“Abantu” Leaders (Leadership with Ubuntu Principles)

Attuned Leadership: Leadership from an African Humanism Perspective (Ubuntu)

I would like to open with this paraphrased quote, from Dr Reuel Khoza: Good leaders understand that they do not have all the answers. They are like the conductors of an orchestra, they themselves do not play, but they make the musicians play to the best of their abilities.

A leader who is in constant contact and communication with his followers knows and sees the potential that his followers have, he pushes them to the realisation thereof. Khoza defines attuned leadership as leadership that is based on values, is reflective, led by a vision and is resonant. From this definition, one can draw that attuned leaders know not only their followers, but also know where their followers are headed and are thus leading them in that very direction. Leadership from the Ubuntu perspective is highly based on moral grounding; the leader is not pleased just by seeing activity, instead, the positive results of his and his followers’ activities are what matter, and how these results are achieved (morally speaking) may matter even more. Furthermore, Ubuntu is based on being, realising that one is, and it also fathoms that there is a great almighty (not necessarily ‘God’ but there is a deity) that leads and sustains the people.

Professor Metz shared the same sentiments as Khoza, stating that Ubuntu as a principle is widely used in Africa, especially in the southern region of Africa. There are numerous proverbs that are used that promote this principle. African humanism prizes community and individual. However, if applied incorrectly, the individual may be lost over the community in the sense that the community will be seen as more important. Metz warns that some of society’s greatest innovators were and many today are introverts – they need a personal space, enjoying contact with no one while they make the greatest inventions. As such, the line between the individual and the community needs not be made opaque, it should be very visible so as to protect people’s personal and private space; this tends to benefit society to a great degree.

Metz’ conception of Ubuntu as an ethic has two facets to it. Firstly sharing a way of life with others, and secondly, caring for others. Principles applied to achieve the former include having trust, cooperation and listening to others. The principles that promote the latter include sharing resources, being confident in society and showing compassion.  These principles promote not just society but community. Metz’ principles complement those Khoza holds for attuned leaders very well.

In closing, another quote from Khoza: I do not believe [I think] that the intelligentsia in South Africa makes up even 6% of the country’s population. Thus by virtue of you holding a university degree in this country, you automatically become a leader here. And if you do not play that role, then you are misleading South Africa.

It is to all of us that this challenge of leadership is posed. Take it up!

Social Innovation: Developed Countries’ Practices

More and more the world seems to be catching on to the breaking news that the government on its own cannot solve the challenges in society – especially not in capitalist societies. Governments around the world fund of organisations and businesses in countless endeavours to realise their potential in boosting development. These grants are aimed at combatting challenges such as absorbing school drop outs into the economy andempowering disabled people.However, the problem with these grants is that more often than not, there is no monitoring or evaluation to conducted with them in order to find out whether they make positive changes in society or not, countries such as Canada and South Africa are perpetrators and thus also victims of this. This idea of government grants to organisations and businesses in the name of development is an interesting one.

Dr Siobhan Harty, from the Canadian government’sSocial Policy Directorate, explained that the implementation of this idea is very much a result of innovative thinking which is now being highly encouraged in Canada and in other developed countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom. The latest idea in encouraging cooperation in development between the government and the private sector is that of Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) – in SIBs the government transfers the financial risk to the private sector. At the end of a project the government, depending on whether the project was a success or not, will reimburse the parties that carried out the project with a profit added on top. The advantage to this is the efficiency of the private sector, which the government lacks and now seeks to lend by means of SIBs. (One could see this as a form of outsourcing.) SIBs are the most recent and currently also the most complex and difficult form of SIBs that one can find.

With the introduction of SIBs has come a challenge to define the role of governments and the private sectors of those countries that wish to apply them. The UK, currently the leader in the application of SIBs is currently attempting to define these roles. In developed countries this may be a viable model for development projects. But is this model suitable for developing countries as well? One could start by considering the fact that in reality; the private sectors of developing countries such as South Africa are dominated by international companies. In the case of SIBs it is the same international (or foreign-owned) companies that stand to gain more. Locally owned businesses will not reap as much fruit from this initiative as they would wish to. Moreover, is the developing countries’ context suitable for SIBs? Yes these SIBs promote collaboration, the sharing of ideas and so forth. But are developing countries ready for almost ‘passive’ governments? Is outsourcing development a good idea for many war-torn and troubled states? I doubt that Social Impact Bonds could be as beneficial in these countries as they could be in the developed lands.

Open Source Technology, Open Source Social Innovations

Open source technology makes a very interesting model for develoment. Different kinds of people participate in a project, bringing their context and expertise. Open source offers users of computer software the chance to use and modify (if one has the expertise to do so) freely the software. Dr Saunders explained the concept quite well in the lecture he gave. Open source is an interesting way to view collaboration in innovation as users get to change what they wish to change in comupter software to make it friendlier for their context and their specific (perhaps even special) needs. These collaborators may or may not know one another. This can lead to computer software being available in a number of different languages, even languages that may be used by small groups in society. Can open source software assist the elderly to learn how to use modern computer technology? Can it help marginalised groups such as those who learn slowly to learn how to explore the world at their own pace and from the comfort of their homes? If used wisely, yes it can!

Moreover, depending on how wide-spread one open source software and its blueprint is, ideally there can be as many modifications to the software as there are users thereof. The fact that the programme codes (the secrets of software corporates) are made available to the general public, in open source technology, gives the sense that there are people who are willing to gain nothing while helping others (altruistic people), sharing secrets that they could possibly use to make money. Dr Saunders also made reference to Wikipedia as a form of open source – people can share their expertise on different topics on that website.

This made me wonder. Do social innovators qualify to be viewed as participants in open source if they design solutions to social challenges and keep the solutions open to different types of interpretations when they are applied in different contexts? I will provide an example. In South Africa, communities are supposed to come up with Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) in consultation with their local governments. The principles that guide these processes of IDP development (called the Batho Pele Principles) are the same around the country. Thus there is a standeard expectation, a foundation for IDPs, but each community follows this process and develops different kinds of needs and priorities for their communities. Can this process be viewed as a form of open source? I could site multiple examples like this one, but I think this one shoul suffice.

Keyword: Investment

Corporate Social Investment Class Summary

The CSI class was very interesting and informative. It is encouraging to see that South Africa has a law of this nature in place. Further than that, it is more encouraging that the private sector, well some companies therein, are willing to “invest” in society today. The shift from companies from looking at the role they play more as an investment rather than a responsibility (as Ms Manavhela explained) gives one the sense that the private sector can be humane after all. The sector no longer wants to play the role of development in South Africa as though it is forced to; there is a willingness to sow the seeds thereof. The word “investment” does, however, denote that the sector wants to see results that are favorable to it and to society, thus the need for development experts (as some of us wish to become) in CSI should not be taken lightly. Moreover, Ms Cuff and Ms Manavhela accentuated the point that the private sector is hell-bent on seeing positive results produced efficiently on their investments. As development may be seen as something that the government should lead in or at times undertake alone, adopting the model of the private sector (professionalism, skills etc.) is something the government should strive to apply.

Moreover, one would also want to encourage companies to have strategies, clear strategies, at that, on what they invest in. This does not necessarily mean they should focus on specific projects, but even in their ad-hoc giving they should set criteria. If this is not done, CSI funding will turn out the way government grants do – much is given but no positive returns can be seen. Finally, the idea of mining communities receiving more CSI than others is not a good idea (as experience has shown in Tshikululu Social Investments). This idea creates a dependency and acarelessness in these communities, laws such as these may really be the “zombie ideas” that Dr Atyiebo alluded to, that still exist in South Africa. Development and investment; not dependency and recklessness, is what we should strive for.

Lecture 1 on SI

Report of Week 1 Seminar

 

This is a report on the Development Studies Honours seminar held on 11 September 2013 at the University of Johannesburg (UJ). The seminar was run by Mr Rogers Hlatshwayo, the Chief Director of Strategy, Business Process and Risk in South Africa’s Department of Social Development (DSD). The report covers five topics. Namely, these are: how I thought the seminar went, what I learned in the seminar, how worthwhile the seminar was for me, my expectations and suggestions on how the seminars can be improved. Thereafter the report will be concluded.

The seminar went well but the guest lecturer did not seem very comfortable, possibly because he may have been worried about the limited time that he had. Also because of time Mr Hlatshwayo skipped a lot of the slides he had prepared, resulting in a lot of things not being explained. However, the question and answer session was very fruitful, Mr Hlatshwayo gave up-to-date information in his responses to questions. It was evident that he knew what he was talking about and he knows his department well.

Moreover, one of the most important things that I learned was that social innovation makes an endeavour to find solutions that are not only effective but also sustainable. In thinking about solutions to problems one ought to keep in mind that they will have an effect on future as well. Another important point made was that the best time to find solutions for societal challenges was in the past but right now is also a good time to start. By this he emphasised that it is better to prevent than to remedy social problems.

With regards to the how worthwhile the seminar was, I found it to be very worthwhile. The fact that Mr Hlatshwayo brought a lot of knowledge and application of social innovation made the seminar worth attending. What I had expected from the seminar was that Mr Hlatshwayo would explain what social innovation means, theories for and against it and how it works. However this was not the case. Instead his focus was more on the application of social innovation in finding solutions to challenges within the DSD. There was a degree of disappointment, seeing as I left the seminar without a clear understanding of what social innovation.

From the above, one can conclude that the first Social Inovation Development Studies Honours steminar from the UJ gave found that the seminar run by Mr Hlatshwayo went well. However, there were a few shortcomings in the seminar. Furthermore, I learned quite a number of things from the seminar. Some of my expectations were not met, but the seminar was still worthwhile. The coming seminars would be more fruitful if the class would meet with the lecturer (Dr Matsinhe) for an hour to discuss the week’s readings. During this time the week’s readings will be clarified. The remainder of the seminar would then be left to the guest lecturer to utilise.

The History of Ideas Lecture

The second seminar on design thinking comprised two parts. In the first part of the seminar the concept of design thinking was discussed. The second half of the lecture was dedicated to a lecture about ideas, old versus new ideas, and it was presented by Dr E. Etieyibo. Etieyibo’s lecture will be summed up in the second half of this summary and design thinking will be discussed first.

Design thinking can be defined as a process that requires the skill of analysing problems and searching for or exploring possible solution to that problem. In the design thinking process one will have to think creatively about how problems can be solved (Razzouk and Shute, 2012: 1). There are several steps involved in the process of design thinking. The first step is that of understanding exactly what the problem is. Before one begins searching for or coming up with solutions to a problem, one needs to first understand clearly what the problem is.  Secondly, when the problem is fully understood, one can then begin doing research and finding solutions to the problem. This process may involve doing research to find out what other people have done to solve similar or the same problem. On the other hand, one can rely on one’s own ideas to solve the problem (MJV, 2009: internet source).

The third step in design thinking is that of prototyping. This is where feasibility and efficiency of the solution will be tested. The solution is implemented in a small scale so as to see how well it works and to check if it has any flaws or if modifications need to be made to the solution. Finally, if the solution is found to be worth implementing on large scale, the social innovator ought to do so. This happens only when one is content that the solution is a good one. This last step is known as development, where the solution I applied (MJV, 2009: internet source).

In the lecture about old versus new ideas Etieyibo began by defining ideas as the product of mental processes. Ideas are either practical or non-practical. Non-practical ideas are those that cannot be proved or applied in reality. On the other hand, practical ideas (which social innovators strive to produce) can be applied in reality to solve problems. Moreover, Etieyibo accentuated that when coming up with ideas and solutions to challenges one ought not to limit oneself. In generating ideas it is good to come up with ideas that are not conventional because at times these sorts of ideas can be the best ideas to implement s solutions.

Furthermore, Etieyibo explained that there are foundational and non-foundational ideas. Foundational ideas create structure and influence the whole of society. On the other hand, non-foundational ideas can influence only certain parts of society. For foundational ideas to exist, there need to exist non-foundational ideas first. IN his final remarks, Etieyibo questioned the use of the South African identity document (ID). For Etieyibo the use of the ID is too limited and it could be modified to do more than just prove one’s identity. The ID is an old idea that should be modified and make way for new ideas.

The summary provided above discusses the contents of the second Development Studies Social Innovation Honours seminar. The seminar was based on design thinking, what is and how it works. The latter part of the seminar discussed the concept of old versus new ideas.

References

MJV Tecnologi Inovaciao. 2009. What is Design Thinking?

http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/what-is-design-thinking_5165a2c99c215.jpg

Acessed on: 27 September 2013

Razzouke, R., and Shute, V. 2012. “What Is Design Thinking and Why Is It Important?”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. (82) 3, pp. 330–348.

Ubuntu Summary

This paper is a summary of a theory off African humanism as argued by Reuel Khoza. The paper sets out to explain Khoza’s argument for a philosophically comprehensive African humanism. This short paper will firstly explain the origins of the concept of African humanism and how it was argued for. Thereafter a comparison of African and Western humanism will follow. The paper ten briefly discusses practical applications of African humanism in South Africa and in the corporate world, leading up to the paper’s conclusion.

African humanism or ‘ubuntu’ as it is famously known in South Africa (SA) sets the foundation for positive relations between people. Ubuntu holds the African worldview and is genetically inherited by all Africans, as some of its proponents claim that is. The intellectual founding principles of ubuntu have their roots in the 19^th century’s idea of Pan-Africanism which opposed colonialism. The Pan-Africanist movement spread out into the world and was greatly propagated by African writers in France who modified the idea. Pan-Africanism was said to have a spiritual element to it by Edward Blyden, one of its earliest proponents.

There are a number of definitions of ubuntu, all of which emphasise that there is a sense ‘brotherhood’ that all Africans are born with. Africans have their own way of living which is different from the Western ideals of life. Almost all African languages have maxims that express how the individual and community have a natural intrinsic link. Ubuntu defines man according to society, which is at odds with the Western definition of what or who man is. In African societies one can have increased or low levels of ‘humanness’, depending on their relations with others. However, this sense of unity has historically been abused by some African leaders for selfish political gain. Due to its value and strength amongst Africans, some fell for the politicians’ trickery. These users twisted the truths and applications of the principles of ubuntu.

The philosophical nature of ubuntu is that even though it is opposed to extreme individualism, it also does not completely endorse extreme collectivism. Instead, it is better related to social democracy. For ubuntu, man is seen as a social. Individualism has not place in a flourishing society. Yet still, society’s success relies on the individual’s hard work and altruism. In turn, man benefits from the rewards of giving generously to society. Individuals in society rely upon one another for their success. All man is seen as being inter-related in. The principles of ubuntu overlook neither individuals nor society and its institutions. Moreover, unlike Western humanism, ubuntu is neither individualist not atheist. There is a religious element to ubuntu.

In the context of apartheid in South Africa, ubuntu was clearly not flourishing. The idea of African humanism overlooks any sort of boundaries that separate or hinder people from working together and benefitting from each other. Moreover, Khoza further warns that in future, corporations will have to value their staff and apply ubuntu’ principles in order to get maximum results from employees.

The discussion above explained the origins of African humanism. Thereafter the paper explored African and Western humanisms. This paper found that there are many differences between the humanisms with ubuntu providing better and well-founded alternatives to Western humanism.