By Eben Enasco Kingsley
In Politics,understanding and measuring political leadership is a complex business.
Although, we all have ideals of what makes a ‘good’ leader, but are often complex, contradictory,and more than a little partisan.
The varying qualities border on skills, getting things done, Managing a society, conceptualizing the accumulation of resources, power built through relationships, trust, goodwill, and influence between politicians or parties and other stakeholders, such as constituents.
From Machiavelli onwards we have wrestled with our idea of what a perfect leader should look like and what makes them succeed or fail.
Taking the idea of ‘political capital’ we can evaluate what sort of authority a leader is granted and how they choose to ‘spend’ their capital.
In Barrister Osarodion Ogie, the incumbent State Secretary to the Edo State Government, We can think of a political capital leader whom stocks of ‘credit’ have accumulated within the rank and file, the elites and gifted politicians.
Politicians are acutely aware of their finite stock of authority.
Academics have defined political capital in a variety of ways. It can be about trust, networks, and ‘moral’ or ethical reputation.
By incorporating many of these ideas, we have developed a notion of leadership capital as a measure of the extent to which political office-holder can effectively attain and wield authority.
And this presents us with alternative method of comparing those who believe they can also become a leader at the bec and call of cunning rat who decided to be the Godfather of politics in the state, thereby setting others against the qualities of Ogie.
Possessing the right qualities of a political Manager is beyond seating out with city rolls with rapped-up weed,(Marijuana) smoking and buzzling with alcohol labels.
The modern act of governance is way more than a grain of opinion generated at best, smoking weeds and leaving with dangerous weapons to outsmart others.
Having leadership capital, is an aggregate of three leadership components: skills, relations, and reputation.
Let’s work this is into a Leadership Capital Index (LCI) with 10 simple variables to enable leaders to be scored, to capture both quantitative data and qualitative assessments.
The measure of a leader’s skills refers to the required leadership abilities, from the communicative to the managerial and cognitive.
We include the power of a leader’s vision, their communication, and popularity.
The difficulty for many leaders is that they have, of course, some of these but not all.
Leadership is also a relational activity. Leaders mobilise support through loyalty from their colleagues, their party, and the public.
Part of the challenge is to retain these ties for as long as possible or, at least, as one scholar put it, to disappoint followers at a rate they can accept.
But how they do this can depend on their leadership style.
The most obvious and talked about way is through personal charisma;
Osarodion Ogie compared to others who are now over night leaders in Ikpoba Okha party’s offered what JM Burns famously termed ‘transformational’ technocratic competence, and delivery leadership more in the style of Angela Merkel, suiting the cultural norms of his constituents, state and the context.
leadership is continually judged by reputation and Ogie has created his own performance measurements.
Looking across these three areas allows us to understand how they influence each other in ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ cycles. Successful leaders communicate, achieve aims, and strengthen relations and reputation.
In reverse, failing leaders poorly communicate or never map out a vision, then often lose confidence, control, and credit.
Many commentators view the political management reforms of Ikpoba Okha local government with some scepticism, raising concerns about the desirability of stronger leadership and the efficacy of institutional reform in encouraging stronger leadership.
Using data from a near four-year evaluation of the impact of Osarodion Ogie in the Local Government and state, it is evidence suggesting that institutional variation does influence the way that organisations operate.
It can have a positive impact on their performance, though the results are mixed with the internal decision-making elements showing most difference, whilst there is less evidence of effects in relation to partnership working and engagement with the public.
In hung and balanced authorities, an internal focus on managing coalitions and party competitors is judged to impede the role of leaders in partnership working.
Outworn notions of leaders as dynamic, decisive, authoritarian, competitive and testosterone charged individuals are not well suited to the complex environments found in most public policy sectors such as health, welfare, inequalities and climate change.
In contrast, system leadership requires well-developed skills of negotiation, consultation and political astuteness to enable collaborative direction-setting and decision-making with other stakeholders.
The task is primarily one of relationship building and working across diverse sectors and groups in the hope of achieving a common purpose.
Ogie has the qualities to muscle through and bring to fore dividends of democratic precedence.
Those that have closely work with him, know more about his quite dispositions to achieving aims.
For those calling for his removal, are still in the era of thuggery dominations.
No sane government will leverage it wealth on thuggery and expect to deliver reforms to the society.
Those still fraternizing with “Agberoism” , should come out and join forces with modernized reforms to kick start a new era.
Forming a parallel leadership could stay for a night, but can’t stand the test of time.
In essence, the ‘great man Agberoism’ theory of leadership goes for a while and later hit a snag.
But good and successful political leaders are regarded as those who are strong and lead from all sides.
Those who display a more collective and inclusive leadership are deemed to be weak and less successful.
Archie Brown’s illuminating book on political leadership merits revisiting at this time.
It exposes the myth of the strong leader in the modern age and challenges the widespread view that ‘strong leaders’ are the most successful and admirable.
Arguably, the last thing the state needs now is a strong leader of the type Barrister Osarodion Ogie is offering his flock.
The wider literature on leadership has much to offer in any attempt to establish what sort of political leadership is not only desirable but also more likely to be effective in an increasingly complex and interrelated world.
The days of the ‘great man Agberoism’ leader who claims, or is expected, to know all the answers and galvanises everyone to act in accordance with their particular beliefs and preferences are long gone.
Such individuals, whatever they may claim, are generally ineffective and usually fail.
Yet business has been at the forefront of thinking in regard to the leadership styles that are best suited to our times.
In Ogie, there is the servant leader, or the quiet leader – who leads from behind and empower others to take the lead where appropriate.
Then there is the adaptive leader, or the engaged leader who acknowledges that the challenges confronting governments fall into the category of ‘wicked problems’ which defy single bullet solutions.
Modern government is a messy complex system where issues overlap and where collaboration across departments and policy sectors is unavoidable.
Good leadership is not only about the individual qualities of the leader but also about enabling the whole system to be supportive of innovation, an awareness and understanding of complexity, as well as an appreciation of the perspectives of different stakeholders.
Successful leaders understand complex adaptive systems and culture and the essential qualities needed for effective political leadership are discipline and sustainability.
Criticism of the overbearing or over mighty leader should not be mistaken for an attack on leadership which has a vital role to perform. But the work of government is both complicated and complex and is not the result, or sole responsibility, of any single person.
Fostering the cult of the leader does a disservice to the importance of the leadership function and to good government.
Political leadership in the modern era is multifaceted and has to be seen in context.
Doubtless the absence of demi-gods makes life infinitely less interesting for sections of the media but that is no great sacrifice.
What appeals most to the electorate is the authentic leader who can engage and espouse clear principles and values that they live by through their actions.
By those criteria SSG OSARODION OGIE should hold most appeal for continuation as a political leader in his home front and in the state ahead of the Grimes and Caprice of those few elements who assembled in manifestation of such tendencies
Be the first to comment