By J. ’Kayode FAYEMI, PhD., CON Former Governor of Ekiti State, Nigeria at the Excellence in Leadership Conference 2015 Daystar Christian Centre, Oregun, Lagos Wednesday, November 4, 2015

1. PROMOTING STEWARDSHIP IN PUBLIC SERVICE
By
J. ’Kayode FAYEMI, PhD., CON
Former Governor of Ekiti State, Nigeria
at the
Excellence in Leadership Conference 2015
Daystar Christian Centre, Oregun, Lagos
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Protocols and Introduction
Let me start by thanking my friends Pastors Sam and Nike Adeyemi and the leadership
of Daystar Christian Centre for the opportunity given to me today to share some of my
thoughts on a very important topic with this distinguished audience. Pastor Sam
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”.1
It is interesting to note that many of the participants at that event
over 2 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, has 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
1
“Christians in Politics: The Challenge of Transformative Public Engagement”, Chapter 12 in the book Regaining the
Legacy by J. ’Kayode Fayemi, Amandla, 2013

2. Page 2 of 13
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.”2
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-
2
Chinua Achebe, The Trouble with Nigeria (Fourth Dimension Publishers 1983) p.1

3. Page 3 of 13
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 times3
, to lead Nigeria at this auspicious time with the
integrity of his heart.
3
Psalm 78 verse 72, King James Bible

4. Page 4 of 13
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.4
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
4
See Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and
Greatness (25th anniversary ed.). New York: Paulist Press.

5. Page 5 of 13
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.”5
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. 6
Servant Leadership in the Public Sector
This relationship between servant leaders and the led underpins public sector
governance in modern societies especially within the context of a democracy.
Democracy is by itself a contract, not a process. Democracy is based on one
fundamental assumption: Society, through a process that is open and transparent,
agrees to cede its individual power to some among its ranks, who exercise it with the
aim of achieving a general will of the society rather than the private wills of all of
5
Romans Chapter 13 verse 1, King James Bible
6
See Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and
Greatness (25th anniversary ed.). New York: Paulist Press.

6. Page 6 of 13
society. In order to achieve this, the appointed individuals, under an institution known
as government, develop norms and rules that are agreed on by the society, and which
form the basis of the contract. It is the responsibility of the appointed individuals and
the larger society to adhere to these rules and norms – often seen in constitutions, state
structures, national visions and policies that direct development and governance of the
society.7
This is the basis of not just democratic governance but of all types of
governance. No government can exist without the consent or at least the acquiescence
of the majority of the people.
It is my understanding of the foregoing concepts that guides my involvement in public
service and governance. Furthermore, as someone who cut his teeth in leadership early
in life by serving as an altar boy – a mass server in the Catholic Church, the defining
principle that has informed my passionate involvement, from my years in student
activism in high school and university to the frontlines of pro-democracy activism in
exile and now in politics and public office, has been the idea of serving a higher purpose
in the public square and locating the right vocational channels through which to
actualize my obligations as a man of faith to God and country.
I am therefore pleased to share from my modest experience, insights on 5 defining
characteristics of Servant Leadership and its advantages in bringing about better peace
and development outcomes in our country.
Servant Leaders in the Public Sector Produce Successors
A key leadership deficit evident both in the realms of public sector governance and
indeed every sphere of our national life is the failure to facilitate succession planning.
This failure is traceable to the dominant model of leadership in our institutions which
we earlier identified as typically authoritarian and dictatorial. In politics and in many of
our public sector institutions this paradigm has effectively created personality cults in
which fawning loyalty rather than competence dictates the allocation of reward and in
which divergent thinking, innovation and initiative are punished while servile group-
think is rewarded. In such environments, members who are desirous of prolonging their
careers tend to blend in rather than exercise initiative, thereby crippling their leadership
potentials. Many politicians and public servants run public offices as personal fiefdoms
which cease to function effectively whenever they are physically absent.
In such dysfunctional organizations, leadership is seen as being vested in a single
authority figure rather than as a function diffused among several empowered actors.
Leaders in these environments tend to be psychologically insecure and are simply
7
https://africaplatform.org/social-contract-as-foundation-to-state-society-relations/

7. Page 7 of 13
unable or unwilling to mentor and empower their subordinates. Under these
circumstances the executive impulses of young potential leaders are stifled and they are
not effectively equipped to undertake greater responsibility. The only types of
personalities that rise in these settings are those who are equally insecure and
egotistical. Having become adept in the dark art of survival in repressive official
environments, they eventually assume high office only to reprise the authoritarian
styles of their predecessors, perpetuating a circle of mediocrity.
Servant leaders are not self-perpetuating and insecure. They don’t arrive in positions of
authority unprepared for the demands of authentic leadership. They are empowering of
others. They connect success with succession meaning that they measure their success
not in terms of how much they have been able to hoard power but by how much they
have been able to distribute it among others thereby enabling a greater multitude to
achieve their own potentials. They are not arrogant to think of themselves as infallible
or indispensable. By preparing and mentoring others to succeed them, servant leaders
demonstrate a keen sense of their humility and dispensability in the scheme of things.
This is a challenge to us; both current and aspiring public servants, to pay attention as
true Servant Leaders, to building a successor generation that can sustain and build upon
our efforts in the making of a new Nigeria through rigorous succession planning.
Servant Leaders in the Public Sector as Good Listeners
I have never seen a good servant who acts on his or her own accord. Every servant takes
instructions from the one at whose pleasure he or she is appointed to serve. Many of us
in our individual lives and careers have little patience for opinionated subordinates who
refuse to take instructions, and we speedily reverse the employments of such people
classified as recruitment errors. In the same way, Servant Leaders are good listeners
who craft their programmes and policies only after seeking input from all stakeholders
especially the majority of the people at the grassroots who they represent. Even in our
pre-colonial traditional societies where the monarch is seen as the embodiment of all
authority and power, every member and every household of the community had a say in
the matters of collective interest. Governance was based on widespread consultation in
the village square that broadened the pool of opinion and the building of consensus. In
the end, the decision, though sanctioned by a chief or a king, had to be a collective one
of which he was just the instrument of execution.8
8
Imperatives for Successful Sub-National Governance in Africa, Chapter 6 in the book Regaining the Legacy by J.
’Kayode Fayemi, Amandla, 2013

8. Page 8 of 13
To be truly effective, the design of programmes and policies by public servants has to
emanate from the people’s perception of their own needs. In this sense, the limitation
of leadership in Nigeria is our emphasis on the conduct of elections often at the expense
of the democratic relationship between the government and the governed. We have not
yet come to see that democracy means participatory governance which in effect means
that policies are generated from the bottom-up not imposed from the top-down. There
is a hubris which occasions leaders presuming to know far more about the people’s
problems than the people themselves. This paternalistic attitude causes us to prescribe
solutions that often have no relation to the challenges on ground and consequently
devise strategies that are unworkable. 9
Yet, there are times when leaders armed with
greater insight and a more dispassionate appraisal of the challenges, must stand up for
what they believe is in the best interest of the majority and not be afraid to stand alone.
Times when short term populism must not be allowed to take the place of the long term
interest of the people. Even then, conveying such positions to the public is an exercise in
effective public communication.
Despite the tonnage of well-intentioned and even altruistic efforts to fight poverty in
Africa, these programmes fail because they are largely imposed on the people by
political elites. They have no buy-in at the grassroots level. For development plans to
work, the people have to take ownership of their conception and drive their execution.
For this to be the case, the development goals have to be generated by citizens and tally
with their own needs and aspirations. A more meaningful approach to policy conception
and execution calls for us to adopt a more robust posture of listening and attentiveness
attuned to the pulse of the communities on the receiving end of our initiatives. This
means a return to the ethos of consultation and consensus that our forefathers used to
good effect. In our times, this can be interpreted as the forging of strategic partnerships
between public servants and civil society organizations and other non-state actors that
help to articulate the frustrations and the priorities of the people. 10
Servant Leaders in
the Public Sector absolutely have to listen.
Servant Leaders in the Public Sector and the Power of Personal Example
Servant Leaders lead by example. They demonstrate in their private and personal
conduct the type of behaviour they require from the people. We have unfortunately had
a dearth of servant leaders in the public sector who inspire us with their personal
integrity. Furthermore, our society has been socialised to entertain dichotomies that
fragment life into separate, often disconnected domains. Thus, many of us believe there
is a wide gulf that separates the private from the public, the personal from the
9
Ibid
10
Ibid

9. Page 9 of 13
professional, and the moral from the practical. The consequence of this belief is the
notion that we can and often act according to different dictates in these realms. So, for
example, we might preach virtue and rectitude at home while participating in public
theft and corruption. When legislators brawl in the glare of television cameras, it rarely
occurs to us that these law makers are also parents who surely in their homes admonish
their children to be of good behaviour in school. A parent who rages against stealing at
home may be involved in creative accounting at the office.
Obviously, the result of such dissonance is hypocrisy which does not escape the notice
of the next generation. They take note of the inconsistencies and contradictions
between what we say in private and what we do in public. Indeed, few people are as
adept at spotting such hypocrisies as children. They lose faith in our utterances and our
moral authority begins to wane. Most tragically, they learn that “talking the talk” need
not necessitate “walking the talk.” The fragmented view of life that entertains these
dichotomies is incompatible with servant leadership which manifests through the
example of a whole and holistic life of integrity. In this regard, an authentic servant
leader is one who exemplifies constancy across the various domains that he or she is
involved in. In sum, authentic servant leadership is defined by personal integrity.
Integrity is usually understood as a virtue synonymous with honesty. Integrity comes
from the same etymological root as the verb “integrate.” It conveys a sense of
wholeness and coherence and is used by engineers when they say “structural integrity”
to mean when a structure holds together firmly. To live with integrity therefore means
to live an integrated existence or to live a whole life. Living and leading by integrity
entertains no dichotomy between the personal and the professional, the private and the
public or the moral and the practical. Indeed, for the servant leader, leadership is not
merely a position or a title that one assumes somewhere. Leadership is not what we do;
it is who we are. Servant leadership is therefore more about how one lives than how
one leads. It is a lifestyle.
True leadership is something quite distinct from holding an office or a position. We will
enhance the quality of leadership on our shores if we dissociate it from the acquisition
of titles and positions. True leadership is influence. It is driven by core convictions,
values and ideas. In a profound sense, leadership is living out one’s values and ideas. It is
the sheer power of personal example that projects influence.
Servant Leaders Must Demonstrate Competence
Servant leaders must offer substance and not just style. Looking back at a passage in the
bible we touched on earlier, Psalm 78 verse 72 gives us an insight into why David was

10. Page 10 of 13
such a great leader in his time. We are told that “David shepherded them with integrity
of heart”, and also “with skillful hands he led them”. 11
The fact that God Himself
testified that David was a man after His heart did not stop him from acquiring a pretty
impressive résumé for his time – shepherd, writer, poet, musician and songwriter,
astronomer, temple designer, warrior, administrator – and he excelled in all. Integrity is
not enough, skill or competence is equally essential for effective leadership in all realms
of life. 12
It is common to come across individuals at the centre of high-profile scandals who are
very skilled, persuasive, powerful leaders but who lack integrity, conversely, we also
have people who are well-thought of, well-liked, and with good intentions, but who are
limited in their ability to get things done effectively because they lack the knowledge
and competence. 13
The armoury of leadership must contain a huge stock of competence in anyone who
aspires to lead. The next generation of leaders must therefore be distinguished not by
wealth or their possession of shiny trinkets but by the quality of their thoughts and
ideas. Those who control the levers of the knowledge economy now control the world.
In our contemporary context, the primary index of governmental capacity is intellectual
capital. Governance is knowledge based, ideas centered and data driven, with service to
the people as its sole motivation. Today, Servant leaders are expected to innovate and
generate creative solutions to the challenges their people face. Our readiness to
compete effectively in the 21st
century global economy is measured by, among other
factors, how much commitment we show to knowledge production and intellectual
reflection in our political culture and leadership selection process.
Servant Leaders in the Public Sector and Empathy
The servant leader is first of all a servant who takes care to ensure that other people’s
greatest needs are being met and that those people, while being served are the better
for it and are increasingly empowered to be independent. In contrast to the old notions
of the leader as a power-wielding figure, the servant leader is one whose first
responsibility is to consider the needs of others and to create conditions where the led
can become leaders themselves.
11
Psalm 78 verse 72, New International Version of the Bible
12
FORWARD! Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hand by Clyde Kilough, on
http://www.ucg.org/unitednews/forward-integrity-of-heart-skillfulness-of-hand
13
Ibid

11. Page 11 of 13
Often leadership positions have the effect of alienating leaders from those they are
meant to lead. In time, the leader becomes so entrapped by the perks of office that he
can no longer relate with the people. Their needs become alien to him and he is thus
unable to address their problems because he can no longer see himself as part of the
people. We have a situation in which our leaders are far removed from the effects of
dysfunctional health systems because they fly abroad to avail themselves of better
healthcare in more functional countries just to treat common ailments, or a situation
where public servants cannot relate with security challenges because they have been
assigned personal security details by the state. In such instances, public servants have
the tendency to allow the privileges of office and the superficial honorifics used in
addressing us to get to our heads – “His Excellency”, “Honourable Minister”,
“Distinguished Senator” e.t.c, and lose the essential grounding in our common
humanity.
This is why President Buhari on assumption of office humbly requested to be spared
such inanities. In this regard, servant leaders demonstrate empathy by remaining
humble enough to see themselves as being one with the people. They are great
communicators who know how to keep their fingers on the pulse of the people. They
have the challenge of ensuring that those that have their ears are people who tell them
the truth and not what they want to hear. Sycophants have done a great deal in ruining
the legacies of many leaders and they are never in short supply in the famed corridors of
power.
In emphasizing this point, I will like to borrow again from the example of Jesus as the
greatest model of Servant Leadership. Christians are encouraged in our faith by the
scriptures in the book of Hebrews, which in contrasting the priesthood of the Old
Testament and the Priesthood of Jesus, states that “Seeing then that we have a great
high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast
our profession. For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling
of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.”14
The
greatest legitimacy Jesus has as a model for us to follow is the fact that He did not sit in
the high heavens bellowing instructions to us on earth, but took the form of man to
experience the same emotions and frailties we do, and was ultimately victorious. Hence,
we current and aspiring public servants have a lot to learn from Jesus’ model of Servant
Leadership in ensuring the trappings of office do not alienate us from the pains felt by
those being led.
It is important to note however that this is different from the vain populism practiced by
some unscrupulous politicians and demagogic public servants, who have mastered the
14
Hebrews Chapter 4 verse 14, Kings James Bible

12. Page 12 of 13
art of showmanship in feigning an affinity with the masses, but whose stewardship of
the public trust is largely used to further their personal, selfish interests.
Conclusion – Leadership is Not Titles
I will like to conclude this presentation by reiterating some points I have previously
made. These points bear re-stating at every opportunity. The first is that true servant-
leaders owe a duty to the successor-generation to demystify leadership, defining it less
as a task reserved for a select group of special individuals but as something everyone of
us is called to accomplish in various ways and in diverse sectors of life. We must move
away from a culture that sees the leader as the ‘Messiah’ and from all notions that all it
takes to transform society is the miraculous emergence of one extra-ordinary leader.
Leadership is therefore not a title or a position. It is influence rooted in a core of
convictions and beliefs committed to advancing the common good. Positions, titles and
offices merely serve as symbols of leadership. Merely occupying a position and having a
title does not make one a leader in the truest sense of the term. An office or a position
does not confer moral authority so much as it presumes it. Moral authority is a personal
attribute one takes into public office and leaves with at the end of one’s tenure. The
timeless leaders that we continue to remember with fondness either never occupied an
office or did so for a short period of time – Martin Luther King, Mahatma Ghandi,
Obafemi Awolowo remain such iconic figures. These leaders derived their accolades in
spite of their public office, rather than because of it. They derived their relevance and
significance from their personal attributes of character, competence, courage, intellect
and charisma. Yet, many of our public figures – ex-Governors, ex-Ministers, ex-Senators,
e.t.c. – very quickly fade into obscurity and have nothing constructive to contribute to
national life upon leaving office because they were mere ‘title-holders’ with no tangible
legacy beyond the accomplishments of personal gain while in office.
If we accept that leadership is influence through example and not title or office, then we
simply cannot afford to reduce leadership to holding political office. In spite of the
‘Naija-pessimism’ out there, I regularly run into many young people that are leading
effectively and exerting positive influence in various sectors of society. Many of them
are my mentees. These game-changers and rising stars in our country deserve our
accolades because they did not wait idly to be called. They experienced great tutelage,
honed their competence, built their character on a moral foundation, looked for
opportunities in cross-generational contexts and took the efforts of their predecessors
to higher levels. In short, they hearkened to the immortal words of Frantz Fanon that
every generation must discover its mission or betray it. In order not to betray our
mission, every generation must expand the frontiers of achievement, enriching the store

13. Page 13 of 13
of wisdom by which society and its leadership constantly reinvents itself. This is the
essence of the idea of a truly progressive society.
So, like I seize every opportunity to tell my young friends, please don’t try to impress me
by telling me you want to be like me and attain the heights that God’s grace has helped
me attain. You’ve got to do better than that. Make your own mistakes. Benefit from the
energy and fiery idealism of youth, but learn from the errors of the past generations so
as not to repeat it.
Whoever you are, wherever you are – lawyer, commercial bus driver, auto mechanic,
hairdresser, student, doctor, journalist – whatever your profession or vocation and
current station in life, I challenge you today to step out of your own comfort zone to
realise your leadership potential.
Are you ready to lead?
Ladies and gentlemen, I thank you for listening.
J. ’Kayode FAYEMI, PhD., CON
Lagos, Nigeria
Wednesday, November 4, 2015