There are as many definitions of leadership as there are leaders; with each defining this concept the best way it appeals to them. The world has seen many ceremonial leaders come and go especially in the political arena; and among most of the expected qualities they should possess should be accountability. Surprising enough, subjects of leadership find it a little difficult to see beyond the lapses of Leaders no matter how accountable they claim. It is in this dilemma that I’m tempted to question the place of accountability in leadership.

I was looking through the accounting project topics of some undergraduates recently to consider their perspective on this matter; am sure you can guess what I found- an average employee or student in the world of finance sees quality leadership from how well the leader is able to handle financial statements, economic performances and financial evaluation.

Now if you ask a Politician this same question, you will certainly get a different response, same it is when you ask a teacher, doctor or a business man. When it’s my turn to answer this question, my response will be;

[b]Well No…[/b]I can explain
Because accountability in leadership means different things to different people based on their psychological makeup, it could be a little difficult to grant a ‘kudos’ to a leader no matter how well the leader performs.

Many leaders exist who have not handled public finances no matter the number but they perform so well. What am I driving at? It is wrong to base the quality or performance of leadership from the accountability point of view because what appeals to one in accountability may not appeal to another the same way, there are other yardsticks to measure quality leadership.

Some of which includes but not limited to

• Effective communication, collaboration and commitment

• Ability to take responsibility

• Taking the first lead always

• Service

• Quality assurance and discipline

• Self-discipline and respect