Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 May 2024 Photo Supplied
Dr Ina Gouws
Dr Ina Gouws is Senior Lecturer: Programme: Governance and Political Transformation, Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Dr Ina Gouws, Senior Lecturer: Programme: Governance and Political Transformation, Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State.

Community-based governance refers to the systems and processes involved in the interface between community participation, community engagement, and public sector decision-making. This requires a partnership between civil society, business, and government. For this partnership to work, all partners must commit and invest in these processes for the sake of better services to communities. In recent years, communities have had to approach community-based governance with regional and local governments as mostly absent partners.

As South Africa approaches the national and provincial elections this week, voters need to reflect on the indispensable role civil society organisations have assumed in bridging the governance gap left by ineffective local and provincial governments. These organisations, driven by a profound commitment to community welfare, have extended their reach beyond their designated mandates, skillsets, and financial capacities to address pressing community needs. Their tireless efforts have underscored the significance of community-based governance and the urgent need for collaboration between civil society and government institutions.

Embracing community-based governance

In most provinces across South Africa, communities have found themselves grappling with the consequences of governance failures, ranging from inadequate service delivery to systemic corruption. Faced with these challenges, civil society organisations have emerged as beacons of hope, leveraging their grassroots networks and intimate understanding of local dynamics to deliver essential services, advocate for change, and empower communities.

However, the burden should not fall solely on the shoulders of civil society. As the nation prepares for a new phase of post-election governance, incoming national and provincial governments must acknowledge and appreciate the pivotal role played by these organisations. They must recognise the wealth of expertise, connections, and trust that civil society brings to the table.  By rebuilding the fractured relationship between government and communities, which is fundamental to effective community-based governance, a collaborative approach is therefore required. Moreover, governments must move beyond mere acknowledgement and actively engage with civil society organisations as equal partners in the pursuit of sustainable development and social justice. This entails fostering open channels of communication, soliciting input from communities and civil society in policy formulation and decision-making processes, and allocating and then PROVIDING resources to support the initiatives and projects driven by these organisations.

By embracing community-based governance and forging genuine partnerships with civil society, provincial governments can tap into a valuable reservoir of knowledge and experience that is essential to addressing the complex challenges facing South African society. Together, they can work towards a future where governance is not just about top-down directives, but is rooted in the principles of inclusivity, responsiveness, and accountability. South Africans are not experiencing such partnerships at all in most provinces. Voters MUST reflect on this before they cast their votes.

Reimagine governance in South Africa

Voters must not forget the impact an ineffective national and provincial government has had on their communities. We must vote with the expectation that our national government's ultimate goal must be to ensure that communities at the grassroots level receive the services and support they need for the people living there to thrive. This includes providing essential utility services such as water, electricity, and sanitation; social services such as health care, education, and welfare; and fostering economic growth through investment towards job creation and infrastructure development.

Provincial governments are supposed to play a crucial intermediary role by bringing national objectives to the regional level, tailoring strategies and policies to the specific needs and circumstances of their areas. They therefore set the tone for local governance, and by extension, community-based governance, by interpreting national policies and ensuring their implementation in a way that addresses local priorities. South Africans have not experienced this level of good governance in recent years; some never have.

So, if this interpretation and implementation does not happen – which is the case in most provinces – the tone set for community-based governance is one of disarray, failure, and suffering. There are of course a few cases that are the exception.  South African voters can change this by voting for a national and provincial government that will impact communities in constructive ways and pave the way for the local government elections to follow.

We are on the cusp of a new electoral cycle. As voters, we must seize this opportunity to reimagine governance in South Africa – governance that puts the needs and aspirations of communities at its core, nurtures collaboration between government and civil society, and paves the way for a more equitable and prosperous future for all. With this vision, we can truly realise the promise of democracy and ensure that no community is left behind. These may be national and provincial elections, but you are voting for your community!

News Archive

MBA Programme - Question And Answer Sheet - 27 May 2004
2004-05-27

1. WHAT MUST THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE (UFS) DO TO GET FULL ACCREDITATION FOR THE MBA PROGRAMMES?

According to the Council on Higher Education’s (CHE) evaluation, the three MBA programmes of the UFS clearly and significantly contribute to students’ knowledge and skills, are relevant for the workplace, are appropriately resourced and have an appropriate internal and external programme environment. These programmes are the MBA General, the MBA in Health Care Management and the MBA in Entrepreneurship.

What the Council on Higher Education did find, was a few technical and administrative issues that need to be addressed.

This is why the three MBA programmes of the UFS received conditional accreditation – which in itself is a major achievement for the UFS’s School of Management, which was only four years old at the time of the evaluation.

The following breakdown gives one a sense of the mostly administrative nature of the conditions that have to be met before full accreditation is granted by the CHE:

a. A formal forum of stakeholders: The UFS is required to establish a more structured, inclusive process of review of its MBA programmes. This is an administrative formality already in process.

b. A work allocation model: According to the CHE this is required to regulate the workload of the teaching staff, particularly as student numbers grow, rather than via standard management processes as currently done.

c. Contractual agreements with part-time staff: The UFS is required to enter into formal agreements with part-time and contractual staff as all agreements are currently done on an informal and claim-basis. This is an administrative formality already in process.

d. A formal curriculum committee: According to the CHE, the School of Management had realised the need for a structure – other than the current Faculty Board - where all MBA lecturers can deliberate on the MBA programmes, and serve as a channel for faculty input, consultation and decision-making.

e. A system of external moderators: This need was already identified by the UFS and the system is to be implemented as early as July 2004.

f. A compulsory research component: The UFS is required to introduce a research component which will include the development of research skills for the business environment. The UFS management identified this need and has approved such a component - it is to take effect from January 2005. This is an insufficient element lacking in virtually all MBA programmes in South Africa.

g. Support programmes for learners having problems with numeracy: The UFS identified this as a need for academic support among some learners and has already developed such a programme which will be implemented from January 2005.

The majority of these conditions have been satisfied already and few remaining steps will take effect soon. It is for this reason that the UFS is confident that its three MBA programmes will soon receive full accreditation.

2. WHAT ACCREDITATION DOES THE UFS HAVE FOR ITS MBA PROGRAMME?

The UFS’s School of Management received conditional accreditation for its three MBA programmes.

Two levels of accreditation are awarded to tertiary institutions for their MBA programmes, namely full accreditation and conditional accreditation. When a programme does not comply with the minimum requirements regarding a small number of criteria, conditional accreditation is given. This can be rectified during the short or medium term.

3. IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE ACADEMIC CORE OF THE UFS’s MBA PROGRAMMES?

No. The UFS is proud of its three MBA programmes’ reputation in the market and the positive feedback it receives from graduandi and their employers.

The MBA programmes of the UFS meet most of the minimum requirements of the evaluation process.

In particular, the key element of ‘teaching and learning’, which relates to the curriculum and content of the MBA programmes, is beyond question. In other words, the core of what is being taught in our MBA programmes is sound.

4. IS THE UFS’s MBA A WORTHWHILE QUALIFICATION?

Yes. Earlier this year, the School of Management – young as it is - was rated by employers as the best smaller business school in South Africa. This was based on a survey conducted by the Professional Management Review and reported in the Sunday Times Business Times, of 25 January 2004.

The UFS is committed to maintaining these high standards of quality, not only through compliance with the requirements of the CHE, but also through implementing its own quality assurance measures.

Another way in which we benchmark the quality of our MBA programmes is through the partnerships we have formed with institutions such as the DePaul University in Chicago and Kansas State University, both in the US, as well as the Robert Schuman University in France.

For this reason the UFS appreciates and supports the work of the CHE and welcomes its specific findings regarding the three MBA programmes.

It is understandable that the MBA review has caused some nervousness – not least among current MBA students throughout the country.

However, one principle that the UFS management is committed to is this: preparing all our students for a world of challenge and change. Without any doubt the MBA programme of the UFS is a solid preparation.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept