When President Bola Ahmed Tinubu delivered his address on August 4, 2024, in response to the nationwide #EndBadGovernance protests, the moment was ripe for genuine connection, empathy, and action. Instead, the speech veered into a detailed account of policies and achievements, accompanied by a stern call for law and order. The disconnect between the President’s words and the palpable distress of the Nigerian people underscored a fundamental misstep in his approach to addressing the unrest. The address, while replete with policy details, failed to resonate with a nation on the brink of economic and social upheaval.
The President’s speech began with a focus on the violence and property damage inflicted during the protests. He expressed sorrow for the loss of lives and destruction in various states, yet the tone quickly shifted from empathy to a defense of the administration’s stance on maintaining public order. The speech portrayed the unrest as an issue of a few individuals with political agendas seeking to destabilize the country. This framing seemed to alienate the very citizens whose grievances had sparked the protests in the first place.
Rather than bridging the gap between the government and the people, the speech seemed to reinforce it. President Tinubu’s emphasis on enforcing law and order, while crucial, overshadowed the immediate needs of the populace. The focus on maintaining public order, while necessary, came at the expense of addressing the genuine concerns driving the protests. It was a missed opportunity to offer solace, concrete solutions, and a path forward that acknowledged the real pain and struggle of ordinary Nigerians.
The Importance of Empathy in Leadership
In times of crisis, effective leadership is characterized by more than just technical solutions; it requires a deep understanding of and connection to the emotional state of the people. This principle was notably demonstrated by Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, following the Christchurch Mosque shootings. Ardern’s response was marked by an outpouring of genuine empathy and a commitment to addressing the immediate needs of the affected communities. Her leadership was not merely about policy implementation but about demonstrating a heartfelt connection to the victims and a determination to enact meaningful change.
Similarly, Nancy Koehn’s Forged in Crisis: The Power of Courageous Leadership in Turbulent Times highlights the importance of empathetic leadership. Koehn explores how historical figures like Abraham Lincoln navigated crises not just through policy but through an understanding of the emotional and psychological needs of their people. Lincoln’s ability to connect with the public’s suffering and articulate a vision for the future was instrumental in guiding the nation through the Civil War.
In contrast, President Tinubu’s address failed to connect on this emotional level. The speech’s focus on detailing government policies and achievements, such as the removal of fuel subsidies and the introduction of new foreign exchange systems, seemed disconnected from the immediate suffering of the citizens. While these policies may have long-term benefits, they do little to alleviate the short-term pain experienced by those struggling with soaring prices and economic instability.
A Misplaced Focus on Policy Over People
The President’s speech was heavy with technical details about government policies, including the distribution of conversion kits for compressed natural gas and various funding schemes for micro and small enterprises. While these initiatives are significant, they do not address the immediate needs of a population grappling with economic hardship. Presidential addresses during times of unrest are often not the best forum for discussing complex policy issues. Instead, such speeches should focus on offering empathy, reassurance, and a clear plan of action to address the immediate concerns of the people.
The failure to address these concerns in a meaningful way was a glaring omission in Tinubu’s speech. The enumeration of achievements and policies, while important, felt out of touch with the daily struggles of ordinary Nigerians. What good does a government credit policy for nano and micro-enterprises do for a person struggling to afford basic necessities? The disconnect between the policy details presented and the pressing needs of the people highlighted a significant gap in the President’s response to the crisis.
Lessons from Historical Leaders
Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Leadership in Turbulent Times provides valuable insights into how effective leaders handle crises. Goodwin’s exploration of U.S. Presidents such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt illustrates the importance of combining empathy with action. Roosevelt’s New Deal, for instance, was a comprehensive plan that addressed both immediate relief and long-term reform. His fireside chats were not just about policy but about reassuring the American people and fostering a sense of shared purpose.
Similarly, Theodore Roosevelt’s leadership during the Progressive Era involved addressing the immediate needs of the public while also pursuing broader reforms. His ability to communicate effectively and connect with the concerns of the populace was a key factor in his successful leadership. Tinubu’s speech, in contrast, seemed to focus more on defending past actions and less on addressing the immediate needs of those protesting.
The Missing Elements in Tinubu’s Speech
One of the most critical shortcomings of President Tinubu’s speech was the failure to outline specific measures to address the immediate concerns raised by the protests. Effective crisis management often involves not just acknowledging the issues but also demonstrating a commitment to making meaningful changes. The President’s speech lacked any concrete plans to reduce the cost of governance, streamline administrative processes, or directly address the economic strains faced by ordinary citizens.
The absence of such details was a significant oversight. During times of crisis, it is essential for leaders to demonstrate a clear understanding of the public’s grievances and to offer tangible solutions. The President’s focus on detailing policy achievements without addressing the immediate needs of the people created a sense of disconnect and frustration among those who felt their voices were not being heard.
Final Words
In navigating the turbulent waters of leadership, especially during times of widespread unrest and economic despair, the true measure of a leader is not solely found in their policy achievements or their capacity to uphold order. It is equally defined by their ability to connect deeply with the pain and aspirations of their people, to offer genuine empathy, and to propose actionable solutions that address immediate concerns while paving the way for long-term improvement.
Effective leadership in times of crisis involves more than just managing the immediate situation; it requires a profound understanding of and connection to the human element of the crisis. As Harvard Historian Nancy Koehn insightfully notes, “Great leaders are those who, in the midst of profound turbulence, forge a new path not by simply following the familiar trails, but by deeply understanding and responding to the suffering and aspirations of those they lead.”
Ronald Heifetz, in Leadership Without Easy Answers, offers a complementary perspective, emphasizing the importance of addressing both the technical and adaptive challenges faced by leaders. Heifetz asserts, “Leadership is about helping people see the world as it is and as it could be, and then guiding them through the uncertainty and fear that change often brings.” This insight underscores the necessity for leaders to not only articulate a vision but to also empathetically engage with the real and immediate fears of their people.