Obscurity As A Source of Power

Human beings are obscure as members of the outgroup within a large system designed for insiders, simply because the ingroup members create a system of wilful blindness. It is this system that seeks to deny the right of those that do not look like the dominant to belong, by denying their existence, when it matters most. The obscurity so suffered by the members of the outgroup has nothing to do with their lack of character, stature or presence. It is a deliberate attempt by the ingroup members to dehumanize all those whom they perceive not to belong. The ingroup members suffer a superiority complex that is predicated on a very weak soul, for they need others to fall off the radar for them to appear to be stronger, or as the only humans worth recognition. It is for that reason that outgroup members, collectively and individually, need to use their obscurity as a source of power, instead of succumbing to the insignificance accorded to them.

Through focused personal purpose, in relation to the system they serve, all humans can rise to the occasion of living highly impactful lives, despite limitations of a system, if and only if, we study the system dynamics and work it to the advantage of all. It is about being smart about what you LOVE, connecting that to what the world NEEDS, monetising it and then ensuring that you are GOOD at it. It is that being GOOD, that I would like to latch on, for it includes being able to WORK the system, intentionally, for the benefit of all. Anyone whom you exclude, it must be because you are protecting the integrity of the system.

As Dr. Chuba Okadigbo said:

“If you are emotionally attached to your tribe or political leaning to the point that truth and justice become secondary considerations, your education is useless, your exposure is useless. If you cannot reason beyond petty sentiments and tribal attachments, you are a liability to mankind.”

This message rings true for both ingroup and outgroup members of any tribe, sub-tribe, Board, Executive Committee or team. It is for that reason that I advocate for diversity and inclusion, even of the wilfully blind members of our society, unless, otherwise, of cause, all that has been tried has failed.

Seeing self, the collectives (as complex as they are), the chosen purpose/ikigai and the lenses through which all the seeing happens, is a first step towards using obscurity as a source of power. For some, the concept of ingroup and outgroup dynamics is more like a foreign concept, and what makes it difficult to understand is that these groups are not fixed, but dynamic in nature. Here is a basic description:

In sociology and social psychology, an ingroup is a social group to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member. By contrast, an outgroup is a social group with which an individual does not identify. For example, people may find it psychologically meaningful to view themselves according to their race, culture, gender, age, or religion. It has been found that the psychological membership of social groups and categories is associated with a wide variety of phenomena.

The terminology was made popular by Henri Tajfel and colleagues during his work in formulating social identity theory. The significance of ingroup and outgroup categorization was identified using a method called the minimal group paradigm. Tajfel and colleagues found that people can form self-preferencing ingroups within a matter of minutes and that such groups can form even on the basis of seemingly trivial characteristics, such as preferences for certain paintings.

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups

As birds flock and fish school, so do humans tribe, paraphrasing David Logan of Tribal Leadership, an essential book on the subject. Deep awareness of self and others, including their intentionality can only happen when we are intentionally focused. Eyes only, are limited and cannot see the depth of self as well as that of others, hence in our quest to understand, we may be fooled by what we see, and for that reason, I recommend seeing with the heart. Let us look at the diagram below, to understand the complexity of it all:

Ref.: https://integrallife.com/four-quadrants/

Trying to understand the individuals in the workplace, I (as in quadrant 1, the Subjective) without language and conversations, is akin to using the doctors’ stethoscope without medical school training, and thereby failing dismally to understand the symptoms presented by a sick patient. Where thoughts, emotions, memories and more are located, as illustrated above, is a mystery to all, for they sit inside all of us, and cannot be accessed without deep conversations. All can lay claim to any beliefs and values as their own, when in casual conversation; it is only when we have both, deep conversations and we observe behaviour, under difficult conditions, that we are able to draw a trustworthy link. Trust begins to emerge, with self, through reflection and observation, by drawing causal links between what we believe in and what we do, what others say and what they do. It is for that reason that I say we need to see and look at others with the heart, especially in the context of power dynamics. The eyes alone are inadequate, to see through masks and ill intentions of others, same applies to good intentions, and good people: we may just miss them, if we do not engage deeply and sincerely.

Professional intimacy becomes the key to driving powerful and human-driven growth for individuals, teams, business units and large-scale corporations. Many have given up on the quest to collaboratively exist with others, whether it be within the smallest organisation, as in couples, or large corporations. Trust is a real issue and most decide to just do me, to the detriment of collaborations. It is for that reason that I believe that a few things must fall for humanity to rise (#humanityMUSTrise):

·        #RacismMUSTfall

·        #SexismMUSTfall

·        #AgeismMUSTfall

·        #AbleismMUSTfall

·        #ClassismMUSTfall

·        #ElitismMUSTfall

Many would love to see a simple world where all just buy into the ideals of a world in which not one person or group seeks to dominate another, but that is not to be, for that is not how the world order is set, for it is in the hands of the wicked one, who wields great influence. Most people look out for the narrow interests of their self, or few people like them, and at most times, at the expense of others. Economic systems, blocks, countries, sectors, industries and tribes, are organized around these narrow self-interests. Abundance is not abundant anymore, for humanity and what we know as Ubuntu, is in scarce supply. The constellations of most systems are such that they exclude, and any talk of diversity and inclusion is met with disdain, especially when resources must be shared, because the few that have access, believe in scarcity. Hoarders! I say!

The WE (Intersubjective), as illustrated in the diagram above, is fragmented along the lines of all that must fall. This is more especially traumatic for the lowest in the food chain of discrimination, the Black Woman. Most, if not all that must fall rests on the shoulders of the Black woman who is under attack all their life’s existence. Men are not about to give up the privilege that they have, for in their narrow sense of self, women DO NOT BELONG, save for when their self-interests are at stake. It is the limited experience that I have as a Black man that I could speak to that intersectionality of adversity, which is why I am not qualified to speak to the full extent thereof.

Since the ITS (interobjective) flows from the intersubjective, toxic beliefs, values and more, result in toxic systems, networks, technology, governments and more. Our families, communities, business and other forms of organisation existence are reflective of what sits inside all of us in that hierarchy that we imposed on ourselves in the order in which prejudice exists:

1.      White Men

2.      White Women

3.      Black Men

4.      And Black Women as last, and most vulnerable.

I have nothing to offer to the Black women (in the form of intellectual understanding of their plight, and solutions to how they could mitigate against the risk of being downtrodden), from a position of privilege, where in certain instances, even the White woman and man, seem to be the underdogs. Privilege blinds me, and absolute privilege blinds us, absolutely!

It would be irresponsible though, to let the fear of being labelled to prevent me from finding my voice and expressing part-solutions, from where I stand, as a privileged Black man in a post ’94 South Africa. I love my country, I love Africa, and I love my people, in the collective sense, including those that have more privilege that I have bestowed upon them by a harsh system that dispossessed those that look like me from accessing basic human rights.

From a Systems Constellations point of view, if We (just below the White man in that hierarchy) seek to belong to the present system of things, we need to own and transcend all that comes with the political identity bestowed upon us through the subjugation of one by another. In my own guarded voice, I offer the following solutions:

1.      Be present, fully so, wherever you go, without being aggressive about it. Aggression is NOISE, and you cannot be obscure if you are noisy. Stealth is key, and I know it is difficult to be calm when one is angry, but then, that is when the angry Black man, or mad Black woman label becomes the alarm system that alerts the custodian of the system, to close the door in our faces. BE CALM, BE PRESENT, BUT BE OBSCURE… Own the badge of obscurity and transcend it like a Capoeira dancer that strikes when least expected. When all around you are losing their cool, trying to defend and protect the status quo, calmly claim your crown when they least expect you to.

 

2. Ask for permission to lead, to be and to belong… it is counterintuitive to ask for permission to belong from the very same people that are your tormentors. This is about finding where the power lies in the system, and using it to your advantage, for the benefit of the whole. Skillfully navigating the system requires you to have a full understanding of what it is made of, and a casual look at it and acting on on-the-surface information is detrimental to your career aspirations, so is it to the sustainability of the system for people like you who still must help you to take over the reigns for the benefit of even the antagonists of change and transformation.

Ref.: The Source

 

It is when you know the intricacies of the interconnectedness of the system you seek to transform, that you will be able to do so with finesse that will confound even the most avid of your critics, as the one that is seen not to belong. When we rise to the occasion and we operate at deeper or higher stages of consciousness (depending on your perspective), the system has no choice, but to let us belong- ask Nelson Mandela, or read up on him, and you will get the gist of my point. He knew the system so well! He had 27 years to study it, reflect on it and plot what his dance and blows will be like, and with precision, he executed, with those around him. Those that followed have only themselves for not reading the script of a movie that was written as it was being acted out and directed. The threat to his dream comes from the leaders that follow, as opposed to it being ill-conceived.

3.      Leading transformation of any system can only be performed through collaborativethought, acts, beliefs and systems. Find strength in collaboration. The prevalent and dominant systems across the world, thrive on autocracy, and their days are numbered. Unite with those that share the same beliefs, irrespective of how they look, and sound like. There is always strength in unity.

4.      Transcend the chicken and egg situation, or a case of who is going to blink first, and the bad news is… YOU should. The oppressor will NOT do it first for you.

5.      Appoint a Personal Board to look after you heart, mind and soul. The loneliest place to be in is being a Change Leader. Without a Board, you will run out of steam, and you will always have fewer options.

6. Do not wallow in you misery, and do not reject any form of assistance, however insignificant it may seem.

This article first appeared on www.linkedin.com/in/goodnews

Goodnews Cadogan is the Co-Founder and Convenor at the Centre for Courageous Authenticity in Leadership, a non-profit company that is focusing on courage and authenticity in professionalism and leadership, across all forms of organisation existence.

 

Rejoinder to Ambassador Phatse Justice Piitso on President Thabo Mbeki- ANC Eastern Cape Extended PEC

His article is here.

Mine is merely an alternative view to that of the Ambassador, as opposed to being superior, more right, or better.

What blinds leaders and followers alike is the ego and pandering to its whims and wants. It is what coups, corruption and fraud, marshal law and third terms are made of. By third term here I refer to the State Presidency; I do not support the concept of two terms limit for the party, neither do I support life presidency. The further we move away from the ego, the fewer we are, at the top of that pyramid, despite many laying claim to have transcended and owned theirs.

Many of the leaders in the ANC have changed it to a movement that is filled with leaders who have moved (since 1990) from selfless to self-serving leaders who are in it for personal gain, and at the expense of all and sundry. This has been a dominant narrative, captured in the famous narratives: “I did not struggle to be poor.” and: “It is our time to eat!”

When Thabo Mbeki abandoned the ANC, and rightly so, and wrote the widely distributed letter, he did so because he saw what the Ambassador, is yet to see. The Zondo Commission and numerous Press reports have confirmed that indeed, there was no good news story to tell about the lost nine years. Some of the members of the ANC, and I must say a minority, saw reason as far back as at the 2005 National General Council that it was headed towards bad news and more bad news, in the build up to Polokwane. The movement continued, like a runaway bus, on that downward spiral. If the Ambassador does not see the aftermath, he can be forgiven for the way in which he has evaluated Mbeki’s appraisal of the bad news years.

Despite being endowed with foresight to see where his beloved organisation was going, he (Mbeki) still stepped aside, without the slightest hint of resistance for he knew it was not up to him to stop the Tsunami or behave like the instant hero he is accused of being. Sixty odd years of commitment hardly qualify as being instant.

Even some of the staunch protagonists of the man of the people and the tsunami, hang their heads in shame now when they see the aftermath ka Gilikankqo they unleashed on the movement, the country, the Continent, and the world in the form of the G20. The latter impact was felt within days, in that fateful September.

Two Centres of Power is a limited form of philosophy to define the required capacity to deal with the complexity of a combined role of State and Party to lead society. The ANC as the leader of society is not a Party in competition with the State but rather part of a combined force for change and transformation of the relationship between capital and the large majority that it represents.

If at the Mafikeng Conference this resolution was taken, as Zizi has shared in his recent address in East London, it is the most telling of how the architects of the NDR then, saw it fit to achieve two objectives:

• To widen the apex points of the leadership pyramid, such that it creates two interchangeable positions at the critical points (between the Party and the State): national, provincial, and local levels, again, saving us from u Gilikankqo, and the nine lost years and those who came in to eat and fill their coffers.
• This would also create a tampering effect as the leaders (top-down) and followers (bottom-up) seek to align their criteria of who ascends to leadership positions, thereby meeting each other halfway as illustrated herein below:

Figure 1. Intertwined State and Party Leadership: Keeping Each in Check, Yet Bound by the NDR

Conflating the two pyramids is a simplistic view of what it really takes to lead at different levels, with two types of focus, the party within, as in 1 million members and the 11m that voted it in, on one part of the twined pyramid, AND 60 million of the population in South Africa, and the 1 billion Africans. I share the levels of leadership and associated levels of complexity and focus, in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Levels of Leadership, © Cultural Transformation Tools

In isiXhosa, we have a saying: “Ooxam bayaphaxulana!” and the opposite is: “Iindonga Ziwelene!”, and both loosely mean, in opposite ways: “They deserve each other!”. I invoke these two idiomatic expressions to explain that it was appropriate for Zizi to refuse to be part of the Polokwane brigade, not for the same reasons the Ambassador advances, but to ensure that his not so instant legacy is not tainted.

He (Mbeki) bought himself the license to stand with pride today and be part of the Renewal of the ANC. He did not deserve to sit at the high table of those who had lost their ways, neither did they deserve his counsel, which would have fallen on deaf ears, eyes, and logic, any way. Mbeki did not abandon the ANC, or the NDR; they did, under the guise of RET.

Unity at all costs is not a wise philosophy to punt when a leader is convinced of their purpose, and that of a party that has, through new leadership, forgotten that it is the leader of society and has always been committed to being led by the best in society.

Stepping aside was not a big deal for President Mbeki when Gwede, the then Secretary General and Motlanthe, the then Deputy President came to deliver the bad news. He could easily have declared marshal law and directed the armed forces to lock them up for treason, but again, the Party had decided. All that was left for the party leaders, was to make their bed and sleep in it.

An insult or vulgar language is usually, gross and a false description of what is, and what is not. None of that is contained in President Mbeki’s address to the gathering of the Eastern Cape ANC extended PEC. Everything he said about who qualified or did not qualify to be in the leadership collective of society was the truth, for they did not come from among the best in society.

I repeat myself when I say, stepping aside was never an issue for President Mbeki, despite most describing him as being aloof and full of himself. It is my belief that he would have advised the current SG to step aside on being consulted recently on the matter. I am making a case of separating the self from the party when making critical decisions: 10/10 for Mbeki there.

The legal framework is a lower bar, compared to the moral and ethical frameworks. Recently, in one of my #goodnewsthoughts I reflected that: “If our leaders lead on the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in law, and not on the basis of a moral high ground, our movement and our democracy are danger ⚠️ … the eye of the needle is too small for the Courts…”– after all, apartheid and related corruption were concepts found in Law. Once more, the bar used here to judge leadership suitability, by the Ambassador, is flawed. The moment one takes a leadership position, if they are supposed to be from among the best in society, they subject themselves to the higher bar: to be morally upright.

If we cannot see the moral grounds on which those who must step aside should, then we do not deserve either to be leaders or leading followers who are entrusted with the moral fibre of the movement, or society in general, let alone government.

Those who elect leaders on behalf of society must be able to exercise their conscience, governed by the long view. They must be endowed with abundance of foresight capability, and this includes all of those who are eligible to be part of the 6,000 who might have to elect the next NEC. If the Ambassador is one of those, and there are many who share his views in that community of leaders, we are in trouble as the 60 million South Africans.

The 1 million members of the party ought to take direct responsibility for electing their leaders, so should the party leaders start to look at the 11 million voters as those whom they must look to satisfy. Furthermore, the leaders must see themselves as leaders of 60 million, as opposed to as, of just a few thousands.

The SG and many of those who are affected by the step aside resolution, wholly or partially (not yet charged), have questionable loyalty status towards the NDR.

What they contributed to in the past is of no value in the face of current reality. Their self-inflicted demise should neither be celebrated nor condoned, on account of past and even present performance or contribution.

In requoting Mbeki: “We should never be despondent because the weather is bad, nor should we turn triumphalist because the sun shines”- he just stated facts in his usual unemotional self.

He certainly did not spare any holy cows, his examples were apt and those who listened intensely, will only be shocked later how some of his examples become more relevant, soon. The incisive, no holds barred nature of his delivery to the Eastern Cape ANC, is exactly what the doctor ordered.

Sixty odd years is not instant by any measure.

Distancing, Nje (Nothing Social)

The history of social distancing and its association with stopping the spread of viral infections dates back to medieval times, for back then health officials did not understand viruses very well (this is in the 14th Century), but they knew that keeping the distance and disinfecting worked.

“They knew that you had to be very careful with goods that are being traded, because the disease could be spread on objects and surfaces, and that you tried your best to limit person-to-person contact,” says Jane Stevens Crawshaw, a senior lecturer in early modern European history at Oxford Brookes University. (www.history.com)

This article, is not so much about about preventing the spread of the virus, it is about distancing, nje, as the title suggests. In most of the Nguni languages, specifically in isiZulu and isiXhosa, nje means just, as depicted in the interview below (which I found to be hilarious). Thando, the musician, explains that her name does not have a suffix to it that explains it further, like Thandolwethu, Thandokuhle and more.

Thando Nje! Hence Distancing Nje!

So, what is distance nje?- and why do I say there is nothing social about it?

With the emergence of social (and business) media and platforms, including the age-old telephone, it is possible to achieve social intimacy, without closing one bit, the physical distance between human beings that are legitimately scared of even the slightest form of physical contact; certainly no hugs and no handshakes and resorting to touching with the foot or elbow as a form of physical distancing. It is for that reason that I believe, it is just physical distancing that is required to stop the virus in its tracks, as it literally moves from one person to the next.

Is it really appropriate then to refer to it as social distancing, even though it is possible to socialise and even conduct elaborate business interaction, online?- I believe that it is a misnomer to refer to it as social distancing, rather refer to it as distancing, nje for that is what it is. Maybe, for clarity, we can call it physical distancing, for that is what it is.

So, in short, practice physical distancing without losing the social intimacy on which all human relationships depend, whether it be at home, village, town, metro or district. This is very true for all sectors of society: business, public & political, non-profit and the co-operative sectors.

This blog article appeared on http://www.linkedin.com/in/goodnews as well and I can be followed on twitter at http://www.twitter.com/goodnews_cado and on http://www.twitter.com/coachcadogan

We work with large and medium sized organisations, senior executives in companies, as well as those who play a leading role in other sectors of society, are our coaching clients. We make it easy for our clients by deciphering the code that hides their world of leadership, from hazy view to clarity that makes way for clarity of leadership and followership.

Our work with families, legacy families that are concerned with the sustainability of generations that come beyond the current era, come to us to work with how that constellation can be shaped, intentionally.

On the other hand, over and above all this, we work with organisation constellations for the same purpose: to intentionally create futures that support sustainability, in the most clear way.

Black, Coloured, South African, and Human

It is courageous and authentic to be frank about our views. My humble opinion is that all voices expressed in social media on the subject, have a right to belong (or exist), in so far as they recognize and accept the existence of other voices. No one can present themselves as an expert on a political identity of another. Some of my White friends have earned the title of ‘reverse coconut’ from me, in jest. It is so because of their views on race and racism and the suffering they endured (and still do) as the system of institutionalised deems fit. My own political identity is that of being ‘human’ and it took a process and a number of rituals to get to it. I cannot impose it on others, neither do I
expect others to exclude me from the human race because of one reason or the other. To me, Wayde is human and happens to be South African. It is for him to correct me if he feels otherwise, and I will accept his counsel with humility.

The elusive dream of post-’94 SA

An article in the New York Times in 2012: Unfulfilled Promises Are Replacing The Prospects Of a Better Life For All

I cannot fault the article, neither can I fault the expectation for government & the ruling party to make it easier for the likes of Mr Sello, on one hand (to provide simple government support & zero tolerance for fraud and corruption, including dispensing patronage to close associates, friends and family), and, on the other, sophisticated government support that can, through shrewd public policy design (and implementation), thwart the organised looting of our resources by the multinationals through illicit revenue outflows. The vehicles for this corporate plunder are thin capitalisation and transfer pricing schemes.

If sophisticated leaders in corporate, as well as multi-billionaire investors across the world, fear change, how much more is it for the multitudes of voters beholden to the ANC, for the inches of positive changes that happened since 1994? – Human beings are not good at dealing with change, and we see this in simple family or romantic relationships that may not be serving us well, but we remain attached, nevertheless. Learned helplessness creeps in, and the guilty party, unfortunately understands this, and they carry on plundering with oblivion. In this case, the ANC and alliance leadership ‘know’ that our people do not know better, and they know that the middle class does not have the ‘balls’ to start a ‘new’ party to drive into the new vacuumed space. We are paralysed, and it will take more than one generation to wake up from the slumber, dust ourselves up and drive self-serving leaders out of power. Just recently, one of my friends was saying that as we grow older, we stop looking beyond our small family units, in the hope that our national challenges will sort themselves out. There are very few people who are prepared to take up the proverbial arms and build something new, for there is a lot at stake, including personal safety, in some parts of South Africa. The end to the current state of affairs is not near, for we do not have untainted, young and old leaders from which we can choose, to make a national turnaround. The interconnectedness of the political elite means that whomever we choose within that pool, we are not going to be able to break the cycle of downward spiral. Business leadership has a hand in this, for they are smiling all the way to the bank, whilst the country is burning, literally and figuratively. As Mintzberg says (Governing Management, Managing Government), it is the concert of private, public, non-governmental and co-op leadership that makes democracy go round… Sadly, with us, all are from the same pool of selfish and egoistic leaders (government, politics and business), save for a few from the NGO movement & Co-ops, who lack the resources and the courage to challenge the status quo.

We need business leadership that has the vision of what a democracy in South Africa would look like, and then go and do what is required in their businesses first, to stop the exclusion of skilled and patriotic leaders who want this economy to thrive. They have to ensure that they go beyond the myopic quarterly results to monitor and evaluate leadership efficacy and to top it all, they have to reach out the NGO sector, to finance programmes that will increase the level of socio-political education of the 49m. This is the bridge that will create the union between narrow business interests and the wider societal agenda of driving both formal and informal education needed to shift South Africa in the right direction. A few hundred of millions of Rands, usually spent in 5 year terms, in the months preceding elections, sponsoring political parties, can be diverted to finance the bridge between business and society, through credible social programs.

Political leadership seems to be a passenger in their own political vehicles, just like a driver of a vehicle that has experienced a partial head-on collision with another. The dislodgement of the wheel assembly from the steering column renders both driver and steering wheel, powerless. No amount of logic, finger-pointing, or political reports is going to stem the tide of the challenges in this space.

If South Africa is to be better off than the average African state, after liberation, under the current system of things, it has to look to civil society for the answers (I include business leadership), for these are the ones who have a lot to lose. Political leadership has attained its political power in 1994, including access to resources, and therefore is not motivated to drive societal transformation with the same pre ’94 vigour. Most of the business leaders in South Africa lack a balanced view of the world, and therefore a double-edged sword of a narrow spectrum of consciousness and short-sightedness, is most likely to hurt the very assets they are stewards of.

Business leaders are content with serving the short term needs of the political elite, at the expense of the long term needs of the wider society, members of which are currently disadvantaged as a result of them serving the short term needs of the political elite of the old regime. It is sad state of affairs because it shows that they have a very short memory of what brought the South African economy to its knees in the early ’90s. South Africa’s indigenous businesses and multinationals operating within our borders, in the SADC region and in the rest of Africa, are crying out for leaders who have done a lot of work on their being. Otto Scharmer describes this internal work as the quality of the intention and attention of their leadership practice. Most refuse to go there, for they are afraid of what they might just awake to, as C. Jung states: ““Your visions will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.”

A good example of business and political leaders that are in the same slumber, is in the United Kingdom, and the disastrous manner in which they handled Brexit saga. Lack of foresight and an inability to deal with the complex needs of a diverse society resulted in a tumble of the markets across the globe, massive currency loss of value, as well as deepening of societal divisions along many ‘isms’: age, class and more. It also cost the Prime Minister his job.

Back home, we have been stumbling from one crisis to another, most recently, Nenegate and Tshwane burning. That dream, that Madiba magic that held the nation together at times critical from 1990 onwards, is running on reserve fuel. We run the risk of further crises on all fronts, unless, as in the late 1980’s, business and civil society leadership wakes up by looking within and questioning the attention and intention of their leadership practices, as individuals and collectives, at home, in organisations and in different sectors. We know as a nation that political leaders (when in power) are usually the last to actually see and feel the trend, with recent examples when they have been unable to predict Nenegate, Tshwane, and thirdly, the bigger one: powers of the public protector Constitutional Court judgement.

To all C-Suite executives, I appeal to you, not because you are not Immune to the required Transformation in South Africa, but because you are. My appeal is further motivated by the fact that you are not uniquely blind to the obvious, but your counterparts up in the UK share the same blind spots, including the belief that politics is not your responsibility. Furthermore, it is my belief that you have skills and knowledge to deal with the challenges we face, including the resources to look right in there in your hearts for the reasons why you have mostly been quiet. It is your quietness and your continued support of political leadership, under the guise of supporting democracy, that contributes to the elusive dream of a post ’94 South Africa.

I appeal to you to give that monetary support (hundreds of millions of Rands) to the deserving NGO and Co-Op sector organisations, so that the post ’94 as mapped out in our Constitution, can become a reality.

Most of all, I remind you that it begins with you. It is values-based leadership that will transform your businesses and thereby give you the currency to speak truth to power, for you will have none of the ‘small(anyana) skeletons’ that could tumble out of your closets, when you become true to our Constitution.

First Africa Coaching Symposium

The time has come for African leaders and coaches to come together and accept that coaching belongs in the continent as one of the levers that can enhance leadership  
capability in all forms of organization existence. For our continent to prosper, it should have prosperous regions. For the African regions to prosper, they have to have successful member countries, and these countries should not only have great leaders, they should have great coaches.
Leadership greatness begins with leadership coaching, in one form or another. In the African tradition, the healing profession and traditional authority are one such good examples of how coaching has made it possible to pass on, from one generation to another, the art and practice of same. Coaching is one of the cornerstones of indigenous knowledge systems. Modern schools of thought on coaching, borrow a lot from how our ancestors have always passed on practice of any of their crafts through coaching and mentoring.
I invite you, together with my partners, to share, craft and envision the role of coaching in the socio-economic development of the African continent.
If you are a coaching executive in a corporation, public or private, or in government and even in the non-governmental sector, you ought to be here. If you are a highly respected professional in any discipline, or just a C-Suite or other executive, you may want to join us, and you will come out richer as we shape the malleable role of coaching in leadership development for Africa’s growth.

Please use the booking CODE… CADO5100

First Africa Coaching Symposium

FW de Klerk- A Lesson in Values-Based Leadership, #RhodesMustFall, #RMFO

FW de Klerk’s Response to The #RhodesMustFall Campaign- A Lesson in Values-Based Leadership

His Leadership Life Lacks ‘Mae’ As Part of His Being

It is a sad thing to be writing an energy-sapping article, to caution a leader who ought to know better, when I should be inspiring others to be positive and upbeat about 2016. FW de Klerk as some of you might have gathered from various publications, most notably the BBC article entitled, FW De Klerk criticises Rhodes statue removal campaign, believes the campaign is off the mark. Just like many who have benefited from apartheid, he lacks moral, authentic and ethical leadership qualities. These three qualities of leadership were never a requirement in the party, let alone in Cabinet, and were never asked of him and his predecessors by the White electorate of the days of National Party rule (from 1948-1994), and more directly, in the last days, over which he presided. It is not a surprise that he criticises the campaign at Oxford and elsewhere, wherein the aim is to remove from the pedestal of human leadership legacy, the icons of those who represent an unjust system. The aim of these campaigns is to not just get rid of the symbolism that is both offensive and insensitive to the feelings of those who were at the receiving end of a brutal system of colonisation, patriarchy, racism and imperialism, but to ensure that the current values that give life to the culture of these institutions, shift to reflect current and sustainable newfound values.

Before I go on and explain the lack of ‘mae’ in FW De Klerk’s leadership being, I would like to just highlight a few things that he needs to hear (including those who are supportive of his narrative):

• History and Legacy are two different and unrelated concepts. When one is removed as an icon of good leadership (in the inclusive sense), it does not mean history will be falsified or they will be obliterated from history books. All it means is that they are removed from an area of honour and prominence in society and they get relegated to the back of the class, where they belong. When I deal with moral leadership, you will see the light.
• Two wrongs do not make a right. If the process as explained above, does not go all the way, so as to take all material wealth Oxford or any other institution enjoys from the perpetrators of crime, and give it to its rightful owners, you should rather advocate for that as opposed to justifying your cheap and callous logic. Again, when I deal with authentic leadership, you will see, and probably feel more, as a leader.
• Impact on history without qualifier smacks of prejudice and blind Whiteness that has no place in ethical leadership. As I deal with your lack of ethical leadership in your being, I hope to educate you and those who support your narrative and logic. When I coach, teach, develop and consult on leadership, I do so (and I know those who share the same space do it for the same reason) to make manifest, in the leader, team or organisation, positive impact. This positive impact is through the eyes of the adopted and collective values, in our case, our Constitution. Rhodes would have gone to jail for a long time under the current dispensation, so his impact is no different to that of Adolf Hitler, with most probably more voluminous a list in atrocities.
• You are not qualified to speak on behalf of Black people as to how much pain or hatred, they should feel for the man, simply because your people were paid off in 1902, 1910 and in 1948, and went on to do to the Blacks what the English did to your people. Let the Black people find their own way in rehumanising the Black body, which the intersectionality of global repression against them, found humanity faced with patriarchy, racism, classism and many of the ‘isms’ that came with the package deal. Speaking of the package deal, its aftermath is still felt today and is sometimes hidden through meaningless terms like ‘born-frees’. With nothing to bequeath to this generation, failures of your people (together with the British) relating to all three aspects of modern leadership: moral, authentic and ethical, will be felt for centuries to come.

Let me begin with a scholarly description of what moral leadership is, the first component of the ‘mae’ acronym:

Moral: ““Moral leadership helps followers to see the real conflict between competing values, the inconsistencies between espoused values and behaviour and the need for realignments in values, changes in behaviour, or transformations of institutions….[However] the transformational leader may be a breaker and changer of what society has regarded heretofore as right and wrong.”- Steven Covey

Looking at Covey’s description of moral leadership, juxtaposed against our transformation in South Africa, as well as the role de Klerk played, it may seem odd  to strip him of this quality, especially after engineering, through transformational leadership, the current dispensation. It is difficult to believe that de Klerk transformed at the level of values, whereby he would have denounced the dehumanisation of the Black body, and accepted them as being equally human. As indicated earlier, the concept of a historical account is not such a complex issue that it can be confused with a positive legacy that a leader has left behind. De Klerk’s ability to process any level of complexity is unquestioned; it is his interpretation that is questionable: wenza ngabom! He is deliberate in how he expresses his narrative and therefore, immoral as a leader.

Unarmed teenage boys were killed just outside Umtata, during the same period negotiations were going on; on the other hand, the South African economy was headed for a definite meltdown. The trigger for apartheid and the whole repressive system of colonising Africa was resource driven. It was greed and the need to amass wealth that saw millions of Black South Africans side-lined in the build up to 1910 as the Union of South Africa was created, by his people. The multinationals and the system of imperialism were bolstered and the economy of the West prospered at the expense of the dehumanised, undeserving masses of Black people.

Global sanctions and an orchestrated system of economic exclusion against South Africa, threatened its very trigger, an exclusive economic system that continued to feed off an extractive economy, creating better jobs elsewhere in the West. Rumours abound are that this is the real driver and the foundation of our rainbow nation, with De Klerk benefitting personally. Political power was and still is a small price to pay, to sustain that system. The structural dynamics handed over to an inept government in 1994 still have to be shifted to reverse years of imperialism and colonisation. Judging by FW De Klerk’s behaviour and utterances in the last 20 years, it is difficult not to believe his suspected motive for transformation, for he continuously fails the test on moral leadership, no matter how many times he rewrites the examination. Whenever the question of history comes up, he fails to deal with it in a manner that allows the victims and the perpetrators to collectively own it and transcend it towards a truly diverse rainbow nation, where the spoils of the past would be shared. One needs to read some of Professor Sampie Terblanche’s work to understand how the negotiations were never about economic power, but just politics. De Klerk represents the side that had both political and economic power, a side that effectively shielded capital from having to account for its contribution to the past.

What we see in the Boardroom (of corporate SA) is no different, even though the context is slightly different, for what we find is that there is seldom a closed loop relationship between the espoused values and the actual behaviours of most private sector leaders (the focus of this article). It is for that reason that the #ZumaMustFall campaign fell flat on its face: the trigger for it was the same as the trigger for apartheid. But then, I digress.

Authentic leadership is the next in the ‘mae’ that is missing from De Klerk’s leadership being.

Authentic leadership is one of the key requirements that can position a leader as one who is values-based in their being.  As part of our battery of pre-coaching assessments, this dimension measures the leader’s capability to relate to others in an authentic, courageous and high integrity manner. It is composed of:

 

Integrity measures how well the leader adheres to the set of values and principles that she/he espouses; that is, how well s/he can be trusted to “walk his/her talk.”

Courageous Authenticity measures the leader’s willingness to take tough stands, bring up the “un-discussables” (risky issues the group avoids discussing), and openly deal with difficult relationship problems.

Source: www.theleadershipcircle.com

 

When a leader flip-flops between one set of values and another (opposing), to justify their position, and even ask for absolutes from the other side, just to show that they are not the only ones in the wrong, that leader cannot be trusted. When De Klerk says those institutions that hold funds bequeathed to them by Rhodes, have to return them all to the victims, he fails the paper on Authenticity with no hope of a rewrite but he has to redo the course. He just never was in the lecture room!

 

Do we find similar behaviour among the leaders, in the Boardrooms of corporate SA? – Absolutely!

 

They will tell you how intra-Black GINI index (World Bank estimate) has grown, so that they do not have to deal with the national question on true economic transformation. There are many ‘if only’ statements uttered in SA Boardrooms, so that real organisation and macro-economic transformation is excluded from the strategic conversations we should be having. It is leaders like De Klerk who reinforce this kind of thinking and utterances, for they do not provide a different way of seeing the world, in so far as Black lives are concerned. I can just hear: “If only all can be graduates, all will be OK”, whilst the Black graduates in your midst, are treated with disdain.

 

The last, but not least, and certainly not complete, in the list of the requirements for Values-based leadership, is Ethical Leadership. We used to share a joke in my early days in corporate, which went like: “Ethics is not a county in England!”

 

Ethical Leadership can be derived from, among others, this Wikipedia description: Ethical leadership is leadership that is directed by respect for ethical beliefs and values and for the dignity and rights of others. [1]:22 it is thus related to concepts such as trust, honesty, consideration, charisma and fairness. [2]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_leadership

De Klerk chastises the campaign because he believes, the impact Rhodes had on society, however devastating to Blacks it was and still is, is important enough to be honoured until time immemorial. This kind of narrative displays total disregard for the rights of Black people and others who have suffered as the result of global imperialism, colonialism and continued racism.

Up to this day, remnants of the values that were influenced by the superiority complex of the Anglo-Saxons, greed and need to amass wealth at the expense of the locals, still reign supreme in the Boardrooms of Corporate South Africa, as well as across the world in the multinational corporations. In 1994 we experienced migration of this way of being in South African leaders, from the Cabinet and Parliament, into the Boardroom.

Lessons for South Africa

 

1. Corporate SA leaders, Black, White, woman, man, young or old, should be more conscious of the lack of ‘mae’ in themselves: moral, authentic and ethical leadership.
2. Corporate leaders need to reflect on their way of being and find time to align themselves with the true values of our Constitution, and not just the letter thereof.
3. When working on organisation culture and strategy of a new and true way of being, corporate leaders need to know that they cannot speak on behalf of their followers and colleagues, especially if they have always had, or currently have privilege.
4. Corporate leaders need to work into the bone of their body, new ways of being that will allow them to have credibility, not only in the eyes of the markets, but include the trust by the citizens of this country, South Africa.
5. Corporate leaders need to ensure that what they say and what they do, are aligned.
6. Corporate leaders need to develop ways, authentic ways of redefining what business organisations are all about, for double digit economic growth will always be a pipe-dream, if they do not fix the way they are seen by the majority of their employees. The most competitive nations, according to the list of the World Competitiveness Report, have less conflict between corporations and the majority of their citizens.
7. Corporate leaders need to create processes, systems and policies that are aligned with both the spirit and the letter of our transformative legislation, chief among them being our Constitution.
8. There needs to be consequences for those who still reminisce of the past and want to, by whatever means, either maintain or recreate it for the benefit of the few. They do not belong in the decision making bodies (governance) of corporations operating inside South Africa.

In conclusion, I hope I have not only educated FW De Klerk, but the few at the top of our Irish coffee economy, so that we can have a truly harmonised society, the way it is supposed to be, through values-based leadership.

@goodnews_cado | @coachcadogan  | www.linkedin.com/in/goodnews | www.about.me/goodnews_cadogan | www.nyuzi.wordpress.com

Reconciliation Is Reciprocal By Design

It is a dance led by the privileged, in which those buried in adversity become active participants

I read recently that (@Fact) those who dance frequently are the ones among those with the highest self-esteem and most likely to have a positive outlook on life. In many of the assignments I have had the pleasure of being part of (organisation change and transformation), both as part of the leadership of an organisation, as well as a consultant, coach and facilitator, I have been witness to this, that may seem to be trivia. Reconciliation, as described in the dictionary:

• The restoration of friendly relations.
• The action of making one view or belief compatible with another.

It is when it is described as a verb, an action word, that I become excited with the language I use the most to express myself when I am not speaking in isiXhosa, isiZulu, or in ChiChewa, or ChiTumbuka. This is how it is captured (RECONCILE):

• To restore friendly relations between.
• To make (one account) consistent with another, especially by allowing for transactions begun but not yet completed.

As in dance form of two dancers in tango, it (reconciliation) has to be voluntary, with both taking alternating roles of leader and follower, depending on the context and movement as it interchanges in seamless flow until the music is over. The reason I prefer the verb or action word, is that it is explicit in its description that there has to be restoration between two, who were once friends, but now are not. It is an act, as accountants and bankers would say, of making one account consistent with another, taking into account what has begun (in apartheid years), which may have to be changed in midstream, to accommodate what has come as a result of the new South African democracy.

Twenty years down the line since the dawn of our democracy, many still relate our story from two extreme positions: victor and victim, privilege and adversity, rich or poor, young or old, able and differently-abled (disabled) trust fund baby and born poor baby, and more. THAT is the current reality and it will take the two from the mentioned and the unmentioned pairs, to dance with reckless abandon, to really reconcile the South African situation. In one of the many workshops I have facilitated in the name of organisation transformation, one Black fellow said: “How can I forgive and forget, when you (referring to a White person in the room) are still wearing my grandfather’s jacket?”

That jacket could be anything: the wealth built by your family through 300 odd years of heritage, and bequeathed to you as the privilege you would like to attribute to hard work today. It could be the private school, former model C, or premier university degree education that you may attribute again, to many hours of burning the midnight oil. It could be the cushy job that you have landed at one of the local conglomerates, multinationals, or it could be the family business built over many generations, through hard work, as you would like to believe. That jacket, looked at from different perspectives, represents different things to different South Africans; it is also one of the stumbling blocks to national reconciliation. Whilst we are at odds as a nation, divided by the past and the present, we will have a hard time to create a competitive nation out of the ashes of apartheid, for its cinders still burn negative energy which feeds the anger of the victims of the past. On the other hand, the same cinders, keep the greed-fire burning, making it difficult for those who have the proverbial fat in their mouth, to consider reconciliation as an option.

Most of these feeble attempts at the level of the corporation, to reconcile, under the banner of transformation, almost end up in smoke, for none of the leaders (shareholders, Boards and executives) are prepared to go all the way. Those who now have nothing to build on, have to work their way through the system, like we did, they say. It is always all talk, with no real altering of the values and beliefs that got us where we are as a nation today. They are prepared to take a few from the other side (those dispossessed of their forefathers’ jackets), so that they may be what is commonly known as ‘economic security guards’ so as to keep peace. I believe that kind of peace is short-lived.

Until such time we all fall in love with the dance of reconciliation, like the character (having a great career and a loving family, lawyer John Clark) in ‘Shall We Dance?’, we will not find the joy of reconciliation, for as much as we have tried on the political front, we have failed dismally to reconcile [using the banker’s definition: To make (one account) consistent with another, especially by allowing for transactions begun but not yet completed]. John Clark could not find peace in the art of dance until he fell in love with it, deeply.

1. As the half that faced adversity in the previous regime’s tenure, we need to have the resilience required to penetrate the thick wall of denial by those who benefited from the past. We have to do it with love and compassion. That resilience must show in:
   1. Media coverage.
   2. Robust, courageous and bold public policy, with enforcement capacity, including change in foreign and trading policy if it comes to the push.
   3. In recent conversations with trusted associates, they were shocked at the suggestion of taking away incentives from the auto sector if they were not prepared to transform. I say, all businesses should earn their keep in our economy. They must have an operating license that is supportive of our transformation and reconciliation agenda as a nation (united nation of all those pairs mentioned above).
2. Furthermore, as the half that faced adversity in the past and currently still so, we have to find practical ways of beating the exclusive system of privilege, by staying true to the values of sharing and finding power in numbers. Do not be content with being the only Black, woman, or disabled person, or any of the many I have not mentioned.
   1. Just imagine if those who have more than 5 Board position, only stopped at 5 and accepted no more.
   2. Imagine if the billions of Rands mad available since the 1990’s were spread across thousands, if not millions, through broad-based structures! It would make it easier of the owners of corporations in South Africa had their values aligned with the Constitution, for all transformation programs would go the Full Monty.
   3. Organisations like BBEC would swallow, in influence terms, organisations like Business Leadership SA and similar, which, in my view, are still exclusionists in approach, despite the façade of transformation. It is the values that count and the values manifest in narrative and actions. Many of the business formations fail dismally on the latter two.
3. Pitching reconciliation alongside national competitiveness is something agents of transformation are not doing enough, hence the suspicion with which it is viewed by the privileged. Credible research, from credible institutions, like Harvard, point to a scenario of doom, if national reconciliation is approached half-heartedly. None of the winning nations according to the World Competitiveness Report, have glaring civil war, whether on the streets or in the Boardrooms of their corporations. In speaking to leaders in business in South Africa (and I speak to a lot of them), they say: “It is war out there!”- Under the circumstances, South Africa stands no chance of being a super economy in Africa, on this count alone.
4. As the privileged South Africans, the wealthy who never voted the National Party (just kidding) or supported apartheid, or supported sanctions-busting initiatives in the dark ages of pre 1994, sincerity is important towards driving reconciliation. Your shenanigans in the Boardroom can easily be traced back, to the past in the old South Africa, or some parts of the current political agenda in opposition politics. The best quality in the oppressed masses, is the intellectual ability to gauge the intentions of others, verbal or unspoken, so stop trying, you are busted. Engage in real transformation that goes beyond talk shops.
5. Create platforms for multitudes to emerge from the oppression of the past, as the wealthy ones:
   1. Loosen the stranglehold you have over access to wealth and wealth creation.
   2. Do not always go for the usual suspects, for there are many who are worthy, beyond the few politically connected leaders and professionals.

• Genuinely reach out to those whose values, hearts and minds are wired to do good. There are many, believe me, they are the ones who continue to prevent South Africa from burning with frustration with the capitalist system.

6. I believe that you, as the privileged few, you stopped learning a long time ago. As the rest of the developed world’s creative minority is experimenting with more innovative ways, you are still stuck in the past in:
   1. Wealth and wealth creation and shared benefits of same. The old hat of capitalism is being rejected the world over by enlightened leaders.
   2. Nation-building is the foundation of a partnership between business and political leadership (nations go to war to protect business interests, just as an indication of how far they are tight together). If you are malingering in this area, your currency to criticise government will always be without value, like an adopted child’s in a callous family home.

• You have to invest your wealth, to multiply it, and you are not going to be successful if you invest with the few who do not have the long view of South Africa. You have to develop the art of the long view so that you can recognise it in others, others a few generations from now, your legacy may be zero, to your own, and the nation in general.

1. As reconciled nations become competitive nations, it surely begins in commerce, to create THAT competitive nation. A nation not beholden to its government for family survival will surely have power to appoint the political leaders it wants.

As you reflect on what you will do as a South African that would love to see national cohesion, be conscious of the position you occupy in society, not out of anger because no wealth has been bequeathed on you, or you never had a chance to get a good education, or a cushy job. It should also never be out shame, guilt and arrogance, because of the wealth amassed, both in the old and the new South Africa. I plead with all South Africans to reflect and envision from a common position of being human. It is the oneness of humanity that will yank us out of our comfort zones. Believe me when I say, both positions: privilege and adversity are of comfort, for when we remain in each, we do not have to do the hard work of unlearning what has always worked for us, and learning and doing the critical reconciliation that is required. We could remain as we are and build the high walls to keep others out, or throw missiles over the walls and criticise the system; that is not going to build a competitive nation through reconciliation.

REAL RECONCILIATION is not diversity awareness programs and learning stupid things about how to deal with an Afrikaner and Zulu, Xhosa, Venda and Shangaan and more. Real reconciliation will happen we, as leaders, seek to understand what makes our followers tick, and what they want, to give more, then give it to them, for the benefit of all.

Visualise a South Africa that is a force to reckon with in Africa in terms of competitiveness and integral consciousness of its leaders A South Africa that cares for each and every one of its 49 million citizens, with leaders that are candid with each other, whether they are in academia, politics, commerce or government. .

I visualise leaders who are not there to milk the economic system for their own narrow benefit, but for most.

Remembering Mandela: For Every Dreyfus, We Need a Picquart

I am not sure in remembering Mandela, as a student of leadership, fascinated with human behaviour, what message I would like to convey. My message is directed at practicing leaders in politics, government, non-profit sector, co-operative sector and in the private sector, the latter, being the main laboratory of my observations, and the subject of this first article in the series. On a different subject altogether, a few days ago, Kerry Sandison, one of my colleagues and friend, brought to my attention, the Dreyfus Affair. Two characters are of interest to me in this complex plot, Dreyfus and Georges Picquart. Captain Dreyfus was falsely accused and convicted for spying for the Germans, only to be exonerated much later, at the instigation of Picquart, who was the head of counter espionage. Ironically, Picquart was sabotaged in his investigation and sent to fighting duty in French Tunisia. Had it not been that Dreyfus was later exonerated, a plot hatched to charge Picquart, would have succeeded. He was eventually given the rank of Brigadier-General, even after he had resigned from the army, to ensure that he attains a rank he would have had, had the Dreyfus affair not marred his career.

Looking at South Africa today, in political, public, private and non-profit sectors leadership, I see many characters that have had a similar experience to Dreyfus, with very few emerging as the courageously authentic Picquart, to save the former from the harshly toxic systems that they serve. The Public Protector casts a lone figure amongst the few that are prepared to be thrown to the wolves and face accusation of being foreign spies, just like Dreyfus. It is a few, muted voices that are of the Picquart mettle that are prepared to risk being shut out of the patronage network, or being cast out of a system they serve. These systems seem to be invincible against the lone voices that represent the genuine fight against unjust practises, despite the Constitution we crafted at the dawn of our democracy. Our beloved country, I cry, seems to resemble the Dreyfusards and the anti-Dreyfusards of that era in France (1894-1906). For the sake of self-preservation, short-termism, exclusionism, egoism, greed and disregard of our founding values, enshrined in our Constitution, leaders in all (contrary to popular belief that it is only the politicians, of the ruling party at that) these systems as described, are prepared to anything, to keep others out. These leaders are also prepared to remove from the society, as the previous government agents were, all those who seem to make it difficult for them to live out their plans, however unjust.  Just like in the case of Picquart, once those who hold the critical strings of power have made their decision to take a leader out, they are prepared to use even junior officials to the incumbent leader, to dislodge them from the system.

On the other hand, from an SA media perspective, there seems to be unbalanced coverage of the characters like French army major named Ferdinand Walsin Esterhazy, who was the real culprit, for which Dreyfus took the fall for, because of his influence and the power he wielded in the French ruling class. The Esterhazys in the in all these systems of leadership, are protected under the guise of protecting what seems to be seen to be with utmost integrity. Any Dreyfusards (seen to be supporting the underdogs in the system of orchestrated injustices) are told how powerful and authentic these systems are, and how they are absurd in thinking that they can conquer same.

In the private sector, there is orchestrated onslaught against those that are seen to be threatening the livelihood of current beneficiaries through genuine and aggressive transformation initiatives. Someone wants said to me that in choosing leaders from the designated groups communities, the previously and currently privileged shareholders and executive directors of large private corporations,  say: “We know how to choose ‘our Blacks’ or ‘our women’, so that they do not turn out to be the Picquart that upsets the system equilibrium.” From time to time, they would apply tactics commonly referred to as White supervision, like: split leadership positions on appointment of Black or woman leaders, with watered-down versions of pre- 1994 positions springing up in all manner of form and substance. For those of you who are waiting for the Mandela factor in this narrative, I will unpack it now, beginning with private sector leadership.

In remembering Mandela, I think he would have been either the Dreyfus or the Picquart we need in the Boardrooms of companies operating in South Africa. In the same way he uttered the following words on major world issues, he would be the lone voice that garners for support from each of the sub-committees of these Boards:

• On the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, December 4 1997, Mandela assembled a group and said: “as South Africans, our Palestinian guests and as humanists to express our solidarity with the people of Palestine.” At the speech, he called for the metaphorical flames of solidarity, justice, and freedom to be kept burning.

“The UN took a strong stand against apartheid; and over the years, an international consensus was built, which helped to bring an end to this iniquitous system. But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.”

 

• Mandela was a long-time supporter of the Palestinian Liberation Organization and made a speech to reporters in 1999, in which he agreed to be a political mediator between Israel and its neighbours.

“Israel should withdraw from all the areas which it won from the Arabs in 1967, and in particular Israel should withdraw completely from the Golan Heights, from south Lebanon and from the West Bank,” Mandela stated, according to the Jewish Telegraph Agency’s Suzanne Belling.

 

• Mandela met with Fidel Castro in 1991, giving a speech alongside him entitled “How Far We Slaves Have Come.” The country was commemorating the 38th anniversary of the storming of the Moncada, and Mandela hailed Cuba’s ‘special place’ in the heart of the people of Africa, its revolution, and how far the country had come.

“From its earliest days, the Cuban Revolution has also been a source of inspiration to all freedom-loving people. We admire the sacrifices of the Cuban people in maintaining their independence and sovereignty in the face of the vicious imperialist-orchestrated campaign to destroy the impressive gain made in the Cuban Revolution….Long live the Cuban Revolution. Long live comrade Fidel Castro.”

 

• Mandela urged for the end to harsh UN sanctions imposed upon Libya in 1997, and pledged his support for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, who was a long-time supporter of his.

 

“It is our duty to give support to the brother leader…especially in regards to the sanctions which are not hitting just him, they are hitting the ordinary masses of the people … our African brothers and sisters,” Mandela said.

Source: http://rt.com/files/news/21/69/c0/00/nelson-1.jpg

Madiba was not afraid to show his true colours on any matter he viewed as being important for the sake of his integrity. He had the courage to say and do the right things, irrespective of the initial backlash, even from his own comrades, as long as he could explain from an authentic place, why he thought and felt that way.

Most of private sector leadership would score very low if tested on courageous authenticity; what they say is always filtered to suit the audience and they play to the gallery. What they do in real terms, is seldom aligned to their utterances on major policy and organisation culture aspects of the organisations they lead. Most business leaders cannot even offer authentic views on government policy or practices, because their own houses in corporate, are not in order. They lack the moral high ground to take government on, even on genuine policy shortcomings.

The Private Sector Dreyfus Affair

For both, those who believe he sold out through the CODESA agreements of 1994 (the spineless Blacks), as well as those who believe it is your birth right to continue with corporate policies that are not even relevant in the eyes of contemporary (and progressive) thought leadership on the economics of the commercial enterprise (White males and other privileged individuals of whatever race, gender or creed), here is what I would like you to think about, as you remember Mandela with me:

• Voting against, stonewalling and abstaining from enacting policies that seek to create a large portion of risk-based pay for executives, to be linked to transformational leadership prowess and commitment is NOT a good memory of Mandela, on your part.
• Voting against, stonewalling and abstaining from enacting policies that seek to close race and gender-based wage gap, including reduction of the deep-cut wage gap (CEO to the proverbial sweeper), is NOT a good memory of Mandela, on your part.
• Voting against, stonewalling and abstaining from enacting policies that seek to excite all to be aligned to the founding values of our Constitution, through aligned organisation values, is NOT a good memory of Mandela, on your part.
• Voting against, stonewalling and abstaining from policies that will ensure 100% utilisation of opportunities created through natural attrition, to swell the senior ranks of leadership (across all functions) with designated employees, is NOT a good memory of Madiba.
• If, as a member of the Board, its sub-committees and the executive team of an organisation of whatever size, you have not aligned your personal values with those of our Constitution, as a start, you do NOT have a good memory of Mandela.
• If, as a member of the Board, its sub-committees and the executive team of an organisation of whatever size, you leave a colleague out to dry, when they raise issues you should be supporting, like rooting out behaviour that is contrary to the 5 points above, but not limited to, you are the same as the French army major named Ferdinand Walsin Esterhazy. As described above, he was the symbol of injustice during the Dreyfus Affair era. You could NOT possibly have a good memory of Mandela, with that attitude. You have to #UnEsterhazy yourself as a leader.
• If the shareholders of your corporation are not educated in the principles of distributed ownership models and they start (ukukhumsha) using fancy terms like equity equivalents that they do not use in other markets, you are NOT remembering Mandela in a good way.
• Alexander Forbes, through one of its subsidiaries, produced one such Dreyfus, in Unathi Ndlovu; there was no Picquart that appeared to save her from the system. As is reported, four men conspired to remove her from the organisation she served, when she raised issues they were not comfortable with. As a business leader, when it comes to issues of both transformation and creation of a high performance culture, are you a Dreyfus, Picquart or an Esterhazy? The latter is an agent of the past, in terms of economic transformation and does not have to be a White male, though it is easier when one is, to be.

Just as a note to remember: it is not necessary for me to advise first line supervisors, middle management and senior management on how to remember Madiba. They always fall in line with what top management and corporate leadership ask of them, either for the sake of self-preservation or internalised personal values. Either way, the latter ends up being the ultimate anchor of management behaviour, driven from the crest of leadership.

In my introduction I mentioned that I will engage all leaders in South Africa according to the sector they operate in, because in remembering Mandela, the form in which the characters I have chosen to illustrate the point, take a different form in each. As you engage me in my characterisation of business leadership, in so far as what Mandela would do today, had he been between the ages of 35 and 65, as a business leader, I would like to exclude other forms of leadership existence.

In the next article, I will unpack the Dreyfus Affair in the setting of political leadership, the soft target of most analysts and social commentators. It will be great then, for you not to try to hide behind challenges facing these leaders, as you deal with your own, as I raise them here.

Wherever this article will appear, there will be an opportunity for me to engage you as a leader in corporate SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5TiUhhm7cQ

It’s Not HR’s Job to Be Strategic

Executive Training Dubai

Human-capital issues are top-of-mind for CEOs around the world ? but their regard for the HR function remains perilously low: In a PwC study, only 34% said that HR is well prepared to capitalize on transformational trends (compared with 56% for…

Source: blogs.hbr.org

See on Scoop.it – Leadership and Management

View original post