Whether the Pakistani president himself fits a different bill is a moot question that may be debated elsewhere, but perhaps many would agree that the situation of Bangladesh has been roughly similar, give or take some degrees of difference under the different regimes.

What Bangladesh has lacked is a type of leadership that can truly transform this nation, rich in resources and potential that have been plundered right and left, both from within and without. Evidence of Bangladesh's richness is reflected in how much wealth a few individuals were able to amass in a few years. But this is probably the tip of the iceberg.

How much more has been looted awaits revelation, depending on how far and deep the present "powers that be" are willing to go to earn the people's respect and trust in their motives and abilities.

Clearly, the resources are there and will continue to be generated by the immense labour pool, the alluvial soil, the mighty rivers, the gas fields, etc. The question is whether we will see a transforming leadership that will harness and channel these resources and build the dream of 1971: Shonar Bangla.

Much has been written about leadership. The leader must be able to marshal human, informational, and material resources to achieve a desired vision. In the early 50s, leaders were placed in an autocratic-democratic continuum. The autocratic leader dominated decision-making while the democratic leader permitted individuals and groups to decide within prescribed limits.

This one-dimensional view of leadership is no longer tenable, and provides little insight into the multidimensional nature of leadership. More recently, there has been the evolution of a new concept -- transformational leadership (TL). Under these leaders, subordinates function more effectively, put more effort into their work, and are generally more satisfied and less conflict-ridden. These leaders are also more adept at making "second-order" changes, i.e., they are capable of changing systems and processes with enduring effects.

Who are these transfor-mational leaders? Four traits reflect their orientations:

• Idealised influence is a trait that makes the leader admired, respected, and trusted. All words and actions of TLs must foster and strengthen these characteristics. Importantly, it must be recognised that it takes time for these characteristics to take root in the minds of others; but it takes only one misstep to destroy the created impression. Such are the vicissitudes facing TLs, such are the asymmetric properties of this important trait.
• Inspirational motivation is a second trait that enables TLs to motivate followers by providing them meaning and challenge in the work they do, and imbuing them with the leader's values. If those who work in association with the leader demonstrate baser motivations, the leader has clearly failed as an inspirational motivator.
• Intellectual stimulation is the third trait of TLs, whereby they stimulate followers to be innovative and creative as they are encouraged to approach old situations in new ways. Without creating the intellectually stimulating environment, followers may feel trapped in the mind-set of the leader, with which they may not always be in accord.
• Finally, the TLs are involved with their core group, paying attention to their needs and by acting as coaches and mentors. Involvement here is key.

Transformational leadership is about inspiring followers to assimilates the leader's values and adopt them in one's own sphere of influence, thereby creating a chain, or ripple, effect down the line.

Unfortunately, in a culture that breeds, nurtures, and sustains a feudalistic mind-set, where (so-called) leaders at every level behave like feudal lords with numerous serfs and sycophants to serve their whims and fancies at a moment's notice ... to be repeated down the line ... the type of leadership that this nation has seen is crude, abysmal, reactionary and lacking promise of instilling participative and democratic norms.

Among those who have begun to raise a hue and cry about reforms, early elections, and the installing of democratic ideals, none seem to fit the bill as transformational leaders. The noise they have begun to make seems to be driven by external forces, or by a desire to save their own skins, that will do little to install democracy in the country. Elections do not a democracy make!

What this nation needs is deep social transformation that is more likely to be effected in the younger generation as yet unexposed to the ways of the greedy and corrupt. The need is also to build institutions under a transformational leadership that will serve as the foundation to root out the corrupt and the inept.

This process must begin at the top and with a degree of urgency, sincerity, and commitment that this nation has not seen in the past. The leadership must come from the ranks of the new, the educated, the young, the idealistic, and the imaginative.

Without such leaders, we will again be stuck with a set of autocrats and feudal lords who often rely on external sources and not their own people for their legitimacy and continuity, and who have shown that serving their own interests is paramount. And that does not bode well for the dream of Shonar Bangla.

The writer is Professor and Program Chair at Pennsylvania State University.