BY REV. UNIMNIAKE JOSEPH UGBE, PERMANENT SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HUMANITY AND SOCIAL WALFARE, CALABAR, CROSS RIVER STATE, NIGERIA.


1. INTRODUCTION:
The Public Service consists of the workers in government agencies other than the Military and Police. It is responsible for providing services based on government policies to all citizens of the nation.
The Public Service is an essential tool for the economic growth and development of the nation. It is also a unifying force in the country. It’s main feature is “neutrality”. This makes the workers ready to serve the government of the day without bias to political activities . The service is being governed by existing rules and regulations guarding its operations.
Indiscipline is a worldwide phenomena affecting all organizations and societies, but in varying degrees. In some societies, this malady has led to political and economic instabilities, social conflicts and even violence . It also births competition between groups struggling for state power. This power is so useful for the distribution of the so-called national cake(Odunuga, 2000).
Popoola, et al; (2015)have shown indiscipline can affect the productivity of an organization and this works against its survival. They therefore stress the need for a leadership of the Nigerian Civil Service which will effectively handle indiscipline through appropriate policies and the exemplary lifestyle of leaders.
Their mandate is to carry out the day to day administration of government business in a manner that the citizenry and all living in Nigeria are properly served.


2. AN OVERVIEW OF NIGERIAN PUBLIC SERVICE
The Nigerian Public Service cannot be put in the right historical perspective without a mention of its historical roots. Thus the history of the Nigerian Public Service can be traced to the British |Colonial Administration from 1860-1960- a period long enough to destroy a people’s culture, tradition and values and replace them with something all together new.
Their mandate is to carry out the day to day administration of government business in a manner that the citizenry and all living in Nigeria are properly served.
Under the British Colonial Administration, the Public Service in Nigeria could be said to be a branch of the British Crown Service. However, with the independence gained in 1960, the service was taken over by the few Nigerian staff who had worked with the British officers. The challenge of running the administration of the newly independent nation by its nationals was enormous. The initial seemingly smooth take off was later bedeviled by numerous problems, many of these could be attributed to the wrangling’s among the political class and leadership which resulted in the 3 year civil war from 1967-1970. The Service suffered from the effects of the civil war to the extent that many years after the war, the service is really yet to recover as a one united service.
Various attempts have been made by successive administrations in the country to make the public service work better. This resulted in numerous public service reforms in the country. These few among others are mentioned here:
Morgan Commission of 1963, Adebo Commission of 1971, Udoji Commission of 1974, Phillips Panel of 1985, PublicService Reform of 1988, and Ayida Commission of 2003. All these have been efforts to restructuring the public service for better performance and service delivery. Amidst all these efforts, the general opinion of most scholars and practitioners is that the Nigerian Public Service is “still considered stagnant and inefficient and the attempts made by past panels (commissions) have had little effects on productivity and service delivery of the Nigerian (Civil) Public Servant”.

3. CONCEPTS OF DISCIPLINE AND INDISCIPLINE IN THE WORK PLACE.
The work place is normally an organized outfitwith specific goals. According to Malfarland (1979), discipline “refers to conditions of orderliness in which members of an organization conduct themselves with respect to the needs and desires of the organization,subordinatingtosome extent their own needs and desires.We see discipline as concerned with the imposition of certain restrictions on the behaviour of members (employees) of the organization”
Every organization strife to maintain discipline among its staff or employees as a safeguard for goal attainment.
Indiscipline in the workplace, on the other hand, refers to the undesirable, unruly behaviour of the employees. It is a condition of the disorderliness in which members of an organization conduct themselves without respect to the rules and regulations of the organization. This amounts to disobedience where the staff refuse to subordinate their needs and desires to the overall interest and needs of the organization .Marfarland also describes indiscipline is “an act of misconduct which is a deviation or bypassing of the established rules which should be followed without any discretion. It is an act or a conduct which prejudice the interest of the employer or which is likely to impair his reputation or create unrest among other employees”.
Ochai(1984) holds that staff indiscipline manifests in several ways in the public service. He mentioned habitual lateness to work, truancy, lack of commitment to work, buck passing or refusing to take responsibility for actions or inactions. The list also includes bribery and corruption, tribalism, misuse of government property, embezzlement and misappropriation of funds and many others.
It is the opinion of Ehiyaman, Abah and Gberevbie(2009) that “ Public/Civil servants in contemporary public organizations in Nigeria exhibit discipline in a minimal level coupled with some elements of indiscipline”. This confirms the fact that, no organization is devoid of indiscipline. As disciplined as staff in an organization may look, a closer scrutiny will reveal signs of indiscipline.
It is important to note that indiscipline in any organization could be classified into types or categories. This classification is however dependent on the severity of the consequences attached to the indiscipline or misconduct.
The three categories are as follows:
1. Minor Infractions :
This refers to those acts of misconduct which do little or no harm to organization’s operations. The result of these actions may really be harmless when isolated but cumulative analysis may become serious. Examples of minor infractions includenegligence, failure to be present when needed, carelessness, minor violations of rules, etc.
2. Major Misconduct/Infractions:
These are those acts of misconduct which can affect the orderly operations of an organization. Consequently, the consequences attached to such misdemeanor are also grievous. Examples of these include failure to carry out instructions, cheating , stealing or violating safety rules, etc.
3. Intolerable Offenses:
These refer to those offences of such illegal and drastic nature and can
endangerthe relationship between the employer and the employee. Examples
of these include use of weapons, theft and fighting. These offenses can bring
serious harm to those within the workplace and bring down the reputation of
the organization.


4. CAUSES OF INDISCIPLINE IN WORKPLACE
Though the deprived human nature tends to evil and negative actions, there areusually reasons which triggers up such indiscipline in any organization. These causes of indiscipline therefore, are several, varied and simply inexhaustive.
What is capable of triggering up disobedience and misconduct in one employee in an organization may not affect another person in the same organization or even elsewhere.
The following are some of the causes of indiscipline in an organization.
1. Inadequate or ineffective orientation of the employees
2. Absence of proper and definite rules and regulations
3. Failure to adhere and enforce rules properly
4. Nepotism, favouritism, casteism shown in treatment of certain employees.
5. Undue delays in implementing promotions or agreement by employers
6. Absence of team spirit among the employees
All these could be summarized as unfair management practices, victimization, absence of code of conduct and inadequate attention to personnel issues by management , absence of effective leadership, communication barriers between employees and employers, defective supervision, etc.
Yahciogh’s(1996) in Popoola,et al.(2015) have opined that “ people get involved in acts of indiscipline because their interest and values are challenged or because their needs are not met”. They have seen causes of indiscipline as caused by various factors, namely : Political factors, individual employee factors, management factors , and ineffectiveness in the disciplinary process.

5. ATTEMPTS TO CURB INDISCIPLINE IN THE NIGERIAN PUBLIC SERVICE
It is a common belief that no civil/public service the world over, is without incidences of indiscipline. However, the Nigerian situation is alarming and worrisome.
Ehiyamen, Abah and Gberevbie(2009) have painted a gory picture of indiscipline and misconduct in the Nigerian Civil Service thus:
“For example, staff may report for duty , in time and sometimes late. On arrival, they may perform their duties without seriousness. After spending few hours on duty some of them take permission to go out of the workplace while others just sneak or vanish. Another group may go to drinking houses or beer parlors. ‘, to return to the office only towards the closing time. Some of them may take permission to stay away from the office or workplace for a number of days for fabricated reasons. Others may just absent themselves for reasons that are far from cogent (Ochai, 1984). It is needless to say that productivity is affected negatively by these vices of staff in the public sector. Accordingly to Adebayo (2001), such acts of indiscipline include lethargy , apathy, laziness, rudeness to members of the public . malingering, presenting false sick certificates in order to go and attend to private business and a host of other deplorable attitudes”.
This situation has impacted negatively on governance and the development process of the country. There have been several attempts by various government to curb indiscipline in the public service in the country. But there have really been no worthwhile results. Notable among these were the mass purge from the public service in 1975 and also in 1984.
The Jaji declaration of 1970, the establishment of institutions and programme respectively such as code of conduct Bureau , Director for Social Mobilization for Self Reliance and Economic Recovery(MAMSER), National Orientation Agency(NOA), War Against Indiscipline (WAI), Public Service Reforms, etc were all aimed at improving the situation in the Public Service vis-à-vis indiscipline. The publications of civil service Handbook, Public Service rules , Financial instructions, Manual Circulars etc are also efforts at curbing indiscipline through enlightenment.
In spite of these various steps and moves , there has been rather a steady rise in number of reports of indiscipline . Thus, instead of the problem showing signals of reduction or abating, there is an astronomical rise in a multidimensional manner.
Infact, the most disturbing issue about this situation is that, top public /civil servants are also involved in this moral degradation .This is unfortunate .
Again Ehiyamen, Abah and Gberevbie have noted that this situation has deepened indiscipline in the public service.
According to them
“ This is where Leaders(top civil/public servants) who are supposed to lead by example by being disciplined are the very ones who exhibit attributes of indiscipline. It is often more than not, the leaders who misuse government vehicles, report late for duty, syphon and embezzle public funds, delay actions on files which went to their tables, get drunk while on duty , play truancy, engage in acts of tribalism, sectionalism and nepotism for deciding who gets what, when and how(Achebe 1986)
The unfortunate thing is that these leaders expect their subordinates to behave like saints, be disciplined and thus highly productive. This is pure hypocrisy and double standard in operation.
Achebe (1986) concludes that “ it is instructive , nonetheless of them to know that personal example should be demonstrated which is the hallmark of true leadership”.
Achebe’s position above is very crucial to the solution of thisteething problem. The need for leaders of the public/civil service to lead by example remains desirable.


6. CURBING INDISPLINE THROUGH TUPOCRACY
The opinion of Achebe on the responsibility of leaders in the nation’s public/civil service to lead by example cannot be swept under the carpet. Leadership by example is the easiest way to influence followers.
The concept of leadership by example has always been a desirable expectation in all organizations across the world because of the huge results it brings.
It is noteworthy that the concept has been made more popular in academic circles with the crafting of the word “Tupocracy” (which means “ Do as I do” or leadership by example) by Rev. Godwin Akpan Amaowoh, PhD. This Man of God led by the Spirit of God has crafted a system of governance or leadership that is sure to produce positive results where others have failed.
In his words, “Tupocracry” as a Socio political culture is derived from “Tupos” and simply means “Government or leadership by example”. Drawing inferences from Biblical examples ,Amaowoh (2008) drives home the point that the most effective and result oriented system of governance or leadership style is that of leadership by example. According to him,
“ It is no gainsaying that the contemporary Nigerian society in particular, and the world in general, is desperately in need of leadership by example”. This type of leadership is the one portrayed in his write up as a role model mentor and tupocrat.
The issue stressed here is that the Nigerian government cannot be seen to be fighting indiscipline in the Public service when the leaders are themselves swimming in indiscipline. This is only the issue of “ Do what I say and not what I do”.
The implication of the principle of Tupocracy is that the fight against indiscipline must start with leaders themselves. For instance in public office, the subordinates will find it easier to practice punctuality to work if their boss is always reporting to work on time.
But where the boss is known for habitual lateness to work and suddenly wakes up to demand punctualityfrom the subordinates, his actions will backfire negatively, and cannot produce expected result. If he resorts to imposing sanctions, that will destroy the morale of the workers and thus affect or reduce their productivity.
Therefore, the issue of reorientation, mobilization or even war against indiscipline should be a wholesome exercise. It should be encompassing. Infact the political class, that is ,political appointees and elective officers of the government should not be exempted from this fight. They should be properly sensitized the moment they assume office. As for the public/civil servants, they should also be sensitized for change along the ranks. Those at the top should be encouraged to lead by example. By this lifestyle leadership or leading by example, the expected change can easily be achieved.


CONCLUSION
The crafting of “Tupocracy”, leadership by example by Rev. Amaowoh is revolutionary. All societies and organizations that are involved in fighting indiscipline or corruption generally need to apply the tenets of the concept. Then the results will be obvious. The desired change in an organization comes faster by the example of the boss than so much talking or even attempt to employ sanctions.
It is expected that the leadership of the Nigerian public/civil service and the political class will take the lead in a self-cleansing exercise as a fight against indiscipline and then the subordinates will follow.








REFERENCES
1. Chinua Achebe (1986). The trouble with Nigeria. Italey court, Jordan hill, Oxford Ox2, Bej, Heinemann.
2. Godwin Akpan Amaowoh (2008). Tupocracy. Leadership by Example for the church and Civil Society. Eket Big Hands Int. Ltd.
3. Malfarland, D. E. (1979). Management: Foundations and Practices. 5th Edition. New York Macmillan
4. Ochai, B. (1984) “War Against Indiscipline in Nigeria” in New Nigeria Newspaper of 19/5/1984
5. Osezua M. Ehiyaman, Abah O. Emmanuel and Daniel E. Gberevbie(2009) Staff Indiscipline and productivity in the Public sectors in Nigeria. African Research Review(An International Multi-Disciplinary Journal-Ethiopia Vol 3(4) 2009.
6. Popoola Emmanuel , et al . (2005) Indiscipline and low Productivity in Nigeria Civil Service: causes and Strategies for eradication. In proceedings of the International Academic conference for Sub Sahara African Transformation and Development, Vol 3 No4, March, 12-13 2015. University of Illorin, Nigeria.
7. Training Manual. National Workshop on Financial and Economic Crimes, Anti corruption, fiscal responsibility and good governance for staff and Local governments Officials . organized by House of representative Committee on Crimes.