LRA Funding - Priority No. 2 - New Personnel NEEDED?

Related to the previous post, VISIBILITY & Vigilance - No.1 Priority, this post highlights 'Priority No. 2: FUNDING' of the Lonehill Community Initiative as a function of Stakeholder Support & other Project Funding sources.

And here's where I, as a Lonehill Stakeholder, feel massively cheated by what I see as our Adminstration Service Provider's lack of personal leadership, initiative, innovation and performance in delivering on Priority No. 2.

Their initial task - for which they were awarded an attractive contract - was clearly to increase subscriber numbers (thereby increasing contributor funding and LRA dominance of the area) by providing exceptional administration support service to stimulate positive word-of-mouth and goodwill... including to provide proactive sales, marketing and communication. From such base 'other Project Funding sources' could and should have been attracted.

For the tenure of their contract of +- 3 years the sales-marketing-communication portfolio, in my opinion, has been a continually inneffective disaster.

It's always difficult to pen something that highlights any apparent incompetence or lack of capability of any business, team or individual... unless YOU are the recipient of what you deem to be pathetically poor service that YOU actually PAY for. Then it is your right and duty to stand up and voice your opinion on behalf of all consumers.

I pen my opinion regarding The Big Idea (TBI) - administration service provider to the LRA - from my perspective as both a passionate voluntary contributor on the inside of the LRA Board, and from being a deeply concerned monthly contributor on the outside, and assessing the paucity of results from what I believe to be their embarrassingly-poor service delivery for our Lonehill Community Initiative.

Let me put it as kindly as I can using a current business example.

If we (the Lonehill Stakeholders) were owners of a Super 14 Rugby Franchise and we employed PROFESSIONAL staff and players to ensure that we deliver exceptional performance to beat the competition, we would firstly expect our entire team to produce some BIG wins by out-playing, out-kicking, out-passing, out-tackling, out-scrumming, out-jumping, out-smarting, out-coaching, and doing almost everything better than anyone else.

We would EXPECT such effort and personnel to produce RESULTS.

But, let's say that our team delivers piddle-poor performance in the field, with nary a win to their name, that these PAID 'professionals' are delivering below-par performances that would embarrass AMATEURS, and we see that they cannot pass, kick, tackle, scrum, coach or, in fact, that they do very little of any of the basics right.

And let's say that the entire infrastructure is assessed to be one of 'mismanagement & disarray' during their tenure.

Would YOU keep this personnel on... let alone PAY them..?

Here's my personal opinion, TBI have been PAID and paid well (almost a MILLION Rand last year alone to be at the administrative core of the infrastructure described by new LRA Chairman - Rob Gillespie - as being one of 'mismanagement & disarray'), and they have shown very little in the way of promise, initiative, inspiration, innovation or anything much pro-active to justify our retaining them any longer.

To be blunt, in my opinion they've been pretty poor at their overall administration function for the LRA. For many their service has sucked, they clearly don't enjoy dealing with people and their problems, they ignore problems in the hope that they will just go away - leaving the 'ignored' very disgruntled, they are defensive and reactionary, they cannot communicate effectively, and their marketing is woeful.

Almost everything that was required of them when first contracted-in has not been fulfilled. And the less-than-mediocre results to our initiative has spoken volumes. In fact, the initiative almost landed up back on the rocks last year and is still in the throes of being turned around by the current Board. Thank goodness for people standing up to be counted.

Hence my assessment of TBI having a 30% performance achievement rating - mainly arising from their focus on soft non-priority issues. That's a failure in my book.

But hey, they've done well out of it, let's give them that... although I have mentioned that I feel cheated as a stakeholder, I am a believer in 'what's done is done' and I'm not going to begrudge what they have pocketed. But, I ask a simple question - why continue the farce? They are a square peg trying to fit poorly into a round hole. There is nothing natural about the fit at all. They have not proven themselves to be able to deliver much more than a poor to lowly-mediocre performance. What makes anyone think they will do any differently for our community initiative in the future?

So here's my open opinion, let's get in a NEW administration team... or pay some of the local VOLUNTEERS in our community to provide us with what we really need, administrators who will focus on our KEY PRIORITIES, which are or should be to:

1. Know Their Target Market Intimately: By Graphic Territory Map Representation and Database Compilation they should be able to point to the profiles and contact details of every stakeholder - Householder, Complex, Street Enclosure, Business Owner, Civic... including identifying the most significant leaders and influencers, and being in regular contact with them (monthly, if not weekly). Communication and Marketing are critical components of this brief.

2. Provide Stability of Administration Above Community Politics: Given that a community of volunteers is expected to be constantly changing and to have many differing views, the administrator should provide a neutral rock of stability to represent all community stakeholders as opposed to siding with vested interests to undermine other stakeholders views or rights.

3. Provide Professional Leadership To A Community Of VOLUNTEERS: The intention of going professional was in recognition that volunteers have limited time to give to managing community affairs. The administrator should demonstrate the ability to manage the Lonehill Community Initiative without need for management by the volunteers.

Both points 2 and 3 require an understanding of Community Vision and Strategy.

4. Provide Exceptional Service With A SMILE: When we're paying YOU good money we want to know that you're enjoying what you're doing and that you're happy to take on our problems while we're at work.

Please believe me when I say that this is the kindest I can be, having left much of what I could quite easily say on the cutting room floor. It is not my intention to be malicious ... just REALISTIC. This is not a commentary on the people in TBI and/or whether I like them or not (I can accept people I don't 'like', if they really perform and deliver on core strategy), or how they run their business, it is more whether they are suited to the task at hand.

As an example of how lack of understanding of the reality of the task at hand can waste money, I offer the current debacle of the local Metro Council's R7 Million expenditure on a call centre solution to alleviate the backlog crisis resulting in a learner's and driver's licence application nightmare.

Whilst Council officials and the call centre operators were publicly pronouncing on radio how smart their call centre solution was - 'the best of breed call centre software and operation', they claimed - the market was actually on radio telling them the complete opposite and proving it by queuing outside testing centres from 2 a.m. in the morning to get bookings from officials who totally bypassed the call center operation as unworkable. Having a daughter needing to get her licence, I was again caught right in the middle of this farce.

Neither the Council officials nor the call centre operators could accept that there was anything wrong with their strategy or operation (sound familiar?) - yet the REALITY of the market forces on the ground forced them to pull the plug on an impractical endeavor that just piddled off their markets and their own people at their driving centres who knew differently.

The Council officials and call centre's intentions may well have been 'right' in their perception, they just did not undertake to understand the market forces at play or to implement the strategy correctly - and they failed hopelessly at the task at hand. Seven MILLION rand (R7 million) wasted because they couldn't see past their own arrogance, mediocrity and incompetence.

Likewise, without getting personal about the people, TBI - in my opinion - have failed to understand or deliver on the seriously important task at hand in our community initiative.

Understanding that our families peace of mind and security is paramount above the probable 'hurt feelings' of those who are not delivering on providing a foundation for Priority No. 2, it is my opinion that the sooner we get a FRESH approach to administration in this community, with fresh faces, the better it will be for us to achieve our ultimate aims.

Let me make it clear, Priority No. 1 is actually reliant on Priority No. 2... so they are inseparable in importance:

SECURITY ==> VISIBILITY & VIGILANCE ==> FUNDING

We need people who understand this and who can deliver on it in a MASSIVE way.... especially when we are PAYING them.

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 - 705-2790
Lonehill Resident