CHAPTER ONE

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY:

The word leadership has been defined by many scholars particularly in the field of public administration, to be one who exerts influence or makes things happen that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. If the leader causes changes that he intended, he is said to have exercised power, but if he causes changes that he did not intend or want, he has exercised influence but not power (McFarland 1969).

Chukwuemeka (2008) defined leadership simply as the art or process of influencing people.

Generally leadership has to do with influence and power, and any person who is endowed with these qualities in the context of a group, community or Nation has the personality of a leader. There are different types of leaders, some of which include intellectual leadership, opinion leadership, group leadership, social leadership, executive leadership, and administrative leadership.

Leadership can also be looked at from their styles and task. Fiedler (1969) identified two types of leadership which include task oriented leadership and interpersonal relations oriented

1

leadership. He also identified three leadership styles (based on the use of authority) which include autocratic leadership, democratic leadership and independent leadership. But in this work, we shall categorize leadership into two types which are common in contemporary African societies, we shall consider their attributes and how they affect changes in the society.

According to Dike (2003), he identified two types of leadership that is common to African society. These are instrumental leadership and societal leadership. The main concern of the instrumental leader is how to use his office/position to achieve personal gains/goals (personal, close friends, cohorts, etc) community or National objectives are secondary to him. He may not be lacking in social or community commitment, but in practice, he gives more considerations/attentions to self over the interest of the society he governs. Such leaders will hold on to power for as long as their selfish private objectives are achieved. They do not care whether the community or region derives anything/benefit from their rule or not.

2

The “societal” leader on the other hand is a public servant first and only secondary a private person. He uses his position to promote community or national objectives. For him, power and influence are important only if they can be used to solve societal or human problem. He is ready to resign when he is convinced that he cannot influence changes to the benefit of the public. Given the antecedents of the nation’s post and present leaders, it is clear that the majorities of them were and are still, instrumentalists and naked opportunists.

It is only societal leaders that can motivate people to work because they have the interest of the work, Nation and the people, but instrumental leaders cannot motivate, this being the case, we want to see the type of leaders we have in Delta State whether instrumentalists or societalists. From time immemorial, this had been the case with most of our leaders and all efforts to make them see reason and change for better proved abortive.

3

Although there are some factors that sustain instrumental leaders in Nigeria/African.

Some of these factors are:

(1)        The guaranteed loyalty of the masses to leaders in Africa, and indeed in Nigeria the masses through socialization have come to internalize the norms of respect for authorities. They find it very different to criticize or challenge authority irrespective of what they do, although this is gradually changing.

(2)        The title of office (chief, general, minister, commissioner etc). This allows its holder to insist on being treated like one and if the behaviour or performances of the leader and expectation from the public of the present leader is the same as that of the past leader, people may not worry about any change. They see it as the usual thing. (What is called the usual behaviour).

(3)        The deeds of Nigeria leaders-they are showered with lengthy eulogies composed during his life time by men who recite them in his honor at public gathering. As one man pointed out. Musicians have a tendency to sing the praises of leaders and men of wealth, not minding how corrupt they might be.

4