Nigeria and the Poverty of Leadership Part 1

Nigeria and the Poverty of Leadership Part 1

Oluwaseyi Oduyela/Washington, DC

Contemporary leadership theory has been described as complex, fragmented, and contradictory, making its study frustrating for the scholar and its application difficult for the practitioner.

Throughout human history, social and political observers have recognized the importance of leadership and have contemplated the most appropriate form for it to take. For the most part, these conceptions were not scientific findings communicated to other scholars. Rather, they were the beliefs of social philosophers, practitioners of leadership, or the followers who observed leadership.

My objective is to place the leadership role in Nigeria in perspective, illustrating how leadership contributes to the realization of organizational goals. My intention is to find an understanding of the basic functions of leadership, that is, what leaders must do to be effective, and the critical processes of leadership, that is, how the functions fit together in the accomplishment of the task.

I will look at leadership in history in Nigeria, how it was before, what it is now and what went wrong.

Attempting a Definition of Leadership

Leadership is widely discussed and studied but remains an elusive and hazy concept. Although the study of leadership is emerging as a legitimate discipline, one still finds little agreement on what leadership is. There are almost as many definitions of leadership as there are people attempting to define it. In 1984, Pulitzer Prize-winner James McGregor Burns wrote that we know a lot about leaders but very little about leadership; we believe that remains true today. If one is to begin to understand what leadership is, it is worthwhile to examine what leadership is not. Leadership is not hierarchical, top-down, or based on positional power and authority, (Rosenbach and Taylor, 1998). And although effective managers must practice good leadership and effective leaders must possess managerial skills, leadership is not management.

According to Starratt (1993), Leadership presupposes an institutional social setting in which people have a reasonable knowledge of what they are doing. They know the meaning of the words and actions of others, follow a predictable routine, and sustain continuity from day to day in what they collectively do.

If one is to understand leadership, according to Rosenbach and Taylor (1998), one must understand its essential nature–that is, the process of followers and the leader engaging in reciprocal influence to achieve a shared purpose. Leadership is all about getting people to work together to make things happen that might not otherwise occur or prevent things from happening that ordinarily would take place.

Another definition of leadership that may be widely accepted by most theorists and researchers might say that “leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.” The major points of this definition are that leadership is a group activity, is based on social influence, and revolves around a common task. Although this specification seems relatively simple, the reality of leadership is very complex. Intrapersonal factors (i.e., thoughts and emotions) interact with interpersonal processes (i.e., attraction, communication, influence) to have effects on a dynamic external environment. These three aspects, according to Chemers (1997), bring complexity to the leadership process. It is my purpose to try to make that complexity a bit more manageable, thus increasing our ability to understand what effective leadership is. Kim and Maubourgne (1992), in a similar way, define it as the ability to inspire confidence and support among the people who are needed to achieve organizational goals. A major point of leadership, according to Dubrin (2004), is that it is not peculiar to high-level positions. It is required at all levels in an organization and can be practiced by a person not assigned to a formal leadership position, (Dubrin, 2004).

The Ideal Leader

Decades of academic analysis have given us hundreds of definitions of leadership, and thousands of empirical investigations of leaders have been conducted. Yet no clear and unequivocal understanding exists to distinguish effective leaders from ineffective leaders (Bennis and Nanus 1985, 4). Several scholars have also explored the difference between leadership and management. As Bennis points out, “leaders are people who do the right things; managers are people who do things right. Both roles are crucial, but they differ profoundly” (1985, 18).

In their findings, Bennis and Nanus (1985), identify four features of an Ideal leader.  The first of these is the articulation of a compelling vision. An Ideal leader is someone with a clear picture of what he/she is trying to accomplish. Second, someone with the ability to communicate this vision to others, especially followers, with a clarity and vibrancy that creates a “shared meaning.” Third, someone is seen to be trustworthy by adopting on an unwavering commitment to a vision that allows followers to see that the leader is in for the long haul. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, an ideal leader is someone who is able to make the fullest use of his/her personal resources of intelligence, energy, and commitment because he/she is confident about his/her capabilities and optimistic about the eventual success of his/her efforts.

An ideal leader recognizes that organizations must continually adapt to meet changing needs and circumstance. The ideal leader will anticipate and see opportunities for a change instead of sticking to a situation that is no longer working. He/she will also ensure that the change will further the mission and aims of the organization. There should be a balanced approach to maintaining the status quo, which may be working quite well, and innovation, which involves flexibility as well as a degree of risk.

Contemporarily, in Nigeria, the qualities and attributes mentioned above are not present. It isn’t that Nigeria has never experienced quality leadership since Independence, it has and in fact, that’s what got her the Independence. Herbert Macaulay started as a rebel against the British colonialists and likes of Awolowo continued with their Egbe Omo Oodua, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe rose from the East and Sir Ahmadu Bello the Sardauna of Sokoto rose from the North.

Sir Ahmadu Bello could have been the first Prime Minister of Nigeria, he preferred to stay as the Premier of the Northern region and sent one his men, Tafawa Balewa to the central government. Awolowo being the Premier of the Western region was a phenomenon.

Awolowo’s leadership in the Western region brought development that today benefitted not just the Western region but the whole of Nigeria. What we have today as Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) was Awolowo’s creation. It was Awolowo who brought Television Broadcasting to Africa in 1959, making Nigeria the first country in Africa to enjoy television. It was named Western Nigeria Broadcasting Service (WNBS). The Western regional government also introduced the “Rediffusion” , this broadcasting system is installed in all households for the government to reach the ordinary people ( Radio A soro ma gbesi).

The Action Group government of Western Nigeria created Oodua Investment (Caxton Press, Wema Bank, National Bank, Sketch Newspaper, Cocoa House and the WEMABOD Estate.)

The Universal Primary Education (UPE) program of the Action Group provided an opportunity for every child in the Western region to enjoy free education.  The western region under Awolowo was a successful region. True I didn’t witness the Action Group government, but I sure witnessed the new baby, Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). UPN was one of the political parties of the so-called Second Republic. The UPN won in Oyo, Ogun, Ondo, Lagos and Bendel States.

As we have leaders, we have people who are attracted to these leaders and who chose to be followers. Among these followers are those who genuinely believe in that leader and share his ideals, visions and mission while on the other hand are those who pretend to believe in the leader to actualize their selfish political goals.

Chief Obafemi Awolowo though was a leader who sought office through democratic means, but he was more of a social welfarist than a Democrat. Why did I say this? We grew up to know Awolowo as the leader of Yoruba, I grew up to hear from my parents (who are Ijebu) and most adults in Yoruba land that we owe so much to Awolowo.  Yoruba belief in Awolowo was so strong that a myth was created between 1978 and 1983 that they see him in the moon.

Why do Yoruba people think or believe in Awolowo that much? Why did they brand anyone not in Awo circle as Anti-Yoruba?  I grew up believing that Chief Richard Akinjide, AMA Akinloye, Victor Olunloyo, Samuel Akintola because they are not on Awo side until I met Chief Richard Akinjide in 2000. After all, Awolowo provided free education and I am a beneficiary of free education. Awolowo brought the first Television to Africa, built the Liberty Stadium; what about the Cocoa House building? For all these, our parents (in Yoruba land) believe they owe him a lot. They pledged their allegiance to him and even fought and died for him.

Because of what he has done, being a visionary leader, focused and purposeful, it was easy for Awolowo to hand-pick people to run for office rather than allow primary elections.  We can argue that a true democrat will want the wishes of the people regardless of whatever you think of feel, but Pa Awolowo got away with it many times if not all the time except for Oyo State. In 1978, Pa Awolowo had chosen Ven Alayande as the governorship candidate of the UPN in Oyo state but Chief Bola Ige insisted on primaries when he refused to step down for Pa Alayande. Chief Bola Ige won and he became the Governor in 1979.

Olabisi Onabanjo became the governor of Ogun State, Michael Ajasin was Ondo state governor, Ambrose Alli was Bendel State governor and Lateef Jakande became the governor of Lagos state.

In Ondo state, Chief Michael Ajasin remained in his private house as the governor, he did not move to the Government House. Before he became governor, he was building a new house, Pa Ajasin stopped the building project, he said he won’t want people to think he was using state money to complete his house project. And for four years, Pa Ajasin rode in his personal 504 Peugeot. Chief Bola Ige who was a member of the Zikist movement was very critical of Chief Awolowo until the two met and the Cicero of Esa Oke became a member of the Awolowo political clan. As governor of Oyo state, Bola Ige did not acquire new property, not even new cars. In Lagos state, Alhaji Lateef Jakande seemed to be the most successful of the UPN governors. For four years, Jakande did not step out of the country. Under Jakande, Lagos state was so rich that other states came to borrow money. Lagos state’s budget was always in surplus. Jakande’s time was Lagos golden age.

All the low-cost housing estates in Lagos were built by Jakande for real low-income citizens. None has ever been since after Jakande. Jakande started the metro system but it was Buhari who killed the project when he truncated Nigeria’s democracy in the December 1983 military coup. It is sad that no one knows much about Jakande in Lagos and since the after Jakande, no one has made Lagos greater than Jakande, NONE.

Professor Ambrose Alli was governor of Bendel state, he led the state with dignity and integrity.

To most historians and political scientists, northwestern Nigeria is known for its conservatism but people like Aminu Kano, a Muslim politician was an aberration. In the 1940s Aminu Kano led a socialist movement in the northern part of the country in opposition to British rule. Mallam Aminu Kano embodied the essence of leadership; to protect the weak, nurture the poor, and provide peace and stability to the minds of the citizen. Aminu Kano did not just rise to challenge the British colonialists, he also led the people to rise against the tyrants and feudal oligarchs of the north. His Northern Elements Progressive Union in the First Republic was the poor people’s party. In the Second Republic, he founded the People’s Redemption Party (PRP).

Malam Balarabe Musa another socialist became Kaduna State governor in 1979 under PRP. Balarabe Musa, 81 years old now remains the same left-wing northern politician.

Malam Aminu Kano did not wish to own anything that the ordinary man in Kano couldn’t afford to own. He will not use the word ‘masses’. He preferred to call them ‘people.’ Aminu Kano refused to be tainted by the corruption and self-aggrandizement that always saw her leaders always living head and shoulders above their people.

……to be continued….