|
|
Nigeria is a land of opportunities, yet many of her citizens are groping in search of them. Pessimism is at the verge of supplanting hope as many Nigerians wallow in abject penury, yet standing on fertile land. Some are even living on top of a 20 billion barrel oil reserve, yet unable to cater for basic existential needs, like, food, shelter and clothing. This is a mystery! The fate of over a 100 million people that live in this most populous African country is dependent on how well and how swift, this mystery can be solved.
Leadership is a critical solution tool. Everybody seems to agree that leadership holds a rare magic in tearing through the clouds of contradictions in Nigeria. However, the leadership model needed to turn the tables and position Nigeria in its rightful place in the developmental ladder remains elusive. Hence, if 100 Nigerians are asked the questions, “What is leadership and who is a leader?” 99 would most likely come up with definitions purely from positional perspective. Fingers will be pointed towards the corridors of people in government, like, the President, Governors, Legislators, Inspector General of Police, and so on.
This notion of leadership accounts, largely, for the multiplicity of criticisms levelled against government. When there is no food on the table, positional leaders are called to answer, even when the individual has failed to take the necessary steps, to place food on the table. When crime and criminality snowball, government must step forward with clear- cut answers or be made an object of scorn. It is immaterial that citizens are unwilling to co-operate with security agents to arrest crimes. It does not also matter, that the society has thrown values to the wind, hence condoning ostentatious displays of wealth, which, in fact, is an open invitation to violent crimes.
No day passes, without one hearing or reading an outburst of anger by citizens, who feel that the country’s leadership has lost focus. Unprintable words are used in lampooning what some have called a ‘deranged leadership’. In frustration; many have drawn comparison between the present democratic experiment and military autocracy. Analysts, including this writer, have wondered whether we are ascending the democracy consolidation table or relapsing into a dictatorial conundrum. Assigned leaders spend quality time trying to win followers’ confidence. Time to run with the dream and envision new paths are lost in the process and many a leader loses concentration and drifts.
I’m beginning to entertain serious doubts about the urgency and potency of the above notion of leadership. It kills initiative. It demolishes confidence. It strangulates vision. It is diversionary and postpones the opportunity for an individual assessment of self, making the individual shift the burden of blame unnecessarily. It is not only fragmentary, but also confusing. It is the greatest enemy to development in Nigeria, in particular and Africa, in general.
The best concept of leadership, which I feel should be packaged for urgent sale to Nigerians, is that notion of leadership that prioritizes participation. This latter notion is akin to democracy and in tandem with the African notion of “igwe bu ike” Leadership, should be seen from the binoculars of influence. It should be seen as everyone’s business. Although, we know that everybody will not become leaders as there are bound to be followers, the more leaders we have, the easier the task of nation building will be.
To enable us imbibe this invigorating leadership model, it is crucial that we deal with myths that surround leadership. John Maxwell, a down-to-earth leadership thinker, has dealt with these myths, which I suggest we adapt to fit our situation here.
The first myth is the one that reduces, in fact, conscripts leadership to governmental position. It is this myth that gives, a senior manager in a private firm, who makes billions of Naira a year but pays her staff, paltry sums of money monthly, the guts to criticize government, for poor wages and human rights abuses. It should also be noted that the fact that somebody is a Governor of a state does not necessarily mean that she is a leader. (I’m using she to also mean he) The point here is that it is possible that a person occupying a governmental position is not a leader in the real sense of the word. She does not possess the core leadership qualities. Her position as a Governor, cannot therefore procure for her a leadership role, she does not possess ab initio. Stanley Huffty, puts it beautifully: “it is not the position that makes the leader, it is the leader that makes the position” What the new leadership model does here is to empower the real leader to supply the missing arsenal in the positional leader’s toolbox and propel positive change.
Another myth is that of management. According to my mentor, John Maxwell, the critical difference between the manger and a leader lies in the ability to create positive change. “Managers can maintain direction, but they can’t change it. To move people in right direction, you need influence”
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Wilfred Mamah
This user has not written anything in his panorama profile yet.
|
Comments
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
