Accountability

So Tony Blair got elected again, despite some sources maintaining that the opposition party (Conservatives) actually got more votes. Well, he didn't cheat, but he running a system whereby those who he is directly accountable to -the people, do not seem to have much of a say in his performance.

Now, I am not saying that it is easy to create a democratic system; since every country has a different one, there is obviously no right method. However I do believe that there should be pressure for reform if the system is functioning so badly.

Accountability is crucial. How can he claim to represent the majority of the British people if he does not? Therefore he should govern the country on the principle that he represents only 20% of the population. Thus the rest of the population should have a way of expressing their opinion in order to represent themselves, and this could be through a demonstration, like the 1 million people (of a total population of 60 million) who protested about Iraq. That is a sizable number, should they be taken more seriously if they march again, since now the government would have to listen to them more (before Tony Blai actually did have a bigger proportion of the public who supported him).

Every organisation needs to be accountable. To who, is an interesting question, and one that brings up the topic of stakeholders. Who are stakeholders, who are the most important, how can you represent them or engage with them, how can you be transparent with them and how can you ensure you do not operate as to create a conflict between stakeholders?

Responsible leaders need to pay close attention to these issues -they need to think about their accountability, and choose an option that is suitable. Unfortunately its harder to me more precise than that, since different types of organisations, and they are distinguished based on their accountability. Needless to say all organisations should ensure that the accountability method they have selected is working as intended. If not, maybe its time to reconsider. Who are you responsible for? How can you be responsible to them?

Responsible influencing

Reading this article (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GE11Ak01.html) brought back to my mind one topic that I feel very strongly about, and have a great interest in. It is, the role of the media. As much as I would love to talk about this in more detail (based on several essays written at University), I want to focus on this article and on the lessons for responsible leadership.

I'll briefly state I am a big fan of ATimes, since many of its writers are the kind that are not in mainstream media - they do not have a particular standpoint and many guest writers are welcomed. Thus to read about Iran from the viewpoint of an Iranian professor based in Iran is always refreshing.

His example is of the US Media's coverage of Iran's nuclear threat. Granted the example is of Fox news (one of the most right-wing media outlets, and the most criticised for its uncritical support of the Bush government), but this media source is also one of the most widely viewed in the US -it has massive influence.

To create a 'special feature' on Iran, would presumably mean to do some in-depth research and create the time for a proper assessment of Iran and its nuclear threat (more so than the usual brief news items), so it is shocking that these 'specials' can be so subjective.

The media plays a crucial role in democracy, and it provides leadership to many people who follow the media, what they learn impacts how they act. Thus it plays a crucial leadership role. In a market system, poor leadership, would be noticed, and that leader would be changed. In the media, it is not so simple. It is not so easy to criticise back, not so easy to get heard if you disagree, and so on.

Responsible leaders should provide information to their followers that is objective; especially if it is claiming to be objective, or if their very position as a leader depends on them being objective. No objectivity = no respect = no leadership. Thus in this situation, more than others, objectivity would be crucial. Consider it almost the same as truthfulness. A lack of objectivity is equal to being incorrect.

Responsible leaders need to deliver on what they promise; they need to create channels for feedback, they need to protect their position and reputation. They should not rely on other's lack of knowledge and lack of ability to discover the leader's flaws. One hopes that the 'market' will eventually provide avenues for the followers to discover that they are being led astray, and to provide alternative options. If a media source is proclaiming to be objective, it should (at least try to) be. If the media has such an influence on people, it has a global responsibility to do this. Leaders in other fields can take strong lessons from this!