Sources of Authority in Civil Service: Meaning, Types, and Examples (Explained)

1. Introduction: Understanding the Concept of Authority in Civil Service

In every organized society, the effectiveness of governance and administration largely depends on the proper exercise of authority. Authority is the legal and moral right to make decisions, issue directives, and enforce compliance. Within the civil service, authority serves as the foundation of order, discipline, and accountability. It provides the framework through which public servants execute policies and deliver services to citizens efficiently.

In the context of government, authority defines who can decide what and on what basis. It determines the chain of command, clarifies responsibilities, and ensures that actions taken by public officials align with established laws and administrative rules. Without authority, the operations of the public service would descend into chaos, as every action or decision requires legitimate backing.

Understanding the sources of authority in civil service is, therefore, crucial to the success of public administration. It helps civil servants, policymakers, and citizens identify where the power to act originates, how it should be exercised, and the limitations surrounding it. These sources form the legal, ethical, and conventional foundation upon which governance stands.

In Nigeria and many Commonwealth nations, the civil service derives its authority from several key sources—constitutional provisions, legislative acts, executive orders, administrative circulars, judicial interpretations, and established conventions. Together, these ensure that government operations remain consistent, transparent, and accountable.

This article explores these sources of authority in the civil service, explaining their meaning, types, and practical examples. It also examines how authority functions in the Nigerian public service context and highlights its challenges and best practices.

2. What Is a Source of Authority? (Definition & Explanation)

The term “source of authority” refers to the origin or foundation from which the right to exercise power or control is derived. In simpler terms, it identifies the basis upon which a person or institution is empowered to make decisions and expect compliance.

In public administration, a source of authority is the legal or institutional backing that legitimizes administrative actions. It explains why a public officer has the right to act and how far that right extends. Authority without a valid source is arbitrary and illegal, while authority derived from a recognized source is legitimate and enforceable.

2.1 Difference Between Power and Authority

Although often used interchangeably, power and authority are conceptually different.

• Power is the ability or capacity to influence others or bring about change, whether legitimate or not.
• Authority, on the other hand, is power that is recognized as legitimate by law, rules, or custom.

For example, a minister has the authority to issue directives to departments under the ministry because the Constitution and enabling laws grant such power. However, if the same minister orders actions outside legal boundaries, that becomes an exercise of power without authority.

2.2 Source of Authority in Management and Public Administration

In management theory, authority originates from the organizational hierarchy, which defines roles and responsibilities. In public administration, this concept expands beyond organizational charts—it includes legal instruments, political legitimacy, and administrative traditions.

According to Max Weber’s classical theory, authority in organizations is structured to ensure predictability and rational decision-making. In civil service systems, this means that every action must trace back to a recognized source of authority, such as a law, policy directive, or official circular.

Thus, the sources of authority in management—laws, delegation, and custom—are mirrored in government settings through constitutional provisions, administrative delegation, and established conventions.

 

3. Why Authority Matters in the Civil and Public Service

Authority is not merely a bureaucratic tool; it is the organizing principle that sustains the functioning of the civil service and the entire machinery of government. Without legitimate authority, no administrative process can operate effectively. In the context of the public service, the authority ensures that policies are executed in a manner consistent with the law, public interest, and institutional hierarchy.

3.1 The Role of Authority in Maintaining Order and Efficiency

Authority provides clarity of command and accountability within the civil service. Each officer knows the scope of his or her duties, who to report to, and what limits exist in exercising discretion. This clarity prevents conflict, duplication of roles, and confusion that could derail public service delivery.

For example, in the Nigerian Federal Civil Service, Permanent Secretaries derive their authority from the Constitution and the Public Service Rules (PSR). Their position empowers them to supervise directors, approve budgets, and ensure compliance with government policy. Similarly, a director derives authority from delegated responsibilities assigned through official circulars or administrative orders.

When authority is well-defined and respected, bureaucratic efficiency improves. Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) can function smoothly because every action follows due process. It creates predictability and stability, which are hallmarks of effective governance.

3.2 Authority and Accountability in Government

One of the most important functions of authority is to establish accountability. In public administration, authority and accountability are inseparable—the power to act must always be matched with responsibility for outcomes. Civil servants exercise authority on behalf of the state and must justify their actions based on legal or institutional mandates.

For instance, a Head of Department (HOD) who authorizes expenditures must do so within the limits of the Financial Regulations. If funds are mismanaged, the HOD is accountable to audit and oversight bodies because the authority to spend was granted within specific parameters.
This balance prevents abuse of power and promotes responsible governance.

Moreover, authority ensures the rule of law in administrative operations. Every instruction or decision can be traced back to a recognized legal or institutional framework—ensuring that public officers act in the name of the government, not personal interest.

3.3 The Link Between Authority and Discipline

Authority establishes discipline within the civil service. When subordinates recognize and respect the lawful authority of their superiors, it fosters a culture of obedience, professionalism, and ethical conduct. Civil servants who disobey lawful directives can be sanctioned, not because of personal disagreement, but because such disobedience violates the chain of command—a fundamental principle of administrative control.

In Nigeria, the Public Service Rules (PSR) clearly stipulate disciplinary procedures anchored on authority. For example, Rule 030301 empowers supervisory officers to initiate disciplinary action when subordinates breach conduct standards. This ensures that authority is not only a privilege but also a mechanism for maintaining institutional integrity.

3.4 Misuse of Authority and Its Consequences

Despite its importance, authority can be misused when exercised without accountability or legal backing. Instances of abuse of authority—such as illegal transfers, victimization of subordinates, or unauthorized financial approvals—erode public trust and compromise administrative efficiency.

In Nigeria’s civil service history, several commissions of inquiry have exposed such abuses, leading to reforms in administrative procedures. A well-known example is the Udoji Commission (1972–1974), which highlighted inefficiencies arising from unchecked bureaucratic authority and recommended merit-based reforms.

Therefore, for the civil service to function effectively, authority must always operate within clearly defined boundaries. Legitimacy, transparency, and ethical responsibility are essential ingredients of its proper exercise.

4. List and Explain the Main Sources of Authority in Civil Service

4.1 Overview

The authority that governs the operations, conduct, and decisions within the civil service system emanates from multiple interconnected sources. These sources define the legal legitimacy, institutional framework, and ethical standards guiding civil servants in the discharge of their duties. In a well-structured bureaucracy—such as that of Nigeria or other Commonwealth countries—the sources of authority ensure that the civil service functions in alignment with constitutional mandates, statutory provisions, administrative regulations, and established conventions.

Authority in the civil service is not derived arbitrarily. Rather, it is institutionally constructed through an established legal order that defines who exercises power, how such power is exercised, and within what limits. In essence, these sources of authority serve as the foundation for accountability, hierarchical discipline, and continuity of governance, especially in a system that upholds the principle of the rule of law and public interest administration.

Broadly, the sources of authority in civil service can be categorized into:

1. Constitutional Authority
2. Legislative Authority (Acts of Parliament)
3. Executive Authority (Delegated Powers)
4. Judicial or Administrative Precedents
5. Administrative Rules, Circulars, and Guidelines
6. Customs, Traditions, and Conventions of the Service

Each of these sources contributes to the overall framework within which the civil service operates. However, the most fundamental of these—forming the primary legal basis—are the Constitution and the Acts of Parliament, which will be discussed in detail below.

4.2 Constitutional Authority

The Constitution is the supreme source of authority in any civil service system. In Nigeria, this is embodied in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999, as amended), which explicitly outlines the structure, powers, and functions of the public service and its institutions.

According to Section 171 and Sections 153–160 of the Nigerian Constitution, the civil service derives its legitimacy and operational existence from the constitutional framework. The Constitution:

• Defines the Civil Service Commission as a statutory body responsible for recruitment, promotion, and disciplinary control of officers.
• Establishes the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF) as the central coordinating institution for federal service matters.
• Provides for the Public Service Rules (PSR) and Financial Regulations (FR) as instruments of enforcement within the constitutional framework.

In practical terms, constitutional authority serves as the foundation of legitimacy, ensuring that every administrative act or decision within the civil service has a lawful basis. This prevents arbitrary exercise of power and protects both public officers and citizens from administrative abuse.

Furthermore, the Constitution also establishes the principle of separation of powers, thereby delineating the functions of the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary—a structure that the civil service must respect in its daily tasks. Civil servants, therefore, act not as political agents but as constitutional functionaries whose roles are bound by law and institutional ethics.

Academic Insight:
Scholars such as Adebayo (2010) and Adamolekun (2002) note that the authority of the civil service must always be seen as derivative, not autonomous. This means civil servants act under authority—never above it. Their power is legitimate only when it is exercised within constitutional limits.

Illustrative Example:
For instance, the appointment of a Permanent Secretary in Nigeria is made under the authority of the President, but such an appointment must comply with the Federal Civil Service Commission (Establishment) Act and related constitutional provisions. Thus, while the President’s authority is executive, it is constitutionally defined and not personal.

“In Nigeria, the Constitution is the primary source of authority in civil service, serving as the foundation upon which other administrative instruments derive their power.”

4.3 Legislative Authority (Acts of Parliament)

Beyond the Constitution, another major source of authority in the civil service is legislative enactment, often referred to as Acts of Parliament. These laws are passed by the National Assembly (or the State Houses of Assembly at the subnational level) to operationalize the broad provisions of the Constitution and regulate specific areas of public administration.

Legislative authority functions as an instrument of delegation from the people (through their elected representatives) to the administrative machinery of government. Such laws confer powers, create agencies, define responsibilities, and establish limits to administrative actions.

In the Nigerian context, several key Acts of Parliament govern the civil service and its related functions. These include, but are not limited to:

1. The Public Service Rules (PSR) and Financial Regulations (FR) — though administrative in nature, they are backed by statutory authority through the Civil Service Commission Act.
2. The Civil Service (Re-organization) Act, 1998, provides for structural reforms in administrative management.
3. The Federal Character Commission Act (Cap F7, LFN 2004) — ensures equity and representation in recruitment and promotion within the service.
4. The Freedom of Information Act, 2011, legally compels transparency and access to administrative information.
5. The Public Procurement Act, 2007, regulates administrative processes concerning government expenditure and contract awards.
6. The Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2007, mandates prudent management of public finances by civil servants and agencies.

From a theoretical standpoint, Acts of Parliament function as secondary legal authorities that give practical expression to constitutional mandates. They specify how institutions must operate, define the powers of civil service commissions, and determine sanctions for misconduct or negligence.

Scholarly Perspective:
Adamolekun (2002) and Olaopa (2018) assert that without legislative authority, the civil service would lack the operational clarity needed for accountability. It is through statutory enactments that administrative discretion is constrained by law, ensuring predictability and uniformity in public administration.

Example:
The Public Procurement Act (2007), for example, institutionalized the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) and standardized procurement procedures across ministries and agencies. Before its enactment, procurement processes were opaque and vulnerable to abuse. The law thus represents a shift from discretionary authority to rule-based authority—a core attribute of modern bureaucracies.

“Acts of Parliament serve as one of the vital sources of authority in public service in Nigeria, ensuring that the conduct of civil servants remains consistent with legislative intent and national policy.”

4.4 Delegated or Administrative Authority

Delegated or Administrative Authority refers to the power legally transferred from a higher governmental body (such as the legislature or the executive) to administrative agencies, parastatals, and individual public officers for efficient governance.

In the civil service system, this form of authority operates as an extension of both constitutional and legislative powers, allowing specialized agencies and departments to implement policies, make regulations, and carry out functions that the legislature or executive cannot practically execute directly.

From a public administration theory perspective, this aligns with Max Weber’s bureaucratic model, which posits that authority in modern governance must be rational-legal and derived from formally delegated power rather than personal will.

The Legal Basis of Delegation

In Nigeria, delegated authority is provided under statutory instruments such as:

• Subsidiary legislation (made under the provisions of an enabling Act).
• Ministerial regulations, circulars, and administrative instructions issued under constitutional or legislative powers.

For example, under the Public Service Rules (PSR), Permanent Secretaries and Directors exercise disciplinary control over junior officers on behalf of the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC). This reflects delegated authority—their powers are not original, but borrowed under law.

Purpose and Policy Rationale

Delegated authority enhances:

• Efficiency — enables prompt decision-making within ministries and departments.
• Specialization — allows technical experts to handle specific regulatory issues.
• Continuity — maintains governance even when political officeholders change.

However, delegation does not transfer responsibility; the delegating authority retains oversight and accountability. For example, a Minister remains answerable to Parliament for acts done by subordinates under delegated authority.

Academic Commentary

According to Olaopa (2018), delegated authority in the Nigerian civil service exemplifies the principle of “decentralized responsibility within centralized control.” It ensures responsiveness without eroding hierarchical discipline.

Illustrative Example

The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) derives authority from the NAFDAC Act (1993) to regulate food and drugs. Although the National Assembly enacted the Act, the agency exercises delegated powers to issue regulations and enforce compliance on behalf of the federal government.

4.5 Executive Authority (Presidential or Ministerial Orders)

Executive Authority represents the powers vested in the President, Governor, Ministers, and other principal officers of the Executive Arm of government. These powers are exercised in accordance with constitutional provisions and are operationalized through executive orders, directives, or ministerial instructions.

In the context of the civil service, executive authority serves as the operational engine that drives the implementation of laws and public policies. While the legislature enacts laws, the executive ensures their enforcement through the machinery of the civil service.

Legal Foundation

In Nigeria, Section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) vests the executive powers of the Federation in the President, who may exercise such powers directly or through ministers and officers in the public service. This section provides the constitutional legitimacy for ministerial orders and executive directives that civil servants are bound to obey.

Practical Function

Executive authority in the civil service manifests in forms such as:

• Executive Orders: Directives issued by the President or Governor to enforce existing laws or administrative reforms (e.g., Executive Order No. 5 on the promotion of local content in science and technology).
• Ministerial Circulars: Policy statements or instructions clarifying administrative matters.
• Cabinet Decisions: Policy resolutions transmitted to Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) for implementation.

Accountability and Control

Although civil servants implement executive directives, they must ensure that such orders do not contravene existing laws or the Constitution. Civil servants are ethically and legally obliged to seek clarification or written confirmation when executive instructions conflict with statutory provisions—an essential aspect of bureaucratic accountability.

Academic Perspective

Adebayo (2010) posits that executive authority, when guided by administrative ethics, provides the link between political leadership and bureaucratic continuity. It ensures that policies are implemented effectively while preserving institutional neutrality.

Example:
When the President issues an executive directive for the digitalization of all federal payroll systems (e.g., the IPPIS reform), civil servants act under executive authority, translating political intent into administrative reality.

“Executive authority in public service in Nigeria ensures that civil servants execute presidential or ministerial directives in alignment with constitutional principles.”

4.6 Judicial Authority (Court Interpretations)

The Judiciary serves as another critical source of authority in civil service, primarily through its power of judicial review and interpretation of laws. Judicial authority determines the boundaries of administrative action and safeguards civil servants and citizens from unlawful exercises of power.

Function and Scope

Under the doctrine of separation of powers, the judiciary ensures that executive and administrative decisions remain consistent with the Constitution and statutory laws. This creates a check-and-balance mechanism that preserves the integrity of governance.

In practical terms, the judiciary:

• Interprets civil service laws and regulations;
• Adjudicates disputes involving employment, promotion, or discipline of civil servants;
• Defines the scope of powers of administrative agencies;
• Protects the fundamental rights of civil servants and citizens affected by administrative decisions.

Examples from Nigerian Case Law

1. Garba v. University of Maiduguri (1986) — the Supreme Court held that administrative bodies must observe fair hearing in disciplinary proceedings.
2. Longe v. FBN Plc (2010) — reaffirmed that even in administrative actions, the rule of law and due process must prevail.
3. Olaniyan v. University of Lagos (1985) — established that public servants with statutory appointments cannot be removed except in accordance with the law.

These precedents underscore that judicial interpretations not only clarify administrative rules but also become binding authorities guiding future administrative conduct.

Scholarly Insight

According to Gboyega (2003), the judiciary institutionalizes legality within public administration by transforming judicial rulings into functional components of administrative law—thereby expanding the sources of authority beyond legislative and executive realms.

“Judicial authority in civil service provides interpretive guidance on constitutional and administrative powers, reinforcing the rule of law in Nigeria’s public service.”

4.7 Conventional Authority (Tradition and Precedents)

The final, though informal, source of authority in civil service is Conventional Authority, derived from traditions, customs, and precedents that have evolved within the administrative system. Unlike constitutional or statutory powers, conventional authority is not codified, yet it carries moral and institutional weight because it reflects accepted administrative practices.

Nature and Relevance

Conventions fill the gaps left by formal laws, ensuring consistency and continuity in governance. In Nigeria, as in other Commonwealth administrative systems, many civil service traditions—such as the principle of political neutrality, hierarchical reporting, and collective responsibility—are maintained through convention rather than legislation.

For example:

• The practice that Permanent Secretaries remain in office despite changes in political leadership is based on the convention of administrative permanence.
• The tradition that Ministers provide policy direction while civil servants handle implementation stems from British administrative precedent and remains a cornerstone of the Nigerian public service ethos.

Academic Perspective

According to Adamolekun (2002), administrative conventions function as the “unwritten constitution” of the civil service—sustaining institutional stability even when formal laws are silent. They represent a culture of governance that complements legal authority.

Limitations

While conventions are valuable for continuity, they are not legally enforceable unless incorporated into law. Their violation may be politically criticized, but cannot be challenged in court unless a statutory provision exists.

Illustrative Example

The rotation of Permanent Secretaries across ministries is guided by administrative convention to prevent over-familiarity and encourage cross-sectoral experience, though not explicitly mandated by any law.

“Conventional authority in civil service derives from established traditions and administrative precedents that guide behavior and maintain institutional continuity.”

5. Sources of Authority in Public Service in Nigeria

5.1 Overview: The Nigerian Context

The Nigerian public service operates within a structured administrative framework where authority is legally defined, institutionally delegated, and procedurally regulated. The system derives legitimacy primarily from the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and is complemented by a network of administrative instruments such as the Public Service Rules (PSR), Financial Regulations (FR), and the Civil Service Handbook.

Authority in Nigeria’s public service is therefore not arbitrary; it is legally constituted, procedurally exercised, and institutionally supervised. Each administrative action—be it recruitment, discipline, financial approval, or delegation of duties—must trace its authority to one or more of these formal sources.

The civil service, as the executive arm of the government, functions as the principal instrument for implementing governmental policies. Thus, understanding the sources of its authority helps explain how governance operates legally and efficiently within a complex federal structure.

5.2 Constitutional Authority in the Nigerian Public Service

The 1999 Constitution remains the supreme source of administrative authority in Nigeria. It provides the legal foundation for the establishment, organization, and control of the federal and state civil services.

• Section 169 establishes the Public Service of the Federation, while Section 206 establishes that of the states.
• Section 171(1)–(6) empowers the President to appoint key officers in the public service, such as Permanent Secretaries and Heads of Extra-Ministerial Departments, thereby legitimizing executive authority.
• Section 318(1) provides a detailed definition of “public service,” clarifying its scope and institutional coverage.

Through these provisions, the Constitution authorizes the creation of ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) and outlines the chain of administrative command. Every directive, appointment, or disciplinary action within the Nigerian public service must therefore align with constitutional provisions, either directly or through delegated authority.

5.3 Statutory and Regulatory Authority

Beyond the Constitution, legislative enactments provide the second major layer of authority. Acts of the National Assembly establish specialized agencies and empower them to perform functions on behalf of the government. Examples include:

• The Federal Civil Service Commission (Establishment) Act, 1973, empowers the Commission to appoint, promote, and discipline federal officers.
• The Public Procurement Act (2007) defines procurement procedures and financial accountability frameworks.
• The Fiscal Responsibility Act (2007) regulates fiscal management and expenditure oversight.

Through these statutes, the National Assembly delegates operational powers to various institutions, thereby expanding the legal sources of authority across the public service system.

5.4 Administrative Authority: Public Service Rules (PSR)

The Public Service Rules (PSR) constitute the most comprehensive codification of administrative authority governing civil servants’ behavior, responsibilities, and disciplinary processes.
Originally derived from colonial regulations, the PSR has evolved through periodic revisions to reflect Nigeria’s governance realities.

Key provisions include:

• Chapter 2 – defines the conditions for appointment, promotion, and transfer of officers.
• Chapter 3 – outlines conduct standards, ethics, and disciplinary measures.
• Chapter 16 – regulates petitions and appeals within the service.

The PSR, therefore, operationalizes constitutional and statutory authority by specifying who may exercise what power and under what conditions. For instance:

A Director derives authority from the PSR to recommend disciplinary actions, while the Permanent Secretary exercises delegated powers of appointment or promotion within set limits.

The Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF) and the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) jointly ensure compliance with these rules, thereby institutionalizing bureaucratic accountability.

5.5 Financial Regulations (FR) as a Source of Authority

Financial authority in the Nigerian public service is governed by the Financial Regulations (FR)—a statutory instrument derived from the Finance (Control and Management) Act, 1958 (as amended). The FR provides binding rules for financial control, expenditure authorization, accounting, and audit procedures across all government ministries and parastatals.

Key authorities derived from the FR include:

• Vote Book Control (FR 403–406) – authority for financial officers to record expenditures.
• Warrant Authority (FR 205) – the legal basis for issuing and utilizing budgetary funds.
• Accounting Officer’s Responsibility (FR 310) – makes Permanent Secretaries accountable for public funds under their charge.

By linking fiscal operations to constitutional and executive authority, the FR ensures that every expenditure or financial commitment in the public service carries legal authorization.

5.6 Institutional Sources of Authority

Authority in the Nigerian public service is also distributed among key governance institutions that regulate, coordinate, and supervise administrative processes.

1. Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC):
   • Established by the Constitution (Section 153(1)(d)), the FCSC is empowered to appoint, promote, and discipline officers in the Federal Civil Service.
   • It acts as the custodian of personnel authority within the federal bureaucracy.
2. Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF):
   • Serves as the administrative nerve center of the federal bureaucracy.
   • Issues circulars, guidelines, and reforms that operationalize the PSR and ensure uniformity in administrative practices.
   • Its authority is largely delegated by the President through the Permanent Secretary (Service Policies and Strategies Office).
3. Budget Office, Bureau of Public Service Reforms (BPSR), and Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF):
   • Each of these agencies wields specific administrative authority under its enabling acts and executive mandates, particularly in budgeting, reforms, and financial control.

5.7 Civil Service Handbook and Other Administrative Instruments

The Civil Service Handbook serves as a reference document that outlines operational standards, procedures, and best practices in the conduct of public administration. Although not a legislative instrument, it provides interpretive guidance for applying the PSR and related regulations.

In addition, official circulars, memoranda, and service-wide policies (e.g., reforms on digital governance, gender inclusivity, or pension administration) represent evolving sources of authority that respond to emerging administrative realities.

Example:

• The 2017 Service-Wide Circular on Establishment Matters clarified the procedure for handling staff abscondment—demonstrating how administrative circulars create binding authority within the service.

5.8 Examples of Nigerian Civil Service Reforms Anchored on Authority

Authority in Nigeria’s public service has been continuously shaped by administrative reform commissions and modernization initiatives, such as:

• The Udoji Commission (1972–1974): Introduced performance management systems and merit-based promotion, formalizing administrative authority structures.
• The Ayida Panel (1994): Reaffirmed the central role of the Head of Service as the coordinating authority of the civil service.
• The Bureau of Public Service Reforms (BPSR) initiatives (2003–present): Focused on rationalizing authority hierarchies through e-governance, IPPIS (Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System), and accountability reforms.

These reforms highlight that authority in Nigeria’s civil service is dynamic, adapting to constitutional changes, administrative needs, and technological innovations.

5.9 Summary

In summary, the sources of authority in the Nigerian public service are a composite of constitutional, legislative, and administrative instruments, reinforced by established conventions and institutional mandates.
Authority is thus distributed through a multi-tier system:

• The Constitution provides legitimacy.
• Statutes and Regulations operationalize policy.
• Institutions and Circulars enforce and interpret administrative standards.

Collectively, they ensure that public service operations are legal, ethical, and accountable, reinforcing public confidence in governance.

6. Other Types and Classifications of Authority

Authority in the civil service is not a monolithic concept. It manifests in different forms and classifications depending on the context, source, and legitimacy of power. Understanding these distinctions helps clarify how government authority is exercised, why certain decisions carry binding force, and what makes an action legitimate within administrative frameworks.

This section analyses other typologies and models of authority relevant to public administration and civil service studies.

6.1. Formal vs. Informal Authority

Formal Authority

Formal authority refers to officially sanctioned power granted to individuals or institutions through legal instruments or organizational hierarchy. It is codified in laws, regulations, or administrative documents, and recognized by the entire civil service system.

In the Nigerian context, formal authority emanates from:

• The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999 as amended), which grants the President and other officers’ powers of appointment, control, and discipline over the public service.
• Public Service Rules (PSR) and Financial Regulations (FR), which stipulate how ministries and agencies should conduct their operations.
• Civil Service Commission guidelines, which authorize specific positions to exercise administrative control.

Formal authority is structured, explicit, and enforceable. For example, a Permanent Secretary’s authority to approve budgets or postings is derived from established rules and recognized by law.

Informal Authority

Informal authority, on the other hand, is derived from influence, expertise, reputation, or personal relationships, rather than formal legal delegation. It is often exercised by individuals who may not hold the highest rank but are respected for their knowledge, experience, or leadership qualities.

In the civil service, examples of informal authority include:

• Senior civil servants whose experience commands respect across departments.
• Advisors or technical officers who shape policy decisions through expertise.
• Unwritten norms that dictate “how things are done” within agencies.

While informal authority lacks formal legitimacy, it often enhances administrative efficiency by complementing formal structures. However, when misused, it can also lead to favoritism or bureaucratic bottlenecks.

Summary Insight:
Formal authority provides legal legitimacy, while informal authority provides functional legitimacy within administrative systems. Effective civil service management depends on balancing both.

6.2. Traditional, Charismatic, and Legal-Rational Authority (Weber’s Classification)

Max Weber, a foundational scholar in sociology and public administration, identified three ideal types of authority that explain the legitimacy of rule within societies and organizations. These are critical in understanding the foundations of government authority and bureaucratic power.

1. Traditional Authority

Traditional authority is based on custom, heritage, and long-standing practices. It derives legitimacy from cultural continuity — the belief that “this is how things have always been done.”
In governance, traditional authority is often seen in:

• Monarchies, emirates, and chieftaincies.
• Recognition of traditional rulers in Nigeria (e.g., Emirs, Obas, Obis) as custodians of local customs.

While traditional authority provides social stability, it may resist change and modernization. In Nigeria, this form of authority coexists with modern bureaucratic systems through traditional councils and cultural institutions that complement local governance.

2. Charismatic Authority

Charismatic authority rests on personal qualities, vision, or leadership charisma. It depends on the devotion of followers to the extraordinary personality of the leader.
Examples in administrative or political settings include:

• Reform-driven leaders who inspire civil service transformation.
• Individuals whose innovation or patriotism commands loyalty beyond their position.

Charismatic authority is unstable and transitional — it often diminishes when the leader leaves office unless institutionalized into rules.

3. Legal-Rational Authority

Legal-rational authority is the hallmark of modern bureaucratic systems such as the civil service. It is based on impersonal rules, legal frameworks, and structured procedures.
Officials derive their authority from the office they occupy, not from personal characteristics or heritage.

In Nigeria’s public service, this authority is expressed through:

• Constitutional and legislative provisions.
• The Public Service Rules, Financial Regulations, and other statutory instruments.
• Defined administrative hierarchies and standard operating procedures.

Legal-rational authority ensures predictability, accountability, and professionalism — qualities essential to an efficient bureaucracy.

Weberian Reflection:
Civil service authority is largely legal-rational, supported by elements of traditional and charismatic legitimacy in leadership and reform contexts.

6.3. Three Sources of Authority in Administration (Law, Delegation, and Custom)

In administrative theory, authority in government originates from three core sources — law, delegation, and custom. These sources interact dynamically to sustain governance and administrative coherence.

(a) Law

Law remains the supreme and foundational source of authority in any public administration.
All administrative powers in the civil service must stem from:

• The Constitution,
• Acts of Parliament, and
• Subsidiary legislation.

This legal grounding ensures that civil servants act within the bounds of legality and accountability. Any administrative action taken without legal backing is ultra vires (beyond lawful authority).

(b) Delegation

Delegation occurs when authority vested in one body is transferred or assigned to another body or individual to perform specific tasks.
For instance:

• Ministers delegate administrative responsibilities to Permanent Secretaries.
• Permanent Secretaries delegate functions to Directors or Heads of Units.

Delegation improves efficiency, enables specialization, and ensures smooth workflow. However, the delegator retains ultimate responsibility for the actions of the delegate.

(c) Custom (or Convention)

Custom, sometimes referred to as administrative convention, refers to established practices and traditions that, while not legally binding, are accepted as legitimate sources of authority.
In the Nigerian public service, such conventions include:

• The protocol of seniority in decision-making.
• Established inter-ministerial consultation before major policy announcements.

Custom serves as a stabilizing factor that preserves institutional memory and continuity in administrative practice.

Summary of the 3 Sources of Authority:

• Law → Legal legitimacy
• Delegation → Operational flexibility
• Custom → Institutional stability

Together, they form the triadic framework of authority that underpins administrative functioning in civil service systems globally and in Nigeria.

7. The Relationship Between Authority, Power, and Responsibility

Authority, power, and responsibility form the core triad of administrative control in any civil service system. Without a clear understanding of how these concepts interrelate, public administration becomes ineffective, arbitrary, and prone to abuse. Authority defines who may act; power determines the capacity to act; and responsibility ensures accountability for the action taken. Together, they form the backbone of authority in government and ensure orderly governance.

7.1. Conceptual Linkages

Authority

Authority refers to the legitimate right to make decisions, issue directives, and enforce compliance within an organization. It is derived from recognized sources of authority such as the Constitution, legislation, or delegated powers.
In the civil service, authority is position-based and must align with established procedures. A Permanent Secretary’s ability to approve postings or budgets, for example, is a direct function of the formal authority vested in that office.

Power

Power represents the ability or capacity to influence behavior, events, or outcomes, whether or not it is formally sanctioned. While authority is legally recognized, power may also emerge through expertise, persuasion, or control of critical resources.
In practical terms, an officer might have limited authority but substantial power due to technical knowledge or access to vital information. Power, therefore, extends the functional reach of authority within bureaucratic settings.

Responsibility

Responsibility is the obligation to perform assigned duties and to be answerable for the outcomes of those duties. In the civil service, every position carries corresponding responsibilities defined by job descriptions, administrative rules, and ethical codes.
An officer entrusted with authority must accept responsibility for the manner in which it is exercised. Responsibility thus transforms authority from a right into a duty of service and accountability.

Key Relationship:
Authority confers the right to act → Power provides the means to act → Responsibility ensures accountability for the action.

7.2. Authority and Accountability in the Civil Service

Accountability is the moral and administrative consequence of authority. In democratic governance, authority in government is meaningful only when it is exercised transparently and responsibly.

In Nigeria’s civil service framework:

• The Public Service Rules (PSR) and Financial Regulations (FR) mandate officers to account for resources under their control.
• The Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act reinforces personal accountability of public officials.
• The Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) and Office of the Head of Service (OHCSF) oversee disciplinary measures for misuse of authority.

Each level of authority corresponds to a specific level of accountability:

• Ministers are accountable to the President and National Assembly.
• Permanent Secretaries are accountable to their Ministers and the Head of Service.
• Directors and officers are accountable to their superiors within the administrative hierarchy.

This chain of accountability ensures that authority does not become arbitrary power. It creates a transparent mechanism for evaluating performance, enforcing ethics, and maintaining public trust.

Administrative Principle:
“Authority without accountability breeds corruption; accountability without authority breeds frustration.”
The ideal civil service balances both dimensions through institutional checks and procedural clarity.

7.3. Delegation of Authority

Delegation of authority is a structural necessity in public administration. Since no single official can perform all functions, authority must be delegated down the hierarchy to ensure efficiency and timely decision-making.

Principles of Effective Delegation

1. Clarity of Scope – Delegated powers must be clearly defined to prevent confusion or overreach.
2. Unity of Command – Subordinates should receive directives from only one superior to avoid conflicting instructions.
3. Responsibility Retained – While authority may be delegated, responsibility cannot be abdicated. The delegator remains accountable for outcomes.
4. Adequate Control Systems – Mechanisms such as reporting, audits, and supervision should accompany delegation to prevent misuse of authority.

In Nigeria’s civil service, Permanent Secretaries delegate routine administrative duties to Directors, while Directors further delegate to Heads of Units. Such cascading delegation ensures that operations remain fluid, responsive, and functionally decentralized.

However, excessive centralization or reluctance to delegate often leads to bureaucratic delays, while over-delegation without control can result in loss of oversight. Therefore, an optimal balance must be maintained.

7.4. Span of Control

The span of control refers to the number of subordinates directly supervised by one superior. It is a critical factor in determining the effectiveness of delegation and the flow of authority.

• A narrow span of control implies fewer subordinates per manager, allowing close supervision but possibly increasing administrative costs.
• A wide span of control allows more subordinates per manager, promoting efficiency but potentially reducing individual attention.

In civil service systems, the ideal span depends on:

• Nature of work (routine vs. complex tasks),
• Competence of subordinates,
• Availability of communication tools, and
• Level of standardization in procedures.

For example, a department implementing standardized procedures (e.g., payroll or records management) can operate effectively with a wide span of control. Conversely, policy or technical divisions may require a narrower span due to the complexity of decisions involved.

A well-managed span of control ensures smooth supervision, accountability, and clarity in the chain of command—all of which reinforce the legitimacy of authority in government administration.

7.5. Integration of Authority, Power, and Responsibility in Administrative Ethics

For the civil service to function effectively, authority, power, and responsibility must be integrated into an ethical and procedural framework.
This integration prevents the misuse of authority and aligns bureaucratic action with the public interest. Key ethical imperatives include:

• Exercising authority within legal limits.
• Using power for public benefit, not personal gain.
• Accepting responsibility for both success and failure.

Ethical leadership and transparent governance ensure that authority remains a tool for service delivery rather than domination. When properly balanced, authority becomes the conduit through which law, policy, and public trust converge.

8. Challenges in Exercising Authority in Civil Service

Authority in the civil service is indispensable for maintaining order, implementing policies, and achieving national development objectives. However, the exercise of authority within public institutions—especially in developing democracies like Nigeria—is often undermined by a range of administrative, ethical, and structural challenges. These challenges weaken institutional efficiency and erode public confidence in government authority. Understanding these constraints is crucial for reforming governance systems and strengthening administrative accountability.

8.1. Bureaucratic Bottlenecks and Red Tape

The Nigerian civil service, like many others, is characterized by complex layers of approval, rigid procedures, and excessive documentation requirements. While bureaucracy is designed to ensure accountability and standardization, its over-formalization has often led to inefficiency and frustration.

Key implications include:

• Delayed decision-making: Even routine tasks may require multiple endorsements from different departments.
• Reduced innovation: Civil servants hesitate to take initiative for fear of breaching procedure.
• Policy stagnation: Projects can remain pending due to administrative inertia or procedural ambiguity.

For instance, in some ministries, a file requiring five levels of authorization can take weeks or months to process, delaying public projects. Such procedural delays weaken the sources of authority in public service by making legitimate power appear ineffective or disconnected from results.

Reform Suggestion:

• Introduce e-governance systems to automate workflow approvals and file tracking.
• Implement performance-based assessment to encourage proactive decision-making.
• Simplify administrative hierarchies to enhance the speed of authority transmission.

8.2. Corruption and Abuse of Authority

Corruption represents the most serious threat to the ethical exercise of authority. When authority is used for personal gain rather than public good, it undermines institutional integrity and public trust.

Manifestations include:

• Bribery and favoritism in postings, promotions, and contract awards.
• Nepotism and political interference that distort meritocracy.
• Misappropriation of funds through the manipulation of administrative discretion.

The abuse of authority often arises where control systems are weak, and accountability mechanisms are selective. For instance, if disciplinary actions target only junior officers while shielding senior officials, it creates a culture of impunity.

Such practices distort the legitimate sources of authority in civil service, converting official power into instruments of self-interest rather than service delivery.

Reform Suggestion:

• Strengthen the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) to enforce ethical compliance.
• Promote transparent recruitment and promotion systems based on merit.
• Institutionalize whistle-blower protection laws to encourage reporting of abuse.

8.3. Overlapping and Conflicting Authority

In many public institutions, authority is not clearly delineated. Different departments may have overlapping mandates, leading to confusion, duplication, or conflict. This challenge is particularly visible in the Nigerian context, where multiple agencies perform similar regulatory or administrative functions.

Example:
Both the Federal Ministry of Environment and National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) have, at times, had unclear operational boundaries. This overlap creates tension, delays, and policy inconsistencies.

Implications:

• Reduced efficiency and accountability.
• Inter-departmental rivalries that stall projects.
• Contradictory directives that confuse subordinates.

Reform Suggestion:

• Review and harmonize mandates of ministries and agencies through legislative amendments.
• Establish inter-agency coordination committees to ensure policy alignment.
• Promote clarity in job descriptions and reporting structures to prevent jurisdictional conflicts.

8.4. Centralization of Power

Excessive centralization is another challenge undermining effective government authority. In Nigeria’s civil service, decision-making is often concentrated at the top—within ministerial or permanent secretary levels—leaving lower cadres with little discretion.

This structure:

• Slows down operations, especially at local or departmental levels.
• Discourages initiative and accountability among junior officers.
• Overloads senior officials with minor administrative approvals.

Reform Suggestion:

• Encourage decentralization and devolution of authority, especially in local governance and service delivery.
• Develop clear delegation frameworks under the Public Service Rules to balance oversight with flexibility.
• Train mid-level officers to manage delegated powers responsibly.

8.5. Political Interference and Instability

Authority in civil service should be apolitical and rooted in professional standards. However, political influence often compromises administrative neutrality. Appointments and policy directives may be guided by political loyalty rather than merit, distorting the sources of authority in public service.

Consequences:

• Reduced morale among career civil servants.
• Frequent policy reversals after political transitions.
• Loss of institutional memory and continuity.

Reform Suggestion:

• Enforce the principle of political neutrality enshrined in the Public Service Rules.
• Protect the tenure of key administrative officers from political dismissal.
• Empower civil service commissions to operate independently of executive manipulation.

8.6. Weak Oversight and Accountability Mechanisms

Even where authority is properly defined, oversight institutions are often too weak to enforce accountability. Auditor-General reports may highlight financial irregularities without follow-up sanctions. This gap between authority and enforcement perpetuates impunity.

Reform Suggestion:

• Strengthen institutional synergy between the Auditor-General’s Office, Public Accounts Committees, and anti-corruption agencies.
• Adopt open data systems to make administrative decisions publicly accessible.
• Institutionalize citizen feedback mechanisms (e.g., service charters, complaint desks) to enhance transparency.

8.7. Cultural and Ethical Challenges

Finally, the cultural orientation of public servants affects how authority is perceived and exercised. In hierarchical societies, subordinates may avoid questioning superiors even when directives are illegal or unethical. This blind obedience fosters administrative errors and undermines integrity.

Reform Suggestion:

• Promote a culture of ethical reasoning and constructive dissent through civil service training.
• Integrate ethics and accountability modules into induction and promotion courses at the Administrative Staff College of Nigeria (ASCON) and Public Service Institute of Nigeria (PSIN).
• Recognize and reward officers who demonstrate integrity in exercising authority.

9. Conclusion: Strengthening Authority and Accountability in Public Service

Authority lies at the core of every organized administrative system. It is the formal and moral foundation upon which policies are implemented, laws are enforced, and public trust is sustained. In the civil service, authority determines who may act, how they act, and under what limits their actions are justified. As explored throughout this study, understanding the sources of authority in civil service is indispensable for effective governance and sustainable public administration.

9.1. Summary of Key Insights

The article has established that authority in public service is not arbitrary; it derives from clearly defined legal, institutional, and conventional sources. These include constitutional provisions, legislative enactments, delegated powers, executive orders, judicial interpretations, and long-standing administrative conventions. Together, these form the legal and operational framework that guides decision-making within the civil service.

From the Nigerian perspective, authority is drawn from critical governance instruments such as the 1999 Constitution, the Public Service Rules (PSR), the Financial Regulations (FR), and the Civil Service Handbook. These instruments ensure that every administrative act has legitimacy, accountability, and purpose.

However, the study has also highlighted persistent challenges—bureaucratic rigidity, corruption, overlapping authority, and political interference—that constrain the effective exercise of authority in the public service. Without reform, these weaknesses can distort the very foundations of administrative governance, leading to inefficiency, distrust, and moral decay.

9.2. The Role of Legal, Moral, and Ethical Authority

For authority to maintain legitimacy in governance, it must rest on three interrelated pillars:

(a) Legal Authority

This is the foundation upon which all administrative power is built. Legal authority ensures that actions of public officials are backed by laws, regulations, or legitimate delegation. It guards against arbitrariness and guarantees uniformity across the public service. Strengthening legal authority requires regular review of statutes, clear job definitions, and transparent administrative procedures.

(b) Moral Authority

While legal frameworks define what officials can do, moral authority defines what they should do. It is rooted in personal integrity, fairness, and commitment to public welfare. Civil servants must internalize the ethos of service—placing national interest above personal or political considerations. Moral authority, therefore, bridges the gap between legality and legitimacy.

(c) Ethical Authority

Ethical authority is the manifestation of moral values within institutional behavior. It ensures that actions conform to both legal norms and societal expectations. Public officers who exercise ethical authority promote trust, discipline, and credibility in governance. Embedding ethical standards within the training and evaluation systems of the civil service will help institutionalize integrity and professionalism.

9.3. Building a Culture of Professionalism and Transparency

Sustaining the credibility of sources of authority in public service depends largely on the attitudinal and structural transformation of the civil service. Reform must not only target institutions but also the values and behavior of civil servants. The following measures are central to this transformation:

1. Institutional Strengthening: Reinforce the capacity and independence of key institutions such as the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC), Office of the Head of Service, and Bureau of Public Service Reforms (BPSR) to enforce merit, discipline, and transparency.
2. Digital Governance: Adopt technology-driven administrative systems to reduce human discretion and procedural delays, thereby enhancing accountability.
3. Ethics and Training: Regular capacity-building programs should emphasize leadership ethics, accountability, and decision-making skills.
4. Performance Evaluation: Introduce results-oriented performance metrics linking authority with measurable service outcomes.
5. Public Engagement: Encourage citizen participation through open government portals, enabling feedback and monitoring of administrative actions.

Professionalism in the civil service requires that authority be exercised responsibly, consistently, and transparently, not as a privilege but as a duty of trust conferred by the state and the people.

9.4. Toward an Accountable and Democratic Civil Service

The future of governance in Nigeria—and indeed in any democracy—depends on how effectively public institutions can balance authority with accountability. When civil servants understand the sources of authority in civil service and apply them within constitutional and ethical boundaries, governance becomes predictable, lawful, and citizen-centered.

Conversely, when authority is abused or poorly defined, it erodes institutional integrity and weakens democracy. Therefore, building a transparent authority system is not only an administrative necessity but also a democratic imperative. It ensures that power is exercised within the law, for the people, and in the service of justice and national development.

In essence, strengthening authority and accountability in the public service is about reconnecting governance with legitimacy. It is a call for a new civil service culture—one that values competence over connection, service over status, and principle over privilege.

10. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on Sources of Authority in Civil Service

1. What are the five sources of authority in public administration?

The five major sources of authority in public administration are Constitutional, Legislative, Delegated (Administrative), Executive, and Judicial authority. These sources collectively form the legal and institutional foundation that guides government operations and public officers’ actions. The Constitution remains the supreme source, providing legitimacy to all other forms of authority. Legislative authority comes from laws passed by parliament, while delegated authority allows specialized agencies or ministries to issue regulations. Executive authority stems from presidential directives, and judicial authority arises from court interpretations. Together, they ensure that civil servants act within defined legal frameworks, maintain accountability, and avoid arbitrary decision-making.

2. What is the main source of authority in government?

The Constitution is the main source of authority in any government. It establishes the structure of governance, defines the powers of institutions, and safeguards citizens’ rights. In Nigeria, for example, the 1999 Constitution (as amended) outlines the roles of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, ensuring checks and balances. All other forms of authority — such as ministerial circulars, financial regulations, or civil service rules — derive their legitimacy from constitutional provisions. Hence, the Constitution not only empowers public officials but also restricts misuse of power through legal boundaries and accountability mechanisms.

3. What is the meaning of the source of authority?

A source of authority refers to the origin or foundation from which legitimate power or control is derived in an organization or government. It defines who has the right to make decisions, issue commands, and enforce compliance. In public administration, sources of authority ensure that every action taken by civil servants has legal or institutional backing. Without recognized sources of authority, decisions would lack legitimacy and governance would become arbitrary. Thus, understanding the meaning and scope of authority helps uphold the rule of law, fairness, and administrative order in the public service.

4. What are the three sources of authority in management?

In management theory, particularly within administrative sciences, the three primary sources of authority are legal authority, delegated authority, and customary authority. Legal authority originates from laws, rules, or organizational charters. Delegated authority is granted by a superior to a subordinate to perform specific duties, while customary authority arises from traditions or established organizational practices. In public administration, these three sources ensure order, hierarchy, and efficiency. They define how tasks are distributed and ensure that decision-making remains structured, transparent, and aligned with institutional goals.

5. How does the Constitution serve as a source of authority?

The Constitution serves as a fundamental source of authority by legally empowering all branches of government and their respective officers. In the civil service, it determines the establishment, roles, and limits of ministries, agencies, and commissions. For instance, in Nigeria, the Constitution empowers the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) to oversee recruitment and discipline, while it authorizes the Head of Service to implement administrative policies. It also guarantees citizens’ rights, which public servants must protect. Essentially, the Constitution gives civil service authority both legitimacy and accountability under the rule of law.

6. What is the difference between authority and power?

Authority and power are closely related but distinct. Power is the capacity or ability to influence behavior or outcomes, while authority is the legitimate right to exercise that power. In government, authority is always backed by law, policy, or recognized norms, making it lawful and acceptable. Power without legitimate authority becomes coercion or abuse. For example, a minister has authority to issue directives based on constitutional and statutory mandates, whereas an official acting without authorization merely exercises personal power, which can lead to administrative misconduct or corruption.

7. How is authority delegated in the public service?

Delegation of authority in public service involves transferring specific decision-making powers from higher-ranking officials to subordinates. This is done to improve efficiency, promote accountability, and reduce administrative bottlenecks. For instance, a Permanent Secretary may delegate procurement or disciplinary functions to departmental heads under the Public Service Rules (PSR). However, delegation does not mean the superior loses responsibility — they remain accountable for decisions made under their authority. Proper delegation also ensures that the chain of command remains intact, fostering transparency and institutional discipline across ministries and agencies.

8. What are examples of authority in government?

Examples of authority in government include ministerial directives, presidential executive orders, legislative acts, court judgments, and civil service regulations. Each of these represents a distinct form of lawful power derived from the Constitution. For instance, when the President issues an executive order to reform procurement systems, that is executive authority. Similarly, a Permanent Secretary issuing circulars based on the Public Service Rules exercises administrative authority. These examples illustrate how government authority operates at multiple levels — from the top (constitutional) to the operational (departmental).

9. What are the authorities that guide civil servants?

Civil servants are guided by multiple authorities that ensure their actions conform to established standards. These include the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Public Service Rules (PSR), the Financial Regulations (FR), the Civil Service Handbook, and circulars from the Office of the Head of Service. Additionally, directives from the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) and relevant laws enacted by the National Assembly provide operational authority. Together, these instruments define roles, procedures, and ethical expectations, ensuring that the Nigerian public service remains professional, efficient, and accountable.

10. Why is authority important in management and governance?

Authority is vital in management and governance because it provides the legitimacy and structure needed for effective decision-making. It enables leaders to assign duties, enforce compliance, and maintain discipline within institutions. In the public sector, authority ensures that actions are taken within legal frameworks, promoting accountability and transparency. Without authority, governance would descend into disorder, with overlapping roles and unclear responsibilities. Therefore, authority serves as the backbone of both management and public administration — sustaining order, enhancing coordination, and fostering public trust in government institutions.

References (APA Style)

Adebayo, A. (2001). Principles and Practice of Public Administration in Nigeria (2nd ed.). Spectrum Books Ltd.

Adamolekun, L. (2013). Public Administration in Africa: Main Issues and Selected Country Studies. Ibadan University Press.

Akpan, N. U. (1982). Public Administration in Nigeria. Longman Group Ltd.

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. (1999). Lagos: Federal Government Press.

Federal Civil Service Commission. (2020). Guidelines for Appointments, Promotion and Discipline in the Federal Civil Service. Abuja: FCSC Publications.

Federal Government of Nigeria. (2021). Financial Regulations (Revised Edition). Abuja: Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation.

Federal Government of Nigeria. (2021). Public Service Rules (Revised Edition). Abuja: Office of the Head of Civil Service of the Federation.

Gulick, L., & Urwick, L. (Eds.). (1937). Papers on the Science of Administration. Institute of Public Administration.

Max Weber. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Free Press.

Nnoli, O. (2000). Introduction to Politics (2nd ed.). Enugu: Pan African Centre for Research and Development.

Ola, R. O. F., & Tonwe, D. A. (2009). Nigerian Public Administration: Principles and Practice. Amfitop Books.

Olowu, D., & Sako, S. (2002). Better Governance and Public Policy: Capacity Building for Democratic Renewal in Africa. Kumarian Press.

Omolayo, B. (2004). Organizational Behavior and Management. Lagos: JAS Publishers.

Public Service Handbook. (2019). Abuja: Office of the Head of Civil Service of the Federation.

Yusufu, J. (2018). Administrative Law and Civil Service Ethics in Nigeria. Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Press.