A typical example or pattern of something, a pattern or model, that’s the word paradigm. Though I was tempted to use the word shift, I later realised that it’s more honourable to use a simple word that is understandable by a larger portion of people than using a more complex word you’re not ready to prove. So, I opted for the word CHANGE.
Leadership has paradigms, but who change the existing paradigm must be ready to do so despite all oppositions. It’s like a set of patterns that those on the train of leadership learn and naturally become, and so is the spirit of paradigms among the leading leaders and the emerging leaders.
They can do everything imaginable within the spread of their influence to enforce their paradigms or, simply say, their standards. The effect of a paradigm determines how the people relate with the leadership; in governance, religious, educational, legal, industrial, or traditional institutions.
Paradigms are meant to bring ease to the lives of the people, to make them become better of who they are, and to create a better future for them. However, some leaders see it differently. Leaders are few in numbers, but the people being led take a larger portion of the number, for this, the leader, either elected or came into power by influence should know that the people come first. In anything they do, they should have it in mind that any paradigm that is not set for the betterment of the people may not last. Even if it lasts, it would eventually be broken down.
During the era of monopoly in the United States, the 1896 election was supposed to bring an end to this and make a common man feel like a citizen but the forces that determined the economy of America then, decided to bring in their own President. McKenley was brought in to the race of the White House and was financed with millions of dollars, just for their paradigm that was staggering then, to maintain its stability when the president was elected.
They had their way and monopoly continued but little had they known that the people were ready to do anything to be called an American; having access to the wealth of the nation. Roosevelt was the answer after which the existing president was murdered. Era of Ford automobiles came in and people could afford to buy and drive a car of their own.
Paradigms: one changes the other and the people decide which is good for them. I am in a country that the leaders decide the paradigm to work with; either it affects the people positively or not, it rarely concerns them but their main priority is to make a name for themselves:
‘The former President of Nigeria.’ If this is the paradigm that brings development to a nation, by now Nigeria should be among the top ten countries leading the economy of the world. Do we need our leaders to go through the school of people’s paradigm or don’t we have a set of paradigms for our leaders to follow? Though it sounds rhetoric, but it’s the question that the conglomerate of Nigerian leaders should provide an answer to, and now is the time.
It was indeed a battle that deprived the likes of John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, J. P Morgan of their wealth and fame though they got more wealth through their companies that were broken up. For example, the Standard oil of John D Rockefeller was divided into Mobil oil, Chevron, and the likes. These people lived outside their wealth and began to see a common man as relevant among the US citizens, because of the new paradigm in United States government.
I am not enforcing a paradigm here but my sincere contribution to those at the helm of leadership is to think and rethink, if their paradigm would favour the people or would just make them a name that the people may rain curses on in years to come. Paradigm could influence the people to work for you.
Paradigm could as well work together with the people to bring out the best in them. When you bring out the best in the people, you bring out the best in a company or organisation, and so it applies to a nation.
God bless my nation is as a result of a paradigm that brought out the best out of the people and the people brought out the wealth in the nation and everyone benefited from it.
When your paradigm is good for the people, as a leader, it is as well good for the company or organisation or even the country you lead. Think of the people before changing or enforcing paradigms.
Omotayo Samuel Olatunji
