One of the most persistent weaknesses in modern leadership is the habit of comparing bad situations instead of fixing them. When citizens raise genuine concerns about hardship, poor public services, or weak governance, they are often met not with solutions but with comparisons; others are worse off, the past was worse, or another country is struggling more. Such arguments may sound persuasive, but they solve nothing. Leadership is not tested by how well failure is explained, but by how effectively it is corrected.
Comparing failures does not transform them into successes. A bad situation does not become acceptable simply because a worse one exists elsewhere. Yet this line of reasoning is frequently deployed to deflect criticism, lower expectations, and excuse inaction. Over time, comparison becomes a convenient shield against accountability, allowing poor outcomes to be defended rather than addressed.
In governance, comparison is not a substitute for performance. Citizens do not elect leaders to explain why conditions could have been worse; they elect them to make things better. Roads are not repaired by statistics, hospitals are not improved by historical references, and unemployment is not reduced by pointing to other struggling economies. What people experience in their daily lives remains the truest measure of leadership.
Leaders have a responsibility to treat all problems with equal seriousness. However, the tendency to equalize by arguing that one problem is less urgent because another is worse often hinders effective solutions. True governance does not measure hardship against hardship; it addresses each challenge effectively, fairly, and transparently. Excusing or delaying action because a worse problem exists elsewhere undermines public trust and stalls progress.
This culture of justification is particularly dangerous because it normalizes mediocrity. Once leaders succeed in convincing the public that hardship is inevitable or relatively acceptable, urgency disappears,accountability weakens, innovation stalls. Gradually, governments become comfortable managing decline rather than pursuing progress, while citizens are conditioned to endure rather than to demand improvement.
Even more concerning is the long-term effect on public trust. When leaders repeatedly justify failure through comparison, cynicism grows and confidence in public institutions erodes. Citizens disengage not because they are apathetic, but because they feel unheard. A society that loses faith in solutions eventually settles for explanations, and that is a dangerous place for any democracy.
Moreover, comparing bad situations undermines the dignity and intelligence of the people. Citizens understand that challenges exist; economic pressures, global shocks, inherited problems, but they also recognize when genuine effort, clear policy direction, and measurable progress are missing. Explanation is not the same as excuse, and the public knows the difference.
True leadership confronts problems honestly and directly. It acknowledges shortcomings without defensiveness, proposes practical solutions, and commits to clear timelines that allow citizens to track progress. Governance is a continuous responsibility, and the need for more time to prepare after assuming office is rarely a convincing justification for inaction.
Societies do not progress by ranking their suffering; they progress by reducing it. The true test of leadership is not the ability to justify hardship, but the courage and competence to confront it. Citizens deserve leaders who replace comparisons with action, excuses with accountability, and rhetoric with results. Ending the culture of comparing failures and treating every problem with equal seriousness is not optional,it is essential if leadership is to regain meaning and public trust.
Author:
George Akom
Senior Assistant Registrar
Ghana Communication Technology University
kingakom77@gmail.com | +233 24 338 7291
