Leadership Selection Racket And Tribalism In The Contemporary Nigerian University System 2
Francis O. Egbokhare February 7, 2018
http://thechronicleofeducation.com/2018/02/07/leadership-selection-racket-tribalism-contemporary-nigerian-university-system-2/
Continued from part 1 (5 February 2018)
University environments have become like political parties where you either hold a broom or stand under an umbrella. Union leadership in many universities are the new threat to academic freedom and free speech.
At the heart of the crisis of higher education in Nigeria is the loss of diversity in staffing and student population. Kenny (2007) opines, "Nigerian Universities at first were dominated by British lecturers. According to him, a Nigerianisation policy was understandable, but unfortunately, the present policy provides no quota for foreign staff… The effect has been to discourage non-Nigerians from entering the system, and the result is an increasing homogeneity of staff. This is accentuated when regional, and non-national criteria are brought in, and when there are fewer opportunities to get degrees abroad. The extreme result contrary to the spirit of a university is, staff all of one tribe, who have done their Bachelor, Masters and Doctorate all in the home university"p27.
Currently, it is difficult to find diversity in Nigerian Universities. There are a number of factors that account for this. The situation is symptomatic of more fundamental problems ranging from expatriate employment policy; insurgence of ethno religious politics in Nigerian Universities, ethnic nativisation policy of dominant groups, inbreeding, among other factors. Many Universities can now conveniently conduct departmental, faculty, management, as well as senate meetings in an ethnic or sub-ethnic language. There is now a joke that what qualifies one to be a foreign staff is membership of a different ethnic group from the one in the location of the University or being very light skinned.
Locationalisation refers to the new tendency of staff of Universities to insist that only those who are employees of a University should be appointed to leadership positions, especially the position of Vice Chancellor. Sometimes, this is extended to locals who are also alumni. Steps are often taken to rig the process of selection to exclude those who are perceived to be outsiders. Branches of unions are often in the forefront of such agitations. Localisation is founded on the principle that indigenes of host ethnic groups have a birthright to lead their institution. This is now narrowing down to state of origin, local government of origin, host communities, religion and sectarianism as subethnic groups seek to find a basis for an advantage. This is complemented by politics of zoning for other offices in a bid to achieve political balance. In some universities, some positions are permanently zoned to certain areas, while others practice rotation.
All over the country, federal universities are increasingly succumbing to primordial forces in the selection of their leaders and succession has now come to look like a military coup or war of opposing forces. Territoriality has led to inbreeding in leadership selection. Inbreeding is intellectual incest. Outsiders cannot compete fairly with insiders as processes are "fixed" from the beginning, and are made to look transparent. You can no longer have the Adamu Baikie, Akinkugbe and Ade Ajayi who were leaders in institutions away from home. Private universities, especially the faith-based ones have followed a similar trajectory of appointing only the faithful to leadership positions notwithstanding their qualifications and capacity.
The appointment of deputy Vice Chancellors in many institutions is now like an operation run by the Chicago mafia. A fall guy, often a weak, unknown and very unpopular if not sometimes incompetent individual is recruited to compete with the anointed faithful. He is of course defeated flatly but is compensated with another less juicy position. Everybody who matters in the mafia is settled.
An extension of the above is the manipulation of recruitment processes, sometimes through smart adverts to ensure advantage for indigenes of the relevant ethnic groups.
Which model predominates (localization, locationalization or union control) in any University depends on the balance of ethnicities, the strength of the local staff unions and prevailing external political currents. In state universities, there is a new argument for zoning of the position of Vice Chancellors and distribution of key management positions. In some federal universities, union leadership has become the beneficiaries of the space for autonomy and control vacated by government. In fact, they now ironically constitute the new mafia that muzzles dissent and disseminate patronage. University environments have become like political parties where you either hold a broom or stand under an umbrella. Union leadership in many universities are the new threat to academic freedom and free speech.
It will not be out of place to give some insight into how the selection process for a Vice Chancellor is "operated." First, you get a foothold in the selection committee, if that fails where there is reasonable balance of forces, that is, in ethnically driven situations, mobilize the local royalty and ethnic associations and frighten the non-indigenes. Encourage other people from your group who are weak to apply, get your members elected into the selection and search committees, score your candidate a near perfect score and score the strong opponents who do not belong to your group very low to undermine their chances. This way you satisfy all righteousness and sell the impression of a credible process to the undiscerning public. Truth is that the scoring formula at the interview is designed to achieve predetermined ends and favour anointed candidates. In addition to this, the interview questions are leaked to the anointed candidate and, s/he is coached by some of the members of the selection committee.
The process has assumed a disturbing dimension in terms of the financial inducement. Some applicants now seek funding support from their State Governors and ethnic politicians, while contractors readily offer financial support to assist deserving candidates. This is the new dimension. With a corrupt council in place, it is no longer a difficult enterprise to pursue in an environment that was once so sacred that honour was the most prized asset.
As has been stated above, the process of selection of Vice Chancellors and other principal officers in recent times have witnessed agitations, sometimes violent, by host communities of institutions, religious interests, unions, special interest groups among others working alone or in alliances. The process has become "jujunized" with voodooism freely and openly displayed. In one university coffins were carried all over campus to intimidate opponents, while generally, sacrifices are placed at road junctions to mobilise support of dark forces. Positions of internal members of council in some Universities are zoned to ethnic or special interest groups and academic positions such as Deans of Faculties and Directors of Centres are shared too for ethno-religious balance. Unions and management routinely compel individuals to step down for others often using blackmail and disinformation to force compliance. It would appear that authoritarianism of government has now been replaced by internal cleavages and struggles for control. In some Universities, senate has become a platform for politicking; elections to positions and offices have taken a sad turn with the use of text messaging to spread disinformation. A disturbing trend is the growing tendency, tilting towards dictatorship of unions which now in a mafia-like manner, determine who gets elected to offices even at the expense of some of its own members, in order to achieve the narrow interests of a few. The academia appears to have lost its moral edge by employing the same dirty tactics of the political class. Akinrinade (2012) ascribes this to the loss of the thinking cap and demonstration of crass intellectual deficiency. Bamiro (2011) describes it as the deintellectualization of the academia. It is my opinion that the ivory tower has fallen and in its place, we have built a temple to the worship of mammon.
Francis O. Egbokhare is a professor in the department of Linguistics and African languages, University of Ibadan.
© 2018, The Chronicle of Education. Permission to use parts of this article is granted provided that www.thechronicleofeducation.com is properly acknowledged.
Contact: editor@thechronicleofeducation.com
Disclaimer
All reactions or contributions published by The Chronicle of Education are strictly the views of the authors concerned. Publication of the reactions or contributions does not imply support for or endorsement of those views.
Toyin Falola
Department of History
The University of Texas at Austin
104 Inner Campus Drive
Austin, TX 78712-0220
USA
512 475 7224
512 475 7222 (fax)
No comments:
Post a Comment