Governance, national ethos and succession planning (2), by Abiodun Komolafe

by · The Eagle Online

The private sector has something to give here to the political establishment. The best companies endure and continue to perform because of careful succession planning. A very good example is Procter & Gamble (P&G), which sadly exited Nigeria a few years ago. The company is one of the biggest and most successful in the world. Its very commendable operating base is that the company “promotes strictly from within.”

P&G will not hire a genius to fill a strict strategic opening in its organisation. This would indicate a failure of succession planning. In over two centuries, the company has done extremely well, and the Nigerian political economy should look at this very enduring model to use in all areas of endeavour.

Succession planning must determine and propel the political economy and must be a key element in establishing the hegemonic base of the state. All the states that have been successful over the past eighty years have used this framework and Nigeria must not carry out the futile and self-destructive proposition that it can swim against the tide.

​Let’s be clear: the “Pact” with the people is a debt, not a favour. But look at how we handle succession in Nigeria. It’s usually a desperate scramble for survival, not succession. Leaders pick successors to “cover” their tracks, not to carry a vision. In sane climes, leadership is a relay race – and frankly, nobody cares how fast you run your lap if you leave the baton lying in the dirt. Your success isn’t about the buildings you put up, it’s about the person you hand the keys to. 

Therefore, a successor should build on the foundation, not spend two years digging up the floorboards to settle old scores.

Ekiti State Governor Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji deserves credit for his choice of: “Building Legacies: Governance, Successor-generation and Continuity,” for his April 14 discourse at the Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD). The lecture, full of penetrating insights, should mark the beginning of a reinvigoration of the much-needed path to Nigeria becoming, once again, a competitive political economy. Discourses matter; unfortunately, they have been relegated or even suppressed in the quest for temporary advantage.

There is a poignant reminder of the dangers of temporary convenience coming out of the momentous announcement, last week, by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – much like Angola did two years ago, and Qatar before it – that it would be quitting the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). This announcement means that Nigeria must now make far-reaching, hard decisions about its continued membership in the cartel, and whether remaining within it still serves the national interest.

What is of importance here is that, as far back as 1978, Chief Obafemi Awolowo kicked up a storm when he raised the issue on the campaign trail in the buildup to the 1979 presidential election. Absurdly, those incapable of thinking beyond tomorrow imputed religious undertones to Awolowo’s desire to examine the context and desirability of Nigeria’s continued participation in the oil cartel.

The same people’s emotional and intellectual inadequacy is now exposed with the UAE’s exit from the cartel. Can one impute religious undertones or motives to the UAE’s exit? Certainly not! The exit rests on hard economic calculation – exactly what Awolowo wanted, and correctly so. Had there been a serious debate in 1978, who knows what policy prescriptions beneficial to the nation would have come out of it? But, again, this is Nigeria!

1978 should be instructive, and Oyebanji is echoing the sage by presenting a profound discourse as a contribution to highlighting policy prescriptions for the immediate future. As the great Canadian philosopher, Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980) famously posited: “The medium is the message.” By choosing ABUAD for this dialogue, BAO, as Oyebanji is fondly known – chose a more-than-appropriate medium.

The inception of ABUAD in 2009 is important; and it is not surprising that, in such a short time, it has built up what will be an enduring international reputation for integrity and very high intellectual standards. What links BAO and ABUAD is the current, very urgent evolution of the centuries-old definition of ‘The Idea of a University.’

Cutting-edge institutions such as ABUAD now realise that the idea of a contemporary university must realign with the evolution of a better, more humane, and equitable society. Today’s university must link the unstoppable advancement of new technologies with the quest to elevate human capacity, leading to greater self-fulfillment. The focus of ABUAD is clearly predicated on this, and since it is one of the few institutions leading this redefinition, it must be lauded. This is why BAO was correct to have chosen the university as the medium for the message.

It must be spelt out in data and flashed up to match the giant strides being made by institutions such as ABUAD. Oyebanji must revamp the curriculum of the institutions under him so that they can become a feeder for ABUAD and others. For example, in today’s world, it would be absurd if coding in a state like Ekiti, renowned for its quest for knowledge, does not start from Primary One. This should be the first necessary step in an overall revamp; otherwise, the entire educational curriculum risks becoming irrelevant, if not redundant.

It is inconceivable that ABUAD would, in 10 years’ time, be enrolling students who have not been equipped in their formative years to be robustly competitive and vigorously prepared; indeed, the institution is already doing so now. Since ABUAD itself has limited capacity, it is imperative that the tertiary institutions under the suzerainty of the state government be brought up to speed to match, if not surpass, these standards. Only through such an evolution can the state breathe free from the “accidental leader” syndrome that has long stifled our progress.

Also Read

Properly considered, there cannot be leadership of an accidental nature if a process stretching back to the youthful formative years is in place to nurture a leadership based on preparation and mentoring – both of the visible and overall community-standards type. The absence of such a process, unlike in India, Malaysia, Singapore and the UAE – nations that have learned to absorb their tragedy and transform it into vision – manifests itself in Nigeria’s pathetic underperformance.

To build legacies, as Oyebanji clearly desires, must be based on a framework for enduring continuity. This is very much like feeding a factory process through well-chosen raw materials. If, for example, we want to manufacture chocolates, the process begins with the quality of the beans that the farmer harvests from his cocoa trees. The wrong raw materials will lead to the erosion of quality and irreversible damage to the reputation of the brand. Only carefully constructed succession planning can lead to endurance.

Awolowo may be gone, but it will be ill-advised for politicians, especially in the Southwest, to repudiate his overriding ethos – even if you hate him – and expect to win an election. In contemporary terms, a governor such as Oyebanji, who has made a robust start and is about to consolidate it in his expected second term, should now put succession planning at the heart of his endeavours, if he has not started to do so already, for this is the only way he can make his successes endure.

The last kilometre is always the hardest! Succession planning is not about installing a successor or anointing a candidate. Rather, it is about entrenching an overall plan – the acceptance of a programme as the propelling force – so that long after the storyline of his personal tenure has ended, the BAO spirit will still be driving Ekiti State to greater heights.

May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!

● Concluded.

Email: ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk and Mobile: 08033614419 (SMS only).

Follow The Eagle Online Channel on WhatsApp

[wpadcenter_ad id='745970' align='none']