BEE Partner, South Africa Economy Watch

To understand the management control scorecard, the definition of top management needs deciphering. Although the Codes do not define the term, they do define “top manager” so one can assume that a top manager represents top management. A top manager is: Read the rest of this entry »

To understand the management control scorecard, the definition of top management needs deciphering. Although the Codes do not define the term, they do define “top manager” so one can assume that a top manager represents top management. A top manager is: Read the rest of this entry »

Bonus points

Two bonus points are available in employment equity. The bonus points are based on what the Codes term EAR EAP stands for “economically active population“. The Codes do not provide a clear explanation on how the bonus points are to be calculated. What follows is my interpretation on how to calculate bonus points. The two points are allocated to each indicator based on the indicator’s percentage of total points available. If the management indicator meets its EAP target, the bonus points would be 2s x 2 points. If the employee indicator reaches its EAP target, then the bonus points would be ¹₂-⁽₅². x 2 points. Read the rest of this entry »

Split compliance targets

The employment equity scorecard splits the compliance targets between 0 to 5 years and 6 to 10 years. The Codes acknowledge that transformation is not going to be an overnight phenomenon and that businesses will take a while to establish Black people in relevant employment positions. They have provided moderate targets for the first five years in consideration of this. Overnight transformation strategies are unlikely to result in sustainable development.

The management indicator

The majority of points, 15, are allocated to this indicator. The management indicator is subject to the gender adjustor and full points will only be scored where 50% of the management targets for Black people are held by Black women. The targets are split. The target for 0 to 5 years is 40% of total management and the target for 6 to 10 years is 60% of total management positions that should be held by Black people. Read the rest of this entry »

The QSE skills development scorecard only contains one indicator. It is significantly simpler than skills development of non-QSE businesses and easier to obtain a higher score. Unfortunately, because the target is based on terms and calculations used in the Skills Development Levies Act, the SDLA, this is a technical section.

Indicator terminology

Leviable amount

The leviable amount is derived from the SDLA. It the amount that the levy that must be paid to the SETA is calculated on. BEE uses the same calculation and therefore terminology, but sets a target over and above that payable to the SETA. The scorecard sets the target for the indicator as 2% of the leviable amount for QSEs. Essentially, the leviable amount is the annual total net salaries and wages payable by the entity. Read the rest of this entry »

Targets

Achievement of the allocated points is based on the measured entity reaching the compliance targets. The compliance targets in this element are fairly ambitious because very few suppliers will have a decent BEE status level, particularly in the early stages of this policy. The Codes accounted for this by splitting the compliance targets from years 0 to 5 with a target of 40% and years 6 to 10 with a target of 50%. The QSE targets are substantially lower than those provided in the generic scorecard. Read the rest of this entry »

Targets

The targets are discussed before indicator terminology in this element because they are necessary for understanding some of the indicator terminology. Enterprise development and socio-economic development use the same methodology for calculating the target. The calculation is not clearly articulated in the Codes and is a technical calculation. Read the rest of this entry »

The Codes have introduced new concepts in enterprise development to encourage sustainable contributions.

Statement 600 provides a benefit-factor matrix that classifies the substance of contributions on their ability to enhance the financial and operational capacity of the beneficiary entity. The greater the substance of the contribution, the higher the recognition granted to that contribution. The benefit factor is the percentage recognition given to the actual amount of the contribution. Read the rest of this entry »

Targets

As mentioned above, the target is calculated on the same basis as that of enterprise development. The calculation is not clearly articulated in the Codes and is a technical computation. To avoid repetition, the following constitutes a brief summary of what was communicated under enterprise development.

The target for socio-economic development is 1% of net profit after tax (NPAT). NPAT is easily manipulated through accounting entries, so the Codes use an anti-circumvention approach, outlined below. Read the rest of this entry »

The socio-economic development element is a request to business to play an active role in social upliftment. It is BEE‘S conduit for Black people living below the poverty line by providing a lifeline to people without any access to the mainstream economy. Socio-economic development may take a variety of forms, including rural development, contributions to traditionally non-economic activities such as the arts and medical facilities for the poor. Read the rest of this entry »

BEE Qualifying Contributions

Sector-specific contributions

The benefit-factor matrix refers to sector-specific contributions, which are not addressed elsewhere in Statements 700 or 807. There is a definition referring to sector-specific programmes. Although it is not clear whether there is a link between the definition and the reference to sector-specific contributions above, it would appear logical to assume so.

The origin of sector-specific contributions is from previous draft statements. The objective is that sector codes will determine sector- specific socio-economic development contributions as guidance to industry from each sector. Read the rest of this entry »

2. Global reach

Q Is South Africa’s reputation as a nation to buy into — whether the customer is a foreign investor, a tourist, a potential immigrant or from one of the other customer categories — strong and solid throughout the world? In this context, can branding be a powerful tool? Finland, for example, embarked on a successful campaign to enhance its image and position as a country associated with hi-tech innovation. It wanted to assist its companies to become more competitive in the United States, and used branding to improve its image. Read the rest of this entry »

A well-known marketing adage states that a bad product will not last very long in the marketplace. No amount of sales, advertising or promotional effort will do it any good if people simply do not want to buy it. As any first-year marketing student knows, and in the words of famed marketing guru Philip Kotler, the marketing concept states that ‘the key to achieving organisational goals consists in determining the needs and wants of target markets and delivering the desired satisfactions more effectively and efficiently than competitors’: In today’s bitterly contested global marketplace, countries have customers and competitors too. South Africa is no exception. Read the rest of this entry »