Age As A Performance Factor In Leadership: Dividend Or Disaster For Nigeria

By Emmanuel Gandu

HIGHLIGHTS

1. Introduction
2. Hypothetical questions
3. Global leadership age overview
4. Arguments for and against younger or ageing leadership.
5. Age and political leadership of Nigeria
6. % presentation of leader’s ages.
7. Implication for Nigeria with an ageing leadership.
8. Concluding remarks.

INTRODUCTION
Leadership is a central concept as well as vital component in the life of any organization that seeks to develop to its maximum potential.
It is the fulcrum, the flagship, the focal, the bearing point from where every decision making process evolves and revolves.
History shows that quality of leadership either mars or makes the productive capacity and destiny of organizations or Nations.

It is in the light of this premise that Nigerians have found it expedient to subject the quality and age of their leadership vis a vis the expectation of a healthy growth and development of the country.
They hinge the discussion and arguments for quality leadership on observable and verifiable indices of performance ranging from peace and security, economy, education, health, agriculture, science and technology, infrastructure and manufacturing, law, order and justice, amongst others.

Arising from these concerns is the question of age as a performance factor in leadership. This concern is on the minds and lips of Nigerians. Some have argued in support of a younger leadership as opposed to the existing situation of an ageing leadership while others are in favour of an ageing leadership. In the midst of this two divides are those who support neither younger nor ageing leadership, arguing that age has little or no impact on performance of political leadership.
The perception, opinions, arguments, theories and postulations are abound.

This discourse, therefore, is an attempt to highlight, contribute, and bring to the fore some of the shades and shadows of the subject of age as a performance factor in leadership in contemporary Nigeria.

HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS
The following questions are intended to provoke interrogation, critical analysis, and an informed discourse of the subject :
(1) What is the relationship between age and effectiveness of leadership ?
(2) How does an ageing leadership affects quality of governance ?
(3) How does younger and older leaders differ in output. How are they similar ?
(4) How does age preference between leaders and followers impede or enhance governance ?
(5) How realistic is “the older the age, the better the quality of leadership” school of thought ?
(6) Which one would you rather prefer – an ageing leadership or a younger leadership ?

GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGE OVERVIEW
The world is a stage where leaders come and go. As their ages differ, so the level of their performance, effectiveness, and contribution towards maximizing the potential of their Nations varies.
Age may or may never have been an impediment to their effectiveness. If anything, it was an impetus.
One thing that is common to all of them is that they never left their Nations the same as they met it – good or bad.
(1) Adolf Hitler of Germany ascended the leadership in 1933 at the age of 44 years.
(2) Benito Mussolini ruled over fascist Italy from 1922 at the age of 39.
(3) Abraham Linkoln, the slavery abolitionist was US president from 1861 at the age of 52.
(4) Mao Zedong (Mao Tse Tung) also known as Chairman Mao was the founder of the Peoples Republic of China in 1949 at the age of 56.
(5) Kwame Nkrumah led Ghana to independence and became her first president in 1957 at the age of 48.
(6) Nelson Mandela started the struggle against apartheid white minority rule at a very young age, was incarcerated in prison for 27 years, secured freedom for the majority black South Africa, and became the first black president of South Africa in 1994 at the age of 76.
(7) Ronald Reagan who together with Pope John Paul II brought down the Barlin wall separating Western and Eastern Germany, demolished communism, tore down the Iron Curtains between the East and the West, balkanized the Soviet Union (USSR), and ended the cold war between USA and Russia. This was when he became the 40th US president in 1981 at the age of 70 years.
(8) Margaret Thatcher became British Prime minister in 1979 at the age of 54.
(9) Mikhail Gorbachev became the last president of the then old and defunct Soviet Union (USSR) in 1985 at the age of 54.
(10) John F. Kennedy became the US president in 1961 at the age of 44.
(11) Barrack Obama became (first black) president of US in 2009 at the age of 48.
(12) Donald Trump became the 45th US president in 2017 at the age of 71. He will be sworn in as the 47th US President in January 2025 at the age of 80.
(13) Joe Biden became president of US in 2021 at the age of 79.
(14) Emmanuel Macron became president of France in 2017 at the age of 40.
Emmanul Macron was 6 years old when Muhammadu Buhari became Nigeria’s Head of State in 1983 at 41 years old.
(15) Muhammadu Buhari as Nigeria’s president handed over power to Ahmed Bola Tinubu in 2023 at the age of 81years old.
(16) Fidel Castro became president of Cuba in 1959 at the age of 33.
(17) Ito Hirobumi became the Japanese prime minister in 1885 at the age of 44.
(18) Anwar Sadat became president of Egypt in 1970 at the age of 52. He was the joint winner of the 1978 Nobel prize for peace with the then Israeli prime minister Menachem Beghin.
(19) Saddam Hussain became the 5th president of Iraq in 1979 at the age of 42.
(20) John Major became the prime minister of Britain in 1990 at the age of 47.

ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST YOUNGER OR AGEING LEADERSHIP
Questions about age in leadership is like asking if height matters in sports. As the performance of each athlete depends on the sporting event, the position, and role assigned, so it is with the age performance of the political leader.
There are certain ages when some persons are better in performance than others. This depends on the level of mental maturity or mental depreciation, experience, exposure, knowledge skills, environment, managerial ability, etc.

The assertion that an older age is synonymous with a better performance in leadership may be a fact.
However, younger leaders have not only demonstrated better leadership ability, but have also been found to be far more effective than the older ones.
Generally, it can also be argued that younger leaders seems to be more open – minded, proactive, well informed, and better able to follow modern technological trends that impact society than older leaders.

While some may believe that age may not impact a leader’s capacity to perform, others hold the opinion that age does affect a leader’s openness to change.
As leaders grow older, such leaders are likely to become less willing to make pragmatic changes, less interested in innovative, and new ideas.
According to Barker and Mueller (2002) older leaders spend less time and resources on research and development as opposed to younger ones who are excited by new innovation that enhances productive ventures.

Still on ageing leadership, prevailing situations and examples in our climes suggest that older leaders are more likely to take a passive approach to their leadership role – for example, delegating many functions, and becoming involved only in crisis situations.
They are also said to be more likely to maintain the status quo rather than respond to new challenges and new opportunities that arise.
In some situations, such older leaders appear to prefer to maintaining rather than innovating would be positives. In others, they are negative.

It is argued that older leadership boasts of knowledge, experience, Commitment, foresight, team work, and wisdom that all combine to make them effective leaders.
However, they have been found to be deficient in some leadership tasks such as making complex decisions, competencies involving multitude of activities, rapid information processing, multi-task assignment, etc, which have been found to decline with increasing age.

Finally, some ageing political leadership in Nigeria is said to be less motivated on further accomplishment of successes and achievement due rightly or wrongly, to the allegation that they already have attained their highest hierarchy of needs.
This argument is hinged on the lack lustre administration of president Muhammadu Buhari exhibited in the last lap of his 8 year presidency. He is said to have alluded to this claim when he was allegely quoted to have said that he was tired of governing Nigeria.
On the contrary, a younger leader with a future ahead of him/her would be excited to further challenging achievement for themselves and country.

AGE AND POLITICAL LEADERSHIP IN NIGERIA
(1) Chief Anthony Enahoro, then a member of parliament moved the motion for the Independence of Nigeria in 1953 at the age of 30 years.
(2) Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto became the premier of Northern region in 1954 at the age of 44.
(3) Owelle Nnamdi Azikiwe became the ceremonial president of Nigeria in 1963 at the age of 59.
(4) Chief Obafemi Awolowo became minister for local government in 1952 at the age of 43. He became the first Premier of the Western region in 1954, and later the minister of Finance during the Yakubu Gowon civil war years.
(5) Col. Yakubu Gowon became Nigeria’s Head of State in 1966 at the age of 31.
(6) Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu became head of the failed Biafran dream country at the age of 33
(7) Murtala Mohammed became Nigeria’s Head of State in 1975 at the age of 37.
(8) Gen T.Y Danjuma became Nigeria’s Chief of Staff at the age of 38.
(9) Olushegun Matthew Aremu Obasanjo became Nigeria’s Head of State in 1976 at the age of 39.
(10) Alhaji Shehu Aliyu Shagari became president of Nigeria in 1979 at the age of 54.
(11) Muhammadu Buhari became Nigeria’s Military Head of State in December 1983 at the age of 41.
(12) General Ibrahim Gbadamasi Babangida became Nigeria’s Head of State in 1985 at the age of 44.
(13) Goodluck Ebele Jonathan became Nigeria’s president in 2010 at the age of 53.
(14) Muhammadu Buhari is currently the president of Nigeria in 2022 at the age of 80 years old.

% PRESENTATION OF AGES OF LEADERS
From the facts and arguments of this presentation, one can deduce the following :
(1) Ages of world leaders :
(a) A total of 20 world leaders and their ages was sampled.
(b) 16 of these world leader’s ages is 54 and under. This represents 80%
(c) 4 of these world leader’s ages is 70 years and above. This represents 20%
(2) Ages of Nigerian leaders :
(a) A total of 14 Nigerian leaders and their ages was sampled.
(b) 13 of these leader’s ages is 59 and below. This represents 93%
(c) Only one (1) of the leader’s age is 70 years and above. This represents 7%.

IMPLICATION FOR A NIGERIA WITH AN AGEING LEADERSHIP
70% of Nigeria’s 230 million population (UN 2024) is aged 30 years and there about.
According to the World Bank this makes Nigeria with the highest world’s youthful population of 12% that is in extreme poverty.
On the other hand, the remaining less than 30% of Nigeria’s population is the ageing adult population of leadership structure. What it means is that this few old men and women decide and implement government policies that drives the economic, educational, technogical, and developmental aspects of Nigeria.

The attendant consequences of all these statistical population imbalance vis a vis access to governance for control of resources for developmental challenges are as huge as they are catastrophic for the future :

1. There is deliberate little or no planning for the future of the youths as these old leadership politicians are busy looting the resources of the country to their foreign bank accounts.
2. The neglect of the 70% youthful population by the ageing leadership is already manifesting as there are 20 million out-of-school children in Nigeria.
3. The skewed National planning policies in favour of corruption and looting of national resources by the old and ageing leadership is already impacting on the population thereby causing high levels of poverty, unemployment, hunger and food insecurity, insecurity of live and property, and poor funding for education and health.
4. The hard social and economic situation makes migration (“Japa” syndrome) attractive to the youths who daily depart Nigeria in droves to greener pastures abroad. As a consequence, Nigeria is losing her able bodied young men and women to other countries, thereby leaving behind the weaklings and the less trained of the youths. With this exodus scenario, one wonders the people that will drive the nation’s engine room in the future.
5. Regrettably, most of the young people leaving (Japa) Nigeria are the highly skilled and well educated. The long-term implication of this is the potential danger of a vacuum in critical sectors of the economy.
6. The immediate consequences are already being reflected and manifesting as various forms of social and economic disturbances like banditry, kidnapping, violent vandalism, killings, looting, and all types of anti social behavior by the poor and ever increasing vulnerability of the idle youthful population.
7. Unless there is an urgent deliberate intervention to ensure that the ageing Nigerian leadership considers the pragmatic inclusion of the youths in high leadership positions, or the give way to these youths, or they are forced out like done in Mali, Niger, Bourkina Faso, and other regime change like Ghana, the impending consequences for development may be gloomy and challenging in the near future.
8. The sheer number, size, and the quality of the youthful population offers great potential towards expanding Nigeria’s capacity as a regional economic hub of Africa as well as globally. A young, large population could be an economic asset because population growth and development are closely correlated with urbanization.
9. Nigeria’s leadership must adopt strong policies to create an enabling environment where the abundance of the youthful human resources is utilized optimally. There should be coherent and structured policies of economic and political empowerment of the youths, and not the present “feeding bottle” youth programs.
10. Since the ageing leadership politicians are not obviously ready to vacate the scene and leave the stage, the Nigerian youths are encouraged to take back their country, their own future through the ballot box. After all, they have the voting population to do that, they have demonstrated it as was always manifested in the yearly BBNaij all youth reality TV show voting pattern in the past.
11. To show clearly, legitimately, and within the ambit of the law how the power of the youths votes can be translated into change of leadership in a peaceful democratic process, the 2019 presidential election readily comes to mind. For the purposes of this discourse, that 2019 presidential election votes are compared with the 2019 BBNaija votes. During the 2019 Nigeria’s presidential election, Muhammadu Buhari got elected with 15 million votes (15, 191,847), while Atiku Abubakar came second with 11 million votes (11,262,978). This made up a combined votes total of 26 million (26,454,825) for that year’s (2019) presidential election. On the other hand, the all youths 2019 BBNaija votes was extraordinarily far higher than the entire national votes for the 2019 presidential election. According to voting figures released in 2019 by Pay Porte, BBNaija votes that were cast in the finale of that “Pepper Them” season 4 of 2019 BBNaija was 50 million votes.
12. I therefore recommended to, and call on the Nigerian youths to vote wisely by electing one of their own, a youthful leader come 2027 in order to not only breakaway from the jinx of the Nigerian ageing leadership but to take back their own future from the parasitic and corruption infested polity.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
It is quite obvious that majority of the political leadership across the world is presided or are presiding over the governance of their own country at a younger age.
It therefore remains to be seen whether the ageing political leadership in Nigeria will harken to the clarion call to willingly vacate the political stage for the younger crop of leaders to assume the mantle of leadership for a better and vibrant Nigeria or be rejected at the ballot box if they refuse to step aside.
Nigerian youths are encouraged to take back their own future through peaceful democratic processes of the ballot.

Peace 🙏