANAni gunaiH karmaNi sarvazaH; ahaMkarvimudhAtmA kartAhamiti manyate.

  40. 40.

    Verse 3.28: tattvavittu m = MahAbAho guNakarmavibhAgayoH; guNa guNeSu vartante iti matvA na sajjate.

  41. 41.

    Verse 4.13: cAturvarnyaM mayA sriSTaM guNakarmavibhAgazaH; tasya kartAramapi mAM viddhyakartAramavyayam.

  42. 42.

    Verse 3.29: prakriterguNasaMmUDhaH sajjante guNakarmasu; tAnakritsnavido mandAnkritasnavinna vicAleyet.

  43. 43.

    Verse 3.26: na budddhi bhedaM janayedajnAnAM karmasaGginAm, joSayetsarvakarmANi vidvAnyuktaH samAcaran.

References

  • Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bales, R. F., & Slater, P. (1955). Role differentiation. In T. Parsons & R. F. Bales (in collaboration with J. Olds, M. Zelditch, Jr., and P. E. Slater) (Eds.), Family, socialization, and interaction process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY: Collier Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1), 112–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bharati, A. (1985). The self in Hindu thought and action. In Marsella, A. J., DeVos, G., & Hsu, F. L. K. (Eds). Culture and self: Asian and Western perspectives (pp. 185–230). New York, NY: Tavistock Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. (2003). Culture’s influence on creativity: the case of Indian spirituality. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2005). A model of self, work, and spirituality from the Bhagavad-Gita: Implications for self-efficacy, goal setting, and global psychology. In K. Ramakrishna Rao & S. B. Marwaha (Eds.), Toward a spiritual psychology: Essays in Indian psychology (pp. 41–71). Samvad Indian Foundation: New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2008). Toward an Indian organizational psychology. In K. R. Rao, A. C. Paranjpe, & A. K. Dalal (Eds.), Handbook of Indian psychology (pp. 471–491). New Delhi: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2011). Spirituality and Indian psychology: Lessons from the Bhagavad-Gita. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2014). citta or consciousness: Some perspectives from Indian psychology. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 28(1 & 2), 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S., Mrazek, S., & Munusamy, V. P. (2009). From social engineering to community transformation: Amul, Grameen Bank, and Mondragon as exemplar organizations. Peace & Policy, 14, 36–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cakrabarti, S. K. (1987). Managerial effectiveness and quality of work life: Indian insights. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cakrabarti, S. K. (1993). Managerial transformation by values: A corporate pilgrimage. New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 637–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., Dasborough, M. T., & Weiss, H. M. (2017). Affective events and the development of leader-member exchange. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 233–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • England, G. W. (1975). The manager and his values: An international perspective. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M. G. (1970). The effects of supervisory behavior on the path-goal relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance., 5, 277–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 1). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, F. E. (1971). Validation and extension of the contingency model of leadership effectiveness: A review of the empirical findings. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 128–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, F. E. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, F. E., & Garcia, J. E. (1987). New approaches to effective leadership: Cognitive resources and organizational performance. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • goyandakA, H. (2004). zrImadbhagavadgItA zAMkarabhASya. Gorakhpur, India: Gita Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. (1976). Role-making processes within complex organizations. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1201–1245). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In J. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143–166). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 175–208). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, A. W., & Winer, B. J. (1957). A factorial study of the leader behavior descriptions. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement (pp. 39–51). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemphill, J. K. (1950). Relations between the size of the group and the behavior of “superior” leaders. The Journal of Social Psychology, 32(1), 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultures consequences (2nd ed.). California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly., 16, 321–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., & Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business, 3, L–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, & political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, R. L., & Katz, D. (1952). Leadership practices in relation to productivity and morale. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, R., & Katz, D. (1953). Leadership practices in relation to productivity and morale. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics (pp. 554–571). New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1951). Human organization and worker motivation. Industrial Relations Research Association: Industrial Productivity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, S., Schriesheim, C. A., Murphy, C. J., & Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Toward a contingency theory of leadership based upon the consideration and initiating structure literature. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12(1), 62–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., & Bond, M. H. (2004). Social axioms: A model of social beliefs in multi-cultural perspective. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 119–197). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created “social climates”. The Journal of Social Psychology, 10(2), 269–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • muktAnand, S. (1995). muktesvarI (second edition). ganezapurI. India: gurudeva siddha pITha.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture., 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116

  • Shartle, C. L. (1979). Early years of the Ohio State University leadership studies. Journal of Management, 5(2), 127–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • sinhA, J. B. P. (1980). The nurturant task leader. New Delhi: Concept Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • sinhA, J. B. P. (1990). Work culture in the Indian context. New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • sinhA, J. B. P. (1995). The cultural context of leadership and power. New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • sinhA, J. B. P. (2000). Patterns of work culture: Cases and strategies for culture building. New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, P. E. (1955). Role differentiation in small groups. American Sociological Review, 20(3), 300–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C. (1972). The analysis of subjective culture. Oxford: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C. (2009). Fooling ourselves: Self-deception in politics, religion, and terrorism. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • vedavyAsa. (1970). zrImadbhAgavatam-mahApurANa. gorakhpura. Gorakhpur: Gita Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. S. (2010). Developing tomorrow’s leader today: Insights from corporate India. Singapore: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank Professors jai ballabh prasad sinhA, rAmAdhAra siGha, ricA awasthI, and Ananda candrasekhar nArAyaNan for their insightful comments that helped me improve the paper. An earlier draft of the paper was presented at the symposium (ICAP2014-SP1482) on “Alternative Models of Leadership and Their Motivational Foundations,” organized by Professor arvinda kumAra sinhA, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India, at the International Congress of Applied Psychology, Paris, France, July 9, 2014.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Management & Culture and Community Psychology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Dharm P. S. Bhawuk

Authors
  1. Dharm P. S. Bhawuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dharm P. S. Bhawuk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, Woodbury University, Burbank, CA, USA

    Satinder Dhiman

  2. W. Paul Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ, USA

    A. D. Amar

Appendix 1: gItA Leadership Questionnaire (gLQ)

Appendix 1: gItA Leadership Questionnaire (gLQ)

Appendix 1A

  1. 1.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, actions are unavoidable (verse 3.5). Therefore, it is necessary for leaders to guide common people (verse 3.21).

  2. 2.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, action is better than inaction (verse 3.8). Therefore, leaders should engage common people in action.

  3. 3.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, common people have the propensity for material pursuits of life (verse 3.20). Therefore, leaders should act in the spirit of loksaMgraha to redirect common people toward spiritual pursuits.

  4. 4.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, leaders should lead by example like king janak did (verse 3.20).

  5. 5.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, karma is inevitable (verse 3.5), therefore, leaders should be exemplars so that common people can follow them (3.21).

  6. 6.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, leaders should be busy with work for loksaMgraha or the benefit of the society, much like common people are driven to work extremely hard in pursuit of material benefits (verse 3.25).

  7. 7.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, leaders should guide those who do not know and think they are the actors who cause the outcomes, thus suffering from the bondage of karma (verse 3.27).

  8. 8.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, the leaders should be knowledgeable (in the spiritual sense) to be able to lead common people (verse 3.29).

  9. 9.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, leaders (or those who know) should rather engage common people (or those who do not know) in action for material pursuits than wait for them to be ready for spiritual pursuits (verse 3.26).

  10. 10.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, common people follow the example of “zreSTha jana” or leaders, and so leaders should set good example for common people through their actions (verse 3.21).

  11. 11.

    According to the bhagavadgItA, it is our duty to perform our svadharma (verse 3.35) however, unpleasant it may be. Therefore, we should perform work prescribed by the leader, even if it is unpleasant.

Appendix 1B

  1. 1.

    Since actions are unavoidable, it is necessary for leaders to guide common people.

  2. 2.

    Since action is better than inaction, leaders should engage common people in action.

  3. 3.

    Since common people have the propensity for material pursuits of life, leaders should act in the spirit of loksaMgraha to redirect them (common people) toward spiritual pursuits.

  4. 4.

    Leaders should lead by example like king janaka did.

  5. 5.

    Since karma is inevitable, leaders should be exemplars so that common people can follow them.

  6. 6.

    Leaders should be busy with work for loksaMgraha or the benefit of the society, much like common people are driven to work extremely hard in pursuit of material benefits.

  7. 7.

    Leaders should guide common people who do not know and think that they are the actors who cause the outcome; thus suffering from the bondage of karma.

  8. 8.

    Leaders should be knowledgeable (in the spiritual sense) to be able to lead common people.

  9. 9.

    Leaders (or those who know) should rather engage common people (or those who do not know) in action for material pursuits than wait for them to be ready for spiritual pursuits.

  10. 10.

    Common people follow the example of “zreSTha jana” or leaders, and so leaders should set good example for common people through their actions.

  11. 11.

    It is our duty to perform work prescribed by the leader, however, unpleasant it may be.

Appendix 1C

  1. 1.

    It is necessary for leaders to guide their subordinates toward action, since human being cannot live inactively. (17 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I guide my subordinates toward action, since human being cannot live inactively. (15 words)

  2. 2.

    Leaders should engage their subordinates in action, since action is better than inaction. (13 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I would engage my subordinates in action, since action is better than inaction. (16 words)

  3. 3.

    Leaders should act in the spirit of loksaMgraha to direct their followers toward a balanced life, since people tend to pursue materialistic life. (23 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I act in the spirit of loksaMgraha to direct my followers toward a balanced life, since people tend to pursue materialistic life. (26 words)

  4. 4.

    Leaders should lead by example like king janaka did. (09 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I lead by example like king janaka did. (11 words)

  5. 5.

    Leaders should be exemplars so that their followers can follow their actions. (12 words)

    I-form: I am an exemplar so that my subordinates can follow my actions. (12 words)

  6. 6.

    Leaders should work for loksaMgraha or the benefit of the society, much like common people work hard in pursuit of material goods. (22 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I work for loksaMgraha or the benefit of the society, much like common people work hard in pursuit of material goods. (24 words)

  7. 7.

    Leaders should guide their subordinates away from ignorance that they are agents who cause outcomes, thus preventing the bondage of karma.(21 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I guide my subordinates away from ignorance that they are agents who cause outcomes, thus preventing the bondage of karma. (23 words)

  8. 8.

    Leaders should be spiritually wise to lead their subordinates. (9 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I think spiritually in leading my subordinates wisely. (11 words)

  9. 9.

    Leaders should rather engage their subordinates in action for material pursuits than wait for them to be ready for spiritual Journey. (21 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I would rather engage my subordinates in action for material pursuits than wait for them to be ready for spiritual journey. (24 words)

  10. 10.

    Leaders should set good example for their followers through actions, since people follow the example of “zreSTha jana” or leaders. (20 words)

    I-form: As a leader, I set good example for my followers through actions, since people follow the example of “zreSTha jana” or leaders. (22 words)

  11. 11.

    It is the duty of leaders to perform even unpleasant work required by their organizational roles. (16 words)

    I-form: It is my duty as a leader to perform even unpleasant work required by my organizational role. (17 words)

Appendix 1D

  1. 1.

    G-form: Human beings cannot live inactively, therefore, leaders must guide their subordinates toward action. (13 words)

    I-form: Human beings cannot live inactively, therefore, I guide my subordinates toward action. (12 words)

  2. 2.

    G-form: Action is better than inaction, therefore, leaders must engage their subordinates in work. (13 words)

    I-form: Action is better than inaction, therefore, I engage my subordinates in work. (12 words)

  3. 3.

    G-form: People tend to pursue materialistic life, therefore, leaders must direct their subordinates toward spirituality for the benefit of the society or loksaMgraha. (22 words)

    I-form: People tend to pursue materialistic life, therefore, I direct my subordinates toward spirituality for the benefit of the society or loksaMgraha. (21 words)

  4. 4.

    G-form: Leaders should lead by example like king janaka did. (09 words)

    I-form: I lead by example like king janaka did. (08 words)

  5. 5.

    G-form: Leaders should be exemplars so that their followers can follow their actions. (12 words)

    I-form: I am an exemplar so that my subordinates can follow my actions. (12 words)

  6. 6.

    G-form: Just like common people work hard in pursuit of material goods, leaders should work for loksaMgraha or the benefit of the society.(22 words)

    I-form: Just like common people work hard in pursuit of material goods, I work for loksaMgraha or the benefit of the society.(21 words)

  7. 7.

    G-form: Leaders should dispel their subordinates’ misconception about being agents who cause outcomes, thus preventing the bondage of karma. (18 words)

    I-form: I try to dispel my subordinates’ misconception about being agents who cause outcomes, thus preventing the bondage of karma. (19 words)

  8. 8.

    G-form: Leaders should be spiritually wise to lead their subordinates. (9 words)

    I-form: I think spiritually in leading my subordinates wisely. (8 words)

  9. 9.

    G-form: Leaders should rather engage their subordinates in action for material pursuits than wait for them to be ready for the spiritual journey. (22 words)

    I-form: I rather engage my subordinates in action for material pursuits than wait for them to be ready for the spiritual journey. (21 words)

  10. 10.

    G-form: People follow the example of “zreSTha jana” or leaders, therefore, leaders should set good example for their followers through actions. (20 words)

    I-form: People follow the example of “zreSTha jana” or leaders, therefore, I set a good example for my followers through actions. (20 words)

  11. 11.

    G-form: It is the duty of leaders to perform even unpleasant work required by their organizational roles. (16 words)

    I-form: It is my duty as a leader to perform even unpleasant work required by my organizational role. (17 words)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bhawuk, D.P.S. (2019). lokasaMgraha: An Indigenous Construct of Leadership and Its Measure. In: Dhiman, S., Amar, A.D. (eds) Managing by the Bhagavad Gītā. Management, Change, Strategy and Positive Leadership. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99611-0_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation