During the past three decades, Botswana has acquired a reputation for sound development management and good governance. That reputation has been derived primarily from the behavior and performance of the country's public servants. Some analysts have argued, for example, that the positive performance of the public service in Botswana, compared to other African countries, is the direct result of the fact that the public sector is mostly staffed by competent men and women motivated to fulfill their duties honestly and effectively. (1)
Moreover, the country's public affairs have been managed in a transparent manner by a public service that can be regarded as being apolitical, and one where public servants are held accountable. Public servants in Botswana play an important role as partners in the management of the public sector and national affairs. It is the bureaucracy and not the political leadership, contrary to conventional thinking, that has been the dominant factor in the country's policy-making and implementation. (2) The most recent data (2000) indicate that there are 121,035 employees in the Botswana public sector with a distribution of 85,690 (71 percent) working for the central government; 18,847 (15 percent) working for local government; and 16,498 (14 percent) employed by parastatals. (3)
Consistent with the record and reputation of the public service, compared to other African countries, Botswana has also been able to react rapidly to any real or perceived deficiencies in the management of its development policy so as to maintain the necessary administrative capacity for economic development and progress. (4) This article discusses and analyzes employee perceptions of leadership and performance management in the Botswana public service in light of the foregoing discussion on the nature and functioning of the country's public servants. It is based on a sample survey of, and focus group discussions with, employees in two major central government institutions that were conducted in 1999. For technical and other practical reasons, these two institutions will not be identified here. They will, instead, be referred to as Institution A and Institution B. They were chosen for their separate and distinct public reputations. Institution A tends to be highly regarded as an efficient government agency while Institution B is seen as under-performing.
The methods used to collect the opinions of the employees were a questionnaire and focus group discussions. A total of 110 questionnaires were administered to junior management and general staff members of the two institutions, comprising 8 percent of the total number of employees in these institutions. The questionnaire was a fairly comprehensive and detailed instrument covering the various areas indicated in the next section.
Focus group discussions immediately followed the completion of the questionnaire. These were designed to supplement the rich information contained in the questionnaire responses. These focus group discussions developed into lively and very frank discussions about a range of relevant issues, and provided impactful insights into the views of the public servants regarding leadership and performance management. They also offered a thorough impression of the organizational culture of the two institutions.
Findings and Discussion
Leadership and Organizational Planning
Employee perceptions about leadership and organizational planning revealed a mixed bag across the two institutions. In Institution A, the quality of leadership and organizational planning was rated very high. This institution has demonstrated its recognition of the need for change and re-engineering by commissioning external reviews of its operations and recommendations for improving performance and efficiency Furthermore, it has been engaged in some degree of strategic planning and has been attempting to link its strategic planning activities to its operational policies at all levels of the organization. In support of those goals, Institution A has also developed a vision statement, organizational objectives, and support activities with an emphasis on further improving the quality of its service delivery. Identifying the need to restructure and reposition the institution is an indicator of good leadership committed to developing and implementing policies to fulfill the mission of the institution.
In Institution B, leadership and organizational planning was, not surprisingly, regarded as very weak. Close to one-half (47 percent) of the interviewees in that institution rated leadership qualities as just satisfactory while another 28 percent gave a rating of poor. This suggests that administrative and leadership capacity is currently inadequate, and there is considerable room for improvement of organizational effectiveness. This includes strategic planning, which now seems to be haphazard at best. Also, there are no concrete operational policies that are passed on to all staff from a unit, divisional, departmental, and organizational perspective. Perhaps this stems from the fact that there are no strategic objectives at the micro-level (unit, division, department) that feed into the objectives at the macro-level (organization). This state of affairs, in turn, leads to the staff misunderstanding organizational policies and goals, and the role of their units/departments/divisions in achieving them.
Leadership and the Organizational Environment
The nature of any organizational environment has much to do with, among other things, employee motivation and job satisfaction. In Institution A, all of the employees said that they were consulted frequently by their superiors and their ideas were sought. One-third of the respondents indicated that they are always consulted, and the other two-thirds indicated that they are consulted most of the time.
With respect to job satisfaction, approximately 49 percent of the respondents from Institution A expressed dissatisfaction with their current job in the organization. The reasons for this dissatisfaction are many and varied. However, the primary issues highlighted were under-staffing which resulted in work overload; a lack of challenging work at times; placement in posts without regard to ability and past performance; and lack of opportunities for promotion. While all of these reasons are significant, it is the issue of promotions, or lack thereof, that was most prevalent.
The system of promotion in the Botswana public service has been very rigid. For a staff member to qualify for promotion under normal circumstances, a minimum period of service at the immediately preceding level was a necessary condition, and seniority became paramount in the process. Consequently, promotions based on merit have been hindered. Although efforts have been made in recent years to break out of this system, most staff continue to remain skeptical about the process. Not surprisingly, in the focus group discussions, the majority of the employees expressed dissatisfaction with the promotion process. The main issues they cited were lack of properly planned career paths; non-availability of posts in the organizational establishment; the non-transparency of the promotion process; the lengthy promotion process; and promotions based on seniority rather than performance.
With regard to the physical environment in Institution A, a majority (61 percent) of the respondents expressed the view that they were satisfied with the layout and cleanliness of their work environment. However, the rest were dissatisfied for a number of reasons including the views that some offices were too crowded for effective cleaning; inappropriate geographical location of some offices in the industrial areas; lack of cleaning manpower and machinery; the lack of motivation and proper supervision of the cleaners; and office buildings are too old and not well maintained. Although only one-third of the employees were dissatisfied here, working in poor quality offices, as well as bad facilities, affects the self-esteem of staff and therefore impacts negatively on morale, communication, and customer service.
In Institution B, 87 percent of the respondents said that they were not consulted by their superiors nor given opportunities to participate in decision-making processes in the organization. As a matter of fact, the focus group discussions at this organization revealed a wide belief that senior managers are reluctant to consult junior staff members for the erroneous reason that the latter may have nothing to contribute to the decision-making process. This is quite a bone of contention and a source of de-motivation for these junior staffers. Consequently, it is not surprising to find that there is also considerable job dissatisfaction within the organization.
Fifty-six percent of the respondents in this institution are dissatisfied with their jobs. The specific reasons given for this dissatisfaction include inadequate financial and other rewards for their performance; poor communication between senior management and themselves; an inaccessible and remote senior management; job descriptions that are rarely adhered to or followed; lack of guidance and supervision from senior management; heavy workloads; and a senior management that is resistant to change. One result of this state of affairs, as expressed in the focus group discussions, is that employees strongly desire a more inclusive and participative management throughout the entire organization.
As was found to be the case in Institution A, the promotion process was also heavily criticized in Institution B. In addition to the issues cited by the employees in Institution A, the employees in Institution B also listed that promotions are awarded on subjective criteria; the organization's slow expansion rate created a lack of posts; senior management showed a lack of interest in the welfare of staff; and senior management opposed the upgrading of some posts. Basically, what seems to be coming through very loud and clear is that there is no direct link between promotion and performance. As a result, the current promotion system does not reward high performers, which frustrates all staff members.
The physical environment was also of some concern to the respondents from Institution B. Approximately 57 percent of these employees were unhappy with their office surroundings. They indicated that the cleanliness of their work environment was of an unacceptable standard and posed a "health hazard" with some dirty toilets and a dirty kitchen. Some office areas were also regarded as overcrowded and in need of repair.
Performance Management and Training
The Botswana government intends to roll out a performance management system (PMS) by 2004-05 to cover the entire public service. (5) This was deemed necessary as part of the ongoing process to improve the quality of services being delivered by the public sector. In that regard, a series of questions were included in the questionnaire to determine the current nature and extent of PMS knowledge among the employees, as well as the status of training plans within their organizations.
In Institution A, 63 percent of the respondents indicated that they were not familiar with the concept or practice of performance management. However, despite their widespread lack of knowledge about PMS, they expressed overwhelming support for the use of PMS in their organization. In fact, 82 percent of them agreed that PMS should be implemented in their organization based on what little they now know about its potential to improve efficiency and service delivery.
On the issue of staff training, the respondents expressed considerable dissatisfaction. Approximately 56 percent of them indicated that they had no knowledge of staff training plans in their organization. Of the rest who did know about training plans, a majority considered them to be inadequate. Some of the reasons provided for their dissatisfaction in this area included: (1) a lack of staff input into the formulation of training plans; (2) training needs assessments not being undertaken; (3) a lack of job-related short-term training courses; (4) a shortage of training slots; and (5) a lack of transparency in the training selection process.
These views seem to highlight perceived inadequacies in the training system in Institution A, which, in turn, can be attributed to a lack of a focused and structured approach to plan and prioritize training needs. From employee perceptions, it would appear that the training system and capacity of Institution A is not only inadequate, but that opportunities for formalized on-the-job training are neglected. Interestingly enough, the majority (69 percent) of the respondents believe that they can benefit from further training and thus have plans to obtain such training with or without the assistance of their organization.
This incomplete staff knowledge and understanding of PMS and the surprising perceptions regarding training are in contradiction to the highly respected quality of the leadership in Institution A, which ensures that staff members are consulted on the major issues that affect them.
In Institution B, 60 percent of the interviewees said that they were unfamiliar with both the concept and practice of performance management. Nonetheless, as was the case with Institution A, a solid majority (87 percent) also expressed support for the use of PMS in the organization if proper structures are put in place for its implementation and application to all levels of staff.
Similar trends were recorded on the issue of staff training in Institution B as discussed for Institution A. Fifty-seven percent of the respondents said that they had no knowledge of staff training plans in the organization, and 74 percent said that such plans were inadequate. The focus group discussions also revealed that only a few staff members had benefited from training despite the fact that staff members are polled via questionnaires about their training interests, and selection for courses is done by a training committee. Some of the additional reasons cited for dissatisfaction with the staff training approach in Institution B included staff members being selected and sent on training courses without their prior knowledge or consultation; a lack of objectivity in the selection of candidates for training courses; and the charge that most of the training courses are not relevant to the work of the organization. As with Institution A, a significant majority (92 percent) of the respondents indicated their intent to pursue further training whether or not they are assisted by their organization.
As shall be seen shortly, this is an area where the perceptions of the respondents in both institutions show some convergence. But before describing those perceptions, it would be useful to first point out that there currently exists an activity-centered organizational culture, common to the Botswana public service, which makes it difficult to generate objective and quantitative data about the performance of any of the country's government institutions.
This lack of a system of measurable outputs has implications for performance management since it (performance management) is characterized by measurable targets, among other things. The current system of measuring performance at the staff level is limited to an annual performance appraisal. However, this performance appraisal system has been soundly criticized by the respondents from both Institution A and B as being highly subjective due to the absence of objective and measurable targets; lacking in professionalism; and being a foregone conclusion since most staff members get salary increments irrespective of their level of performance.
Consequently, this measurement system of individual staff performance does not comport with the need for a reliable and valid system of measurement, or with the requirement for the continuous improvement of the measurement system. Undoubtedly, the performance measurement system in Institutions A and B, as it is in the public service generally, is not related to output or targets. Since these targets do not functionally exist in the various departments or divisions, there can be no alignment of measurements with appropriate indicators of performance in the two organizations.
One tool that is being used to encourage employees to qualitatively assess their individual and group performances is that of Work Improvement Teams (WITS). WITS were introduced into the Botswana public service in 1993. They are adapted from the work improvement group concept as implemented in Singapore, but their origins are linked to the Japanese framework of quality control circles. All public officers in Botswana are required to be members of WITS, and their WITS should complete at least two projects per year. (6)
WITS are defined as groups of public servants from the same work unit, irrespective of divisional status, who meet regularly to identify, examine, analyze, and solve problems pertaining to work in their department or work unit; identify and examine improvement opportunities and propose and implement improvement measures; help to adapt the work unit and, hence, the department to changing circumstances; discuss and conduct studies on how to improve their working environment, efficiency, effectiveness, quality of service, knowledge and skill, teamwork, work performance, use of resources, work goals, objectives and targets, systems, methods and procedures, and so on; develop problem-solving skills; and ensure job satisfaction. (7)
The underlying framework of the WITS strategy is influenced by, among other things, the need to increase productivity and performance in the public service by: striving for an emphasis on people who are challenged, encouraged, developed, and given the power to act and to use their judgment with the confidence that they can tackle virtually any challenge without fear of failure; participative leadership and teamwork, rather than coercive and authoritarian leadership, with a vision of an ideal organization with a defined purpose and goals which are articulated to foster commitment and collaboration; an innovative work style that seeks to solve problems creatively and independently rather than depending on control from an outside authority; a strong client orientation rather than orientation toward serving a bureaucracy; and a mindset that seeks optimum performance and drives employees to seek improvement in the performance of their organizations even in a changing environment. (8)
In both Institutions A and Institution B, more than three-fourths of the respondents indicated their familiarity with and participation in WITS activities. Similarly, a majority (more than two-thirds) in Institution A considered their participation in WITS to be useful in assessing and improving their job performance and productivity. However, in Institution B, a similar magnitude of more than two-thirds did not regard WITS as being useful in assessing and improving their productivity for the following reasons: (1) a lack of commitment to WITS by senior management; (2) the findings and recommendations from WITS projects are never adhered to and ideas generated by WITS are never implemented; (3) in instances where projects are adopted, there is no monitoring of the implementation and recommendations from these projects; (4) WITS are perceived to have been imposed from the top and there is, seemingly, no flexibility in the choice; (5) some minor problems which could easily be solved by management are referred to WITS; and (6) some of the WITS projects approved are not relevant to the specific work situation.
Clearly, the difference in the attitudes of the employees of the two organizations, vis-a-vis the benefits of WITS, has a great deal to do with the commitment and disposition of the senior management toward improving organizational capability and performance. In Institution A, senior management is definitely more attuned to the notion of pursing excellence in leadership and improving organizational performance, as previously demonstrated.
Policy Implementation and Management
As noted earlier, the national policy process in Botswana--from development to implementation and monitoring--is the domain of the public service. It is probably a unique situation from a global perspective, where the elected politicians have very little say in the day-to-day running of their country. As one would expect, the respondents from Institution A generally regard policy formulation and implementation as operating fairly well in their organization while in Institution B, the respondents have the opposite view.
In Institution A, there is a much more open, participative, and consultative process with respect to policy implementation and management. In Institution B, on the other hand, there is an ad hoc and seemingly confused state of managing the policy process. This, in turn, not only hinders communication and feedback between the lower and higher levels of the organizational hierarchy, but also leads to poor functional relationships and, inevitably, poor service delivery.
An Analytical Commentary
The foregoing findings and discussion clearly indicate that there are considerable differences in the quality of leadership and performance management in the Botswana public service, as perceived by the employees in the two institutions in this study. Institution A commands a leadership that is oriented toward quality service delivery and marshals its human resources in a skillful and participative manner to achieve its goals and objectives. On the other hand, Institution B seems unwilling or incapable of coming to grips with the type of inclusive and participatory leadership style that would lend itself to better performance management and an improvement in the quality of its service delivery.
Indeed, the findings of this study are consistent with aspects of the responses from the 1996 study by Jones, Blunt, and Sharma which indicated that the effective manager (leader) is perceived as one who consults subordinates, treats them considerately, promotes their self-development, supports and helps them, and provides them with clear direction. (9) What obtains in Institution B is what was found in one Botswana Ministry to be "an organizational culture where authority is exercised in a rather paternal way and where deference to authority figures--managers--is high." (10)
Past and current research findings have, however, convincingly demonstrated that positive work outcomes (improved job performance) tend to be associated with, among other things, individuals who are committed to their organizations and their careers, as well as organizations that are committed to those individuals through job involvement. This indicates a relationship of employee-organizational congruence where employees accept organizational imperatives and contribute to organizational goals. (11) Unfortunately, this state of affairs is both lacking and not yet recognized as useful by the senior managers in Institution B.
Given the leadership and performance management shortcomings in Institution B, as seen from the point of view of the employees themselves, one can conclude that all is not well in the Botswana public service and, in fact, the public service's bold reputation for efficiency may be a thing of the past. At the very least, there are elements of the public service that are characterized by weak administrative leadership; inept or non-existent strategic planning; unmotivated staff; a general lack of communication, interaction, and feedback between the various levels of staff; and archaic management practices quite unsuited to the introduction of PMS.
Along with the implications for the introduction and sustainability of the envisaged PMS, these shortcomings will also be of some concern to the national interest due to the influence and impact of globalization. First, with respect to the proposed introduction of PMS by 2004-05, all of the public service institutions in Botswana would first need to move toward an organizational culture that accepts the complex process of defining, in measurable terms, intended outputs/outcomes. When such a framework is in place, consideration can then be given to the design and introduction of new reward systems, for example, based on measured performance against quantitative criteria. Moreover, for the PMS to be successfully applied in the Botswana public service, there must also be a firm understanding that performance management is not performance appraisal. Based on reactions in the focus group discussions, there seems to be a notion among some staff members that performance management can be equated to performance appraisal. However, appraising performance is but one part of a performance management system.
Performance management is an ongoing communication process, undertaken in partnership, between employees and their immediate supervisors that involves establishing clear expectations and understandings about the essential job functions each employee is expected to undertake; how each employee's job contributes to the goals of the organization; how each employee and supervisor will work together to sustain, improve, or build on existing employee and organizational performance; how job performance will be measured; and identifying barriers to performance and removing them. (12) In essence, performance management is a system. It has a number of parts, all of which need to be included if the PMS is going to add value to an organization, its managers, and staff.
For the Botswana public service, the introduction of PMS is being touted as an essential part of productivity reforms. (13) In fact, in introducing PMS in the Botswana public service, the original draft speech of the President of Botswana, His Excellency, Mr. Festus Mogae, had stated the rationale as including, among other things, the fact that from the mid-1980s signs of complacency and outright neglect of duties began to creep into the public service and productivity visibly declined, leading to the establishment of the Botswana National Productivity Center (BNPC) in 1993 to promote productivity throughout the economy.
The President's original draft speech further reasoned that a culture of indifference and outright laziness had crept into the public service, leading to a situation where the government is accused of insensitivity to the needs, aspirations, and problems of the nation. He also contended that there is a general waste of resources and inefficiency in managing those resources in ministries and departments; there is an inadequate or complete lack of strategic management by ministry and department managers; ministries are not driven by any vision and/or mission; there are no strategic plans, key goals and objectives; and there is very little information on performance and achievement of strategic obligations. As a result, there is a general lack of confidence in the public service by the nation, compounded by unending public disquiet about the government as an ineffective and inefficient service provider and "taxpayers getting more and more convinced that they are getting a raw deal out of the taxes they pay." (14)
Consequently, the primary objective of the PMS in the Botswana public service is the improvement of individual and organizational performance in a systematic and sustainable way. It is also intended to ensure customer satisfaction through regular interaction with the organizations, and provide a planning and change management framework that will be linked to budget and funding processes. This, in turn, would enable the government to enhance its capacity to manage at a higher level of productivity and service delivery accomplishment. (15)
The benefits of PMS to the Botswana public service are envisaged as: (1) facilitating the use of IT and other performance improvement initiatives; (2) addressing what customers or the public want in terms of service; (3) facilitating team-building and team work; (4) facilitating identification of the actual as opposed to the desired performance, including training needs in the process; (5) improving communication between management and employees, including enabling the joint derivation of output and plans of action; and (6) clearly specifying the standards and/or requirements for ministries and departments resulting in a shared vision, communicated strategy, common values, and universal focus on output. (16)
In the context of globalization, the Botswana public service, like all other public services around the world, would also need to renew or re-engineer itself to both function in a globalized setting and create a conducive environment for the private sector to benefit from globalization by competing favorably in the international market place. Globalization is indifferent to national borders, and nations have lost most of the sovereignty they once had as goods, capital, and people move freely in an interdependent mode. (17) Moreover, national policies (including economic, social, cultural, and technological areas) that were previously under the jurisdiction of states and people within a country, have increasingly come under the influence of international organizations and processes and in some instances, large private corporations. (18)
Against that scenario, the Botswana public service needs to adapt a global mindset with a transformed leadership that pursues the capacity to turn threats or stumbling blocks into opportunities; to motivate people to excel, not just to survive; and to accelerate innovations in the workplace. Undoubtedly, globalization demands new thinking as the certainty of laws and predictable relations no longer exist and more has to be done with less resources and time to react. (19) For Botswana, developing and managing public service personnel who can think, lead, and act from a global perspective, and who possess a global mindset, must become a priority. Continuous change of the mindset of these public service officers, in line with global trends and private sector realities, is therefore of paramount importance. (20)
As this work demonstrates, despite Botswana's reputation for generally sound and efficient public service management, some public service institutions are now performing rather poorly. Indeed, according to one view expressed in an original draft speech for the country's current President, but which was later omitted: "The years following our attainment of independence [in 1966] were characterized by a general dedication, zeal, and enthusiasm by public officers in the execution of their duties." (21) However, by the mid-1980s, complacency, laziness and, at times, outright neglect of duties and responsibilities began to permeate the public service. (22) Leadership skills have declined and performance management has become problematic.
Nonetheless, Botswana still maintains the requisite capacity to determine and implement the necessary reforms such as performance management systems to rapidly improve the quality of its public service delivery. As a matter of fact, Botswana must be commended for being one African country that has, over the years, voluntarily introduced measures to reform its public service. Most other African countries have embarked on such reform measures primarily as a result of conditionalities associated with donor assistance packages. Given the influence and impact of globalization, Botswana now needs to intensify its public service reform efforts. Good leadership needs to be brought back in.
(1) See, for example, G. Somolekae (1993) "Bureaucracy and Democracy in Botswana: What Type of a Relationship," In S.J. Stedman (ed.), Botswana: The Political Economy of Democratic Development. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner; and B. Tsie (1996) "The Political Context of Botswana's Development Performance," Journal of Southern African Studies 22(4): 599-616.
(2) K.R. Hope, Snr. (2002) From Crisis to Renewal: Development Policy and Management in Africa.) Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers; and G. Somolekae (1998) "A Brief History of the Botswana Public Service," In K.R Hope, Snr. and G. Somolekae (eds.), Public Administration and Policy in Botswana. Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta Publishers.
(3) Bank of Botswana (2001) Annual Report and Economic Review 2000. Gaborone, Botswana: Bank of Botswana.
(4) K.R. Hope, Snr. (1995a) "Managing Development Policy in Botswana: Implementing Reforms for Rapid Change," Public Administration and Development 15(1): 41-52; K.R. Hope, Snr. (1995b) "Managing the Public Sector in Botswana: Some Emerging Constraints and the Administrative Reform Responses," International Journal of Public Sector Management 8(6): 51-62; K.R. Hope, Snr. (1999) "Human Resource Management in Botswana: Approaches to Enhancing Productivity in the Public Sector," International Journal of Human Resource Management 10(1): 108-121; and A.A. Goldsmith (1999) "Africa's Overgrown State Reconsidered: Bureaucracy and Economic Growth," Word Politics 51(4): 520-546.
(5) Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM) (1999) "Botswana Public Service Productivity Reforms," The Public Service Management Journal 1(2): 46-47.
(6) Hope (1999).
(7) K.R. Hope, Snr. (1998) "Improving Productivity in the Public Sector," In K.R. Hope, Snr. and G. Somolekae (eds.), Public Administration and Policy in Botswana. Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta Publishers.
(9) M.L. Jones, P. Blunt, and K. Sharma (1996) "Managerial Perceptions of Leadership and Management in an African Public Service Organization," Public Administration and Development 16(5): 455-467.
(11) M. Somers and D. Birnbaum (2000) "Exploring the Relationship Between Commitment Profiles and Work Attitudes, Employee Withdrawal, and Job Performance," Public Personnel Management 29(3): 353-365.
(12) R. Bacal (1999) Performance Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
(13) DPSM (1999).
(14) F. Mogae (1999) "Original Draft of Address to the Nation on the Occasion of the Launch of the Performance Management System." Gaborone, Botswana: Office of the President, Republic of Botswana.
(15) DPSM (1999).
(17) A. Giddens (2000) Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New York: Routledge.
(18) M. Khor (2000) Globalization and the South: Some Critical Issues. Geneva: UNCTAD.
(19) P.S. Kim (1999) "Globalization of Human Resource Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective for the Public Sector," Public Personnel Management 28(2): 227-243.
(20) M. Mangori (2000) "The Impact of Globalization on Productivity and Quality Initiatives: The Botswana Perspective on Performance Management in the Civil Service," Mimeo. Gaborone, Botswana: Botswana National Productivity Center.
(21) Mogae (1999).
Kempe Ronald Hope, Sr.
P.O. Box 3005
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Kempe Ronald Hope, Sr. is the Senior Policy Advisor in the Cabinet Office of the Executive Secretary, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA). The views he expresses here are private and not necessarily those of the UNECA. This article was written while he was Professor of Development Studies and Director of the Center of Specialization in Public Administration and Management (CESPAM) at the University of Botswana.…