Dear Editor,
I don’t know about you, but I had many reactions to the President’s 5:30am meeting to address project delays across Ministries. In the space of sixty minutes of his address, I danced between annoyance, agreement and everything in between. Upon reflection, I am choosing to see the President’s meeting as a teachable moment – an exercise in sense-making and question formation. Before I give my two cents, it is always important to note how I am coming into this conversation, so there is no question about my biases or lack thereof. I have several years of project management experience and certifications, and my current academic pursuits and research are centered on leadership for sustainability. Perhaps most important though is my identity as a Guyanese.
From a Project Management perspective, delays in projects are not uncommon, especially when multiple moving parts and variables are involved. However, in this instance, I can understand the President’s frustration at the delays, as these projects are critical to Guyana’s development, and they directly impact the lives of Guyanese. What I do not and cannot understand is why we selectively left out the other multi-million dollar contract owners whose projects are years behind schedule. Was it a case of selective accountability or simply an oversight? If the goal is transparency and responsibility, then why were some names notably absent from this “name and shame” activity? What seems to be baffling me the most is this narrative that the contractors need to have project management skills so that they are able to manage their respective projects?
Editor, a causal look at the list of people who are being given contracts will highlight a couple of things, 1.) The lack of capacity and capability of many of these contractors to effectively manage large or small-scale projects and 2.) A troubling but familiar pattern of certain companies and/or individuals being selectively awarded contracts. This then raises the question: is the issue really about project management deficiencies or is it about our procurement practices and the clear patterns that often seem to shape who gets these contracts. If we are to be honest with ourselves, we would not pretend that favouritism isn’t embedded within our systems.
From a leadership perspective, this meeting raises important questions about how accountability and responsibility are cultivated within a system. It seemed, to me, a clear indication of the type of leadership style that is at play. The President spoke at length about leading by example, while at the same time publicly shaming and speaking down to 1.) The people he hand-picked as part of his cabinet, and 2.) The people who were hired by those who he has ultimate responsibility for. There seems to be a contradiction at play here. You cannot in one breath claim to lead by example and in the next, diminish those under your leadership. Respectfully, I would encourage the President to reflect on the message being sent – to the younger generation, aspiring leaders, and to the public at large – through this approach.
As a Guyanese, I completely understand this whole situation – the President’s approach, his Ministers nonchalant attitudes and the projects being behind schedule. All of it is on brand with how things operate in Guyana. This is nothing new. Which pains me to accept and admit. The posture of the President, the reaction of his Ministers, the timing of the meeting, the locking of gates, all of it feels familiar. Unreasonable delays, public reprimands and displays of power are familiar strategies in our culture, used to show who’s in charge and gain political points rather than to genuinely address systemic issues. So, the question becomes, what kind of leadership do we want and are willing to accept for our country?
Lastly, the President was sure to point out that we should lead by example. In that spirit, I would encourage him to share with the Guyanese people the Concept Note for the One Guyana Initiative. Recall that the President said that this would be ready and available to the public by August 2023. If we are talking about delays to things that are of national importance, then it is imperative that we also hold the President accountable for his commitments.
Sincerely,
N.N. Chapman
