We often learn the most about leadership by watching our leaders in times of crisis. As world leaders attempt to contain the rapid spread of COVID-19, they must simultaneously perform two opposing and difficult tasks: prepare their countries for significant risks and avoid inciting panic.
What we see as a result are multiple test cases in crisis leadership, as several different countries face similar versions of the same problem and respond with significantly different approaches and outcomes.
By focusing on the COVID-19 response on three continents - specifically looking at China, Italy, and the United States - there are clear lessons on different aspects of managing the outbreak. These lessons are not only useful to other countries as they manage their COVID-19 responses, but also provide valuable examples for leaders in all areas. la Chine, l’Italie et les États-Unis – il y a des enseignements clairs sur différents aspects de la gestion de l’épidémie. Ces leçons ne sont pas seulement utiles à d’autres pays dans la mesure où elles gèrent leurs réponses COVID-19, mais elles fournissent également de précieux exemples pour les leaders dans tous les domaines.
China shows the limits of "COMMAND & CONTROL" and the benefits of decisive action
Even before the COVID-19 outbreak, the Chinese government was widely believed to have significant control capacity, using broad state authority and a significant surveillance program. As the starting point for COVID-19, the Chinese government's efforts to control the virus were watched by the world.
China responded with what the World Health Organization called "perhaps the most ambitious, agile, and aggressive disease containment effort in history," including shutting down manufacturing sectors, sharing information widely, conducting mass testing, and quarantining millions of people. The Chinese government made the decision to absorb a significant economic cost to contain COVID-19 rather than potentially lose control, and the result has been effective - the number of new cases has steadily declined in recent weeks.World Health Organization called "perhaps the most ambitious, agile, and aggressive disease containment effort in history," including shutting down manufacturing sectors, sharing information widely, conducting mass testing, and quarantining millions of people. The Chinese government made the decision to absorb a significant economic cost to contain COVID-19 rather than potentially lose control, and the result has been effective - the number of new cases has steadily declined in recent weeks.
This is an example of the benefit of command and control leadership and a decisive action to immediately consolidate efforts into an aggressive response.
However, consider the erosion of trust that this type of system creates. The Atlantic has documented how local Chinese authorities underreported the spread of COVID-19 to the federal government, as Wuhan Province did not report the outbreak until weeks after it began and downplayed the likelihood of human transmission until whistleblowers came forward and were subsequently punished. This delay cost China valuable time to contain the initial outbreak.
When people are afraid to come forward to tell the truth and are discouraged from speaking out, critical information often does not reach the leadership until the problem has escalated. Although it cannot be known with certainty, the COVID-19 outbreak may have been contained earlier under different leadership conditions.
Italy shows the danger of a slow response and lack of coordination
The epicenter of COVID-19 in Europe has been Italy, which has seen a rapid increase in cases over the past two weeks - the number of cases jumped by 50% in a single day on March 1.
In part because the outbreak in Italy escalated so quickly, the Italian government's response has been inconsistent. CNN reported that Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte acknowledged "not quite correct" hospital management in northern Italy contributed to the outbreak, but even as the virus spread, the Italian government and tourism officials tried to convey that everything was under control and it was business as usual.
Just two days later, Italy dramatically stepped up its response, closing schools, sporting events and tourist sites, following the lead of China. Today, the country is under lockdown. These rapidly changing messages from the Italian government have created confusion and distrust for both citizens and tourists.
The lesson is clear: in a crisis, leaders can create panic and mistrust when they quickly change their message. It seems that the country's leaders underestimated the potential spread of the virus and that various groups and stakeholders were not acting in coordination. When major issues strike, leaders must be careful not to say something that they will end up contradicting later. Giuseppe .Il semble que les responsables du pays aient sous-estimé la propagation potentielle du virus et que divers groupes et parties prenantes n’agissaient pas en coordination. Lorsque des problèmes importants frappent, les dirigeants doivent veiller à ne pas dire quelque chose qu’ils finiront par contredire plus tard.
The United States is trying to control the narrative
U.S. exposure to COVID-19 is relatively limited, but the threat has increased in recent days and the country is on alert and preparing for the worst. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has been warning Americans to prepare for a potential outbreak since Feb. 25, and Vice President Mike Pence has been tasked with leading the crisis situation.
Even President Donald Trump's allies will likely admit that this challenge is out of step with his leadership tendencies. President Trump likes to control the narrative surrounding his administration and tries to avoid unfavorable coverage. This leads him to downplay problems to win the public relations battle, as he did in late February in response to a sudden drop in the stock market.
In the business world, trying to control the narrative is a common way to respond to public adversity, and it can work when there's not much disagreement with the underlying facts. Just as a struggling startup leader might do, the U.S. government has attempted to mitigate concerns and assure Americans that COVID-19 has already been contained.
However, the virus does not respond to public perception or communication from the vice president. Although the future of COVID-19 in America is unclear, it is possible that the president's response may not be realistic in hindsight if the virus follows the same pattern of escalation as in China and Italy.
Crisis management is perhaps the most difficult test for leaders. This is especially true for a case like COVID-19, which has no comparable historical precedent or solution and where the threat is constantly evolving. Leaders in all areas can learn from this: problems are best anticipated in environments of trust and transparency, challenges are best faced with coherent, decisive, and consistent action. They must also realize that winning communication through not-so-reassuring promises in the short term is not a long-term solution. Only time will tell exactly how effective the world's leaders have been and which strategies have produced the best results.
Les dirigeants de tous les domaines peuvent tirer des enseignements: les problèmes sont mieux anticipés dans des environnements de confiance et de transparence, les défis sont mieux confrontés à une action cohérente, décisive et cohérente. Ils doivent également se rendre compte que gagner la communication a travers des promesses pas aussi rassurantes, à court terme, n’est pas une solution à long terme. Seul le temps nous dira exactement à quel point les leaders mondiaux ont été efficaces et quelles stratégies ont produit les meilleurs résultats.
By Acceleration Partners - Translated from English