A question recently crossed my mind: how comfortably would a Nigerian state governor step into the role of a bank’s chief executive?
The question is about the discipline of leadership. A bank CEO must attract customers, generate income, manage costs, protect capital and account for performance. Revenue cannot simply be assumed. It must be earned and sustained.
For a governor whose state depends heavily on Federation Account allocations, the financial challenge can be different. Much of the attention may centre on how to distribute available resources, with less pressure to demonstrate how the state is expanding its productive economy.
This raises a more important question: are we assessing our governors by the money they spend or by the public value they create?
Federal allocations are a legitimate part of Nigeria’s fiscal structure. Receiving them is not a failure. However, dependence becomes a concern when it encourages a government to wait for the next distribution rather than strengthen the foundations of economic activity within its state.
Revenue generation should also mean more than imposing additional levies on people and businesses already struggling to survive. A sustainable revenue strategy helps enterprises grow, improves infrastructure, simplifies administration and builds confidence. It expands the productive base from which public revenue can emerge.
Citizens have responsibilities in this arrangement too. We scrutinise the President over fuel prices, inflation and national economic conditions. We should apply comparable attention to how our states and local governments use the resources they receive.
What happened to the allocation? Which services improved? Were projects completed at reasonable cost? Are schools producing better learning outcomes? Are healthcare facilities functioning? Are businesses finding it easier to operate?
A budget announcement cannot answer these questions. Neither can a commissioning ceremony.
The corporate comparison has its limits. Government exists to serve people, including those who cannot pay for essential services. A governor cannot measure every public investment by financial profit. Equally, a bank CEO cannot pursue profit without regard for risk, regulation and the institution’s long-term soundness.
Nevertheless, both roles demand discipline: clear priorities, credible financing, responsible execution and measurable results.
This is why proposals for state-funded fuel or transport support deserve serious examination. If a governor believes a subsidy is necessary, the proposal should explain its cost, funding source, beneficiaries and duration. Citizens should also know which other expenditure would be reduced to accommodate it.
That would make the choice visible. People could judge whether the relief offers greater value than alternative investments in transport, electricity, education or healthcare.
I would therefore hesitate to conclude that a president would automatically make a better CEO than a governor. The better test is the individual’s record: has that leader strengthened institutions, managed resources responsibly and delivered sustainable outcomes?
Nigeria needs governors who can explain how they create public value—not merely how they distribute public revenue.
The evidence of leadership should be visible in a stronger economy, functioning services, productive citizens and institutions that continue to perform after the officeholder has left.