Evaluating the Social Director: A Critical Examination of Promises and Performance

By; Abraham Favour Olohigbe

Manifestos have been a very cogent factor in the political realm of the student environment. When students hear or see manifestos, they believe the one who has good promises, but is it true that all the promises declared will be honoured, or is it just another sweet lie to manipulate us into voting? Sometimes student politicians promise us the heavens and give us more hell than heaven itself with their sweet little lies and a sprinkle of an iota of truth. Walk with us as we scrutinise the proposed initiatives by the incumbent Social Director, Miss Ogundare Mary, while we shed light on its strengths, weaknesses, and how they align with the needs of the hall’s residents.

She stated her manifesto with such simplicity, with three major points opting for directives that appear tailored to meet the barest minimum. On close examination of her first point, which is “promoting creativity and skill development,” with sub-points including skill acquisition and tech lectures and training, the skill acquisition involved the training of Queenites who registered for lip gloss making, gele tying, baking, reselling and Sharesell, makeup, and hairstyling. These skill acquisition training sessions can be considered a good idea, but to what extent can a three-day skill acquisition session, where mostly the basics are taught, increase income? Yes, it can unlock potential in Queenites and spike their interest to pursue the skill further by undergoing proper training. This particular point was feasible enough. The tech lectures and training were only done once during the hall week. We wonder if it would have a lasting impact on the Queenites who attended, as her manifesto states the tech lecture to be conducted probably twice or thrice because her choice of words implies multiple sessions.

Another point of hers included talent hunts, which is actually a great idea. The wealth of training was probably left untapped, as it occurred only once during the hall week (variety night) when some Queenites had left for their humble abodes. Out of five contestants who were called, only two appeared for the talent hunt, raising the question if the social lives of Queenites truly increased or decreased or if they became uncomfortable sharing their talents. Talent hunts ought to be conducted in stages, but this probably reduced the competition between competitors.

During the fresher’s week, a treasure hunt took place. In an interview, the Social Director stated that she couldn’t remember the exact number of freshers that started the treasure hunt, but she remembers there were about 20 if not more and less than 10 made it to the last stage. So the winner of the treasure hunt was named Miss Fresher, which is a new development and a very outstanding idea.

Perhaps the most long-anticipated point in Miss. Ogundare's manifesto was the cafeteria facelift like a new coat of paint, new chairs, etc. The only lift the cafeteria experienced was the increase in the price of food due to inflation. There is no physical evidence that the cafeteria facelift process even began.

The Social Director’s last point on collaborative decision-making is indeed a very good one. She pledged to employ surveys, polls, evaluations, and feedback mechanisms for collaborative decision-making, and this demonstrates a commitment to inclusivity. However, the reliance solely on physical feedback mechanisms raises concerns about the effectiveness and inclusivity of the process. In today's digital age, relying solely on physical feedback mechanisms may result in a biased representation of opinions, as individuals who are more vocal or visible within the hall community may dominate the feedback process, while others remain unheard.

Miss Ogundare's manifesto for the position of Social Director at Queen Elizabeth II Hall reflects a blend of commendable intentions and practical limitations. While her emphasis on simplicity and straightforward directives suggests a desire to address essential needs within the hall community, the manifesto's lack of detailed strategies and execution raises questions about its effectiveness. Miss Ogundare's commitment to inclusivity through collaborative decision-making is laudable, yet the reliance solely on physical feedback mechanisms may inadvertently exclude diverse voices and limit input. 

Ultimately, while the manifesto speaks of Miss Ogundare's earnest aspirations and dedication to serving her community, it also highlights the need for a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to governance within Queen Elizabeth II Hall.