My excitement about a statement made by Hon. Johnson Asiedu Nketia, Chairman of the governing party, on 26th August 2025—that “Ghanaians are beginning to forget about merit in recruitment – it’s all about protocol and whom you know”—stems from the fact that the current leaders of Ghana are not only identifying our most debilitating problems, but are also showing leadership beyond mere rhetoric. They are demonstrating commitment, setting the right tone, and making pragmatic efforts to address the very issues impeding our growth and development.
The short history of governance in Ghana can be summed up in the words of this old verse:
“Law and terrors do but harden
All the while they work alone;
‘Tis a sense of blood-bought pardon
That dissolves a heart of stone.”
As a country, we have lived through regimes that proved it is not enough to have knowledge of the law written in books or leaflets, nor simply in one’s head. If history shows anything, it is that coups have not been our best bet in “delivering the goods.” Today, however, we are witnessing a blend of brains at work and a genuine fear and love of God at play. While the foundations are still imperfect, governance is a process; step by step, we will arrive at a better Ghana for all.
Mr. Nketia’s observation, if left unchecked, could worsen vices such as cronyism, nepotism, favouritism, bootlicking, ingratiation, pessimism, and a dangerous breach of the psychological contract between state and citizens.
Based on established research, in a two-part series I will compare how Singapore rose to global prominence through meritocracy, pragmatism, and honesty, and explore how Ghana can mitigate the risks Mr. Nketia highlights. I will examine outcomes of cronyism such as organisational deviance (OD), organisational cynicism (OCy), and counterproductive work behaviour (CWB). I will also analyse the mediating role of psychological contract violation (PCV), as well as the correlations between nepotism, favouritism, and societal cynicism (SCy).
Lee Kuan Yew’s Classic Model of Meritocracy, Pragmatism and Honesty
Lee Kuan Yew adopted a nontraditional leadership style by applying a high-performance model to state governance. He recognised that professionalism was essential to Singapore’s success and built a top-notch state bureaucracy by employing and nurturing the best candidates. Lee believed policies could only succeed in the context of strong institutions and full public trust. His government appointments were strictly based on meritocracy.
Lee also prioritised human capital development, often stressing that Singapore’s lack of natural resources made education and skills its greatest assets. “The single most important factor affecting national competitiveness is the quality of a nation’s people,” he argued. For him, creativity, entrepreneurship, teamwork, and work ethic were the keys to national advancement.
Lee inspired his people to aim higher: “There is a glorious rainbow beckoning those with the spirit of adventure, and rich findings at its end. Follow that rainbow and ride it.” He created opportunities that rewarded discipline, sacrifice, and contribution to Singapore’s success.
Great leaders, he believed, build teams around mission and purpose—not personality cults. Yet, in Ghana today, cynical notions persist: “It’s about who you know, not what you know” or “You must be connected to a power broker to get ahead.”
If Mr. Asiedu Nketia, his government, and indeed the nation, succeed in creating a system where a meritorious villager from the North—who knows no one in high office—can still serve Ghana, nepotism will reduce drastically. Our SOEs, which currently make huge losses, could see a turnaround, bringing value for money and accelerated growth. Ghana would then truly benefit. In such a case, Mr. Nketia’s role might be remembered in Ghana’s development story as Nixon once described Lee Kuan Yew: “a mosquito in the body of a giant” whose influence shaped the nation’s destiny.
Singapore became globally attractive to investors through discipline, low corruption, technological advancement, and intolerance for complacency. Ghana too must implement pragmatic policies to reset mindsets, attract high-calibre talent, and build an independent, transparent judiciary. This would unleash upward mobility and foster a business-friendly environment where all can thrive. As Yaw Nsarkoh once observed: “All societies from the periphery that have made major development strides first built cultures of discipline, laser focus, grit, and hard work.”
Setting the Right Environmental Tone and Renewed Mindset for the Ghana We Want
Members of the current administration have been making statements that send positive signals—they care about the masses and are morally awake to the nation’s challenges. They are refusing fatalism and cynicism such as “nothing will change,” “there is no hope,” or “obiara boa.” With sustained effort, Ghana can still catch up with the Asian Tigers. The road will not be easy, but step by step we can secure dignity among respected nations.
As Roger Hamilton put it: “A lot of people think we are creatures of habit, but we’re not. We are creatures of the environment.”
Ghanaians, like all people, are shaped by their environment—family, school, community, workplace. While genetics may play a role, research shows environment is far more influential in shaping ambition, behaviour, and development. The key question is: How is Ghana’s environment shaping our collective progress?
There is no proven difference between races in capacity for development; the gap lies in governance, culture, and environment. Africans abroad often adapt quickly to well-functioning systems, proving our potential when placed in the right setting. This means Ghana must nurture an enabling environment that drives productivity, discipline, and shared national values.
We will not achieve the Ghana we aspire to through budgets and speeches alone, but by reshaping our environment to reflect the future we want. National values must be clearly defined, widely shared, and consistently upheld.
As Ludwig Bamberger observed: “No people has a pure culture; the most cultured peoples have it in the least.” Culture is dynamic. If aspects of our culture no longer serve us, we must alter them. Human development is always a product of both nature (genes) and nurture (environment).
Henry Adjei Boadi
Corporate Generalist and Researcher