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”
I also consider the knowledge myth relevant here. In Nigeria, where the utterly impeding “culture of big man” is holding sway, this myth needs to be broken. The “culture of big man”, which I hope to address fully in my next article, is that culture in Nigeria that could be likened to apartheid in South Africa. The culture erects an imaginary “Berlin Wall” between the stupendously rich and the miserably poor; between the educated, the half educated and the uneducated. Those in the priority divide of “rich and liberated” have apportioned to themselves the birthright of leadership. They lay claims to leadership, even when they do not care about the core leadership values of integrity, transparency and accountability. The impression being sent out is that to be a good leader, one must have attained a very high level of education and economic liberation. Although, it is true that knowledge is critical in leadership, knowledge here should not be equated to academic degrees, which many flaunt to a derisive level in Nigeria. You do not need to be an “Engineer Dr” to be a leader. There are so many philosophers who can reason more constructively than Socrates, Aristotle, Jean Paul Sartre, Thomas Aquinas and Hume, joined together, but who cannot lead. In contrast, there are many, we may call the “half educated” who are real leaders. The difference lies in the ability to create positive change. A similar argument goes for economic liberation theory.
A leader is the one that charts the course. The real leader possesses vision and momentum. She generates confidence in others. She is eager to make sacrifices. She is not ready to take anything less than victory. The real leader radiates warmth. She possesses non-negotiable values, referred to above. She is aggressive, but thorough. She has trained her eyes to see beyond today. She is desperate to produce more leaders, by empowering others. She realizes that her authority and legacy are dependent on how she is able to reproduce more leaders that will run with the vision. She is very conscious of the transient nature of her position; hence she knows it would be tragic for her time to be up, without a well-trained successor.
Nigeria will be different, if we all start to learn how to become leaders. The senior manager, in a private firm could create a change that will save many of her employees and remove the pressure from the assigned leaders. The market woman can exercise a leadership role that can beat a pathway for several consumers. The classroom teacher possesses an awesome opportunity to impart on our younger generation and prepare the soil for an eventual harvest of great leaders.
When we embrace this leadership model, the task of nation building becomes easier, because everybody is attuned to the vision of success, from individual, corporate and national perspective. We can now carefully examine the development indicators and find a way of changing, through honest and collective efforts, the message of doom to that hope. This message of hope, so powerfully presented and pursued will melt the heart of the most uncaring of assigned leader and push her willy-nilly, to fulfill her manifestoes. Positive change will automatically follow.
Perhaps, it may be important at this juncture, to ask, do we have individual and collective goals? Where do we want to be in the next ten years? Has anybody bothered to come up with clear roadmap of where this country will be in 2014? Vision 2010 had these kinds of questions in mind, but where is it in terms of concrete, practical results. Why are we so short-sighted? It seems to me that Epicurus was a Nigerian. I say this because, his laughable philosophy of “eat, be merry, for tomorrow we die” is holding sway here. Nobody seems to desire delayed gratification. We want it now and we fail.
In its Millennium Summit, the United Nations set a series of goals, which some critics have dismissed as unrealistic, especially in relation to Africa’s condition. These goals, encapsulated as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), may seem unrealistic, but it sets a worthy agenda. The goals are simple and easy to remember. They are as follows:
• To eradicate extreme poverty
• Achieve universal primary education
• Promote gender equality
• Reduce child mortality
• Improve maternal health
• Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
• Ensure environmental sustainability
• Promote global partnership for development.
Each of these goals has clear targets. They are conceived to serve as global development measuring indicators. There is no doubt that development energy, in Nigeria, and in all other African countries are being channelled towards the MDGs. I think it would be useful, if Nigeria encapsulates its own development priorities with clear targets like the MDGs. Nigerians are already tired of hollow phrases like “poverty eradication”, that cannot be translated to “poverty reduction” Our people are desirous to understand development agenda like the “needs” in clearer, lay person’s terms. We should set realistic goals and market them to ordinary Nigerians. This can stimulate ideas and serve as bulwark of inspiration, especially now that optimism is in very short supply.
In conclusion, let me emphasize that the leadership model, I seek to package here, does not lose sight of the fact that government is an important driver of change. What I seek to emphasize is that we all have crucial roles to play in driving change and propelling development. Ours is a rocky terrain, full of potholes. No single driver can go it alone and go it successfully.
« volver.