Just as the head of a household shapes a family's image, the conduct of elected officials — the mayor and district mayors — becomes the public face of the local government they lead.
How an agency chief has lived and how they behave in office directly shapes the trust and image that residents hold of the institution.
Integrity, respect for people, and professional competence and drive are the standards by which staff and residents judge their leaders.
The ninth round of directly elected local government has begun.
In the June 3 local elections, Seoul voters showed a tendency toward split-ticket voting — weighing each candidate's individual capabilities rather than casting ballots along strict party lines as in the past.
Observers say the result reflects a civic maturity built over 30 years of local self-governance.
That has prompted a widely shared view in political circles: "Seoul citizens have a very high level of political awareness. Even the mayor and district mayors can be held accountable at any time if they fall short."
The Seoul mayor and 25 district mayors now stand before an electorate with exacting expectations. Every action and word in the course of their public duties will inevitably face public judgment.
<style ref="s1">Above all, integrity is the most fundamental quality a public official must possess.</style>
When a district mayor compromises on fairness and integrity, the first people to feel it are the district office staff. Employees may hesitate to speak out for fear of personnel repercussions. But internal assessments tend ultimately to find their way outside — because a reputation is not built in a moment but accumulated over time.
For those who have won re-election, the record and assessments from their first term are already in place. Staff and residents will watch them with an even sharper eye than before.
<style ref="s2">A leader's respect for people is equally not a matter to be taken lightly.</style>
As local self-governance has taken root, the political awareness of city and district office staff has grown considerably. A chief who imposes unreasonable workloads or adopts an authoritarian manner will find it hard to earn the organization's trust.
Beyond that, the votes of employees and their families carry no small weight in local elections. Analysis of past local elections suggests that internal organizational assessments have had a meaningful influence on results. The era in which gapjil and authoritarianism could still win public support is over.
<style ref="s3">Professional competence and the ability to drive policy forward matter just as much.</style>
When a leader lacks administrative experience or a firm grasp of policy, civil servants are the first to notice. Staff compare their chief against predecessors and assess policy judgment and administrative leadership with a clear eye. Ultimately, a leader's capabilities reach the public directly through the organization's morale and the results it delivers.
Elected local leaders win office through the votes of residents. But they must not forget that those votes include the choices of the civil servants who work alongside them — and those workers' families.
A chief's life history and everyday conduct already serve as a benchmark among staff. That assessment sometimes shapes how residents perceive the institution, and ultimately determines the image of the local government as a whole.
A chief's image is the brand of local government itself.
When the ninth-term Seoul mayor and 25 district mayors demonstrate trustworthy leadership grounded in integrity, communication and expertise, residents will feel the maturity of local self-governance for themselves.
"Now that local self-governance has passed the 30-year mark, residents need to examine their leaders' competence and ethics more carefully than ever," said a resident of one of Seoul's autonomous districts. "Ultimately, good local government is built together by good leaders and engaged citizens."
seouldream01@heraldcorp.com
