I will, in all honesty, plead with my readers to indulge me as I make a statement which, in our society, some people may ordinarily describe as “personal.” Truly, this is my personal assessment of the President of the Federation of Tourism Associations of Nigeria (FTAN), Aliyu Badaki, and it is made without malice.
Aliyu Badaki, in my considered view, does not appear to fully understand the demands of his office as Federation President. As I have often said, when a leader interprets every contrary contribution or position as a “personal attack,” such a leader risks running headlong into avoidable walls.
I see a federation gradually drifting towards the cemetery, and unless there is a deliberate change of direction, FTAN could find itself in a very difficult place.
In his rejoinder to my intervention over his so-called “advocacy” on the regulatory initiative involving the Nigerian Institute for Hospitality and Tourism (NIHOTOUR), Badaki referred to me as “one Frank Meke,” a description I find unnecessary and dismissive. We know ourselves, and I am fully aware of who I am and the role I have played in the Nigerian tourism industry.
He also sought to dispute what he described as “facts.” But the facts remain that NIHOTOUR, over the past year, held several meetings and engagements to which he was invited, yet he allegedly declined to participate. At the same time, Badaki and his associates reportedly made frequent visits to the National Tourism Development Authority (NTDA) office, with photographic evidence of some of those engagements.
Again, Badaki had considerable access to the office of the Honourable Minister of Arts, Culture and Tourism, Hannatu Musa Musawa, a lawyer, over several weeks. At the peace meeting convened by the President of the National Association of Nigerian Travel Agencies (NANTA), Yinka Folami, and hosted by the Minister, Badaki did not hide his disagreement with Dr Abisoye Fagade.
Yet, at that meeting, witnessed by several stakeholders whose confidentiality I respect, he did not adequately articulate the critical aspects of the NIHOTOUR or NTDA regulatory frameworks that he claims are causing serious concerns within the industry.
His rejoinder, which he personally signed and through which he took responsibility for his advocacy position, also failed to demonstrate where he convened a meeting involving the two agencies and the Minister and was subsequently ignored.
I understand that FTAN may currently be struggling with suitable space to host meetings. But Badaki manages a hotel and could, in the interest of the industry, generously make one of its meeting facilities available for a properly structured stakeholder engagement involving all parties connected to the matter.
In the same vein, he carefully sidestepped several efforts reportedly made by NIHOTOUR to engage stakeholders and seek solutions. This raises questions about whether the real objective is resolution or prolonged confrontation.
This issue touches me personally, and I dare say for the first time that FTAN appears to have developed a serious case of mediaphobia.
For those who may not know, the Association of Tourism Journalists is one of the critical associations within the federation and has made, and continues to make, significant contributions to the growth and development of Nigerian tourism.
I was at head of a team when journalists and other industry stakeholders mobilised tourism practitioners and travelled to Abuja to help birth this federation more than three decades ago. I will not tell that story in this article, but perhaps I should do so soon, especially if the current leadership appears determined to lead us back to Egypt.
On a lighter note, I find it extremely ironic for a leader who champions his advocacy through the media to turn around and suggest that he owes the media no accountability for his leadership successes or failures.
I recently watched Badaki on TVC during a prime-time 7 a.m. broadcast interview, where the anchor even encouraged him to smile. I will leave out what preceded that moment on the set.
For free, let us help FTAN get its advocacy right.
The Bible, in James 1:5, teaches that anyone who lacks wisdom should ask God. There is wisdom in seeking divine direction, but there is also wisdom in seeking the contributions and support of others. A leader does not have to like everyone around him, but those people may possess the knowledge and experience necessary to help find solutions.
I have worked around several industry leaders, past and present, in both the private and public sectors. One enduring quality of leaders who eventually succeed is their ability to build collaboration, consensus and broad-based support.
NANTA has survived and celebrated 50 years of impactful presence and unity, not because it has been free of challenges, but because successive presidents have understood the importance of gathering the best brains available to support the association’s engagements with government and its various constituencies.
FTAN has NANTA as a member and should, perhaps, consult it on how to build a stronger institutional presence and sustain growth.
I have worked with about eight NANTA presidents, and whenever major challenges arose, they were willing to identify the best brains within and outside their immediate circles, irrespective of personal policy preferences, and bring them together to resolve difficult issues.
Every NANTA president I worked with inherited a different operational environment, but they understood the importance of building internal coalitions and consensus around matters affecting the survival of the association.
Even in relation to the NIHOTOUR regulatory framework, NANTA reportedly approached the matter through a coalition and consensus-building process.
FTAN can seek similar strategic advice.
Indeed, FTAN should put a hold on its current advisory spins and undertake a structured and strategic engagement, beginning with its specialised media community, to clearly identify the jurisdictional issues embedded in the relevant NTDA and NIHOTOUR legal frameworks.
It should then engage allied and member associations and develop alternative solutions that can command wider support.
I find it both funny and sad that FTAN would repeatedly visit NTDA, take pictures and publicise such engagements, yet allegedly fail to sit down with the agency’s leadership to thoroughly discuss the issues it claims are hurting its members.
Limiting FTAN’s reach and operational environment to its members and the two agencies involved NTDA and NIHOTOUR also suggests a limited understanding of the wider ecosystem of the tourism industry.
The federation must engage chambers of commerce and other institutions critical to the development of cultural and tourism enterprises.
I am also concerned that, after about a year, FTAN has not, to my knowledge, sufficiently audited the two relevant legal frameworks and established the financial, operational and employment implications of the clauses it considers injurious to its members.
It has also not adequately articulated its membership structure, yet it has proceeded with broad generalisations that do little to advance a focused advocacy strategy.
In the past year, there has also been little evidence of a sustained lobbying ecosystem involving the Senate and House of Representatives committees responsible for culture and tourism.
Has FTAN embarked on a structured campaign for transparent public hearings to review specific provisions of the relevant statutes and ensure that operators’ concerns are properly integrated into the legislative process?
FTAN cannot run advocacy like a gunboat under the command of Nebuchadnezzar. It needs an intelligence structure and a supportive committee not necessarily composed only of “yes-sir” executive members to monitor legislative developments, track bills through readings and committee stages, and follow through on processes leading to possible amendments.
Does FTAN have certified lawyers with legislative experience who can provide credible legal and legislative guidance? It needs professionals capable of separating genuine policy concerns from internal politics and ensuring that its advocacy remains focused on solutions.
Advocacy is an art, not noise-making and banal postulations. Everyone can write, but not everyone is a journalist.
Lobbying is also an art. It is not blackmail. It identifies problems, targets the right institutions, builds relationships and mobilises the right support towards consensus and solutions.
Above all, good leaders do not look down on others. They turn opposition into opportunities for dialogue and transform critics into positive burden-bearers and partners in finding solutions.
Nigeria’s political environment itself demonstrates that consensus-building is often achieved through persistent engagement, persuasion and coalition-building. The lesson for FTAN is simple: no institution can successfully navigate complex challenges by fighting everyone around it.
FTAN, under its present leadership, has increasingly created an image of being quarrelsome, embittered and antagonistic towards institutions and individuals. It appears to have chosen division over collaboration and confrontation over consensus.
The question is: who would willingly associate with a leadership perceived to thrive on blackmail and hostility rather than openness, consensus and collaboration?
I am ready and willing to do my part to stop FTAN from becoming a shadow coffin bearer of its own legacy.
We will not allow FTAN to die as long as God gives us breath.
