The lack of a succession plan, poor management quality, less attention to customer satisfaction, less consideration to stakeholders interest poor resource management and no continuity in execution earlier started tasks disregard to the need for respectful organizational stewardship, lack of accountability in leadership and hasty or unprepared leadership decisions can have severe consequences including organizational instability, loss of valuable institutional assets, knowledge, lowered employee morale, and increased staff turnover.
Leadership evolves through diverse styles influenced by knowledge, politics, culture, social contexts, and psychological traits, often reflecting broader societal shifts. These “colours” or trends range from adaptive, tech-driven approaches to inclusive practices shaped by personal and group identities, impacting organizational success for better or worse.
Immoral act reduce employee motivation and loyalty as lack of growth and opportunities to employee talent development discourage energetic movement. Such failures erode trust, foster disengagement, and amplify conflicts, leading to inconsistent decision-making and higher absenteeism. As employees feel unsupported and directionless, immoral acts of leaders or neglect of due consideration for talent development their motivation and loyalty diminish. Such disregard unethical acts where unprepared leaders prioritize personal thrift growth over systemic improvement, result in reduce energetic drive for better performance.
There is a need for knowledge-or experience where decisions is evidence-based, to create innovation. Leadership that take advantage of power dynamics for personal gain is un worthy of the position of higher responsibility chair. Besides, low attitude to skill and experience undoubtedly result deleterious, governance models. Such leadership can neither strengthen nor aspire organizational success.
As pointed out immoral acts in leadership reduce motivation, loyalty, and trust. Similarly neglect of talent developmentsignals disregard for employee growth which ultimately leads to disengagement. Most often, unprepared leaders prioritize personal thrift and undermines systemic improvement. Failure of stewardship weakens organizational resilience and long-term prospects.
Leadership styles evolve reflecting broader societal changes including cultural, political, and technological trends which directly shape their effectiveness. Adaptive, inclusive, and knowledge-driven leadership styles tend to drive organizational resilience and innovation. On the contrary, leadership overly shaped by power struggles or personality flaws weakens governance and performance.
Ethiopia’s and most African political history reveals a persistent lack of robust, institutionalized succession planning, leading to centralized leadership around individuals and systemic collapses upon the individual downfall. Lack of good governance in different states lead to their down fall. Haile Selassie’s regime downfall highlighted the absence of a clear succession plan. This over-reliance on personal rule, amid famine, economic stagnation, and military unrest, fueled the 1974 revolution, as no institutional mechanisms ensured continuity beyond the emperor. Leadership was unduly centralized around him, and when he fell, the entire system collapsed. The absence of collective leadership left the system vulnerable, culminating in the monarchy’s overthrow by the Derg.
Similarly, Mengistu Haile Mariam’s rise within the Derg involved eliminating rivals like Generals Aman Andom and Tafari Benti, consolidating one-man rule under Marxist-Leninist ideology without provisions for handover. Mengistu, leading to its rapid disintegration in 1991 amid insurgencies and this led to his flight to Zimbabwe. This highlighted governance flaws where revolutionary legitimacy overshadowed institutional resilience. The deposition of Mengistu dismantled not only his rule but also the entire governing structure, showing that the system was dependent on one man rather than institutional continuity.
The late PM Meles Zenawi’s death in 2012 exposed fractures in the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), as his personal authority had sidelined rivals and concentrated power, lacking a groomed successor. The event afterwards indicates shows leadership fractures within EPRDF that revealed the party’s heavily reliance on his personal authority. The lack of collective succession planning weakened the EPRDF existence. This a show case that bred instability without collective planning, resulting in leadership vacuums and internal purges.
PM Hailemariam Desalegn’s resignation due to inability to sustain leadership until the end of his term though appreciable which can be considered as responsible act than clinging rigidly to power until collapse. Off course his resignation in 2018 was framed as an effort to open space for reforms and national dialogue during a time of political unrest in Ethiopia. Yet the later fracture of EPRDF demonstrated the fragility of Ethiopia’s governance model and lack or absence of robust succession plan. But this is not to mean absolutely there was no good thing done in the previous administrations. Previous administrations, including Hailemariam’s and those before him, had both achievements and shortcomings.
Legacies are layered with both progress and setbacks. Goods: Infrastructure development, economic growth initiatives, and attempts at modernization. Bads: Political repression, limited democratic space, and unresolved ethnic tensions.
Anyhow, such dependency of leadership with only one person where power and skill is concentrated in a single figure or individual creates systemic vulnerability. Thus far outcomes clearly shows the need for creating enabling environment to fill the gap and sustain resilient leadership to withstand shock or maintain governance as it should be.
This is not a thing only in government high political position to day there is a need for well-organized succession plan in both government organization and private companies. Ethiopia’s government organizations and private companies often lack robust succession planning, with positions frequently held until retirement or death or deposition for political case or otherwise. The absence of merit base assignment hinder carrier advancement and encourage staff turnover. Shifting to open the system, to merit-driven succession requires transparent recruitment, independent oversight clean from political or other secular affiliation, prioritizing skills and training over favoritism. This approach needs open door for merit base renovation away from political deal in civil service.
Al the same, this is not to mean that good leadership is only a matter of succession plan only, there is more to it with modern principle of management that help to bring good governance. Just moving forward breaking old ties with old backward procedures will let us have new better alternative to find resolution to move forward.
Adopting new modern approach with open mindset promotes constructive engagement, enabling all to work together towards common goals with energy rather than remaining stuck with dirty bureaucratic tricks Good leadership transcends mere succession planning; it integrates modern governance principles to foster effective, transparent, and inclusive systems that drive progress beyond outdated bureaucratic practices. Adapting agile methods and the state of art in management will help deliver services timely using resources optimally, taking advantage of all available means to meet needs with innovation.
Just putting leadership at cliff edge with no succession plan resulted clumsy down fall so far and will not do good to move forward with honor. Appling good management or leadership makes the difference between patching up a cracked foundation and rebuilding one that can truly hold for generations. This principle applies everywhere: in our organizations, in our communities, and in the international arena.
Leadership without foresight collapses, while leadership with sustainable structures endures. Thus we must advocate for leadership structures strong enough to sustain progress over time. Leadership is not about fragile fixes. It is about the courage to rebuild, to transform, system with sustainable growth with instrumental mind to endure better work and life atmosphere.
Good leadership enables smooth transitions that maintain momentum, morale, and effective governance which promotes progress and honours. True leadership cultivates an instrumental mind-set one that endures challenges, nurtures resilience, and creates better atmospheres for both work and life. It is not reactive, but visionary. It does not cling to temporary remedies, but lays foundations that last.
Governance and leadership are complex, involving both progress and setbacks. The balance of good and bad underlines the need for sustained reforms aimed at building stronger, more resilient leadership frameworks and governance structures that can better manage transitions and withstand challenges without dissolving into fragmentation.
You can reach the writer via gzachewwolde@gmail.com
