Kenya Kwanza leadership does not inspire self-drive, creativity

Let us be honest with ourselves: Is the Kenya Kwanza government cursed? This is not a careless provocation. It arises from the uncontestable fact that as the administration enters its fourth year, it still lacks a single outstanding performer among Cabinet Secretaries or Kenya Kwanza Governors.

President William Ruto publicly reprimanded his senior officers about two years ago, calling out their poor performance and demanding visible improvement. With that clear warning on record, one would expect at least a few senior leaders to rise above the ordinary. None has. Some may be quietly performing well. But, as public servants, their record should publicly speak for itself.

The performance is even more blurred when one considers the resources placed at their disposal. With full ministries, technical staff, programme budgets, and the machinery of state supporting them, it is reasonable to expect at least three or four individuals to define the government’s identity. In any serious administration, such figures naturally emerge.

They would be dynamic, present in public forums, responsive to citizens, and committed to raising service delivery to higher standards. That this has not happened suggests that either internal incentives do not reward excellence or the leadership environment discourages initiative and independent thought.

Whichever the case, what has filled the gap is a worrying pattern of senior officials devoting significant energy to condemning critics, issuing confrontational statements, and defending questionable policies and service delivery inefficiencies, even when the evidence points the other way. This defensive posture erodes trust and distracts attention from genuine problem-solving.

The state of the education sector illustrates the point. The instability and confusion surrounding the CBE curriculum transition require sober assessment and engagement with Kenyan experts. We are blessed with globally recognised experts in many sectors to struggle with birthing the curriculum. Persistently defending the disorder instead of inviting serious review only prolongs the crisis and deepens the frustration of parents, teachers and learners.

Further, the Kenya Kwanza government’s centralist leadership style also influences how it engages with devolution. The repeated movement of County leaders to State House for development discussions reflects a drift back to an older order where decisions were centralised and counties relied on direction from Nairobi.

Devolution was designed precisely to prevent this. It was meant to empower counties to make decisions closer to citizens and act with confidence within their constitutional authority. In the earlier years of devolution, we saw some governors such as Kivutha Kibwana rise to limelight for tangible performance.

However, reversing devolution to the centre clearly contradicts the principle of subsidiarity which places responsibility at the most immediate level capable of addressing local needs. Subsidiarity is a practical safeguard that ensures governance remains responsive, accountable and grounded in the lived realities of communities. When counties fail to exercise delegated authority and instead defer to the centre for decisions that should originate locally, the benefits of devolution weaken.

Beyond constitutional principles, good leadership requires a culture that inspires people to be more innovative, more self-driven, and more determined to support the national vision. A functioning leadership environment produces individuals who take initiative without waiting for instructions, who think critically, and who engage constructively with complex challenges.

It encourages honest feedback and values competence above political alignment. I do not see that culture in this administration. We know exemplary performance by top government officials does more than improve service delivery. It sets the standard for the entire country, especially for young people who watch leadership closely. Senior positions expose character, discipline, and work ethic in ways that deeply shape expectations of the next generation.

We cannot expect exceptionally driven and inspired young performers if those privileged to lead government do not demonstrate transformative effort themselves. This leadership gap is precisely one reason why the Gen Z movement erupted last year.

As the administration moves forward, it must recognise a simple truth. Impressive government performance is not a favour extended to the public. It is a legitimate public expectation anchored in the Constitution and in the social contract that binds leaders to citizens.

Dr Mokua is executive director of Loyola Centre for Media and Communication