Opinion
Reading List For Public Servants And Reform Managers
Published
1 month agoon

By Tunji Olaopa
Since its inauguration many decades ago, public administration has generated a permanent discursive framework that ensures that it has the theoretical and practical contents to sustain the professionalism and efficiency that the public service requires to complement the state everywhere. This becomes even more critical given that the democratic imperative keeps articulating and aggregating the significant political preferences of a citizenry that knows what it wants from a leadership and its administrative apparatuses. This therefore means that for public administration to fully and adequately complement the democratic imperative—for the public service to optimally aid democratic governance in any state—the public administrative discourse must always be in full swing to ensure it is not outstripped by the discourse on democracy.
This, I suspect, is not the real challenge. This is because the public administration discourse has remained fundamentally fecund in terms of its inner dynamics of responding to the challenges that confront public administration and the public service over the decades. From Max Weber to Woodrow Wilson, and from the new public management (NPM) to the new governance theory, public administration has kept up with the changing dynamics of the times that enables it to overcome critical hindrances and challenges from the first to the fourth industrial revolutions to the transformation of the nature of the state, and from artificial intelligences to the new normal instigated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the polycrises that have engulfed the world.
The real challenge, I think, derives from the capacity of public servants to keep up their intelligence quotient with the vast array of discourses that public administration throws up. The twenty-first century demands a public servant that is knowledgeable, intelligent, adaptable and a transformative leader with the preemptive capacity to articulate a vision, design a strategy and get things done. This challenge to the intelligent quotient of the public servant, like most issues, is again more crucial once we begin to speak about the postcolonial public servant caught within the dysfunctional grip of a postcolonial public service like Nigeria’s. This puts a double bind on such a public servant to do more in order to be able to live up to the national and global expectations of a twenty-first century public servant charged with the fundamental responsibility of crafting and implementing public policies with the tools of modern decision science.
One significant way, and a most difficult one at that, by which a postcolonial public servant and public manager in a country like Nigeria can keep abreast of the public administration discourse and the challenges of remaining effective sufficiently to man the new public service is to have an up-to-date reading list of books that embody the trajectories of the challenges, triumphs and directions of the public administration apparatuses, especially within a specific context. What I want to do within the limited space of this piece is to outline a few critical books that speak to how far public administration and the public service have advanced. And the methodology is to combine books that provide both global and national perspectives. This speaks to the necessity of inserting a public manager within a global-local context of operation that ensures that such a public manager can think globally and act locally with the discursive resources garnered from such critical intellectual and theoretical-practical resources.
The first book on my list is Zeger van der Wal’s The 21st Century Public Manager (2017). The book is fundamental because it is sufficiently situated in a time that captures the fundamental challenges of public administration in times of crisis (except that it is three years shy of one of the most fundamental challenges to humanity and public administration, the COVID-19 pandemic). However, the book recognizes that we live in a VUCA—volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous—time; a VUCA environment that was aggravated by the pandemic and polycrisis the world, and public administration, are currently confronting. The author was motivated to write a book that demonstrates that “public administration matters.” It is a book that was “hands-on, actor-driven, and speaking to the daily life of public managers who often operate in tough circumstances.” And with the book, the author meant to “speak to (aspiring) public managers across the globe. A book that would take their issues, pains, and challenges but also their optimism, clever solutions, and coping mechanisms as a starting point…. A book, above all, that would take senior practitioners seriously by providing them with examples, perspectives, and strategies grounded in the latest research evidence and best practices while being accessible and actor-driven at the same time. A book, lastly, that would be relevant and timely to public managers in the developing as well as the developed world, in the West and the non-West.”
In chapter four, van der Wal enumerates what he calls the “seven clusters of demands, dilemmas and opportunities” that public managers need to think through to operate optimally within the VUCA administrative environment. The first demand is that of “managing stakeholder multiplicity.” The new governance space now carries the burden of a multitude of stakeholders with diverse and often ambiguous demands, attitudes and styles. The dilemma is how to design and deliver a coherent administrative and managerial vision to such a diverse audience. The opportunity however derives from the benefits of leveraging the unlimited channels and supports that come from such diverse audiences to push through policy goals. The second demand is “Managing authority turbulence.” This implies that an average public manager is caught within an authority matrix that limits her capacity to utilize her formal power to enact critical decisions. The dilemma for the public manager is that of how to demonstrate collaborative capacity, even with those lacking the requisite skills while still holding on to critical authority. And yet, there is the opportunity of shared accountability that comes from the collective ownership of policies and programmes. The third demand for the twenty-first century public manager is “managing the new work(force)”. The public manager is confronted with the changing nature of work itself, and with an emergent workforce that incorporates new workforce, new worldviews and new generations, from Gen Z to Generation Alpha. This new workforce consists of a young, educated, knowledgeable, tech-savvy and assertive citizenry with a mind of its own. The dilemma is that of how to accommodate this new idea of work(force) while pushing it efficiently to achieve service delivery. The opportunity comes from the ability to remove bureaucratic constraints while achieving performance and productivity.
The fourth demand is that of “managing innovation forces.” Innovation forces are the critical resources, especially innovative technologies, that a public manager requires to keep the public service system as optimal and efficient as possible. The challenge however is that of being as innovative and entrepreneurial as possible within the ambit of budgetary limitations and ambiguous expectations from the politicians and the public. The opportunity that faces the public manager is that of experimenting with newer and developing innovation to achieve effective policies. The fifth demand is “managing ethical complexities.” Public administration is now embroiled within a global ethical governance framework that is enhanced by digital technologies and the need for accountability and transparency. The public manager therefore faces pressure from politicians, citizens, global innovations, and so on. The challenge is that of how to manage the public service ethically while facing enormous scrutiny from multiple publics with competing value sets. The opportunity comes from leading ethically in ways that achieve bureaucratic legitimacy for the state. The sixth demand comes from “managing short versus long time horizons.” This situates the public manager within the need to respond to the need for short-term goals by politicians and long-term planning for overall institutional resilience. The opportunity is that of deploying scenario-building techniques and technologies to anticipate future challenges.
The last demand is “managing cross-sectoral collaboration.” This is demanded by the new governance space that involves new and multiple stakeholders and non-state actors. The public manager needs to mediate this space to achieve extensive buy-in and ownership of ideas and policies, generate financial assistances and expertise, and tap into innovative ideas. The dilemma is how to balance this partnership while managing trust and power relations.
In Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector (1992), David Osborne and Teed Gaebler make the critical case that government can follow the logic of performance that have transformed capitalist corporation into performing better and achieving more efficient productivity result. And to make government work more efficiently and productively, the authors argue that government needs to be reinvented through the sweeping away of all bureaucratic bottlenecks that had made government too cumbersome to achieve democratic governance. An entrepreneurial government, as they call it, envisions some broad social goals and objectives, put in place performance management systems that strategize about these objectives, and employ people to sign performance contract to achieve the goals.
Osborne and Gaebler envision the responsibility of government as that of steering and not rowing; government’s responsibility is not to deliver services, but to articulate strategies that will enable the service delivery function to be outsourced to private contractors. Reinventing Government follows up on the managerial revolution brought about by the new public management and the objective of making government more flexible, lean and effective for the sake of performance. It demands that the public manager must be more than a thermostatic administrator who is merely gauging the institutional temperature of the public service. She must be more of a leader; a manager who anticipates challenges and coaxes the public service into more entrepreneurial and innovative performances.
In the 2007 book, The End of Government…As We Know It: Making Public Policy Work, Elaine Kamarck takes on the thread of the need to rethink how government business should be pursued for better result. The end of government as we know it is the end of the idea of government circumscribed by a bureaucracy that encumbers government from performing. It is the end of the traditional Weberian framework of government and its deadweights of hierarchies and red tapes. In the post-bureaucratic state, argues Kamarck, government needs to get tools that will facilitate the right connection between policy design and implementation. These tools are categorized into three: reinvented government, government by network and government by market. All three are meant to get the public sector to work in ways that involve externalities and outsourcing modalities that enable government to achieve efficient performance.
In its 2011 publication, The Future of Government, the World Economic Forum provides more recent contents that sum up the institutional reform objective of bringing the idea of government up to the requirement of the twenty-first century. What the managerial revolution demands is that government must be FAST—flatter, agile, streamlined and tech-enabled. The traditional structure of the bureaucracy, being rigid, inward-looking and founded on outdated competencies, must be modernized in ways that make it more collaborative, transparent, flexible and participatory. In other words, government and its public service must reflect the demands articulated by van der Wal in The 21st Century Public Manager.
The key issue that links all the preceding publications is that of public value that the new public service must create as a response to citizens’ informed demands. This is the focus of Mark H. Moore’s Creating Public Value (1995). In the book, Moore “sets out a philosophy of public management—an idea of what we citizens should expect of public managers, the ethical responsibilities they assume in taking offices, and what constitutes virtue in the execution of their offices.” Within the new managerial imagination, the public manager is more than an administrator who is supposed to look downward in terms of “the reliable control of organizational operations; she is rather meant to look outwards “towards the achievements of valuable results” or upwards “towards renegotiated policy mandates.” A public manager therefore becomes an explorer who is concerned with discovering, defining and producing public value.
These preceding books and publications sum up the global dimension of the materials that ground the postcolonial public managers and the public servants, especially within the Nigerian public service system, within the demands of public administration as a universal endeavor concerned with what the government does and the paradigms, trajectories of discourses and methodologies by which government can become more efficient and more productive. However, this global managerial imagination must be reckoned within the context of the inherited public service system Britain bequeathed to Nigeria. In my inaugural lecture, Big Bad Bureaucracy: Reinventing the Bureaucracy as a New Public Service in Nigeria (2018), I took all these preceding books, as well as my many years as a critical insider in the dysfunctional public service system in Nigeria seriously. The publication therefore becomes a critical leeway into how the Nigerian civil service system, founded on the traditional Weberian institution, works in stimulating what I have called bureau-pathologies that have compromised the search for a workable developmental state in Nigeria, post-independence. And how an insider perspective could enable a proper understanding of what ails the system, what needed to be done and how to go about reinventing the government from an approach that is not just universal, like Osborne and Gaebler’s, or Kamarck’s or Moore’s; but one that is rooted in contextual administrative dynamics. This provides a situational context by which public managers in Nigeria could begin to relate to what these non-Nigerian administrative theorists are saying about the nature of government and the reinvented mandates of the public manager.
This therefore makes even more fundamental the administrative memoir as a cogent introduction to how Nigerian public managers and public servants navigated the dysfunctionality of the postcolonial system while striving for a more efficient and optimal public service that will instigate developmental planning and democratic governance. Two of such memoirs are crucial, in my reckoning: Chief Simeon Adebo’s Our Unforgettable Years (1984) and Tunji Olaopa’s The Unending Quest for Reform (2023). Simeon Adebo represents a critical administrative figure in the emergence and consolidation of the public service and public administration discourse in Nigeria. He was one of the founding pioneers that ushered in what has been called the golden age of public administration in Nigeria. Indeed, his administrative commitment in the old western region led to the formulation of the Awolowo-Adebo paradigm of the politics-administration dichotomy, one of the defining dichotomies around which public administration emerged. Adebo’s public service reform efforts constitute a key framework for rethinking the institutional rehabilitating and reinvention of the civil service system in Nigeria. On the other hand, The Unending Quest for Reform articulates a challenging reaction to the bureau-pathologies that ate up the civil service system after the pioneering efforts of Adebo and his cohorts unfortunately went into critical debilitation. The Unending Quest for Reform serves the function of outlining what I consider a philosophy of institutional reform founded on many years of not only participating in the dysfunction of the civil service system, but also researching its root causes and administrative and political trajectories from pre-independence to date.
I am recommending these books—of course there are more—as the first level of challenging the intellectual acumen of any public manager who is willing to place herself within the VUCA and postcolonial environments of the public service in Nigeria, and dare to be critical sufficiently to become a significant part of the reinvention of the new public service as a world-class institution for making democratic governance productive for Nigerians. It is best to end this reflection about public administration discourse and the books public servants could start reading with Pablo Neruda, the Chilean poet-diplomat and politician: “The books that help you most are those which make you think that most. The hardest way of learning is that of easy reading; but a great book that comes from a great thinker is a ship of thought, deep freighted with truth and beauty.”
. Olaopa, Professor of Public Administration, is the Chairman,
Federal Civil Service Commission,
Abuja.
You may like
-
How To Cut Public Waste , Ensure Service Efficiency – Olaopa
-
Toyin Falola And The Tree Of Knowledge : Visual Configurations And Projections Of Self Between The Mythic And The Everyday ( 1)
-
Vice President Kashim Shettima, Books And An Enlightened Leadership
-
NyaknnoAbasi Osso: The Search Engine Before Google
-
BOOK REVIEW: The Unending Quest For Reform: An Intellectual Memoir
-
The Unending Quest For Reform – Tunji Olaopa’s Intellectual Memoir: A Commentary

By Toyin Falola
People who are well-grounded in understanding the operations of the universe would quickly tell anyone who cares to listen that life is about words, signs, and symbols. Individuals in this category do not suddenly come to that knowledge midway through their life’s journey but through experiences, exposure, and study.
Regardless of their cultural identity or ideological mindset, everyone would accept that many things that happen in life are circumscribed by universal signs and symbols, which ordinary or inexperienced people may not easily understand. For example, where people are born and the environment where they grow up are vital signs that sometimes determine the trajectory of their life journey.
These things constitute what should be called signs because where we are born, and the environment where we grow up is crucial in shaping a few things in our lives, especially how we see the world or how we socialize in it, leading to the manner of which we negotiate the unfurling activities. More importantly, one’s lifelong destiny is often shaped by confident choices that humans make, especially the choice of what career path to follow or one’s ambition concerning one’s intellectual evolution. Professor Badejo’s signs and symbols of greatness are easily unmasked by his life’s series of activities, especially his career choices. Anyone expert in political science and law should excel in what they do, except if they do not have enough discipline to see themselves through.
The world has long cultivated the habit of celebrating individuals with outstanding contributions to the human world, and it is no coincidence that Professor Badejo falls into this category. The signs have always been there that an individual of his intellectual strength and persuasion cannot but contribute significantly to the straightening of things in a chaotic world, particularly in their conviction that as the world operates today, issues and activities are not orderly or in a right direction to guarantee collective advancement.
It cannot be overemphasized that every moment in human history is always dotted with a fair share of critical problems that often demand outstanding individuals’ precocious ideas and creative ingenuity. Professor Badejo is a shining example of the quest to make the world a better place. His foundation in the legal profession is deliberate, for he understands early enough that people who would dare the devil in today’s global society must understand the operations of their activities and predict human steps. This way, they can make timely decisions that would change the tides of things for the good of everyone. As already implied, the world always faces a fair share of its challenges because there are individuals who are blessed to solve issues using their intellectual strength. As a professor and a professional in legal affairs, Badejo is very grounded in dissecting international issues so that people can have a proper overview of the interplays of power and contestation in the global community. In other words, if you intend to take advantage of the vulnerable systems of the world, people like Badejo would be there, reminding you of the atrocities sparked by the parochialism of your ambitions.
It is exciting to discover that Badejo has profound knowledge of political science, which places him in good condition to understand political figures’ operations, intentions, and inclinations toward whatever actions they embark on. It, therefore, makes it more rewarding for him to use his intellect to redefine public relations through political insights so that the human world will attain progress and sustain the one they have already accomplished. That Badejo has worked in different places, especially in international locations, using his educational insights and professional skills to improve the conditions of the world speaks highly of his dedication to making an indelible impact.
I cannot state enough how vital Badejo has been. As indicated, the signs that he would make such accomplishments exemplify his career choices. While we cannot deny his commitment to such ambitions, we cannot understate how he has dedicated himself to getting the best from his knowledge. We, therefore, cannot undervalue his dedication to academic engagements, as that forms the basis of his intellectual advancement today―one which continues to brighten his life in tremendous ways. At the international level, he has served in different capacities; the summary is that he was either contracted to use his wealth of experience to save the day or use his professional expertise to provoke a change.
His efforts in community development services, especially in his involvement with the international community or non-governmental organizations, have always demanded his intellectual support. This cannot even overshadow his contributions to building the world’s human capital. It is interesting to state that Professor Badejo is a teacher who has made substantial contributions to knowledge generally. Apart from being a seasoned researcher, he has always been dominant in teaching, producing a sizeable fraction of students who underwent tutelage under him. This explains why many people can attest to how profoundly this scholar has redefined how they see the world and the things in life. Teachers hold a good place in our collective lives because they sacrifice very much to mold people’s minds correctly.
Badejo belongs to the class of educators who make incredibly critical efforts to improve Africa. He has painstakingly conducted research to study different issues, especially in areas of political science and, by extension, the legal profession. His success is significant, and he is enthusiastic in his endeavors. I should inform you that although the activity of teaching is conventionally seen as restricted to the four walls of an institution, it, however, transcends such conceptual location; teaching is what we do when we enlighten groups of people, communities of learners, and class of individuals to impact them or provoke them to change socially.
It gets more enjoyable when you know that Badejo has made an invaluable impression on us all with his solid academic publications, from which many of us today learn. In 2024, Badejo published an exemplary work titled Nigeria Corruption Perception Data. Apart from the fact that this work produces an objective overview of how the country is perceived by its citizens and the world generally, it is also an indictment of the political class about how they manage the systems and institutions in the country, thereby affecting Nigeria’s political and economic destiny in some ways. One who knows Badejo knows that such academic engagements increase his adrenaline because it will use his intellectual expertise in that domain and allow him to present his thoughts or ideas to the people. He has consistently revealed to the world the undergarments of Nigeria’s political systems, especially how it has become vulnerable in the hands of the few who control it. In what manner and character does one explain the problems of unbridled leadership compared to how neocolonial Nigerian leaders have particularly (mis)managed the country’s available resources, demonstrating their myopic imagination about the future? Issues like this are always given the necessary attention, and it explains how Badejo addresses fundamental issues, not the periphery.
Perhaps because of his intellectual depth, he has consistently produced respectable works on African democracy, using the Nigerian situation as his experiment laboratory. On many occasions, he has suggested to the political elites that they should make conscious efforts towards transforming Nigeria’s democracy and save it from whatever problems it may face. He takes this position, knowing that it is the freedom highlighted by democracy that is fundamental to the creation of a functional society, which would produce the necessary atmosphere in which people can grow. He understands that although democracy may have internal failings and even complications that could be a threat, especially when mismanaged, it remains the only avenue through which divergent thinking can be amplified so that the best ideas and approaches can be born. Such an individual cannot but be celebrated and even appreciated for their invaluable contributions to the human world. They have paid their dues and thus would always be accorded royal treatment, for their voices remind us of what we should be as a collective and not what our impulses want us to be.
On May 15, 2025, I will offer an in-person tribute and a lecture in his honor.

By Tony Afejuku
Elegant Natasha. Handsome Natasha. Beautiful Natasha. Nice Natasha. Sharp Natasha. Clever Natasha. Natasha the envy of men and women. Natasha of several qualities – above all, Natasha the rebel; Natasha a worthy rebel. Natasha a good patriot that is a worthy patriot. Everything the columnist has just stated or has just outlined or has just highlighted constitutes his interpretation of Senator (Barrister, Mrs.) Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s performance when she appeared before Arise News Good Morning Show on Friday, 28 February, 2025 to throw light on the drama that happened in the Senate a day or so before.
What was the drama on that day really about? What happened in the Senate between her and the Senate President was it really all about her seat re-allocation or re-assignment? Or, was it essentially about something else to entrap her – as she was allegedly told on the floor of the Senate on the afore-mentioned day of drama? The columnist saw everything as shown live on his television set that was privately power-generated (in this power-less or electricity-less clime) from the beginning to the end. The columnist wondered why, just why Natasha reacted the way she did, and why specifically she dared the Senate President the way she did. What was inevitably amiss? Why was/is Natasha claiming everybody’s attention the way she did (and she is still dong)? Why were her fellow senators, more than several of the male senators, I mean, flowing to her in her river of rebellion against the standards of the Senate that must be kept up? Was it because even if she was right in her classical democratic rebellion of a loner, it was necessary that the prestige of the great senators and that of their equally great but almighty President who is not more than first among equals should not be allowed to dwindle? And why was the Senate President so stupefied when Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan brandished Order 10 several times as she rebelliously but decorously stood her ground, grounds or no grounds? Did the Senate President at any time try to have a bite or a taste of Natasha’s inviting stupefacient something that had caused him the stupefaction I was allowed personally to notice by the inner master on that day that the rebellious one knocked him to stupor – or to a state of near-stupor before his like-minded senators came to his rescue? All these questions are significant ones (or must be significant ones) for all those who desire to find a factual and truthful solution to what is growing to be a pattern of values between the Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Senator (Mrs.) Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the very wife of Mr. Godswill Akpabio’s good friend (or now erstwhile good friend?).
On Saturday, 29 February, 2025, that is, almost a week ago, I read entirely on pages 10-12 of Saturday Vanguard details of the Natasha Uduaghan-Godswill Akpabio problem and other proclamations, claims and counter-claims, including Natasha’s full interview she granted Arise News Good Morning Show which I had already alluded to. Natasha answered more than very satisfactorily all the questions put to her concerning the following: “allegations by a northern group”; “harassment of clerk and requests for CVs of staff”; “how the sitting arrangement issue started”; “denial of rights”; and “the night-cub incident.” My assertion(s) to each of her every answer is clearly clear and transparently transparent, and brings me to this conclusion: A highly brilliant and sharp female senator; a highly valuable, worthy, no nonsense female senator that Senator (Drs. Mrs.) Remi Tinubu, our President’s dear, dear wife, who is equally bright and brilliant, needs in her core team of patriots to help make our country reach its rightful destination. But I have no persuasive influence whatever upon her to make her see Natasha as I see her – or as I am seeing her. Yet I should tell her as the inner master tells me to say to her what I am now saying to her. Natasha certainly has her foibles – like all human-beings, including our one and only Godswill Akpabio. Her foibles, however, pale into nothing or insignificance in comparison with her positively rebellious bent and manner.
Since the matter between Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Senator Godswill Akpabio entered our television screens and newspapers and everywhere outside the main-stream media the Senate President has not deemed it right to claim our attention with at least one important line of defence from his own persuasive mouth. Why? Others, some of whom claim to be activists (activists my foot!) have been speaking for him. Why? If he does not want to say anything he should instruct his hangers-on, including his lawyer(s), his acolytes and cohorts and sycophants, and Natasha’s back-stabbers in the Senate, to keep mum until the brouhaha stills itself, evaporates and vanishes. But will it? I don’t think so until he transparently opens his line of persuasive rebuttal himself.
By the way, why did his wife, his damsel (who, like Natasha, is an impeccable communicator), come into the fray? What for? I saw her on television trying to persuade people like us in vain. After all said and done I exclaimed to myself “What for?” in the trope of a question. She said several things which I, as a literary detective and gleaner, punctured. I will only mention one or two here. (After all, I am not Natasha’s lawyer as I am not Unoma’s lawyer). She said, among other things, that no woman or women ever complained against her disciplined darling husband as a governor or minister – if I heard her well. I chuckled. No woman or women who succumbed to the sheets-whims-and-caprices of her darling governor- or minister- husband would complain openly or in loud silence to Unoma or to anyone for that matter close to Unoma. I put this to Unoma as a literary gleaner who is ever objective come rain or sunshine. Secondly, her open swipe at Natasha’s husband has drawn the very decent man who cannot hurt a fly out of his refined shell. I am sure that she and her disciplined husband have since seen and read the mature and refined letter of the highly cultured Alema of the very beautifully great Kingdom of Warri, the envy of many kingdom-less kingdoms, on what has been that shouldn’t have been.
There are other things I want to say but which I am nicely holding back as a top Niger Delta personage. What I can do best is to immerse myself in my own quiet way on how to bring this matter to a good and transparent end. The Senate President and the Alema of Warri must meet to resolve the knot in the favour of their friendship and that of the people of the whole of the Niger Delta and beyond. The situation needs to be remedied. I know how, but I won’t open my mouth wide here. For the time being, however, Natasha, our worthy rebel, needs to be appeased with appeasable appeasement by appeasers agreeable to the parties and all the parties in our Niger Delta and the Confluence State and beyond. I hope I am not building castles in Spain. Phew!
Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.

By Tunji Olaopa
The autobiography is a most delicate, complex and indeed disruptive art form. It is the autobiographer’s authorial insistence to be heard in terms of his or her narrative addition to a historical discourse. In fact, it is the autobiographer’s narration of the historical event from his or her own perspective. And more often than not, when the autobiographer is a fundamental participant in the event, the complexities of that event and the circumstances surrounding it are multiplied. Only very few autobiographies enjoy global approval. And that is because the art form is seen as an ego trip. That sentiment is summed up by the English biographer, Humphrey Carpenter: “Autobiography is probably the most respectable form of lying.” This is even made worse if the protagonists are critical individuals whose lives have affected national trajectories. General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB) is one such critical protagonist, and his autobiography has arrived.
A Journey in Service has since started generating lots of furors in all strata of the Nigerian public space, online and offline. Lots of opinions have tied IBB to several significant historical moments in Nigeria, especially the annulment of the June 12 elections, and the demise of MKO Abiola. What many have conveniently glossed over, and a case I have consistently made, is that personal narrative in the forms of autobiography and memoirs serve a unique function in terms of their historical import. If A Journey in Service had not been written, we will all be gasping within the yawning silence of the political and administrative gaps that ought to have been filled with whatever the autobiographer has to say. But now it has been written, and we can then commence the journey of unraveling how the narrative fits or fails to fit in with the existing accounts of Nigeria’s political development.
This personal narrative has a critical import for me as a historian of Nigeria’s administrative and reform trajectories. The Babangida administration played a very fundamental role in articulating a significant portion of Nigeria’s administrative reform architecture. And so, that portion of the trajectory, and the entire institutional reform agenda of the Nigerian state, will not be complete without adding the voice and perspective of the key protagonist to the understanding of how the reform policy emerged. No matter what anyone thinks, the imperative of national history demands that such an account be added to the stock of what we already know, and to flesh out a better understanding of what we already know. The idea therefore is to see how the protagonist, no matter the groundswell of national opinion for or against him, fits into a larger picture of the political and administrative frameworks that enable us to see where the nation is coming from and where it is headed.
This is a task every institutional reformer must long for without getting sidetracked by sentimental opinion that accords blame and slings mud. This is part of what makes IBB and A Journey in Service such a delight for me. Unfortunately, the head of the historic administration does not consider that irreducible reform agenda that distinguishes his administration so significantly as to celebrate its conception, elements and operation, as well as its limitations, in a significant autobiography. That responsibility has been passed to posterity. This piece rescues that fundamental omission.
The pre-Babangida administrative reform narrative must always revert back to the 1974 Udoji Commission. That Commission is singular because it was the first to attempt an alignment between Nigeria’s reform efforts and the emerging managerial revolution in public administration across the globe. The Udoji Commission took its immediate inspiration from the Lord Fulton Committee of 1968 in Britain. The task of the Fulton Report was to inquire into the capability readiness of the British civil service to confront the modern British society and its technological complexity. Fulton’s most significant recommendation was the displacement of the cult of generalist amateur civil servants in an approaching administrative dispensation that requires a critical mass of new managers who possess the professionalism and specialist expertise to harness the talents needed to make the civil service economic, effective and efficient.
By the time the Udoji Commission was inaugurated, Nigeria had also reached the critical juncture where it became imperative to ask whether the Weberian assumptions underlying the British administrative legacy were capable of tackling the urgent governance requirement of a postcolonial society. The wage impasse which the system had been confronting before independence, for the Commission, was a symptom of a deeper administrative malady represented by a bureaucratic culture that had arrested innovation and entrepreneurial creativity in the analysis and implementation of policies. Managerialism therefore provides the most timely and perfect means of making the civil service system align with the goals of national development.
The Udoji Commission went on to leverage the global good practice of the time that calls for a new style of public service that deploys new management techniques of Planning, Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS), Management by Objectives (MBO), the precursor of what is today called the performance management system, project management system, among others, that were totally alien to the Nigerian public service, at the time. The new management architecture that the envisioned management system would have institutionalized would obviously have been inadequate but would have laid a critical substructure that would have set Nigeria on the new productivity paradigm that assisted Malaysia, Singapore, the Asian Tigers and many other developing countries that are within Nigerian global ranking at the time.
The most devastating blows that the civil service suffered were those created not by it but the governance tradition that militarism and “New Federalism” of the post-civil war years created where the rigorous analytical frame that governed development investment got replaced with the unreflective “with immediate effect” command and control governance tradition which created huge process, policy, capacity, performance and resource gaps. The Udoji Commission and its limitations, as well as the succeeding Phillips and Ayida Commissions, could be understood only within this military tradition of which IBB was a significant part. When he assumed office in 1985, one of the most immediate decisions was, according to his admission, the need to “strengthen the practice of the presidential system with clear economic, political, and social reforms to strengthen the nation as a constitutional democracy based on the presidential system.” Assuming the title of a “President” was therefore more than a mere nominal gesture to narcissism. Rather, he said, it was “a summation of our consensus on the need to preserve and strengthen the presidential system and make it work better for the nation.”
But a nominal title was not enough. A commitment to the presidential system, IBB insisted, defined the necessity of “structuring a reform programme around institutions to make it work.” And given the tension that already was prevalent in the heated polity, IBB surmised, the reforms that must make any significance must be as comprehensive as the administration could make it. And the first act of symbolic gesture was negative: the urgency of the need “to review the various draconian decrees, convictions, and pending cases that bordered on human rights violations.” The Exchange Control (anti-sabotage) Decree 7 and Decree 4 (Public Officers Protection Against False Accusation) had to be significantly reviewed. This was followed by the real positive task of reforming the economy and governance in ways that go beyond “knee-jerk populist reflexes.”
The task, in governance and economic terms, was therefore to “Remove the government from the role of an enormous money changer to that of an enabler of the appropriate economic environment. We also needed to let the economy, in general, breathe more freely.” It was to liberalize the economy and make government an able enabler rather than occupying the ‘commanding heights of the economy.”
Unfortunately for us all, IBB fails to dwell on what could have been a defining dimension of A Journey in Service, the civil service reform framework of the Babangida administration. This is shocking but revealing in itself. One possible reason is that the author subsumed the civil service reform under the broader political reforms: “Our political programme targeted the critical areas of political and socio-cultural restructuring highlighted by the Political Bureau report: the party system, the electoral process, including election administration, the federal structure, the civil service, and the problem of succession, including political leadership.”
And yet, this fails to do justice to the significance of the Babangida administration and its inheritance of the Dotun Philips Commission from the Buhari-Idiagbon administration. The Phillips Study Team is significant because it had the task of re-organizing the operations of the civil service in terms of professionalism that will eventually align it with the managerial revolution recommended by Udoji. And that reform effort alone cements his administration’s significance in the annals of administrative history in Nigeria, and a fundamental contribution to the cumulation of reform knowledge in Nigeria. IBB already gave the significant intellectual basis of the restructuring that was an imperative: to achieve “national rebirth and future greatness,” there is a need for political and economic restructuring that frees up the national space for transformation. And one way to do this, according to him, was cultivate intellectuals: “We needed the input of intellectuals to enlighten the business of government.” There was also the crucial need for the public service as the engine of government business. It beats me how IBB did not see that.
The Dotun Philips Study Group was constituted by the Buhari-Idiagbon administration in 1985, with the objective of undertaking an interrogation of the structure, mode of operation and strategy of the civil service in the light of contemporary administrative situation, as well as finding means by which the eroded professionalism of the system could be restored. After the 1985 coup, Babangida inherited the study group and transformed it into a full-blown commission whose task was to keep up with the objective of aligning the spirit of managerialism and a professionalized civil service with the form and spirit of presidentialism. This was to be incorporated into the total package of the Civil Service Reforms through a Civil Service Reorganisation Decree No. 43 of 1988. Given the administration’s concern with the rigid Soviet-styled centralization of the economy and the need to open the economy up to market forces, it was only logical that the administration would adopt the critical managerial principle of letting managers manage by having greater control on critical resources. This possesses the capacity to inspire a wholesale decentralization of the HRM function to MDA. The policy choice here is between centralized resource governance for example where the civil service commission wields constitutional powers for recruitment, promotion and discipline exercised at top management levels by the Commission while delegating the powers to MDAs at middle to lower levels.
The Philips reform was compromised essentially because (a) it took the issues involved in professionalism too far (for instance, by attempting to make a professional out of everybody within the civil service); and (b) its own unique managerial thrust was directed towards integrating the civil service into the presidential system of government, with one unintended consequence being that professionalization turned into politicization through an attempt, for instance, that turned an administrative post (permanent secretary) into a political one (director-general). And yet, this is not a failure because it was a logical reform complement to the short-circuited Udoji Commission recommendation of a public service founded on performance management, and its underlying managerial philosophy was significant in getting the Babangida administration its governance template for transforming national development.
I insist that an administration is only as good as its reform agenda, both in design and implementation. The Babangida administration gave Nigeria’s reform trajectory one of the key moments in the protracted attempt to translate the gains and efficiencies of a managerial opportunity to a bureaucratic system.
. Olaopa is a Professor of Public Administration and Chairman,
Federal Civil Service Commission .
NEW TIMES CULTURE

BREAKING: Ex-presidential Spokesperson Okupe Dies

Professor Femi Badejo At 70: The Advocacy Of Equity

Natasha As Worthy Rebel
Top Stories
-
Opinion4 days ago
Natasha As Worthy Rebel
-
Opinion4 days ago
IBB In The Annals Of Civil Service Reforms In Nigeria
-
Latest News4 days ago
BREAKING: Senate Suspends Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Over Sexual Harassment Claim
-
Latest News3 days ago
BREAKING: Ex-presidential Spokesperson Okupe Dies
-
Opinion3 days ago
Professor Femi Badejo At 70: The Advocacy Of Equity