Socio marketing practices and corruption in the Nigerian nation can be described as twin problems that have plague the ethic and administrative barriers and principles of the Nigerian state. The Nigerian states have failed to choose between capitalism and socialism, thus corruption has manifested itself in the land. Corruption is defined as “the abuse of public office for private gain.” Despite cultural and linguistic differences in Nigeria, one thing that most Nigerian will agree on, and which seems to be something that unite them almost unanimously is the fact that corruption has eaten into the fabric of the country. Corruption has become the order of the day. The consensus is that corruption is so embedded in the national life of the country that everybody appears to have accepted it as a way of life when doing business in or with Nigeria. Infact, corruption in the global world has become a source of concern for most countries and Nigeria is no exception. The situation of corruption in Nigeria has become so pervasive that TI – transparent international states that between 1996 and 2002, Nigerian had oscillated between the world’s most corrupt nation to somewhere around the world’s worst four nation to do business with. Corruption was accepted as a way of life even in the marketing sphere. The giving and acceptance of bribery was inculcated into the everyday running of the country to such an extent that the argument has been made that it is the culture of the nation. Corruption in Nigeria manifests itself in four major varieties, namely: occasssional or opportunistic corruption, widespread corruption, systematic corruption and finally, destructive corruption. Our study centered on the effect corruption has on our socio marketing practices in Nigeria. The analysis carried out shows that there is a statistically relationship between socio marketing practice and the high level of corruption in the country. Based on the results, a descriptive survey method was carried out. The results shows that there is a significant corelationship between corruption and the bad policies of socio marketing practices being undertaken in most organizational places within the country.
The first country to address the issue of corruption is the United States with its enactment of the foreign corrupt practice act (FCPA) of 1977. That act was enacted to bring to a halt the bribery of foreign official and to restore confidence in the integrity of the American business system and make it a crime to offer bribe to foreign officials in order to obtain services. Corruption in Nigeria manifests itself in four major varieties, namely: occasssional or opportunistic corruption, widespread corruption, systematic corruption and finally destructive corruption. I will address each type separately. Occasional or opportunistic corruption: this type of corruption involves the art of paying bribes to gain unfair advantage or the art of abusing one’s position by taking bribes to perform official duties that one is obligated to perform by virtue of the office.
This type of corruption is so prevalent in Nigeria that it is expected, that everyone knows that you need to grease the palm of the public officer before he can perform the functions of the office. In some situations, refusal to grease the palm of the official may lead to delays in obtaining the services sought.
Widespread corruption: this type of corruption involves a situation where the society as a whole endorses the taking of bribes as socially accepted. Bribery in all facets of the Nigerian industry has become so rampant that it is generally recognized as a means of obtaining services. Infact, some Nigerians in defence of this corrupt practices claim that “culture demands it.” However, as was pointed out before, all countries including Nigerian prohibit bribery as a matter of law.
Systematic corruption: this type of corruption deals with situations where everyone is on the take from employee to employer, and private citizen to office holders in an attempt to reap personal gains. This type of corruption leads to outright extortion from anyone requiring services or negotiating contracts before services could be rendered or before such contracts could be awarded. This type of corruption is the one that has brought Nigeria the bad name it has today as among the most corrupt nations because it is the type that most touches on Nigerian international business transactions.
Destructive corruption: this type of corruption involves situations where the rich is seeking to acquire more wealth, which leads to their doing whatever it takes to grab the giant share. This type of corruption is prevalent at the federal government level with top officials who have access to the country’s financial resources. These resources are confiscated by the privileged few to the detriment of the majority who are wallowing in poverty. Sometimes when contracts are awarded for these officials to build infrastructures in the particular locality or state, they usurp the resources for their own personal use thereby rendering the country bankrupt.
These various forms of corruption not only stifle development as resources are diverted to individual use but also imbue governance with inefficiency and increased cost.
Social marketing is the systematic application of marketing, along with other concepts and techniques, to achieve specific behavioral goals for a social good. Social marketing can be applied to promote merit goods, or to make a society avoid demerit goods and thus to promote society’s well being as a whole. For example, this may include asking people not to smoke in public areas, asking them to use seat belts, or prompting to make them follow speed limits. Although “social marketing” is sometimes seen only as using standard commercial marketing practices to achieve non-commercial goals, this is an over-simplification.
The primary aim of social marketing is “social good”, while in “commercial marketing” the aim is primarily “financial”. This does not mean that commercial marketers can not contribute to achievement of social good. Increasingly, social marketing is being described as having “two parents”—a “social parent” = social sciences and social policy, and a “marketing parent” = commercial and public sector marketing approaches. Beginning in the 1950s when Weber asked “Why can’t you sell brotherhood and rational thinking like you can sell soap?”, it has in the last two decades matured into a much more integrative and inclusive discipline that draws on the full range of social sciences and social policy approaches as well as marketing. The economy of Nigeria is a middle income, mixed economy emerging market with well-developed financial, legal, communications, and entertainment sectors. It is ranked 31st in the world in terms of GDP (PPP) as of 2009, and its emergent, though currently underperforming manufacturing sector is the third-largest on the continent, producing a large proportion of goods and services for the West African region. Previously hindered by years of mismanagement, economic reforms of the past decade have put Nigeria back on track towards achieving its full economic potential. Nigerian GDP at purchasing power parity more than doubled from $170.7 billion in 2005 to $374.3 billion in 2010, although estimates of the size of the informal sector (which is not included in official figures) put the actual numbers closer to $520 billion. Correspondingly, the GDP per capita doubled from $1200 per person in 2005 to an estimated $2,500 per person in 2009 (again, with the inclusion of the informal sector, it is estimated that GDP per capita hovers around $3,500 per person). It is the largest economy in the West Africa Region, 3rd largest economy in Africa (behind South Africa and Egypt), and on track to becoming one of the top 30 economies in the world in the early part of 2011.
Although much has been made of its status as a major exporter of oil, Nigeria produces only about 3.3% of the world’s supply, and though it is ranked as 15th in production at 2.2 million barrels per day (350,000 m3/d) (mbpd), the top 3 producers Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the United States produce 10.7 Mbbl/d (1,700,000 m3/d) (17%), 9.8 Mbbl/d (1,560,000 m3/d) (15%), and 8.5 Mbbl/d (1,350,000 m3/d) (13%)respectively, collectively accounting for 63.6 Mbbl/d (10,110,000 m3/d) (45%) of the world’s total production. To put oil revenues in perspective, at an estimated export rate of 1.9 Mbbl/d (300,000 m3/d), with a projected sales price of $65 per barrel in 2011, Nigeria’s anticipated revenue from petroleum is about $52.2 billion. This accounts for less than 14% of official GDP figures (and drops to 10% when the informal economy is included in these calculations). Therefore, though the petroleum sector is important, it remains in fact a small part of the country’s overall vibrant and diversified economy.
The largely subsistence agricultural sector has not kept up with rapid population growth, and Nigeria, once a large net exporter of food, now imports a large quantity of its food products. In 2006, Nigeria successfully convinced the Paris Club to let it buy back the bulk of its debts owed to the Paris Club for a cash payment of roughly $12 billion (USD).
Although almost every government since 1960 has promised to raise ethical standards and restore accountability and transparency in governance, massive looting of the nation’s wealth and resources by high ranking state officials has remained a permanent feature of the country’s political life. In fact, over the years, the Nigerian political elites have generally sought to acquire the wealth they needed to make them the richest in the land, hoping thereby to gain political base, influence, legitimacy and identity. At the same time, Nigerian governments generally have circumvented virtually all mechanisms designed to eradicate a culture of impunity and promote accountability of public officials.
Corruption in Nigeria is as old as the country itself, though its nature, scope, and consequences have varied considerably over the years. Indeed, from the late colonial period to date, commentators have expressed concern about the level of venality in the country. According to Tignor, the British used their worry about political corruption in Nigeria to argue that the transfer of power ought to be slowed down. A considerable amount of bribery, nepotism and the use of political office for personal enrichment existed in late colonial Nigeria. Allegations of maladministration and dishonesty led the colonial Government to establish a commission headed by Bernard Storey to investigate the activities of Lagos Town Council. The ensuing report contained the first extended public discussion of widespread corrupt administrative practices in Nigeria. The report illustrated the numerous ways in which individuals were forced to pay for ordinary and essential services. Tignor quoted Storey as saying that, “running like a brightly coloured thread through the tangled skein of the Council’s administration has been the subject of honesty or the lack of it-of corruption. I could not get away from it at the public inquiry; it was mentioned in connection with almost every matter brought before me.” According to Tignor, Storey’s findings made the Western regional regime remove the Lagos town councillors from office and installed a caretaker administration. Similar investigations were later conducted throughout Southern Nigeria. Thus, the Eastern Regional Assembly brought a motion to investigate the town council over allegations of corruption.
The investigating team which published its report in 1955 found evidence of bribery in the letting of contracts, favouritism in the allocation of market stalls, and illegal payments from junior members of staff to their seniors for large increases in their emoluments. The report concluded, however, that the corruption which existed would “not prevent Port Harcourt Town Council developing into a fairly efficient organ of government.” In Onitsha, an inquiry conducted by a British observer O. P. Gunning into the administration of the District Council revealed ample circumstantial evidence of incompetence and serious corruption on the part of sections of the Council and of the executive staff. According to Tignor, Gunning stated that, “the activities of the Council as a whole have come to be regarded by the general public of Onitsha as a public scandal.” Most parts of the East were affected by allegations of “systematic corruption and dishonesty,” thus forcing the appointment of a commission to inquire into bribery and corruption throughout the whole of the East. However, the Foster-Sutton commission of inquiry into allegations reflecting on official conduct of the premier of the Eastern region of Nigeria found no evidence of the pilfering of state funds and revealed no punishable offences, although it concluded that the behaviour of the premier (Dr Azikiwe) “had fallen short of the expectations of honest, reasonable people.” In the West, the Nicholson commission of inquiry published a report indicting National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroon (N.C.N.C.) politician, and the principal leader of the Ibadan District Council Adegoke Adelabu, of corruption. Nicholson was quoted as saying that, Adelabu “behaved corruptly, driven by his lust for power and a sense of opportunism.” The British colonial office demanded Adelabu’s resignation and forbade him from serving in ministerial capacities at higher levels. However, Nicholson found the District Council to be free of gross maladministration. In the North, Abubakar Balewa, who later became Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, in 1950 publicly condemned “the twin curses of bribery and corruption.” Nevertheless, unlike the situations in most parts of the country, there were neither British appointed commissions of inquiry, nor published reports condemning individual politicians. Although corruption was also a reality in the region, those in the North sought to control the damage and control corruption by promoting reforms from behind the scenes.
Although the actual amount of political corruption in the country during this period is difficult to determine, its actual presence cannot be contested. In fact, there were reports that almost all the regional governments plundered financial surpluses obtained through statutory control of export-crop marketing. The statement by the colonial office would appear to capture the general situation: “there is a lot of fraud going on in the country, and many of us are exploiting the ignorance of the masses to line our pockets. Can’t we try to be honest? Self-government, founded on fraud, deceit, and corruption, will not last.” The corrupt behaviour of most Nigerian political elites during this period clearly set the stage for a more resilient generation of corrupt public officials that have since independence plundered Nigeria’s wealth and resources, with almost absolute impunity. Shortly after independence, in 1962, a new commission of inquiry headed by Justice Coker was established to investigate allegations of corruption in the Western Region. The Coker Commission issued a four-volume report detailing administrative excesses in the region. The report reported the misuse of public funds for private and political gain. According to it, “the investments made in the Region were important and but for political considerations which were certainly uppermost constituted a most flagrant breach of trust by which the peoples of the Western Region have been robbed of the financial benefits to which they are entitled from the Western Regional Marketing Board.”
According to Tignor, the Commissioners took the view that the National Investment and Properties Company was formed for the main purpose of providing funds for the Action Group, and held its leader Obafemi Awolowo responsible for much of what had been “illicitly distributed.” The Commissioners stated further that Awolowo’s scheme “was to build around him with money an empire financially formidable both in Nigeria and abroad-an empire in which dominance would be maintained by him by the power of the money which he had given out.” Fresh opportunities were created at the national level in the 1970s, and early 1980s, by the relatively enormous increases in public receipts from oil, obtained through compulsory public acquisition of majority shares in the oil-producing companies, as well as through taxation. Although spoliation was widespread and well-documented, prosecutions in court were rare. The prevailing climate of impunity ensured that the practice of spoliation flourished unchecked. Furthermore, despite its negative impacts on the economic and social life of most Nigerians, the ability of individuals or groups to seek redress was seriously constrained.
The Mohammed-Obasanjo Administration set up an Assets Investigation Panel in 1975 to investigate the assets of state governors, federal commissioners, and high-ranking officials. Those found guilty of corruption were dismissed summarily, and the government confiscated their assets. However, the second republic witnessed increased level of venality by high-ranking government officials. As the Chairman of the Nigerian Anti-Corruption Commission, Justice Akanbi commented: “we are all witnesses to the horrifying disclosures at the end of the second republic, of fantastic amounts of wealth unlawfully accumulated by persons who normally would not own such wealth.” Under the Buhari Administration, many politicians of the second republic were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment for corruption and abuse of office. They were also asked to repay funds they were alleged to have stolen. However, corruption cases were heard and sentences imposed by military tribunals that did not demonstrate real independence. The process as a whole was not in full conformity with international standards of fair trial. Further, the efforts of the government would seem to be the exception, rather than the rule.
The process was also selective because massive corruption in the military hierarchy itself was mostly ignored, though well-documented. Lieutenant General Oladipo Diya, the Chief of General Staff in Abacha’s Administration, admitted that the military had come to symbolize corruption, but argued that it would be “impracticable” to probe the affairs of ‘millions of Nigerians.’ He stated further that it would be inexpedient for the new government to challenge past corruption. Implicit in this contention is the ‘wisdom’ of forgetting about past corruption, and focusing on the future ones. The General Babangida’s regime that assumed power in 1985 not only released most of the public officials awaiting trial and those convicted of corruption but also rehabilitated them by offering them appointive positions. Babangida also restored to their original owners’ assets forfeited to the government. In 1989, the Babangida Administration set up a National Committee on Corruption and other Economic Crimes under the chairmanship of Justice Kayode Esho, a retired Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
The Committee’s main task was to identify the causes and the possible extent of corruption in the country. In addition, it examined the deficiencies in the existing legislation on corruption and other economic crimes. The Committee was asked to suggest remedies, which would lead to the removing of the incidence of corruption as well as improvements to the existing legislation. The Committee, after extensive consultations, public hearings, and visits to other countries, submitted its report to the federal government on September 5, 1990. The Committee found unsatisfactory several legal rules dealing with corruption and offered instead a single law to deal comprehensively with corruption and other economic crimes. The Committee also recommended the establishment of an independent commission to tackle corruption. The government’s handling of the report and the scale of comprehensive corruption and outright plunder of the national wealth and resources under the Babangida Administration, however, showed that General Babangida never seriously intended to address corruption. Babangida’s own Political Bureau of 1987 attested to the level of political corruption in the country at the time.
According to it, “corruption pervades all strata of the Nigerian society-from the highest levels of the political and business elites to the ordinary person in the village.” In effect, the Committee on corruption was set up merely as a ploy to mollify the public while the administration continued its expropriation of the nation’s wealth and resources. According to Larry Diamond, a new aspect involves widespread stories of corrupt conduct by the President himself. Never before in Nigeria has the head of state been so widely suspected of extensive personal involvement in corruption. Tales have been circulating for years of Babangida’s large cash gifts to military officers, cabinet ministers, traditional rulers, and potentially contentious opponents; of Mercedes Benz cars given to major newspaper editors and directors of state broadcasting corporations; of the president’s secret personal investments in banks and companies; off-the-books oil being lifted by private tankers. While none of these stories has been publicly documented, they have been conveyed by diverse and well placed sources with enough consistency to lend them an air of plausibility.
Thus, under Babangida, corruption became the raison d’être of government. While Babangida now lives in a fifty-bedroom mansion in Minna, Nigeria, several of the billions of dollars, including a $12 billion windfall realized from crude oil during the Gulf war remains unaccounted for, said to be scattered around North American and European banks. Arguably the most powerful Nigerian because of his unbelievable wealth, Babangida, the self-acclaimed “evil genius”, became virtually untouchable. According to reports, Babangida backed the current government of Obasanjo with a huge amount of money during Obasanjo’s election campaign in 1999. Further, almost half of the previous and current members of Nigerian parliament are reported to be on his pay-roll. In short, Babangida was “generous” with state money, dispensed patronage and his Government stands out as having made many persons billionaires. After General Babangida’s resignation in August of 1993 and the short-lived Shonekan’s interim government, the Abacha Administration, with General Abacha himself heading the pack of plunderers, showed an insatiable appetite for wealth. Abacha surrounded himself with compromised military officers and a civilian class who helped him loot and plunder the nation’s resources with absolute impunity. Abacha, probably the most feared leader Nigeria has ever had, established a predatory relation with the Nigerian economy. He deployed the entire machinery of the state, including its repressive apparatus, to extract wealth from the economy. Arguably, Abacha is the most corrupt leader that Nigeria ever produced. One commentator suggests that, “most of Nigeria’s rulers have been crooked, but Sani Abacha was probably more crooked than the rest.” In the months following his death, revelations about the massive scale of corruption in his regime began to surface. General Abubakar who succeeded Abacha instituted an internal government investigation to track where the money had gone, but he resisted opposition demand for a public investigation. Under Abacha, several billions of dollars from the Nigerian treasury were illegally and fraudulently transferred to North American and European banks. Deploying a circle of family members, trusted aides and business associates, Abacha was reported to have siphoned $2.3 billion cash from Treasury, awarded contracts worth $1 billion to front companies and took $ 1 billion in bribes from foreign contractors.
According to reports, Abacha’s wife was placed under house arrest after attempting to flee the country with several trucks full of foreign currencies. Further, about $2 billion was transferred in the 1990s from public funds to private accounts abroad held principally by members of the Abacha family. Much of what Abacha plundered during his stay in power may never be known, let alone repatriated. It should be noted that the Swiss Federal Banking Commission named a dozen banks, including Credit Suisse, as having failed to exercise due diligence in vetting depositors linked to Abacha who had together paid in $660 million. Much of this money had come into Switzerland from banks in the United Kingdom and the United States, and there had been flows back to the United Kingdom. The military government headed by General Abdulsalami Abubakar in 1998 recovered some funds from Abacha’s family and two former ministers that had apparently been appropriated in a fraudulent buy-back of Russian-held debt, but there were no prosecutions. Nor was there a full disclosure and accountability with respect to the monies recovered. Similarly, the Obasanjo government has recovered further funds and had some of Abacha’s private accounts frozen. It should be noted that Abacha family also agreed in principle to surrender about $1.2 billion of their wealth under a new compromise deal with the Government.
This was considered a full and final settlement of what the Government believed the late Gen. Abacha looted from the treasury, although the government reported in November 2003 that it had reached agreement with the Swiss authorities for the return of close to $660, traceable to Abacha. While the government is pursuing money stolen by Abacha, however, it has looked the other way from the looted money under earlier administrations, especially that of General Babangida. Yet, the leadership of Babangida Administration is reputed to have trailed that of Abacha in terms of the scope and degree of depredations by their respective regimes.
According to reports, the Obasanjo Administration refused offers by experts, including those from UN, to trace monies looted from Nigeria during the Babangida regime, but encouraged the pursuit of Abacha stolen funds. Furthermore, most of the money recovered is reported to have found its way back to private purse of high-ranking government officials, and rarely returned back to the treasury. If Abacha were alive, probably no government would have dared confront him with allegations of corruption, let alone seek justice, forfeiture and restitution. The impression created seems to be that of a political vendetta against the Abacha’s family, not a genuine commitment to the eradication of political corruption in the country. This proposition will be well-grounded if one considers that it was Abacha who jailed President Obasanjo in 1996, for allegedly planning to overthrow his regime. The above is not to suggest, however, that the Obasanjo Administration has not taken any steps to deal with corruption. Quite the contrary. At least, when contrasted to the previous regimes, the Obasanjo Administration has consistently put the issue on the national agenda, although very little has been achieved, because the commitment on the part of the Government is largely rhetorical. Perhaps, one concrete achievement of the Administration is that it resurrected a report on corruption that was dumped by the previous regimes and thereafter proposed an anti-corruption bill to the parliament, thereby instigating the promulgation of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.
Furthermore, on assumption of office, the Obasanjo Administration also set up several committees to investigate, analyze and proffer solutions to the human rights abuses, including corruption, said to have been committed by past administrations. A Commission of Inquiry known as Oputa Panel was set up in 1999 to investigate human rights abuses that have occurred since 1966. However, although the Commission made several recommendations to redress past injustices and prevent future violations, they are yet to be made public, let alone implemented. There are reports that powerful individuals in the country are obstructing any Government action on the report, though it would seem the government itself is disinterested, for political reasons, in taking any action on the report. Also, the Obasanjo Administration has appointed panels to investigate appointments and contracts made during the period leading to the transition to civilian rule, where billions of dollars were reportedly plundered and purloined, and into failed contracts and fraudulent land transactions under previous governments.
Despite these efforts, however, nothing tangible has been achieved in terms of eradicating or even reducing the level of political corruption in Nigeria. In effect, the efforts to date have produced no largely results and, the practice of spoliation remains, if not intensified. Although the current democratic space has allowed a limited enjoyment of human rights, including free speech, the return of democracy has neither resulted in reduction of political corruption nor an improved enjoyment of economic and social rights by the majority of Nigerians. Throughout President Obasanjo first term in office that ended in May 2003, allegations of corrupt inducement by the executive to the parliament abound. High-ranking federal ministers and state commissioners were indicted for massive looting, but rarely brought to justice. In 2001, the Nigerian senate instituted a probe into its financial affairs after allegations of corruption.
According to the report by the Senate Committee, many contract awards and other payments were authorised by the late Okadigbo, a former president of the senate, and a dozen other Senate officers to themselves or contractors with whom they were associated. Payments authorised by Okadigbo alone were said to amount to about $2.7 million and included about $40, 000 for ‘Christmas welfare.’ However, all the senators involved were cleared of any wrongdoing by another committee of the senate. The impression is that politicians plundered so much money from the treasury because of fear that the military might return, and wanted to “keep” enough for their retirement, and to ensure their future affluence. Others were said to be involved in the “stealing game” because of fear that they might lose their bids for second terms, or to amass enough money for election campaigns. Whatever the reasons for the theft of national resources and wealth might be, its consequences for the vulnerable sectors of the population, are far reaching. Reports of high level corruption among the members of the National Assembly, however, are still commonplace in the news and commentaries. Virtually all the branches of government, including the criminal justice system (i.e. the police and the courts) are affected.
Corruption generally flourishes in Nigeria because no effective control mechanisms are available and governments have lacked the political power to deal the problem. It is therefore not surprising that apart from Abacha, no Nigerian president has been brought to justice on corruption charges. The result of the failure of governments, (including the current one), to bring high-ranking state officials to justice has precipitated corruption among public servants that also pillage the state resources. In short, at the beginning of a second term of Obasanjo Administration, there is no evidence of real change. One commentator succinctly described the situation: Unfortunately, the euphoria that greeted the enthronement of democracy in Nigeria has been, so to speak, cut short by putrid and shameful dance involving our highest political office holders. From the certificate forgery and perjury implicating ex-speaker Salisu Buhari, Bola Tinubu, Evan Enwerem etc. to contract award cum anticipatory approval racket that rocked the senate to the allegation of corruption against the executive back to the sword of probe or Damocles now dangling over the House of Representatives, the whole is a dance in a shameful celebration of corruption.
There is no serious watchers of political events in Nigeria right now who will not be scandalized by the monumental corruption in virtually all our so-called exalted offices since the past one year. Many observers of the political trend in Nigeria argue that there is little chance that the second coming of the Obasanjo Administration would lead to a positive and progressive change or improvement.
Given the widespread allegations of corruption before and during the April 2003 general elections, it would seem ludicrous to expect that the next four years would not witness more or even worst cases of grand corruption in the country. Meanwhile, citizens’ expectations of enjoyment of basic necessities of life under a democratic dispensation have dimmed, as the nation’s wealth and resources that should naturally be available to meet those needs are plundered, almost daily, by the country’s political ‘leaders’, without saturation or remorse.
Ho. There is no statistical relationship between socio marketing practice and corruption in Nigeria
Hi. There is a statistically significant correlation between socio marketing practice and corruption in Nigeria
Dependent and independent variables: The terms “dependent variable” and “independent variable” are used in similar but subtly different ways in mathematics and statistics as part of the standard terminology in those subjects. They are used to distinguish between two types of quantities being considered, separating them into those available at the start of a process and those being created by it, where the latter (dependent variables) are dependent on the former (independent variables).
The independent variable is typically the variable representing the value being manipulated or changed and the dependent variable is the observed result of the independent variable being manipulated. For example concerning nutrition, the independent variable of daily vitamin C intake (how much vitamin C one consumes) can influence the dependent variable of life expectancy (the average age one attains). Over some period of time, scientists will control the vitamin C intake in a substantial group of people. One part of the group will be given a daily high dose of vitamin C, and the remainder will be given a placebo pill (so that they are unaware of not belonging to the first group) without vitamin C. The scientists will investigate if there is any statistically significant difference in the life span of the people who took the high dose and those who took the placebo (no dose). The goal is to see if the independent variable of high vitamin C dosage has a correlation with the dependent variable of people’s life span. The designation independent/dependent is clear in this case, because if a correlation is found, it cannot be that life span has influenced vitamin C intake, but an influence in the other direction is possible.
Use in mathematics:
In calculus, a function is a map whose action is specified on variables. Take x and y to be two variables. A function f may map x to some expression in x. Assigning gives a relation between x and y. If there is some relation specifying y in terms of x, then y is known as a “dependent variable” (and x is an “independent variable”).
Data analysis can take the form of simple descriptive statistics or more sophisticated statistical inference, which are among those shown in Figure 3.
Figure 1. Type of Research, General Research Approaches, Data Collection Techniques, & Data Analysis Techniques
Data analysis techniques include univariate analysis (such as analysis of single-variable distributions), bivariate analysis, and more generally, multivariate analysis. Multivariate analysis, broadly speaking, refers to all statistical methods that simultaneously analyze multiple measurements on each individual or object under investigation (Hair et al., 1995); as such, many multivariate techniques are extensions of univariate and bivariate analysis. The diagram presented below as Figure 4 proposes an approach to decide when a specific type of data analysis technique is appropriate. Each data analysis technique is later defined in the diagram below;
Figure 2. Decision Tree for Choosing Best Form of Data Analysis (Adapted from Hair et al., 1995)
It should be noted that when selecting a data analysis technique, a researcher should make sure that the assumptions related to the technique are satisfied (i.e., normal distribution, independence among observations, linearity, and lack of multi-collinearity between the independent variables, etc.). Structured Equation Modeling, SEM, can be applied as a preferred substitute for many of the techniques in the diagram, in some cases providing additional statistics and examinations. For a detailed discussion refer to Geffen, Straub, and Boudreau (2000) and to Geffen (2003).
Examining interaction effects with LISREL when the interaction involves a continuous variable is problematic because of high degrees of shared variance. In such cases, PLS should be used. For a discussion of applying interaction effects in PLS, see Chin et al. (2003). When the interaction involves a nominal item, such as gender or group number, LISREL can be applied but measuring the interaction requires comparing samples. See discussion in Bollen (1989).
SEM are typically applied with reflective measures. On this, please see the discussion in Gefen, Straub, and Boudreau (2000) and to Gefen (2003). PLS is especially adept to handling formative measures (indicators) in addition to reflective measures (indicators). Although formative measures are, in theory, not applicable in LISREL Gefen, Straub, and Boudreau (2000), recent research (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001) suggests that it might be possible to apply formative measures also in LISREL. Still such attempts are extremely rare in the literature and in the experience of the authors here seldom show appropriate fit indexes.
DISCUSSION OF RESULT
The result of the data analysis shows that the country lacks reasonable records and data in socio marketing structures and techniques as well in its implementation. The other data collected rated the country so high in terms of corruption level despite the fight against this evil menace in the country. The multivariate analysis on both the socio marketing practice and corruption level on the country tells the simple facts that the nation is still far behind in terms of poor marketing practices and high level of corruption.Let me highlight the marketing skills and attitudes required to compete in our fast-paced marketing environment. Today’s marketing professional must be fiercely focused on delivering value to all stakeholders. Marketers must be acutely environmentally aware (and I don’t mean ecology). They must be comfortable with offline and online marketing techniques, see technology as a tool for optimizing marketing effectiveness and be prepared to have their performance evaluated using hard core marketing metric But do our marketers measure up? My candid opinion is that there are a lot of marketing people in Nigeria doing pretty good jobs. However, there are truck loads more who are still being badly led. This is not necessarily from the educational institutions, though they must accept their own fair share of the blame. It is also as a result of working with line managers who pretend they are astute marketers but fail to develop themselves. They pass on their bad habits to new recruits thus, perpetuating poor practices. There is also the pressure from many ‘marketing’ bosses, who are painfully focused on short term instead of long term competitiveness, favour transactions rather than ensuring relationships and worse still, confuse branding with brand building.
Marketing seems not to have its proper position in most board rooms. What is the right place of marketing in business?
Perhaps we should ask ourselves how many marketing people are able to interpret or make sense of a set of financial statements. This is important. In the board room, a lot of decisions are made at the strategic level that impact on organizations’ bottom line and there is high concern about delivering shareholders value. Globally, marketers have been able to put up a solid fight for a place in the board room. It is coming with global marketers’ ability to demonstrate direct contribution of marketing in delivering long term shareholder value. In Africa, we still seem to be concerned about the next advertising campaign to give visual endorsement of our contribution to corporate success. This is misguided. It extends the argument that marketing is simply cost rather than an investment. To become relevant enough to warrant a place in the board, marketers must learn to think beyond advertising campaigns and focus more on practices that help develop and deliver sustainable competitive advantages. We must work smarter. In order to win a place in the board rooms, marketing professionals must unlearn and relearn. We must retool ourselves to stay relevant in this information driven age. Otherwise we run the risk of being nothing more than glorified sales people.
There is really no right place for marketing in business if marketing is to be effective. Marketing as a philosophy must exist everywhere within the organisation. No exceptions. The notion that marketing ought to be relegated to the marketing department is outdated. Everything that a business does revolve around the customer, but you will agree with me that marketing departments are rarely the only ones who deal with customers. Take a hotel for instance. Waiters, chambermaids, swimming pool attendants, personal trainers in the gym, front office staff, concierge, valet, laundry men, etc, all have to deal with guests more than even the marketing function of a hotel. Yet all these touch points can make or break the experience of staying in a hotel. So tell me what is the right place of marketing in a business? Everywhere!
What challenges do you reckon marketers face in Nigeria in particular and Africa in general? There are many issues but I want to focus on three broad challenges. The first is lack of professional confidence. Let me add quickly that this is not peculiar to Africa. In speaking with and training marketing professionals from almost 100 countries over the last 12 years, I find that marketing people still lack the conviction to practice marketing with confidence. Somehow they do not see the relationship between the theory and practice of marketing. They learn that if you are good to the customer, the customer will reward you with their business and tell their friends. However, somehow, you still find many marketing people overseeing abuse of customers. We must believe that marketing works and have confidence in its ability to deliver on the bottom line in the long term.
The second challenge is working without marketing metrics. Our marketing community seems to be used to working without the benefit of hard evidence. We therefore make multi-million naira decisions based on gut feelings and hear say. This is a problem. For example, there is still confusion about the circulation figures of our national dailies. Marketers need these data independently verified so they can make informed decisions. Truth be told, we do not know what the readership figures are. Many still believe that there are more females than males in Nigeria. And most have never been to the National Bureau of Statistics website. The lack of industry wide data in many sectors means that many marketers have to literally work in data darkness. It is akin to driving a fast car blind folded and in reverse. This undermines the potentially good work of many marketers in Nigeria and restricts the potentials of many organisations.
The third challenge facing our marketers is technophobia. Today’s consumer technologies should be a marketers dream come true. However, what we see is not a warm embrace of these developments but a disturbing apathy towards the deployment of technologies. Today’s web and server based technologies can improve customers’ experiences and as well organizational effectiveness yet many marketers take a back seat and pretend that this is the realm of the IT function. Online marketing language still sounds like post modern hieroglyphics to many and database driven marketing makes many jump out of their marketing skins in humiliating terror. And for many facebook is still where to post pictures and give birthday wishes. The use of technology presents significant marketing knowledge gaps between marketers and their global counterparts.
Finally and related to point three above, is the ability of our marketing professionals to deal with the fast pace of change in today’s business environment. This realization drives home the fact that the skills of yesterday will no longer suffice for tomorrow’s opportunities and threats.
You mentioned branding and brand building earlier. Is there any difference between the two?
That will be the subject of another discussion. The difference between the two is as clear as looking at Africa and Europe from outer space at night.
Can you tell us about the Chartered Institute of Marketing and its position in the place of marketing globally?
The CIM is the most recognised professional marketing organisation in the world. It is the diamond standard for those who want to be taken seriously within the marketing profession. CIM members hold distinguished positions in industry around the world. The CIM qualifications are sought after by blue chip employers all over the world because CIM Charter holders have distinguished themselves in the industry. I know many personally who have delivered phenomenal values to their organisations.
SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION
The practice of marketing in Nigeria is entering a new era of challenges that has no precedent in the history of the current generation. The objective context of the marketing programs of business organizations with regards to the environment of such program is witnessing fundamental shifts necessitating a rethink of the way we do marketing. It implies a return to the basics of successful traditions of marketing practice while raising the marketing game to new and higher level of strategy. The combined forces of Democracy, Deregulation and Digitalization which I call the (3D forces) on the business environment are changing the economic structure of many industries with potential seismic effects. Marketing as one of the leading functions of business cannot insulate itself from these potential seismic effects. It must adapt (and where possible take advantage) of the 3D forces to fulfill its mission in business organizations to win in the market place.
Corruption Five years of democracy and political stability has led to increased level of “Business Confidence” in Nigeria as well as a high level of corruption rate in the country. Business Confidence is a macroeconomic index that measures the level of confidence of people to invest and spend based on their sentiment and perception of the “conducive-ness” of the business environment. Foreign Direct Investment (FDIs) is increasing led by the huge investments in the telecom sector. The manufacturing has also witnessed new FDIs through Nigeria Breweries, Guinness and companies like Nestle. Empirical evidence suggests that national capitals stashed away in savings in foreign countries are beginning to return to Nigeria in the form of private investments. The capital market is growing rapidly occasioned by the new level of business confidence and the increased savings level of the middle class.
The economy grew by more than 10% last year, a feat unprecedented in the last decade. There is now a more structured approach to macroeconomic management. While the gains of economic growth and the spiral effects of FDIs might not have yet trickled to the bottom of the economic ladder, empirical evidence suggest clearly that the middle class is growing with increasing prosperity. A dipstick index of the increasing economic prosperity of the middle class is the number of new cars on the road especially on Lagos 3rd mainland bridge every morning.
We are witnessing the entry of new firms into Nigeria competing in existing industries and sometimes opening up new industry niches and categories. The entry mode of these firms rage from licensing, agency relationships and sometimes full business entry. Some firms that divested in the days of military rule are returning. In the manufacturing sector, some of the old multinationals have who divested returned to significantly increase equity in their local subsidiary and take their full control. Intra and inter industry category competition is on the increase.
A higher level of marketing and business excellence is now expected of the Nigeria managers. During the days of military rule, the local subsidiaries of international firms were virtually abandoned by their international headquarters as they scaled down on their investments. The quality of human capital and professional excellence declined in many sectors. Marketing standards and practice fell in Nigeria from the lofty levels of the past. This trend is now reversing as we witness new investments in development of marketing talents in many industries. International exposure and secondments of marketing talents is on the increase. There is an increasing change of leadership and generational shifts with returnee secondments, Nigeria repatriates or expatriate Marketing Directors who are expected to bring world-class practice to their companies. The driver of this trend is recognition by the international firms that they virtually increased the level of their investments in Nigeria, at the same time and at nearly the same scale as their rivals. This implies a higher level of competition that demands a higher level of marketing excellence if the firms are to achieve their expected returns on investments.
Kotler, P,- Roberto, W and Lee, N. (2002): Social Marketing – Improving the quality of Life.
Lefebvre, RC, Flora, JA. (1988): Social marketing and public health intervention. health
Manoff, R. (1985) Social marketing: New imperative for public health. New York: Praeger.