State-controlled institutions that are required to be businesslike in their attempts to become financially sustainable could benefit enormously from having independent oversight committees. These are not made up largely of accountants and auditors but rather of business and marketing people - with the objective of nipping crises in the bud.
Right now, as with any state entity, they are subject to the Public Finances Management Act which is not only effective but something from which the private sector could learn. This act insists on independent outcomes committees being appointed to all state-owned entities and, while these have varied from extremely efficient to hardly efficient, they are limited in their capacities to predict crises.
Predicting outcomes
An outcomes committee, though, is not made up largely of accountants and auditors but rather of business and marketing people who are able to look at all policies and decisions under consideration by boards of directors, with the specific mandate of examining all possible outcomes and how these would affect the entity. With the objective of nipping crises in the bud.
For example, an outcomes committee for South African Airways (SAA) would look at a decision say, to retrench staff as a cost-saving measure, and then predict the impact that this move would have on service and the potential to draw new customers. Or, predict potential repercussions marketing campaigns could elicit from competitors, such as the current litigation brought against SAA by Comair and Nationwide.
As far as, say, the SABC is concerned, an independent outcomes committee could be an extremely useful tool in terms of being able to represent the public at large to allay wrong perceptions and also to be able to predict the impact of staff appointments on corporate credibility and so forth. The current situation at the SABC could keep such a committee extremely busy on all manner of controversial issues.
Public companies
These are just two of the many advantages that independent outcomes committees could have on boards of directors of state-owned organisations. For that matter, they could be equally applied to public companies as well. In essence, the objective would be to predict reactions and create a bridge of understanding and perception management between the organisation and its publics and stakeholders.
Outcomes committees don't have any right of veto or legal standing, but they do inevitably have an extremely influential voice if they are truly constituted from independent specialists and not just loaded with political appointees.
Chris Moerdyk was head of strategic planning and public affairs for BMW South Africa and spent 16 years in the creative and client service departments of ad agencies, ending up as resident director of Lindsay Smithers-FCB in KwaZulu-Natal. Chris was recently listed in a Markinor survey as one of South Africa's top 10 marketing thought leaders. Apart from currently being a corporate marketing analyst, advisor and media commentator, he is non-executive chairman of Bizcommunity. Email Chris on and follow him on Twitter at @chrismoerdyk.
You make a really good point in terms of how important it is to have a multi-disciplinary approach to a business/organisation. Uninternded consequences of good ideas can destroy service levels. Posted on 24 Mar 2009 13:08
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Message Board accepts no liability of legal consequences that arise from the Message Boards (e.g. libel, slander, or other such crimes). All posted messages are the sole property of their respective authors. The maintainer does retain the right to remove any message posts for whatever reasons. People that post messages to this forum are not to libel/slander nor in any other way depict a company, entity, individual(s), or service in a false light; should they do so, the legal consequences are theirs alone. Bizcommunity.com will disclose authors' IP addresses to authorities if compelled to do so by a court of law.