OF MONKEYS AND A SPARROW!
Opinions
I didn't see it coming. I didn't even hear it fresh off the press. In fact, I heard it late. By chance. A chance Facebook post led me to Twitter where supposedly a war had broken out over a racist post made on Facebook. So, I went to Twitter. Then back to Facebook. And there it was! A fight between a sparrow and a troop of monkeys! What a way to begin the new year! Don't get me wrong; I'm not celebrating anything here. There's nothing to celebrate. But there's a lot to talk about. Racism. Yup! It hasn't gone anywhere, mate. It's 2016 and racism is very much still alive and well, thank you very much. It's a smart animal, you see.
Sometimes it goes all Machiavellian and successfully fakes its own death! Sometimes it just swoons or goes into a comatose state; but one thing it never does is die. Even when it has at times looked dead and buried, like the mythical Phoenix, it has risen from the ashes and left us all bewildered and bemused. And so here we are again, fresh into the new year, and a White South African woman has stirred the hornet's nest. It's on! Where did this furore come from? I'll tell you where, in case you missed it. Around Christmas time and leading up to the New Year, close to 500,000 people, mostly, if not all, Black, converged upon the beaches of Durban. When they left a few days later, the litter left in their wake was the stuff of fiction. Well, to be honest, there's nothing new there. It pretty much happens every year around that time.
Enter Penny Sparrow, a White woman who was so disgusted by both the swarming masses and the litter that she went postal! She went nuts! She went bananas! She likened the holiday makers to monkeys! South Africa went into uproar. When she tried to do damage control not long later, she only managed to add insult to injury. She said she was misquoted and misunderstood. She said she actually likes monkeys because they are cute! Cute! Cute? Well, South Africa and every Black person who got wind of the news didn't think there was anything cute about the whole thing. Monkeys are cute. I'm from Kgatleng. We've got them. In fact, they're our tribal symbol – our totem. They are a cute species. Naughty, but cute. So, I'll give her that. However, her comments about Black people were uncouth and unacceptable, no matter how she meant them.
For any younger readers unaware of the history of racism, likening Black people to the simian species is an old and effective way of conveying the idea that White people are higher up on the evolutionary chain than Black people, who must be at the lowest rung because they are closer to apes. That most of us understand this to be a complete misunderstanding of Darwin’s theory of evolution doesn’t matter. The preposterous suggestion works on the idea that there’s no smoke without fire. It’s also effective because enough people (both Black and White) really do think Black people are closer to apes than White people, having been conditioned to think that way. It's all a matter of repeated psychological reinforcement. Sadly, it has worked. It also gives permission to supposedly smart people like Nobel Prize winner James Watson to keep trying to demonstrate that the Black race is inherently less intelligent than the White race; an endeavour that also has a long history premised on a pseudo-science called "Scientific Racism." Scientific racism is the use of scientific and pseudo-scientific techniques and hypotheses to try to support, reinforce, and justify racism, racial inferiority, or racial superiority; or alternatively the practice of classifying individuals of different phenotypes into discrete races. As a body of theory, scientific racism employs anthropology (notably physical anthropology), anthropometry, craniometry, and other physiognomy-based disciplines, in proposing anthropologic typologies supporting the classification of human populations into physically discrete human races that might be asserted to be either superior or inferior. This unfortunate and withered branch of science gained a lot of traction during the New Imperialism period (c. 1880s – 1914) where it was used in justifying White European imperialism, and it culminated in the period from 1920 to the end of World War II.
Since the latter part of the 20th century, scientific racism has been criticized as obsolete and has historically been used to support or validate racist world-views, based upon belief in the existence and significance of racial categories and a hierarchy of superior and inferior races. Such a science certainly has no place in the modern world nor should it ever have had a place in any world for that matter. Racism is something we've all either witnessed or experienced, whether blatantly or subliminally. Here in Botswana, perhaps most of us are fortunate enough never to have been victims of racism. But our forebears who worked the South African mines know it all too well.
Many people fail to believe that race isn’t a biological category, but an artificial classification of people with no scientifically variable facts. In other words, the distinction we make between races has nothing to do with genetic characteristics. Race was created socially, primarily by how people perceive ideas and faces we are not quite used to. The definition of race all depends on where and when the word is being used. In American history, the meaning of the label “White” has changed over time, eventually adding groups like the Italians, Irish, and Jews. Other groups, mainly Africans, Latinos, American Indians, Pacific Islanders, and Asian descendants, have found the path for worldwide social acceptance much more difficult.
The irregular border of ethnicities touch educational and economic opportunity, political representation, as well as income, health and social mobility of people of color. So where did this type of behavior begin? There are many ideas thrown around as to how racism began, though the truth lies in the history of mankind. Before people were able to travel and experience different groups of other people distinct from themselves, we predominantly stayed in the same kind of area with the same kind of people. We feared things that were different, and we lacked the power to face those kinds of things. All this changed once we did, in fact, obtain this level of human advancement, but the fear never drifted. The truth is, racism began as soon as people faced those of different races.
We’ve always had the fear of change, not to mention the unknown. It seems that racism has been around so long that by now we would have been able to overcome it as our species developed. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. Frequent contact with those of whom we are afraid continues to lead to disputes, which, in time, is what caused racism to transform from people simply disliking each other, to the permanent and indestructible foundation of common racism and prejudice. Contemporary racism is said to have been derived from many places, one of the most common ideas being upbringing.
As a child, you are reliant on your parents to help you become who you are. Part of that involves their own, distinct opinions, that of which children don’t have the maturity to form on their own. They need the help of their parents, and this is often where the problem starts. If you were told that all Asians were sneaky or all Whites are evil or all Blacks are criminals, you can bet that you are going to feel this way about them. Upbringing is the biggest cause of racism. Even if you allow yourself to get to know some of them, this will always be in the back of your mind. We've been taught that Nigerians are crooks, for example. We've been told not to trust a Nigerian. And so, even when dealing with the most upright Nigerian, at the back of your mind, the fact that they're Nigerian makes you treat them with suspicion. It's psychological conditioning. The same applies to racism. Another suggestion as to how racism makes its way into our heads is through the almighty media. As we grow up, media becomes a factor of our lives whether or not we want it to be, and is also a major source of how racism keeps itself active. Since the 70’s, the media has been giving us racial labels, one of the largest supplies coming from crime shows like “Law and Order”, and “CSI”. When dealing with crime, people of color are reflected in the demarcation of “them” and “us”. Whites are often represented as the “good guy”, or the strong, law obeying citizens. They often the targets of the people of color, sometimes without any sort of evidence.
Directors and writers use racial stereotypes to make a more complex story with more suspects. We even have bumper stickers cheekily written things like, "A Black Man Is Always A Suspect." In the novel, “The Power of One,” by Bryce Courtney, which was also made into a movie starring Morgan Freeman, a young, White, African boy named Peekay lives in a world where the government, the country, and the world revolves around racism. World War II is coming to an end, and in South Africa, the Whites seem to hate the Blacks just as much as the Blacks hate the Whites. Peekay was raised by a compassionate and loving Black woman he refers to as “Nanny," due to the unsafe conditions at home with his bad, mentally ill mother. He grew up with Nanny and his best friend, who was also Black.
To Peekay, racism didn’t exist. The author, Bryce Courtney, didn’t intend on writing a book fully based on racism in South Africa. He grasps a trace of apartheid by Peekay’s experiences as a White boy by unhurriedly soaking it into South Africa as a toxin. “Adapt, blend…develop a camouflage.” This thought went through Peekay’s mind once he had been exposed to racism, having been forced to attend a boarding school full of bigger, darker students. In Chapters One and Two, as a mere five-year-old, the bright protagonist Peekay is already addressing the necessity of affecting camouflages in order to survive the system. He is often forced to act differently around people of different skin colors in order to fit in better to prevent himself from getting beaten or teased. He faces his first taste of racism the very first night at the boarding school. One boy, known as “The Judge," who was much older, stronger, and darker than Peekay, comes up with the nickname “PissKop” for Peekay, because of Peekay’s habit to wet the bed that was caused by The Judge’s, along with the help of many other older Black students, tendency to beat Peekay and spit in his face.
The Judge also convinces Peekay that Hitler is determined to march all Englishmen in South Africa into the ocean, and even forces Peekay to eat human feces. Upbringing is a very strong factor of what influences people to become racist, or to have even slight racial views. In Peekay’s case, he had gone from one extreme to another. At home, Nanny and his best friend were the only people he could call family, besides his mother who spent time at what Peekay called “The Mental Breakdown Place." When sent to the boarding school, he wasn’t expecting the Black students to dislike him because of his skin color. He saw the Black kids as merely bullies, and before they started bullying him hadn’t anticipated them to gang up on him because they were Black. This is what caused Peekay’s neutrality with the racist society in which he lived. He gave each person a chance to be a good person, because he had seen the good in different ethnicities to which many people were stubborn to open up their minds. The power of one, or the idea of how one person can make a significant difference, is an important idea in relation to challenge in the novel. Giel Piet (played by Morgan Freeman in the movie), one of Peekay’s boxing coaches who had been sneaking tobacco to all of the prisoners, was forced to eat feces by Sergeant Ballman, a White racist who works at the prison. If Giel Piet had refused to eat the feces, the guards would have found the tobacco, resulting in the prisoners getting beaten along with Giel Piet .
As Peekay witnessed this happen to his coach, he thought, "It made me angry. Angry it was done. Angry I couldn't do anything to stop it." But how does racism really affect society? Visibly identifiable members of racial and ethnic oppressed groups continue to struggle for equal access and opportunities, particularly during times of stringent economics. Often, the targeted race has a harder time doing things such as finding a well-paying job or house. While there have been some sizeable gains in the labor force status of racial minorities, significant gaps remain. Racism is rampant in all areas of employment. For many members of exploited racial and ethnic units, there is always an economic depression. Studies show that people of color are the last hired and the first fired. As a result, budget cuts, downsizing, and privatization may disproportionately hurt people of color. In February 1995, the unemployment rate for African Americans was 10.1 percent as compared to 4.7 percent for White Americans (Berry, 1995). The unemployment rate for adolescents of color is approximately four times that of White adolescents. What's more, in America, the majority of unemployed men are Black, and compared to other races, Blacks and Latinos on average have disproportionately low incomes. Perhaps the American correctional system also betrays an ugly message of subtle racism.
Blacks constitute only about 12% of the American population but more than 50% of the prison population. So bad is the situation that prison is known as "The Black Man's College." There are more Black young men in prison than there are in college. But what can be done? There are several methods proposed to reduce racism and promote tolerance. These include education, changing the attitudes of both the "oppressed" and "oppressor"; legal and political change, enforcing equality until it becomes normative behavior; and change to social structures believed to be the root causes of racism. All of these methods include a belief that as more "others" are included in social institutions and power structures, familiarity itself will erode fear and stereotypes.
Individual Change
Some believe that racist behavior stems from racist attitudes and beliefs that can only be changed on the individual level, in individual minds and hearts. Tactics here include public education and changing portrayals of racist minorities in the media, as well as individuals speaking up against demeaning language, jokes, and use of stereotypes, as well as racist violence and racial discrimination. A corollary to changing the attitudes and beliefs of racists is changing the attitudes and beliefs of people who have been targeted by racism, a refusal to accept being demeaned or discriminated against.
Legal and Political Change
Others believe that racist individuals are the product of a racist society; that the legal and political system must be changed first before social and individual change can follow. The great civil rights campaign in the U.S. in the 1950's and 60's was an expression of this. Root Causes Still others search for connecting causes at the root of racism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, agism, religious intolerance and all other forms of discriminatory behavior, in hopes that addressing the root causes will create the most social change.
Economic Change
One argument proposed by the radical left is that all social discrimination and oppression is the result of an exploitative economic system. Any economic system that creates "Haves" and "Have-Nots" will sooner or later create racist justifications for maintaining the status of the "Haves" over the "Have-Nots." According to some on the radical left, the few who exploit the labor and resources of the many now promote social divisions as a "divide and conquer" strategy. By turning men against women, Blacks against Whites, Christians against Muslims, Arabs against Jews, young against old, etcetera, they disguise the fact that the true battle is Corporations Against Everybody.
By this argument, a truly socialist economic system will result in eliminating racism and all other -isms. Socialists are not the only ones, however, who claim that a different economic/social system will eliminate the evils of racism and other discriminatory practices. Libertarians and the followers of Ayn Rand have claimed that a "Real Capitalism" would eliminate such social evils; Democrats and Republicans both claim that a "Real Democracy" will eliminate racism; the Christian Right claims that a real (i.e. Christian) social morality will eliminate racism; Communists claim that Real Communism will save us and anarchists claim that Real Anarchism will; etcetera. Sin and Salvation A similar argument, one that I identify with as a Pastor, says that all these -isms, like all other social evils, are the result of humankind's sinful nature. The only cure is the salvation of humanity and the establishment of a society based on religious virtue and/or under religious rule. Christians argue for Christianity as the world's salvation, Muslims argue for Islam, and so on. Psychological Healing Those who believe that all discriminatory -isms are rooted in human psychological insecurities believe the way to eliminate all of them is to focus on raising emotionally healthy and secure individuals with high self-esteem who don't need to feel superior to anyone else. For those who are already adults, we should try to understand them and teach them a more healthy way to deal with their fears and emotional needs. Attacking "racists" as "the enemy" only compounds the problem.
Behavioral Therapy
Another argument says that since human beings try to make their beliefs justify their behavior with at least as much (or more) energy than they make their behavior conform to their beliefs, energetically enforcing non-discriminatory behavior on all fronts and making sure that all individuals are exposed to the widest possible variety of human beings and cultures will eventually erode all racist and discriminatory practices and attitudes. This could be called "behavioral therapy for society." Penny Sparrow has stoked ancient fires pitting the Black man against the White man.
I doubt she foresaw the backlash that would ensue following what she thought would be an innocuous and isolated comment by a random stranger in the vast world of social media. How woefully wrong she was! She has unwittingly demonstrated that the hope of a "Rainbow Nation" is just a fantastic myth. South Africa is as racially divided as it was before the ANC assumed power. Granted, gains and strides have been made here and there and a Black man finds himself leading a predominantly White party, but that doesn't change the stubborn facts of entrenched racial attitudes. I hope that not too far away, we can fulfill the dream of Martin Luther King Jr. that “one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.'” In the meantime, "His eye is on the sparrow…"
Opinions
Fuelling Change: The Evolving Dynamics of the Oil and Gas Industry
The Oil and Gas industry has undergone several significant developments and changes over the last few years. Understanding these developments and trends is crucial towards better appreciating how to navigate the engagement in this space, whether directly in the energy space or in associated value chain roles such as financing.
Here, we explore some of the most notable global events and trends and the potential impact or bearing they have on the local and global market.
Governments and companies around the world have been increasingly focused on transitioning towards renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power. This shift is motivated by concerns about climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Africa, including Botswana, is part of these discussions, as we work to collectively ensure a greener and more sustainable future. Indeed, this is now a greater priority the world over. It aligns closely with the increase in Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investing being observed. ESG investing has become increasingly popular, and many investors are now looking for companies that are focused on sustainability and reducing their carbon footprint. This trend could have significant implications for the oil and fuel industry, which is often viewed as environmentally unsustainable. Relatedly and equally key are the evolving government policies. Government policies and regulations related to the Oil and Gas industry are likely to continue evolving with discussions including incentives for renewable energy and potentially imposing stricter regulations on emissions.
The COVID-19 pandemic has also played a strong role. Over the last two years, the pandemic had a profound impact on the Oil and Gas industry (and fuel generally), leading to a significant drop in demand as travel and economic activity slowed down. As a result, oil prices plummeted, with crude oil prices briefly turning negative in April 2020. Most economies have now vaccinated their populations and are in recovery mode, and with the recovery of the economies, there has been recovery of oil prices; however, the pace and sustainability of recovery continues to be dependent on factors such as emergence of new variants of the virus.
This period, which saw increased digital transformation on the whole, also saw accelerated and increased investment in technology. The Oil and Gas industry is expected to continue investing in new digital technologies to increase efficiency and reduce costs. This also means a necessary understanding and subsequent action to address the impacts from the rise of electric vehicles. The growing popularity of electric vehicles is expected to reduce demand for traditional gasoline-powered cars. This has, in turn, had an impact on the demand for oil.
Last but not least, geopolitical tensions have played a tremendous role. Geopolitical tensions between major oil-producing countries can and has impacted the supply of oil and fuel. Ongoing tensions in the Middle East and between the US and Russia could have an impact on global oil prices further, and we must be mindful of this.
On the home front in Botswana, all these discussions are relevant and the subject of discussion in many corporate and even public sector boardrooms. Stanbic Bank Botswana continues to take a lead in supporting the Oil and Gas industry in its current state and as it evolves and navigates these dynamics. This is through providing financing to support Oil and Gas companies’ operations, including investments in new technologies. The Bank offers risk management services to help oil and gas companies to manage risks associated with price fluctuations, supply chain disruptions and regulatory changes. This includes offering hedging products and providing advice on risk management strategies.
Advisory and support for sustainability initiatives that the industry undertakes is also key to ensuring that, as companies navigate complex market conditions, they are more empowered to make informed business decisions. It is important to work with Oil and Gas companies to develop and implement sustainability strategies, such as reducing emissions and increasing the use of renewable energy. This is key to how partners such as Stanbic Bank work to support the sector.
Last but not least, Stanbic Bank stands firmly in support of Botswana’s drive in the development of the sector with the view to attain better fuel security and reduce dependence risk on imported fuel. This is crucial towards ensuring a stronger, stabler market, and a core aspect to how we can play a role in helping drive Botswana’s growth. Continued understanding, learning, and sustainable action are what will help ensure the Oil and Gas sector is supported towards positive, sustainable and impactful growth in a manner that brings social, environmental and economic benefit.
Loago Tshomane is Manager, Client Coverage, Corporate and Investment Banking (CIB), Stanbic Bank Botswana
Opinions
Brands are important
So, the conclusion is brands are important. I start by concluding because one hopes this is a foregone conclusion given the furore that erupts over a botched brand. If a fast food chef bungles a food order, there’d be possibly some isolated complaint thrown. However, if the same company’s marketing expert or agency cooks up a tasteless brand there is a country-wide outcry. Why? Perhaps this is because brands affect us more deeply than we care to understand or admit. The fact that the uproar might be equal parts of schadenfreude, black twitter-esque criticism and, disappointment does not take away from the decibel of concern raised.
A good place to start our understanding of a brand is naturally by defining what a brand is. Marty Neumier, the genius who authored The Brand Gap, offers this instructive definition – “A brand is a person’s gut feel about a product or service”. In other words, a brand is not what the company says it is. It is what the people feel it is. It is the sum total of what it means to them. Brands are perceptions. So, brands are defined by individuals not companies. But brands are owned by companies not individuals. Brands are crafted in privacy but consumed publicly. Brands are communal. Granted, you say. But that doesn’t still explain why everybody and their pet dog feel entitled to jump in feet first into a brand slug-fest armed with a hot opinion. True. But consider the following truism.
Brands are living. They act as milestones in our past. They are signposts of our identity. Beacons of our triumphs. Indexes of our consumption. Most importantly, they have invaded our very words and world view. Try going for just 24 hours without mentioning a single brand name. Quite difficult, right? Because they live among us they have become one of us. And we have therefore built ‘brand bonds’ with them. For example, iPhone owners gather here. You love your iPhone. It goes everywhere. You turn to it in moments of joy and when we need a quick mood boost. Notice how that ‘relationship’ started with desire as you longingly gazed upon it in a glossy brochure. That quickly progressed to asking other people what they thought about it. Followed by the zero moment of truth were you committed and voted your approval through a purchase. Does that sound like a romantic relationship timeline. You bet it does. Because it is. When we conduct brand workshops we run the Brand Loyalty ™ exercise wherein we test people’s loyalty to their favourite brand(s). The results are always quite intriguing. Most people are willing to pay a 40% premium over the standard price for ‘their’ brand. They simply won’t easily ‘breakup’ with it. Doing so can cause brand ‘heart ache’. There is strong brand elasticity for loved brands.
Now that we know brands are communal and endeared, then companies armed with this knowledge, must exercise caution and practise reverence when approaching the subject of rebranding. It’s fragile. The question marketers ought to ask themselves before gleefully jumping into the hot rebranding cauldron is – Do we go for an Evolution (partial rebrand) or a Revolution(full rebrand)? An evolution is incremental. It introduces small but significant changes or additions to the existing visual brand. Here, think of the subtle changes you’ve seen in financial or FMCG brands over the decades. Evolution allows you to redirect the brand without alienating its horde of faithful followers. As humans we love the familiar and certain. Change scares us. Especially if we’ve not been privy to the important but probably blinkered ‘strategy sessions’ ongoing behind the scenes. Revolutions are often messy. They are often hard reset about-turns aiming for a total new look and ‘feel’.
Hard rebranding is risky business. History is littered with the agony of brands large and small who felt the heat of public disfavour. In January 2009, PepsiCo rebranded the Tropicana. When the newly designed package hit the shelves, consumers were not having it. The New York Times reports that ‘some of the commenting described the new packaging as ‘ugly’ ‘stupid’. They wanted their old one back that showed a ripe orange with a straw in it. Sales dipped 20%. PepsiCo reverted to the old logo and packaging within a month. In 2006 Mastercard had to backtrack away from it’s new logo after public criticism, as did Leeds United, and the clothing brand Gap. AdAge magazine reports that critics most common sentiment about the Gap logo was that it looked like something a child had created using a clip-art gallery. Botswana is no different. University of Botswana had to retreat into the comfort of the known and accepted heritage strong brand. Sir Ketumile Masire Teaching Hospital was badgered with complaints till it ‘adjusted’ its logo.
So if the landscape of rebranding is so treacherous then whey take the risk? Companies need to soberly assess they need for a rebrand. According to the fellows at Ignyte Branding a rebrand is ignited by the following admissions :
Our brand name no longer reflects our company’s vision.
We’re embarrassed to hand out our business cards.
Our competitive advantage is vague or poorly articulated.
Our brand has lost focus and become too complex to understand. Our business model or strategy has changed.
Our business has outgrown its current brand.
We’re undergoing or recently underwent a merger or acquisition. Our business has moved or expanded its geographic reach.
We need to disassociate our brand from a negative image.
We’re struggling to raise our prices and increase our profit margins. We want to expand our influence and connect to new audiences. We’re not attracting top talent for the positions we need to fill. All the above are good reasons to rebrand.
The downside to this debacle is that companies genuinely needing to rebrand might be hesitant or delay it altogether. The silver lining I guess is that marketing often mocked for its charlatans, is briefly transformed from being the Archilles heel into Thanos’ glove in an instant.
So what does a company need to do to safely navigate the rebranding terrain? Companies need to interrogate their brand purpose thoroughly. Not what they think they stand for but what they authentically represent when seen through the lens of their team members. In our Brand Workshop we use a number of tools to tease out the compelling brand truth. This section always draws amusing insights. Unfailingly, the top management (CEO & CFO)always has a vastly different picture of their brand to the rest of their ExCo and middle management, as do they to the customer-facing officer. We have only come across one company that had good internal alignment. Needless to say that brand is doing superbly well.
There is need a for brand strategies to guide the brand. One observes that most brands ‘make a plan’ as they go along. Little or no deliberate position on Brand audit, Customer research, Brand positioning and purpose, Architecture, Messaging, Naming, Tagline, Brand Training and may more. A brand strategy distils why your business exists beyond making money – its ‘why’. It defines what makes your brand what it is, what differentiates it from the competition and how you want your customers to perceive it. Lacking a brand strategy disadvantages the company in that it appears soul-less and lacking in personality. Naturally, people do not like to hang around humans with nothing to say. A brand strategy understands the value proposition. People don’t buy nails for the nails sake. They buy nails to hammer into the wall to hang pictures of their loved ones. People don’t buy make up because of its several hues and shades. Make up is self-expression. Understanding this arms a brand with an iron clad clad strategy on the brand battlefield.
But perhaps you’ve done the important research and strategy work. It’s still possible to bungle the final look and feel. A few years ago one large brand had an extensive strategy done. Hopes were high for a top tier brand reveal. The eventual proposed brand was lack-lustre. I distinctly remember, being tasked as local agency to ‘land’ the brand and we outright refused. We could see this was a disaster of epic proportions begging to happen. The brand consultants were summoned to revise the logo. After a several tweaks and compromises the brand landed. It currently exists as one of the country’s largest brands. Getting the logo and visual look right is important. But how does one know if they are on the right path? Using the simile of a brand being a person – The answer is how do you know your outfit is right? It must serve a function, be the right fit and cut, it must be coordinated and lastly it must say something about you. So it is possible to bath in a luxurious bath gel, apply exotic lotion, be facebeat and still somehow wear a faux pas outfit. Avoid that.
Another suggestion is to do the obvious. Pre-test the logo and its look and feel on a cross section of your existing and prospective audience. There are tools to do this. Their feedback can save you money, time and pain. Additionally one must do another obvious check – use Google Image to verify the visual outcome and plain Google search to verify the name. These are so obvious they are hopefully for gone conclusions. But for the brands that have gone ahead without them, I hope you have not concluded your brand journeys as there is a world of opportunity waiting to be unlocked with the right brand strategy key.
Cliff Mada is Head of ArmourGetOn Brand Consultancy, based in Gaborone and Cape Town.
cliff@armourgeton.com
Opinions
The case for Botswana to ratify the ACDEG
The Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) is the most comprehensive dataset measuring African governance performance through a wide range of 81 indicators under the categories of Security & Rule of law, Participation, Rights & Inclusion, Foundations of Economic Opportunity, and Human Development. It employs scores, expressed out of 100, which quantify a country’s performance for each governance measure and ranks, out of 54, in relation to the 54 African countries.
The 2022 IIAG Overall Governance score is 68.1 and ranks Botswana at number 5 in Africa. In 2019 Botswana was ranked 2nd with an overall score of 73.3. That is a sharp decline. The best-performing countries are Mauritius, Seychelles, Tunisia, and Cabo Verde, in that order. A glance at the categories shows that Botswana is in third place in Africa on the Security and Rule of law; ninth in the Participation, Rights & Inclusion Category – indicating a shrinking participatory environment; eighth for Foundations of Economic Opportunity category; and fifth in the Human Development category.
The 2022 IIAG comes to a sweeping conclusion: Governments are less accountable and transparent in 2021 than at any time over the last ten years; Higher GDP does not necessarily indicate better governance; rule of law has weakened in the last five years; Democratic backsliding in Africa has accelerated since 2018; Major restrictions on freedom of association and assembly since 2012. Botswana is no exception to these conclusions. In fact, a look at the 10-year trend shows a major challenge. While Botswana remains in the top 5 of the best-performing countries in Africa, there are signs of decline, especially in the categories of Human Development and Security & Rule of law.
I start with this picture to show that Botswana is no longer the poster child for democracy, good governance, and commitment to the rule of law that it once was. In fact, to use the term used in the IIAG, Botswana is experiencing a “democratic backsliding.”
The 2021 Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (CPI) had Botswana at 55/ 100, the lowest ever score recorded by Botswana dethroning Botswana as Africa’s least corrupt country to a distant third place, where it was in 2019 with a CPI of 61/100. (A score closer to zero denotes the worst corrupt and a score closer to 100 indicates the least corrupt country). The concern here is that while other African states are advancing in their transparency and accountability indexes, Botswana is backsliding.
The Transitional National Development Plan lists participatory democracy, the rule of law, transparency, and accountability, as key “deliverables,” if you may call those deliverables. If indeed Botswana is committed to these principles, she must ratify the African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance (ACDEG).
The African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance is the African Union’s principal policy document for advancing democratic governance in African Union member states. The ACDEG embodies the continent’s commitment to a democratic agenda and set the standards upon which countries agreed to be held accountable. The Charter was adopted in 2007 and came into force a decade ago, in 2012.
Article 2 of the Charter details its objectives among others as to a) Promote adherence, by each State Party, to the universal values and principles of democracy and respect for human rights; b) Promote and protect the independence of the judiciary; c) Promote the establishment of the necessary conditions to foster citizen participation, transparency, access to information, freedom of the press and accountability in the management of public affairs; d) Promote gender balance and equality in the governance and development processes.
The Charter emphasizes certain principles through which member states must uphold: Citizen Participation, Accountable Institutions, Respect for Human Rights, Adherence to the principles of the Rule of Law, Respect for the supremacy of the constitution and constitutional order, Entrenchment of democratic Principles, Separation of Powers, Respect for the Judiciary, Independence and impartiality of electoral bodies, best practice in the management of elections. These are among the top issues that Batswana have been calling for, that they be entrenched in the new Constitution.
The ACDEG is a revolutionary document. Article 3 of the ACDEG, sets guidance on the principles that must guide the implementation of the Charter among them: Effective participation of citizens in democratic and development processes and in the governance of public affairs; Promotion of a system of government that is representative; Holding of regular, transparent, free and fair elections; Separation of powers; Promotion of gender equality in public and private institutions and others.
Batswana have been calling for laws that make it mandatory for citizen participation in public affairs, more so, such calls have been amplified in the just-ended “consultative process” into the review of the Constitution of Botswana. Many scholars, academics, and Batswana, in general, have consistently made calls for a constitution that provides for clear separation of powers to prevent concentration of power in one branch, in Botswana’s case, the Executive, and provide for effective checks and balances. Other countries, like Kenya, have laws that promote gender equality in public and private institutions inscribed in their constitutions. The ACDEG could be a useful advocacy tool for the promotion of gender equality.
Perhaps more relevant to Botswana’s situation now is Article 10 of the Charter. Given how the constitutional review process unfolded, the numerous procedural mistakes and omissions, the lack of genuine consultations, the Charter principles could have provided a direction, if Botswana was party to the Charter. “State Parties shall ensure that the process of amendment or revision of their constitution reposes on national consensus, obtained, if need be, through referendum,” reads part of Article 10, giving clear clarity, that the Constitution belong to the people.
With the African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance in hand, ratified, and also given the many shortfalls in the current constitution, Batswana can have a tool in hand, not only to hold the government accountable but also a tool for measuring aspirations and shortfalls of our governance institutional framework.
Botswana has not signed, nor has it acceded or ratified the ACDEG. The time to ratify the ACDEG is now. Our Movement, Motheo O Mosha Society, with support from the Democracy Works Foundation and The Charter Project Africa, will run a campaign to promote, popularise and advocate for the ratification of the Charter (#RatifytheCharter Campaign). The initiative is co-founded by the European Union. The Campaign is implemented with the support of our sister organizations: Global Shapers Community – Gaborone Hub, #FamilyMeetingBW, Botswana Center for Public Integrity, Black Roots Organization, Economic Development Forum, Molao-Matters, WoTech Foundation, University of Botswana Political Science Society, Young Minds Africa and Branding Akosua.
Ratifying the Charter would reaffirm Botswana’s commitment to upholding strong democratic values, and respect for constitutionalism, and promote the rule of law and political accountability. Join us in calling the Government of Botswana to #RatifyTheCharter.
*Morena MONGANJA is the Chairperson of Motheo O Mosha society; a grassroots movement advocating for a new Constitution for Botswana. Contact: socialcontractbw@gmail.com or WhatsApp 77 469 362.