Let’s ‘werk saam’ -- if you do all the work
THE trouble with “samewerking”, cautioned a former banking regulator 15 years ago at the height of the financial sector joint ventures fad, is that the relationships always end in tears. Both parties understand that they are in a mutually beneficial alliance, but both believe, he said: “Ons is saam, maar jy werk. [We’re together, but you do the work].” Ask anyone who has ever been part of an MBA syndicate and those who did the work will confirm the sentiment.
The nine-month tripartite alliance between government, labour and business, a miracle of South African “samewerking” if there ever was one, runs a high risk of failure unless it can produce tangible results soon.
Dodging another downgrade in December is a base case, and odds are that — if there are no serious political missteps between now and then — the ratings agencies will give us another pass.
In March, I challenged the chairman of a large company about why he was less than enthusiastic about the idea of this three-way co-operation. He warned that it was unlikely to succeed and, when it failed, he said, business would be made the scapegoat. Time will show if he’s right, but time is not an abundant commodity.
Top emerging markets economist Peter Attard Montalto, who recently completed one of his regular visits to South Africa as part of formulating a country view for his employer, the Japanese investment bank Nomura, bemoaned our lack of urgency on critical matters.
He was most concerned that we appeared too laid back about kickstarting the economy to provide desperately needed opportunities to increasingly frustrated young people unable to find jobs.
In summary: we talk too much and do too little — and that’s the problem with “samewerking”. Partners in a complex joint venture need to harbour not just the same goals, but the same values. The really important conversations need to move beyond those held with pragmatists at the National Treasury and start to directly impact policymaking.
Big business, often criticised for failing to tackle obvious policy failings, finds itself in a difficult position. Aside from a few private sector voices such as those of Sipho Pityana and Neal Froneman out of the gold sector expressing their concerns for the future of the country and demanding the sacking of the president, business appears oddly content in its quiet diplomacy.
This column warned in March, as the co-operative movement between the three groups was taking shape, that it was a rare opportunity for business to directly influence policy.
Since then, there has been a single project to fund small business. A good start. More is needed. But it’s far from doom and gloom.
The World Economic Forum’s annual global competitiveness report showed this week that South Africa was reversing its slide. It’s now in 47th place out of 138 countries. Over a 10-year horizon, South Africa remains less competitive relative to the rest of the world than it was in 2007, but we are seeing a vast improvement on our 2014 low of 56th place.
We perform poorly in hiring and firing and come rock-bottom in labour-employer relations. But we box above our weight in key areas.
Our financial market ranks 11th in the world and first for financing through the JSE. We are in the top quartile in business sophistication and innovation, and that success should be celebrated. It points to a crucial failure — the country underperforms in key public sector functions. It’s where a publicprivate collaboration can make a real impact to ensure that a globally competitive business sector passes on those skills to an underperforming state sector.
But many politicians are allergic to a private sector intervention — a barrier to progress.
Improvement doesn’t happen by osmosis. It will take action. Strong action. Now.