Kayode Fayemi: Promoting Stewardship in Public Office

 

By Kayode Fayemi.

Pastor Sam Adeyemi provided a very broad shoulder to lean on in my years in office as Governor of Ekiti State and I remain greatly indebted to him for his constant prayers and wise counsel. It is always a delight to watch from a distance the good work that this ministry is doing in advancing the life and the light of God in this increasingly perverse world. I count it a rare privilege to participate in the very noble effort that the Excellence in Leadership Conference is, which I have been made to understand, serves the purpose of extending the frontiers of the Church’s influence beyond the four walls of brick and mortar, in shaping every area of our national life with our transcendent values and ultimately raising role models.

As I contemplated on the theme of this conference – Promoting Stewardship in Public Office – I could not help but reminisce on an event I attended as a guest speaker sometime in February 2013, organized by a group called the “Apostles in the Marketplace (AIMP)”. The event had a similar focus and I remember the paper I delivered that day was titled “Christians in Politics: The Challenge of Transformative Public Engagement”. It is interesting to note that many of the participants at that event over two years ago have gone on to deepen their participation in politics and governance at different levels, and by the grace of God my brother and friend who was a co-speaker at the event, Pastor Yemi Osinbajo has gone on to become our Vice President, while one of the conveners and Chairman of the Board of the AIMP, Mr. Okechukwu Enalamah and I, have been confirmed to serve in President Buhari’s cabinet alongside other faithful servant leaders. I hope this session will similarly inspire as many of us as possible to get more involved in politics and public service, even as I pray God opens more doors for more Godly men and women of faith to attain strategic positions in the public sphere as we work together to redeem the desolation of our land and generation.

The Need for a New Model of Leadership

In 1983, Chinua Achebe wrote, The Trouble with Nigeria, in which he offered his famous diagnosis of Nigerian society: “The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian land or climate or water or air or anything else. The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility [and] to the challenge of personal example which are the hallmarks of true leadership.” Achebe’s theory of leadership failure is one of the most frequently quoted statements about Nigeria. It was a damning critique of Nigerian elites that has continued to resound even after three decades that the notion of an overarching leadership failure as the root of our society’s ills has almost become a cliché trotted out by everyone including successive generations of leaders to explain our chronic national underperformance.

Without a doubt, the need for us to evolve a new paradigm of leadership on our shores has never been more urgent. The nation is undergoing a period of economic uncertainty occasioned by declining oil revenues. At the same time, a fast growing population poses pressing questions in terms of the challenges of feeding, housing, educating, employing, managing and leading tens of millions of citizens, levying new demands for public goods. There has been a breakdown of societal values and a corresponding degradation of vital social and moral institutions.

The most pungent expression of these issues is to be found among young Nigerians who constitute the country’s largest demographic category. A lot of our youth no longer see a clear, scrupulous path to a decent and fulfilling life. Many of our young people are entranced by the possibilities of upward social mobility inherent in fraud and a variety of get-rich-quick schemes that reflect our societal bias for instant gratification. Others have been initiated into terrorism and political violence. If leaders are role models and influencers, what sort of leadership are we modeling for our young compatriots? What sort of examples are we setting for them from our places of privileges high up in the pinnacle of society? What kind of leadership will inspire, mentor and rally them towards a greater sense of purpose?

The sort of paradigm of leadership that prevails in any society is predicated on how that society answers a vital moral question. Is power for self-aggrandizement or is it for serving the common good? If a society comes to believe that power is for self-aggrandizement, then public office and leadership will be marked by hyper-authoritarianism, corrupt enrichment and dysfunction. There is a clear difference between a leadership that preserves the common good and a leadership that promotes the affluence of a privileged minority. The former creates a climate of inclusion, unity and mutuality. The latter fosters imbalances, inequalities and inequity.

Looking back at Nigeria’s socio-political trajectory, it is no mystery as to which leadership model has been ascendant for much of our history. Despite the riches and natural endowments with which Nigeria has been providentially blessed, the benefits of our commonwealth have not been equitably distributed. Wide disparities of income persist and millions of Nigerians still live in grinding poverty. For such a young population, lack of legitimate means of social mobility breeds social discontent and unrest thus explaining the escalation of crime and conflict across Nigeria in recent years.

While it is true that abuse of power and impunity are as much a reality of leadership in every sphere of national life as it is with the public sector, leaders in the public sector bear more responsibility as those with the vested authority to utilize the instruments of office in moderating the conduct of the citizenry. More importantly, public sector leaders usually have the charisma that endears people to them, making it possible to influence their behaviour. Nigerians are good followers and will key into whatever is modeled by our leaders. We do what we see our leaders do, not what we have been asked to do. If leaders lead with integrity, the message will be clear that this is a nation of honest people, who believe in hard work and integrity. These values from the public sector will effectively translate into other spheres.

Clearly, we need a new paradigm of leadership in Nigeria. We need a new definition of leadership which cuts to the core essence of the social contract between government and the governed, and recognizes that the people have the power, and leaders are servants empowered by the people to do their bidding. As the old order that never worked for us is becoming obsolete, we need to embrace the emerging order of Servant Leadership, largely energized by the power of personal example modeled by President Buhari, who the Almighty God who rules in the affairs of men, in His wisdom, has chosen as He did King David in biblical times, to lead Nigeria at this auspicious time with the integrity of his heart.

Defining Servant Leadership

Robert K. Greenleaf (1904–1990) is credited as being the first to coin the phrase “Servant Leadership” in The Servant as Leader, an essay he first published in 1970 but which had subsequent editions. I agree with a lot of Greenleaf’s submissions and urge further reading of his works, being one of the greatest contributors to the body of knowledge on the subject of our discourse. Though most of his work sought to address the power-centered authoritarian leadership style that was prominent in institutions in the United States during his time, there are key lessons which are relevant to our contemporary Nigerian experience.

However, the concept of Servant Leadership is timeless. The greatest teacher of all times, our Lord Jesus dedicated much of His teachings to this important concept, giving instructions to both leaders and followers that transcend the spatio-temporal context of His admonitions. He famously contrasted authoritarian models of leadership with His prescribed paradigm of servant leadership while expressly rejecting the former. He repudiated the leadership culture of His day that was characterized by hypocrisy, ostentation and blatant abuse of authority and warned His followers not to “lord it over” those under them. He called for a radical change in the style and substance of governance – a call that is still very relevant today.

The concept of servant leadership may be difficult to readily grasp but its defining features are humility and service. Authoritarian leaders perpetuate an alienating gulf between themselves and the people they lead which in turn fosters a master-servant dynamic. In contrast, servant leadership inverts this dynamic by defining leadership as a position of service. At the risk of appearing to be sermonising or spiritualising an otherwise secular concept, I submit that the life and ministry of Jesus is one of the greatest models of Servant Leadership that we all need to learn from in developing a new paradigm of leadership that puts the people first.

Servant Leadership, Legitimacy and Moral Authority

Still on the point that Servant Leadership is a derivative of God’s design for man, the theme of servant leadership is deeply connected to the idea that leadership is a trust and that all power comes from God. Above the structures and systems of governance stands a great sovereign from whom ultimate legitimacy flows. The idea of a transcendent authority above all earthly sovereignty is readily acknowledged in various religious and moral traditions. The bible tells us in the 13th chapter of Apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans that “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” It is variously articulated as a higher power or a higher law, but whatever its depiction, the point being clearly made is that earthly institutions do not have the final say over the fate of people. Leaders must still answer to a higher power.

The ancient Chinese sages defined this standard of transcendent morality as “the Mandate of Heaven” – a crown of legitimacy that inhered in governments that rule according to the dictates of justice and ethics. In Chinese philosophy, heaven would bless the authority of a just ruler but would withdraw its mandate from an unjust ruler. The mandate of heaven would then be transferred to those who are better suited to rule according to the dictates of higher morality.

The mandate of heaven is a metaphor for the moral legitimacy of rulers but it also points to the need for leaders to be on the right side of history. One of the defining traits of servant leadership is a consciousness of that transcendent sovereignty in which true legitimacy resides and the awareness that they will be weighed on scales more consequential than those of the media or critics.

Servant leadership defines power as a part of a social covenant that frames the relationship between the leaders and the people they lead. We can see a new moral principle which holds that the only authority deserving of one’s allegiance is that which is freely and knowingly granted by the led to the leader in response to, and in proportion to, the clearly evident servant stature of the leader. Those who choose to follow this principle will not casually accept the authority of existing institutions. Rather they will freely respond only to individuals who are chosen as leaders because they are proven and trusted as servants. To the extent that this principle prevails in the future, the only truly viable institutions are those that are predominantly servant-led.