Family Matters

We have seen enough examples both locally and internationally of persons holding high office, not being certain of the role and placement of their significant others, which, if not managed effectively has the potential to cause major embarrassment and some measure of harm to both the office holder, as well as the family member. One of the more recent International examples is the meeting between United States President Elect, Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, at the New York based Trump towers. Whilst the meeting was characterized as ‘informal’, many questions were raised as to the presence of President Elect Trump’s daughter at the meeting between both leaders. Many have questioned whether the lines of protocol were crossed, whilst others have spoken in defense of the meeting attendee, citing that it was an informal event.

The local political front provides us with many examples of the blurred lines as to the levels of inclusion of family members in the management of official functions, and other daily activities of persons in public office. In the corporate world, many times similar uncertainty exists with the spouses and significant others of the high office holders and the level of interaction expected and provided, particularly related to the management of the special events.

Essentially, these form part of the ethical dilemmas that may face public officials both in the political realm as well as the corporate world. We must understand and appreciate both sides of this dilemma. From the perspective of the office holder, it should be noted that we all emanate from the nucleus of a familial structure, regardless of the type of structure.

That being noted, the familial structure provides a specific role in the socialization, development, and support provided to the office holder.

As a direct result, the family structure would have been the primary focus for the development of the individual’s locus of control.

This means, that when the office holder comes into office, he or she comes with the family’s norms, mores, values, beliefs and socialization. As a result, it is to be expected that the office holder will place heavy emphasis on the opinions of his or her significant other, siblings and other relatives.

This being understood, it is also the responsibility of the office holder to quickly reconfigure his or her thinking to appreciate that their role is now expanded, and, as such, their area of responsibility includes a much wider periphery than their immediate and expanded family structure. They are to be guided now by the principles and protocols of the office to which he or she has ascended. This requires a clear sense of separation of roles and responsibilities relative to such office, not only for the office holder, but so too for the significant other, as well as family members.

It is not ok for family members of office holders to assume authority over the staff and resources that may belong to the state, or to the corporate office unless, of course, if the corporate office resources are family-owned.

And even in this scenario, there are protocols to be adhered to.

Such behaviour, if condoned and supported by the high office holder, essentially borders on ethical derision.

Pertaining to the appearance of significant others and family members at events in support of the high office holder, this practice requires the element of protocol finesse, which can easily be provided by a protocol or PR officer. In most cases, the appearance of the significant other is required and expected, and in some cases, members of the extended family may be welcome, however, as mentioned, such activity requires tact and diplomacy