Interviewed by: Paul Ariola 121262

I chose to interview Mr. Basilio as the scholar of politics as he is well known for political issues and how
institutions work. However, we did not have the time to meet since my schedule conflicts with his.
Instead, I interviewed him via phone. As he picked up the phone, I greeted him “Good afternoon sir!
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to interview you. The topic will be about effective leadership
and I will be asking you six questions. But before we begin would is it okay if I record this conversation?”
He laughed and replied: “I think it’s best if you write what I say instead of recording. People might take it
against me.” After that I asked the first questions.

I asked “what is your idea about effective leadership?” then he replied by saying

“Well for me, a leader should or must have five qualities. One quality would be a good vision.
This leader should have a vision in mind for him to plan ahead of time how he will see his
country/institution or whatever in the future. The second quality would be rallying. A leader
should know how to motivate people or more specifically his constituents in supporting his
vision. Third, he should also be an ethical person. Here, effectiveness can be measured if a
leader decides or does the right thing to do. He must act with the rectitude or morality of
intention. Fourth quality would be decisiveness. Sometimes decisions are made to be made in a
short period of time. He has to know how to make a decision by knowing the costs and benefits
of a decision but emphasizing on the benefit of the common good. He must be effective in
making decisions in times of facing difficulties and how he carries out the plan. Fifth quality is
that a leader should be magnanimous. He should know how to address any certain opposition.
Also, he should know how to learn from the mistakes in the past for a better outcome in the
future.”

After that I asked him “Given these qualities you presented, what do you think should be the style of an
effective president?” This was my transition to my second question. He answered that the style of an
effective president should have a political skill. I asked him with a follow question “Sir what do you mean
by political skill? Do you have a specific definition of which?” Then he replied by answering that a
political skill comprises of the skill to address any oppositions. He expounded by saying “in the face of
adversity, the leader should know what to do and what happens. Magnanimous pa din like what I said
earlier wherein a leader should convince his constituents in gaining support for his plan of action.

After this, I gave him a transitioning sentence towards my third question. I asked “given the qualities and
style you stated a while ago, who do you consider to be the most effective president in the Philippines?”
He then laughed and answered by saying that there are plus and minus points to every president we
have now. He also said “I won’t be answering your question right now kasi malalaman mo kung sino
bobotohin ko sa election haha! Pero pinakaimportante ay ang political skill pa din” (I won’t be answering
your question right now since you will know whom I will vote for in the election. Nevertheless, political
skill is still important for an effective president). I then rephrased the question to get a definite answer
“Sir aside from the presidential candidates this year, who would you consider as the most effective
president. He answered “Well, for me, it would be Manny Pangilinan given the fact that he has indeed
the political skill. His achievements would be the evidence to it.”

For the next question, I asked him “Given these qualities of a best leader, how would you describe
PNoy’s leadership?” He answered “Haha! Nakarecord ba to iho?” (Haha! Are you recording the
conversation?) and told him “No sir” and he replied by saying “okay good! Because people might use
this against me haha. Well I only have one comment on that and that is his limited vision. He has this
vision for good governance called the Daang Matuwid but his vision is like a one card trick magician. This
means that all agenda can be done all at once. But this case is impossible since not all agenda can be
executed all at once. He has this good vision but his vision is too limited. The people’s needs in the
country are too many but he’s vision is too limited”

Then I asked the last question “given these descriptions on PNoy’s leadership and on a scale of 1 to 5 – 1
being the lowest and 5 being the highest, how would you rate the President in terms of the following” 1)
organizational capacity? He answered “Ahh! I would give him a 3! He only has limited knowledge on
distribute aids. Remember the MAMASAPANO incident? That’s one example.” 2) political skill? He
answered “I would give him a 2. He doesn’t know how to engage in political give and take.” 3) policy
vision? He answered “I would give him a 3. He lacks sympathy towards his people. I mean he does have
but he lacks the acting skills to do it.” 4) citizen compassion? He answered “Definitely 1! He has no
magnanimity when there was a power shortage in the Mindanao area, the tacloban and mamasapano
incident!” and lastly 5) communication techniques and capabilities? He answered “2! It has been
consistent that there was a lack of communication between institutions.”

All questions were asked and I ended the interview by appreciating for the time and effort given and I
assured that his answers will remain confidential.