The Mont Fleur Scenarios
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EEPER EWS DDVOLUME 7 NUMBEREEPER1 NNEWS What will South Africa be like in the year 2002? What willSouthAfricabelikein theyear The Mont Fleur Scenarios Fleur The Mont with a new introduction by Mont Fleur facilitator, Adam Kahane Adam facilitator, Fleur Mont by with anewintroduction EDITORS Jenny Beery Esther Eidinow Nancy Murphy ART DIRECTOR EWS Pete Allen Cocke ADDRESS N Global Business Network 5900-X Hollis Street Emeryville CA 94608 PHONE 510.547.6822 FAX 510.547.8510 EEPER URL http://www.gbn.org D COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Nancy Murphy [email protected] The Mont Fleur Scenarios DEEPER NEWS® (formerly pub- lished as THE DEEPER NEWS®) is a series of articles published by Global Business Network DEEPER NEWS and THE DEEPER NEWS are registered trade- marks of Global Business Network Learning from Mont Fleur Scenarios as a tool for discovering common ground cenario thinking as a way of approaching the in their country over 1992–2002. (For a full list of future is increasingly being used as a tool for participants and their affiliations at the time, see page Sstrategizing in private and public sector organi- 21 of this Deeper News.) zations. The “Mont Fleur” scenario exercise, undertak- en in South Africa during 1991–92, was innovative Summary of the Scenarios and important because, in the midst of a deep con- flict, it brought people together from across organiza- The scenario team met three times in a series of tions to think creatively about the future of their three-day workshops at the Mont Fleur conference country. This Deeper News presents the Mont Fleur center outside Cape Town. After considering many scenarios as they were originally published in the possible stories, the participants agreed on four sce- South African newspaper The Weekly Mail & The narios that they believed to be plausible and relevant: Guardian Weekly, in July 1992. We hope this new introduction will provide a useful overview of the pro- • Ostrich, in which a negotiated settlement to ject, reflecting on its effects and the broader insights it the crisis in South Africa is not achieved, has provided. and the country’s government continues to be non-representative Context and Participants • Lame Duck, in which a settlement is The historical context of the project is important to achieved but the transition to a new dispen- understanding its impact. It took place during the sation is slow and indecisive period between February 1990, when Nelson Mandela was released from prison, and the African • Icarus, in which transition is rapid but the National Congress (ANC), Pan African Congress new government unwisely pursues unsus- (PAC), South African Communist Party (SACP), and tainable, populist economic policies other organizations were legalized, and April 1994, when the first all-race elections were held. During • Flight of the Flamingos, in which the govern- these years, dozens of “forums” were set up in South ment’s policies are sustainable and the coun- Africa, creating temporary structures that gathered try takes a path of inclusive growth and together the broadest possible range of stakeholders democracy (political parties, civic organizations, professional bod- ies, government departments, trade unions, business The group developed each of these stories into a brief groups, etc.) to develop a new way forward in a par- logical narrative. A fourteen-page report was distrib- ticular area of concern. There were forums to discuss uted as an insert in a national newspaper, and a 30- education, housing, economic policy, constitutional minute video was produced which combined cartoons matters, and many other areas. They ranged from with presentations by team members. The team then informal, off-the-record workshops to formal, public presented and discussed the scenarios with more than negotiations. The Mont Fleur project was one type of fifty groups, including political parties, companies, forum that, uniquely, used the scenario methodology. academics, trade unions, and civic organizations. At the end of 1992, its goals achieved, the project was The purpose of Mont Fleur was “not to present defin- wrapped up and the team dissolved. D itive truths, but to stimulate debate on how to shape EEPER the next 10 years.” The project brought together a What the Project Was and Was Not diverse group of 22 prominent South Africans— N EWS politicians, activists, academics, and businessmen, The ideas in the Mont Fleur team’s four scenarios from across the ideological spectrum—to develop and were not in themselves novel. What was remarkable disseminate a set of stories about what might happen about the project was the heterogeneous group of 1 important figures delivering the messages, and how the parties and then finding a way to narrow this group worked together to arrive at these messages. or reconcile these differences. The Mont The approach was indirect and the results subtle: Fleur process, in contrast, only discussed the domain that all of the participants had in • Mont Fleur did not resolve the crisis in common: the future of South Africa. The South Africa. The project, along with other, team then summarized this shared under- non-scenario forum processes, contributed standing in the scenarios. The aim of such to the establishment of a common vocabu- non-negotiating processes is, as Marvin lary and mutual understanding. The shared Weisbord, an organizational consultant, has language of Mont Fleur extended beyond stated, to “find and enlarge the common the negotiating elite, and was thus able to ground.” include such dialogues as an exhortation to Flamingos in a Sunday church sermon and a Results from the Project concern raised about Lame Duck on a rural radio phone-in. This kind of common The Mont Fleur project produced several different understanding, together with many other types of results: substantive messages, informal net- factors, promoted agreement upon a settle- works and understandings, and changed ways of ment to the crisis. thinking. The primary public output of the project was the group of scenarios, each of which had a mes- • The participants did not agree upon a con- sage that was important to South Africans in 1992: crete solution to the country’s problems. They reached a consensus on some aspects • The message of Ostrich was that a non-nego- of how South Africa “worked,” on the com- tiated resolution of the crisis would not be plex nature of the crisis, and on some of the sustainable. This was important because ele- possible outcomes of the current conditions. ments of the National Party (NP) govern- More specifically, they agreed that, given the ment and the business community wished prevailing circumstances, certain strongly to believe that a deal with their allies, advocated solutions could not work, includ- instead of a negotiation with their oppo- ing armed revolution, continued minority nents, could be sufficient. After hearing rule (Ostrich), tightly circumscribed majority about the team’s work, NP leader F.W. de rule (Lame Duck), and socialism (Icarus). As Klerk was quoted as saying, “I am not an a result of this process of elimination, the Ostrich.” broad outline of a feasible and desirable out- come emerged (Flamingos). • Lame Duck’s message was that a weak coali- tion government would not be able to deliv- • The process was not a formal, mandated er and therefore could not last. This was negotiation. Rather, it was an informal, important because the nature, composition, open conversation. At the first workshop, and rules governing the Government of some of the participants expected to National Unity (GNU) were a central issue encounter difficulties in agreeing on any- in the pre-election negotiations. The NP thing. Over the course of the meetings, wanted the GNU to operate subject to they talked until they found areas of shared vetoes and other restrictions, and the ANC understanding and agreement, several of wanted unfettered “winner takes all” rules. which were relevant to the formal negotia- Lame Duck explored the boundary in a EWS tions which were occurring simultaneously. N GNU between compromise and incapacita- tion. EEPER • It did not deal with the differences among D the participants. Negotiation tends to focus • Icarus warned of the dangers of a new gov- on identifying the positions and interests of 2 ernment implementing populist economic policy. This message—coming from a team • The scenario process is logical. There is no which included several of the left’s most place in the core of a scenario conversation influential economists—was very challeng- for positions or values. Instead the discus- ing to the left, which had assumed that gov- sion is about facts and logic: can you con- ernment money could be used to eradicate vince your fellow team members that the poverty quickly. The business community, story you are putting forward is plausible? which was worried about Icarus policies, In the first Mont Fleur workshop, a story found the team’s articulation reassuring. The about the Chinese Red Army helping to lib- fiscal conservatism of the GNU was one of erate South Africa fell away on these the important surprises of the post-election grounds, rather than on the basis of prefer- period. ences. • The simple message of Flight of the Flamingos • The process is open and informal. Building was that the team believed in the potential scenarios can be creative because the process for a positive outcome. In a country in the is “only” about telling stories, not about midst of turbulence and uncertainty, a credi- making commitments. This allows people to ble and optimistic story makes a strong discuss almost anything, even taboo sub- impact. One participant said recently that jects. Early in the Mont Fleur process, one the main result of the project was that “We of the ANC members proposed a story mapped out in very broad terms the outline called “The Chilean Option: Growth of a successful outcome, which is now being through Repression” (a play on the ANC filled in.