Imagine my surprise as I arrived at the LRA AGM venue last Wednesday at 8:10 p.m. (after wrapping up my own weekday business meetings) to find that the AGM meeting had finished after just 40 minutes.
Now there's a refreshing turn-up for the books: a +-R15 Millon p.a. community enterprise put to bed with minimal issues apparently raised from the floor.
I put this down to the timeous presentation and pre-circulation of the AGM financials and Chairman's Report. Well done!
I'm told that there were between 50 to 80 people present... and I wonder whether this reflection of public interest in the Lonehill community is a good thing or a bad thing?
Let's face it, Lonehill now appears to be pretty-well managed on the surface. A very welcome change from this time last year. The security presence seems reasonably alert. The environment is looking neatly maintained. There is an improvement in communications efforts. And the timely circulation of the annual financials and reports shows a measure of basic management skills that we all want to see.
These are GOOD things!
All of this may well have created a sense of comfort that 'someone else' has got things nicely under control, thank you. Making it easy to stay at home in front of the TV and warm fireplace, while others get on with the job. That would truly be a magnificent compliment to the immediate past Board and Chairman, if true. And, I sincerely hope it is.
However, even if true, if I were in the position of the current Chair, a personal mantra about communities that I developed from participating in and watching this initiative evolve would continually run through my mind:
'Apathetic Communities arise from Pathetic Leadership'.
This statement always served to remind me that the success of the original launching of the Lonehill Security Action Group initiative was founded upon the mass-inclusion of everyone who wanted to play a part - no matter how small. This was deliberately counter-intuitive to, and our unique differentiator to, the way that community associations had been run before.
Just days before the massively successful launch of this initiative, I was told by the then cash-strapped LRA that this community was too 'apathetic' to care. This cash-positive initiative swallowed up the LRA in a necessary merger for the LRA within the year.
So my concern as the current Chair - especially with the AGM feedback email also pointing to the fact that no new faces stood up to make themselves available as directors - would be as to whether I have over-managed the turn-around to the exclusion of others in Lonehill. After all, there is no point in doing a fantastic job of managing an enterprise back to health, only to have it collapse within a few weeks or months of the few remaining directors leaving it for whatever reason.
Too few people involved in the community-management processes is a bad thing in my view. It leads to the danger of the co-opting of like-minded thinkers, group-think-mentality, 'yes-wo/men' too scared to challenge autocratic command and control, and myopic assumptions leading to disastrous decisions. Where've we seen this before?
There is no greater legacy that a leader can leave than to have a quality management process and leadership succession plan in place to ensure a smooth transition of an enterprise to greater levels of growth.
In a clipping that I garnered some years ago from the Business Day, Steven Covey once identified four fatal mistakes that tend to occur in organisations.
1. 'The first mistake comes at the idea stage. All too often, good ideas are squelched by negative energy, self-doubt and fear. Without that core idea, the organisation has no purpose.'
2. 'The second mistake occurs in the production stage. It's hard to come up with a great idea, but even harder to properly execute it. This is where most new organisations fail — more than 90% within two years.'
3. 'The third fundamental reason for failure occurs at the management stage, as the founder tries to do it all, micromanaging to death. Formal systems are never set up to control company practices, especially cash flow. Even founders who concede they can't do it all single-handedly often sow the seeds of future failure by hiring “clones”, people who think the same way they do and who have the same strengths and weaknesses. But strengths become redundant and weaknesses are just multiplied.'
4. 'The fourth and final flaw occurs at the change stage. Initially successful organisations often fail to reinvent themselves and adapt to changing market conditions and new opportunities. They get so bogged down in their own bureaucratic cultures that they can no longer meet and anticipate the needs of their targeted customers.'
Says Covey: 'To survive and thrive over the long haul, organisations need to be led by management teams that are capable of perceiving and short-circuiting the critical threat at each stage of this cycle. Most importantly, a successful team must have a spirit of mutual respect, acknowledging and utilising the strengths of each member while offsetting the weaknesses of one by the strengths of the others.'
'Four different kinds of strength are needed: the strengths of an entrepreneur, a producer, a manager and a team-building leader.' 'Very few individuals possess all four of these strengths, which is why successful leaders must focus on those areas that are most vital to their specific roles and surround themselves with a team of people who will fill the remaining needs.'
'Every one of the four roles is vital, but in my experience most organisations are overmanaged and vastly underled.'
So what does this vested-interest observer believe are some key points of stimulation for thinking stakeholders and leadership in this community:
i. That the LRA leadership be motivated to bring together the widest array of key community stakeholders, decision-makers, interested parties to find ways to work TOGETHER to the maximum benefit of the community - a BIG indaba - no matter how pro- or anti-community they may appear to be. Every input in a collaborative environment will be valuable.
ii. That a solution be researched/proposed/developed whereby all community stakeholders be motivated to share the 'proactive community security service' load with equivalent parity.
iii. That openness and transparency should return to the reporting of critical performance figures and proceedings in monthly LRA Board meetings - after all, this is an OPEN community initiative and contributing stakeholders should be entitled to see how their directors represent their interests at such meetings.
iv. That marketing & communication efforts, whilst vastly improved in the past year off a piddle-poor base, offers greatest potential for significant quality improvement befitting of the size of this initiative.
Some numbers that we might like to know each month are (amongst others):
- The numbers of contributors by breakdown: individual households / complexes / enclosures / business etc.
- % of contributors vs. non-contributors related to total households in the LRA defined area
- % Revenue applied by contributor breakdown to PROACTIVE guarding force
- Possible vs. Actual contribution by total community households
- % allocation of community events revenues to reducing load on contributors
- Target revenue projections from special events/promotions/programs designed to reduce load on contributors
- % of emails that actually reach total no. of households
- etc.
Many of these figures we used to know in the main before they were taken behind closed doors... for obvious reasons, in my opinion, of becoming a little embarrassing to those tasked to grow them.
Finally, I was also told that some pointed reference was made at the AGM to the comments made by this writer on this forum as somehow not being in the community's best interests - and their apparently having proposed draconian actions be taken by the LRA to shut this forum down. Have no idea whether that is true or what such commentators might be referring to, but if they were referring to this writer then they are more than welcome to enter into open debate on their perspective on this forum and correct any statements they believe to be inaccurate in this forum. It's all about maturity of discussion and sharing of differing opinions.
I must say that I find it hugely amusing that almost every resident/stakeholder I have ever met in this community has almost always been scathing of the lack of open transparency exhibited by Political, Government and Municipal figures, and the same residents are almost always universally disgusted at and disapproving of the draconian clamp-downs on freedom-of-speech perpetrated by Hitler-, Amin-, Apartheid-, Mugabe-era style leadership as precursors of the very worst of societies disasters. I have yet to find one that openly stands up to declare their support of any of the above leadership-styles and/or their resultant cowardly acts of supression of contrary views.
And yet, we apparently still find some of these very same residents/stakeholders at local public meetings who seriously propose invoking the same draconian actions on anyone who dares to hold/make a different opinion or to make a comment that they might not like. A trifle hypocritical maybe?
This writer believes that Greater Lonehill has enormous potential to achieve so much more than it has so far... if that's being critical, well so be it. I happen to hold a different opinion... ;-)
Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident
Custom Search
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Lonehill - What A Difference A KNIGHT Makes
Almost one year ago to the day, I wrote - When Is an AGM Not An AGM..? - in which I made pointed reference to 'mediocrity', 'incompetence', and specifically to: 'The lack of financial statements at today's meeting, together with a quick sight of the hurried collection of two copies of the statements, raises questions as to INEFFECIENCIES and LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY that may well exist in the minds of service-providers who are not being called to account for piddle-poor deliverables'.
One year later, and after perusal of the Chairman's Report - well-prepared and timeously delivered to our homes before the impending AGM meeting - confirms that LRA Chairman Rob Gillespie is the white knight that was so sorely needed to step in and stop the rot. I have already conveyed my compliments to Rob and his LRA team in Lonehill: Give Credit Where Credit Is Due.
The Chairman's Report confirms everything that made this writer and others a trifle unpopular last year, with the report confirming that our service providers 'had been allowed to slip into a mode of "below-expectation" delivery, which is typical of a poor management environment'. So point made and the stance of those courageous few who stood up to ask questions and investigate the matter is vindicated as having being in the best interest of our community.
I find myself in total disagreement with the Chairman's comment that criticism of the Finance and Administration portfolio 'was unwarranted and undeserved'. In my opinion, it was totally deserved and the Chairman is too loyal to a fault to those who were paid a bundle to deliver the mess that he (and his new team) had to fix up. I cannot find myself at all confident in the abilities of such operation to ever manage itself in the future... in my opinion, making them too highly paid in the past for what they didn't deliver, and still now at R50,000 p.m., for the service that they currently deliver.
Loyalty is admirable, but when it appears to entrench incompetence it serves primarily to invoke criticism of leadership, just as in David Bullard's latest blog criticism of our Minister of Safety & Security and our latest crime figures where he comments: 'Anyway, nobody ever gets sacked from Thabo Mbeki’s Cabinet, however incompetent or mediocre their performance'.
There are a number in this community who will NOT work with this F&A portfolio team due to a lack of faith in their ability or capability to support a project with any semblance of enthusiasm or sustainability. I have written before in this forum of the importance of getting the 'right people on the bus' and referred to http://www.jimcollins.com/ site to underscore the point.
This will continue to present a substantial divide for many that have proven to be major contributors to the Lonehill Community Initiative (i.e. those who truly know how to think and deliver in a big way), and my view is that if the Chair wishes to remain loyal to a group that others don't believe in then the Chair should allow for another bus to be manned by those who have differing (read 'higher') standards of project delivery for Lonehill. That would be 'Leadership'.. and the community would benefit from a wider net of people who want to contribute in their way!
I would still like to see much more open and transparent leadership, board-meetings, goal-setting, accountability and reporting than happens right now. The last quarterly-feedback meeting revealed that arbitrary/autocratic/unilateral decisions are STILL being taken without referring to the community (refer the Lonehill Control Centre idea mooted and roundly pooh-poohed by residents in attendance).
Community association directors should not have the unfettered ability to take arbitrary decisions without conducting reasonable research of their stakeholders opinions and, if they do so without such research, should hold themselves wholly accountable to such decisions (as they should for all decisions, but don't right now). Groupthink and arbitrary decisions taken behind closed doors proved to be a very dangerous, destructive force in the immediate past debacles... and must be guarded against by the community.
Why, mark my words, just now someone will want to entrench the directors for a 5-year term... shades of Mugabe-style entrenchment, heaven forbid. It ain't healthy! My view is that a community association Chairman should have a maximum of 2 years in the Chair... and the second year should be spent grooming the Vice-Chair to take over (i.e. a succession plan to ensure continuity but also injecting fresh thinking). This keeps us away from the demigod-like characters that seem to abound in our society.
Too much is still hidden behind the veneer of Section 21 legalese and a balance sheet, when in addition here's what is really required: Management KPI's need to be evaluated to show how effective our LRA Service Providers really are - and therefore how effective our leadership is. Because I don't have access to the numbers (which I should as a stakeholder), I fear that we are some way off the contributing numbers we were at when things began to fall off the 'moral high-ground' rails.
Also, to me, very little effort has been stimulated by current leadership to directly engage positively with those who have made significant contributions in the past. It has been mostly those who have wanted to contribute who have pushed leadership to enter into any discussion, with very little response other than a seemingly passive condescending ear. From my direct personal experience, it appears that 'assumptions', mostly incorrect, seemed to have perpetuated through to current leadership that is a carry-over from a time and ethos that should forever be an embarrassment to those who contributed to what led up to the AGM debacle of last year.
If I am wrong in my perceptions above, I will be happy to be so convinced.
That all being said, the timeous and pretty complete Chairman's Report leave me feeling upbeat for the security and well-being of our families in Lonehill in the coming year. I'm pretty much in agreement with much of what is outlined by the Chair as needing to be focused upon in the coming year. For me Rob Gillespie gets 100% PLUS for effort and achievement in pulling the LRA act together once again. So I extend my heartfelt personal 'Thank You' to Rob and his LRA team.
I would like to think that it is the sign of a mature community that allows for stakeholders to work towards progress for the community in general whilst they may be in disagreement on specifics. I still look for the 'great INDABA' of all interested stakeholders as the starting point for our next big growth move forward. I hope to see it this coming LRA year... ;-)
If my business meetings end in time I hope to be able to make this AGM meeting. See you there.
Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident
One year later, and after perusal of the Chairman's Report - well-prepared and timeously delivered to our homes before the impending AGM meeting - confirms that LRA Chairman Rob Gillespie is the white knight that was so sorely needed to step in and stop the rot. I have already conveyed my compliments to Rob and his LRA team in Lonehill: Give Credit Where Credit Is Due.
The Chairman's Report confirms everything that made this writer and others a trifle unpopular last year, with the report confirming that our service providers 'had been allowed to slip into a mode of "below-expectation" delivery, which is typical of a poor management environment'. So point made and the stance of those courageous few who stood up to ask questions and investigate the matter is vindicated as having being in the best interest of our community.
I find myself in total disagreement with the Chairman's comment that criticism of the Finance and Administration portfolio 'was unwarranted and undeserved'. In my opinion, it was totally deserved and the Chairman is too loyal to a fault to those who were paid a bundle to deliver the mess that he (and his new team) had to fix up. I cannot find myself at all confident in the abilities of such operation to ever manage itself in the future... in my opinion, making them too highly paid in the past for what they didn't deliver, and still now at R50,000 p.m., for the service that they currently deliver.
Loyalty is admirable, but when it appears to entrench incompetence it serves primarily to invoke criticism of leadership, just as in David Bullard's latest blog criticism of our Minister of Safety & Security and our latest crime figures where he comments: 'Anyway, nobody ever gets sacked from Thabo Mbeki’s Cabinet, however incompetent or mediocre their performance'.
There are a number in this community who will NOT work with this F&A portfolio team due to a lack of faith in their ability or capability to support a project with any semblance of enthusiasm or sustainability. I have written before in this forum of the importance of getting the 'right people on the bus' and referred to http://www.jimcollins.com/ site to underscore the point.
This will continue to present a substantial divide for many that have proven to be major contributors to the Lonehill Community Initiative (i.e. those who truly know how to think and deliver in a big way), and my view is that if the Chair wishes to remain loyal to a group that others don't believe in then the Chair should allow for another bus to be manned by those who have differing (read 'higher') standards of project delivery for Lonehill. That would be 'Leadership'.. and the community would benefit from a wider net of people who want to contribute in their way!
I would still like to see much more open and transparent leadership, board-meetings, goal-setting, accountability and reporting than happens right now. The last quarterly-feedback meeting revealed that arbitrary/autocratic/unilateral decisions are STILL being taken without referring to the community (refer the Lonehill Control Centre idea mooted and roundly pooh-poohed by residents in attendance).
Community association directors should not have the unfettered ability to take arbitrary decisions without conducting reasonable research of their stakeholders opinions and, if they do so without such research, should hold themselves wholly accountable to such decisions (as they should for all decisions, but don't right now). Groupthink and arbitrary decisions taken behind closed doors proved to be a very dangerous, destructive force in the immediate past debacles... and must be guarded against by the community.
Why, mark my words, just now someone will want to entrench the directors for a 5-year term... shades of Mugabe-style entrenchment, heaven forbid. It ain't healthy! My view is that a community association Chairman should have a maximum of 2 years in the Chair... and the second year should be spent grooming the Vice-Chair to take over (i.e. a succession plan to ensure continuity but also injecting fresh thinking). This keeps us away from the demigod-like characters that seem to abound in our society.
Too much is still hidden behind the veneer of Section 21 legalese and a balance sheet, when in addition here's what is really required: Management KPI's need to be evaluated to show how effective our LRA Service Providers really are - and therefore how effective our leadership is. Because I don't have access to the numbers (which I should as a stakeholder), I fear that we are some way off the contributing numbers we were at when things began to fall off the 'moral high-ground' rails.
Also, to me, very little effort has been stimulated by current leadership to directly engage positively with those who have made significant contributions in the past. It has been mostly those who have wanted to contribute who have pushed leadership to enter into any discussion, with very little response other than a seemingly passive condescending ear. From my direct personal experience, it appears that 'assumptions', mostly incorrect, seemed to have perpetuated through to current leadership that is a carry-over from a time and ethos that should forever be an embarrassment to those who contributed to what led up to the AGM debacle of last year.
If I am wrong in my perceptions above, I will be happy to be so convinced.
That all being said, the timeous and pretty complete Chairman's Report leave me feeling upbeat for the security and well-being of our families in Lonehill in the coming year. I'm pretty much in agreement with much of what is outlined by the Chair as needing to be focused upon in the coming year. For me Rob Gillespie gets 100% PLUS for effort and achievement in pulling the LRA act together once again. So I extend my heartfelt personal 'Thank You' to Rob and his LRA team.
I would like to think that it is the sign of a mature community that allows for stakeholders to work towards progress for the community in general whilst they may be in disagreement on specifics. I still look for the 'great INDABA' of all interested stakeholders as the starting point for our next big growth move forward. I hope to see it this coming LRA year... ;-)
If my business meetings end in time I hope to be able to make this AGM meeting. See you there.
Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Lonehill - Security Ops. Manager Moves On
Johan Engelbrecht writes:
The time has arrived for me to move on.
I have had the privilege to serve the community for almost three years, had the opportunity to work with three Boards of Directors of the LRA and last but not least established a super relationship with the SA Police in Douglasdale, to the benefit of our community.
I want to thank some individual residents with whom I had a closer working relationship, people such as:
Herman Erdman , Chris Crozier, Bill Parr, Willem Hazewindus , Joy Cook, Lindie and Shirley, the events girl of Lonehill.
Special thanks must go to Trevor Nel, the driving force behind the establishment of the Lonehill Initiative. I have yet to meet a more passionate person when it comes to issues affecting the community. He shoots from the “hip” and calls a spade a spade. You know exactly where you stand with him, thanks Trevor.
Herman Erdman, what a gentleman, but eish, when he is not happy, you hear it in no uncertain terms. And then Chris Crozier, the Diplomat, I can continue forever.
I am leaving behind a passionate team of Managers, Supervisors and Security Officers, without them, we could not achieve the levels of success against crime , they do not always receive appreciation and credit for the work they do. Thank guys, keep up the good work.
My successor will be announced soon and to him/her, I want to wish them the best and they must remember that Lonehill is and will always be the “Blue Chip “suburb of the country.
Johan Engelbrecht
Operations Manager
076 145 2075
The time has arrived for me to move on.
I have had the privilege to serve the community for almost three years, had the opportunity to work with three Boards of Directors of the LRA and last but not least established a super relationship with the SA Police in Douglasdale, to the benefit of our community.
I want to thank some individual residents with whom I had a closer working relationship, people such as:
Herman Erdman , Chris Crozier, Bill Parr, Willem Hazewindus , Joy Cook, Lindie and Shirley, the events girl of Lonehill.
Special thanks must go to Trevor Nel, the driving force behind the establishment of the Lonehill Initiative. I have yet to meet a more passionate person when it comes to issues affecting the community. He shoots from the “hip” and calls a spade a spade. You know exactly where you stand with him, thanks Trevor.
Herman Erdman, what a gentleman, but eish, when he is not happy, you hear it in no uncertain terms. And then Chris Crozier, the Diplomat, I can continue forever.
I am leaving behind a passionate team of Managers, Supervisors and Security Officers, without them, we could not achieve the levels of success against crime , they do not always receive appreciation and credit for the work they do. Thank guys, keep up the good work.
My successor will be announced soon and to him/her, I want to wish them the best and they must remember that Lonehill is and will always be the “Blue Chip “suburb of the country.
Johan Engelbrecht
Operations Manager
076 145 2075
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Lonehill Resident Responds: I Prefer What The Greek Brothers Have Built
George Joubert responds:
Dear Trevor,
Well done! Keep the news coming! The Truth will always out but remember that two-way communication is the glue that holds any relationship together!
The “news” about the Lonehill shopping centre is not really new and is something we have known about for many years? This goes back right to the days when you got the health club to remove their ugly sign from the Lonehill skyline above the shopping mall’s roof top!
On a personal note, my wife and I have always shopped at the Lonehill shopping mall going back to the days when it was a little “village market” type operation and we knew each of the shop-owners by name and they ours! Perhaps there is a marketing lesson here for the (developers) and the new shop-owners!
I must say though that I prefer what the Greek brothers have built to that small, dingy mall -- although I know there will be many who will object to this! But I very seldom have to drive outside of Lonehill any more to do my shopping! We now have a huge choice of goods and restaurants right on our doorstep! It is inevitable that some people will be affected by change or will resist it!
You are also fully aware that my sole objective regarding security was ALWAYS to achieve TOTAL transparency in EVERY type of business transaction anyone does in Lonehill but which WOULD still benefit EVERY Lonehiller whether a member of the LRA or not!
So with ALL this in mind – why does the LRA not do a survey and ask the residents to vote on what they think of the Lonehill Shopping Mall?
You also have a reasonable database of Lonehill so why don’t you test the “market”?
The shops are not going to go away and the last thing anyone wants is a ghost “mall” on our doorstep!
The key to my security solution – for which I took so much abuse -- was always to make it a “no-brainer” for those residents (whom I often castigated for being ostriches, freeloaders and fence-sitters) to join the security “initiative”! The one you instigated and started with other Lonehill residents (including myself) so many years ago and set the ground rules and standards!
It is sad that the present regime are NOT prepared to discuss ideas or solutions with those who actually were instrumental in starting that ball rolling!
My own view is that this may detract from their own importance!
But like you, this attitude will NOT stop me from making a contribution that WILL benefit ALL the residents in Lonehill!
Kind regards,
George
George L Joubert
Managing Director
Ambis Group (Pty) Ltd.
George@Ambis-sa.com
Tel +27 (0) 11 465 5930
Fax +27 (0) 11 465 1048
Mobile +27 (0) 83 250 6251
Dear Trevor,
Well done! Keep the news coming! The Truth will always out but remember that two-way communication is the glue that holds any relationship together!
The “news” about the Lonehill shopping centre is not really new and is something we have known about for many years? This goes back right to the days when you got the health club to remove their ugly sign from the Lonehill skyline above the shopping mall’s roof top!
On a personal note, my wife and I have always shopped at the Lonehill shopping mall going back to the days when it was a little “village market” type operation and we knew each of the shop-owners by name and they ours! Perhaps there is a marketing lesson here for the (developers) and the new shop-owners!
I must say though that I prefer what the Greek brothers have built to that small, dingy mall -- although I know there will be many who will object to this! But I very seldom have to drive outside of Lonehill any more to do my shopping! We now have a huge choice of goods and restaurants right on our doorstep! It is inevitable that some people will be affected by change or will resist it!
You are also fully aware that my sole objective regarding security was ALWAYS to achieve TOTAL transparency in EVERY type of business transaction anyone does in Lonehill but which WOULD still benefit EVERY Lonehiller whether a member of the LRA or not!
So with ALL this in mind – why does the LRA not do a survey and ask the residents to vote on what they think of the Lonehill Shopping Mall?
You also have a reasonable database of Lonehill so why don’t you test the “market”?
The shops are not going to go away and the last thing anyone wants is a ghost “mall” on our doorstep!
The key to my security solution – for which I took so much abuse -- was always to make it a “no-brainer” for those residents (whom I often castigated for being ostriches, freeloaders and fence-sitters) to join the security “initiative”! The one you instigated and started with other Lonehill residents (including myself) so many years ago and set the ground rules and standards!
It is sad that the present regime are NOT prepared to discuss ideas or solutions with those who actually were instrumental in starting that ball rolling!
My own view is that this may detract from their own importance!
But like you, this attitude will NOT stop me from making a contribution that WILL benefit ALL the residents in Lonehill!
Kind regards,
George
George L Joubert
Managing Director
Ambis Group (Pty) Ltd.
George@Ambis-sa.com
Tel +27 (0) 11 465 5930
Fax +27 (0) 11 465 1048
Mobile +27 (0) 83 250 6251
Monday, July 09, 2007
Lonehill - A Story Of 'Greed & Stupidity'
Returned from a glorious break in the bush, where the animals are honestly transparent about surviving by the bush 'law of the jungle', to a deluge of messages on my answering machine about the Lonehill shopping centre developers... and snippets of Noseweek articles (July 2007) piled up under my door .
Seems that Noseweek - http://www.noseweek.co.za/ - have broken a story on the Lonehill Shopping Centre developers which documents an apparently outrageous tale of 'Greed and Stupidity', and community disregard, that appears to have netted them a property asset-pile of billions.
See article link: The faces that launched a thousand shops - 'Notorious Joburg rogue developers, the freewheeling Theodosiou brothers have amassed a gigantic fortune parking flagrantly illegal shopping centres all over town'
See article link: Greed and stupidity - 'THE THEODOSIOU brothers inherited a property dynasty from their father, but by 1995 greed and stupidity had reduced them to bankruptcy.'
Lonehill Residents Association (LRA) Chairman - Rob Gillespie - is quoted as saying: 'These guys are bad news. You cannot believe anything they say, you cannot work with them. They're a law unto themselves'.
I can only raise a wry smile as I read the entire story. Those who have followed my writings on Lonehill will know that none of what I read comes as any surprise. Nevertheless, I'd still be interested to hear the developers side of the story.
Even I have to admit finding myself at times both bemused and exhibiting begrudging recognition for what they appear to have 'achieved' with such brazen chutzpah (although I can't get around the extreme disregard they seem to show for the rights of others). They clearly live by their own rules and I'll bet that they enjoy the notoriety. Only in the wild west!
If there is one thing that I have learnt it is that almost everyone in this community has a different perception of reality... and many have a very different view on what is morally-acceptable behavior.
Lest anyone should forget, even voluntary community do-gooders can fall into the trap of collective stupidity (I am reminded of the feedback of unbelievably stupidly-infantile behaviour at an infamous LRA board-meeting held around this time last year) which led to my return to producing pointed commentary such as in this link from Oct.22, 2006: Community Leadership for DUMMIES..!.
Power and control exercised behind closed doors can lead 'well-intentioned' people to make stupid decisions, just as greed can.
For me, openness, transparency, honesty and integrity have sadly proven to be the rarest of commodities on offer in this community, and experience tells me that no one should be thought to be any more morally-superior to anyone else lest one wants to be wholly-disappointed.
As bordering on the cynical as that may seem, it is perhaps the perfect base for no-nonsense negotiation between all stakeholders (assume that everyone has a vested interest and press for a declaration of such), and for ensuring the continual questioning and open recording of all contracts and commitments that affect this community.
Since launching the Lonehill security initiative in 2000 I've seen enough 'moral high ground' halos slipping from local heads in our real-life soap opera to produce a script worthy of Endemol (based in Lonehill) shooting as an international series soapy.
The script could have all the hallmarks of a fiction best-seller: Crime, greed, stupidity, ego, evil, deceit, arrogance, skullduggery, intrigue, conniving, collusion, murder, death, terrorism, horrific shoot-outs, drug-dealing, incompetence, apathy ... with 'rogue billionaires' thrown in.
But, stupidity and sarcasm aside, the past is the past, this is one resident who doesn't have time to waste on the pathetic.
The point is: What is the LRA going to do about the shopping centre issue?
Is it an issue that affects residents? Is it an LRA issue? Should the LRA be proactive on behalf of residents... or reactive, leaving affected residents to fend for themselves? Should the LRA be providing leadership in finding a solution to the problem... or just sitting back and watching the situation unfold at its own pace?
From what I read there appear to be two current possibilities discussed: The building alterations get approved retrospectively and they stay as they are (with consequent inconveniences for nearby residents remaining as status quo), cementing another fortune for the developers and encouraging others to do the same, or any illegal structures get demolished by Metro council order.
Where do they demolish it back too... back to the original 'low impact neighbourhood convenience centre'? Seems like a big lose-lose-lose mess for everyone involved. Is there a solution? I believe so.
Here's a little clue, the old saying goes, '..when life gives you lemons, make lemonade'.
Speaking as a business strategist, just as I saw the possibilities of our initiative becoming a HUGE SUCCESS (which it still has, despite the delaying hiccups of recent debacles), I can again see the opportunity for some hugely innovative solutions that can come from this latest exposé that can be a MAJOR WIN for everyone of the stakeholders involved. Yes, I mean everyone!
Having done my voluntary bit to inititiate and activily participate for well-over my promised three years in driving what is now a +R100 Million Lonehill initiative from a zero-revenue base - introducing the principle of cash-positive project management to our then cash-strapped community structure - I'll happily declare my vested interest in providing these new solutions on a transactional revenue-fee basis. No solution, no pay, no nonsense.
Those who consider themselves to be key decision-making stakeholders who can benefit from such solutions are welcome to contact me. Just don't expect any pussy-footing around. I ain't got time to waste with stupidity and petty egos... the stakes are too high for all stakeholders to play games right now. I will treat every concerned such stakeholder contacting me with the healthy disrespect I have implied above in seeking a WIN for all - no one will be regarded as more pious than the other. Stay away from me if you fear common-sense finding of a workable solution. My questions will be direct and pointed to get to a solution in shortest possible time.
Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident
Seems that Noseweek - http://www.noseweek.co.za/ - have broken a story on the Lonehill Shopping Centre developers which documents an apparently outrageous tale of 'Greed and Stupidity', and community disregard, that appears to have netted them a property asset-pile of billions.
See article link: The faces that launched a thousand shops - 'Notorious Joburg rogue developers, the freewheeling Theodosiou brothers have amassed a gigantic fortune parking flagrantly illegal shopping centres all over town'
See article link: Greed and stupidity - 'THE THEODOSIOU brothers inherited a property dynasty from their father, but by 1995 greed and stupidity had reduced them to bankruptcy.'
Lonehill Residents Association (LRA) Chairman - Rob Gillespie - is quoted as saying: 'These guys are bad news. You cannot believe anything they say, you cannot work with them. They're a law unto themselves'.
I can only raise a wry smile as I read the entire story. Those who have followed my writings on Lonehill will know that none of what I read comes as any surprise. Nevertheless, I'd still be interested to hear the developers side of the story.
Even I have to admit finding myself at times both bemused and exhibiting begrudging recognition for what they appear to have 'achieved' with such brazen chutzpah (although I can't get around the extreme disregard they seem to show for the rights of others). They clearly live by their own rules and I'll bet that they enjoy the notoriety. Only in the wild west!
If there is one thing that I have learnt it is that almost everyone in this community has a different perception of reality... and many have a very different view on what is morally-acceptable behavior.
Lest anyone should forget, even voluntary community do-gooders can fall into the trap of collective stupidity (I am reminded of the feedback of unbelievably stupidly-infantile behaviour at an infamous LRA board-meeting held around this time last year) which led to my return to producing pointed commentary such as in this link from Oct.22, 2006: Community Leadership for DUMMIES..!.
Power and control exercised behind closed doors can lead 'well-intentioned' people to make stupid decisions, just as greed can.
For me, openness, transparency, honesty and integrity have sadly proven to be the rarest of commodities on offer in this community, and experience tells me that no one should be thought to be any more morally-superior to anyone else lest one wants to be wholly-disappointed.
As bordering on the cynical as that may seem, it is perhaps the perfect base for no-nonsense negotiation between all stakeholders (assume that everyone has a vested interest and press for a declaration of such), and for ensuring the continual questioning and open recording of all contracts and commitments that affect this community.
Since launching the Lonehill security initiative in 2000 I've seen enough 'moral high ground' halos slipping from local heads in our real-life soap opera to produce a script worthy of Endemol (based in Lonehill) shooting as an international series soapy.
The script could have all the hallmarks of a fiction best-seller: Crime, greed, stupidity, ego, evil, deceit, arrogance, skullduggery, intrigue, conniving, collusion, murder, death, terrorism, horrific shoot-outs, drug-dealing, incompetence, apathy ... with 'rogue billionaires' thrown in.
But, stupidity and sarcasm aside, the past is the past, this is one resident who doesn't have time to waste on the pathetic.
The point is: What is the LRA going to do about the shopping centre issue?
Is it an issue that affects residents? Is it an LRA issue? Should the LRA be proactive on behalf of residents... or reactive, leaving affected residents to fend for themselves? Should the LRA be providing leadership in finding a solution to the problem... or just sitting back and watching the situation unfold at its own pace?
From what I read there appear to be two current possibilities discussed: The building alterations get approved retrospectively and they stay as they are (with consequent inconveniences for nearby residents remaining as status quo), cementing another fortune for the developers and encouraging others to do the same, or any illegal structures get demolished by Metro council order.
Where do they demolish it back too... back to the original 'low impact neighbourhood convenience centre'? Seems like a big lose-lose-lose mess for everyone involved. Is there a solution? I believe so.
Here's a little clue, the old saying goes, '..when life gives you lemons, make lemonade'.
Speaking as a business strategist, just as I saw the possibilities of our initiative becoming a HUGE SUCCESS (which it still has, despite the delaying hiccups of recent debacles), I can again see the opportunity for some hugely innovative solutions that can come from this latest exposé that can be a MAJOR WIN for everyone of the stakeholders involved. Yes, I mean everyone!
Having done my voluntary bit to inititiate and activily participate for well-over my promised three years in driving what is now a +R100 Million Lonehill initiative from a zero-revenue base - introducing the principle of cash-positive project management to our then cash-strapped community structure - I'll happily declare my vested interest in providing these new solutions on a transactional revenue-fee basis. No solution, no pay, no nonsense.
Those who consider themselves to be key decision-making stakeholders who can benefit from such solutions are welcome to contact me. Just don't expect any pussy-footing around. I ain't got time to waste with stupidity and petty egos... the stakes are too high for all stakeholders to play games right now. I will treat every concerned such stakeholder contacting me with the healthy disrespect I have implied above in seeking a WIN for all - no one will be regarded as more pious than the other. Stay away from me if you fear common-sense finding of a workable solution. My questions will be direct and pointed to get to a solution in shortest possible time.
Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
