.png)
Reading list
In this topic, we discuss the challenges many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders face in balancing multiple needs. We also look at the challenge of responding to change, crisis and conflict.
While reading this topic, think about the following questions and how they relate to your organisation, community or nation:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership is perhaps even more demanding than it used to be. It’s no longer only based on traditional values, knowledge, laws and extended family relations. Leaders must also operate within the contemporary environment of non-Indigenous governance, its different standards and financial requirements.
“True leaders in the Aboriginal community are often burnt out through the pressures of doing all with nothing… Leaders in the Aboriginal community have to be strong, resilient, moral and highly skilled in both Aboriginal and mainstream politics… you have to get support from both the community and government to get things done.”
– Marjorie Anderson, Leadership: An Aboriginal perspective, 2006.1Marjorie Anderson, “Leadership: An Aboriginal perspective,” (Sydney, 7 April, 2006).
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural values and leadership principles are often at odds with non-Indigenous views. The non-Indigenous view is generally that leaders are independent of the demands of family and kin.
One of the biggest challenges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders face is finding the balance between:
These wider responsibilities include working for their organisations, communities and nations, as well as with governments and other stakeholders. They must balance this with looking after their own wellbeing.
It’s not always easy for leaders to balance their responsibility to govern collectively – and in a way that benefits all group members – with their cultural responsibilities and obligations to family or kin. Those involved in landowning corporations – such as Prescribed Body Corporates (PBCs) – may be particularly challenged. At the same time, they have to:
Sometimes leaders say they have two-way accountability. Today, they often need to be accountable in several different directions. Having these different forms of accountability leads to a balancing act sometimes called two-way governance.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders may not always be able to make decisions on the spot. The timeframes for consensus decision-making may seem slow to government officials or commercial companies, but rushed processes can undermine the legitimacy of leadership and governance.
Generally, there’s a small pool of leaders in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations, communities and nations. That means individual leaders have huge workloads. They must wear many different hats. They have multiple responsibilities and obligations. On one hand, they can be harshly criticised for speaking out if they’re not seen to have the cultural right to do so. On the other, they can be held accountable for issues out of their control.
The Institute for Urban Indigenous Health (IUIH) is a great example of an organisation adapting to a servant leadership style to complement their shared governance approach. Shared governance is about partnership, shared decision-making and the distribution of leadership. It gives decision-making authority and autonomy to the people who will implement the decision. The aim is for group members to have the responsibility, authority and accountability to determine what goals to pursue. Leaders set guidelines, and team or group leaders make independent decisions that fit within these guidelines.1Gen Guanci, “Shared Governance: What it is and is not,” Creative Health Care Management,[link]
IUIH was a Finalist in Category A of the 2014 Indigenous Governance Awards. Here CEO Adrian Carson and Jody Currie, Director of Operations and Communications discuss some of the complications of shared governance and how they tackled challenges that arose in bringing together four health services.
“…Leadership is actually about building consensus, not seeking it.”
– Adrian Carson, CEO.
Perhaps the biggest pressure for leaders is the ability to adapt and respond daily to the ‘three Cs’ – change, crises and conflict – while ensuring the ongoing resilience and self-determination of their group.
Covid-19 is an example of a crisis that has had varied impacts on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups. Leaders needed to adapt and develop specific strategies to manage the distinct challenges of this pandemic.
“Indigenous leadership can be challenging, but it also offers qualities for challenging dominant ideas about what leadership means and looks like, to influence, and advance such ideas.”
– Rachel Wolfgramm, Chellie Spiller and Cora Voyageur, Indigenous leadership, 2016.3Rachel Wolfgramm, Chellie Spiller and Cora Voyageur, “Indigenous leadership – Editors’ introduction,” Leadership 12, no. 3 (2016): 263, [link]
Leaders who recognise the need to adapt and change can better manage external influences and take opportunities. But they also need to be able to protect cherished values and stability.
Effective governance is about working out the balance between the need for both:
The balance is different at different stages of a group’s life.
Ultimately, many leadership challenges will be unique to your or your group’s circumstances. To prepare, take time to reflect on your particular needs, aspirations and the different leadership styles you may need.
Because Waltja Tjutangku Palyapayi Aboriginal Corporation has a long history, there have been times they have needed to adapt their governance to ensure they remain effective for community. During COVID, Waltja remained in operation and worked hard to keep Central Desert families safe and healthy. A key priority was ensuring relevant information continued to be shared in different languages. Directors in communities reached out to Waltja staff and kept them updated on what help was needed during the pandemic. Waltja then collaborated with other organisations in the region to help families stay strong, the Waltja Way.
Another example of Waltja adapting their governance to meet community needs was in 2019, when Waltja decided to register as a NDIS provider after consultation with directors and communities. Being an NDIS provider ensures Waltja can provide Disability and Aged Care services to clients across remote Central Australian communities.
During the global pandemic, Indigenous groups in Australia demonstrated remarkable organisational capabilities in exercising adaptive self-determination. They proactively directed their efforts and took autonomous actions to deliver essential services and timely support to their communities during the crisis. Organisations and their leaders effectively adapted to evolving circumstances and implemented innovative solutions to govern the impacts of COVID-19.
The Indigenous Governance of Development (IGD) project highlighted the different forms of self-determination shown by many Indigenous organisations during the pandemic. Carried out by the Centre of Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR) and AIGI, the project aimed to improve understanding of the distinctive crisis resilience and governance innovations exhibited by Indigenous organisations in times of crises. The study ran an online survey and conducted follow-up calls with thirty incorporated Indigenous organisations throughout different stages of the pandemic. Organisations demonstrated great capabilities for collective self-governance that were used as a strategic resource to navigate the pandemic’s challenges.1 Lara Drieberg, Diane Smith and Dale Sutherland, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 12, [link]
A common element highlighted in the IGD project’s findings included the considerable effort of Indigenous organisations to protect their cultural values in their responses to the pandemic. Respondents highlighted that their priorities centred around protecting the health of Elders. One organisation shared that values of ‘kinship, communication, community and connection’ led the way.2 Lara Drieberg, Diane Smith and Dale Sutherland, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 26, [link] Another response expressed a commitment to and responsibility for serving community provided strong motivation:
“Responsibility to serve community acted as strong foundation to help [our] organisation stay afloat. [A] strong sense of purpose and responsibility ensured staff stayed committed and focused on the job at hand and on getting through.”
– Responding organisation, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 26.
Organisations recognised a need for locally meaningful, timely and accurate information about COVID-19. They effectively utilised their Indigenous networked pathways to quickly distribute information regarding symptoms, prevention of virus transmission, and testing. They also significantly invested in communicating information with cultural relevance, ease of understanding and applicability to local communities and their members.3 Lara Drieberg, Diane Smith and Dale Sutherland, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 28, [link]
Organisations also developed and delivered culturally relevant communication. Close to 50% of organisations translated information into local Indigenous languages or multimedia formats to increase its relevance to the audience. They also demonstrated their own expertise on Indigenous communication styles to translate what was often complex technical information into meaningful content.4 Lara Drieberg, Diane Smith and Dale Sutherland, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 28, [link]
The COVID-19 pandemic illustrated the capacity of organisational leaders, including board members and executives, to remain informed about the latest government directives and health guidelines. The engagement of the board was also instrumental for communication to reach community:
“Whenever we had the opportunity to speak outwardly to our community, the board were also there with me or one of the doctors. They didn’t want to get involved in operations, they tell us all the time ‘that’s what they pay us for’, but they absolutely wanted to complement what we were doing and get the word out there from themselves as community members. They’ve been instrumental in the vaccine rollout. The chairperson and I got our vaccinations the other day and posted it all over our social media. That’s the sort of thing where our board is really helpful for us”.
– Responding organisation, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 29.
For Indigenous organisations, the focus extended beyond merely responding to external pressures or events; it involved directing their own trajectory and exercising autonomous action. This proactive approach exemplifies adaptive self-determination. Organisations mobilised their relationships with non-Indigenous partners and stakeholders, reaching far beyond their immediate Indigenous networks. 60% of organisations rated their strong relationships with external agencies as important. Some organisations leveraged external partnerships to direct extra sources of support and resources such as helpful tips, increased understanding of the pandemic and for some even provision of personal protective equipment (PPE), tablets and smartphones. Organisations also pursued new partnerships with health services, community organisations and government to coordinate and develop ways to support their members.5 Lara Drieberg, Diane Smith and Dale Sutherland, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 32, [link]
Indigenous organisations were also key in responding to the lack of healthy, affordable and available food in remote communities across the country. Several organisations reported that they immediately began coordinating the provision of food, shelter and health and personal items for those in need. Some organisations also offered mental health support and linking to other services. Importantly noted, of the responding organisations, 37% took on significant additional roles and workload to deliver their priorities.6 Lara Drieberg, Diane Smith and Dale Sutherland, Governing the Pandemic: Adaptive Self- Determination as an Indigenous Organisational Tool (Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, 2024), 26, [link]
Stay connected
Subscribe to AIGI news and updates.
