Highlighting Nigeria’s opulent and arrogant leadership philosophy
Although it might be challenging to describe precisely, leadership is a universal phenomenon that affects all facets of the human experience. Nonetheless, as one gain an understanding of leadership, a number of traits persistently come up as relevant concerns deserving of careful consideration and examination. Empathetic listening, devoted action, service, and empowerment are some of these traits. In an era of diversity and responsibility, successful leadership becomes even more important and recognized beyond the themes, features, attributes, and definitions of leadership.
According to a Chinese philosopher, Lao Tzu, “great leaders must first become good slaves,” The biggest impact that leaders have on the world and the greatest recognition for maintaining their obligations to others come through significant acts of service. By putting the needs of others ahead of their own interests, servant leaders earn the respect of those around them and demonstrate their commitment to attaining lofty objectives.
Autocratic leadership, which is typically observed in Nigeria, views other people as a means to their own ends or as a “human resource” for the accomplishment of their own aims, in contrast to the moral perspective of servant leadership. Although autocratic leadership is transactional and focused primarily on ensuring a quid pro quo (a favour or advantage granted in return for something) cash exchange for employees’ contributions, servant leadership is transformational and committed to advancing others.
It goes without saying that Nigeria is well endowed by Providence with the human and material resources required for national advancement. But ever since gaining political independence, Nigeria has continued to plod along as a failed, frail, and “juvenile” state. Nigeria, a country with a bright future and one that was expected to lead Africa out of its economic backwaters of underdevelopment, is still one of the most underdeveloped, corrupt, crisis-ridden, morally bankrupt, and leadership-deficient nations in the world. Its infrastructure is also in very poor condition. Instead of serving as an example of transformational leadership, contemporary bureaucracy, national progress, national integration, and innovation, Nigeria seems to be infamous for everything that is ordinary, corrupt, unreasonably violent, and morally repugnant.
Read Also: The Controversies Of The New Naira Notes
So, it is impossible to refute the claim that Nigeria is a victim of poor governance and intricate systemic corruption that has swept the country like cancer. This viewpoint is shared by liberal thinkers and researchers, who contend that corruption and Nigeria’s leadership problems, are intricately linked and are to blame for the country’s continued economic problems, political upheaval, and underdevelopment. Current debates claim that the leadership in Nigeria exhibits extreme moral decay and immoral behaviour.
One of Nigeria’s most serious problems, poor leadership, has been highlighted over time. This has prompted debate over whether leadership is a luxury or a service to society. So, it is essential to emphasize how necessary it is for leaders to make sacrifices and be committed to serving others. This is in opposition to a corrupt leadership culture that is typified by an insatiable, selfish quest for power in both the political and economic spheres. In favour of an entrenched, affluent leadership style that has detrimental effects on every level and facet of society, public and social services are no longer given priority. This promotes hasty, ineffective resource allocation, which results in poor macroeconomic management and a protracted economic disaster.
The system orchestrates a deplorable leadership trend that, among other things, exposes public resources to manipulations for the unjust acquisition, retention, and application of financial and political power; focuses on the enjoyment and exploitation of the extravagant luxuries of political office; lowers standards to deplorable levels; and, in the end, expands the parallel dimensions between leaders and their people in terms of loyalty and trust
Effective political leadership does not imply furthering one’s personal agenda at the expense of the greater good. In a similar vein, the privileges and rewards of the political office ought to be designed to provide a safety net against shocks that can weaken effective leadership. Unjust gains here lead to the leadership’s attention to collecting rather than deliveries.
The public good has unquestionably suffered as a result of degraded service, lowered standards, poor use or allocation of resources, the extinction of the spirit of sacrifice, and, lastly, the abandonment or replacement of aims.
Nigeria needs a new kind of leadership; it must be motivated by merit and service, enthusiastic, global-minded, and, above all, people-focused. Instead of taking annual vacations to exotic locations, where they intimidate the governed and become inaccessible, leaders should be seen as making selfless sacrifices for social, economic, and humanitarian programmes and foundations that help lift their people.
The Nigerian scenario most vitally demands an alert army of followers who view themselves as employers in the Nigerian firm in order to secure a governance system that upholds service as the cornerstone of government. Lack of or insufficient access to services breeds instability and civil unrest, and this combination has the potential to bring down both the government and the economy. As a result, leadership is arguably the most crucial aspect in determining whether a nation succeeds or fails. Without authority, leadership does not exist. Hence, in order to develop a theoretical framework for responsible leadership, we must think about power.
Highlighting Nigeria’s opulent and arrogant leadership philosophy
