By UCJ-UI Features Desk
Every election season on campus brings familiar faces into the spotlight. Students who may have been known mainly within their faculties, halls or social circles suddenly become aspirants, campaigners and candidates, asking their colleagues to entrust them with leadership.
But behind the posters, manifestos and campaigns is a more personal question: why do students want to lead in the first place?
Responses gathered by the UCJ-UI Features Desk point to no single answer. For some students, leadership is primarily about service and creating change. For others, it comes with the appeal of recognition, influence, networking, experience, ambition and the opportunities attached to holding office.
Some believe these motivations can exist together, while others are more sceptical about what drives people into leadership.
Malicious intent?
For one respondent, the first thought that comes to mind when a student announces a bid for office is whether the person genuinely wants to make a difference or is seeking recognition.
That question of intention appeared repeatedly in the responses.
Fadekemi Adesina said she would first want to know a candidate’s agenda and whether they genuinely mean what they say. She believes recognition, networking and ambition are among the factors that often draw students into leadership, although she thinks only a few are genuinely motivated by service.
Victor Akinlotan similarly said he would want to know a candidate’s main aim and whether there might be an ulterior motive. He identified influence and money among the motivations he associates with students seeking leadership.
Another respondent described the motivations as being divided between those who want influence and recognition and those who genuinely want to serve, putting the split at roughly 50:50.
For another respondent, fame and CV building are among the reasons students may seek Student Union positions. The respondent also alleged that some may be attracted by the possibility of misappropriating funds, though this was presented as a personal assessment rather than a fact and personal benefit as motivations that can exist together, questioning what a person might gain from serving, whether influence, money or power.
A different respondent similarly observed that, for many students, influence and recognition are tied to a quest for power and monetary benefits, while others balance a desire for influence with a willingness to serve. A smaller group, the respondent said, may simply want to create an impact without expecting personal advantages in return.
Honest drive to change?
For students who are genuinely interested in leadership, however, the attraction can be very different.
Israel said he had considered contesting after being inspired by a leader he admired.
“I saw my role model leader make a change and it gave me hope that there’s still good in people,” he said, explaining that the experience also gave him the desire to make a difference himself.
Stephen Chinemerem also said contesting for leadership had crossed his mind because of an interest in leading in areas where things could be made to work.
Another respondent said the motivation comes from seeing something that is not working and believing they have the ability to become an agent of change. For such students, leadership is less about occupying a prestigious position and more about improving the environment around them.
Personal ambition or service?
Yet personal ambition is not necessarily viewed as incompatible with service.
Olusegun Shalom Aderonke said there are several reasons someone may contest. A person may have a natural inclination towards leadership, believe nobody else is ready to take responsibility, receive encouragement from others or even be pushed into a position.
Aderonke acknowledged that recognition, influence and connections can also motivate people.
“Personal ambition isn’t necessarily a bad thing,” Aderonke said. “You can be ambitious and still genuinely want to serve. The problem is when the ambition becomes more important than the people.”
For Fanibe Emmanuel Eniola, the desire to serve should remain central.
He described leadership motivation as having “the heart for the people” and seeing a problem that one believes they have the capacity to address.
He estimated that the desire to lead and serve could account for about 70 per cent of the motivation, while personal ambition could account for the remaining 30 per cent. However, he stressed that ambition should not overshadow the people a leader is expected to serve.
What is in for the grab?
The responses also show that some students are attracted to leadership because of what they believe they can gain from it.
Experience was one of the most frequently mentioned benefits. Respondents pointed to opportunities to develop leadership skills, work with people, build networks and gain practical experience that could become useful after graduation.
Fadekemi mentioned connections and an improved CV, while Hawau Oladele said leadership can provide valuable experience and recognition and potentially give students an advantage when applying for scholarships and other opportunities.
Another respondent mentioned access to opportunities and resources, as well as recognition after graduation. The respondent also described personal benefits as potentially including a sense of fulfilment, recognition that can remain useful after graduation, and access to opportunities and resources.
Recognition and influence, however, remain controversial aspects of student leadership.
One respondent said the prestige attached to student leadership is significant, but warned that entering office primarily for prestige, honour or attention could undermine the purpose of leadership.
Another respondent argued that some students may see leadership as a means of gaining power, monetary benefits or access to resources.
For one respondent who had previously considered contesting, the attraction initially included popularity, respect, certain benefits and the opportunity to build a CV. The respondent later lost interest after becoming dissatisfied with what they saw as an increasing emphasis on influence rather than quality and capacity.
The respondent said that even after becoming somewhat influential and receiving strong backing for a campaign, they eventually questioned whether pursuing student politics was worth the time compared with building a career, pursuing internships and other opportunities.
What wins it?
The question of who actually gets elected produced similar observations.
Several respondents described successful candidates as popular, influential, confident or outspoken. Victor said popularity and influence can be important because a candidate may struggle to win without them.
Fadekemi described influential, confident and outspoken people as more likely to have an advantage during elections, while Hawau said students may vote for familiar faces or candidates who receive endorsements from halls or faculties.
Another respondent said people who “know people” may have an advantage, especially those who have gone through leadership before and can offer first-hand advice.
One respondent offered a different explanation, arguing that successful candidates often understand how to appeal to people and build support. The respondent said voters may be influenced by whether they feel a candidate will represent their interests and provide a sense of trust and security, while political influence can also matter when influential people have confidence in a candidate’s reliability.
Is popular same as good?
But popularity alone does not define a good leader, according to the responses.
Trustworthiness, resilience, confidence, responsibility, communication skills and a willingness to serve were also repeatedly mentioned.
One respondent described a desirable leader as someone who is trustworthy and outspoken. Another said a candidate should be politically astute, confident, responsible, well-spoken, and ready to serve.
This distinction between being able to win an election and being able to lead after winning was another recurring concern.
The respondents repeatedly questioned whether campaign promises are enough to determine who deserves consideration.
Emmanuel argued that a manifesto is easy to write, but implementation is more important. He suggested that students should examine a candidate’s previous service, personality, track record and understanding of leadership rather than relying solely on campaign promises.
Aderonke agreed, saying students should look at what a candidate has done before and how they have treated people.
“Past actions and how they treat people say more,” Aderonke said.
Adeyefa Ebenezer similarly advised students to examine precedents.
“Has the person served before and has the person delivered?” he asked.
For him, leadership should also be assessed beyond what is visible during campaigns. He described the demands of office as much greater than what may be contained in a manifesto, noting that a leader must deal with problems that arise daily.
What don’t we all then do it?
The demands of leadership also explain why some students who might otherwise consider contesting choose not to.
Some respondents cited workload, academic commitments, lack of resources, lack of confidence or uncertainty about their ability to lead effectively.
One respondent said they had never seriously considered contesting because they felt they were not assertive enough. Another cited apathy, while Abdul-wahab Alabi said student politics simply was not his area of interest.
Hawau said she had considered contesting because she believes leaders can effect change, but concerns about her capacity to lead efficiently and the resources required to participate in an election have held her back.
Another respondent initially avoided the idea because of workload but later became more open to contesting after realising that leadership might not be as demanding as they had assumed. The respondent said they could even consider a position such as Student Union president if it provided an opportunity to represent students effectively.
For another respondent, the decision to pursue leadership has also depended on confidence in one’s ability to lead well. The respondent said there had been occasions when a willingness to make positive impacts encouraged them to step forward, but at other times, a feeling of incompetence made them hold back, preferring to remain a subject rather than occupy a position without being able to lead effectively.
Leadership, therefore, can be both attractive and intimidating.
It can offer experience, networks, recognition and opportunities, but it can also bring pressure, accountability and demands that extend beyond campaign promises.
The responses also suggest that leadership can change the people who occupy positions of authority.
One respondent said taking on leadership can bring greater responsibility and improve a person’s ability to relate with others, while another offered a more cautious view, saying access to resources and power can change people negatively.
How does it end?
Perhaps this is why some respondents believe the most important thing is not simply why a person enters leadership, but what happens after they get there.
A person may begin with ambition and still serve genuinely. Someone may seek recognition and later use their position responsibly. A candidate may have a strong manifesto but struggle with implementation. Another may have little interest in prestige but lack the capacity to manage the demands of office.
The responses suggest that the motivations behind student leadership are rarely as straightforward as service versus selfishness. For some, the two exist side by side. For others, one may gradually replace the other.
Ultimately, the question students face when choosing leaders may extend beyond what a candidate says they want to do.
It may be about what has already been done, what the person values, how they respond to responsibility, and whether their actions match the reason they give for seeking office.
Leadership begins with the desire for service, influence or recognition, but its real test starts after the votes have been counted.
