Transformation still lagging

THE topic of transformation has – once again – divided our nation. Whether it relates to the appointment of judges or whether apartheid can still be blamed for the ills of our government, we need a continued rational debate on this important topic.

The first flaw in this debate is to imply that “transformation” stands in opposition to quality and excellence. This view is espoused by racist white people who believe black people are in general less able to perform than white people.

This view must be rejected out of hand.

But the view is also expressed by white people who assert that black people are appointed with less than the required qualification and experience, while white candidates are ignored. Therefore, the logic goes, standards will inevitably drop.

But there are also black people who fall into this trap by saying that merit (read: experience and technical stature) is not the actual basis for appointing people. They here- with implicitly assert that black people who are less competent and without the required experience will be appointed to positions in the name of transformation.

If transformation is for the moment about “appointing more black people” (and this is a reduction), there are crucial aspects to keep in mind:

Responsible transformation does not require appointing equity people below the minimum requirements for the job. It does imply serious commitment to developing black people (including women and people with disabilities) who were for so long denied opportunities.

If the choice then arises to choose between two candidates, the choice for an equity person is not affecting excellence at all.

But be aware that the very notion of “excellence” is socially determined. Many institutional cultures still – tacitly – view excellence in “white”, “colonial” and “English” terms.

One could argue the exact opposite: by reinforcing the old culture (the old boys’ club), standards are compro- mised as one of the strengths of global citizens and organisations is the ability to thrive on diversity and use diversity as a strategic advancement.

People from diverse backgrounds bring new networks and valid experiences to the table, and this indeed makes a fundamental contribution to transformation.

Though difficult, it must be said that “blackness” in itself does not always guarantee transformation. Not all black people have escaped the internalised views of colonialism and apartheid.

Many professions actually train candidates to a one-sizefits-all cultural view. In their striving to be accepted, black people adopt the dominant culture and in fact are used – willingly or unwillingly – as instruments against real transformation.

The whites then hide behind the black faces (usually in the communications or HR division) and are too glad that they can still exert power from behind the screen.

Another aspect of transformation in its “equity” guise is the sometimes unrealistic expectations. If, for example, 25% of all qualified engineers or 20% of all qualified chartered accountants are black, there is just no way in the world that an engineering or accounting firm can “reflect the general population” in this specific regard.

Transformation here would mean two things: active support and development of black talent to qualify as professionals, and then an active seeking to appoint them in relation to the proportion of candidates available.

But part of the problem with the transformation debate is that it is narrowed down to “appointing black people”.

If one understands that South Africa as a nation has to transform itself from apartheid to a constitutional democracy, the concept becomes both wider and deeper.

The values and principles of our constitution are now the transformation indicators.

If the constitution gives our workers the right to strike and to do so peacefully but unions go on the rampage and kill and destroy in their path, we clearly have not transformed. If women and gay people are vulnerable and more than often do not feel safe, and our constitution states that human beings should be treated without discrimination, we still fall short of transformation.

If our government typically confuses the ANC with the state, and do not deliver on the socio-economic rights to education and healthcare due to mismanagement, ineptitude and corruption, we clearly show more regression than progression with respect to transformation.

By narrowing the public debate about transformation to issues of equity, we do give due attention to an important dimension of restorative justice. The danger is that other equally important matters that are less convenient to put in the public domain are then omitted from the transformation frame.

This in itself points to the immaturity of our public discourse: if something is not black and white (literally and metaphorically), it is not worthy of further exploration. We thus live within the spaces of the old apartheid dividing lines in which many of us still feel safe.

In the meantime, transformation suffers.