The ‘politics’ of change

The ‘politics’ of change

Ashley Dobia Mwanza

When the Global Political Agreement (GPA) was set into ‘motion’ in Zimbabwe, at the outset the process was exciting, had its fair share of ambiguity and had and also continues to have a fair share of critics.

A long arduous process had finally given hope and vision for the country’s short to medium term future which would no doubt inadvertently affect the long term future of the once prosperous Southern African nation, formerly known as the ‘Jewel of Africa’ and the ‘breadbasket of Africa’.

When the GPA was set into ‘motion’, at that point two kinds of anxiety typically arose within the country and beyond. The first was a nagging fear that in the end despite the fine words and rhetoric, nothing in the country will ever change, outright pessimism. However, second is the fact that indeed, everything, yes, actually everything will change.

Our fear, mistrust and doubts all began to erupt, and, fed on one another. Some would go on to show their frustration toward the leaders with the feeling they were being abandoned and/or ignored. Then as the whole phenomena started to unfold, Zimbabweans sensed changes were coming regardless of time or what they said, but they did not know what that would mean for them. “Where do we come in? What is our role? What is the mission and vision, and where will they take us? What does the process involve?” we asked. The words of Wesley Granberg-Michaelson sum up these questions, “the plain fact is that transition and change create anxiety, and this anxiety is part of the human condition.”

In short our commitment (patriotic duty) to embark on a course of change triggers anxiety, raises real questions about roles, functions and process. When a country initially embraces a compelling vision for its future and embarks on the journey, it generates excitement, affirmation and hope. But once into the process, tensions, doubts, and anxieties invariably begin to surface.

The focus of our governments should not be misplaced and has for far too long being the case. Most politicians place their focus on generating strong support, and even though they do succeed in that regard, most citizens feel left behind whether they are home or abroad. Some even go on to ask that if an agreement was drafted by a small group of people, how is it to energise the multitudes? Formal approval of any agreement within government, parliament, organisation etc., is only the first step. Philip Kotler says that organisations (including governments) vastly under-communicate their vision, and in my own experience and observation, he is right. Take for example Ireland and the Lisbon treaty, the majority of politicians asked the citizens to vote for the treaty so as to have it ratified, the electorate was being ‘cowed’ into voting for something that a vast majority did not understand. The treaty comprises 270 pages of complex legal language. But if you ask citizens to accept something they cannot comprehend, you will get their ‘anger’. The referendum held in June 2008, received a strong negative response. Why, because of poor communication.

Granberg-Michaelson goes on to say governments and organisations alike need to develop a proactive communication strategy to share the vision throughout the populace. Often a process of clarifying an organisation’s vision will also include an identification and reaffirmation of its central values. This step is crucial for guiding the process that implements the vision and the changes that occur.

It’s a frequent mistake to overlook the process that there should be a shared and respected set of values that all ascribe to. Assuming that such values are clear can have detrimental effects or results that can adversely affect any process. Shared values, openly acknowledged and affirmed, can become the threads that weave the fabric of society enabling it to deal successfully and creatively with any conflict or problems. In times of high tension and stress (such as that in Zimbabwe) that accompany such a journey (transition/change), those values will nurture trust in a process that otherwise seems filled with risk and uncertainty.

This article which is part of a series of articles under the topic Changing the way we change was particularly inspired by the Zimbabwean and Irish situations.