Jamaican Prime Minister Bruce Golding, is insistent in his desire to restrict the building approval process to 90-days and by so doing, revolutionize the development process in the island. Indeed according to Mr Golding, he is shifting the impetus in the development approval process from the developer to the regulators. In other words he is seeking to implement change management, which is basically the application of a structured approach to the process of change in individuals, organizations and societies that enables the transition from a current state to a desired future state. Successful change management is determined by far more than changes in processes, technology or even public policy, as it is primarily driven by the active engagement and participation of the people.
However, the approach adopted so far by GOJ, has excluded the populace and has sought to rely only on the technocrats and the public sector bureacracy to make decisions which can fundamentally and permanently alter the character of communities and potentially compromise individuals' investments in real estate (whether used as their primary residence or for speculative purposes). Indeed, several of the policy alterations made so far are so controversial, that the intervention of the courts will be required, to facilitate a process of judicial review.
For example, the altering of the setback distances to five (5) feet per floor from the property’s boundaries, despite overwhelming and clear objections from the citizenry. Similarly, increasing density ratios from 30 habitable rooms per acre to 55 habitabitale rooms per acre is yet another example to name a few. Of course the failure of the state regulatory agencies to advise and consult affected parties, in the face of community altering investments, is perhaps the principal factor which is likely to derail the notion of change, that the Golding regime is seeking to effect in the development process.
To ensure a successful process of change, it is necessary to use influence and strategic thinking, in order to create vision and identify those crucial, early steps towards it. Indeed, it is apparent that the Golding regime has subscribed to Gleicher’s formula for change (which is basically D x V x F > R). In the current context, this illustrates that the combination of dissatisfaction with the current scenario(D), vision for the future (V) and the possibility of immediate, tactical action (F) must be stronger (greater) than the resistance (R) within the country, in order for meaningful changes to occur. However the model notes that if any of the components are missing or their prescribed values low, they will not be able to overcome the resistance and the process of change will be unsuccessful. In this regard, the Golding regime is apparently oblivious to its error in seeking to bolster only one side of the equation by the inclusion of the architects and urban planners among other technocrats who favour their proposed strategy and miscalculating the impact of widespread public disaffection. If there is no provision for public consultation, the strategy will ultimately fail as the Resistance will be so high, that the policy thrust would be stymied.
Obviously, there are simple solutions to this scenario. Firstly. the citizenry must be consulted at each stage of the process and their input accepted as an integral part of the decision-making process. Secondly, the Government must communicate its vision in a coherent and sustainable manner (e.g. the current failure to explain the role of EIA’s in the proposed 90-day approval process is a case in point). Thirdly, eschew any thoughts of populist political pandering as it will only serve to increase resistance (e.g. announcing that persons who live on three-fourths of an acre are living in luxury). Fourthly, every effort must be made to convince the citizenry that you have the relevant expertise to effect the process of change (e.g. a policy whereby each new construction will overlook and overshadow the neighbour’s property is an example of what not to do). Finally, every effort must be made to engender the trust of the citizenry (e.g. do not seek to engage the citizenry in the process and then ignore their inputs or operate contrary to prior agreements).
Changing the character of neighbourhoods, no matter how well intentioned will always be a source of conflict but if the process is managed well, optimal solutions can be determined, which will facilitate sustainable development. The process of change management is a people process and therefore has to be handled with due care. Failure to acknowledge the delicate balance that must be achieved, will only serve to invoke the old maxim “The Road to Chaos is Usually Paved with Good Intentions”
However, the approach adopted so far by GOJ, has excluded the populace and has sought to rely only on the technocrats and the public sector bureacracy to make decisions which can fundamentally and permanently alter the character of communities and potentially compromise individuals' investments in real estate (whether used as their primary residence or for speculative purposes). Indeed, several of the policy alterations made so far are so controversial, that the intervention of the courts will be required, to facilitate a process of judicial review.
For example, the altering of the setback distances to five (5) feet per floor from the property’s boundaries, despite overwhelming and clear objections from the citizenry. Similarly, increasing density ratios from 30 habitable rooms per acre to 55 habitabitale rooms per acre is yet another example to name a few. Of course the failure of the state regulatory agencies to advise and consult affected parties, in the face of community altering investments, is perhaps the principal factor which is likely to derail the notion of change, that the Golding regime is seeking to effect in the development process.
To ensure a successful process of change, it is necessary to use influence and strategic thinking, in order to create vision and identify those crucial, early steps towards it. Indeed, it is apparent that the Golding regime has subscribed to Gleicher’s formula for change (which is basically D x V x F > R). In the current context, this illustrates that the combination of dissatisfaction with the current scenario(D), vision for the future (V) and the possibility of immediate, tactical action (F) must be stronger (greater) than the resistance (R) within the country, in order for meaningful changes to occur. However the model notes that if any of the components are missing or their prescribed values low, they will not be able to overcome the resistance and the process of change will be unsuccessful. In this regard, the Golding regime is apparently oblivious to its error in seeking to bolster only one side of the equation by the inclusion of the architects and urban planners among other technocrats who favour their proposed strategy and miscalculating the impact of widespread public disaffection. If there is no provision for public consultation, the strategy will ultimately fail as the Resistance will be so high, that the policy thrust would be stymied.
Obviously, there are simple solutions to this scenario. Firstly. the citizenry must be consulted at each stage of the process and their input accepted as an integral part of the decision-making process. Secondly, the Government must communicate its vision in a coherent and sustainable manner (e.g. the current failure to explain the role of EIA’s in the proposed 90-day approval process is a case in point). Thirdly, eschew any thoughts of populist political pandering as it will only serve to increase resistance (e.g. announcing that persons who live on three-fourths of an acre are living in luxury). Fourthly, every effort must be made to convince the citizenry that you have the relevant expertise to effect the process of change (e.g. a policy whereby each new construction will overlook and overshadow the neighbour’s property is an example of what not to do). Finally, every effort must be made to engender the trust of the citizenry (e.g. do not seek to engage the citizenry in the process and then ignore their inputs or operate contrary to prior agreements).
Changing the character of neighbourhoods, no matter how well intentioned will always be a source of conflict but if the process is managed well, optimal solutions can be determined, which will facilitate sustainable development. The process of change management is a people process and therefore has to be handled with due care. Failure to acknowledge the delicate balance that must be achieved, will only serve to invoke the old maxim “The Road to Chaos is Usually Paved with Good Intentions”
See Also
Papine, the new standard for Jamaica's Development?
Jamaica Must Remain Centred
No comments:
Post a Comment