On the 13th of December 2023,  President Bola Ahmed Tinubu inaugurated the newly reconstituted Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC), and gave a marching order to the Commission to “competently facilitate the transformation, reorientation, and digitisation of the federal bureaucracy to enable, and not stifle, growth and enhanced private sector participation in the development of the Nigerian economy, in full adherence to the renewed hope agenda of his administration.” The FCSC has since interpreted this mandate as a charge to interrogate a fundamental question: What has the FCSC failed to do to institutionally gatekeep the federal civil service and safeguard its professional integrity, dynamics of efficiency and structural parameters despite many years of consistent and sustained administrative reforms in Nigeria?
To answer this question in a resolute way demands first the admission that given the institutional degeneration of the FCSC itself in the wake of the system-wide decline of the public administration system in Nigeria, it does not have the requisite structural and institutional parameters, to complement any forthright system-wide reform to reform the civil service reform and thereby participate in bringing to fruition the Renewed Hope Agenda of His E xcellency, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. This therefore, requires a concerted reflection outside the box in measure that will instigate the critical injection of fresh and innovative ideas, insights and models of performance that are potent sufficiently, to compel the repositioning of the federal civil service in terms of its operational capability readiness, redoubled managerial acumen and policy professional policy professionalism that could add up to become a game-changing event for the successful implementation of the Renewed Hope Agenda of the Federal Government. This is the mandate of the renewed FCSC.
And in pursuing this fundamental mandate, we must never forget to situate the FCSC within the context of the ongoing service-wide reforms, especially the performance bond-enabled central policy and service delivery coordination framework of the Presidency and the Federal Civil Service Strategy and Implementation Plan of the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.
The FCSC reforming the reform mandate is essentially a complementary task whose significance adds to the overall health of the federal public service system in Nigeria.
And in complementing this ongoing reform, the FCSC is compelled to focus on the broader picture of reforming the reforms to encompass the rehabilitation of the public service in Nigeria.To clarify: this larger challenge faced by the FCSC involves answering the loaded question: Who is a Nigerian public servant? This of course looks like a very simple question. However, we begin to see how complex it is when we place it in the context of how majority of Nigerians see the public service and public servants—politicians, the police, immigration and customs, the fire system, national electricity, education boards, and many more.
How have a large majority of Nigerians encountered public servants in these ministries, departments and agencies? The answer is simple: Nigerians encounter bureaucratic inefficiency aggravated by bureaucratic corruption. And the Ease of Doing Business Index demonstrates this from year to year. It is difficult to clear your goods at any of Nigeria’s ports. It is a traumatic experience to get the police to be your friend. Nigerians pay for electricity they do not enjoy, and they are even bullied by overzealous officers in the process. Let us not even talk about the police and the politicians. Long story short: the perception of public servants by Nigerians is bad.
The public service has become bureaucratic because there are so many impediments and obstacles that have prevented the system from becoming creative and innovative in rethinking its own internal operations, processes and procedures that would have made for optimal functioning.
When any ordinary Nigerian visits the federal secretariat in any state of the federation, the lack of inter-sectoral collaboration, for example, or the near-absence of technology-enabled system’s capability ensures that such a Nigerian is frustrated in making simple administrative transactions. And that terrible perception reflects badly not only on the capability readiness of the FCSC to efficiently gatekeep the professionalism of the system, but also the systemic efficiency of the public service to backstop the government’s policies that lead to good governance. And so, attending to these institutional debilitations demands a focus onthree general and systemic components around which reform reflection and action must converge.
First, there is the urgent need to challenge and reengineer the traditional Weberian— “I-am-directed”—bureaucratic tradition which essentially rides on outdated administrative practices, analogue operating system, red-tape bureaucratic culture and poor stewardship with regards to the consideration given to, and the rights of the citizens as the customers who consume public services. In other words, the old Weberian system around which the Nigerian public service system still revolves crucially undermines bureaucratic efficiency. It will therefore be a wrong choice of operational mechanism to hinge the success of the Renewed Hope Agenda of the Tinubu administration. Reforming the reform of the Nigerian public system therefore implies rethinking the basis of its institutional efficiency to get service delivery done effectively.
Second, reform must confront the low organisational intelligence quotient (IQ) of the public service workforce and especially its top echelons. This has not only impacted on the essence of public spiritedness and professionalism of the public servant, it has also triggered the breakdown of public service values that makes the public service all over the world a noble calling. The root cause of this decline in the vocational spirit of a public servant can only be redressed by a consistent, coherent and strict metrics of re-professionalisation.
Third, bureaucratic efficiency must be connected with the ultimate objective of achieving an effective and efficient democratic service delivery that defines what good governance is for Nigerians. And this demands that the public service must be compelled to become a performing and productive institution that holds its workforce to metrics of performance accountability. And a culture of structural performance can only take off when reforms reduce the series of systemic constraints that limit the effectiveness of the system to deliver public goods to Nigerians. We have a good example in how the President himself has got all the key governance players in the government to sign on to a performance bond with a dedicated policy coordination backend.
Fourth, a key component of performance management for productivity is a functional competency-based human resource management practices which, in the case of the Nigerian public service system, are already compromised. Two structural issues are responsible for this compromise. The first is the collapse of internal control mechanism, and the second is the rampant bureaucratic corruption aggravated by the lack of the culture of deferred gratification.
The consequence of all these institutional weaknesses is the bloated and inefficient status of the administrative system that allows it to keep generating redundancies and ad hoc structures and units of government agencies that compete with the existing bureaucratic structures in order to achieve what is often taken to be a flexible administrative arrangement unencumbered by administrative codes, rules and regulations. There is also the unfortunate replication of these parallel structures across each state of the federation. The result is the explosion of the cost of governance in ways that burden the capacity to allocate needed funds to critical governance projects speaks more to the infrastructural needs of the citizens than mere overheads.
Olaopa, an online contributor wrote in from Abuja.

By: Tunji Olaopa