OPINION: Why excessive transparency reflects poor leadership

My first article this year was about citizens showing trust in their government, and one of the factors that I considered important is transparency: honesty and openness in governance. Wherever there is transparency, there will be trust.

I also did mention that a leader should strike a balance between what goes public and what remains under cover.

Some degree of opacity is inevitable – and can actually be healthy in a democracy. Excessive transparency should be avoided, since it can cause problems, including unintended consequences.

Also transparency requires context – without which what you say can easily be misunderstood or misconstrued, and backfire.

Also, transparency is a spectrum; it isn’t all or nothing. Things don’t have to be either completely open or completely secretive.

If you indiscriminately make everything 100 per cent open, you could be wasting other people’s time, confusing them – and even causing them strife.

As a leader, it’s important to ask yourself when transparency is appropriate and helpful – and when it is distracting or a burden. Are you being transparent for the sake of it, or are you truly trying to help people make better choices, better decisions – and, therefore, build trust in you?

At the end of the day, transparency is a positive force. So, this balancing act is important.

Way back as a practising professor, I attended leadership seminars organised by UDSM. I recollect that the vice chancellor or someone from top management would officially open the seminar, and then give an excuse to leave.

This was fairly common in those days, and I wonder today how much the leaders missed because what was covered in the seminar was very relevant. We also learned how to balance transparency.

With this in mind, I ask the question: was it necessary or prudent for the Speaker of Parliament to summon for questioning the Controller and Auditor General (CAG) via a press conference?

I’m not questioning the legality; nor defending any of the two officials; I’m merely questioning the process that involved too much undue transparency.

Both are top-echelon, highly-respected public service officials who could have amicably communicated with each other off the public record.

This is where leadership training is useful.

In addition to balancing the transparency factor, seminars also impart knowledge about leadership characteristics such as humility. Humility makes one a more effective leader.

The more you can contain your ego (‘Edging God Out!’), the more realistic you are about issues. You learn how to listen and admit that you don’t have all the answers. You exhibit the attitude that you can learn from anyone at any time.

Your pride doesn’t get in the way of gathering the knowledge you need to achieve the best results. It doesn’t keep you from sharing the resulting credit.

Humility allows you to acknowledge your mistakes.

Great leaders are those who are strong and decisive – but are also humble. Humility doesn’t mean one is weak or unsure of oneself.

It means one does indeed have the self-confidence and self-awareness to recognize the value of others without feeling threatened.

This is one of the rarer attributes of good leadership because it requires containment of one’s ego.

Great leaders are outstanding in strategising: another strong leadership quality.

Great leaders have the ability to look ahead, to anticipate with some accuracy which way the wind is blowing.

Leaders should have the ability to anticipate trends well in advance. They should continually ask themselves: ‘Based on what is happening today, what will it be like in three months, six months, one year, two years ahead?” They do this through thoughtful, strategic planning.

Because of increasing competitiveness, only leaders with foresight can gain the ‘first mover advantage’ (FMA).

Leadership is the ability to get people to work for you because they love to. Your ability to get everyone working and pulling together is essential for success. The 20/80 rule applies here, whereby twenty per cent of your people contribute 80 per cent of your results.

Your ability to select these people – and then to work well with them on a daily basis – is essential to the smooth functioning of your organization.

Get the cooperation of others by making a commitment to get along well with each key person every single day.

You always have a choice when it comes to a task: you can do it yourself, or you can get someone from your team to do it. It’s all about team-building.

There are many other things about leadership. But, I highly recommend that top leaderships take some time out of their busy schedules to attend such seminars.

Otherwise, this overt friction in government leaderships is unhealthy. Belligerent behaviour in public office is harmful. It should not be tolerated – and, least of all: supported.