Lonehill: Time Moves Us ALL On - R.I.P. Sigrid Dreyer

Condolences to Dieter, family and friends on the all-too-rapid passing of Sigrid Dreyer. Sigrid, ex-Pam Golding Properties and leading Townhouse Property Specialist in Lonehill, played a very important sponsoring-business part in the launch and continual support of the Lonehill Community Initiative. Sigrid stepped up to the plate in her first year of retirement to take a role in stimulating last year's turn-around of the Lonehill Residents Association (LRA), when the news of her terminal illness surfaced in April of this year. Rest-In-Peace Sigrid. You made a significant difference in this community... thank you.

For me, the passing of yet another aquaintance this year is a continual signal that time moves us ALL on... whether we like it or not!

So the trick is to enjoy life while you can... because it is over all too soon before you even blink.

In that regard, this forum has touched on much of what I would like to see happen in Lonehill (or to be honest, would like to have seen happening a long time ago already) before time erodes the many fleeting opportunities that present themselves.

One of the key points made early on in this forum - refer Dr. Jan Nel comment et al in A Wrong RIGHTED - That's Leadership! - is for the LRA to openly recognise and honour those who make, and have made, a substantial difference to this community by their extraordinary contribution - whilst they are alive..!!!

Too many good people and their amazing efforts are too easily forgotten. They should be lauded permanently to stimulate and encourage others still to come to follow their example whilst recognising their sweat-equity invested in this community.

From the surface, Lonehill is now looking pretty-well-managed once again, some marketing innovations are being tested at last, and the security presentation looks pretty sharp (admittedly, this all from my superficial observation outside of the management structures - meaning that I believe it should be far more open and transparent to all)... which is a welcome reverse of the concerning slovenly conditions that seriously placed the security of our families in jeopardy and stimulated myself to relaunch this forum to point out where the problems really lay a year or so back.

So it now becomes far easier for me to rest my keyboard and use this time for other projects that interest me. Management is so simple really - and the 'new' board of last year showed precisely that, once again, in getting us back to where we were some years before. This forum has clearly identified where past mistakes were made. So no need to repeat them here.

Lessons should have been well learnt about the myopic dangers of autocratic, power-and-control, behind-closed-doors, decision-making of the few versus the open, inclusive participation of everyone who cares as we did to launch and grow this initiative.

Clearly, when it comes to 'Leadership' I believe that there is HUGE potential for giant leaps in progress for this community by unleashing the personal and collective leadership participation of all the stakeholders in Lonehill. I believe firmly that there is an unlimited abundance of ideas and potential hidden within the minds of all stakeholders in over 6000 local households, organisations and enterprises just waiting to be unveiled, uncovered and exposed for the benefit of everyone in this community and beyond.

I point to three key areas of focus that all Lonehill initiative leaders should be stimulating:

1. To RAISE Standards... continually... especially those of service delivery, openness and transparency.

2. To unleash the Abundant Potential that lies within our community... open up to include everybody who wants to participate.

3. To facilitate a regular major indaba of all key stakeholders, decision-makers and interested contributors in this community.

Do the above and I can unplug my keyboard... ;-)

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

Lonehill: Uphold The Right To Comment, Critique, Disagree & Criticise

Having received the AGM minutes this week... I now wish that I was able to make it on time to stand up to question and pooh-pooh what appears in my opinion to be the pathetic desperate last shakes of the 'power-and-control'-oriented in this community. I refer in particular to the AGM item titled 'Criticism against the LRA'.

If anything is a sign of autocracy looking to cling to a foothold in this community it is what I interpret as the utter codswallop conveyed in the above-mentioned extract from the AGM minutes.

It was precisely this blog author's opinion of the autocratic power-and-control-freak oriented attitude of previous past leadership that stimulated this very forum to counteract the patent nonsense of behind-closed-doors group-think decision-making that had us falling headlong into the downward spiral of 'mis-management and disarray' as identified by 'new' LRA Chairman - Rob Gillespie at the first 100 day feedback meeting of last year - see links: NEW LRA Board - First 100 Days - Promising! & VISIBILITY & Vigilance - No.1 Priority .

Nothing is more damaging to the progess of any society, organisation, or community than the dogma of those who look to dumb-down co-stakeholders who dare to question, critique or criticise their leaders. Especially, if those asking such questions, critiquing, or criticising, have already sweated blood successfully in the very hot seats or heat of the kitchen that they choose to comment on. That, to me, is called 'valuable insight and experience'.

For me, questions, critique and criticism - and the positive welcoming and handling thereof - are the sign of a mature community and MATURE leadership.

Here are some links to articles and research that discuss this very issue in a variety of ways:

1. Democracy and the importance of criticism, dissent and public dialogue - http://www.wolpetrust.org.za/dialogue2005/DN042005gumede_paper.htm
(Extract. "South Africa must have a political culture that encourages disagreement and does not penalise those who depart from the prevailing orthodoxy. Moreover, in a culture of silence and fear, there is the very real risk that leaders will not receive the information they require to make good decisions. When members of the ANC feel free to differ from the president or the party leaders, society is likely to hear a wider range of opinions, and better decisions may result. Policy errors are most likely to occur when people are rewarded for conformity. A system of free expression and dissent protects against false confidence and the inevitable mistakes of planners in both the private and public arenas.")

2. Say what you think – The importance of giving offence - http://www.indexonline.org/en/news/articles/2006/1/international-say-what-you-think-the-importa.shtml (Extract: "..in the real world, where societies are plural, then it is both inevitable and important that people offend the sensibilities of others. Inevitable because where different beliefs are deeply held, clashes are unavoidable and we should deal with those clashes rather than suppress them. Important because any kind of social change or social progress means offending some deeply held sensibilities. ‘If liberty means anything,’ George Orwell once wrote, ‘it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.’ Not to give offence would mean not to pursue change.")

Further to the AGM item titled 'Criticism against the LRA', I make these observations:

i. Nice to see that the Board has decided to uphold freedom of speech. That's encouraging.

ii. Would like to see specifics on who the supposed 'critics' are deemed to be by those making such pointed reference... I'd like to read/hear their input... and what 'related to personal business interests' means. Does one interpret that any resident with personal business interests has no role to play in the Lonehill community? If so, I would regard that as retrograde-thinking of the worst order.

iii. I find it a huge ASSUMPTION on the part of those who suggest that such 'critics' would not be approached to work with the directors in the near-term because 'it would cause conflict at meetings and not be productive'. Says who? And who would perpetrate 'the conflict'? Those in the current board meeting seats threatened by input from others that don't conform to their views! Do we interpret that to say that 'groupthink' on the LRA board should not be questioned/interefered with? Read article 2. above.

iv. From the above-mentioned AGM item, I'd like to highlight to those that may not have read the posts in this forum, that here indeed you will find regular posts that are hugely complimentary and encouraging of the immediate past LRA board's positive turn-around of the 'mis-management and disarray' they were faced with last year. As have the compliments flowed, in past forums by this author, to all of those volunteers having made positive contributions to this community initiative since launch. As author of this blog forum, I'd love to find/read others in this community also regularly writing similar complimentary, considered, pointed, balanced and questioning views / opinion on happenings in the Lonehill community - no matter whether their opinion differs to mine.

Never fear those who look to dumb-down the input of others, I certainly don't. Everyone has the right to openly express and stand by their point of view in a community... and others have the right to openly challenge that point of view.

Oh, by the way, I took the trouble to do a self-critical review of my own comments, pointed barbs, educational links and back-slapping statements of encouragement on every post on this entire forum... and I stand 100% behind them all as being, in my opinion, 100% on the money.. ;-)

That said, it's really nice to see Lonehill looking as good as it does with some simple management processes in place.

Imagine what could be achieved with some really impressive STRATEGY in place - backed by the concerted input and support of all key stakeholders, decision-makers and interested contributors in this community. I continue my call for the LRA to stimulate a major indaba of these individuals.

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

Lonehill - GOOD Thing, Bad Thing?

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

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

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

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

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

Neighbourly Crime Control - in Lonehill

Found this article in Hi-Tech Security Solutions

by Dr Chris Crozier, chairman, Lonehill Residents' Association - 6/1/2006

The Lonehill Residents' Association (LRA) is now probably the most active and organised volunteer residents' association in the country, a state it has reached in the last six years after 20 or so years of being like most other RAs.

In the late '90s, crime in Lonehill was out of control, and it was scant consolation that other areas were in the same predicament. Armed robberies, hijackings and worse were commonplace: two or three residents were killed every year in violent crime incidents. Finally, in mid-2000, an angered resident, Trevor Nel, who had had enough, started an aggressive, in-your-face campaign to do something about it. Nel's initiative led directly to the LRA in its current form and there is no doubt that through the efforts of the LRA over the last five years as many as 10 or 12 lives have been saved.

The key to getting control of our suburb was to leverage combined purchasing power. The fact was that we were spending hundreds of thousands of rand every month for multiple, uncoordinated security companies who saw their role as reactive, not preventative, and were patently ineffective in stemming the criminal rampage. We went out to tender to get a security company on board that was willing and able to provide more than reaction services. We wanted every home, road closure and townhouse complex to be linked into a common security network, with bobby-on-the-beat foot patrols, a coordinated and dedicated squad of reaction vehicles and our own local control room.

The process was kick-started, tragically, by a particularly horrific hijacking gone wrong that left a resident with seven AK-47 bullets in him (he miraculously survived, though at enormous physical, emotional and financial cost) and 70 more in his vehicle. Unfortunately it often takes a terrible incident to get people moving in the right direction, but we had a meeting where a couple of hundred people turned up and a volunteer core was formed. That core started the tendering process and defined a vision for where we wanted to go.

The next significant step was to raise funds so that the LRA could operate. We called for contributions to a capital fund of R1500 per household, and soon had a kitty of close to R500 000. The interest from the money (the capital was held in trust pending final approval of how best to use it), funded the operations for the initial months.

The third key step was to take control of our administration and directly contract with the residents, using our security provider as an outsource operation to whom we pay one cheque at the end of each month. To do this, we agreed on a deduction from the gross security payment to cover our admin costs (which we were taking away from the security provider) and appointed a company to manage it for us. This had two important consequences: it took administration away from volunteers who had limited time and resources and gave us full control of the money. The first addresses the problem of volunteer fatigue as enthusiasm dwindles; the second recognises that money is power - you may not like it, but it is an ineluctable truth.

Today, the LRA is a R15m per annum business, directly employing six people, and through contracts with service providers employs nearly 300 people providing security, administration, technical support and, most recently, marketing services. The core of our success is simply coordination and the power to say what we want from the security company instead of accepting what they want to offer.

Coordination makes a tremendous difference. If you have six independent vehicles in a 15 km area, you can push your panic button and 'your' response vehicle is 4 km away (or in another area entirely), while a rival company's vehicle is around the corner and unaware of what is going on. We currently have four vehicles, two motorbikes, 12 foot patrols and over 60 complex and road closure guards all on a common radio network. Plus there are undercover agents feeding information in. We know we have prevented at least two robberies in the shopping centre.

We made mistakes along the way, one of which was a phase of being a touch over-proud of ourselves, and not working very well with the SAPS, but we have been cooperating much better with them over the last year and appreciate the support we get from them.

The results are clear. There is still crime in Lonehill, but we have contained it to well below the levels experienced in surrounding areas. In the last six years we have had one murder: not good, but prior to the LRA security initiative we would have expected at least a dozen in that time. We are achieving a steady long-term decrease in crime, although the beginning of 2006 has threatened our record, but armed robbery in particular has shown a surge throughout the area and we are getting some of the spillover.

We have not deployed technology in the form of cameras and monitoring systems, yet. Cost is a factor, but it is chiefly the cost of human monitoring to make them effective rather than the equipment cost; but we believe that as sector wages rise and equipment costs fall, we will soon be re-evaluating surveillance technologies. Fewer, higher-level people working shorter shifts are becoming relatively more affordable as wage structures change, and the advent of IP video surveillance offers many possibilities such as letting volunteer residents get directly involved in monitoring, doing virtual patrols without having to leave their homes; or to transmit video feeds directly to reaction vehicles as they respond; and to track suspicious persons and vehicles without having reaction vehicles rushing around searching for them.

For more information contact Dr Chris Crozier, 011 783 1508, chris@cirrus.co.za

Lonehill: Give Credit Where Credit Is Due

Perceptions are important... and here's what I perceive right now while driving around Lonehill.

It seems to be pretty clean and in good condition once again, and the proactive guards and vehicles seem to be far more visible and attentive again. Just the way we like to see it as a minimum basic standard of service delivery.

Clearly, LRA Chairman Rob Gillespie and his team have stimulated a marked improvement in the management of security service levels, communication and visibility of our inititiative. Let's give credit where credit is due.

It is always important to encourage those who make a difference.

Giving credit where credit is due... the more I think about this... the more I believe that this is what makes for quality leadership.

I'd certainly like to see a lot more prominence given to those who have clearly stood up at significant moments in Lonehill's past, and to those currently and in future who do and will stand up, to make positive difference-making things happen in a MASSIVE meaningful way in this community.

Often these people are unheralded, go unrecognised, are in danger of being forgotten, and their input is often ignored for puerile personal/political like/dislike reasons (i.e. grow up, people), or just not sought after. I talk of people like Lindy Boulanger (Lonehill's most caring connector); Joy Cook (vociferous Complex representative), Geoff Caplin and Bill Parr (both made the Observer program tick like a well-oiled clock), to name just a few. There are many others that I can mention.

This forum has been very much about the strategic RAISING of our community standards by getting the 'right people on the bus' and removing those who have clearly not made any significant measurable difference off the unique foundation of a cash-positive community initiative that we contributors have provided them with.

The continual raising of standards is the essence of LEADERSHIP that everyone should look for in any project that they champion... and which is almost universally lacking in most projects driven to failure.

This interesting presentation - The Importance of Being a Leader - www.fngla.org/leadership/doc/ImportanceofBeingaLeader.ppt - has some interesting pointers (from slide13 - titled Give Credit Where Credit Is Due) that can be applied to greater effect in our Lonehill community initiative:

Pointer 1. Create a climate where people are involved and important.

Pointer 2. Always give credit for the contributions of others…no matter what the size of the contribution.

Pointer 3. We become more powerful when we give our power away.

Quote: 'You can accomplish anything in life, provided that you do not mind who gets the credit.' - Harry S. Truman

Some further interesting quotes and pointers from the presentation that stimulate thought related to our initiative are:

Quote: 'The success of a grassroots group is attributable, in part, to the coordination and motivation of group members. The extent to which a grassroots organization encourages members to identify with the group may be important for sustained success.' (Bettencourt, p. 170.)

This quote highlights one of my key concerns for our current LRA executive who appear to operate almost directly contrary to the above sentiment. Methinks they appear a little too fearful of, or overly-sensitive to, the criticisms of others and/or lacking in confidence to bring a major day-long INDABA together of all key interested stakeholders in this community (yes, decision-makers in Summercon, the Shopping Centre, Complex Chairpeople, Church Leaders, Business People, anyone with a passionate interest in our community) - whether they agree or disagree with individual Board members views.

If the challenge is a fear for facilitating such meeting, I will happily do it (as much-loved as I am by many of the above ;-) or I will find the second-best of facilitators from outside this community to do it.

The danger in not doing the above is that the 'few' will again misread the sentiments of the community or thumbsuck their own assumptions once again which will lead to a repeat of last year's disastrous first AGM happening again in the future.

To repeat Point 1. above again: Create a climate where people are involved and important.

Quote: 'Ninety-nine percent of all failures come from people who have a habit of making excuses' George Washington Carver

Anyone attending the latest quarterly feedback session would have been galled at the silly excuse of people being too short to do a decent job on the community noticeboards. I long ago gave up buying the silly excuses emanating consistently from the same source. I find it difficult to accept that short people lacking in any ideas are still around to regale us with consistent excuses and apologies. It does nothing for the current executive who appear to stand by such mediocrity. Someone please show me what they do to make a positive difference in this community that can't be done a thousand times better by those more motivated. Get the right people on the bus... or show me some measurable indication of their positive contribution to growing this initiative.

By the way, did anyone notice at the last quarterly feedback meeting presentation that our unilaterally changed logo (obviously changed sometime during our farcical marketing debacle era) seems to reflect the singular resident - "Lonehill Resident's Association" (note the apostrophe) as opposed to what we used to be - "Lonehill Residents Association" - reflecting all residents. Someone please correct me. Am I again showing my grammatical ignorance, to which I will always profess.. ;-)

If I'm correct this error will forever symbolise for me the classic mistakes of mediocrity made by autocratic, unitlateral decision-makers who believe that they alone represent a community's interests. I wonder who signed off on it?

Quote: 'Success on any major scale requires you to accept responsibility….In the final analysis, the one quality that all successful people have is the ability to take on responsibility.' Michael Korda - Editor-in-Chief, Simon & Schuster

What are the measurables (KPI's/CSF's - Key Performance Indicators/Critical Success Factors) that LRA service providers and LRA board members are asked to deliver on? What numbers can we use to assess how well people are delivering on their responsibilities? These have not been clarified in the current executives term which can indicate a specific weakness or fear for accountability. As community stakeholders we're entitled to hold our service provideres and excutives to account... and they should relish the challenge.

Pointer: 'You Cannot be a Leader if Your “View” Does Not Change… A leader encounters the world outside the boundaries of an organization, the more you know about the world, the easier it is to approach it with assurance. Take every opportunity to expand your “view”.'

To be honest, I think that current LRA board members seem to have done a great job of re-instilling basic MANAGEMENT criteria over people that should be able to manage themselves. I don't believe that this is 'leadership'. I believe that leadership needs to recognise that strategy and direction needs to be applied to stimulating a massive leap in the growth of our community initiative project. Get rid of those who cannot manage themselves.

Pointer: 'True leaders foster risk taking, encouraging others to step out into the unknown, rather than play it safe' (Kouzes & Posner, 2002.)

Personally, I have found this to be the one major stumbling blocks for the vast majority of those who have found their way onto the LRA board during my time of involment since initiating this Lonehill community project. What they miss is that it took some huge risks by us founder/initiatitors of this initiative to put our reputations on the line to deliver an initiative of this scale. To take it to the next level takes much less of a reputational risk than it does to sit back and preside over its mediocre collapse into a heap of mismanagement and disarray.

So in giving credit where credit is due to those who have brought us back to a basic minimum standard that we had once achieved a few years ago... my ongoing encouragement is for the LRA Board to be different to their immediate predecessors and open up to include those who want to make a massive difference in this community... everyone can be catered for (regardless of their vested interest) with the correct strategic thinking. Just do it..!

For extra reading:
Communities: Coming Together Through Effective Leadership
http://www.achievementgaps.org/nea/CommunitiesComingTogether.pdf

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

Lonehill - At The Edge Of The CHASM, Once Again!

I made two points in last week's post related to the LRA feedback meeting:

1. 'Am I thankful for these efforts? YES.'

2. 'Am I impressed with what I saw and experienced last night? NO!'

I wrote: 'To be fair, I am clearly of a very different mind-set to what makes for the type of leadership, quality of project, and commitment to excellence that I'd like to see in Lonehill.'

By way of explanation and positive input, in my opinion, a community feedback session should see the first 30 minutes showing how our money is being spent (identifying the primary recipients of our revenue flow and their vested interests), the results that have been achieved (critical numbers: e.g contributors, incidents, et al), and follow-up of decisions made from the last meeting (e.g. what happened to the past key-contributor recognition program, and the Junior Council follow-up with Crawford College?).

Short, sweet, to-the-point, open, transparent, effective.

Thereafter, the community should be encouraged to discuss issues that they consider important for leadership to take note of.

This neat graphic from - Crossing the Chasm Book Review - had me thinking that perhaps we are again approaching the edge of the chasm which seperates the unique and visionary community ideal we saw for ourselves back in 2000... as opposed to the typical apathetic residents association malaise that exists in most mediocre community-type associations.

As I play over in my mind the magnificent work put into establishing this Lonehill initiative back in 2000 (and as to why it set itself so clearly apart from any previous resident/community association projects going before it), I am convinced that it grew in an open, transparent, mass-collaborative mode to the lip of the chasm (at the time of the marketing tender debacle) where, in my opinion, an autocratic managerial-style adopted by the then LRA leaders made some silly behind-closed-doors ego-centric decisions that saw the entire project falling headlong into the chasm.

The depth of this fall was identified at the AGM debacle of last year and it has taken time for the 'new' LRA board of directors to re-climb all the way back up to the lip of the chasm once again.

Sadly, at last week's 'feedback' session, I detected many of the very same autocratic-style ego-centric warning signs surfacing that may again have our Lonehill Community Initiative slipping back into the chasm once again. My biggest concern was for the almost unilateral style of decision-making by the few on behalf of the community... without first asking the community for its input. As discovered last year, such unilateral decisions can lead to serious embarrassment for the instigators and can result in a considerable waste of time and money should the community want to undo and/or unravel them.

Now, please note, that this is not an attack on any one or more individual/s, it is one person's opinion of what he believes should be happening at leadership level to 'cross the chasm' to the type of community initiative that we are all looking for. In this opinion there is plenty of room for stakeholders with differing opinions and/or vested interests to be settled by means of mature debate, open & participative decision-making, and mutually-beneficial community solutions.

I will try to make it as simple as ..1 ..2 ..3:

1. Allow DISCIPLINED People To Flourish - these are passionate people who will align our community goals with their own goals and who can deliver. It means having people in management that do not need to be highly-managed. It means removing those in management who cannot or will not deliver. It means instituting SMART objectives and deliverables with accountabilities and responsibilities clearly designated. It means actively encouraging those with voluntary and/or vested interest desires to establish and drive mutually-beneficial community projects. It means allowing a process for all stakeholders to participate in developing and/or selecting the projects they want to see as priorities.

2. Create a culture of DISCIPLINED Thought. 'Create A Culture Where The Truth Can Be Heard'... where openness, transparency and fact are sacrosanct... and where opinion is widely sought and encouraged.

3. Allow the above people and culture to stimulate DISCIPLINED Action. Eradicate all bureaucratic hurdles - what Tom Peters' identifies in these two quotes from his slides as 'The Management Paradox':

"Ninety percent of what we call 'management' consists of making it difficult for people to get things done" - Peter Drucker

"There's a war on between the people who are trying to do something and the people who are trying to keep them from doing something wrong" - Bill Creech

Here's my concern, I don't believe that current leadership have yet bought into the above 3 simple factors.

Disciplined People, Disciplined Thought, Disciplined Action... three simple factors identified by one Jim Collins that can take the Lonehill Community Initiative from mediocre, to good... to GREAT. But it takes exceptional leadership to unlock and encourage these three simple factors. As another slide from Tom Peter's 2007 collection says: 'Leaders "SERVE’ people. Period.” - Anon

So whilst I am extremely thankful for the return to the basic levels of management over expected service-provider deliverables, I expect much more of our leadership who have a moral duty to override their own emotions, assumptions and pre-conceived notions to act in the very best interest of our entire community. This cannot be achieved without stimulating the widest, committed, participatory input of the most passionate and critical community stakeholders who WANT to provide input - and understanding that some may well be of VERY different mind-set and opinion to those currently on the LRA.

Leadership is simple... and, as mentioned in previous posts, our Priority No. 1 Strategy should be simple:

SECURITY ==> VISIBILITY & VIGILANCE ==> FUNDING

Security is a function of the quality of proactive Visibility & Vigilance of our security force on the ground which in turn is a function of the inflow of funds from local stakeholders and elsewhere.

Leadership's role should be to say: how can we stimulate and encourage people to develop concepts and ideas to underpin our strategy?

Let's face it, one of the BIGGEST successes in this community began with the step taken to initiate and drive the Lonehill Security Action Group in 2000 - which, through a process of openly-encouraged participation, attracted many contributors within the community to build the platform that we have today, having generated over R100 million in revenue flow through the LRA.

As one who has been there, done that and got all the T-shirts in the above community process as a volunteer for four-and-half years it is my firm opinion from my experience at the front-line that the process slips into the chasm when community-input is not sought, avoided and/or ignored, and when autocratic egos take unilateral decisions behind closed doors believing that 'they' know what's best for the community.

I'm a believer that the community is a lot smarter than such people give credit for. To repeat: "Leaders ‘SERVE’ people. Period.”

Regards

Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790

Lonehill Resident

Systematic RAPE Of Lonehill?

Tony Platt writes:

It is with growing concern that I witness the systematic rape, bySummercon, of our Lonehill environment , it's infrastructure and all they are bringing to our neighbourhood. For the residents of Lonehill, we have them to thank for increased traffic volumes, less than desirable tenants in some of their disgusting developments, and 'a couldn't care less attitude' to some of the other problems resulting from their building of monstrosities on previously open land.

Three residents, of long standing in Lonehill, and to the east of theirTinza, Lonehill Estate and No.17 on Forest developments have recently spent over R60000-00 to drain away excess water seepage, which we have had confirmed as a direct result of these developments, notwithstanding all the boardroom induced propaganda we have heard about 'attenuation'tanks etc.

The indigenous trees they are planting to help beautify Lonehill do nothing to replace the 15 trees we have lost in our gardens due to flooding. Summercon appear to have unlimited access to the powers that be in theCouncil, and my biggest fear is that will manage the clout necessary to cause the Council to redefine some of our open areas and start further development theron.

Their contribution to Lonehill is Nil, as they do their own garden maintainence, employ their own security and all the buyers of their units live off the fat of the land at our expence. It's time for the LRA to become very envolved, together with our Councillor to ensure that the beauty that was once Lonehill is not further ruined by Summercon. They have conned us sufficiently.

From: "Platt" <shaunant@telkomsa.net>

Lonehill Shopping Centre & NOISE Issues

Writes Joei:

I would like to ask you if any of your stakeholders

1. are affected by the noise, drunken patrons, speeding cars etc, if so can they please provide an affidavit (I am available to assist).

2. would be interested in receiving progress updates regarding the noise. If so can they send their email addresses to me and I will update the database accordingly.

Thanking you
Joei Woodman - joei.orourke@businesslogicsystems.com
0829285966

Lonehill: When SMOKE Gets In Your Eyes

Aaaaah shame... I couldn't stay to the end of the Lonehill feedback meeting as I couldn't breathe given the smoke engulfing the room, so I don't know how it ended.

Travelling home I wondered if the tears in my eyes were as a result of the smoke, or for being thankful that some basic management structure had at least been returned to restore our initiative, or for the opportunity once-again lost to show the required sensitivity for community strategic leadership that inspires us on to bigger things.

First, what was good.

+-150 to 200 people in the room to show that communication makes a difference. It's a start.

The announced return of Col. Mickey Ferreira to reinvigorate visibility and disciplines into our security personnel.

An attempt to make something happen to bolster the Environment Fund. The proof of this pudding will be in the eating.

'Come Home To Quality' as a byline has a neat ring to it.

Am I thankful for these efforts? YES.

My compliments again to LRA Chairman Rob Gillespie and his team for getting us back to where we were some 3 years ago.

Am I impressed with what I saw and experienced last night? NO!

To be fair, I am clearly of a very different mind-set to what makes for the type of leadership, quality of project, and passionate commitment to excellence that I'd like to see in Lonehill.

My biggest disappointment is that I last night witnessed a primarily prescriptive leadership attitude based on the apparent ASSUMPTIONS of a few (the very same attitude that led to last year's first AGM debacle) with very little sensitivity for open participative or consultative processess to include the input of interested, committed, passionate community stakeholders.

I believe that this community has so much collective intellectual property at its disposal that is so much bigger than any overly authoritarian ego needs of the few to prove themselves. This, sadly, was highlighted in the handling of the Shopping Centre issue. What we heard was one person's opinion and assumptions attempting to over-ride the mandate sought by passionately involved stakeholders. For me, it spoilt the promising potential of the evening.

Leadership should have no fear of allowing two antagonistic positions of clear community importance to be openly declared, debated and decided upon by consensus. It IS a community problem, and the community SHOULD have a very real say.

Perhaps it's just the arrogant nature of us as South Africans that has us each believing that we know what's good for others.

Despite this, it's not my aim to overly criticise those that are cleary trying and who need to be encouraged to continue their progress (see the complimentary comments letter below), and what I am going to do is recommend that the board follow-up on an advert running on 702 right now to attend a program by Dr. John Maxwell: 'Leadership Is Influence: Nothing More, Nothing Less'.

Maxwell clearly understands the critical difference between voluntary association leaders (being close friends with one of the best - Bill Hybels) and commercial enterprise leaders. He will probably quote Harry A. Overstreet who observed, "The very essence of all power to influence lies in getting the other person to participate."

I believe this will be money well spent by this community to have our core leaders (those intending to remain on the Board for next year) attend this program.

This in from Laurette Jones (copied to myself), from a family I value highly in this community for courageously standing up to help stimulate last year's change of our disturbing decline, and who leaves the type of encouragement that the current Board will obviously like to hear:

Dear Rob,

Just wanted to congratulate you with an excellent feedback meeting.I am feeling advantaged having you as Chairman. Thank you for everything you have done so far and for everything you are still going to do. Please also know that my time and expertise is at your disposal should you require my help with whatever.

Our household will definitely support the ‘Environment Fund Campaign’ = R60 p.m. as we have done for the last 5 years and we also definitely support the Lonehill Shopping Centre ‘Stop The Noise Campaign’ = R60 p.m.

Thank you for committing the LRA to both campaigns equally in effort and energy. I look forward to read the reports on both campaigns.

Best regards, Laurette Jones

I can't end this post with better encouragement than that!

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

Residential Or Commercial FREEHOLD Rights?

Anthony Wilson writes:

Trevor, I note that there is a degree of erosion of the community of Lonehill being allowed by local authorities as they permit, or ignore, the purchase of houses in the residential area to be used for entirely commercial purposes, like the latest I have noticed, the Babor Institute’s “building,” which was formerly a private residence in Concourse. This practice differs from the less blatant practice which probably started the rot, which was to allow people, initially, to run businesses from home, which then outgrew the homes from which they were run, and now many of those owners have purchased separate new homes, albeit, in some examples, right next door!

“Quo vadis?”

Apologies for diving headfirst into a new subject without taking the time to recognize the positive manner in which you have expressed, once again, the challenges facing us, and simultaneously & adroitly encouraged participation by the community. I did appreciate your headline, especially the pun! Bravo!

Regards
Anthony.

ANTHONY WILSON
+27 83.592.61.33

Promising SIGNS, Poor Execution

Let me begin by again continuing to encourage the LRA executive (or whoever rightly deserves the kudos) for the promising signs of improvement in the management of our initiative. And perhaps most important, to share a thought and vote of thanks for our proactive guards who are out in the middle of the night in this freezing cold.

The general overall neat look of the estate, the masses of yellow posters to attract feedback from the community, the new LARGE signboards, email newsletters in print slipped under our doors, and new bibs on our proactive guards all confirm that leadership is taking notice of the need to improve communication and visibility and are attempting to do something about it.

I like people who at least TRY to make things happen!

What a marked change from last year. 'Nuff said. It may well be that we are close to getting back to where we were some three years ago with massive potential ahead of us as a community.

However, as positive as I am feeling about the revival efforts of new leadership, I still see highly annoying evidence of poor execution undermining the promising signs being displayed.

The worst being the hard-to-read, woefully-poorly laid-out, BOLD copy on the noticeboards (please learn some basic copy and lay-out skills or use a professional to do this), the rubbish literally lying under the noses of proactive guards, and illegal posters on poles (two highly visible white ones on one pole in Franschoek have been there for over 10 days) confirm for me that our support staff and managers don't manage by walking around with their eyes open and still don't really care for our community as we do.

Let's put it like this, I am a huge fan of the IDOLS concept (particularly American IDOLS) as a world-leading business phenomeon, which is quite simply a strategic decision to take something common - a talent show - and convert it into something totally uncommon and unique - the greatest source of undiscovered musical talent in the world, having vitually re-established multi-million album sales in a fast-ailing industry.

So what's different in taking a common apathetic residents association concept and turning it into the most uncommon and unique community initiative in the world? It's all about strategy and vision. And, about the quality of people around in staff/service provider functions... can you imagine Simon Cowell accepting the display on our noticeboards right now? No way!

We were well positioned to take the uncommon and unique road three years ago... and BLEW it!

It takes a long time to recover, especially to recover the trust that is abused by such lack of caring and forethought. Don't blow it again.

Received this in from a Lonehill resident who concurs with my last post and whose comment I include because I think he touches on something that I have seen slipping into the current leadership ethos that will undermine its effectiveness in the future.

Anthony Wilson writes: 'Hear. Hear. I note with interest your accurate description of the two-fold manner in which unprincipled leadership manifests itself. ''I would venture that another feature of this kind of dubious leadership is the delegation of responsibility to the community it purports to serve, so that culpability appears to move to those to whom it has been delegated. This leaves “leadership” with no work and no responsibility – a typical political “soft-shoe shuffle!” Regards Anthony.

Yes, Anthony, I have a huge problem with a supposed service-support function that doesn't bend over backwards to make it easy to be a resident in Lonehill. Example: being made to feel like a heel for reporting to the LRA about sewerage spill into the dam that may just choke it up with unwanted organisms and being harangued with ongoing messages to first report such instances to the authorities. Or leaving individual residents to stand up alone against unacceptable noise emanating from developments seemingly in contravention of local regulations. Load of bull..!

For goodness sake, in the 'Community IDOLS' challenge that I envisage, I would reward every such concerned caller to the LRA with a medal for being so community-conscious. 'How can I help you' from our LRA offices should really mean 'How can I HELP you'!

Anthony's perceptive comment identifies what I believe is a very dangerous precendent currently being set that will undermine any reason to call the LRA offices. Why call if they don't care?

And, as if to underline the point, in the last week someone was obviously told to put up new LRA/Fidelity signs in our street. Mine was plonked on patently skew in a slap-dash manner as if to say - 'we truly don't care for you or your home'. If I didn't know how important the LRA initiative was to our collective community security I would change my service provider immediately for this overtly disgraceful show of poor commitment to the basics of service excellence. I'm leaving it up for everyone to see... or for our local manager to arrive and show that he cares... ;-)

George Joubert shares this insight: 'Hi Trevor, I had an interesting comment made by a senior executive (a non-Lonehiller) to a friend of mine - “Hell! I would not buy a property in Lonehill when the Residents’ Association ‘advertises’ all the problems in the area. Rising crime! Polluted dam, etc., etc!” - It just goes to show how careful one has to be! Perception is Truth they say!' Regards, George

What I believe that George is pointing to is that marketing is the essence of getting out the right message at the right time. Perhaps it's time to convey: 'How The LRA Works To Protect Your Family & Grow Your Property Investment in Lonehill'.

Simple to say but always challenging to get across on a noticeboard, so here are some ideas:

Lonehill Residents Meeting
LRA Rules..OK!
Protect Your Family
Your Property
(date)
(venue)

Lonehill Residents Meeting
How LRA Protects
Your Family
Your Property
(date)
(venue)

Lonehill Residents Meeting
YOU Are The LRA
Protect Your Family
Your Property
(date)
(venue)

I can only re-iterate that the moment any leadership stands up with integrity behind a great vision and strategy and stimulates an ethos of service excellence in delivery to their publics, is the moment that their publics will believe the message.

Don't let the promising signs by leadership be undermined by poor execution on the ground.

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

Hear! Hear!

Anthony Wilson writes:

I note with interest your accurate description of the two-fold manner in which unprincipled leadership manifests itself.

I would venture that another feature of this kind of dubious leadership is the delegation of responsibility to the community it purports to serve, so that culpability appears to move to those to whom it has been delegated. This leaves “leadership” with no work and no responsibility – a typical political “soft-shoe shuffle!”

Regards

Anthony.
ANTHONY WILSON
+27 83.592.61.33

Tribunal To REZONE Lonehill Shopping Centre?

As I am about to pen this post, I have just received a call from one of my INNER Circle Business Forum members to say that one of our member's elderly parents had been attacked in their home in Benoni last night. His mother was killed and his father is in surgery right now.

This sobering message is a chilling reminder why we all need to be constantly concerned about our Lonehill Community Initiative and to stimulate for the highest quality concern and commitment of its leadership.

Talking about community issues, a seriously harassed and frazzled resident tells me that there is an an upcoming rezoning tribunal concerning the Lonehill Shopping Centre scheduled for the 24th May. Given this resident's annoyance for noise levels apparently emanating from this centre, it was no surprise to hear the uncomplimentary perception of the LRA's apparent lack of interest on the matter. I know nothing about such tribunal, so I can't help much. Can anyone else?

The Lonehill Shopping Centre owners appeared in a recent news item: Sunday Times Metro - 29 April 2007 - The Battle of Lonehill Mall - 'A Joburg High Court judge has threatened to throw two wealthy property developers in jail if they continue to build on the Lonehill Shopping Mall without council permission'.

I suppose the question can be asked as to why the LRA does not make a clear announcement that such a serious tribunal is taking place over such a prominent Lonehill landmark and issue... and provide information for all parties, whether for or against, to lodge their views and opinions.

Hmmm... all of which introduces perfectly the topic I was going to lead with this week... that of the need for Principled Leadership in our Lonehill community.

Let's face it, leadership has been sorely tested and found desperately wanting in not only Lonehill's recent past, but also in the World Bank - see World Bank board majority want Wolfowitz to resign - and now once again in our own hallowed South African rugby halls of leadership shame - see Rugby bosses drop ball with impunity and further highlighted in this shocking interview - see Transcript of 702 Talk Radio presenter John Robbie's interview with Saru president Oregan Hoskins over the Luke Watson saga.

So where do leaders constantly get it wrong in today's society? Simply, in my opinion, they believe that their personal values can be imposed by their authoritarian decree on their community (note that deliberately ignoring problems is the other side of the same authoritarian leadership coin). When in actual fact, their community has a natural understanding of what rock-steady priniciples cannot and should not be violated. Non-principled leadership therefore undermines the very support and respect it desires from its followers.

What the Lonehill community needs desperately is to identify a set of PRINCIPLES by which the LRA leadership should be guided. This has not yet been done to date (hence my continued call for an indaba of all sector leaders and interested parties in Lonehill)... and therefore the community cannot expect to be led by anything other than the arbitrary whims and personal values of transient leaders. This oversight or lack of foresight will continue to hamper any 'leaders' efforts in Lonehill.

Principled leadership would see our community leaders (amongst all stakeholders, no matter who they are) maturely rising up above their personal values and openly-declared personal vested interests (which almost everyone must have in the community) to apply rock-steady principled decisions to solve issues such as raised in this post.

So what would Principled LRA Leadership do on the above Lonehill Shopping Centre issue... it would recognise that opposing stakeholders in the community have opposing values which are subject to an upcoming Tribunal Review. It would recognise that it needs to apply all its resources to giving maximum publicity to both stakeholders to represent their views and allow due process to take its course.

So the minimum that should be done is to make the community aware of the date of the tribunal and how the different interests can represent their opinions.

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

simplify, Simplify, SIMPLIFY ..1 ..2 ..3

Trevor writes:

From this post - MAD 7. It Only Takes 'HALF-A-DOZEN' Things! (extract below) - I am reminded that it is all to easy to fall into the trap of adding unnecessary complexity to ideas, projects, strategies, et al, that should be as simple as ...1 ..2 ..3

Too many people look to make the simple things in life too complex to understand.

Yes, most often it takes only a few things... 1, 2, or 3 things... just a 'half-a-dozen' things to ensure success in most projects.

I am resolving to simplify every idea, project, strategy I have into a 'simple as ..1 ..2 ..3' graphic presentation.

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 - 705-2790 - www.innercircleforum.com
trevor@innercircleforum.com

LRA Chairman Responds

Pertinent extracts from LRA Chairman Rob Gillespie's response to latest post:

• We are putting Fidelity under some huge pressure to show and prove their might and market position.

  There is a current program and drive in place to recruit at least 5 decent sales people just for Lonehill.

  New products are being made available at very decent pricing – to address the much changed Lonehill segment from 6 years ago.

  The crime stats are as low as they can be at present given the resource that we have at hand.

  The co-operation tactics with SAPS and Metro are streets ahead of anyone anywhere in SA, but we want it better still. That is a Fidelity plus.

  The new door to door campaign and the fund raising campaign along with the benefits module and the increased visibility will go a long way to re-energising and growth.

  The problem that we had was a lot larger than any of us thought, and the rectification process was/is a lot more difficult than you can imagine. But, we are getting there, albeit slowly.

RG

The DANGER Of Divide & Rule Security Co. Tactics

First, hot off the press news link: See latest news item Sunday Times Metro - 29 April 2007 - The Battle of Lonehill Mall - 'A Joburg High Court judge has threatened to throw two wealthy property developers in jail if they continue to build on the Lonehill Shopping Mall without council permission'.

Now to this post:

Following highly visible promotions by security companies looking to break into the Lonehill area, George Joubert writes (extract):

Hi Trevor, Are we not back in a "siege" situation like LSAG were seven year's ago i.e. between the security companies and the robbers -- a rock and a hard place? I wondered what your comments are as the founder of the greatest security initiative this country has ever known?'

My comment:

To be fair, after just returning from my Sunday Morning jog/walk around Lonehill, my impression is that Lonehill is looking relatively neat (and I read that the dam is to be attended to - albeit an overly-delayed response to finding a solution). So I am pretty thankful for those responsible for the 'chalk & cheese' changes that have gone into stabilising our initiative from the 'disarray & mismanagement' debacles of last year. That said:

The danger of not having the LRA as the dominant decision-making body in the delivery of security and other initiatives in Lonehill will probably revert us back to the underlying conditions for urban TERRORISM (I remember the headlines well) that we we faced when six security providers were fighting over the divide-and-rule scraps of our disparate funds - costing us lives in the process, and a fortune in over-payment for piddle-poor service delivery.

If we have learnt anything over the period of this LRA initiative, it should be that MASS-CONSUMERISM (working together) can extract far more value for our collective rand than any individual spend can.

It may be that the 'competition' feels that the LRA Security Initiative is weak and devoid of strategy and therefore ready for the taking. This competition clearly employs traditional VISIBLE promotion techniques, and they seem to understand that VISUAL presence in the security game leads to market dominance in a dog-fight for territory.

Some questions to ask are:

1. Is the LRA/Fidelity service provider out COMPETING and 'baring their fangs' on the street corners to show that they really want our community's business?

2. Does the LRA/Fidelity demonstrate a willingness to display either the bark or the bite to SERIOUSLY capture the imagination of its publics?

I am afraid that I find it difficult to comment much further on current LRA strategy as there is little clear indication that one exists. This apart from my being at pains to COMPLIMENT the LRA's housekeeping stabilisation efforts which I feel have been commendable - given what had to be cleaned up.

Clearly, the Lonehill Community Initiative is dependent on the corporate governance - strategy, implementation, action/delivery, accountability & responsibility - of the people entrusted to manage those resources.

'Disarray & mismanagement' can cause almost irreparable long-lasting damage to the very foundations of such an initiative.

That's the challenge for the current LRA - to recapture the trust of its publics and to demonstrate that there is a credible strategy going forward (I believe it needs a BIG WOW statement to eradicate any negative feelings towards the LRA's impact in this community). The longer this doesn't happen, the more difficult it will be to launch any new community concept in the future.

I must say that I believe that the conditions and situation existing at the time that we launched this initiative back in 2000 are VERY DIFFERENT to the conditions and situation that present themselves today. This means that very different inputs will need to impact very different decisions needed to be taken for the future strategy roll-out of this initiative. Maybe the "siege" that G.J. warns of (and he is right to warn of it) can be avoided with some astute decisions taking into account today's situation in Lonehill.

This will take COLLECTIVE savvy, which clearly exists in this community. The danger, as has already been seen in our recent past, is when the 'few' take 'groupthink' decisions behind closed doors on the pretense of being 'open' and 'in the best interests of the community'. What bull..! It is ego and arrogance at its worst and leads to a collapse of confidence in leadership every time.

Certainly, I have proposed on this forum that the LRA call for all interested stakeholders to attend a strategy indaba meeting to ensure that the widest inputs are gained openly. I cannot see how it can be done with credibility in any other manner than an OPEN consultative process.

I repeat my comment made in the post dated Tuesday, March 27, 2007 - Re-Building Lonehill Community In The Streets :

I'm looking for inspiring LRA leadership that includes an open understanding of questions like:

1. What is the LRA's proposed long-term strategy, objectives and time-related targets?

2. What do the individual LRA directors hold themselves accountable to (i.e. measurable performance targets)?

3. What are the personal feelings of the individual LRA directors towards this community's challenges?

4. Where is The BHAG - the BIG Hairy Audacious Goal for our community?

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident

So Let's Get REAL, Dog! It's Just 'ight For Me

This discussion post is designed to focus on whether the Lonehill Community Initiative's future is to be delivered upon an underlying platter of mediocrity... or whether it will strive to move along the 'good to great' model researched by one of the world's leading business management gurus.

Many thanks to Lindy Boulanger for the delivery of the latest LRA hard-copy newsletter slipped under my door.

It arrived as I was watching a repeat of the latest American Idols. I just love the brutal honesty of the two male judges - Randy Jackson and Simon Cowell. One wonders what they would say about our community initiative (see below).

But first, if you are a local Business Owner, Director & Decision-Maker here's an invitation:

Invitation: My INNER Circle Business Forum is hosting the launch of INNER Circle at The PALAZZO Montecasino this coming Tuesday 17th April. I have set aside 10 seats (first-in, first-served - it's limited seating unfortunately) for local Business Owners, Directors & Decision-Makers on this database who would like to attend. RSVP on the link below or reply to me on this email:

· Tue. 17Apr - INNER Circle LAN 100 PALAZZO - Trevor Nel - (booking essential)

Now to get real and to be brutally honest, the latest hard-copy Lonehill newsletter, whilst at first glance looking attractive, was mostly uninspiring in content and lacking in much meaningful information of serious community value.

There was not a contact number or name in sight for anyone to follow up with the LRA or its service providers - apart from a web address. And no indication of where the crime incidents occurred to give us any idea of regularity of trouble spots to be avoided. It was more an advertising medium for the Lonehill Shopping Centre.

I am reminded of the constructive critique given by the three Idol's judges who constantly remind that the context of their critical analysis is made of the final 12 who have made it through to the final stage over 400,000 other hopeful applicants. The point being that the panel's critique cannot take away from the competitors achievements to date. It is how the competitors respond to the critique that is interesting to note. And so it is with my comments on this forum.

I can almost hear Randy Jackson saying: 'So let's get real, dog. This is not good. It's just 'ight' (alright) for me. Not great.'

And Simon Cowell saying: 'This might do for a little karaoke evening but it's not going to help you win Idols'.

So let's get real. As pleased as I am about the apparent stabilisation of the Lonehill Community Initiative that many of us worked so hard to establish, the discussion has to move on to one of how this initiative is to be positioned now and into the future.

That is, whether it is to be a project meandering from 'boom and/or bust' mediocrity so typical of a traditional residents association, to perhaps being recognised as a good project... or ideally to that of a GREAT project.

My purpose on this forum is to help this Lonehill Community Initiative to achieve GREATNESS.

So who wrote this?

'Why achieve greatness?

• if you're doing something you care deeply about and if you believe in it, it's impossible to imagine not trying to make it great.
• if you have to ask 'why should we try to make it great?' then you're probably in the wrong line of work.
• you will have the ultimate satisfaction knowing that your short time here on earth was well spent, and that it mattered.'
  

It's written by the same author of this statement:

'A great organization is one that makes a distinctive impact and delivers superior performance over a long period of time. For a business, performance principally means financial results, specifically return on invested capital. For a social sector organization, on the other hand, performance must be assessed first and foremost relative to the organization’s mission, not its financial results. Notice that by this definition that you do not need to be big to be great. Your distinctive impact can be on a local or small community, and your performance can be superior and long-lasting without becoming large. You might choose to grow in order to have a wider impact and to better deliver on your mission, but it is important to understand that big does not equal great, and great does not equal big.'

His name: Jim Collins, regarded as one of the world's leading business management guru's and thinkers. And his information is widely available on the Internet. See http://www.jimcollins.com/ - includes free-to-use diagnostic tools.

Says Collins:

'Every institution has its unique set of irrational and difficult constraints, yet some make a leap while others facing the same environmental challenges do not. This is perhaps the single most important point in all of Good to Great. Greatness is not a function of circumstance. Greatness, it turns out, is largely a matter of conscious choice, and discipline.'

But by far the most important insight gained from his research is outlined here:

'Business executives can more easily fire people and—equally important—they can use money to buy talent. Most social sector leaders, on the other hand, must rely on people underpaid relative to the private sector or, in the case of volunteers, paid not at all. Yet a finding from our research is instructive: the key variable is not how (or how much) you pay, but who you have on the bus.

The comparison companies in our research—those that failed to become great—placed greater emphasis on using incentives to “motivate” otherwise unmotivated or undisciplined people.

The great companies, in contrast, focused on getting and hanging on to the right people in the first place—those who are productively neurotic, those who are self-motivated and self-disciplined, those who wake up every day, compulsively driven to do the best they can because it is simply part of their DNA.

In the social sectors, when big incentives (or compensation at all, in the case of volunteers) are simply not possible, the First Who principle becomes even more important. Lack of resources is no excuse for lack of rigor—it makes selectivity all the more vital.'

So, it's all got to do with the quality of people driving the project.

To paraphrase a Jim Collins diagnostic tool question, if your life were dependent upon it, who in Lonehill would you pack into a five- to seven-seater rocketship to re-establish the Lonehill Community Initiative on Mars? Who would be the best people for delivering on the ultimate strategy for the Lonehill Community Initiative? Are they currently on the bus?

Regards
Trevor Nel - 011 705-2790
Lonehill Resident