The Nigerian government has been reorganized several times, but the real challenge lies in making the existing machinery behave differently. The country's institutions are organized vertically through ministries and agencies, while citizens' outcomes are produced horizontally through combinations of these institutions. This creates an interinstitutional void, where no single organization has sufficient authority to make the entire chain work. As a result, institutions can perform well while the government underperforms.
The interinstitutional void leads to a situation where every participant in an execution chain can explain what they did, but nobody can satisfactorily explain why the desired outcome was not achieved. To address this issue, the government needs to distinguish between functions and outcomes. For instance, transport is a function, but reducing the cost of moving goods from Kano to Lagos is an outcome. Functions naturally belong to institutions, but outcomes often do not. The Nigerian state needs two administrative maps operating simultaneously: one for authority and another for outcomes.
A proposed solution is the National Outcome Architecture, an operating architecture imposed upon the existing government for delivering a limited number of priorities. This approach involves identifying a few critical outcomes that require coordinated action across institutional lines. The Presidency should identify perhaps five to seven outcomes that are so important that ordinary ministerial execution is insufficient. These outcomes must be specific enough to govern, such as reducing cargo dwell time at Nigerian ports or increasing non-oil exports.
Once an outcome is defined, the government should map everything that must happen for that outcome to occur. This map, called the National Dependency Map, should expose where government can fail before it actually fails. It should reveal the dependencies between agencies and the potential for failure. However, mapping dependencies without assigning responsibility is insufficient; every national outcome needs an Accountability Spine, which includes political ownership, system ownership, and a delivery mechanism.
The Accountability Spine should have a delivery mechanism capable of seeing the whole chain, detecting failure, and escalating problems that participating institutions cannot resolve by themselves. Nigeria already has a Central Results Delivery Coordination Unit, which can be evolved to perform this function. The unit should move beyond asking whether ministries are meeting their deliverables and focus on whether the systems connecting ministries are producing the intended outcomes.
Not every cross-government problem requires presidential intervention; a Coordination Ladder is needed to address different levels of coordination. Some problems require only shared information, while others require alignment of plans and timelines or collective execution. The government should use the lightest coordination mechanism capable of solving the problem and avoid responding to every interface with another committee.
The proposed reforms are critical to Nigeria's economic development and government effectiveness. The country's budget, for instance, tells us a great deal about institutions but surprisingly little about outcomes. A new approach to budgeting that focuses on outcomes and priorities is necessary to drive economic growth and development. By implementing these reforms, Nigeria can make its government more effective and efficient in delivering outcomes for its citizens.
Key points
- The Nigerian government needs to distinguish between functions and outcomes to address the interinstitutional void.
- A National Outcome Architecture and National Dependency Map are proposed to improve coordination and accountability across institutions.
- A Coordination Ladder is necessary to address different levels of coordination and ensure effective problem-solving.
