Reporting a sewage leak as a resident, waiting for an answer as a business owner, or losing out on an opportunity to another qualified applicant because of political connections are more than manifestations of administrative failures. They expose the underlying leadership culture around what matters with respect to shared expectations, how power operates, and whether cheating on certain things has consequences. With local elections approaching, we need to take a close look at the people running for office, as well as the habits that enable them to maintain subpar leadership.

Read more The leader who serves – or the leader who consumes?

The culture within an organisation is the way things are done around here. It includes the unwritten rules that characterise how we deal with each other daily and whether we speak the truth. Thus, the official values of a municipality contrast with the behaviour that is promoted and, therefore, with how appointments are made. Loyalty to one’s superior or to one’s team replaces competence. Criticism is punished while mistakes are concealed. When those in power do wrong, they are excused by their colleagues. In time, such behaviour teaches everyone what the organisation really values.

Weak leadership is more than the absence of any great leader. The eventual culture of weak leadership is one in which promises are not translated into action, in which holding public office is seen as a means to amass wealth, and in which the best people are denied opportunities due to favouritism. These types of leaders focus on their own positions and allow work to deteriorate while they are in power. Residents are taken for a ride during election campaigns, only to be frustrated afterwards. Employees will often choose to protect powerful individuals rather than serve the public. In the end, the institution is organised for the survival of the politicians rather than for the needs of real people.

Read more When suffering becomes a call to serve

The human consequences of governments failing to deliver reliable public services are immense – using up the time, money and effort that families could better use elsewhere. Effort is being put into maintaining under-resourced and neglected infrastructure which, in the absence of adequate maintenance, can soon cease to function. For those on low incomes who cannot afford to purchase alternative services, life can become increasingly difficult. For businesses, uncertainty is damaging, and for employees and their households, the impact of substandard public services can weigh heavily. Leaders who dismiss experiences of inadequate public services as mere complaints or a public relations problem fail to recognise the human dimension of their policies and actions. Even the most ‘human’ policy is less than humane in practice.

Christian values demand servant leadership

The assessment of this culture by Christian values is stringent. Jesus demanded that rulers not dominate others but rather serve them. He defined the true measure of greatness by a servant’s actions in Mark 10:42-45. In the context of his washing of the disciples’ feet in John 13:1-17, the Christian understanding of leadership is one of responsibility for others’ lives, seeking to bring security, dignity, and hope. Hollow words of politically correct terminology (to say what readers/listeners would like to hear) will mean nothing unless demonstrated in the practical decisions made, the way relationships are conducted, and the responsible use of the resources at one’s disposal.

It’s not sufficient for a person of good character to avoid making poor decisions; they must also learn from their mistakes. Likewise, a highly competent leader with poor character can further exploit community members, using their skills to do even more harm. The best leaders are those of strong character who also possess great competence and are willing to take responsibility for their actions. This means that the leader has a sense of responsibility for their work, seeks out good advice, appoints good staff and follows through on their commitments. Humility is acknowledging what you don’t know, and accountability is taking responsibility for your actions, admitting failure, explaining what went wrong, and acting to fix it. Blaming your predecessor for problems you inherited is not accountable behaviour, and blaming your opponents for your failures is not either.

Leadership development from a Christian perspective (with 85% of the population identifying as Christians, thus to candidates who claim to be Christians)covers five key areas: Christ, community, character, calling, and competencies. Essentially, all leadership development needs to incorporate more than skills to enable truly healthy leaders. Leaders need a good moral compass, a sense of purpose, and accountability that enables others to question and correct them. In public institutions, this means resisting the isolated strongman leader and instead developing strong teams where people can question and hold one another to account in an atmosphere of shared commitment and the freedom to speak the truth.

Changing leadership cultures also requires changing what institutions reward. Honest reporting of problems and services rendered with diligence must be acknowledged and rewarded. When recruiting and promoting, relevant ability should be assessed against transparent standards. Instead of being judged by impressive reports that conceal unresolved problems, performance should be assessed against tangible results. Good procedures are essential; however, they must also support services. Innovations must be tested responsibly and given sufficient budget, required expertise and appropriate oversight.

Voters shape accountability at the ballot box

This has implications for the country’s future economy and society. The conditions for investment and employment to increase, with the aim of creating more jobs and stronger communities through reliable infrastructure, administration, and institutions, need to be strengthened. Businesses need to have confidence in the fairness of decisions, in reliable services and in the responsible use of public means. Addressing some of the causes of crime through effective policing and a just criminal justice system will also be necessary. However, no change of leadership can guarantee these outcomes, and there are many causes of crime. The most damaging is dishonest, incapable administration, which undermines all long-term progress.

The responsibility of citizens within this system is weakened when they make excuses for the misconduct of a person from their preferred party, language, or community. Moreover, society’s culture is harmed when unverified allegations are spread, and every opponent is perceived as an enemy. Critical examination of facts and circumstances, practical questions and equal standards of measurement are the hallmarks of responsible participation. What does one promise? Who promises it? What does one have at one’s disposal? When does one expect to see results? What does one do if promises are not kept? These are the kinds of questions that transform campaign enthusiasm into public responsibility.

Christian voters could help form a bunch of people who practise truthfulness, fairness, compassion and courage. Their witness would then actually count when their money, appointments and organisational life were also characterised by truthfulness, fairness, compassion and courage. In the interests of peaceful participation and informed discussion of issues, Christians could promote co-operation between people of different political and social viewpoints. In the struggle for power over the common good, Christians must defend the dignity of all, be they Christians or not and voters for any political party or not.

Culture defeats strategy without integrity

New leadership will develop when service to others is more respected than positional power, when ability counts more than connections, and integrity is more valued than protecting special friends. We can express our wishes regarding these priorities during the election process and remain good citizens to ensure they are upheld. We should expect that leaders keep their promises in what they do, and we must do the same. The communities we live in need institutions that honour the dignity of all people and create opportunities for all to succeed. Building such institutions is work of faithful service and shared accountability.

At the national, organisational and community levels, culture is how we behave, how we practise, how we carry out our work, and how we organise ourselves to achieve our goals. A political party’s promises and strategies on better public services, more jobs and safer communities can capture our imagination and often even convince us. But there is a second qualifier to add here: ‘Culture eats strategy for breakfast’. In other words, even the best strategies can be defeated by a culture of greed, nepotism, corruption and incompetence. So, we must look at the behaviour a party encourages, rewards and even demonstrates. Our vote to create a better South Africa needs to include a demand for a different leadership culture – one of integrity, competence, accountability, and service to all South Africans.

This column is the opinion of the writer and does not represent the views of Witbank News.
This column is the opinion of the writer and does not represent the views of Witbank News.

Your city, your story, as it happens. Stay in the loop with WITBANK NEWS.
Find us on our  website, Facebook, X,  Instagram or TikTok

Preview in new tab

Got a tip? Email: [email protected]