Instead, it sparked chaos. What started as a public health issue quickly led to disruption in international border agreements, trade and supply chain systems, education systems, and more. Besides the technical complexities, the social dimensions of the problem, triggered by disjointed leadership at many levels, created an immediate breakdown of trust between institutions and the public.  

Presidents, Prime Ministers and other Heads of State, along with health leaders, disagreed not only about the severity and origin of the pandemic, but about what the solutions should be. Was the priority to prevent the spread of disease, keep the economy open, or to protect personal and national autonomy?  

There is a tendency in crisis for leaders to resort to traditional, hierarchical, authoritative responses, and it’s common for them to inadvertently resort to doing other people's jobs. In the COVID-19 pandemic, this happened through the establishment of special committees and taskforces that took over existing mandates, leading to disastrous conflicts in countries like the UK and the US. While to some degree a 'command and control' approach may be necessary, wicked problems differ from military contexts in that the collaboration of others must be earned, not assumed. When leaders are focused on asserting authority, protecting their own space, and non-collaboration, it becomes extremely difficult for the necessary special protocols, such as travel bans or testing mandates, to be put into action.

Independently-minded leaders in countries like the USA, Brazil, Russia, and Tanzania dismissed expert advice and refused to acknowledge the complexity and uncertainty. They touted oversimplified and easy-to-explain solutions (like unproven medicines), rather than listening to one another and agreeing the priorities to find a common way forward. These attitudes were quickly taken up by the public who either refused to abide with health guidance or lost trust in leadership all together. The knock-on effects continue to this day.

Dr. John Nkengasong, Director of African Centres for Disease control, took a different approach. He understood the importance of an integrated response, and just weeks after the WHO announcement, convened 55 health ministers in Addis Ababa to develop a joint African strategy for the COVID-19 outbreak.  

The Africa CDC took a ''systems-focused, not disease-focused'' approach. Drawing on experience from Ebola management, they knew combating disinformation and building public trust would be essential, something many Western countries overlooked. The ministers immediately developed a plan to collaboratively train 100,000 health workers and accelerate testing. And while the response was far from perfect, Africa managed to cultivate a unified response and avert the worst of the pandemic, even while facing major hurdles like vaccine access inequality.

Crisis is a time when leaders, and systems, are tested on centre stage. The COVID-19 pandemic response, for both its failures and successes, shows a lot about the type of leadership needed in the polycrisis that forms today's new normal. While the pressure of crisis led countries like the US and Brazil to polarisation, fragmented actions, and hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths, systems leadership behaviours in Africa and other places created far stronger systems, even with fewer resources, reducing the duration of the pandemic and saving lives.  

With wicked problems, when the complexity is high, a people-centric approach will outperform a leader-centric one, time and time again.