LEADERSHIP CANNOT BE DORMANT

Jan 20, 2017 Editorial, Features / Columnists

Guyana has for a number of years been awash with all sorts of problems and adequate strategies have not been pursued to solve them. How did these problems come about? In essence, when performance is not driven by output, evaluation becomes subjective and at times redundant. If the political hierarchy believes that it has the right to govern, irrespective of performance, it will be difficult to see the dissatisfaction among the people and the slippages in credibility over time. Reverence should not be confused with legitimacy.
Since taking office twenty months ago, there were signs of poor leadership in the new administration as misconduct was not dealt with condignly. A government that does not sanction wrongdoing is bound to lose credibility. If a government does not discipline its employees when they mess-up, there will be more scandals. Leadership cannot be dormant.
The government is accountable to the people, and it is solely responsible for its actions, good or bad. Those in authority should not appoint people who will kowtow to them. They will only get what they want to hear, and that creates a false sense of security. In the same manner, they should not appoint someone who has major weaknesses or is not the most qualified or capable to occupy positions of significant responsibility and sensitivity. It will create rifts between those who consider themselves to be experienced and capable, and those who believe that qualification based on IQ and the support of a leader is all that is required for success.
A government should recruit people who would put the country’s interest ahead of theirs and who are supremely qualified and want to serve for the right reasons, not persons with their own agendas.
And if a government is going to fast-track someone for a job, it should make sure that the person has control over their impulses. Otherwise, the government will be undermining itself. Accountability assumes that the government has a performance management system in place that is anchored in hard goals. If the government does not, it will never be able to get rid of the square pegs in round holes. It will do irreparable harm to itself if it tries to sidestep or avoid the media, however small the media house might be. It must also recognize that social media is a powerful tool that can be used against it, if it does not know how to leverage it.
During the last election, change was one of the major campaign promises of the government; therefore, it should be the architect and sponsor of change and should lead in that direction. But scandals, incompetence, arrogance, abrasiveness, mismanagement and silly politics seem to have derailed the government’s ability to make the changes it promised.
Its departure from its agenda of change is likely to damage its credibility and reduce its trustworthiness among the people. And since the government had not demonstrated any real transparency and accountability, how does it change its modus operandi when it has not even embarked on any major change.
It seems that the government does not intend to do anything differently, despite clear evidence that it is haemorrhaging from the fallout of the drug bond debacle, the D’Urban Park fiasco and other scandals. This is its dilemma. Its attitude is like a failed administration believing it has an inherent right to govern.
Perhaps the clearest sign of a government short on ideas was the appointment of a number of retired individuals instead of youths, ostensibly for succession, and to provide a breathing space for them to consolidate power. None of this has been happening. Great leadership involves taking risks and making strategic choices by focusing on the areas of greatest opportunity and on the performance and the organizational health of the administration.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News