Productivity or low levels of productivity have long been a serious bugbear for local economists, business spokespersons and government agencies, which face the brunt of the consistent negative competitiveness reports.
Policymakers and the business community seem bent on talking about the need for increased productivity, a discourse influenced by institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Economic Forum (WEF).
In its recent Article IV mission report on T&T, the IMF stated the country needs "structural reforms to help the economy run more efficiently....or reduce impediments to doing business."
Has anyone soberly stepped back asked why?
Perhaps a ranking of 31 on the table rankings might probably look better than 81. However, the debate about "if', "why" and "how" definitely needs to be more substantive before we arrive at "what must be done."
Our penchant to uncritically accept measures concocted by multilateral institutions as Dave Ramsaran has written in his chapter, "The Myth of Development: The case of T&T" in a new edited book on Caribbean development, suggests we will only continue the rat race of trying to "catch up" with advanced countries by this very obsession. Simply put, we are our own worst enemies.
If, for one moment, we consider the concern for increased productivity is one that is perched upon a genuine interest in creating wealth for or investing in our own people, how might the existing institutions of state ensure that the gains materialise for people?
How will it be managed?
Whom do we trust to manage the wealth that would be brought about by increased productivity?
The trust factor among our diverse groups (business and state; community and government; people and politician; north and south; teacher and student; opposition and prime minister; parent and principal) is a major issue we have yet to place squarely on the table for meaningful discussion.
There are a number of cleavages which have been jarred open by recent developments. However, viewing increased productivity as the panacea for many of our developmental challenges in T&T does not capture this reality. We need enlightened discussion beyond a parrot-like syndrome.
The recent publication by Terrence Farrell also dovetails nicely with the productivity rhetoric and seems to have drawn the conclusion that "we like it so" and that community-based ways of engagement and relating to each other in place of "serious" work have brought about more harm than good in creating "an underachieving society."
I cannot totally disagree with his analysis, but a more nuanced look at the issues would reveal multilevel and complex realities. From the university to the pundit (save some outspoken pastors recently), we do not wish to face our reality and our own mirrored reflections. Suffice it to say, an approach driven solely by economic variables can tell us but very little about ourselves.
Rating T&T's competitiveness
Let us imagine for one second that by some miracle in three years' time, we rank a solid 25 out of the 130 plus countries on the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI).
What would that actually mean for citizens; the people for whom productivity should matter and who work to make it happen?
Would that increased productivity translate into reduced criminal activity, less nepotism, greater safeguards on the public purse, accountability by our office-holders, greater equality and equity among diverse groups, less perception that justice is for the rich and not the poor man?
What are our real priorities?
Instead of a focus on productivity as sole imperative, an enlightened debate must begin from the point of people. What are necessary for people to enjoy work and work better as a result? How can we improve their experience at work and remove impediments from them achieving a better living or gaining meaningful employment?
Command and control culture
Let us emancipate our work spaces and build organisational cultures based on team work and collaboration within certain recognised limits of course. The "moral economy" upon which the society is built must provide an effective fulcrum in bringing groups together and instilling harmony to set, secure and implement a balanced development agenda that is beneficial to all.
Productivity or low levels of productivity have long been a serious bugbear for local economists, business spokespersons and government agencies, which face the brunt of the consistent negative competitiveness reports.
Policymakers and the business community seem bent on talking about the need for increased productivity, a discourse influenced by institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Economic Forum (WEF).
In its recent Article IV mission report on T&T, the IMF stated the country needs "structural reforms to help the economy run more efficiently....or reduce impediments to doing business."
Has anyone soberly stepped back asked why?
Perhaps a ranking of 31 on the table rankings might probably look better than 81. However, the debate about "if', "why" and "how" definitely needs to be more substantive before we arrive at "what must be done."
Our penchant to uncritically accept measures concocted by multilateral institutions as Dave Ramsaran has written in his chapter, "The Myth of Development: The case of T&T" in a new edited book on Caribbean development, suggests we will only continue the rat race of trying to "catch up" with advanced countries by this very obsession. Simply put, we are our own worst enemies.
If, for one moment, we consider the concern for increased productivity is one that is perched upon a genuine interest in creating wealth for or investing in our own people, how might the existing institutions of state ensure that the gains materialise for people?
How will it be managed?
Whom do we trust to manage the wealth that would be brought about by increased productivity?
The trust factor among our diverse groups (business and state; community and government; people and politician; north and south; teacher and student; opposition and prime minister; parent and principal) is a major issue we have yet to place squarely on the table for meaningful discussion.
There are a number of cleavages which have been jarred open by recent developments. However, viewing increased productivity as the panacea for many of our developmental challenges in T&T does not capture this reality. We need enlightened discussion beyond a parrot-like syndrome.
The recent publication by Terrence Farrell also dovetails nicely with the productivity rhetoric and seems to have drawn the conclusion that "we like it so" and that community-based ways of engagement and relating to each other in place of "serious" work have brought about more harm than good in creating "an underachieving society."
I cannot totally disagree with his analysis, but a more nuanced look at the issues would reveal multilevel and complex realities. From the university to the pundit (save some outspoken pastors recently), we do not wish to face our reality and our own mirrored reflections. Suffice it to say, an approach driven solely by economic variables can tell us but very little about ourselves.
Rating T&T's competitiveness
Let us imagine for one second that by some miracle in three years' time, we rank a solid 25 out of the 130 plus countries on the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI).
What would that actually mean for citizens; the people for whom productivity should matter and who work to make it happen?
Would that increased productivity translate into reduced criminal activity, less nepotism, greater safeguards on the public purse, accountability by our office-holders, greater equality and equity among diverse groups, less perception that justice is for the rich and not the poor man?
What are our real priorities?
Instead of a focus on productivity as sole imperative, an enlightened debate must begin from the point of people. What are necessary for people to enjoy work and work better as a result? How can we improve their experience at work and remove impediments from them achieving a better living or gaining meaningful employment?
Command and control culture
Let us emancipate our work spaces and build organisational cultures based on team work and collaboration within certain recognised limits of course. The "moral economy" upon which the society is built must provide an effective fulcrum in bringing groups together and instilling harmony to set, secure and implement a balanced development agenda that is beneficial to all.
KESTON PERRY
via e-mail
