Numerous scholars have posited that the progress of a nation’s development is contingent upon the presence of leadership that adheres to the norms of governmental accountability across multiple tiers. This study utilizes a historical research methodology, which entails the examination of secondary data derived from pertinent books, journals, online resources, magazines, and newspapers. The objective is to investigate the concepts of leadership and accountability in the context of development challenges in Nigeria, specifically focusing on the administration of public resources. It is evident that these issues are rooted, among other factors, in inadequate leadership across many tiers of government. Numerous studies have indicated that the presence of accountable leadership in the administration of public resources is a crucial factor for national development, and this holds true for Nigeria as well (Ninalowo, 2003; Agweda, 2007; Otinche, 2007). Moreover, it has been contended by many academics that there exists a favorable correlation between proficient leadership and appropriate responsibility in the management of public matters inside a country’s pursuit of progress (Edoho, 2007; Kuada, 2010). In situations where the government exhibits inadequate management of public resources, the occurrence of wastage becomes unavoidable. Moreover, it has been contended by several academics that a significant impediment to development efforts undertaken by successive Nigerian governments since attaining independence in 1960 is the lack of leadership that has failed to adopt a culture of effective public resource management.
The literature is replete with various leadership theories that aim to elucidate the qualities, attitudes, traits, and actions that a leader must possess in order to attain improved performance, whether at the organizational or national level. The leadership theories encompassed in this study are authentic, path-goal, inspiring, visionary, charismatic, transformational, transactional, complexity, distributing, contingency, trait, and situational leadership theories (Avolio et al., 2009). Hartog and Koopman (2001) believe that these theories aim to elucidate the mechanisms via which specific leaders are capable of attaining exceptional degrees of follower motivation, adoration, commitment, respect, trust, dedication, loyalty, and performance. This paper adopts the authentic leadership theory as the analytical framework. The rationale for embracing this approach is in the necessity for organizations, regardless of their public or private nature, to have leaders who demonstrate transparency and uphold ethical conduct in resource management, hence contributing to improved performance (Luthans and Avolio, 2003; Kuada, 2010). The presence of effective leadership is crucial for the achievement of both organizational and national objectives.
Similarly, according to Otinche (2007), it may be argued that effective leadership plays a crucial role in facilitating the governance process, hence promoting social advancement and stability. Hence, an efficient leadership entails the proficient management of resources to optimize organizational performance. Hence, it is apparent that the significance of leadership in fostering progress, be it within an organization or on a national scale, is of utmost importance and should not be underestimated. This is especially true as leaders are expected to demonstrate exemplary behavior. Followers should observe positive character attributes in their leaders, which in turn should inspire them to behave in a manner that fosters improved performance. Hence, it is improbable for any organization or nation to go beyond the extent to which its leaders are able to maintain accountability and transparency in resource management.
Development requires strong individual, organizational, and national accountability structures. According to Ninalowo (2003), accountability requires government officials to explain their actions to the public and justify them morally and ethically. Effective resource management in social development requires responsibility, according to Richardson (2008). Accountability is also crucial to good governance. According to Omona (2010), good governance improves the state’s capacities by using varied strategies to boost government efficiency and effectiveness. Conversely, researchers have provided different views on ‘development’. Ajagun (2003) states that advancement includes economic, administrative, political, social, cultural, and religious aspects, enhancing its relevance.
Challenges to Development in Nigeria
Nigerian progress is severely hampered by poor leadership, in part because public affairs are not handled with enough accountability or transparency. Akinkuotu (2011) argues that the reason for this is that the majority of Nigeria’s political leaders are loyal to the “godfathers” who helped them get into power, and as a result, they will stop at nothing to appease these guys, even at the expense of the country’s progress. Babawale (2007) states that poor leadership and “politics of belly” are pervasive at all levels of government in Nigeria and pose a serious threat to the country’s growth. Nigeria lacks strong leadership to properly utilize its abundance of material and people resources for growth. Widespread income distribution imbalances in society are a result of government accountability and transparency issues, which hinder growth (Buhari 2008). According to Ninalowo (2003), transparency is the process by which public servants carry out their duties in an honest and open manner. In a society where the accountability culture is viewed with disdain, it is inevitable that the public and private sectors will elevate the culture of unethical business practices. Public authorities therefore waste money that could have been allocated to development initiatives. Therefore, there is a connection between societal progress and, on the one hand, genuine leadership that upholds appropriate accountability in the administration of public resources.
There are about 168 million people living in Nigeria, representing more than 250 ethnic groups. With a daily average sale price of USD 100 per barrel on the global oil market, the nation is a significant exporter of crude oil, exporting 2.53 million barrels per day (Gberevbie, 2012; Soyinka, 2012). The majority of people in the country still live in poverty with no real means of support, despite the tremendous amount of money coming into the country (Ibaba and Ebiede 2009). Additionally, the 2005 transfer of USD 2 billion to the National Political Reform Conference (NPRC) by the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) without the consent of the Nigerian National Assembly (The Senate and Federal House of Representatives) demonstrated the lack of accountability and transparency of public officials in the management of public funds (cited in Yunusa 2009). Imported items showed poor management of public resources as well. These goods might have been produced domestically.
One of the main impediments to Nigeria’s growth is the widespread corruption of public servants that has existed in the nation’s governments since its independence in 1960. For instance, due to government officials embezzling public funds, the nation made a total of USD300 billion, or NGN46.5 trillion, from the sale of crude oil on the international market over the course of 20 years, without having to demonstrate corresponding improvements in infrastructure and human capital (World Bank, 1996; Ikelegbe, 2004). Corruption among government officials, especially those at the top, has become the norm in Nigeria, even at the state level. For example, the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) accused former Taraba State Governor Jolly Nyame (1999–2007) of embezzling NGN285 million, or USD1.8 million, in public monies between March 2003 and March 2007 (Musari and Agbana 2012).
Conclusion and Recommendation
This essay has looked at Nigeria’s development issues in relation to ineffective leadership and a lack of accountability in the administration of public funds. It has been maintained that inadequate leadership at all governmental levels—federal, state, and local—that disregards appropriate responsibility in the administration of public resources is the root cause of Nigeria’s development impediments. We come to the conclusion that the Federal Government of Nigeria must strengthen the current anti-corruption procedures if it is to succeed in the war against the mismanagement of public resources and corruption among public officials. Specifically, the pertinent laws that give the Attorney-General of the Nigerian Federation the authority to file charges against dishonest officials must be amended to transfer that authority to the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC). This will make it easier for public servants to strictly adhere to the regulations governing the appropriate administration of public resources as a means of promoting improved development.
References
Agweda, T. (2007). “The Imperative of Leadership in Governance: The Nigerian Experience”. Akpotor, A.S., A.O. Afolabi, M.O. Aigbokhaevbolo, B.O. Iganiga, and O.S. Odiagbe eds. 2007. Cost of Governance in Nigeria: An Evaluative Analysis. Ekpoma: Faculty of Social Sciences, Ambrose Alli University Publishing House, pp.176-187
Babawale, T. (2007). “Good Governance, Democracy and Democratic Best Practices: Prescriptions for Nigeria”. Centre for Black and African Arts and Civilization Publications Monograph Series, Lagos, 2007, pp.7-16.
Buhari, M. (2008). “Discipline and Accountability under Democratic Leadership”. Journal of African Development Affairs, 1(1), 72-78.
Edoho, F. (2007). “State-corporate Alliance: Ramifications for Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Livelihood”. African Journal of Business and Economic Research, 3(1), 96-113.
Gberevbie. D. (2011). “Leadership: The Financial Sector and Development in Nigeria”. Inkanyiso: Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(2), 149-158.
Hartog, D.N.D. and P.L. Koopman. (2001). “Leadership in Organization”. Sinangil, N. and C. Viswesvaran eds. 2001. Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology. London: Sage Publications, pp.166-187
Ibaba, I. and Ebiede, T. (2009). “Ending the Poverty Trap in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria”. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 24(1), 65-89.
Ikelegbe, A. (2004). “Crisis of Resistance: Youth Militias, Crime and Violence in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria”. A seminar paper presented at the African Studies Centre, University of Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands, 5th August, 2004.
Musari, A. and R. Agbana. (2012). “How Nyame withdrew NGN282 million Taraba Funds, by Witness”. The Guardian Newspaper (Lagos), March 29, 2012, p.4.
Ninalowo, A. (2003). “Democratic Governance, Regional Integration and Development in Africa”. Development Policy Management Forum, Addis Ababa. DPMF Occasional Paper, No.11, pp.1-32.
Omona, J. (2010). “Meeting the Millennium Development Goals’ Targets: Proposed UN Global Government Challenges of the 21st Century”. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 25(1), 129-159.
Otinche, S. (2007). “Value-based Leadership and Democracy: A Theoretical Overview”. The Abuja Management Review, 5(1), 20-34.
Soyinka, A. (2012). “Tackling the Subsidy Mess”. Tell Magazine (Lagos), 16 January, 2012, pp.46- 57.
World Bank. (1996.) Nigeria: Poverty in the Midst of Plenty: the Challenge of Growth with Inclusion. Report No. 14733 – UNI Washington D.C.: World Bank, p.38.
Credit Image: https://heartofarts.org/leadership-and-accountability/
Other Articles
