Abstract:
During the past few decades, debate surrounding the role of a firm-hand leadership
style (command-and-control, authoritarian leadership or dictatorship) to bolster
rapid economic growth took place in some East-Asian Tiger countries, such as
Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea. Western development partners, such as the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and former British Prime
Minister Tony Blair’s African Governance Initiative (AGI), as well as leaders
like President Bill Clinton and Tony Blair praised this type of leadership. These
institutions, initiatives and individuals praise this approach, as it led to economic
growth in some African countries. Rwanda and Ethiopia are often identified as two
prominent performers in this regard. Western donors and international financial
institutions (IFIs) are now arguing that the rest of Africa should replicate the East-
Asian Tigers’ Developmental State model to achieve economic development.
However, literature on leadership styles rejects firm-hand leadership outright as
a “debilitating style” (Weir 2011:1). Literature in this regard states that Africa has
been under authoritarian regimes since time immemorial and the very leadership
style that is currently believed to lead to economic growth in the East-Asian Tiger
countries and certain African countries was also blamed for having contributed to
Africa’s under-development.
This contradictory state of affairs leads to an important question: What
did previous African firm-hand leaders in Rwanda and Ethiopia do, or fail to do
compared to their counterparts’ current initiatives to achieve the same economic
growth? This article aims to explore and contextualise the concept of firm-hand
leadership within the broader leadership framework. Furthermore, it sets out to
uncover in what way post-independence African leaders, who were described in
the literature as dictators and authoritarian, ruined their countries’ economies. The article also uncovers and reports on contemporary firm-hand leaders in Africa’s
alternative approach to develop their countries’ economies. Finally, the article
attempts to unpack the theoretical intricacies that surround the concept in order to
delineate critical success factors for this type of leadership on the African context.
