Table 2 identifies six forms of 2ccountability:
political.
administrative,
personal
professional
output and deliberative.
Each one of them has its own defining features and spe- cial mechanisms for implementation. The th rce public administration models notably place different emph asis on these six forms of 2ccountability. Traditional public administration, for example, prioritizes the polirical and administrative 2ccountability of senior public servants, while responsive governance promotes a more all-encompassing notion ofthis concept, focus ing particularly on personal, professional, output and deliberative accountability. Leadership in the public service under the responsive governance model will therefo te make more demands on the relational. analytical and communication skills of senior officials. The pub- lic management model, on the other hand, emphasizes, in particular, the professional and output accountability of public servants vis-a-vis the citizens and other stakeholders