Democracy is in distress. Across continents, citizens are losing faith in political institutions that once promised freedom, stability, and progress. From Washington to Warsaw, Lagos to Lima, voters are frustrated by polarisation, gridlock, and leaders who campaign endlessly but govern poorly.

Yet in the midst of this democratic fatigue, some countries have managed to defy the odds, maintaining stability, achieving economic growth, and retaining public trust, even under intense scrutiny. These nations offer a new lesson in political legitimacy: leadership anchored in performance, not populism.

This approach, what might be called the Transformational, Developmental, Adaptive (TDA) model of leadership, is quietly emerging as an alternative for leaders who seek both longevity and legitimacy through democratic or semi-democratic means. It rests on four pillars: performance, participation, predictability, and perception.

In the 20th century, charisma and ideology could win elections. In the twenty-first, delivery wins’ trust. Citizens no longer care much about where a government sits on the ideological spectrum, they care whether it works.

That’s why some of the world’s most stable governments, from Singapore’s technocratic efficiency to Botswana’s pragmatic democracy and Costa Rica’s human-centered development, have built what political scientists call performance legitimacy. They sustain power not through repression or rhetoric, but by producing results that citizens can see and measure: functioning schools, efficient public services, and safe streets.

Rwanda provides one of the clearest examples in Africa. Under President Paul Kagame, the country has achieved annual growth averaging 7 percent for two decades, expanded healthcare access, and maintained one of the continent’s lowest corruption rates. Kigali is now a symbol of order and ambition in a region often marked by volatility.

But these successes are not accidental. Kagame’s leadership reflects a deliberate attempt to build a developmental state within a democratic framework, one that prizes accountability and discipline while maintaining political governance. Critics point to what they claim is Rwanda’s limited political space and constraints on opposition using their own templates. Yet even many of those critics acknowledge the government’s impressive administrative efficiency and consistent delivery of public goods.

ALSO READ: What Paul Kagame has taught me about leadership

Kagame’s formula has been to link legitimacy to results, and results to long-term vision. It’s a model that has allowed him to stay in power not by fear, but by fulfilling a national bargain: delivering progress and transformation alongside national order.

Performance, however, cannot stand alone.

In an age of social media and civic activism, participation is the oxygen of legitimacy.

Governments that engage their citizens in dialogue, not just during elections but throughout governance, tend to survive longer and govern better. Examples abound: participatory budgeting in Brazil’s Porto Alegre; open data in Estonia; and New Zealand’s transparent, empathetic pandemic communication.

ALSO READ: Decentralization in Rwanda: 25 years of meaningful citizen participation

Even in Rwanda, community forums known as Umushyikirano (National Dialogue Council) and Imihigo (performance contracts) create structured mechanisms for citizen feedback and accountability. They are top-down in design, but they institutionalise responsiveness, a key component of adaptive governance.

The broader point is clear: structured participation stabilises, not destabilises, governance. Leaders who listen, adapt, and co-create policies with citizens build resilience that brute force never achieves.

The third pillar of the TDA model is transformational vision, the art of defining a national purpose that outlives an election cycle.

Successful long-term leaders think in decades, not terms. Lee Kuan Yew did it in Singapore. Nelson Mandela did it in South Africa by prioritising reconciliation over revenge. Kagame, too, has done it in many ways and still will do through "Vision 2050,” a plan that aims to turn Rwanda into a high-income, knowledge-based economy within a generation.

Sceptics may question the centralisation of power, but few doubt the coherence of Rwanda’s strategic planning, a rare commodity in modern politics. Vision-driven governance transforms leadership from a contest of personalities into a continuity of purpose.

Yet vision and performance mean little without ethics and empathy, the moral dimension of leadership that sustains legitimacy from within.

Citizens can forgive slow progress, but they do not forgive arrogance or corruption. Ethical leadership, the ability to act transparently and serve rather than rule, has become the most valuable political currency in the 21st century.

Leaders like New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern and Germany’s Angela Merkel proved that empathy can be a tool of strength, not weakness. Kagame’s administration has also invested heavily in integrity mechanisms, from zero-tolerance anti-corruption drives to performance-based contracts for officials. These systems project moral clarity and create the perception, and often the reality, that public service is about delivery, not personal enrichment.

In a world where institutions are fragile and voters cynical, the equation for enduring legitimacy has changed.

Legitimacy = performance + participation + predictability + perception.

Miss any of these, and even the most charismatic regime will collapse under the weight of public disillusionment.

This model is not only for Africa. The superpowers are experiencing their own crises of governance. Gridlock in Congress, populism in Europe, and declining trust in Western institutions reveal a painful truth: democracy must perform, or it will perish.

Performance-based legitimacy, once seen as a trait of "developmental states,” may now be democracy’s last frontier. Citizens everywhere; in Kigali, Kansas, or Kyiv, want the same thing: governments that work, leaders who listen, and systems that deliver fairness and dignity.

The challenge for democratic leaders is not to abandon their ideals, but to modernise them, to make democracy efficient again. Kagame’s Rwanda may not be a template for everyone, but it forces the world to ask a hard question: Can democracy remain relevant if it cannot deliver results?

The true art of staying in power is not suppression, it’s sustainability. Leaders who blend ethics with performance, vision with empathy, and control with participation will not only endure, but elevate their nations.

In a century defined by short attention spans and long crises, the leaders who will last are those who make power worth believing in.

The writer is a management consultant and strategist.