International Journal of Public Administration

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpad20

Bureaucracy and Policy Implementation in

Democratic Governance: A Focus on Nigeria’s
Fourth Republic

Kehinde John Adegbite, Lawal Ayofe Bakare, A. Abdulfatah Raji & Tadese A.
Raheem

To cite this article: Kehinde John Adegbite, Lawal Ayofe Bakare, A. Abdulfatah Raji & Tadese
A. Raheem (2021): Bureaucracy and Policy Implementation in Democratic Governance:
A Focus on Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, International Journal of Public Administration, DOI:
10.1080/01900692.2021.1947318

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1947318

Published online: 06 Jul 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 16

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lpad20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1947318

Bureaucracy and Policy Implementation in Democratic Governance: A Focus on

Nigeria’s Fourth Republic
Kehinde John Adegbitea, Lawal Ayofe Bakareb, A. Abdulfatah Rajib, and Tadese A. Raheemb
a
Department of Social Sciences, Public Administration Unit, Distance Learning Institute, University of Lagos, Yaba, Lagos State, Nigeria;
b
Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Fountain University, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The study investigated the roles of bureaucracy in Nigeria and its inadequacies in adhering to the Bureaucracy; policy; good
Weberian model of policy implementation in the Nigeria democratic governance. The study governance; administration;
adopted a survey research design and utilized primary data obtained through the administration Democracy
of questionnaires to a purposively selected 220 respondents comprising senior bureaucrats and
CSOs, and conduct of the in-depth interview. The data were analyzed using descriptive analysis
with the aid of SPSS. The study revealed that even though, bureaucrats are not necessarily the
primary makers of the policy. They play an active role in policy implementation in Nigeria. However,
factors such as political pressure, inadequate budgetary allocation, over politicization of the
appointment into governmental offices leading to inadequate professionalism, and environmental
variables hinder the effective implementation of policy in Nigeria. It was equally established that as
ideal as the Weberian model of bureaucracy is, there are inevitable lacuna and inadequacies in its
application to Nigeria, due to factors such as socio-cultural forces, collectivism as against individu­
alism, and absolute formalism. The study concluded that, although Weberian bureaucracy could be
ideal and applicable to large-scale economy, its model is inadequate in addressing all the needs and
circumstances of Nigeria. Hence, the need to restructure or readjust the bureaucracy to adapt to
new and complex problems becomes apparent.

Introduction
It is axiomatic to posit that bureaucracy occupies
a prominent position in the governance of modern
state since modern state structure cannot function with­
out a bureaucratic apparatus. As such, Popoola (2016)
posit that it is uncertain that “any modern industrial
society could manage the daily operation of its public
affairs without bureaucratic organizations in which offi­
cials play a major policy-making role”
Ake (1981) observed that when administrative pro­
cesses in developing countries are analyzed from
a Western viewpoint as couched in colonial language,
there is a high predisposition to misconstrue the princi­
ples, the purposes and processes of public administra­
tion in emerging nations because they see Africa
through operationally defined ideas such as the state,
civil society, and bureaucracy abstracted from Western
experience, which skews their perception.
The return to the fourth Republic in 1999 was expected
to mark a positive implication in the process of designing
and most importantly implementing policy in Nigeria.
Conventionally, policies are conceived by the political
office holders or the executives (ministers), after receiving
input from other non-formal state actors such as pressure
groups, media, and public, processed and implemented
through state machinery and bureaucrats (Popoola,
2016). This however is well experienced under democratic
governance where the various apparatus of government is
well established and functionally present. This traditional
government arrangement and of course, modern system
of governance goes contrary to the dictatorial system of
administration often exhibited by the military. The mili­
tary, being an authoritarian government, do not adopt the
traditional policy making process, they do not possess the
required will to interact adequately with the people for the
purpose of generating ideas, they thus, depend on the
bureaucrats to offer policies and refer it to them for
endorsement (Babawale, 2003). However, since the
bureaucrats usually have more resourceful participation
in policy making and implementation process under
democratic governance than any other system of govern­
ment, this study focuses on the bureaucrats’ influence on
policy implementation under democratic governance in
the fourth Republic of Nigeria.

CONTACT Lawal Ayofe Bakare awalbakr1434@gmail.com Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Fountain University, Osogbo,
Osun State, Nigerai.
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 K. J. ADEGBITE ET AL.

Statement of the Problem bureaucracy has been a subject of repetitive criticisms

and has assumed varying dispositions among various
Bureaucracy, as proposed by Weber is presumed to be
scholars (Osawe, 2015). As such, Akindele et al. (2002)
idyllic to all large organization and societies. Yet, evi­
assert that bureaucracy is an indecisive term that attracts
dence from scholarly works indicates that Weber’s phi­
different views. It could entail organisations of govern­
losophy does not uniformly apply to all societies,
mental activities or the administrative system of the civil
possibly due to differences in culture, values and
service (Olajide & Ibietan, 2016). It could also imply the
specificities.
formal approach for carrying out the functions of
Despite the importance of the bureaucracy (public
government.
service) in policy implementation, in the Nigeria
Nwankwo et al. (2015) perceives bureaucracy as an
bureaucracy has over the years recorded a history of
orderly arrangement that exist in organisations based on
woeful catastrophe in the area of policy implementation
a line of authority and division of labour embedded in
(Olaopa, 2014). The Nigeria civil service has often come
the work system. Gbenga and Ariyo (2006, p. 7),
under heavy condemnation for poor organization/per­
described the concept as “the apparatus which consists
formance, poor planning, overstaffing, indiscipline, red
of the professionals, workers who are subjected to hier­
tapism, undue secrecy, insensitivity, rigidity, over-
archical supervision and carrying out their duties in an
centralization, apathy, incompetence, corruption,
organized manner backed by rules and regulations from
favouritism, impoliteness, and imperiousness,
their superiors”. In this regard, bureaucrats are recog­
(Adamolekun, 2002). It appears that the ideal principle
nized by their activities in formal and public organisa­
of bureaucracy which requires competency and appro­
tions, they are the formal employees of the government
priateness in the discharge of duty have not been well
who were selected not on political patronage, but based
imbued in the Nigeria bureaucracy or have been eroded
on their expertise, experience and service they can ren­
owing to faulty recruitment patterns, which is character­
der. Bureaucracy also signifies the system of authority
ized by favouritism rather than competence.
that exists between men, offices and methods that gov­
Furthermore, the level of understanding of bureaucratic
ernment uses to implement its programmes (Eme &
roles and the extent of acceptability to discharge those
Onwuka, 2010). In a nutshell, the term bureaucracy
roles are questionable among the Nigerian bureaucracy.
refers to the machinery of government put in place to
The poor performance of bureaucracy in Nigeriais often
implement the decisions and policies of government.
witnessed in the poor implementation of public policy.
As noted by Makinde (2017), Nigeria has witnessed
a number of policies which are well designed and Concept of public policy
encompassing, but have failed to address the main issues
The nature of policy is very broad because it encom­
and intentions they were meant to address. She noted
passes personal, group, private through public policies.
further deplorable situation of Nigeria as a state can be
Of interest to this study however is ‘public policy’ which
attributable to the faulty policy design compounded
is what any government chooses as guidance for its
with poor implementation, resulting in policy summer­
action A public policy may be applied to all people in
sault. In Nigeria, there is fundamental lacuna in the
a country or it may be limited to a section of the people
operation of the bureaucracy to achieve this ideal
(Sapru, 2008). Ikelegbe (2006:3), defines policy as “the
(Adebayo, 2011). Thus, this study investigates the roles
unified course and programmes of action that govern­
of bureaucracy and its inadequacies in adhering to the
ment has set and the framework or guide it has designed
Weberian model in the implementation of public policy
to direct action and practices in certain problem area. In
in democratic governance of Nigeria. This will thus
essence, a public policy is a course setting action that
provide expositions of the clear roles of bureaucracy
provides the direction, the guide and the way to the
and its proper structure for effective performance.
achievement of certain goals or objectives desired by
government.
Conceptual review The policy processes in a democratic environment is
fundamentally different from processes involved in
Bureaucracy
autocratic environment. For example, the three arms of
Bureaucracy as a concept is a derivative from two Greek government: legislature, executive and judiciary, are
words which are “bureau” implying office and “Kratos” involved in the policy making process in a democratic
implying rule or power. Therefore, the term “bureau­ dispensation which allows for broader political inclu­
cracy” is used to refer the power of the office (Wasim sion. Also, policy implementers consist of other bodies
2011, Olajide & Ibietan, 2016). The concept of beyond arms or levels of government and governmental

bodies to include media, political parties, interest
groups, advocacy groups who are also policy
implementers.
Governance
Governance has attracted varying views in literature and
carries a variety of definitions (Okotoni, 2006). The
concept of governance owing to its multifaceted inter­
twining of “economic, political and social aspects of
a Nation” (Shehu, 1999), has not been acquiescent to
easy or simplistic definition. Bakare (2016) citing World
Bank (1992) views governance from power viewpoint,
defining it as “the manner in which power is exercised in
the management of a country’s economic and social
resources for development.” Although governance has
a wide range of meanings and applications, there are
some key elements of governance that most scholars
who use the concept tend to agree upon (Turnhout &
Van der Zouwen 2010). These key elements are: the
increased participation of non-state actors, the devolu­
tion of decision making, and the appearance of new
modes of navigation by central authorities. These ele­
ments are used both prescriptively – as ways to achieve
good governance – and descriptively – as empirical
manifestations of a changed political landscape and of
the new methods by which societies are governed.
Therefore, they can be invoked both as policy instru­
ments to achieve democratic norms and as analytical
concepts to describe governance.
Empirical review and gap
Ogunrotifa (2013) identified Nigeria’s bureaucratic
drawbacks as due to the Weberian model which places
less emphasis on the lack of democratic decision making
process in such a bureaucracy. He however fails to
elaborate on how democratic decision-making process
can make bureaucracy better. If the Weberian model
guarantees technical superiority over other systems
then Ogunrotifa is mistaken not to have seen the draw­
back as a function of the personnel and not the system
itself.
Olugbenga (2007) criticized the Weberian bureau­
cracy because of its ecological irrelevance to Nigeria
and Africa but failed to identify a suitable model of
administration that will conform to Nigeria’s and
Africa’s ecological idiosyncrasies. Public service reforms
have been criticized because they have not achieved
much in developing our public institutions (Eme &
Ugwu, 2011; Lawal & Tobi, 2006, Anggraeni, 2014).
Instead of reforms, Nigeria should look at its state
structure (Eme & Ugwu, 2011). Institution building
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 3
and strengthening has better prospects for building
effective bureaucracies compared to face lifting reforms
(Lawal & Tobi, 2006). Anggraeni’s argument that suc­
cessful reforms help bring public service quality is
faulted on the basis of his using just one ministry for
his analysis. The analysis of the Ministry of focus is too
minimal to judge the entire public landscape of the
Nigeria’s public administration.
Ilufoye (2011) and Enahoro (2016) have reviewed
bureaucracy and governance and come to the conclu­
sion that governance is key to bureaucratic role but
Enahoro could not establish critical reasons why bureau­
crats are yet to grasp the tenets of governance despite
almost sixty years of independence while Ilufoye could
not find reasons to blame bureaucracy for its inability to
support the political elite with needed administrative
governance that will impact on its citizens. Sapru
(2016) detailed work on policy and bureaucracy is con­
sistent with the argument in this research but the use of
India as the only case study of policy implementation
and policy making limits the empirical study from
appealing to a wider audience who would have loved
to see cases from other related societies.
Sharma & Mitra (2015) could easily be dismissed as
too academic given the practical nature of their study.
The thoughts and argument of the authors makes the
field of policy and policy studies in democracy look
more like a normative academic exercise despite it
being a scientific field of enquiry with scientific values
just as in political science.
Although, Olaopa (2016), raised the bar of his argu­
ment by considering political and economic institu­
tional synergies in a bureaucracy, he however failed to
give particular reference to Nigeria and case studies
related to its policy dysfunction. The issue of institu­
tional synergy is commended but how does it work in
reality with respect to Nigeria’s bureaucracy, policy pro­
cess and democratic governing experience. Therefore,
there is lacuna with regard to the exploration of bureau­
cratic influence on the police implementation in Nigeria.
Theoretical framework
This study is anchored on the Systems’ Theory. The
system theory conceives public policy as the response
of political system to demands from its environment.
The system theory is hinged on the input-output model
developed in social sciences by Ludwig Von Bertalanffy,
and Kenneth Boulding who revived system theory and
renewed interest in 1960s by applying the systems
approach. The theory assumed that there is mutual
relationship between public policy and environmental
variables.
4 K. J. ADEGBITE ET AL.
The inputs consist of the demands that emanate from
the environment, which are fed into the political system
(conversion) by the masses. The conversion mechanism
involves the political decision maker or policy makers
who work on demands made. The output consists of the
policy implementation or those things done in pursu­
ance of policy decisions and statement issued by the
political system. The feedback mechanisms are the
intended and unintended consequences of policies for
society. This determines whether more demand will be
made or whether more support is needed.
The system theory may be considered as the analysis
of a system to identify the variables that are controllable
and uncontrollable and to determine how the system
actually operates. Equally important is the relationship
between the political system and the environment.
Positive correlation means that the demands that ema­
nate from the environment influenced the policy state­
ments of the political system. On the other hand, the
policy outputs determine the policy outcome which in
turn determines the input. The variables in policy cycle
are interdependent in nature.
Most social policies in Nigeria are as a result of inputs
from the political system. Examples include the Pension
Reform Act (PRA) of 2004 and the Health Insurance Act
of 2005 (NHIS) to mention a few. The PRA of 2004 was
born out of the inadequacy of the Defined Benefit
Scheme (DBS), which was plagued with the shortage of
budgetary release relative to benefits, which resulted into
unprecedented and unattainable outstanding pension
deficit estimated at over N2trillion before 2004
(Balogun, 2006). The yearnings from the polity repre­
sent the input demand. The output is a typical govern­
ment policy evident in the PRA of 2004, once the policy
is implemented; the subsequent reaction from the envir­
onment has given credible feedback to the government
which has necessitated a reform policy of 2014.
Therefore, the general system theory helps to prove
efficacy of input/output mechanism in every polity.
The environmental feedback are reactions, which deter­
mine the continuation, revision or termination of poli­
cies of government after thorough consideration of
policy reactions from the environment.
Methodology
The research strategy adopted for this study was a mixed
method design. A representative percentage of the whole
population was selected for the study. well-structured
questionnaires and in-depth interviews of selected
respondents. The population consist of senior the civil
and public servants in the Federal bureaucracy which
include the staff on GL 07 and above of the Federal
Ministry of information (182), water resources (153),
communication (112), power, works and housing
(314), women affairs (102) and Justice (192) totaling
1055. These categories of people were considered impor­
tant to be included in this study because they are
involved in the implementation of policies. Both strati­
fied and simple random techniques were used to select
120 respondents inclusive of the bureaucrats from var­
ious federal ministries and members of members of Civil
Society Organizations that specialize on policy and gov­
ernance, for questionnaire administration. In addition
to questionnaire administration, an in-depth interview
was equally conducted on six (6) Directors of the
selected Ministries. Thus, the study relied on primary
data obtained through the administration of question­
naires and the conduct of interviews. The data were
analysed using descriptive analysis with the aid of SPSS.
Findings
Evaluation of the roles of bureaucracy in
government policy implementation in Nigeria
The major role of bureaucracy in public policy has been
identified in literature as implemental of policy and
provision of expertise in its formulation. This section
thus, evaluates the extent at which these roles have been
performed in government policy implementation in
Nigeria.
NB: Percentage values are put in parenthesis
VE = Very Effective; E = Effective; IE = Ineffective;
VI = Very Ineffective; NP = Not Performed
A number of roles have been proffered in literature as
the roles of the bureaucrats with regard to policy for­
mulation and implementation. While some roles are
well known to the bureaucrats, the tendency that many
other roles are not even known to them cannot be
denied. In the same vein, the public service rules of
Nigeria clearly specify a number of roles expected of
public servants while some other roles, even, clearly
established in literature, are excluded. Again, to better
appreciate the impact of bureaucracy on policy imple­
mentation, especially, in a nearly young democratic
country, Nigeria, the specific roles of bureaucrats need
to be well investigated and the extent at which these
roles are performed need to be evaluated. Therefore,
this section evaluated the roles of bureaucrats in policy
administration and the extent at which the roles have
been carried out.
As indicated in Table 1, provision of expertise for
effective implementation of policy in the country was
largely considered as part of the roles of bureaucrats in
Nigeria. This is well supported by 79 respondents
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 5

Table 1. Role of bureaucracy in government policy implementation in Nigeria.

VE EF VI NP
Items (%) (%) IE (%) (%) (%) Mean
Provision of expertise for effective implementation of policy in the country 23 45 9 2 12 2.67
(25.3) (49.5) (9.9) (2.2) (13.2)
Ensuring timely processing of policy to avoid redundancy 18 14 2 29 28 2.20
(19.8) (15.4) (2.2) (31.9) (30.8)
Adhering strictly to the rule and standard to ensure procedural implementation and performance of policy 8 7 4 42 30 1.84
(8.8) (7.7) (4.4) (46.2) (33.0)
Ensuring judicious utilization of resources to avoid wastage while implementing the policy 30 38 9 6 8 2.79
(33.0) (41.8) (9.9) (6.6) (8.8)
Strictly adheres to the principles of equity in the discharge of service and distribution of wealth of the country to 14 32 16 8 21 2.08
avoid nepotism (15.4) (35.2) (17.6) (8.8) (23.1)
Proper monitoring of the policy implementation to avoid loss of focus and achieve desirable outcome 37 34 6 7 7 2.98
(40.7) (37.4) (6.6) (7.7) (7.7)
Provides necessary information to guide the executive arm without usurping executive power 27 44 9 9 2 2.86
(29.7) (48.4) (9.9) (9.9) (2.2)
Proper perusal of policy framework to identify loopholes, incoherency and inconsistency in policy formulation 36 28 12 4 11 2.71
(39.6) (30.8) (13.2) (4.4) (12.1)
Bureaucrats are not necessarily the major actors in policy implementation in Nigeria 17 46 5 11 12 2.64
(18.7) (50.5) (5.5) (12.1) (13.2)
Source: Computed from field survey, (2018)

representing 87% while only 13% of the respondents
consider this role to be outside the expected roles of
the bureaucrats. Considering the 87% respondents who
support this role as being part of the roles performed by
the bureaucrats, then, the next thing is to evaluate the
extent of the performance of this role. As equally indi­
cated in the Table with respect to the first assertion,
majority of the respondents 50% believe that the bureau­
crats have effectively performed the role of providing
expertise for effective implementation of policy in the
country while 25% of the respondents indicated that this
role has been very effectively performed by the bureau­
crats. Only very few respondents, 10% and 2% have
indicated that the role was ineffectively and very ineffec­
tively performed, respectively, by the bureaucrats. Given
this submission, it can be well established that not only
the role of providing expertise for effective implementa­
tion of policy in the country, the role was considered to
have been effectively performed by the bureaucrats.
In the same vein, 63 respondents representing about
69%, which the majority of the respondents, indicated
that ensuring timely processing of policy to avoid redun­
dancy is among the roles performed by the bureaucrats
while only 28(13.2%) respondents indicated that this
role is not performed by the bureaucrats. This thus
imply that the bureaucrats perform the role of ensuring
timely processing of policy to avoid redundancy in pol­
icy implementation. However, considering the extent at
which this role is performed by the bureaucrats, the
majority of those who believe that the role is performed
by the bureaucrats however, indicated that the role is
very ineffectively performed (32%). Only 19.8% respon­
dents believe that the role of ensuring timely processing
of policy to avoid redundancy in policy implementation
is very effectively performed while 15% considered the
role to be effectively performed. This therefore implies
that, though, the role of ensuring timely processing of
policy to avoid redundancy in policy implementation is
among the roles performed by the bureaucrats, it is very
ineffectively performed in Nigeria.
It is axiomatic that the bureaucrats work within the
realm of law and regulations. To this end, part of the
expected role of the bureaucrats would be adhering
strictly to the rule and standard to ensure procedural
implementation and performance of policy. As con­
tained in Table 4.6, 61 respondents representing 67%
of the total respondents indicated that the bureaucrats in
Nigeria performed the role of adhering strictly to the
rule and standard to ensure procedural implementation
and performance of policy while about 50% of this figure
indicated that the bureaucrats do not perform such role.
However, even, given the majority of the respondents
who believe that the role is being performed, about 46%
of the respondents believe that this role, though being
performed, is very ineffectively performed by the
bureaucrats. This therefore suggest that the bureaucrats
in Nigeria do not effectively adhere strictly to the rule
and standard to ensure procedural implementation and
performance of policy.
The policy implementation process is the issue of
effective utilization of the available resources. Since the
bureaucrats are the supposed implementers of policy,
they are equally expected to implement the policy as
economic as designed to avoid possible wastage. In this
regard, as indicated in Table 1, more than 90% of the
respondents agree that the Nigerian bureaucrats per­
form the role of ensuring judicious utilization of
resources to avoid wastage while implementing the pol­
icy while less than 10% rejected this assertion. From
among those agree that the bureaucrats perform this
6 K. J. ADEGBITE ET AL.
role, the majority of them 38(41.2%), indicated that the
role is effectively performed, 33% of them indicated that
the role is very effectively performed while about 15% of
them indicated that the role is not effectively performed.
It is therefore established that not only is the role of
ensuring judicious utilization of resources to avoid
wastage while implementing the policy performed by
the bureaucrats, the role is effectively performed.
Nigeria as a country is composed of regions and tribes
which are jointly entitled to the distribution of national
wealth. In this regard, the bureaucrats are expected to
exhibit the required level of equity in the distribution of
wealth. As indicated in the table, about 76% of the
sampled respondents indicated that the bureaucrats in
Nigeria perform the role of strictly adhering to the
principles of equity in the discharge of service and dis­
tribution of wealth of the country to avoid nepotism. In
the same vein, 35% of the respondents equally believe
that this role is being effectively performed by the
Nigerian federal bureaucrats and 15% of them even
agree that the role is very effectively performed. This
therefore indicates that the Nigerian federal bureaucrats
strictly adhere to the principles of equity in the discharge
of service and distribution of wealth of the country to
avoid nepotism. This, however, may be contested since it
is obvious that there is favouritism in the distribution of
resources in Nigeria. However, what this submission
here portrays is that the political office holders could
be those involved in the favouritism while the bureau­
crats only implement what is designed for them by the
politicians.
When the policy is well implemented, the next respon­
sibility is to ensure that the policy is equally well monitored
to sustain the realization of the aims of the policy. Thus, as
indicated in Table 1, almost all the sampled respondents
indicated that the Nigerian federal bureaucrats ensure
proper monitoring of the policy implementation to avoid
loss of focus and achieve the desired outcome. In the same
spirit, more than 77% of the respondents indicated that the
bureaucrats very effectively ensure proper monitoring of
the policy implementation to avoid loss of focus and
achieve the desired outcome. This shows that the federal
bureaucrats in Nigeria ensure effective proper monitoring
of the policy implementation to avoid loss of focus and
achieve the desired outcome.
The provision of the necessary information to guide
the executive arm without usurping executive power is
among the key expected roles of the bureaucrats, espe­
cially, in the developed countries as indicated in the
literature. This is well established in Table 1, as almost
all the sampled respondents (97%) asserted that the
bureaucrats of the Nigeria federal government provide
necessary information to guide the executive arm
without usurping executive power. It is equally estab­
lished in the table that this role is performed very effec­
tively (29.7%) and effectively (48.4%). This is an
evidence that shows that the Nigerian federal bureau­
crats ensure the provision of the necessary information
to guide the executive arm of government and do not
usurp executive power while performing this role.
As part of the interrogation of the possible roles of
bureaucrats in policy administration or implementation,
identification of loopholes, incoherency, and inconsis­
tency in policy implementation may either be performed
by the politicians and/or bureaucrats. In this regard, as
contained in Table 1, more than 80% of respondents
indicated that the bureaucrats in the federal government
of Nigeria perform the role of giving proper perusal of
policy framework to identify loopholes, incoherency,
and inconsistency in policy formulation. Also, not only
that the bureaucrats perform this role, they equally per­
form it effectively, as indicated by 30% of the respon­
dents and very effectively as indicated by 40% of the
sampled respondents. This, therefore, shows that the
federal government bureaucrats in Nigeria perform the
role of giving proper perusal of policy framework to the
policy handed over to them to identify loopholes, inco­
herency, and inconsistency in policy formulation and in
fact, perform this role very effectively.
Educating new political office holders and bringing
them in when they first come to the government is
another important role expected of the bureaucrats.
This is because they are the set of people that have the
information about the office and are in better to benefit
the political office holders about the needs and respon­
sibilities of the office. Many politicians come with pre­
conceived ideas, some arrive in the ministries with some
ideas or philosophies which they consider to be
a wonderful innovation. In this regard, as contained in
Table 1, most of the sampled respondents indicated that
the Nigeria federal bureaucrats effectively perform the
role of educating new political office holders and bring­
ing them in when they first come to the government.
Analysis of interview responses on the role of
bureaucracy in government policy
implementation in Nigeria
To further establish the basis for either validating or inva­
lidating all the submissions gotten from a qualitative ana­
lysis of the questionnaire responses indicated above, this
section presents the content analysis of the responses
obtained through the interviews. As part of their responses
to the roles of bureaucrats in policy implementation in
Nigeria, one of the interviewed, Mrs. Olabode, a Director
in the Ministry of Health, stated that
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 7

we civil servants play a very important role in policy
implementation in Nigeria because we also play a vital
role in policy formulation. Apart from making the ideas
of those in government possible by concretizing it into
policies, we also liaise with other policy implementers
like the various arms and levels of government, govern­
mental bodies, non-governmental organizations, inter­
est groups, advocacy groups, etc in ensuring proper and
comprehensive implementation of governmental poli­
cies” (Respondent 2/Female/Bureaucrats)
In the same vein, other interviewees jointly stated that
the bureaucrats serve as advisers to their ministers at the
federal level and commissioners in the state. The civil
service stores government information and possesses the
professional and technical expertise and experience in
government business. Armed with these rare attributes,
the civil servants are well placed to advise their political
masters on complex issues of government.
However, the extent of performance of these roles has
been adjudged to be abysmally low. Many of the members
of CSOs interviewed observed that the federal bureaucrats
have been characterized with inept and underperforming,
and they associate this low performance to factors such as
nepotism during recruitment, unprofessionalism, inade­
quate training, and frequent political interference.
From all the indications shown above, it can be well
established that even though, bureaucrats are not neces­
sarily the makers of the policy, they however play major
actors in policy implementation in Nigeria. However,
factors such as political pressure, inadequate budgetary
allocation, over politicization of the appointment into
governmental offices leading to inadequate profession­
alism, environmental variables, and foreign influence,
among others hinder the effective implementation of
policy in Nigeria.
Research question 2
What are the inadequacies in strict adherence to rules
and regulations of bureaucracy (Weberian) model in
policy implementation in Nigeria?
As established in the literature and as indicated in the
roles of bureaucrats in policy implementation above,
there are instances whereby some of the bureaucratic
characteristics including the impersonal rules, hierarchy,
and centralization of decision-making might lead to the
inability of the organization to correct or change its
behavior by learning from its previous mistakes while
serving the society. As hinted by (Stillman, 2000, 52),
ingredients of bureaucracy may not, always, help orga­
nizations or society to reach its ideal work or the most
efficient performance. Thus, this section answers
the second research question of this study which borders
on the possible inadequacies of Weberian bureaucracy
as it relates to the policy implementation in Nigeria.
Table 2 presents the analysis of data on the inadequa­
cies in strict adherence to rules and regulations of
bureaucracy (Weberian) model in policy implementa­
tion in Nigeria. The level of agreement and acceptability
to each of the assertions was measured by the mean
value of the response to each of the assertions. The
decision rule is that if the mean value is greater than
2.5 (x2 > 2.5) accept the assertion a being true, otherwise,
reject the assertion. The results of the analysis are shown
in the Tables as follow:

Table 2. Inadequacies in Weberian’s bureaucracy model in policy implementation in Nigeria.

SA SD
Items (%) A (%) U (%) (%) D (%) Mean Remarks
There are no standardized ways of assessing the bureaucracy in Nigeria 25 43 7 5 11 2.75 Accepted
(27.5) (47.3) (7.7) (5.5) (12.1)
Bureaucrat’s implementation of government policies is determined mostly by rationality 22 28 16 12 13 2.30 Accepted
(24.2) (30.8) (17.6) (13.2) (14.3)
Nigerian tradition demands for both vertical and horizontal communication as against the adoption 30 35 7 9 10 2.78 Accepted
of vertical communication channels only as stipulated and specified in the Weberian model. (33.0) (38.5) (7.7) (9.9) (11.0)
Policy implementation direction is determined by the party in power and not the rationality of the 38 34 6 7 6 3.01 Accepted
bureaucrat (41.8) (37.4) (6.6) (7.7) (6.6)
The weberian bureaucratic model does not take enough cognizance 31 30 15 6 9 2.58 Accepted
of how culture determines or influences organizational behaviour vis a vis work relationships, values, (34.1) (33.0) (16.5) (6.6) (9.9)
norms, and ethics
Weberian bureaucracy there is a strong emphasis on formal relationship whereas the Nigerian 21 54 9 3 4 2.81 Accepted
culture recognizes the informal aspects of social life (23.1) (59.3) (9.9) (3.3) (4.4)
Nigerian society is built on the “we or the collective tradition” which negates the “I or the 47 36 3 5 - 3.36 Accepted
individualistic tradition” specified in the Weberian model (51.6) (39.6) (3.3) (5.5)
Application of the Weberian Model in policy implementation has been affected by socio-cultural 10 35 33 6 7 1.80 Rejected
forces (11.0) (38.5) (36.3) (6.6) (7.7)
The ideal Weberian bureaucracy will achieve a better result in policy implementation 22 37 26 3 3 2.29 Accepted
(24.2) (40.7) (28.6) (3.3) (3.3)
Source: Computed from field survey, (2019)
SA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, U = Undecided, SD = Strongly Disagree, and D = Disagree
8 K. J. ADEGBITE ET AL.
Table 2 presents the frequency and percentage dis­
tributions on each assertion. Concerning the first asser­
tion, 25 (27.5%) respondents strongly agreed, 43 (47.3%)
agreed that there are no standardized ways of assessing
the bureaucracy in Nigeria while 7 (7.7%) could not
decide, 5 (5.5%) strongly disagreed and 11 (11.1%) dis­
agreed that there are no standardized ways of assessing
the bureaucracy in Nigeria. Given the majority of the
respondents that agreed to this assertion, it implies
therefore that there are no specific standardized ways
of evaluating bureaucracy in Nigeria (� � = 2.75). This
assertion was accepted since the mean value is greater
than 2.25.
On the second assertion, 22 (24.2%) respondents
strongly agreed, 28 (30.8%) agreed, 16 (17.6%) could
not decide, 12 (13.2%) strongly disagreed, and 13
(14.3%) disagreed that bureaucrat’s implementation of
government policies is determined mostly by rationality.
This is an indication that rationality determines the
bureaucrats’ implementation of government policy in
Nigeria ð� � = 2.30). This assertion was accepted since
the mean value is greater than 2.25. This rationality is
well pronounced in Weberian bureaucracy and this
result has indicated that rationality is not an inadequacy
or deterrent to bureaucratic workings in Nigeria.
As noted in the introduction to this study, Nigeria’s
tradition requires both vertical and horizontal commu­
nication, especially, considering the socio-cultural and
ethnic differences. Thus, as contained in the table, 30
(33%) respondents strongly agreed, 35 (38.5%) agreed to
the assertion that Nigerian tradition demands for both
vertical and horizontal communication as against the
adoption of vertical communication channels only as
stipulated and specified in the Weberian model, while
9 (9.9%) strongly disagreed and 10 (11.0%) disagreed
that to this assertion and 7 (7.7%) could not decide. This
assertion was accepted since the mean value is greater
than 2.25. This is an indication that the vertical commu­
nication feature of Weberian bureaucracy is deficient in
addressing the socio-cultural needs of Nigeria.
Weberian bureaucracy is based on the principle of
formality and any informal relationship is rejected. This
is thus investigated to see whether this conforms to the
Nigeria situation. Based on the fifth assertion, 31
(34.1%) respondents strongly agreed, 30 (33%) agreed,
15 (16.5%) could not decide, 6 (6.6%) strongly disagreed
and 9 (9.9%) disagreed that the Weberian bureaucratic
model does not take enough cognizance of how culture
determines or influences organizational behaviour vis
a vis work relationships, values, norms, and ethics ð� � properly applied, this study argues that better outcome is
= 2.58). This, therefore, indicates that absolute formality
is among the inadequacies of the bureaucracy in Nigeria
because the Nigeria culture and ethnical composition
require both formal and informal procedures to enhance
proper implementation of the policy. For instance,
where the speaking of a specific ethnical language will
facilitate speedy performance of an act, especially, in
a region that is dominated by many people that could
not make proper use of formal language.
As regards with the sixth assertion, 37 (40.7%)
respondents strongly agreed, 34 (37.4%) agreed, 6
(6.6%) could not decide, 7 (7.7%) strongly disagreed
and 7 (7.7%) disagreed that bureaucracy slows down
policy implementation in Nigeria ð� � = 2.98). This indi­
cates that bureaucracy is another major factor affecting
the timely implementation of policy in Nigeria. This
assertion was accepted since the mean value is greater
than 2.25.
Weberian bureaucracy has equally been identified
with the individualistic approach to issue based on the
rule of office. In this regard, 21 (23.1%) respondents
strongly agreed, 54 (59.3%) agreed, 9 (9.9%) could not
decide, 3 (3.3%) strongly disagreed and 4 (4.4%) dis­
agreed that Nigerian society is built on the “we or the
collective tradition” which negates the “I or the indivi­
dualistic tradition” specified in the Weberian model ð��
= 2.81). This indicates that the concept of individualism
is another major inadequacy of the Weberian bureau­
cracy in Nigeria. Collectivism as against individualism
As ideal as the Weberian bureaucracy can be and is,
there are inevitable lacuna and inadequacies, especially
when considered in line with the diversity and compo­
nents of the government of Nigeria. Thus, considering
this fact and preceding indications, the majority of the
respondents agreed that the Weberian Model in policy
implementation has been affected by socio-cultural
forces. As indicated in the table, 47 (51.6%) respondents
strongly agreed, 36 (39.6%) agreed, 3 (3.3%) could not
decide, and 5 (5.5%) strongly disagreed that application
of the Weberian Model in policy implementation has
been affected by socio-cultural forces ð� � = 3.36). This
indicates the Weberian bureaucracy is devoid of socio-
cultural forces and does not accommodate the social
values upon which Nigeria is developed. The country is
zcharacterized by a very sharp and distinguishable set of
cultures, values, and traditions, and all these are brought
together to become a country within which a single
rational value is to be enforced upon all. This is part of
the inadequacies and deficiencies of the model in
Nigeria.
However, considering the potential of Weberian
bureaucracy at achieving better result when duly and
achievable from the application of Weberian bureau­
cracy in the government dealings. It proclaims imparti­
ality and procedural in discharging the duties and

allocating the values. This is well established in this
study as the majority of the sampled respondents agreed
to this submission. As contained in the table, 38 (41.8%)
respondents strongly agreed, 34 (37.4%) agreed, 6 (6.6%)
could not decide, 7 (7.7%) strongly disagreed and
6 (6.6%) disagreed that the ideal Weberian bureaucracy
will achieve a better result in policy implementation
ð�� = 2.29). This assertion was accepted since it has
a mean value greater than 2.25.
Analysis of interview responses on the
inadequacies of the Weberian bureaucracy
model in policy implementation in Nigeria
Evidence from primary and secondary sources reveal
that Weberian bureaucracy may be inadequate in its
application to all situations in Nigeria particularly.
Ogunrotifa (2013) in examining the Max Weber’s theory
of bureaucracy and its application to the Nigerian public
argued that the major drawbacks of Weberian bureau­
cracy for policy implementations are the lack of demo­
cratic input in the decision-making processes and the
concrete tendency of employees to carry out a policy
once it had been hierarchically imposed.
Thus, to complement the responses from question­
naires, interviews were equally conducted to either vali­
date or invalidate the submission arising from the
questionnaire responses. An undue and strict adherence
to rules, regulations in carrying out policies which is red
tapism at its peak has a way of causing failure due to
blocking the adaptability of bureaucrats to the dynamics
of environmental vicissitudes.
A bureaucrat interviewed, a Director in the Ministry
of Finance, stated that
we bureaucrats are very important in policy implemen­
tation in Nigeria because without us policies will never
get implemented. We utilize a lot of tactics and strate­
gies to get policies implemented. We are strict in follow­
ing the rules, regulations, and procedures which gives us
our powers but at times we use our initiative to make
policy implementation easier for us and to accommo­
date those who would have been excluded if we had
followed procedures to the letter.
(Respondent 4/Male/Bureaucrats)
Anggraeni, (2014) posited that the structure of Weber’s
bureaucracy is alien to Nigeria and that a more perso­
nalized mien should be given to bureaucracy. As such he
asserted that while following rules and procedures,
bureaucrats should be more human and humane in
policy implementation. He however revealed
a misgiving that the state structure is already fraught
with corruption and that bureaucrats are likely to
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 9
express favouritism and nepotism in the name of being
dynamic and humane in the course of carrying out their
duties as much evidence shows. Given all these submis­
sions, this study argues that, although Weberian bureau­
cracy could be described as ideal and applicable to large-
scale economy, the fact remains that this presumed
model is equally inadequate in addressing all the needs
and circumstances of Nigeria.
Discussion of findings
In this study, evidence from primary and secondary
sources shows that bureaucracy plays a vital role in
government policy implementation in Nigeria. In fact
without the bureaucracy, policy implementation will be
very difficult if not impossible. In this regard, thus, the
submission in this study is consistent with the argument
of Eme and Ugwu (2011) who asserted that the success
of a developmental state is located in a professional
bureaucracy that makes and implements policies in alli­
ance with the elites. A state is developmental if the
economy is “developing” while economic success is
equated to state strength as measured by the presumed
outcomes of the state’s policies as implemented by the
bureaucracy. This shows that bureaucracy plays a very
vital role in policy implementation. However, as a result
of adherence to rules and openness to the public, Wilson
observed that “public bureaucracy in the country is
neither as rational nor predictable as Weber hoped nor
as crushing and mechanistic as he feared. It is rule-
bound without being corrupt” (Wilson quoted in
Stillman, 2000).
It is established that bureaucracy makes good govern­
ance possible because it is the main part of the imple­
mentation of the decisions or policies of the
government. Sapru (2012) however in looking at official
policymakers and policy implementers in general argued
that although all arms of government engage in policy­
making, the policymaking the role of the bureaucrats has
been condemned is many quarters because it is primarily
viewed as legislative responsibility, but the assumption
of this role by the bureaucracy arises from their admin­
istrative knowledge, status, and closeness to political
power and also because they are concerned with the
ends and not merely the means. This equally aligns
with Enahoro (2016).
However, the findings of this study are consistent
with Olugbenga (2013) who argued that the adoption
of Weber’s bureaucracy in Nigeria is the cause of the
failure in properly implementing policies by the bureau­
cracy because it fails to take into cognizance the peculiar
culture of the people and the need for innovativeness
when implementing policies. Olaopa (2014) provided
10 K. J. ADEGBITE ET AL.
crucial answers to this research question when he
asserted that public managers (bureaucrats) and their
decision-making process drive administration within
the context of governance. As hinted by Stillman,
(2000), ingredients of bureaucracy may not, always,
help organizations or society to reach its ideal work or
the most efficient performance.
This study equally supports the claim of Ogunrotifa
(2013), who argued that the major drawbacks of
Weberian bureaucracy for policy implementations are
the lack of democratic input in the decision making
processes and the concrete tendency of employees to
carry out a policy once it had been hierarchically
imposed. In the same vein, Olugbenga (2013) went
further to explain that the adoption of Weber’s bureau­
cracy in Nigeria is the cause of the failure in properly
implementing policies by the bureaucracy because it fails
to take into cognizance the peculiar culture of the people
and the need for innovativeness when implementing
policies. An undue and strict adherence to rules, regula­
tions in carrying out policies which are red tapism at its
peak has a way of causing failure due to blocking the
adaptability of bureaucrats to the dynamics of environ­
mental vicissitudes.
Weberian bureaucracy is one of the social institutions
in the society serving as an instrument of a deeper social
process that human progress and civilization depend
upon. The ill-functioning of such an institution is not
just a function of stakeholders’ ‘personalities’ but is
buried in the structure of the institution itself. Lawal
and Tobi, (2006), stated that policies are implemented
within the structured framework of the society and
results measured through the outcomes of the systems/
structures. In the Nigerian case, the adoption of the
Weberian bureaucracy hampers the efficiency with
which policies are implemented because the systems
and structures backing up the policy process capacity
of the bureaucracy are weak and faulty. Strict adherence
to rules and procedures kills initiative, wastes time,
complicates what should have been a simple process,
and excludes many beneficiaries from the policy process.
This study further established that the full applicabil­
ity of bureaucracy only appears on paper but its practice
is limited. This position coincides with the submission
of Eme and Ugwu (2011) who argued that the Weberian
bureaucracy used in Nigeria looks good on paper but its
applicability is rather problematic and has set the nation
back. Its makeup which constrains its members to
adhere strictly to rules, regulations, and procedures cre­
ates boredom and undue stress which cripples policy
implementation and makes the bureaucrat seem like
the enemies of the people. The red tapes and bottle
necks created by this rigid approach to doing business
truncates the dynamism which makes business worth
doing and leads to a higher rate of exclusion when
policies are being implemented.
Conclusion
This study has established that while some roles are
well known to the bureaucrats, the tendency that many
other roles are not even known to them cannot be
denied. Although bureaucrats are not necessarily the
primary makers of the policy, they however play major
roles in policy implementation in Nigeria. However,
factors such as political pressure, inadequate budget­
ary allocation, over politicization of the appointment
into governmental offices leading to inadequate pro­
fessionalism, environmental variables, and foreign
influence, among others hinder the effective imple­
mentation of policy in Nigeria. It was equally estab­
lished that as ideal as the Weberian model of
bureaucracy can be and is, there are inevitable lacuna
and inadequacies in its application to Nigeria, due to
factors such as socio-cultural forces, collectivism as
against individualism, and absolute formalism.
Hence, the need to restructure or readjust the bureau­
cracy to adapt to new and complex problems becomes
apparent. A comprehensive overhauling and updating
of the current Civil Service Rule to accommodate
various needs of the modern civil servant within the
context of the digital age.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
References
Adamolekun, L. (2002). Africa’s evolving career civil service
systems: Three challenges state continuity, efficient service
delivery and accountability. International Review of
Administrative Science, 68(3), 007226. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0020852302683005
Adebayo, M. (2011). No Fear: A Whistleblower's Triumph Over
Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA. Chicago Review
Press.
Ake, C. (1981). A political economy of Africa. Nigeria
Longman.
Akindele, S. T., Olaopa, O. R., & Obiyan, A. S. (2002). The theory
of public administration and its relevance to the Nigeria
Administrative Ecology. Journal of Social Science, 6(4),
247–256.
Anggraeni, D. (2014). The effect of policy implementation of
bureaucracy reform and the organizational developmentto
the public service quality in the ministry of home affairs.
International Journal of Social Sciences, 24(1), 1–22.

Babawale, T. (2003). Ecology of Nigerian Public
Administration, M.Sc, Seminar Presentation, Department
of Political Science, University of Lagos, Akoka.
Bakare, L. A. (2016). Community-wide participation and
democratic governance in Nigeria (1999-2016)
[Unpublished Thesis, submitted to Department of Public
Administration] Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife.
Balogun, J. (2006). Managing change: Steering a course
between intended strategies and unanticipated outcomes.
Long range planning, 39(1), 29–49.
Eme, O. I., & Onwuka, C. C. (2010). Bureaucracy and chal­
lenges of good governance in Nigeria. Journal of Business
and Organizational Development, 2(1), 37–50.
Eme, O. I., & Ugwu, S. C. (2011). Developmental state bureaucracy
in Nigeria: Restructuring for effectiveness (1999-2007). Arabian
Journal of Business and Management Review, 1(4), 25–28.
Enahoro, N. I. (2016). The role of bureaucracy in good
governance. International Journal of Advance Legal Studies
and Governance, 6(1), 46–54.
Gbenga, L., & Ariyo, T. (2006). Bureaucracy, corruption, good
governance and development: The challenges and prospects
of institution building in Nigeria. Journal Applied Sciences
Research, 2(2), 17–31.
Ikelegbe, A.O. (2006). Public Policy Analysis. Concepts, Issues
and Cases. Lagos: Imprint Services.
Ilufoye, O. S. (2011). Anti-corruption reforms in Nigeria:
challenges and failures. Assessment of Democratic Trends
In Nigeria, 191–209.
Lawal, O. O., & Tobi, A. A. (2006, July, 3–7). “Bureaucratic
Corruption, Good Governance, and Development: The
Challenges and prospects of institution Building in Nigeria”
[Paper Presentation]. IPSA RC4 mid-term International
conference, Abuja.
Makinde, J. T. (2017). Policy somersaults, poverty of policy
implementation and corruption”, obstacles to development
in Nigeria. An inaugural lecture delivered at Oduduwa Hall.
Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife.
Nwankwo, R. N., Ananti, M. O., & Madubueze, M. H. C.
(2015). Bureaucratic corruption and practice of public
administration in Nigeria. International Journal of
Economics Commerce and Management, 111(12), 680–696.
Ogunrotifa, A. B. (2013). Class theory of terrorism: A study of
Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria. Research on
Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(1), 27–59.
Okotoni, O. (2006). Governance, Taxation and Fiscal Policy in
Nigeria. European Journal of Social Science, 2(1), 121–135.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 11
Olajide, O., & Ibietan, O. (2016). Public bureaucracy and
service delivery in Nigeria: The neo-Weberian explanation.
The Public Administration and Social Policies Review, 2(17),
5–18.
Olaopa, T. (2014). The Nigerian civil service of the future:
A prospective analysis. Bookcraft.
Olaopa, T. (2016). Good Governance: Accountability And
Transparency For Sustainable Development In Africa.
Olugbenga, E. O. (2007). The politics of pharmaceutical reg­
ulation in Nigeria: Policy options for third world countries.
Politics, 3(8), 89–100.
Olugbenga, E. O. (2013). The politics of pharmaceutical reg­
ulation in Nigeria: Policy options for third world countries.
Politics, 3(8), 89–100.
Osawe, C. O. (2015). Nigerian public service performance in a
dysfunctional ecology: Issues, challenges and the way for­
ward. Review of public administration and management, 3
(7), 45–57.
Popoola, O. O. (2016). Actors in decision making and policy
process. Global Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Science, 5
(1), 47–51.
Sapru, R. K. (2008). Administrative Theories and Management
Practices. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.
Sapru, Y. (2012). Augmenting public service delivery through
online feedback systems. Indian Journal of Public
Administration, 66(3), 297–311.
Sapru, Y. (2016). Augmenting public service delivery through
online feedback systems. Indian Journal of Public
Administration, 66(3), 297–311.
Sharma, C., & Mitra, A. (2015). Corruption, governance and
firm performance: Evidence from Indian enterprises.
Journal of Policy Modeling, 37(5), 835–851.
Shehu, A. Y. (1999). Governance. In Governance and the
Nigerian Economy: Proceedings of the One-day Seminar
Held on 19 January, 1994 (p. 9). Nigerian Economic Society.
Stillman, R. J. (2000). The Bureaucracy Problem at DOJ. Public
Administration Review, 36(4), 429–439.
Turnhout, E., & Van der Zouwen, M. (2010). ‘Governance
without governance’: how nature policy was democra­
tized in the Netherlands. Critical Policy Studies, 4(4),
344–361.
Wasim, M. A. (2011). Organisational change and development
in the public sector: inhibiting factors in Pakistan [Doctoral
dissertation]. University of York.
World Bank. (1992). World development report 1992:
Development and the environment. The World Bank.