Dear Editor,
I have read a letter captioned “CEO of GuySuCo has been a failure” in the Kaieteur News, supposedly by one E Joseph, in which he or she claimed that “This isn’t about personal attack; this is about accountability and truth.”
Let’s set the record straight. It is not about a “personal attack”, yet they did just that in this letter. They claimed that the CEO is “incompetent…and failed spectacularly both on and off the field and should be removed”. The writer claimed to be writing from a “position of knowledge”, but gave not even an iota of the “knowledge” so possessed for the readers to make an educated and informed decision about their credibility. Is the removal of the CEO the panacea for all GUYSUCO’s problems? Is this the solution which their “knowledge” permits? The real problem is about accountability versus excuses.
They further claimed that the CEO did not manage his own business well but failed to provide the readers with any evidence, yet this is not “personal”. Then despite the CEO’s vast experience in business and cane farming, in addition to his professional academic achievements, the writer is concluding that his appointment is a “reward for the boys” and all one needs is to “align with the party line, wear the red shirt, and you’re rewarded at the country and corporation’s expense”. Only recently the coalition manifested this propensity, yet no one complained. Yet again this is not personal, but according to the writer, the CEO’s only qualification is “wearing a red shirt”. This means that any qualified person within the Party should not be appointed to any position since that will be “rewarding” the boys. The writer contradicted themself later down in their letter when they concluded that, “Maybe I would give and take if the person was suitably qualified for the post in this scenario”, referring to another appointment.
In my introduction to this letter I stated that the writer claimed their letter is about accountability and truth. Therefore, they must and should be aware that the mantra of the CEO is accountability and truth, and I do think that in enforcing this he rubbed some people the “wrong” way. They simply do not want to be held accountable but persist in making excuses for everything under the sun (or rain). Let me thus explain the difference between accountability and an excuse.
Accountability is about giving a reason or reasons which acknowledge what happened and accept the outcome, while an excuse tries to minimise or remove personal responsibility. A reason explains and accepts, which often leads to action or a solution, while an excuse justifies or tries to “get out” of a consequence that could have been avoided. For too long there has been a litany of excuses from all levels of management which only serve to mask or hide incompetence. This CEO has read the “riot act” and made it pellucid that gone are the days for excuses. Accountability must be accepted for poor yield, poor BGI, poor planting and crop husbandry, poor harvesting and the myriad factors which affect cost and production. Some are upset about this and feel that excuses should suffice. The time has come for all strata of management to be held accountable if targets are to be achieved within the budgetary allocations and costs are controlled effectively and mines are spent economically.
In conclusion, for too long management has been allowed to develop a culture of complacency, and the time has come to change this debilitating culture. I invite this letter writer to visit the estates and make an informed decision rather than depending on their “trusted contacts” inside the company for their enlightened “insights”.