Connect with us

Opinion

Tinubu’s Ministers and Nigeria’s Dilemma

Published

on

By Reuben Abati

Yesterday, 45 Ministers took the oath of office as Ministers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria pursuant to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu exercising executive powers as granted under Section 5 of the 1999 Constitution, and in line with Section 147(3). These Ministers of the “Restored Hope Agenda”, we are told have a mandate to deliver Tinubu’s eight-point agenda as stated in his election manifesto to wit: national security, economy, agriculture, power, oil and gas, transportation, education, and healthcare, with special emphasis on economy and security.

What immediately stands out about this cabinet is that it is the largest since Nigeria’s return to civilian rule in 1999, and given Nigeria’s current economic situation, this is somewhat disappointing as it signals a resort to “big government” with heavy cost implications. President Olusegun Obasanjo began in 1999 with a cabinet of 42 Ministers (1999 – 2003), which he later reduced to 27, and had increased to 30 by the time he was leaving office in 2007. In 2007, President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua had a 39-member cabinet. President Goodluck Jonathan appointed a cabinet of 33 Ministers (2011-2014), and later 37 just before the 2015 general elections. In 2015, President Buhari appointed 36 Ministers, later increased to 42 in 2019. Although 45 Ministers were sworn in yesterday, it must be noted that President Tinubu actually nominated a total of 48 Ministers – three of whom were told to await further screening – Stella Okotete (Delta) Senator Abubakar Danladi (Taraba) and Nasir el-Rufai (Kaduna). El-Rufai has since announced that he is no longer interested with a cryptic Marley-an “Who The Cap Fits” declaration that “man to man is so unjust…your best friend could be your worst enemy”. That is another interesting matter worthy of full commentary. But if you were to add a list of 45 ministers, which may possibly increase to 48 later, to the 20 slots for Special Advisers earlier approved by the Senate for the President, and the accompanying appointment of Senior Special Assistants and Special Assistants, President Tinubu is set to run the most bloated government since 1999. This is curious in the light of the fact that many Nigerians had expected a lean government, to save costs and increase efficiency.

The current state of Nigeria’s economy is frightening, with over 113 million Nigerians living in multidimensional poverty; headline inflation at 24.08%; food inflation – 26.98%, Nigeria’s unemployment rate is about 41%, debt service to revenue ratio is calculated at about 90%, total debt is over N81 trillion, the available band for more borrowings is extremely narrow. Under such a scenario, the basic expectation would be for government to trim its size at all levels and tighten its belt. The only thing we have heard is the Federal Government asking the people to make sacrifice: fuel subsidy has been removed, resulting in increase in the pump price of fuel, the fuel exchange rate has been harmonized resulting in over 16% depreciation of the Naira, and a rampaging epidemic of empty pockets among the people, with the people trooping to the streets in Yola, Port Harcourt, Ibadan and elsewhere pleading with the government “to please allow them to “breathe”.

On top of it all, the Federal Government has announced plans to achieve an 18% tax to GDP ratio by 2024, and even if Taiwo Oyedele, the Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Tax and Fiscal Policy Reforms says this would not mean higher taxation, the simple logic is that the people would be required to make more sacrifices to help government generate much-needed revenue. What is shocking is that whereas government is imposing a regime of austerity, the Nigerian government at all levels is not showing a similar commitment in the governance process, and this much was confirmed again yesterday by the sheer size of the Federal Government. Many would recall that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abass upon assumption of office recently announced the recruitment of 33 aides! The Senate President also has a similar number of 33 aides, and in total, the 10th National Assembly members have since June appointed about 3, 000 legislative aides! It is worse at the state level. The Governor of Adamawa State, Ahmadu Fintiri recently appointed 47 media aides; the Governor of Kano State Abba Yusuf has appointed 97 persons as special advisers and assistants. In Niger state, Governor Mohammed Umaru Bago has 131 aides, all of them women. Whereas the President may claim that he is exercising his powers under the Constitution, he has in actual fact created more Ministries. Obasanjo at a time had 27 Ministers, and still fulfilled Constitutional provisions. Jonathan had 33, and still did not violate the Constitution. It is to be expected that Tinubu’s Ministers would soon announce their own aides, further bloating the size of government. Under Tinubu’s government, the cost of governance would shoot through the roof, with the expansion of size, staff and bureaucracy.

The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI), the media and other informed groups in society had urged before now, that one of the main priorities of President Tinubu’s “Restored Hope” agenda should be the implementation of the famous Oronsaye Report – an 800-page 2012 Report on the Restructuring and Rationalization of Federal Government Parastatals, Commissions and Agencies which stated that the Federal Government alone has 541 parastatals, 929 MDAs, and that there should be mergers, complete abolitions, and rationalizations to block wastages and duplications and ensure efficiency. It is obvious that President Tinubu has no intention to take a look at the Oronsaye Report. In its June 2023 Nigeria Development Update (NDU), the World Bank had also recommended that for Nigeria, it was now “time for business unusual”. It seems so obvious that well, business will remain as usual in the governance arena, and our fear is that a day may well come when Nigerians will begin to praise President Buhari as things currently stand! And that will be a completion of our worst nightmare.

The process of appointing these Ministers was not impressive enough. Those who know Tinubu and his antecedents were convinced that he would hit the ground running and that he would have no difficulties identifying strong talents, a team of the best and the brightest that would help him deliver on his mandate. But it has been one big anti-climax. It took close to the 60-day deadline, and additional days for the President to come up with a list of party loyalists, former Governors, close advisers from his days in Lagos, and a few technocrats. Nine former Governors, with one of them grudgingly withdrawing conveys a veil of staleness, no matter the experience that the former Governors may bring to the table. The kind of unsureness that governed the list is also embarrassing. During the screening process, the President had to substitute the name of the Kano nominee, Maryam Shetty. Nobody even had the decency to inform her. She only got to know when she got to the Senate for her screening. Nobody deserves to be treated so shabbily.

To worsen matters, it only occurred to the President on the. eve of the inauguration of the Ministers to make last minute changes. He reassigned the 66-year-old Abubakar Momoh whom he had named as Minister of Youth to the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs. Young Nigerians had complained that a 66-year-old politician as Minister of Youth was an odd choice. The Pan-Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF) had also raised an alarm about the non-inclusion of the Niger Delta in the list of Ministries. Then the Ministers-designate for Transportation, Interior, and Marine and Blue Economy were reshuffled. The Ministry of Environment and Ecological Management was renamed as the Federal Ministry of Environment. This back and forth looks untidy. It shows lack of preparedness, someone certainly was not paying attention to details about credentials, nomenclature and vested interests. If the President’s excuse is that the last-minute reshuffling is to ensure that the right persons are in the right places, then his attempt does not go far enough. It is one of the reasons why we argue that portfolios should be attached to Ministerial nominations to provide enough room for adjustments before the nominees are eventually confirmed. Further, there are fewer women than expected on the Ministerial list, and there are persons who think that the women have been given decorative positions. This is feedback that the President should pay attention to and address as he makes other appointments into the MDAs. And why is there no person living with disability on the list?

For the most part, the Ministerial list looks like an attempt by the President to settle political IOUs. Every President in appointing their first cabinets feel obliged to settle those who worked for their victory. But even at that, there are many aggrieved APC members and foot-soldiers who must genuinely feel left out, because they believe they deserve to share the spoils of victory. However, Nigerians are not interested in “jobs for the boys”. They want a quality team. This is why the present cabinet must be rejigged within a year or 18 months at best. President Tinubu must constantly move people around and recruit only the best. Ministerial positions must not be treated as chieftaincy titles. The kind of sit-tight, “Kabiyesi syndrome” that we witnessed under President Buhari, with some Ministers staying in office for eight years and remaining anonymous and ineffectual throughout – must not be allowed to happen this time around. Nigerians want Ministers who are ready to serve, not traditional chiefs of Aso Villa.

The President has talked about giving the Ministers a Performance Index. This is also known as Key Performance Indicators (KPI), very important but it must not be couched in general terms such as the emphasis on the eight-point agenda. It must be Ministry and sector-specific, and if any Minister does not show enough promise or capacity within the next 18 months, he or she must be turned adrift without fear or favour. Nigerians are impatient. The Federal Executive Council must be seen to work truly in the best interest of the people. It is standard practice to organize seminars and retreats for newly appointed Ministers. Whatever syllabus may have been chosen for the class of 2023 certain specific subjects must be addressed. It is not enough to pack documents inside conference bags – a copy of the Constitution, Public Service Rules and Regulations, the Procurement Act or some other briefing notes – NO. There must be a proper breakdown of expectations Ministry by Ministry and robust discussions. Nigerians don’t like to read except when there is an examination to be passed; putting documents together and hoping that the Ministers would read on their own would be presumptuous. Many of them probably don’t know what their Ministry is all about. They have to be taught and guided.

As is often the case, they are probably thinking of the contracts that they will award through their Ministries and what would be in it for them. They need to be given a crash course in the details of the Procurement Act and Public Service Rules. Out of ignorance, many past Ministers depend on civil servants who lead them by the nose and astray. Having sound knowledge of procurement is part of the process. It is tied to budget performance and defined regulations.

These Ministers also need to be told that they are Ministers of the Federal Republic with responsibility to all the people and parts of Nigeria, regardless of religion, political affiliation, class or gender and the President was right in stressing this yesterday. Cronyism, nepotism, prejudice are the major afflictions in Nigeria’s governance process. New Ministers would come under severe pressure, both external and self-imposed, to use their positions to settle their own incurred political costs. The party in their wards, local governments and states would call on them to remind them that it is their slot they are using and that they owe them an obligation to fund the party in the state, employ children from the state, award contracts to contractors from within the party and ensure major projects are brought to the community that produced them because “it is their turn”. Nigerians are very good at blaming leadership but the followers themselves are mean. A Minister would be asked to come and help pay hospital bills for newly delivered babies, even when he had no knowledge of the pregnancy: “Honourable Minister, we thank God oh, your wife has just put to bed”. The Minister is likely to be confused because his wife probably gave birth to his last child 15 years ago! But every woman in his state would suddenly become his wife, every pregnancy his own, every wedding must receive his blessing. Some other pressures are self-imposed. To keep the job, for example, some Ministers think that they are obliged to build goodwill among the informal circle around the President – very dangerous people – who exploit their proximity to the President to amass unmerited wealth. They promise appointments and access, and bear tales by moonlight. Many Ministers make the mistake of focusing more on this informal ring of vipers, but others commit the crime of thinking that they must take every project to the President’s home-town or state, to gain favour as a result. Tinubu must discourage such sycophancy.

Pastor Tunde Bakare has already warned about an emerging pattern of “imperial Presidency” in his recent State of the Nation Address. The term as described in a book of the same title by Arthur M. Schlesinger (Houghton Mifflin, 1973, 2004) refers to the abuse of power, its reckless use, and a President getting carried away with his own importance. No government can break the law without the President’s consent, because the buck stops at his desk. Nigerians have a way of misleading their Presidents with excessive sycophancy and Aso Rock is the headquarters of sycophancy. Even the best of men can be tempted like Samson, the Israelite. There are those men who in the President’s presence would immediately go down on their knees and start crawling towards him from a distance, bowing and scraping the floor and intoning “rankadede sir”. Others would prostrate. Oftentimes, such persons are clutching a file under their arms. They want the President’s signature. Whoever acts in that manner should be asked to stand up immediately and stop scraping the floor! Tinubu must make it clear that such flattery would not work with him. Work has begun for the Ministers. It won’t be long before the misfits among them will be exposed.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Give What, to Gain What? Reflections on the 2026 International Women’s Day Theme

Published

on

By

By Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya

At first glance, the theme of this year’s International Women’s Day celebration sounded a little odd to me.

Last year’s theme, Accelerate Action, was clear enough. You read it and immediately understood it as a call to move faster, push harder, do more, close the gaps. It was energetic, direct and unambiguous.

But “Give To Gain”? Give what? To whom? And to gain what, precisely? How is giving a pathway to gender equity? In the legal profession, and in leadership generally, we are trained to think in terms of advantage. What do I gain? What do I secure? What do I protect? But the more I reflected, the more I realised that perhaps that reflection was the point. Because my reflection took me to some of the most defining moments in my professional journey, and they did not come from what I took. They came from what someone chose to give.

A colleague who gave me insights instead of indifference, a leader who gave me visibility in a room where my voice would have been overlooked, a mentor who gave me honest feedback when flattery or a comfortable silence would have been easier.

None of those acts diminished them. They did not lose relevance, influence, or authority. If anything, their giving expanded their impact. Sometimes, some of us act as though giving someone else room to rise somehow shrinks our own space. But leadership does not weaken when it is shared wisely. It deepens.

That is the quiet power behind “Give To Gain”, and the paradox at the heart of this year’s theme. “Give To Gain” is not a call to diminish ourselves. It is a call to invest in one another because when we give from strength, we gain strength. So give respect.
give access. Give honest evaluation. Give opportunity without prejudice. And you will gain trust, loyalty and potential. Give mentorship and gain contunuity, give equal footing and gain the full measure of talent available. That kind of giving multiplies gain.

So perhaps the theme is not so odd after all. In a world that often asks, “What do I stand to lose?” this year’s International Women’s Day asks instead, “What could we stand to gain, if we were all willing to give?”

In the context of gender equity, the theme becomes even more compelling. Giving equal footing is not about doing women a favour; it is about acknowledging merit. When barriers fall, capacity rises to the surface. When access expands, talent flourishes. When women thrive professionally, institutions gain.

Against this backdrop, I began to think about the remarkable women who embodied this principle long before it became a theme. Women who gave intellectual rigour to complex situations and gained distinction. Women who gave courage and resilience in the face of resistance or in rooms where they were the only one, and gained respect. Women who gave mentorship to younger women and gained a legacy that cannot be erased.

Women who gave integrity to public service and the private sector and gained trust and admiration that cannot be manufactured.
Women whose boldness did not ask for permission to contribute. They did not lower their standards to fit expectations.

They gave of their intellect, their discipline, their time and their resilience, and in doing so they expanded the space for others. That is the spirit I want to honour this IWD month.

Beginning tomorrow, on International Women’s Day and continuing through all the remaining days of March, I will be celebrating a female icon who exemplifies this principle. Women who have given and gained. Each day, one story. One journey.

One example of boldness in action. Not to romanticise their journeys or suggest that their paths were easy, but to illuminate them and show what is possible when you dare to try.

Each profile will tell a story of contribution and consequence, of how giving strengthens, and how excellence, when sustained with integrity, inevitably earns its place.

My hope is that other women will read these stories and recognise themselves in them. That men also will read them and see leadership, not limitation. And that we will all be reminded that progress is rarely accidental. It is built, often quietly, by those willing to give more than is required.

If this year’s theme “Give To Gain” means anything to me, it means that we must intentionally amplify the inspiring examples that prove what is possible when women are bold.

Because inspiration and visibility are forms of giving. And sometimes, the simple act of telling a story is the spark that lights ambition in someone who was unsure where or whether she belonged.

This March, I choose to give inspiration and visibility and honour where it is so richly deserved.

And I trust that in doing so, we will gain a stronger world, a clearer sense of direction and possibility and another generation of women bold enough to step forward without apology.

Now the theme no longer seems strange. Now I understand that when we give boldly, we gain collectively. And that is a theme worth celebrating.

Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN FCIArb

Continue Reading

Opinion

Beyond the Vision: The Alchemy of Turning Ideas into Execution

Published

on

By

By Tolulope A. Adegoke PhD

History is littered with the skeletons of great ideas that never saw the light of day. In boardrooms and basements across the world, concepts with the power to reshape industries lie dormant, suffocated not by a lack of merit, but by a lack of execution. We live in an era that venerates the “light bulb moment,” yet the painful truth, as articulated by venture capitalists and historians alike, is that ideas are a dime a dozen; it is execution that is richly rewarded . The journey from the spark of imagination to the tangible reality of a finished product, a profitable corporation, or a thriving nation is an alchemical process. It requires the transformation of abstract thought into concrete action—a discipline that separates the dreamer from the builder. This evolution of an idea into reality is not a mystical event but a replicable process, best understood through the distinct exemplars of visionary individuals, resilient corporations, and transformative nations.

The Individual: The “Thinker-Doer” Synthesis

The romantic notion of the genius lost in thought, sketching blueprints while others do the heavy lifting, is a seductive myth. The reality, as demonstrated by history’s most impactful figures, is that the major thinkers are almost always the doers. Steve Jobs, a figure synonymous with innovation, famously articulated this principle by invoking the ultimate Renaissance man, Leonardo da Vinci. Jobs argued that the greatest innovators are “both the thinker and doer in one person,” pointing out that da Vinci did not have a separate artisan mixing his paints or executing his canvases; he was the artist and the craftsman, immersing himself in the physicality of his work . For Jobs, this synthesis was the guiding doctrine of Apple. He understood that abstract ideation is sterile without the feedback loop of hands-on mastery. The refinement of the Mac’s typography, the feel of a perfectly weighted mouse, the intuitive interface of the iPhone—these were not born from pure theory but from an obsessive, tactile engagement with the building process. The “doer” digs into the hard intellectual problems precisely because they are engaged in the act of creation.

This principle is further illuminated by the career of Elon Musk. While often perceived as a master inventor, Musk’s greatest genius may lie in his ability to execute existing ideas at a scale and speed previously thought impossible. He was not a founder of Tesla on day one, but he stepped in to spearhead its execution, transforming an electric vehicle concept into a global automotive powerhouse. At SpaceX, he inherited the age-old idea of space travel but revolutionized its execution by challenging fundamental cost structures and vertically integrating manufacturing. Musk embodies the “thinker-doer” by immersing himself in the engineering details, sleeping on the factory floor, and distilling complex challenges down to their fundamental physics. Both Jobs and Musk validate the venture capital adage that investment is placed not in ideas, but in the people capable of navigating the treacherous path from Point B to Point Z—the messy, unglamorous grind where visions are either realized or abandoned.

“In the architecture of achievement, ideas are merely the blueprints; execution is the foundation, the steel, and the mortar. A blueprint without a builder is just a dream drawn on paper” – Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

The Corporation: Engineering the Culture of Execution

For corporations, the evolution of an idea into reality is not a one-time event but a cultural imperative. It demands a structure and a philosophy that bridges the notorious gap between strategy and outcome. Procter & Gamble (P&G), a consumer goods giant, provides a master-class in adapting its execution model to survive and thrive. Despite investing billions in internal research and development, P&G recognized that its traditional closed-door approach was failing to meet innovation targets. The company evolved its idea-generation process by embracing “Connect + Develop,” opening its innovation pipeline to external inventors, suppliers, and even competitors. This shift in mindset was merely the idea; the reality was the rigorous, internal execution that vetted, integrated, and scaled those external concepts—like the Mr. Clean Magic Eraser, which was discovered as a prototype in Japan and flawlessly executed by P&G’s operational machine. The company’s success hinges on what researchers call “imaginative integrity”—the ability to make an imagined future so tangible that the entire organization can build toward it.

Similarly, UPS stands as a testament to the power of “creative dissatisfaction.” For over a century, UPS has operated not on bursts of pure invention, but on the relentless engineering and re-engineering of its systems. Founder Jim Casey instilled a culture where the status quo was perpetually questioned—from testing monorail-based sort systems to optimizing delivery routes with algorithmic precision. The idea was not merely to deliver packages, but to create the pinnacle of logistical efficiency. The execution involved tens of thousands of employees “pulling together” to transform the organization repeatedly, embracing changes that ranged from entering the common carrier business in the 1950s to mastering e-commerce logistics in the 1990s. These companies succeed because they build what management experts call the “five bridges” to execution: the ability to manage change, a supportive structure, employee involvement, aligned leadership, and cross-company cooperation. At Costco, this is embodied by CEO James Sinegal, whose Spartan office and relentless focus on in-store details align leadership behavior with the company’s razor-thin margin strategy, proving that execution is modeled from the top down.

The Nation: The Political Economy of Progress

The evolution of ideas into reality scales beyond individuals and firms to the very level of nations. The economic trajectories of countries are determined by their ability to adapt foreign concepts and execute them within local contexts. The post-war rise of Japan is perhaps the most powerful example of this phenomenon. In the early 20th century, Japan was exposed to American ideas of scientific management, but the devastation of World War II left its industrial base in ruins. The idea that saved Japan was quality control, imported through lectures from American scholars W. Edwards Deming and Joseph Juran. The genius of Japan, however, was not in the adoption of the idea, but in its adaptation. Private organizations like the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) took the lead, transforming foreign theories into the uniquely Japanese practice of Total Quality Management (TQM) and the grassroots phenomenon of Quality Control circles. This was not government-mandated execution; it was a national movement of “thinker-doers” on the factory floor, relentlessly refining processes. The evolution of this idea rebuilt a nation, turning “Made in Japan” from a byword for cheap goods into a global standard for reliability.

In contrast, Singapore represents a different model of national execution: the state as a strategic architect. Upon independence, Singapore possessed few natural resources and a uncertain future. The government, however, possessed a clear-eyed vision of industrial development. It actively sought external assistance from the United Nations and Japan, but crucially, the Singaporean authorities acted as the “agent of adaptation” . They did not passively accept advice; they made decisive judgments about what was relevant to their unique circumstances and demanded specific adaptations. This disciplined, top-down execution of economic strategy—from building world-class infrastructure to enforcing rigorous education standards—evolved the idea of a “sovereign nation” into the reality of a first-world entrepôt. The contrast with nations like Tunisia, where external donors took the lead due to a lack of domestic policy clarity, highlights a fundamental truth: ideas flow freely across borders, but the ability to execute them is a domestic condition, cultivated through leadership and institutional will.

Conclusion: The Integrity of the Build

Ultimately, the evolution of an idea into reality demands what can be termed “imaginative integrity”—the unwavering commitment to binding the vision to the execution. It is a concept that applies equally to the Renaissance painter mixing his own pigments, the CEO sleeping on the factory floor, and the nation-state meticulously adapting foreign technology. The world is full of “crude ideas” that lack the refinement of execution; even a brilliantly designed structure like MIT’s Stata Center can falter if the craftsmanship of its realization is flawed.

The journey from “A to Z” is long, and the gap between strategy and outcome is the graveyard of potential. To traverse it, one must recognize that thinking and doing are not sequential acts but concurrent disciplines. The doers are the major thinkers, for they are the ones who test hypotheses against reality, who adapt to feedback, and who possess the grit to push through the inevitable obstacles. Whether it is a nation reshaping its economy, a corporation reinventing its logistics, or an individual defying the limits of technology, the lesson remains constant: the future belongs not just to those who can dream it, but to those who can build it.

Vision sees the path; execution walks it, blisters and all. The distance between a dream and a legacy is measured only by the courage to begin the work.

History does not remember the whisper of a thought, but the echo of its impact. To think is human, but to execute is to leave a mark on time.

Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke, AMBP-UN is a globally recognized scholar-practitioner and thought leader at the nexus of security, governance, and strategic leadership. His mission is dedicated to advancing ethical governance, strategic human capital development, and resilient nation-building, and global peace. He can be reached via: tolulopeadegoke01@gmail.comglobalstageimpacts@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

How an Organist Can Live a More Fulfilling Life

Published

on

By

By Tunde Shosanya

It is essential for an Organist to live a fulfilling life, as organ playing has the capacity to profoundly and uniquely impact individuals. There is nothing inappropriate about an Organist building their own home, nor is it unlawful for an Organist to have a personal vehicle. As Organists, we must take control of our own futures; once again, while our certificates hold value, organ playing requires our expertise. We should not limit ourselves to what we think we can accomplish; rather, we should chase our dreams as far as our minds permit. Always keep in mind, if you have faith in yourself, you can achieve success.

There are numerous ways for Organists to live a more fulfilling and joyful life; here are several suggestions:

Focus on your passion. Set an example, and aim for daily improvement.

Be self-reliant and cultivate harmony with your vicar.

Speak less and commit to thinking and acting more.

Make choices that bring you happiness, and maintain discipline in your professional endeavors.

Help others and establish achievable goals for yourself.

Chase your dreams and persist without giving up.

“Playing as an Organist in a Church is a gratifying experience; while a good Organist possesses a certificate, it is the skills in organ playing that truly matter” -Shosanya 2020

Here are 10 essential practices for dedicated Organists…

1) Listen to and analyze organ scores.

2) Achieve proficiency in sight reading.

3) Explore the biographies of renowned Organists and Composers.

4) Attend live concerts.

5) Record your performances and be open to feedback.

6) Improve your time management skills.

7) Focus on overcoming your weaknesses.

8) Engage in discussions about music with fellow musicians.

9) Study the history of music and the various styles of organ playing from different Organists.

10) Take breaks when you feel fatigued. Your well-being is vital and takes precedence over organ playing.

In conclusion, as an Organist, if you aspire to live towards a more fulfilling life in service and during retirement, consider the following suggestions.

1) Plan for the future that remains unseen by investing wisely.

2) Prioritize your health and well-being.

3) Aim to save a minimum of 20 percent of your monthly salary.

4) Maintain your documents in an organized manner for future reference.

5) Contribute to your pension account on a monthly basis.

6) Join a cooperative at your workplace.

7) Ensure your life while you are in service.

8) If feasible, purchase at least one plot of land.

9) Steer clear of accumulating debt as you approach retirement.

10) Foster connections among your peers.

Continue Reading

Trending