Wise reasoning and political leadership amid COVID-19 pandemic: an exploratory study on Ghana

IF 0.8 Q4 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
S. Kutor, Emmanuel Kyeremeh, B. Owusu, Daniel Amoak, Temitope Oluwaseyi Ishola
{"title":"Wise reasoning and political leadership amid COVID-19 pandemic: an exploratory study on Ghana","authors":"S. Kutor, Emmanuel Kyeremeh, B. Owusu, Daniel Amoak, Temitope Oluwaseyi Ishola","doi":"10.1108/IJPL-03-2021-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper examines how one group of frontline health workers (nurses) amid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic perceive the Government of Ghana (GOG)'s decision to ease the lockdown restrictions when cases were increasing. This paper contributes to the literature on Igor Grossman's concept of wise reasoning and its applicability to COVID-19 management decision-making by political leaders.Design/methodology/approachThe paper employed an exploratory qualitative design. The decision to adopt qualitative method is linked to the paucity of research on wise reasoning, political leadership and COVID-19. The paper draws on qualitative online survey with 42 nurses located in Accra Metropolis, Ghana.FindingsThe paper demonstrates that a confluence of research participants perceived the government's act of easing the lockdown restrictions to be in bad faith on account of (1) nonrecognition of different perspectives and viewpoints from stakeholders and interest groups; (2) rising number of cases which naturally make the decision to lift the restriction unwise; (3) concerns about the prioritization of peripheral issues over citizens' health and (4) concerns about limited and robust health facilities and their implications.Research limitations/implicationsThe key claims must be assessed against the limitations of the study. First, the study is an exploratory study and, therefore, not intended for a generalization purpose. Second, the research participants are highly educated, and the responses in this study are skewed toward them.Originality/valueThe paper is novel in seeking to explore wise reasoning and political leadership during a global pandemic such as COVID-19. This exploratory study demonstrates that COVID-19, though devastating and causing havoc, presents an opportunity to test Igor Grossmann's wise reasoning framework about decision-making by political leaders. This extends the literature on wise reasoning beyond the discipline of psychology (the fact that all the authors are geographers) and Global North to Global South since the data for this study are gathered in Ghana.","PeriodicalId":43080,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Leadership","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPL-03-2021-0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

PurposeThis paper examines how one group of frontline health workers (nurses) amid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic perceive the Government of Ghana (GOG)'s decision to ease the lockdown restrictions when cases were increasing. This paper contributes to the literature on Igor Grossman's concept of wise reasoning and its applicability to COVID-19 management decision-making by political leaders.Design/methodology/approachThe paper employed an exploratory qualitative design. The decision to adopt qualitative method is linked to the paucity of research on wise reasoning, political leadership and COVID-19. The paper draws on qualitative online survey with 42 nurses located in Accra Metropolis, Ghana.FindingsThe paper demonstrates that a confluence of research participants perceived the government's act of easing the lockdown restrictions to be in bad faith on account of (1) nonrecognition of different perspectives and viewpoints from stakeholders and interest groups; (2) rising number of cases which naturally make the decision to lift the restriction unwise; (3) concerns about the prioritization of peripheral issues over citizens' health and (4) concerns about limited and robust health facilities and their implications.Research limitations/implicationsThe key claims must be assessed against the limitations of the study. First, the study is an exploratory study and, therefore, not intended for a generalization purpose. Second, the research participants are highly educated, and the responses in this study are skewed toward them.Originality/valueThe paper is novel in seeking to explore wise reasoning and political leadership during a global pandemic such as COVID-19. This exploratory study demonstrates that COVID-19, though devastating and causing havoc, presents an opportunity to test Igor Grossmann's wise reasoning framework about decision-making by political leaders. This extends the literature on wise reasoning beyond the discipline of psychology (the fact that all the authors are geographers) and Global North to Global South since the data for this study are gathered in Ghana.
新冠肺炎大流行期间的明智推理和政治领导力:对加纳的探索性研究
目的研究在2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行期间,一组一线卫生工作者(护士)如何看待加纳政府(GOG)在病例增加时放松封锁限制的决定。本文对伊戈尔·格罗斯曼(Igor Grossman)的明智推理概念及其在政治领导人COVID-19管理决策中的适用性的文献做出了贡献。设计/方法/方法本文采用探索性定性设计。采用定性方法的决定与缺乏对明智推理、政治领导和COVID-19的研究有关。本文利用对加纳阿克拉大都会的42名护士进行的定性在线调查。研究结果表明,研究参与者普遍认为政府放松封锁限制的行为是恶意的,原因是:(1)不承认利益相关者和利益集团的不同观点和观点;(二)案件增多,解除限制的决定自然不明智的;(3)对周边问题优先于公民健康的担忧;(4)对有限而健全的卫生设施及其影响的担忧。研究的局限性/意义必须根据研究的局限性来评估关键的主张。首先,该研究是一项探索性研究,因此不打算泛化。其次,研究对象的受教育程度较高,本研究的调查结果倾向于受教育程度较高的人群。本文在探索COVID-19等全球大流行期间的明智推理和政治领导力方面具有创新性。这项探索性研究表明,尽管2019冠状病毒病具有破坏性并造成了严重破坏,但它为检验伊戈尔·格罗斯曼关于政治领导人决策的明智推理框架提供了机会。这将关于明智推理的文献扩展到心理学学科之外(事实上所有作者都是地理学家),并将全球北方扩展到全球南方,因为这项研究的数据是在加纳收集的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信