Downloads/The Council on Higher Education%20(1).Pdf (Acces Sed: 18 November 2015 )

o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

How to cite this thesis

Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index?site_name=Research%20Output (Accessed: Date). A PROJECT REPORT IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY In

THE FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT OF QUALITY AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

The effectiveness and efficiency of the University Of Johannesburg merger in UJ Sport

Roger Haitengi

We accept this report as conforming to the required standard

SUPERVISOR: Dr Pule Kholopane EXTERNAL EXAMINER: ……………………………………………………….

THE UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG 7 June 2017

0 ABSTRACT

University of Johannesburg was established in 2005 through a merger process, which consisted of three former institutions namely RAU, TWR and Vista. From the three institutions Vista was incorporated into RAU the previous year (2004) and the other two (RAU and TWR) merging on equal terms (both parties will have an equal decision making role) in order for the newly formed institution to work effectively and efficiently.

The focus of the study was on UJ Sport department and will show the roles that the merger played within the department. It will indicate how effective and efficient the department was after the merger is adopted, and what the current working environment within the department is. It will also show the implementation, changes and transformation they underwent in order to adopt the merger, to become UJ Sport (as one functional unit).

Primary data was collected through interviews from current UJ Sport staff who were present during the merger (2004-2005).A process by means of observation was employed in the study as a primary source of data, while secondary data was obtained by sourcing documentation to show how the merger was implemented and the after effects of the process. The secondary data indicated the current state and performance of the department by using the results, culture survey and annual statistics of UJ Sport as source of data.

In the conclusion, the UJ Sport implemented merger was moderately one sided in the early stages of the merger. This resulted in the department adopting a defensive culture amongst employees and the department itself did not operate at its full potential or capacity. It is recommended that the department starts off by changing the current culture to a constructive one in order for them to be able to address the current issues and move on. It is suggested that they use Cumming and Worley’s six steps of cultural change, which would assist the department to improve their working environment and become more effective, this will allow them to start operating to their capacity or full potential.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This dissertation would not have been completed were it not for the support, patience and encouragement of my loved ones throughout the compilation of these studies.

I would like to give a special thank you to my supervisor Dr Pule Kholopane, for sharing his knowledge and his guidance throughout the dissertation. My gratitude and thanks is also prevailed on Johan Rainsford and Phemelo Motse for their assistances and motivations. I would also like to extend my thanks to Brian Brown for editing this dissertation.

And lastly, my thanks to all the participants for partaking in interviews, responding to questions and sharing their information for the purposes of this study.

III

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………….IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………...…IV LIST OF FIGURE…………………………………………………...…...…IV LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………….IV

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………...…IV CHAPTER 1-INTRODUCTION OF THE STUDY 1.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………...1 1.1.1 Background of study…………………………………………………………...1 1.2 Background of the problem……………………………………………………....3 1.3 Rationale theoretical or conceptual background/foundation?…………………....3 1.4 Statement of the problem ………………………………………………………..4 1.5 Purpose of the study ……………………………………………………………..5 1.6 Research Question …………………………………………………………….....5 1.7 Statement of the hypotheses……………………………………………………...6 1.8 Significance of the study ………………………………………………………...6 1.9 Objective of the study …………………………………………………………....7 1.10 Assumption…………………………………………………………………...7 1.11 Limitations…………………………………………………………………....8

CHAPTER 2-REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….9 2.1.1 Overview of the universities before the merger.……………………………...9 2.1.2 Looking at the merger itself ……………………………………………….....14 2.1.2.1 Similarity in size……………………………………………………………...15 2.1.2.2 Profile: Homogeneity………………………………………………………....15 2.1.2.3 Integration depth……………………………………………………………...15 2.1.2.4 System-wide restructuring process…………………………………………...16 2.1.3 Restructuring process…………………………………………………………16 2.1.3.1 Restructuring & a new landscape for Higher Education……………………...17 IV

Page 2.1.3.2 Ministry of Education of implementation…………………………………...... 19 2.1.3.3 The Higher Education new institutional landscape…………………………....20 2.1.4 Concerning and related aspects to merger that need to be considered.………..21 2.1.5 The outcomes review on Higher Education restructuring……………………..22 2.2 Literature Review: UJ Sport Bureau……………………………………………...27 2.2.1 Merger process of UJ Sport Bureau……………………………………………...29 2.2.2 Accenture Process of UJ Sport Bureau…………………………………………..31 2.3 Summary of Literature Review…………………………………………………...38

CHAPTER 3-METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………...... 41 3.2 Research design………………………………………………………………….....41 3.3 Population of the study…………………………………………………………...... 42 3.4 Sampling method & size………………………………………………………...... 42 3.5 Data collection process………………………………………………………….....43 3.5.1 Primary data……………………………………………………………………...43 3.5.2 Secondary data………………………………………………………………...... 45 3.6 Research validity………………………………………………………………...... 46 3.7 Summary of Methodology…………………………………………………………46 3.8 Research Limitation……………………………………………………………...... 46

CHAPTER 4-ANALYSIS OF DATA 4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….47 Section A 4.2 Primary Data ………………………………………………………………..47 4.2.1 Interview with employees………………………………………………..47 4.2.1.1 Interview with Joel Kgokong………………………………………...... 47 4.2.1.2 Interview with Anton van Rooyen…………………………………...... 48 4.2.1.3 Interview with Francois Fouche……………………………………...... 49 4.2.1.4 Interview with Phemelo Motse……………………………………….....50

4.2.1.5 Interview with Mandla Ngema…………………………………………..51 4.2.1.6 Interview with Pieter Durandt………………………………………...... 52 4.2.1.7 Interview with Johan Rainsford……………………………………….....53 Page 4.2.1.8 Interview with Marianne Viljoen……………………………………...... 54 4.2.1.9 Interview with Itumeleng Mogotsi………………………………………54 4.2.1.10 Interview with Karel Mouton………………………………………...... 55 4.2.1.11 Interview with Henriette Vermaak…………………………………...... 56 4.2.1.12 Interview with Reedwaan Asvat……………………………………...... 57 4.2.1.13 Interview with Jimmy Potgieter………………………………………....58 4.2.1.14 Interview with Sekhori Lashaba……………………………………...... 58 4.2.1.15 Interview with Chris Fortuin………………………………………...... 59 Section B 4.3 Secondary Data…………………………………………………………………...... 60 4.3.1 RAU & TWR merger documents from 2004…………………………………...... 60 4.3.1.1 Memorandum of the Agreement between TWR & RAU……………………….60 4.3.1.2 Memorandum: Domain and program for Sport: the University Of Johannesburg…………………………………………………………………….64 4.3.2 UJ Sport Annual Report 2007……………………………………………………..65 4.3.2.1 The redesign & restructuring in 2007…………………………………………...67 4.3.2.2 UJ Sport human resource/staff 2007…………………………………………….70 4.3.2.3 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2007…………………………………………………..71 4.3.3 UJ Sport Annual Report 2008……………………………………………………..72 4.3.3.1 UJ Sport human resource/staff 2008………………………………………...... 73 4.3.3.2 UJ Sport Clubs results for 2008……………………………………………...... 77 4.3.4 UJ Sport Annual Report 2009……………………………………………………..78 4.3.4.1 UJ Sport human resource/staff report 2009……………………………………..78 4.3.4.2 UJ Sport Clubs results 2009……………………………………………………..81 4.3.5 UJ Sport Annual Report 2010……………………………………………………..82 4.3.5.1 UJ Sport human resource/staff 2010…………………………………………….83 4.3.5.2 UJ Sport Clubs of results 2010………………………………………………….75 VI

4.3.6 UJ Sport Annual Report 2011……………………………………………………..86 4.3.6.1 UJ Sport Human resource/staff 2011……………………………………….…...86 4.3.6.2 UJ Sport Clubs participation 2011……………………………………………....89

Page 4.3.6.3 UJ Sport Clubs results 2011……………………………………………………..89 4.3.7 UJ Sport Annual Report 2012…………………………………………………...... 90 4.3.7.1 Strategic Trusts & Targets…………………………………………………...... 92 4.3.7.1.1 Sport-for-Purpose trusts…………………………………………………...... 93 4.3.7.1.1.1 Trust1: Work-integrated learning, research & community engagement…...... 93 4.3.7.1.1.2 Trust2: Equivalence in sport participation………………………………...... 94 4.3.7.1.1.3 Trust3: Supportive &engaged student, staff & sport Alumni……………...... 94 4.3.7.1.1.4 Trust 4: Leadership that matters in the institution and in civil society……....94 4.3.7.1.2 Sport-for-Performance trusts……………………………………………...... 95 4.3.7.1.2.1 Trust 1: UJ Sport as a winning institution in sports events and competitions...... 95 4.3.7.1.2.2 Trust 2: A national and international profile of UJ Sport…………………...95 4.3.7.2 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2012)…………………………………………..96 4.3.7.3 UJ Sports participation (2012)…………………………………………………...98 4.3.7.4 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2012…………………………………………………..99 4.3.8 UJ Sports Annual Report 2013…………………………………………………….100 4.3.8.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff 2013……………………………………………101 4.3.8.2 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2013…………………………………………………..103 4.3.9 UJ Sports Annual Report 2014…………………………………………………….104 4.3.9.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff 2014……………………………………………104 4.3.9.2 Sports Clubs results of 2014……………………………………………………..106 4.3.10 Report of UJ Sports Annual Report 2015………………………………………...108 4.3.10.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff 2015…………………………………………..109 4.3.10.2 UJ Sport Club results of 2015………………………………………………….111 4.4 UJ Culture Survey 2016…………………………………………………………….113

VII

CHAPTER 5- DISCUSSION AND RESULTS 5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………118 5.2 Results of Primary Data…………………………………………………………….118

Page 5.2.1.1. Question 1: results……………………………………………………………...118 5.2.1.2. Question 2: results……………………………………………………………...118 5.2.1.3. Question 3: results……………………………………………………………...119 5.2.1.4. Question 4: results……………………………………………………………...120 5.2.1.5. Question 5: results……………………………………………………………...120

5.2.1.6. Question 6: results……………………………………………………………...121 5.2.1.7. Question 7: results……………………………………………………………...121 5.2.1.8. Question 8: results……………………………………………………………...122 5.2.1.9. Question 9: results…………………………………………………………..….123 5.2.1.10. Question 10: results…………………………………………………………...125 5.3Results of secondary data……………………………………………………………126 5.3.1 Short discussion and summary of UJ Sport annual report dating from 2007 to 2015……………………………………………………………………………………..127 5.3.2 UJ Sports Human Resource comparison from 2007 to 2015……………………...129 5.3.2.1 Equity Comparison Permanent Staff of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015………………...129 5.3.2.2 Equity Comparison Temporary Staff of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015………………...131 5.3.2.3 UJ Sport Appointments, Resignations, Retirements, and Vacant Positions from 2007 to 2015..……………………………………………………………………...133 5.3.2.4 UJ Sport Club Performance at USSA…………………………………………...134 5.3.2.5 UJ Sport Club Performance at Varsity Sport/Cup……………………………....135 5.4 UJ Culture Survey 2016……………………………………………………………..136 5.5 Observation of the studies…………………………………………………………...138

CHAPTER 6-CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………140

VIII

6.2 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………..140 6.3 Recommendations…………………………………………………………………..141 6.4 Summary of this chapter…………………………………………………………….142

Page REFERENCE LIST……………………………………………………………142

APPPENDIX Appendix A1: interviewee questions……………………………………………………148 Appendix B1: Interview with Joel Kgokong……………………………………………149 Appendix B2: Interview with Anton Van Rooyen……………………………………....153 Appendix B3: Interview with Francois Fouche……....………………………………….155 Appendix B4: Interview with Phemelo Motse…………………………………………..159 Appendix B5: Interview with Mandla Ngema.…………………………………………..161 Appendix B6: Interview with Pieter Durandt……………………………………………163 Appendix B7: Interview with Johan Rainsford…………………………………………..165 Appendix B8: Interview with Marianne Viljoen…………………………………………167 Appendix B9: Interview with Itumeleng Mogotsi………………………………………..169 Appendix B10: Interview with Karel Mouton……………………………………………171 Appendix B11: Interview with Henriette Vermaak………………………………………173 Appendix B12: Interview with Reedwaan Asvat…………………………………………175 Appendix B13: Interview with Jimmy Potgieter………………………………………….177 Appendix B14: Interview with Sekgoari Lashaba………………………………………...179 Appendix B15: Interview with Chris Fortuin……………………………………………..181

LIST OF FIGURE Figure 2.1: Members of the NWG Figure 2.2: The new Higher Education Institutional landscape table of mergers Figure2.3: Operating models as a critical link between strategy and detailed organisational design Figure 2.4: TWR Sports Department Structure Figure 2.5: RAU Sports Department Structure Figure 2.6 UJ Sport Structure by Doman (2007:46) Figure 2.7: UJ Sport and Sports & Movement Department structure (Compete Structure) Figure 4.1: Merger process and Structure 2004 (Joint Steering Committee) Figure 4.2: UJ Sport organizational structure 2011 Figure 4.3: UJ Sport Staff distribution per race category 2011 Figure 4.4: UJ Sport Temporary appointments per race category 2011 Figure4.5: UJ Sport participation strategy 2011 Figure 4.6: UJ Sport Staff distribution per race category Figure 4.7: Temporary appointments per race category Figure 4.8: UJ Sport Model Figure4.9: The organizational design of UJ Sport from June 2013 Figure 4.10: UJ Sport Staff distribution per race category Figure4.11: Temporary appointments per race category Figure 4.12: UJ Sports Staff distribution per race category Figure4.13: Temporary appointments per race category Figure4.14: New proposed UJ Sport structure Figure 4.15: UJ Sports Staff distribution per race category Figure 4.16: UJ Sports Temporary Staff distribution per race category Figure 4.17: General Positive Management Figure 4.18: Enhancing the UJ core business Figure 4.19: Fairness Figure 4.20: Absence of victimization Figure4.21: UJ as preferred place of employment Figure 4.22:Non-abusive managers Figure 4.23: Non-factor variables

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: UJ Sports clubs categorized after re-evaluation during November 2006 Table 4.2: Processes & sessions in 2007 for re-design and restructuring Table 4.3: Staff composition 2007 Table 4.4: SASSU Results of UJ Sport clubs Table 4.5 UJ Sports clubs categorized after re-evaluation during November 2008 Table 4.6: Staff Profile of UJ Sports for 2008 Table 4.7: USSA Results of UJ Sport clubs 2008 Table 4.8: Staff profile of UJ Sports permanent and contract/temporary staff in 2009 Table 4.9: USSA Results of UJ Sport clubs 2009 Table 4.10: Staff profile for permanent/Fixed term 2010 Table 4.11: Staff composition in 2010 Table 4.12: USSA results of UJ Sport Clubs 2010 Table 4.13: USSA results of UJ Sport Clubs 2011 Table 4.14: UJ Sport Management Committee Table 4.15: UJ Sport Policies Table 4.16: WIL Programme Table 4.17: Research Programme Table 4.18: Community Engagement Programme Table 4.19: Mass participation Table 4.20: Student, alumni and staff support program Table 4.21: Staff in leadership positions Table 4.22: Performance Excellence programme Table 4.23: Sport representation Table 4.24: Publicity generated Table 4.25: USSA results of UJ Sport Clubs 2012 Table 4.26: USSA results 2013 Table 4.27: Varsity Cup/Sports results of 2013 Table 4.28: USSA Results of 2014 Table4.29: Varsity Cup/ Sports result 2014 Table 4.30: Sporting Codes Classification

Table 4.31: Equity ratio of UJ Sport 2015: Black 56% vs White 44% Table 4.32: USSA Results of 2015 Table4.33: Varsity Cup/ Sports result for 2015 Table 5.1: Question 2 listed factors Table 5.2: Question 7 listed factors Table 5.3: Question 8 listed factors Table 5.4: Question 9 listed factors Table 5.5: Question 10 listed factors Table 5.6: Equity Comparison Permanent Staff/Fixed Term Contract of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015 Table 5.7: Equity Comparison Temporary Staff of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015 Table 5.8: UJ Sports Appointment, Resignation, Vacant Position, Retired and Dismissals/No renewal of contract/Moved from 2007 to 2015 Table 5.9: UJ Sport Clubs Performance at USSA Table 5.10: UJ Sport Clubs Performance at Varsity Sport/Cup

XII

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS APB Auckland Park Bunting Road Campus APK Auckland Park Kingsway Campus DFC Doornfontein campus CHE Council of Higher Education CPUT Cape Peninsula University Of Technology DNP Did not play DNQ Did not qualify DUT Durban University Of Technology HEQC Higher Education Quality Committee HP High Performance HR Human Resource Maties University of Stellenbosch NMMU Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University NPHE The National Plan For Higher Education NWG National Working Group NWU North West University Prof Professor PUK Pukke (North West University Potchefstroom Campus) RAU Rand Afrikaans University SASSU South African Student Sports Union SCR Student Council Representative SSD Sport Student with Disabilities SWC Soweto Campus TUT Tshwane University Of Technology TV Television TWR Technikon Witwatersrand UFS University of the Free State UKZN University Of KwaZulu-Natal UL University Of Limpopo UNISA University of South Africa UJ University of Johannesburg XIII

UP University of Pretoria USSA University Sports South Africa VISTA Vista University WIL Work Integrated Learning Wits University of the Witwatersrand WSU Walter Sisulu University

XIV

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

1.1 INTRODUCTION The formation in 2005 of the University of Johannesburg (UJ) came about as a result of a merger process announced in 1997 in terms of the Higher Education Act (101/ 1997) by Professor Kader Asmal, the then Minister of Education. In the Council of Higher Education (CHE) Report (SA 2004:35) needs were highlighted as the reason for merging the institutions, in a context of national, regional and institutional goals. These included overcoming the historical legacy of apartheid, improving the quality of the Higher Education output, thereby increasing the effectiveness of such institutions and in return ensuring the viability and sustainability of the new system. To provide a better quality of higher education across the broader spectrum and to help sustain the smaller universities.

This recommendation was also sought to align the geographic distribution of institutions with socio-economic demand and promote greater regional collaboration among the Higher Education institutions. Hall, Luescher and Symes (2004:11) who state that given South Africa’s history, Higher Education restructuring in the country is essentially a politically driven process with specific goals, dispelling the ills of apartheid. In order to set the wheels in motion for the merge, the establishment of certain monitoring bodies was necessary. This meant that merging universities had to strategically merge and function as a single organization. In order to do that would necessitate changes which would have a big impact on the existing organisational cultural aspects within each of the merging universities. A new organisational culture would have to be adopted

1.1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY This study is based on the newly formed University, which is the University of Johannesburg where the main focus is on the UJ Sports Bureau. In 2005 UJ was formed by an Act of Parliament to support and enable the functional need to have a single operating model that supports the academic/sports strategy and helps the process to operate as a future-focused and integration function. Improving and standardizing service delivery functions across the campuses. The institutions that merged to become known as the University of Johannesburg

(UJ) were, Rand Afrikaans University-Auckland Park; Vista University (Soweto and East Rand Campuses) Technikon Witwatersrand (Doornfontein Campus and Bunting Road Campuses) This study will focus on the merger at the University of Johannesburg, looking at the process that the UJ Sport department implemented and the pace at which it was adopted..

In 2008 UJ Sport appointed a company (Accenture) to assist and integrate and the process in the department. During the implementation stage, UJ Sport had to restructure the previous structures (figure 2.4 & 2.5) into the new implemented structure (figure 2.6). In order to accommodate all the employees from the different institutions and be in line with the new policies that the university had adopted as a whole. A new set of objectives had to be established as it was found that due to the merge, staff positions were being duplicated

The following gives a better view of this:

● UJ Sports vision: setting trends in sport and human movement. ● Mission: Provide excellent, multi-levelled academic and sports opportunities for communities through innovative, integrated professional services and programs. ● Strategic Objective: To provide and support excellence in the teaching, learning and assessment in sport and movement programmes, to innovatively engage in local, national and international events, to be engaged in communities through a sport and movement initiative, to build a reputable UJ Sport brand, to provide a professional and preferred student sport experience and to maximise commercialization.

The department established a steering committee. The aim was to assist with the integration and implementation of the merger. The steering committee embarked on a series of workshops to give them a better knowledge of how best to assist in implementing the changes which would be adapted for adoption by the staff. The committee also advised on the restructuring of UJ Sport.

Restructuring UJ sport entailed adding new positions, to accommodate all the UJ Sport employees and by reshuffling employees into different positions from the positions they held previously, through a process called match and place. Some employees were promoted, others were downgraded. Selected staff was put in the newly formed positions with the aim to work together as a unit. To improve and deliver a standardized service to students and the UJ 2

organization.

UJ sport had to renew/review previous policies of the department for adaptation purposes. These new policies would guide employees through the process to assist them with a better understanding of their requirements to function under one cooperated umbrella. Some concerns were raised.

In order for the department to deliver the services needed in the interest of bursary holders and UJ strong leadership and employee empowerment would be required to achieve the objectives of an academic and organisational culture which would result in a complete on field winning performance.

1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM The first problem encountered was that each campus or institutions (RAU and TWR) had its own history in sport and achievements that they had earned. Changes were inevitable after the merge in the working environment and amongst working colleagues.

The restructuring was not favourable to all. The UJ Sport employees were placed in new positions which were new to them and struggled to adapt to their new roles in practice. The selected employees who were promoted created a difficulty amongst staff especially those who were demoted now found themselves having to report to colleagues who served them previously. The expectation of this department was to work as a unit to deliver a quality service to the student and function as a department within a good working environment.

1.3 RATIONALE, THEORETICAL OR CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND/FOUNDATION

Looking at any merger and its effectiveness, and impact on any organization or employees of that organization. In the case of UJ Sports as noted in the background, changes in the department had been adopted in order to implement the merger with one set of guidelines. Each of the three organizations (RAU, TWR and Vista) previously operated in their own way, with their own policies which guided them. This meant that the sports departments, of each of the previous organizations, would change the majority of policies/operations and

resources to form one department.

Any change to this extent impacts on the time frame of a department which can lead to poor performance of service delivery and operational output. The time consumed due to the employees having to adapt to the, unfamiliar changes which put pressure on the working environment and productivity of the department. Resistance from the employees, based on what they use to do to what is expected of them caused difficulties with progress.

It meant that positions would be reshuffled and restructured, which created a negative attitude due to the sensitive nature of job security within any organisation. The major concern among employees was the retention of positions, promotions, demotions and who would be selected to become the new leader in that specific department. These factors affected the working environment and employee empowerment. This procedure had to follow due to duplication of personnel positions within the department.

1.4 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Instability and panic amongst personnel is a norm when organisations merge. This in the main is caused by uncertainties within staff which in turn could become problematic for UJ sports:

- The loss of quality employees in key positions. It not easy to fill specialist positions or find a suitable candidate to have the same quality of a previous employee. - There would be a high level of negativity in the work environment due to the changes which would cause confusion among the employees, due to them not knowing what was going to happen to them. - A lengthy time period would be required coupled with expertise to implement all the changes after the announcement of the merger. This would mean each department within the newly formed university will have to implement the changes within to make it one functional department. - There would have been a lot of resistance due to the organisational culture change and insecurities of employees within the department. This could have affected the core function and performance of the department.

- In the interest of employees and the organisation people with strong leadership qualities and skills would be required to make decisions which would create confidence within staff. This would assist the smooth running at the organisation as problems would be identified and addressed by the appointment of these key members.

1.5 PURPOSE OF STUDIES Bearing in mind the new restructure was not favourable to all the UJ Sports employees due to some employees whom were placed in new positions which were new to them. Some struggled to adapt to the new role in practice whilst some were demoted, and others were promoted where previously they were on the same level which meant they had to report to those that were regarded as their equals. The expectation of the department is to work as a unit to deliver quality service to the student and operate as a department with a good working environment.

The purpose of the study is to look at the seven years that have passed since the merger took place and implementations of the new policies. It will identify how the department and employees have adapted to the policies in practice by managing bursary holders and standardisation of service delivery across the department. To asses if services delivered to the UJ sports bursary holder was done satisfactory and if the results produced were based on the decision making that was taken in were in line with university policy and in the best interest of the bursary holders to allow them to perform on the sports field and academically. The visionary requirement of the department is to work together, to achieve goals and objectives and to close the gaps that were previously glaring.

It is also to show the challenges presented by the merger, the current state of the department after the merge and if it is working as desired. Was the merger successful, effective and what set of challenges are they currently dealing with.

1.6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS According to Bhattacharyya (2006; 12) research always starts with a question or a problem, with the purpose of finding the answer to the question. This is done by applying systematic and scientific methods.

With merger happening before the Accenture process in 2005 and then followed with the Accenture process in 2007. With such massive changes to the organization, within the short space of time, would have any impact on the department (UJ Sport). Which would pose some questions within this research?

Mainly what the impact of changes would be in the working environment of the employees (in UJ Sport) and the performance output of UJ Sport as a department, with all the changes? This would pose another research question from the main that would question, how the Accenture process was implemented and adopted during that period till present.

1.7 STATEMENT OF THE HYPOTHESES

Null hypothesis (Ho): There would be a culture change within the department based on massive changes within a short space of time, which would cause a negative working environment and poor performance output.

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha): There would not be a culture change within the department based on massive changes within a short space of time, which would cause a negative working environment and poor performance output.

1.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The information obtained by this study would show how UJ Sport transformed by using the merger and change in management. It will indicate how UJ Sport adopted the merger and the processes they used to implement the changes. This study will also show how merger impacts an organization or department within the corporation and its efficiency and effectiveness to do so. It will also identify the processes and methods used to make the merger possible in the department with the challenges they faced.

1.9 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objectives of this study are to look at the UJ Sports operational system and how it functions with all the new changes that have been adopted from the Accenture process. If it has manifested within the department currently and what was the impact of the Accenture process adaptation. It would also show how it's impacting the department as a whole including the staff, student and external people.

This would be done by analysing the working environment and how the employees within UJ Sport experience or see the department/UJ, through the UJ Culture Survey conducted in 2016. A performance evaluation would be done against the department peers (other sport departments from different universities) by evaluating the sporting codes within UJ Sport and their positions they have achieved over the years. The overall position of the department would be calculated from the total of sports codes positions, which would be compared to the UJ Sport vision and mission that was proposed to achieve. This would indicate if the mission was accomplished and if UJ Sport was on track with the vision

Looking at the empowerment of employee and the leadership of the newly restructured system in delivering a service, be able to adapt to the new policies in practice and timeous decision making in the department. This would be obtained through the face to face interview with the employees that were present during the merger and Accenture process, and would also be based on the observations obtained. To identify the process that was taken upon during those two periods (merger and Accenture process) and to give an indication of the current situation within the department based on those processes (what the outcome is from Accenture process currently).

1.10 ASSUMPTION The changes in the department during the Accenture process, which occurred shortly after the merger process (which was three years later) that created a lot of uncertainty or insecurity among employees. This disrupted the performance within the organization/UJ department due to the following:

 Just as the employees within the department started settling in and adapting to the new 7

changes that were bought through the merger. Other sets of changes were implemented through the Accenture process in the short space of time and would create a negative working environment.  Some employees would not accept the Accenture process because the process would have a negative impact on them and place them under pressure to implement the changes. Which they would resist by ignoring them.  Employees would get frustrated with the workplace and leave (resign) that would cause UJ Sport to lose key employees and have vacant positions. This would slow down productivity within the department, and these key employees would not be easy to replace.  The department would not perform strategically as it was set out to be by Accenture due to unhappy employees and this would affect their sporting performances.  The working environment would not be stable and conducive due to the constant changes within the department, which would affect the functionality of the department as a whole.

1.11 LIMITATIONS Some limitation of this study was that it is difficult to obtain the data from RAU and TWR Sports due to it being old data and it was not archived and many of the documents are missing. Staff from these institutions have either retired or seeked employment elsewhere. There has been a change of leadership with a new senior director of sport. Most of the data that was retrieved is back dated to 2007 and prior to that was difficult to find but some were obtained.

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 INTRODUCTION In this chapter, we will review the literature of the study which is an important part that will provide a background to this study. This would illustrate the following: what was done from what needed to be done, with ideas of how it was supposed to work versus how it is in practice and the outcomes or finding of those implementations.

The first section of this literature will discuss merger itself and how it was planned to be implemented nationally across all tertiary institutions in South Africa. It will also touch on the different steps, methods, types, and aspect associated with a merger.

The literature review will start from the board spectrum as a whole national plan and flow to the direction of UJ Sport which is the primary focus of the study. This will cover the merger/Accenture process that happened within UJ Sport, in the other sections to come in this literature review.

2.1.1 Background of Universities before merger (NWG report 31 January 2002) Highlighted in the foreword of the report by NWG (2002) Prof K. Asmal indicated that a task team was set up in April 2001 to help advise on the restructuring of higher educational institutions as released by the National Plan for Higher Education (NPHE) in March 2001. This task team was accountable to the ministry and their investigation had to be completed with recommendations to the ministry by the end of December 2001. The task team was the National Working Group (NWG) and the following were their findings in the report:

That the NWG would collaborated with the institutions on a regional basis because they found that the acknowledgment between the higher educational institutions were needed and to have close collaboration. There was also co-operation by means of development and implementation through successfully sharing facilities and infrastructures. This would include joint purchases and usage of equipment. Regarding academia, they suggested more could have been done by institutions jointly developing and providing new courses or programs by coordinating the existing ones which would have optimized their recourse. Courses that were

duplicated would be removed which would lead to better efficiency and less waste. The NWG made a region-specific analysis by looking at current affairs of state with the possibility of future development within higher education. This avoided the one size fits all approach, which would not have made it possible for restructuring in the education system to meet the needs of different regions. Allowing for social and the economic differences in each region.

In the province of Gauteng which is the smallest there were eight (8) higher education institutions of which four (4) were universities (RAU, University of the Witwatersrand, University of Pretoria and The Medical University of South Africa) four (4) Technikons (TWR, Pretoria Technikon, Vaal Triangle Technikon and Technikon Northern Gauteng) with three (3) headquarters of national distance institution (Unisa, Vista and Technikon SA). The NWG proposed that there should be three (3) universities and three (3) Technikons in Gauteng. They also benchmarked the institutions against the transformation of the higher education system that was stated in the white paper with the following guideline as stated in Department of Education (1997):

● Public Accountability ● Effectiveness and Efficiency ● Quality ● Development ● Institutional Autonomy ● Democratisation ● Academic Freedom ● Equity and Redress From the principles there were three main properties the NWG identified that would be crucial to a “fitness for purpose” in the higher education system. The keywords that was identified were equity, sustainability and efficiency, which would helped describe the restructuring of the higher education system. It described that the system should be equally distributed in resources and opportunities. It would have long-term requirements for sustainability and it would be productive within the system by being effective and efficient through teaching, skill development and researchers that are needed in the country.

Based on this report, the state of affairs of the three institutions that merged (as UJ) are as follows:

RAU had just below 20 000 students enrolled. They were also stable, well managed and in a good financial position. However, it did not meet the NWG criteria which determined whether the institution was functioning well. In terms of transformation with the black student being slightly in the majority and English had become the tuition language. There was an imbalance of a demographic profile where the student body was 70 percent white and the success rate of the African student were low compared to the white student. Regarding the staff compliment of only 7 percent permanent academic staff was black and 8 percent permanent professional staff were black in total.

Technikon Witwatersrand had over 12 500 students enrolled and well administered with a stable financial record. The NWG noted them to be an above average functioning institution due to them having moved from a previous white institution to have more than 80 percent black students enrolled. It was required that they upgrade their staff qualifications where only 25 percent of permanent staff and academic members had a master’s or doctoral degree, and that 80 percent of the permanent academic and professional staff body were white.

Vista University consisted of four campuses (The East Rand, Mamelodi, Sebokeng and Soweto campuses) which together had an enrolment of 9000 students. The NWG recommend that the Mamelodi Vista campus be incorporated into the University of Pretoria which had 3300 students enrolled. The East Rand Campus had 1100 students which were divided in 40% business and management, 6% education and 54% other Humanities. While Soweto Campus had about 2100 students enrolled of which 9% were in science, engineering and technology, 39% management, 4% education and 48% other humanities. These two campuses were incorporated into RAU.

The NWG recommendation based on the investigations and findings would help set a fundamental restructuring process/implementations in the higher educational system. Which would address the following issue mentioned by the NWG:

● Coordination of courses fees ● Consolidation of budget

● Having an integrated financial, computer system and administration procedures ● Having support service integrated as one ● By utilizing of facilities and infrastructure through planning ● Having new academic structure developed and academic programs ● Creating new governance structures ● Creating new remuneration and conditions of services ● Reconciling institutional cultures and ethos The Members of the NWG were as shown in Figure 2.1

Figure 2.1: Members of the NWG

Chairperson

Mr. Saki Macozoma

(Deputy Chairperson of the Standard Bank Investment Corporation)

Deputy Chairperson

Ms. Gill Marcus

(Deputy Governor, South African Reserve Bank)

Member Member Member

Prof. Hugh Africa Prof. Malegapuru W Makgoba Mr. Murphy Morobe

(Chairperson, Fiscal and Finance Commission (Retired Vice -Chancellor, Vita (President, Medical Research Council of University and member of CHE) SA and member of CHE) and the National Parks Board)

Member Member Member

Prof. Wiseman Nkhulu Ms. Joyce Phekane Ms. Maria Ramos

(Economic Adviser to President; (Deputy Vice President, Congress of (Director-General, Department of Chairperson, CHE) South Africa Trade Unions) Finance)

Member Member Member

Pro f. Jairam Reddy Prof. Hennie Rossouw Prof. Stuart Saunders

(Chairperson of Council, United Nations (Retired Deputy Vice-Chancellor, University (Retired Vice-Chancellor, University Of Cape University; Chaired the National of Stellenbosch, Served on the National Town) Commission on High Education) Commission on Higher Education)

2.1.2 Looking at merger itself When looking at a merger, to put it simplistically, happens when two corporations join as one. According to Coffey, Garrow & Holbleche (2002:5), a merger is considered to be a union of marriage between two organizations. In the cases of universities that merged, it was defined in section 23 of the Higher Education act that the Institutions would lose their status as juristic persons on the date they are merged into a new juristic person. It meant that it would form a new university that will sustain itself and have standardized service delivery right across the board.

When referring to a merger another term closely related or associated with merger is acquisition. Hough, Nieman & Nieuwenhuizen (2003:248) defined the word as the purchases of a firm or existing business which would be completely absorbed that it no longer exists. So basically like a takeover of a firm which has grown but will have limitations based on the funds they have to acquire those firms. In the case of RAU and Vista, there was no merger. Vista was incorporated into RAU in 2004 due to Vista being mismanaged which resulted in them being dissolved. RAU took over Vista and formatted it into RAU one year before the merger with TWR.

The Ministry of Higher Education could have used a different approach for universities. Like a strategic alliance that is similar to a joint venture which is a formal agreement among two or more organizations that would work to a common goal. According to Gamble, Peteraf & Thompson (2013:161), it involves setting up a mutually owned corporation that tends to be very durable and riskier than other forms of agreements. With an alliance, there are fewer formalities which would not have written contracts and it would be more flexible than a joint venture. Amos, Hellriegel, Jackson, Klopper, Louw, Oosthuizen, Slocum & Staude (2004:100) refers to the alliance as a form of agreement where organizations get involved to pool each other’s physical, financial and human resources to strive to achieve a common goal. These two strategies would be more of an exchange program in the universities where they bring in the expertise among each other to work together towards a common objective. This would not change or form a new University.

A report by Bennetot, Estermann & Mason on university mergers in Europe provided a few important facts on mergers in universities. They claim that in universities there are four 14

elements to look at when differentiating between mergers to create a merger profile, similarity in size, profile homogeneity, integration depth and system restructuring.

2.1.2.1 Similarity in size The similarity in size accordingly to the report meant that the relative size of the institutions getting involved with each other. So, if the merger took place among similarly sized intuitions it would be classified as a horizontal merger. This meant that the universities were both on a large scale and comparable. The other form is the vertical merger which occurs when an institution is relatively larger than the other and if that institution specialises in a particular field which would make institutions different to each other.

2.1.2.2 Profile homogeneity This profile looks at the type of institutions that are getting involved with each other based on their profiles or status of institutions. This would profile institutions whether they are complementary or similar to each other. Institutions could have the same status but different academic profile which could affect the process of institutional combinations. If two universities merge with a highly complementary with courses duplicated the impact would be on the staff numbers which would be low.

2.1.2.3 Integration depth This is the process that institutions decide on when integrating. This report shows three options that were used in European universities. One that the universities opted for a comprehensive integration which allows the institution to legally retain their status but be under an umbrella organization referred to as the federation model. This would be undertaken within a geographical area that would allow institutions to share the resources among them as it could be strategically planned and managed. Clustering is a process that is closely related to a system-wide approach which is driven by the sector and public authorities. This process creates networking through an existing higher education landscape in which regional universities network. A highly complex process which links the transfer of academic programs from colleges to universities with the staff and students. Another one is where a full merger takes place, institutions consolidate their resources and become one legal entity. Institutions also opted in a structural alliance that occurs when individual universities take on

many configurations which were arranged on a geographical basis. The other alliance was a similar profile of institutions within a geographical proximity.

2.1.2.4 System-wide restructuring process This process occurs when institutions have no relations to higher education initiatives and it would be implemented in a primary local context. There are two types of merger processes within the system-wide restructure as mentioned in the report. One is a complementary type which governs the research tertiaries into Universities and the type where universities merge among themselves.

2.1.3 Restructuring process

Not to derail too far from mergers in universities the first thing that happens in the universities with mergers is restructuring. Hall, Luescher & Symes (2004:34) says that the ministry believes that the restructuring of Higher Education is vital to democracy, social justice and the economic and social development of this country. By using the Structural strategies it attempts to change an organization's design by modifying the lines of authority, and span of control and arrangement of work functions by Brown (2001:196). The restructuring had to happen in UJ across the boundaries (through each department within the newly formed University) to have one functional organization, under one umbrella. Meaning all departments within the organization are guided by the same policies, mission, vision, objective and goals.

When we think of restructuring, two types of organizational structure come to mind. One is a centralized and decentralized structure. According to Baligh (2006:60) centralized organizational structures rely on one individual to make decisions and provide direction for the company. Small businesses often use this structure since the owner is responsible for the company’s business operations. Decentralized organizational structures often have several individuals responsible for making business decisions and running the business. Decentralized organizations rely on a team environment at different levels in the business. Individuals at each level in the business may have some autonomy to make business decisions. Brown (2011:448) looks at the centralization versus decentralization which states that it would be required to apply both centralized and decentralized formats for functional,

structure and governance. The decentralised format has a quicker response to change whereas the centralized format has a better coordination and working together in a unit.

According to de Jong, Wiezer, de Weerd, Nielsen, Mattila-Holappa & Mockałło (2016:91- 114) following their findings from reviewing 39 studies on restructuring that was published over 12 years. Their difference between short and long terms effect of restructuring are as follow:

Not all employees experienced the negative effects to the same degree as others, and some studies suggested positive changes in well-being over a duration of time. The reason for the positivity would be related to the type of restructuring and how it was managed, or that majority of the negativity already occurred. But with no doubt, most studies indicated that negative changes happen over a time period during the restructuring and post-restructuring time frame.

They also suggested that some employees with a high organizational status react less negatively prior to restructuring then employees with the change in their work place. Employees with low wage were identified as the most vulnerable group, and the most affected group by negatively of restructuring were the least qualified, non-manual and permanent employees. Employees that stayed on with the organization would have responsibilities or tasks that they familiar with and had not received training for.

Factors that impacted positively to restructuring process was communication, provision of change-related information and training. The negative impact of the well-being on individual characteristics was job insecurity, employee adjustment to change, perceived result of change and negative change experience. The bottom line that the authors illustrated based on their findings of restructuring is that it affects the whole organization sector, whether it for economic or performance reasons.

2.1.3.1 Restructuring and new landscape for higher education (Ministry Of Education June 2002)

After the first report that the NWG submitted in December 2001 to the Ministry of education that who accepted the proposals which the NWG recommended. The department of Higher Education consolidates a number of tertiaries institutions from 36 to 21. In order for the higher education system to achieve the vision for transformation, non-sexist, non-racial and democratic system, which was stated in the Education White Paper 3 (July 1997), three fundamental objectives needed to be achieved.

● By attending to the inequalities in institutions structures and resources where certain institutions were better off than other ● Equally processing knowledge and information by producing graduates with the skills and competencies needed in the economy. ● By utilizing the limited resource effectively and efficiently equally across the board and other social sectors which are priority There were five (5) policies and objectives that The National Plan for Higher Education (2001) identified which would play an important role in transformation and reconstruction in the system. They are as follows

➢ Addressing, the country's Human resource needs through increasing accessibility and creating skilled and competent graduates ➢ Strengthening the current research and increasing the high-level research capacity to the national development needs ➢ To reach, the national, regional skill and knowledge needs in the institutional landscape of the higher education system, with the mission and differentiation of programs ➢ Inequality: promoting the access and outcome of the South African society with student and staff profile demographics being reflected in society ➢ Restructuring institutions and creating new institutions through the institutional landscape of the higher education system in addressing inequalities and inefficiencies of the past. The National Plan addresses the systemic problem and the inefficiencies of structures in

institutions which were inherent in the system by transformation and restructuring.

2.1.3.2 Ministry of Education of implementation (focus on RAU/Gauteng)

In Gauteng the following was implemented or proposed by the ministry:

• That RAU and TWR merge to form a comprehensive university. The two campus of Vista University ( East Rand and Soweto campuses) be incorporated into the new university that would be formed • Wits should be retained as a separate University • UP would also retain their status, but the Mamelodi campus of Vista University would be incorporated into UP • And the three Technikons in Pretoria (Technikon Northern Gauteng, Technikon North-West and Technikon Pretoria) would merge as a new institution

NWG views were accepted by the ministry on the establishing of a merger between RAU and TWR. This was based on the larger scale of needs from the central Gauteng Region in the industry that needs to be met. It was felt that the two institutions would be able to provide both Technikon and university courses, which would make them effective and efficient in their region. They would also promote equity with them joining their students, where RAU had 70% white and TWR 80% Black. The incorporation of the two Vista campuses would serve and provide those communities the best through their vocational and technological courses

The newly proposed institution would have the following characteristics as set out by this report from the Ministry of Education (June 2002):

The total head count of the institutions was 34 000 students, whereby 28 000 students will be enrolled in various campuses and another 6000 students would be off campus doing distance programs. The institution would have 15000 (54%) students studying an undergraduate diplomas for three years, 13 000 (38%) students would study an undergraduate bachelor's degree also for three-years, post-graduate diplomas, post-graduate degrees and honours degrees would be a total of 3500 (10%) students and 2500 (8%) students would be 19

comprised of masters and doctorate degrees.

From the full-time students enrolled, there would be 30% enrolled in engineering, science and technology courses, 30% would be enrolled in business and management, 15% enrolled in education courses and the balance 25% would be enrolled in other humanities courses. The institution would be expected to produces 8000 graduates each year of which 3 300 (41%) would come out of the undergraduate diplomas, 2 400 (30%) from undergraduate bachelor's degrees and 2 300 (29%) from post-graduate qualifications. From the total of the number of students enrolled there would be 67% black students on campus; 50% male and 50%female. The institution would have 900 permanent full-time academic staff of which 35% will hold a doctorate and 40% a master’s degree.

2.1.3.3 The Higher Education new institutional landscape

The Ministry proposed 21 tertiary institutions with two National Institutes for Higher Education to be as follows

Eleven 11 universities, where two institutions will focus on the Technikon programs that will develop a career to suit the needs of that region. The system would have four (4) comprehensive institutions of which three (3) would be merged between Technikon and university and the one (1) remaining would be redeveloped as an existing university. Two (2) were national institutes of higher education. From the 36 institutions that existed only five (5) institutions (the University of Cape Town, University of Stellenbosch, University of Western Cape, University Witwatersrand and Vaal Triangle Technikon) were not affected by the merger. Other institutions had to merge which meant restructuring or incorporating.

The new Higher Education Intuitional landscape table of mergers table of mergers shown in Figure 2.2

Figure 2.2: The new Higher Education Intuitional landscape table of mergers

University mergers Merger of Merger of Unmerged Technikons & Technikons Universities

-Fort Hare and -PE Technikon and -Free State Rhodes North University of Port -Technikon University Elizabeth Northern Gauteng, -Venda and Pretoria Technikon -Free State Medunsa -University of and Technikon Technikon -Natal and Durban- Transkei, Border North West -Vaal Triangle Westville Technikon and Technikon Eastern Cape -ML Sultan -North West and Technikon and -Peninsula Potchefstroom -TSA, UNISA and Natal Technikon Technikon VUDEC -University of -Wits Tech and Cape Town RAU -University of -Mongosutu Western Cape Technikon and University of -University of Zululand Stellenbosch

Two national Institution of Higher Education

2.1.4 Concerning and related aspects to merger that need to be considered.

The merger had aspects that had to be covered and taken into account. In a university like UJ, leadership would play a massive role in the merger. According to Eastman & Lang (2001:220) for a merger process to be successful, merging institutions require a good agreement and strong leadership, as well as the good commitment of political, financial and managerial resources. Strong leadership plays a role in a merge and will determine how successful it will be in the organization and how the organization forges ahead after the merger. The role of leadership within a merger and acceptance of the merger in different divisions of any organization is key for all adopted implementations to be smooth starts with 21

the leader or leaders. Hough, Nieman & Nieuwenhuizen (2003:16) defines leadership as a person being comfortable with people and being able to interact with them, individually. This would allow the leader to be able to confront problems or address them, able to listen to differing opinions and options available to them and deciding which would work and which would not work., Instil trust in their employees or people and give them recognition where deserved. All this is part of leadership behaviour besides their decision making (being able to make the smart decision and effective ones) aspect.

Leaders of a new organization (newly formed university) would have to benchmark the organization against others (universities) to show performance and if there is progress after the merger. This is one of the indicators of how the organization is doing, where the organization is placed in achieving their targets and goals that are set within the organization. Benchmarking is a systematic procedure that measures a firm’s processes, services, and products against those of industry leaders. Companies use benchmarking to better understand how outstanding companies do things so that they can improve their own processes according to Krajewski, Malhota, & Ritzman (2002:159). To benchmark, the organization must have goals set in place to compare themselves against.

Having clear goals set for an organization is determined from the leadership to all the employees which would work towards common goals of the organization that have been set, this is called goal setting. Goals or objective are defined by Martin & Thompson (2010:11) as an organization desirable, which will have a time frame to achieve and it will concern the size or type of organization with their areas of interest that will assist them to a level of success.

2.1.5. The outcomes review on Higher Education Restructuring

Hall (2015: 145-173) states that there was no formal comprehensive outcomes review on Higher Education restructuring, but there were audit reports done by the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC). This was done to give perspective outcomes of the merger process and the HEQC audit reports were conducted on 9 of 11 new universities. When those reports were collectively combined and assessed the findings found three type of institutional circumstances over the years following the implementation of the merger.

First one was that the HEQC audit reports generally saw only four successful mergers which were as follow:

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University which was audited in 2008 and were praised for their quick and effective implementation measures toward their operation, management, and stable governance. However, the was incomplete issues like different academic requirements, organizational cultures, remuneration of standards and academic shape towards diploma programmes

The University of Johannesburg was audited in 2009 with a different panel and their findings were as follow. UJ was considerably settled in terms of their operational aspect of merger and was in a position in their achieving their mission and vision. This was due to their radical organizational redesign and renewal process, which consisted of financial and human resources investment that was steered towards teaching and learning capacity with infrastructures across campuses. One of the biggest challenges they had was the coexistence of degrees and ex-Technicon diplomas in the university itself.

The North-West University was also audited in 2009 and the HEQC found the following findings. Their progress made of the wide range merger requirement was noted. But they had a number of issues like the student and staff profile with the university culture and programme alignment across all campuses. The merger was regarded as incomplete due to the large imbalances in infrastructure, resources, and staffing across campuses that still existed and would be incomplete till there would be comparable levels and quality of programmes on all three campuses for the students. The HEQC noted from the start of the audit that there would be a challenge to combine an institution that has three campuses that are separated from each other by a distance of at least 200 km.

The University of KwaZulu-Natal was audited in 2008, but the Council on Higher Education decided not to publish the report. The unpublished report of HEQC found that the institution had seemly difficult challenges with them merging. Due to four-College model that was adopted, which was a disadvantage and decision-making was often duplicated based on the additional layer they had between faculties and Senate. The was spread of activities across many campuses which made it difficult to contact people and a number of staff issues were unresolved with the consolidated of academic programmes that were incomplete added it the 23

issues too. But the institution was successful in implementing its formative merger.

The four favourable reviews with the above-mentioned institutions had a number of features in common and were able to move quickly, and effectively in integrating their new organization and operations structure. But with that said they still struggled with considerable challenges like their staffing, the new institution mission, and purpose, and aligning academic programmes within an institution.

The second one was the two problematic merger outcomes that the HEQC reports indicated and they were:

The Walter Sisulu University of Technology and Science was delayed due to problems within the institution but took place in 2011. The HEQC found that it was a difficult and painful process, they were under-resourced, had poor financial management, had a wide point of views on the mission and purpose of the institution, and they had a lot of resistance toward merger from staff with poor coherence across their campuses. To add on to this the lack of management within their merger process also affected staff morale. There were many unresolved issues that needed to be addressed like the organizational structure, synchronization of processes, having a sustainable financial plan, revaluating of employee contracts and implementing job descriptions that are equitable service conditions with a performance management system. The committee decided if the issues won't address quickly it would affect their educational quality and sustainability, which place them at risk. In October that year, WSU was placed under terms of the Higher Education Act, which meant that they were under the control of an Administrator and meant the report directly to the Minister. This report also results in the Council and Vice-Chancellor being suspended by the Minister.

The University of Limpopo audit was done in 2010 and also was unsuccessful to mandate merger. The key point for this merger was to provide facilities and training for health sciences in the Limpopo province. This was strongly resisted by staff and the majority of them resigned which were highly qualified. There was also lack suitable mission and had a poor purpose for the core functions of the institution. The campuses where also 300km apart which contributed to the issues. Following this report, the Minister had to step in again, where he assigned a task team to investigate. This team reported back in 2011 and concluded 24

that the merger was unsuccessful and must be undone. This was due to that it was not going to benefit either of the campuses with their current programme to merge. In 2014 they unbundled and became independent universities

Both situations above with problematic institutions that were unsuccessful mergers. They had weak partnerships and had many challenges before the merger process started. None of them had been able to create a sensible and acceptable mission or purpose, and the distanced between the institution's campuses just added to the problems they were facing. Both mergers were designed to help address the economic challenges and cater for the student which did not transpire and caused more damage than anything else.

The third type was the universities that were seen as being on track of reaching the consolidation and integration of the merging process. But based on the last reviews of the HEQC audit panel they still regarded those processes within those universities as incomplete. Five universities fell into this category and they were as follow:

The Tshwane University of Technology`s audit was conducted in 2007 and there were some concerns that the audit report indicated. Their concerns were of the race, language, working ethic, and the ideology situations. All the above concerns caused tension and conflict among the employees, which demonstrated that there was a lack of institutional identity or no common institutional purpose. In 2009 the Minister appointed a commission of inquiry to look into the TUT ongoing problem. The inquiry found that there were two sides with serious void among each other. The one side way the Senate and the executive management at it and other side was the employees and students. This caused them to go back and fore with accusations, counter-accusations, and demands, which created inner-divisions within the institution. The institution was also placed under formal administration till the new Council and Vice-Chancellor were appointed in 2012. This was a similar process that DUT when through, where they had to re-establish governance and appoint new leadership team. But the newly appointed leadership team would still face challenges, like having 50 000 students and them being across four campuses from both urban and rural areas

The long-time standing the University of South Africa was different from the other institutions, where they provider long-distance learning and was very large in terms of

numbers. For them, it was more required changes based on new innovative technology and needs of students. In order for the merger to occur in UNISA, there had to be public dispute and court action before the university considered in creating a new form of comprehensive practice within the organization. This process had a few challenges and when the audit was conducted in 2008. The HEQC found that the throughput of the UNISA students did not fit well with other distance learning universities, which had a serious concern for the panel. The HEQC concern was that the access of the university did not realize the student progress of studies, and the number graduates from the institution would not contribute to social development and the shortage of skill in the country. They also noted the financial and human resource demands in 2004 was daunting, with key aspects of processes within was incomplete. The merger put tension on the relationships between the management and academic which was resolved. But there was dissatisfaction from academic staff due to the conditions they had to work under. That had a high workload which meant they had a lot of students to support and in some courses, the average of the students was too high even for the university itself.

Just as UNISA the Cape Peninsula University of Technology had to also go through public dispute before the merger could take place. CPUT was audited in 2010 and had a number of challenges they faced. The panel noted that the challenges they face where student accommodation, equipped facilities for educational purposes and support learning access for students. This was all due to the diverse nature of the institution demographics and multi- campuses that fell in those areas. They also had a challenge with the student experience from the lecture halls to other social spaces on each campus. Due to this the panel felt that the university should develop a new academic identity and culture to address the student experience

The final university that fell into this category was the University of Fort Hare that also was established for a very long time. They incorporated the campus that was previously under Rhodes University, which was in the coastal town of East London. UFH was audited in 2008 and it was noted that Fort Hare been in a 10-year evolutional crisis, which almost collapsed the entire institution. Since that time period (2000) the institution had used a turnaround strategy, were they re-establish governance structures by stabilizing the administration and erasing the massive debt. The HEQC advised that UFH would require reconciling the 26

operational and concepts toward bringing the rural and urban orientation within the university, and doing so without harming their sustainability and development of the Alice campus.

The universities that fell in this third category had all experienced challenges with the merger, but it must be noted that all had post-merger histories in common. The issues they had with merger were either prior to the merger that won't resolved when the merger happened, due to large political disputes, or due to internal issues within an institution. These universities have a major responsibility to students and their communities in terms of economic development for the country, and that's the reason why they also spread geographically. They would require more time before achieving full alignment and integration as new institutions

When taking the whole HEQC audit reports of the nine of the total 11 new universities. It clearly shows, that all the universities mergers are still incomplete and it will take more than a decade before all requirements of the merger will be met.

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW: UJ Sport Bureau

In this section of literature review, the focus of literature would be based on the process and adaptation of UJ Sport Bureau within the merger of UJ and the Accenture process that followed after. The process that UJ Sport Bureau adopted to become a single operating model that support UJ strategy as a department and falls in line with corporate mission, vision and objectives of UJ.

The core function for the UJ Sport Bureau is not only to provide sports and professional service to students/staff at UJ but also to external stakeholders. This has a major obligation of service delivery and performance and plays a role as to how service delivery is delivered across the board based on the unit functionality. In order for this to happen UJ Sport had to renew and integrate the operating model which was a challenge on its own with all the differences among the two departments. Copper, Dhiri & Root (2012:2) refers to operating a model as for where and in what manner the critical work gets done across the broad of a

corporation. Which mainly links the company strategy and design of an organization that’s purposely placed to deliver a particular strategy as shown in Figure 2.3.

Figure 2.3: Operating models are a critical link between strategy and detailed organizational design.

Source: Copper, Dhiri & Root (2012:2)

In the organization architecture with regards to the incorporation of Vista into RAU, it was simple because Vista adopted the RAU structure in 2004. The merger between TWR and RAU in 2005 would be a big challenge starting with different structures. TWR Sport structure as in shown in Figure 2.4 was very different to the RAU sport structure as shown in Figure 2.5. Tian & Tran (2012:230) define the term structure in one simple sentence is the arrangements of tasks used to get work done

2.2.1 Merger process of UJ Sport Bureau

Looking at the merger process that happened between the two sporting departments TWR Sport and RAU Sport. The discussions amongst them started in 2003 before the merger, and it was focused on how the two could collaborate. Bearing in mind that they both had different structures (as shown in fig 2.4 and Fig 2.5), operations and each had their own the rich history. So not merging as one department was not an option, based on the order from the Educational Minister to be one single tertiary and there was an agreement signed between the two Councils (TWR & RAU) that needed to filter through all department.

The consensus amongst the two was that they would incorporate as one. This was done where both departments would merge equally, disclose full information to each other, have joint decision-making, would operate functionally as one, would appoint all senior staff, promoting existing staff and adjust remuneration of staff to one similar standard within a specific position or level. They established this to ensure that all department conduct the merger process effectively and equitably across the whole board.

After a lot of discussions, planning and implementing, the two departments became one as known UJ Sport and all staff were placed into positions, with two heads of sports and one executive director. Where the department provided opportunities for mass participation for the student and elite athletes to compete at club, provincial, regional, national and international level. They also drew the academical department of Sport and Movement into some of their operational functions where the two worked closely on the different project. All the above happen during the period of 2003 till end of 2004 and UJ Sport department became into existence at the start of January 2005

Figure 2.4: TWR Sports Department Structure

DEAN OF STUDENT AFFAIRS

HEAD OF SPORT

SPORT SPORT SPORT SPORT SPORT SPORT ORGANISER: ORGANISER: ORGANISER: ORGANISER: ORGANISER: ORGANISER: -Rugby -Squash -Martial Art -Hockey -Volleyball -Athletics -Dance Sport -Table Tennis -Tennis -Chess -Cricket -Netball -Basketball -General Sport -Aerobics -Softball -War-games -Bursaries on DFC -Faculties -Soccer -Marketing -Health & Safety -Accommodation (bookings) -Surveys -Open day -TWR Sport -First Aid -Stationery Times -Tracksuits -Posters -Deputise at -Xerox -Sports meeting, -Workshops Dinners -Workshops

Departmental Secretary:

-Basic Administration -Liaison Officer -Secretarial Function manage Office, Budget Support

-Workshops -First Aid

Figure 2.5: RAU Sports Department Structure

RAU Sport Faculty of Economic and Management Council Sciences

RAU: Sports Committee

RAU Sports Management Committee

Chief Director: Sport

Director of Sport Sports Finance

Head Sport Head Sport Head Sports Head Sports Services Head Marketing and Clubs Projects Curriculum Recruitment SASSU Center for Sport Research Bursary Social / Elite Super 16 Science and Biokinetics Teaching Accommodation competition Marketing School Recruitment projects Extracurricular Achieves function

Contract Projects

2.2.2 Accenture process of UJ Sport Bureau

According to the UJ Sport annual report (2007:11), UJ Sports Bureau staff portfolios were allocated on an interim time base period in November 2004, after they had an extensive consultation with staff members. So this meant that first phase project was scheduled in October 2007, which would renew and integrate TWR & RAU sport into UJ Sport. UJ Sport hired a company called Accenture, and they would facilitate the process which is mention as the Accenture process. This meant that UJ Sport went through another restructuring and redesigning process three years later, after the initial merger process in 2005.

In UJ Sport the Accenture looked at six elements in their operating model in order to have one function. The elements were Strategy, Processes, Organisation Architecture, Culture and Performance, Human Resource and Information Architecture. All these elements play a factor in having one functional unit.

In an organizational structure, there are different roles needed for this function. Those roles would have reporting structure for this purpose. Doman (2007) states that roles in a new structure should be constructed around the functional requirements and not individuals. Clear and transparent in terms of responsibility and accountability. It should also not be restricted by the number of current people (permanent employee, fixed term contract and other contractors) but rather benchmarked and fit for purpose. Brown (2011:296-97) refers to role analysis techniques which are designed to clarify role expectation. Based on team norms, influencing member behaviour, team form expectations about the behaviour of the other members of their team. Those sets of behaviours or attitudes associated with the various position in a team are called roles. Based on those factors UJ Sport new structure was created as shown in figure 2.6

Figure 2.6 UJ Sport Structure

Source: Doman (2007:46)

Figure 2.7 shows the UJ Sport and Sport & Movement Department structure including the Academic Department of Sports and movement (Accenture document by Domain 2007: 45).

Figure 2.7: UJ Sport and Sports & Movement Department structure (Compete Structure) 33

UJ Sport elected a steering committee from nominated staff members that would encapsulate 34

the UJ sports structure and drive the intended functions among the teams/other staff within the entity. This is similar to a project team which Tracey & William (1998:545) defines as an ad hoc or team of people temporarily grouped to perform a specific task/job and solving problems by finding solutions. Jeston & Nelis (2006:96) explain this term as business process architecture committee which is a committee that is established with responsibilities to maintain a total overview of the organization process architecture. This committee is established to have a standard link between corporation strategic objectives and the process goal

This steering committee was formed to do the facilitation of the process of the operating model within UJ sport and have all relative stakeholders’ best interest in mind. Facilitation is a skill which plays a major role during the design stage of the process point and the participating teams learn how to work effectively as a whole as referred by Bryson (2004:327). So they had to ensure that there was delivery on the project output and having attained the outcome from the project. Outlining the role that this steering had were the following points:

● Having the responsibility of achieving the outcome of the project ● Guiding those directly involved with the project business on the issue ● They would intervene directly with any issues that might have implications on business ● If any issues arise they would consider changes and will control the scope of the project ● They would re-assess any threats regularly and have strategies in place to counter any threats that would hinder the success of the project by identifying them timeously. ● They would align the agreed requirements with all the key stakeholders in UJ ● They would review all the different approaches, opinions and disputes that emerged by resolving them ● They will all sign off on the document as a mandate that will serve as a functioning document within the department.

All stakeholders that are relevant will play an important role to the operating model and their

opinion counts. Bryson (2004:35) defines the term stakeholder as that of an individual, a group or a corporation that has a stake or claim in the organization whose outcomes could affect the output.

This committee outlined a strategy that will define them as one unit (UJ Sport) that would have a vision statement which would give UJ Sport direction as to where they see themselves. UJ Sports vision statement is “Setting the trend in sport and human movement” Doman (2007:12). A vision statement is defined by Carter, Giber & Goldsmith (2001:25) as a statement an organization sees in an ideal state but it’s a long-term focus. A vision statement is one aspect of strategy, another is the mission statement which is more about the present and what an organization is about (gives them meaning).UJ Sport mission statement "provide excellent, multi-levelled academic and sports opportunities for communities through innovative and integrated professional services and programs” Doman (2007:13).The mission statement is a set of statements that is short-term like now and is the reason why any organization exists according to Carter, Giber & Goldsmith (2001:25).

This required them to do strategic planning, which they did by holding workshops that assisted them with the conceptual operating model among the steering committee. Other staff was consulted and they had an opportunity to give feedback at a special session or via email. Strategy planning can assist an organization in public domain or non-profit organisations and communities by satisfying their key stakeholders more effectively, meeting the mandates, creating the values and achieving their mission based on Bryson (2004:325). Any strategy planning needs to look at a strategic fit for the organization or within the operating model. In UJ sports intended strategy had to enable and support the functions. Campbell & Faulkner (2003:136) defines it organisations as a complimentary justification of an alliance that requires a high level of strategic and core competence.

With the strategic planning, they looked at the organisational culture, which played a major role in this aspect for the institution to succeed or fail. According to Ferguson & Ferguson (2000:34), work culture is how the spread through the operation of the corporation which would entail the values, roles and relationship among the management and workers of an organization. They state that culture gets influenced by the following aspect in an organization:

● The type of organization structure selected ● The governance used in the organization ● How an organization deals with their clients and suppliers ● How the relationship is in the environment an organization is in with other organization or competitors

Domain (2007:42) quotes that culture would be defined in UJ sport as the attitudes, behaviours, knowledge and values which would be shared among the staff and are factors to the function of UJ sport. Cultural fit would have had to be adopted/used based on the different cultures at UJ Sport as a whole had from the merger. Cultural fit where working colleagues in an organization perceptive understanding and are flexible in order to work effectively with each other and learn from one another about the different cultures. All employees are equivalent size, strength and aware of the needs that result, no employee dominates the other which makes the working environment compatible by Campbell & Faulkner (2003:137).

The cultural fit would also depend on the type of human resource within in an organization or department. Each UJ Sport staff/employee had to execute some attribute to enable them to proceed within the structure and their skills, knowledge, aptitudes would be incumbent on them to fill specific jobs within the organizational structure. Pearce ǁ & Robinson (2011:106) defines the term human resources as the way a corporation can attract and retain the staff which plays a major role in them succeeding. The environment that a corporation operates in will influence the selection of staff and the recruitment program the corporation has. The effects on a corporation based on the needed staff within organizations are:

● The reputation that a corporation has as an employer ● The employment they provide locally/nationally (employment rate) ● The availability of skilled people to the Corporation ● The standing corporation has a workers union and labour department For all the processes that are required starts with the information. Information played key roles in the operating model, knowledge, informing and accessible in order to support the functioning of the organization. According to Ferguson & Ferguson (2000:198), information is data that can be used for a specific task or cognition, codify and then change in the form

that it would be used. Information/knowledge can be obtained from internal or external sources to the organization.

2.3 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

Looking at the overview of the literature used above, you will notice most of the statements and reports in the first section are based on the transformation or restructuring in the South African Higher Educational System. The literature in this section shows the process the Higher Education department took to implement the transformation within the South African institutions and the steps they followed. The main focus of this literature was to show the process and how the merger/Accenture process happened to form the University of Johannesburg. It looks at the type of components used within the merger itself as a whole with some of the aspects indicating the type of mergers which was used in UJ. In Council of Higher Education (CHE) Report (SA 2004:15) states four different mergers

● Horizontal merger are universities that function the same way academically and are aligned to the same product service ● Vertical mergers are universities that function the same way academically and are aligned to a different product service ● Diversification mergers are universities that function differently from an academic point but are aligned to the same product service ● A conglomerate merger are universities that function differently from an academic point and are aligned differently to product service

Dodd & Theron (2011:333) proposed that even the universities that merged together with the same organizational cultures, the merger was still a very stressful ordeal. Allows universities faced challenges especially in the organizational culture which would be essentially different to what they were used to.

In the second section of literature which is the main focus of this study. The case study is on UJ sports implementation of the merger/Accenture process within the department and how they adopted it within the department to be functional with the challenges at hand. The organisational structure within the department had to change or restructure using the operating model concept to develop from AS-IS to TO-BE through the Accenture process. 38

With this model, there had to be a change in management to accommodate the organisational structure and to place all the employees into positions to have one functioning unit. The restructuring model that UJ Sport took was to create some additional positions to accommodate all the sports bureau employees and by reshuffling (match and place process) those employees into the different positions created within the new organisational structure. This would allow some employees to be promoted, some demoted and others placed in newly formed positions. The purpose being to work together as one functional unit. The match and place was a customized process created specifically for UJ Sport, to assist them in matching and placing of their employees into the new organisation structure.

These management changes caused the following within the department.

● Resistance to change by some employees ● Changes in the organisation created uncertainty among employees ● Employees stressing about their positions ● Employees morale could be damaged ● Create a negative atmosphere among employees ● Cause good employees to leave ● Could disrupt the function and productivity of the department

The evaluating of the model based on the performance of the department through their objectives and goals set (UJ Sport adopting a winning culture). And looking at the human resource of the department. Also having a look at how UJ Sport is currently functioning after 12 years of implementing the merger and what impact the merger had within the department.

The s Looking at the

These strategic reasons include:

 Positioning - Taking advantage of future opportunities that can be exploited when the two companies are combined. For example, a telecommunications company might improve its position for the future if it were to own a broad band service company. Companies need to position themselves to take advantage of emerging trends in the marketplace.

 Gap Filling - One company may have a major weakness (such as poor distribution) whereas the other company has some significant strength. By combining the two companies, each company fills-in strategic gaps that are essential for long-term survival.

 Organizational Competencies - Acquiring human resources and intellectual capital can help improve innovative thinking and development within the company.

 Broader Market Access - Acquiring a foreign company can give a company quick access to emerging global markets.

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION

This research in the main is focusing on the UJ Sports department to establish the effect and efficiency the implementations they adopted within the sports department based on the merger of the university as a whole. The research will view how they are currently operating with the new policies in the working environment. Are the changes put in place affecting them positively or negatively based on what currently is happening in the UJ Sports If all the implementations are in place to deliver as better productive service to achieve the goals, vision and objective of the university with the merger.

Another aspect that will be looked at is the effects of the merger within UJ Sport that had on the managers and employees which are the driving force of adopting the merger implementations to better the university and themselves in the future.

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

The research uses both qualitative and quantitative methods. However, since the research study focuses on UJ sport, the primary research method would be qualitative research. According to Leedy & Ormrod (2015:98) quantitative research is conducted through structural guidelines and generalised to others or places through explanations and predictions. Qualitative would use more observation in order to understand the situation better. UJ Sport is a department within the University of Johannesburg and is an entity for service delivery and a marketing tool for the university. UJ Sports has only 32 permanent staff members, the majority of staff are temporary due to the environment the department is functioning in. Focusing on the department performance, service delivery, working environment, leadership, decision-making, problem-solving, management ethics and employee empowerment with the changes implemented with the merger. This information will be gathered through the different type of data collecting methods and using other research instruments to obtain the relative information/data needed for this study. Information will also be used from the

literature to assist with the outcomes

There will be an evaluation done based on what was done on paper versus what is happening in practice at UJ Sports. There will also be a comparison done based on the outcome of the results that the department produces over the years to help identify whether there was an improvement resulting from merge of the department. All this will contribute to the investigation whether the merger was effective and efficient within the department.

3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

Nath & Singh (2010:33) refers to the population of study as individuals within a group that has one or more aspects in common and is appealing to research. This population can consist of individuals in a particular type or more specifically to a specific group. The population that was used in this study was UJ Sport department divided into the following sections. In term of staff, three populations of staff were looked at, 1. Was all department staff (UJ Sport) that was present during the merger process (2004) and the Accenture process (2007) and still existed within UJ sport. 2. Was all UJ Sport staff members that were permanent, contract or temporary staff within UJ Sport that contributed to the UJ Sport annual reports ranging from 2007 till 2015. 3. All UJ Staff members (permanent staff) that took part in the UJ Survey 2016 under the department section. Also, all UJ Sport Student (Bursary and non-Bursary students) that participated in sports for UJ Sport which contributed to the sporting results.

3.4 SAMPLING METHOD AND SIZE

UJ Sport Looking at the total amount of staff members at UJ sport there are 32 permanent employees and 119 temporary employees (staff on contracts or temporary staff). From this grouping, a select few will go through in-depth-interviews, preferably those staff members that were involved with the merger of both institutions (TWR Sport and RAU Sport). There will also be a sample of UJ Sport Equity profiles both permanent and temporary staff over the years. Student athletes or scholarship student will also be part of the sampling group where the study will look at the number of holders over the years since the merger was

implemented, and the performance based on results of the sports team against their peers or where they stand against other institutions in South Africa.

3.5 DATA COLLECTION PROCESS

When looking at data collection two things come to mind is it primary data or secondary data. Kruger & Welman (2001:35) defines the two definitions as the primary source could be oral or written as long as it is witnessed directly by the person or people involved. The forms could be through audio, visual or photographic as long as it is raw or first-time data obtained. Secondary data is data/information that has not been witnessed by the person him or herself but gathered from someone else, so its second-hand data or hearsay not witnessed first time by that person.

The primary data in this research would be obtained through in-depth interviews (face to face interviews), observations and having discussion with staff at UJ Sport or other staff members within UJ. Secondary data will be gathered from the UJ Sport annual reports (2007 to 2015) and any other secondary data/sources that are relative to this research.

3.5.1 Primary data

Participant used in the primary data collection will be the face to face interview with staff members that was part of the process when UJ was formed. This will be important information to collect for the purpose of this study. In how UJ Sport went about the merger within the department itself, and how they were affected, changes they went through and the outcome of the merger. Open questions were asked based on the information and the knowledge the interviewee gave from their experience with the merger. There were structured and specific questions asked by the interviewer based on their level of involvement with the process taken by the department as stated in the appendix B1-B15. The following staff was interviewed

● Johan Rainsford ex-TWR Rugby Manager and currently is UJ Sport Facilities Manager ● Phemelo Motse ex-TWR Netball & Athletics Manager but also co-ordinator

bursaries & accommodation and currently UJ administrator ● Henriette Vermaak ex-RAU Hockey Facility Manager and currently SSD (Sport Students with Disabilities) clubs manager ● Anton Van Rooyen ex- TWR as Cricket & Volleyball Manager and currently is UJ Basketball and Volleyball Manager ● Joel Kgokong was a student & was Sport SCR for TWR and is currently the UJ Football Manager ● Mandla Ngema was a former student from RAU ( a basketball player) and is currently the UJ basketball coach ● Francois Fouche ex-RAU Athletics Manager and is currently Senior Manager: Sports Secretariat of UJ Sport ● Chris Fortuin ex-TWR lecturer in the sports department and is currently the Lecturer & diploma coordinator for UJ Sports Department (Academic side) ● Reedwaan Asvat ex-TWR as Squash Manager and currently Campus Coordinator for Sport DFC ● Jimmy Potgieter ex-RAU student & student Assistance for RAU rugby and is currently UJ Rugby Manager ● Karel Mouton ex-RAU Cricket Manager and currently is UJ Cricket & Cycling Manager ● Pieter Durandt ex-RAU Student Marketing Manager and currently is the UJ Marketing Manager ● Marianne Viljoen ex-TWR Biokineticist and is currently the Senior Manager: performance excellence program for the HP (High Performance) in UJ Sport ● Itumeleng Mogotsi ex-RAU Student and played rugby for RAU first time and is currently the backline coach for UJ Rugby ● Sekgoari Lashaba ex-TWR Sports Field Supervisor & chairperson of the works union for TWR breach and currently is the APB ( Auckland Park Bunting Road Campus) Sports Fields, Manager

The observation was also used as a primary source of data collection. My personal views of the current working environment and how UJ Sport is functioning. Assessed from my

personal working experience at UJ Sport from 2007 (student assistance) to currently where I am the UJ Athletics Manager and where views were pointed out on how the department changed or evolved from 2007 to present. Also by interaction with the employees and Sports students on a daily basis, providing additional primary data to this research study.

By observing the sports events and performances of sporting events indicated how UJ sport was presenting itself against other UJ stakeholders and other institutions. The observation of leadership skills transfer and motivation to the employees coupled with decision making where empowerment can be identified within the department towards the employees. The behaviour of the employees to each other was also viewed and will reflect the working environment and respect for each other.

3.5.2 Secondary data

The Integration and renewal of the Support and Enabling Functions for UJ Sports used to understand how the UJ Sports implemented the merger in their department based on the changes they went through. It was used to review if it’s currently adopted in the working environment. It also gives the guidelines of how UJ Sport has to function and allows for this study to make a comparison what is in places and what is not based on the job roles, policies and how the department should function with the objective, mission and the vision of the merger. To show the gaps As-Is to what it has To-Be. This studies literature review was used to assist with the findings of this research.

Annual Report of UJ Sport (2007 to 2010) was used to evaluate the current performances of UJ Sport and to be able to use statistics to prove the findings of the research study conducted. To show the current results of the department, and to identify a possible problem where clear issues can be identified. Also to show if the objectives have been achieved and if the UJ Sport is in line with the mission and vision objective.

Other secondary sources were also used like the internet, printed media and physical research done on the topic at the department as additional secondary data.

3.6 RESEARCH VALIDITY

Lee (1999:153) defines validity as presenting the right facts through taking the correct measurement which is of interest to a research study from the researcher’s concept. Based on this study, the respondents in the primary data were explicitly selected as they were present during the merger and Accenture process within UJ sport and are still in the department, which makes them relative to the study.

Regarding the secondary data, UJ Sport department took part in the UJ culture survey 2016, which was conducted across the university and the data was analysed and interpreted by Statkon (Statistical Consultation Service). They also analyzed the statistics of the UJ Sport annual reports that were used in this study. Memorandum of agreements during the merger process, Documentation of merger and Accenture process final drafted document within UJ sport was also used, which all is relative to the study from valid sources. The performance of UJ Sport was determined by the results of the sporting performances of the UJ teams against their peers (other Universities), at USSA and Varsity Sports competitions. The outcomes of those results and yearly UJ annual reports were also compared to the mission and vision of department to give any indication whether the department was achieving them.

3.7 SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY

Overview of the research methodology of this study. Research used both qualitative and quantitative research but mainly focused on a qualitative research where sampling was the UJ Sport department. Secondary data was collected mainly through annual reports and other relative sources to the study while primary data was collected through face to face interviews and observation. A comparison would be done over the past years to indicate the difference over UJ Sport performances.

3.8 RESEARCH LIMITATION

Due to the environment, UJ Sport is in. It posted a challenge to get hold of the interviewees because they were consistently out their office and lengthen the process. Most of the data before Accenture process and during merger process (before 2007) was stored in files and not all electronically on the server. This took a lot of time to analyse and collect the data.

CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF DATA

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents all the detail information on how the department adopted the merger and the process within the primary and secondary data through the research conducted. This chapter would be subdivided into sections which would the primary data (section A) and secondary data (section B) since it’s a lengthy chapter on these studies. This would break the chapter into two sections and the results would be in the next chapter (chapter 5)

SECTION A

4.2 PRIMARY DATA

4.2.1 Interview with employees

Each interviewee (current UJ staff that was from the institutions that merged) answered the ten questions openly with the follow-up questions if there were any. The questions were broken down into three (3) structural parts questions: 1 to 3 that was the background of the each institutions before merger in 2004, questions: 4 to 7 that was the process that was adopted or done among the institutions to become UJ/UJ Sport and the questions: 8 to 10 that is the current/present/post-merger at UJ/ UJ Sport.

This data was interpreted and retrieved in a most meaningful way that each bit of data would identify critical themes or patterns that would be useful for this study. Due to the lengthy responses from the interviewee’s, short summaries by the interviewer was done, and the full answers of each interview would be found at the appendix B1 to B15.

4.2.1.1 Interview with Joel Kgokong (UJ Football Manager) on 14 February 2017 on APB campus at 12:52 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B1)

Joel was a TWR student at the time and a student Sports Council president at TWR. He worked very closely with the TWR Sport department. He also said that the process was similar to now but then student had more influence of the sports management decisions,

where now it's from top management and students are no long involved or part of decision making process. The first time he heard about the merger was when it was announced by the Higher Education Minister.

He stated that during that time period the merger did not go well with certain institutions that were better off and you could see two different teams pairing up within the department which was negative in his point of view. But the two different institutions had to sit together and discuss the way forward for them to merge. He also felt that some better-qualified candidates from TWR did not get certain positions which did not go down well with the ex-TWR staff.

His role in this process was more from a student point of view where they informed students about the merger and what was going to happen. He also felt that some institutions in this merger benefited more than others like Vista based on the resources, facilities and financial gains to them being one as UJ. But in the same breath, there was an issue with the human resource side (HR) based on that there was now more than one person in the same position, so one would get the job the other would be moved which caused low morale amongst the staff.

He also stated if they leave politics aside from the former institutions the merger would actually work from his point of view. The staff is still dwelling on the past of how they were. He also felt that they not better off with the merger in a sense because when he started at TWR there was transformation and during this process transformation was lacking. But there is some positivity where you now see a black African women leading UJ sport as a Senior Director. He also stated that they need to come to a point where everybody understands what they need to do and there needs to be some clarity on certain things like policies at UJ Sport, which seems to be like a top secret

4.2.1.2 Interview with Anton Van Rooyen (UJ Basketball & Volleyball Manager) on 14 February 2017 on APB campus at 13:15 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B2)

Anton was previously from TWR Sport and in charge of volleyball, cricket and war games (referred to as mind sport now). He also stated that it was similar to now but bursaries then were allocated equally among them collectively. The head of sport at TWR informed him 48

about the merger in the second month of 2004 but was not affected because he just started off that year so he was fairly new at TWR. He remembers with the process that staff member were selected from both sides of TWR and RAU to work on a steering committee, which gave all the staff a progress report about the merger within the department.

Anton stated that he did not really play a role in the department merger process but did more behind the scenes. He also mentioned that when it came to middle management the process was fair but not at the top management of the department, because there was only one ex- TWR staff member that was included in top management the rest was ex-RAU staff members (which were five). He also included that when it came to high-performance sports their department was working and was better than TWR because they mostly focused on competitive sports and social sports.

He said due to him not being long enough in TWR, he does not really know the circumstances prior to the merger so he was unable to state whether they were better off or not. But he did say that he thought UJ Sport has good policies in place, which they don’t always follow the protocol on those policies and that some individuals still holds on to the past, which they need to let go. He felt that UJ Sport still needed to work on transformation.

4.2.1.3 Interview with Francois Fouche (UJ on 14 February 2017 on APB campus at 14:00 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B3)

Francois was the RAU Athletics Manager at the time. Francois stated that RAU Sport was more high performance driven and had three categories (High-Performance Sports, Competitive Sports, and Social Recreation sports), which sporting codes fell in. He also said that the merger started two years prior to the official merger which was in 2005.

Francois thought both parties were uncertain of their jobs during the merger process and the process of the merger started in 2004 with the discussion between both heads of sports (TWR and RAU), which led to a dual management structure for an interim time. An external company (Accenture) was hired (in 2007) to assist UJ Sport with the evaluation and merger process. Where some positions were advertised and other were “match and place”

Francois was part of the steering committee which was involved in creating a new organisational structure and setting the mission, vision and a strategic plan for UJ Sport. He said that RAU Sport felt they got the short end of the stick and the TWR guys felt that the ex- RAU staff got the better position. Francois also pointed out that it was a forceful merger if he had to think back to those days. He stated that RAU was on a better financial level then TWR due to the quality of the financial management of the institution. And from a sporting point of view, they were high performance driven, so RAU was better off without the merger. He also said looking at current affairs from a UJ Sport perspective where they are not fine, because we moved away from the winning culture and we must remember sport has a phase out and in a unit where we are a brand. And that people or students align themselves with a quality and winning brand. So on the road that they currently on, they can lose a lot of high- performance sportspeople and staff because they moving away from high-performance system to a recreational system.

He stated that UJ Sport has been in a 10-year limbo that was stable with the same management structure, but as soon as management changed, the whole vision mission changed with it, which can change the culture.

4.2.1.4 Interview with Phemelo Motse on 17 February 2017 on APB campus at 09:10 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B4)

Phemelo said she was appointed as sports manager for Athletics, Netball and later on they added additional responsibilities like a coordinator for bursaries and accommodation for TWR. She stated that those days all sports managers sat down collectively and allocated bursaries fairly across the board. TWR Sport had a flat structure by having the sports director followed by all the different sports managers. She concludes that the merger was announced in 2004 and it was all over the media (TV and Radio), where RAU and Vista were already merged at that time.

Phemelo said it was a stressful time period for her during the merger but she looked at the brighter future where she could grow. She stated that during the merger period their head of sport (TWR head of sport) communicated to them all on a regular basis regarding the

negotiation process of positions since there was a duplication of positions. She was also told that her position might change at the time. She said everything was smooth till 2008 when Accenture come in and reshuffled (matched and placed) all the positions and staff. This is when she had to move again after being placed as UJ Netball Manager in 2006. She also said that people were reshuffled (placed) into positions which they had no clue of how to operate them or within them.

Phemelo said she was not really involved. It was more of a dictatorship, where she was told you take the position or don't and it came from the senior management. She felt that implementation process was not fair because people looked at their own gains, like senior management positions for themselves and there were favourites within the department. So she said that merger was working for the first time period of years (2005-2008) then came 2009 where the performances dropped and policies were forced upon them.

She said that changes always happen and we need to look at leaderships because it’s very important when it comes to change. Because if we have strong leaderships that know where we heading too then she would say we better off. Phemelo stated that we are not fine at UJ Sport due to leadership dating back to years where the structure had an Executive Director and Director of Sport. Where you need managers with strategic knowledge of their roles and being able to be empowered in doing so.

4.2.1.5 Interview with Mandla Ngema on 17 February 2017 on APB campus at 10:24 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B5)

Mandla was a student at RAU (1996-2000) and became a basketball coach for RAU on completion of his studies till present. He indicated he will speak specifically from the basketball club aspect. Back then basketball had their own sponsors and was not part of the RAU Sport codes forum. In 2004 Mandla said he was surprised to learn through the TWR coach that they going to be a merger. RAU Basketball closed down due to the lack of funds at the time. So hearing about the merger made him excited and it would help better the club. His involvement was when he was brought over from RAU to TWR to smooth over the transition of the merger between the two clubs as RAU basketball had collapsed.

He started as a coach and brought players together and had to quell the rivalry amongst them. He also stated that the process was not fair. He was under the impression that RAU had taken over and he felt right at home because he was use to that environment, but the TWR staff felt that they were excluded due to the majority of line manager and top positions were awarded to RAU staff. He also stated that he does not think it’s working neither is it efficiency. He felt that the department took a step back and each and every year we regress. He said there were continuous changes, and as a coach, he did not know what motivates the changes and how they just get implemented.

Mandla stated that the merger in terms of numbers was good because they have more data of players within the system and from a recruitment point of view they are advancing. However, they are at a disadvantage because the players are aware of their value and get recruited by our competitors due to the current environment. He said he would like to see the clubs being empowered so that the manager and coaches run them and that they be trusted to do so. He felt that there is no trust and coaches are not appreciated.

4.2.1.6 Interview with Pieter Durandt on 17 February 2017 on UJ Rugby Clubhouse (UJ Stadium APK) at 17:50 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B6)

Pieter was a Senior Student Marketing Manager at RAU. He said they functioned much simpler than they do now. He was made aware of the merger through media and that he was shocked because there were previously studies done by the Higher Education Department and they stated that RAU would not have to merge.

Pieter said that the entire university implemented the merger and it was a lengthy process that took 2 years (2003 & 2004). This process entitled the two parties (TWR & RAU) to look at the positions, job descriptions and have a discussion of how to go about the merger amongst them. He also stated that he was part of a steering committee with the responsible of restructure different positions and to do the job descriptions of those positions, as part of tasks on the committee.

Pieter said that the merger had to happen so its either you fight it or be part of it. He said he

was affected in the sense that they moved him from student service marketing to a new environment. He thinks that UJ is in a better position due to things working, but at the same time he thought that the communication channels were better and that their jobs were much simpler then than now. He said in the long run we are in a better position than we would have been in based on the changes in the environment that universities find themselves in. He also stated that no organization is perfect and we have to work towards being the best university in South Africa and Africa. Transformation is good but we should not do it for the sake of it but rather for what is best for the university.

4.2.1.7 Interview with Johan Rainsford on 23 February 2017 at ABP UJ Sport on 11:00 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B7)

Johan was with TWR sport as a Rugby Manager and after a year he received two more sports codes as the manager which was dance and basketball. He said they functioned very well where they had a head of sports and sports managers for all the sports codes. He found out about the merger when their head of sport told them about it and that he had mixed feeling about it because of the many portfolios that were similar to each other. He indicated that he had mixed feelings towards this move.

Johan said that he was part of their steering committee and that each person tried to clarify their role that she or he had to play in by meeting with their counterpart and seeing what they could do as the merger was being introduced. This was done in the beginning phase of the merger. He also said later in 2008 when Accenture came on board things changed and he felt that they were lead in a certain direction. Based on certain people in senior management positions at the time, which could have had other names in those positions and not necessary those who were in them

He also stated that he does not think that they effective but they working to a certain extent with productivity way below what it should be. Where senior management were not listening to the staff members below them and to what they were saying was happening on the ground, but rather telling them what to do. Johan also said that TWR model was a good one compared to now and that with the entry of Accenture a lot of people were appointed one sided by senior management which consisted mostly ex-RAU staff. He felt there were too many 53

“favours” done to a certain part of this process because the discussion on the table was us (TWR) and them (RAU) which did not put it on a sound footing. He felt there is a lack of trust and there is a need to work together as unit and not for any individual gain.

4.2.1.8 Interview with Marianne Viljoen on 10 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 09:00 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B8)

Marianne was the Biokineticist for TWR and at that time they not really serviced TWR Sport (were not really involved/part of the sport as now). She found out about the merger in a department meeting and she was positive about the merger. There was a strategic planning session where they decided that they would have two Bio-kinetic hubs, one at APB and other at APK. Her role was to assist in the planning of building the high-performance sports centre (Hub).

She said that she remembers the Accenture process where they had to decide if they want positions they would have to apply for it. She remembers applying for her senior position, which she felt was fair because she had to go for interviews or through the HR process for it. But some position were earmarked for individuals to be placed which some staff felt was not fair because some of the staff would have preferred to be placed somewhere else. It would have been a better option to let them apply for positions and go through the HR process, rather than the match and place process. She also said she thinks the merger is working because they would not have known what would have happened if RAU or TWR was still around.

She stated that the merger happened for a reason and it makes the institution bigger and more efficient where a small institution would not make it through, especially with “fees must fall” campaign. She also claimed that in her opinion all was not well because there are still challenges from a financial point of view, it could become a struggle as the environment is constantly changing.

4.2.1.9 Interview with Itumeleng Mogotsi on 10 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 09:30 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B9)

Itumeleng was a student and played rugby for the under19 RAU team. He said as a student athlete he was mostly at the training session, lived in the residence and attended to class. He said towards the end of his second year in 2004 the merger started taking place where the ex- RAU rugby assistant was sent over to the TWR side to assist with the merger. He felt that it was a good thing to merge, but was very uncertain how a rugby player from TWR first team was going to play in RAU first team because they had a very strong team with quality players.

He also stated that there were marches on campus and the students asked how the merger was going to work. But he did not play any role in the merger besides being one of the first players to play in the first team rugby as UJ and they started a new culture as UJ rugby. He said he does not think it was fair because rugby was basically given to RAU and football to TWR, so faces did not change. Which meant the TWR players were more in the background and RAU rugby player had the majority of the votes in the club. Rugby was taken over by RAU.

He said he felt the merger was progressing slowly but it had destroyed the organisational culture they were use too. Thinks it working slowly but surely but he noticed that merger killed the old culture, He indicated that to change staff and player’s mind-set will take a long time. He also said that the institution is much better now that the staff and players are having a sense of belonging and students want to take apart in UJ activities. But he felt that we still have to keep on working to change the mentality of people making the changes that everybody is in and not just doing it on paper.

4.2.1.10 Interview with Karel Mouton on 16 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 09:55. (Full response can be found in Appendix: B10)

Karel was the RAU Cricket Manager and said in those days all paperwork was done by hand and typed out later. He stated that the merger came to light in 2003 after many surveys and

then the announcement by Educational Minster. He mentioned that the majority of RAU staff was against it but he felt it was beneficial and after the first 6 years he felt they were stronger with the merger, which was a good thing until this past 4 years.

Karel said that the merger started early in 2004 were Prof Wim Hollander was proactive in it and that he only did the ground work of the merger process of the two cricket clubs ( TWR and RAU). He also said that he was happy because he retained his position where others did not and were not pleased with it. He also does not think it is effective and efficient anymore after Prof Wim Hollander (Executive Director of UJ Sport) lost control of the staff in 2012 and was moved. Later that year Ms. Sanpat Coetzee (UJ Sport Director) was removed from UJ Sport and reasons were not given for her removal. He questions the leaderships because it is no longer working as there is no mission, no focus and no guideline for them, as they are exposed to the environment and there is no protection.

He said when we started we were better off but currently we are not because of leadership and the current issues in the department. He is not blaming the merger but the current issues of leadership and the influences from outside on our leadership. He stated that we need a stronger leader that understands the different sports codes as we all manage different sports and find themselves in a different environment with different politics. Sport cannot be seen as an analytic agenda because every sports code has its own challenges that each one needs to resolve.

4.2.1.11 Interview with Henriette Vermaak on 16 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 10:50. (Full response can be found in Appendix: B11)

Henriette was the manager for the Hockey Astro facility for RAU. She said there was good communication channel with an open door policy with a great working environment and everybody supported each other. She heard about the merger at a workshop that was held at the Hockey Astro and she was fine with it because she likes change, it makes her perform better.

She said that there was much concern among the staff because of their positions which they were not sure about with merger. She felt some people were appointed which were not the 56

best candidates. This caused trust issues among them but the process did not affect her. She also did not play any role in the merger process, she just fell in line. She did say that she thought the process was not fair because of a certain manager that would not excel in that position and there was other candidate from TWR that would done better in that position. Also In some positions both TWR and RAU did not have the right people/person for the position but they never appointed anyone externally, which for her the match and place was not the best methods used in this case.

She felt that the original strategy that was implemented was rushed, that they should have decided then what they wanted to be. A good balance and integration was maintained at the time however, the last three years was a total mess at UJ Sport. She also added that you cannot combine a Technikon and a University. She thought that transformation is necessary but currently the way its being done through the management system is not working and that UJ Sport will implode

4.2.1.12 Interview with Reedwaan Asvat on 16 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 11:20. (Full response can be found in Appendix: B12)

He was a Squash Manager for TWR and they functioned in a similar way as now, but he felt that they were very efficient and worked as a team. The head of sports of TWR communicated to them that they were going to be a merger and he was excited but at the same time unsure. He also said that before the merger they had many meeting to reassure staff and to introduce the RAU staff for a smooth merger.

Reedwaan said that he was not directly involved with the merger process but gave his input and ideas. He said some senior positions were unfair if you look at the experience of those people in those positions. He stated that we still have room for improvement but people are trying under the circumstances to make it work. So we are better off with the merger if you look at it from a student's point view and that it gives UJ the recognition it deserves. Reedwaan also said that they are not perfect yet, which takes time and needs strong management. Because it's one thing to talk about changes and adaptations which need to be implemented fairly and correctly and that everybody has to agree and get on board in order

for it to work. He added that we need communication from top management and for them to set an example for their employees and not the other way around, where employees set the example for them.

4.2.1.13 Interview with Jimmy Potgieter on 10 April 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 13:30 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B13)

Jimmy started off as a student assistant to the Rugby Manager at RAU and was a team manager for a rugby team. He said that (RAU) use to compete against TWR who at times would beat them. He also found out through the department (RAU Sport) about the merger and he was not directly affected because he was a student and Lions rugby was paying him for work done at RAU Sport, but it was tense times among the sport staff members at the time.

He said at the time the RAU Rugby Manager was told that he would run UJ rugby and the TWR guys were told to move over to APK campus because that’s where rugby would be. He stated that his role in the process was minimal, he only contributed to the talks in the meetings by sharing his opinions and assisting in spreading the information.

Jimmy said he felt the process was not fair because some guys got the rough end of the stick. There was no scientific way of measuring who should get what position, and basing it on results was also not fair due to some having better resources than others. He also stated that it's not working, because it was a system that was enforced on staff but actually felt it did not work. He said they were better off without merger because once you start restructuring or divide of resources you don't get the full potential and lose quality staff due to them not coping with the merger. He thought UJ is a great brand from an educational point of view and its working. But from the sports point of view, it was not looking good because sport cannot deliver a service to all four campuses just from one person. So they need to revisit the systems and work on the small stuff now.

4.2.1.14 Interview with Sekgoari Lashaba on 19 April 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 15:00 (Full response can be found in Appendix: B14)

Sekgoari was a supervisor for the sports ground of TWR and he said they operated the same way as previous but does not report directly to sport anymore and he also did controls his own budget, where previously he did not. He stated that the merger was announced on national television and he was also involved with union activities at TWR. TWR management informed him about the merger. At first, he felt uncertain but saw it as a challenge.

He said there were a lot of challenges at first but they all were given responsibility, where they had to say how they would want to see their unit function. He also personally felt that justice prevailed and it was positive changes that were done. On reflection he conceded that the he is better off with the merger albeit those improvements could be introduced. He always felt that UJ was the best institution in the country compared to others when it comes to the merger and its challenges.

4.2.1.15 Interview with Chris Fortuin on 21 April 2017 via email. (Full response can be found in Appendix: B15)

He was a Lecturer/Researcher from RAU in The Department of Sport and Movement Studies which is an Academic Department. He stated that they use to focus more on the participation in the sport of the RAU students. The merger was publicly announced by the Council of Higher Education and he felt it was a good idea because it would ultimately merge all the resources for a greater output. This was a difficult process as staff feared being retrenched and that they would be deployed elsewhere.

Accenture was consulted to oversee the change and implementation of the merger. So in the Academics department individuals accepted the changes or you had the option of leaving. He also stated that it was not fair because the process was extremely flawed as it favoured certain people, which was driven in a certain way to frustrate and get rid of other individuals.

He stated that the merger politically was necessary for a more structured Academic program and can be effective if the aims and objectives are driven to be achieved. But where individuals use a process for their own agendas, it defeated the purpose. This is evident in UJ

Sport. He also felt that the institution was better off because the newly established UJ is more inclusive as it serves a broader community and individuals, as compared with the old institution which only looked at developing certain race groups.

He stated that The Institution is driven by broad goals and objectives and should be managed in that way. When individuals within an institution drive their own agendas which are contrary to that of the institution it can be dangerous and doom to fail

SECTION B

4.3 SECONDARY DATA

In this section of the research, the secondary data was gathered from various sources that were relative to this study and involved UJ Sport. The information was sourced from UJ Sport Annual reports, minutes of meetings with documentation from the TWR & RAU sports merger, Accenture documents (the facilitators) and other sources that played a role in the merger between TWR & RAU in becoming UJ sport.

This secondary data will give any overview on how the merger in the sport took place, the planning process behind it, implementation and the outcomes of the whole process. In this section, it will show the results of the department and how the changes effect the changes of the merge on an annual basis.

4.3.1 RAU and TWR Merger documents from 2004

This section of secondary data contains documents regarding the merger of the two-sport departments (TWR & RAU). Documents like memorandum, Meeting minutes, working session, strategy planning sessions and the implementation document (Accenture 2007 which was mentioned in chapter 1). The time frame of this documents dates to 2004 when the process was in the first phase of the merger.

4.3.1.1 Memorandum of the Agreement between TWR & RAU (2004) which was signed 27 January 2004 from both TWR & RAU Council.

This memo states that in December 2002 there was a decision made based on Section 23 of High Education Act (Act no 101 of 1997, amended) by the Minster of Education to have single tertiary institution through incorporation. It incorporated the East Rand and Soweto campuses of the former Vista University into RAU on 1 January 2004. The following year 1 January 2005 the merger of TWR and RAU came about.

In the declaration, TWR and RAU would co-operate in a transparent, collegial manner and openly in order to respect the decision made by the Minster of Education to have a single institution (University). This agreement was represented by the respective Chancellors and Vice-Chancellors with the purpose of facilitating the co-operation between the two, prior to the merging date. This ensured that the operational decision between the two, prior to the merger did not affect the operational and organizational integrity of the new institution.

The two parties committed the agreement with the following principles to guide them in the merger process

● The merger of equals: that both parties will play a role in decision making and be part of the planning and negotiations. Both parties will have equal status in the merging process. ● Full disclosure of information: both parties will disclose all material information transparent, proactive and timely in order to prepare the merger negotiations and planning for the joint activities. ● Joint decision-making: that where it all will impact the operational, organizational and academic integrity of the new institution that will be a joint decision and determination. So that parties will agree mutually.

It involved all stakeholders being consulted by the two institutions. The parties also had a minimum co-operation and joint decision-making which they covered. And they were:

● Operational functionality: parties must agree on processes, time frames, and transitional arrangements so that they can move towards integrated operations.

This will also ensure that the newly formed university is operational and functional on the date of establishment. ● Staff appointments: All senior staff (head of department or directors of departments) had an existing moratorium unless there was an appointment agreement prior to the date of the merger. (All appointments were frozen). So where the appointment was made the consideration of the partnership merger was considered. ● Staff promotions: a moratorium also existed to all senior staff for promotions prior to the merger date unless the was agreement between the two parties for such a need of promotion ● Staff remuneration: all remuneration adjustment and increases were done if both parties agreed to it. They aligned the adjustment and increases to TWR and RAU staff. ● Renewal of contracts: No renewal of contract was made on any existing purchase or service contract including new ones without agreement between the parties on it. All information about the parties existing, contractual and conditional liabilities had to be exchanged and signed in this Memorandum. ● Capital expenditure: all new capital projects and expenditure had a moratorium on them excluding those in progress, which were agreed upon by the two parties and approved by the Minster of Education. All this information of existing capital had to be disclosed to the two parties. ● State financial support: any financial support request from the Department of Education specifically, as merger operations had to be agreed between the two parties and made jointly to the Department of Education.

The two councils (TWR and RAU Councils) would oversee the merger. They established a joint steering committee amongst them in order to do so. This joint steering committee consisted of an equal number of representatives that were appointed from both councils, where each one was accountable to their council. This process was moved downwards to each management committee that had to establish a merging office with a joint steering committee as shown in Figure 4.1. Which would work on an agreement deal to detail the necessary processes needed for an effective merger? This steering committee was entrusted 62

with the decision making and delegation from the respective councils. However, key level or strategic matters would still the domain of the Council for decisions.

Figure 4.1: Merger process and Structure 2004 (Joint Steering Committee)

Chiefs Form

Joint Steering Committee (JSC)

(8 Members of interim council)

Joint Merger Office (JMO)

 ACADEMIC

 ACADEMIC/STUDENT ADMINISTRATION RAU  FINANCE TWR

 HUMAN RESOURCES

 INFORMATION SYSTEMS  INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, SPORT  LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES (LIS)  MANGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE  MARKETING AND COMMUNICATION  STUDENT AFFAIRS 63

Project Teams

From a communication viewpoint, the parties committed themselves to having an effective channel of communication, which will be open and transparent to all the processes, investigations and decisions made relating to the merger. This also meant that the parties had to commit themselves to the confidentiality in order to avoid invasion of privacy and that some information imported will have to remain confidential between the two parties. There was an alignment of a business agreement between both parties to have full participation on both East Rand and Soweto campuses (which were previously Vista University Campuses) as part of the new university.

This document was done and signed on the 27 January 2004 by both TWR & RAU Council.

4.3.1.2 Memorandum: Domain and program for Sport: the University Of Johannesburg by Prof. Wim Hollander on 20 April 2004.

On 20 April 2004 Prof Wim Hollander wrote a Memorandum to the registrar of operation on behalf of RAU Sport on the subject of the domain and program for sport in the University of Johannesburg. He states in the memo the following: since the collaboration (2000) that was agreed and signed by the different intuitions (TWR, WITS, and RAU) at the time. RAU and TWR sport already started with the discussion of collaboration with each other and they focussed on the merger among them (TWR and RAU) since the introduction of the merger to them in 2003. They asked WITS to give them (TWR and RAU) the opportunity to complete their merger first and then they could further address the collaboration with WITS.

RAU and TWR sport had been involved with discussions right across their department which was engaged from both sport bureaus, sports science and bio-kinetics straight to sport academic for more than three (3) years. This discussion was looking at addressing the core issue of one sports domain for UJ as the sport for the future and the positioning of sport in UJ. They saw sport at the University of Johannesburg more than just providing opportunities 64

for mass participation for the student which was the main component of service delivery. It would also be providing the opportunities for elite athletes to compete at club, provincial, regional, national and international level. This would require the university to provide sport scientific programs to those student athletes with the potential to compete on that level.

The sport scientific programs would be linked with the related academic programs like sports management, sports science, bio-kinetics, sports communication, sports vision, sports development with others and would provide a developmental program to develop student athletes. This would allow the university sport to have a relationship with sports federations on provincial, regional and national level by sharing knowledge and another service of the University. It would play a critical role in the level of sports participation and would include service like educational and training services on a high-performance level.

He also stated apart from the participation of students on the different levels and the nursing for clubs, provincial and national federations, educational and training will also be a part of the sports equation. This would not be seen different or separate from sports participation but as learning service which the aim of the tertiary institution seen as an operational unit in the sports industry which could benefit both.

4.3.2 UJ Sport Annual Report (2007)

In this annual report. UJ Sport stated that they provide participation to all students and staff on different levels. In order for them to achieve this, they categorized participation on three levels which were social/recreational performance, competitive and high performance.

Social/Recreational Competitive High Performance Performance Performance

In this same way, university sports clubs (different UJ sports clubs within UJ Sport) were also categorized. The clubs would fall in a particular category based on criteria the sports club fulfilled, which were evaluated annually by their sports managers. The allocation of budget towards sports clubs was based on the category the club fell in, which meant ±85% of total budget is allocated to the high-performance sports clubs. The high-performance clubs still had an obligation to a competitive and social performance (Internal leagues) participation and

not only focus on high-performance participation. Through this UJ sport believed they would identify and develop talent but they would also continuously strategize and develop the process as shown in Table 4.1

Table 4.1: UJ Sports clubs categorized after re-evaluation during November 2006

UJ sport had nine (9) social/recreational performance clubs, seven (7) competitive performance clubs and seven (7) high-performance clubs in 2007 after the re-evaluation in November 2006. There were three changes brought about as stated in this report. Squash was downgraded to a competitive performance from high performance, mind sports was downgraded to recreational from competitive performance and sport with disabilities was upgraded to a competitive performance from recreational.

It was noted that the way the clubs were categorized was based on few factors like the demand and supply of a sporting code, number participation with opportunities also played a role, the value the sports code had in term of marketing and recruitment for the university, level of achievement of a particular sports code was another factor they had to take into account when considering the level a sport club fell in.

Looking at the mission of UJ Sport in 2007. UJ sports mission statement was to be a professionally and scientifically managed top quality, economically viable education, research, and services as an integrated program to the sector of sports participation (recreational, competitive and high performance) as well as the other sectors of the sports industry. Thus we aim to make a significant contribution to the total development of all

students, including sports students and sports participants of the University of Johannesburg, as well as the broader South African and international sports communities." UJ Sport also had objective or as they state UJ Sports Bureau main objective and they were:

● To provide participation opportunities to UJ students on various levels based on the demand of that level (what every level the sports club is in ) at the different UJ campuses ● To provide the student where possible the opportunity to excel in their performances and optimizing individual level. ● By utilizing and managing UJ infrastructure to establish a UJ brand through the achievement and not only at the advantage of a student sports participants. ● To use sports as a recruitment tool to draw top potential students, especially post- graduate student to UJ. ● To get back and add to the holistic development of students ● To allow the university to contribute actively in the communities in and around UJ as it is the university’s strategic objective.

4.3.2.1 The re-design and restructuring in 2007 (Report of UJ Sports Annual Report 2007)

According to the annual report (2007) TWR and RAU merged into UJ from 1 January 2005. UJ sports clubs were integrated and offered participation opportunities. Clubs were encouraged to support the provincial leagues and other competitions in the different communities. The report stated that UJ Sports Bureau functioned as a unit since 2004 and the first meeting that they had was held on 15 October 2001 before merger was accepted with the following institutions TWR, WITS, and RAU. But on the 21 October 2002 there was a meeting with TWR and RAU on the merger. Four and half years later (2007) the first phase project was scheduled regarding the renewal and integration of TWR & RAU sport into UJ Sport which was facilitated by Accenture.

Based on the annual report of 2007 the following processes took place and session facilitated by respectable parties as shown in Table 4.2:

Table4.2: Processes & sessions in 2007 for re-design and restructuring 67

Staff representation / Process Dates and venues Discussion topic

Constitute the Project Steering Representatives from all 3 18 to 21 September 2007 Committee sections

All staff of the Academic Department, Institute for 2 October 2007 from 12:00 to Introductory session Biokinetics and Sports 13:00 at the Astro Science as well as the Sport Bureau

Project Steering Committee 2 October 2007 from 13:00 to meeting 16:00

Project Steering Committee 3 October 2007 from 08:30 to meeting 16:00 at the Astro

Project Steering Committee 9 October 2007 from 08:00 to meeting 12:00 at the Astro

Project Steering Committee 10 October 2007 from 08:00 meeting to 16:00 at the Astro

Project Steering Committee 16 October 2007 from 08:00 meeting to 12:00 at the Astro

Project Steering Committee 17 October 2007 from 08:30 meeting to 16:00

Proposed structure circulated to all staff for comments by 2 31 October 2007 November 2007

Permission from HR to 31 October 2007 proceed with job profiling

Prof. Aubrey Redlinghuis, Discuss proposed UJ Sport 6 November 2007 from 08:00 André Swart, and Wim structure to 09:00 at A Bridge 409

Hollander

6 November 23007 from Feedback to all staff 14:00 to 15:00 at the Astro

Project Steering Committee Re-address the UJ Sport 6 November 2007 from 09:00 meeting structure to 16:30

Representative volunteer 6 November 2007 from 08:00 Job profiling groups to 16:15

Proposed structure is presented to the Steering 6 November 2007 Committee

Representative volunteer 7 November 2007 from 08:00 Job profiling groups to 16:15

Representative volunteer 8 November 2007 from 08:00 Job profiling groups to 16:15

Representative volunteer 12 November 2007 from Job profiling groups 11:30 to 16:00

Representative volunteer 13 November 2007 from Job profiling groups 08:00 to 16:15

Representative volunteer 14 November 2007 from Job profiling groups 08:00 to 16:15

Representative volunteer 15 November 2007 from Job profiling groups 08:00 to 16:15

Representative volunteer 16 November 2007 from Job profiling groups 08:00 to 16:15

Representative volunteer 19 November 2007 from Job profiling groups 08:00 to 16:15

Project Steering Committee 21 November 2007 from meeting 08:00 to 13:00

Project Steering Committee 22 November 2007 from

meeting 11:00 to 14:00

Request staff electronically to submit their CV's on the SHL template in which the 23 November 2007 preferences are also indicated. Due date: 26 November 2007

Prof. Wim Hollander and Ms. Lorraine Viljoen meet to 10 December 2007 address the future process regarding “match-and-place”

4.3.2.2 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2007)

The UJ Sports staff portfolios for 2006/2007was allocated in November 2004 but had to have extensive consultation among the staff. 2006/2007 was an interim period for UJ Sport. The composition of staff in the department consisted of permanent staff, fixed term contract/contract, and temporary contract/temps or annual contracts as shown in table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Staff composition 2007

Staff composition 2007 Permanent Contract Assistants Sport Admin Supervisors/ managers Support staff 15 1 6 3 4

A total of 21 permanent staff, 7 on contract/temp and a total number of staff 28. What must be noted that the staff indicated in this annual report only indicates administration staff members (coaches, support staff, and contractors were not included) so this is not the total

figures of employees under the UJ sport at that time. It must be noted that this report did not state the gender and race composition of staff.

UJ Sport at that time had some vacant posts too which were as follows:

● Sports Manager for Netball, Squash, and Tennis which resigned during 2002 and the post was kept vacant in lieu of the merger ● Sports Manager for Rowing and Administration of Bursaries that had retired at the end of 2005 ● Sports Manager for Football and Acting Head of the Sports Bureau which resigned at the end of December 2006 ● Manager for Marketing and Functions at sport who resigned on 3 September 2007 UJ Sport kept all posts vacant in lieu of the final re-design and restructuring to be completed/implemented

4.3.2.3 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2007

This data will show the clubs sports achievement against their peers at SASSU as shown in Table 4.4 during the 2006/2007 year as stated in the annual report. Table 4.4: SASSU Results of UJ Sport clubs. CODE 2007 Athletics: T/F 2nd Cross-country Men: 1st Women: 1st Basketball Men: 4th Basketball Women: 8th Cricket 6th Football Men: 1st Football Women: 3rd Hockey Men: 3rd Hockey Women: 2nd Karate Women: 3rd Men: 3rd Netball 2nd 71

Rugby 6th Golf A – Division: 3rd Squash 3rd Rowing: USSA Sprints 4th Table Tennis: Men 6th Women 6th Volleyball Women: 3rd Men: 8th Waterpolo Women: 3rd Men: 7th

4.3.3 UJ Sports Annual Report (2008). A report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) on 9 March 2009.

Starting off the review of the data of the Annual report of 2008 we look at the vision, mission, values, objectives and goals of UJ sport at the time. We also have a review of the re- design and restructuring of UJ sport in this section, based on the previous year`s Annual Report (2007) which was a continuation of the process of re-structuring and re-designing of UJ Sport.

UJ sports vision at the time was: "Setting the trend in Sport and Movement" followed by the mission which was: "To provide excellent, multi-levelled academic and sports opportunities to communities through innovative and integrated professional services and programs"

The following element made up the values of UJ Sport: sports excellence, integrity, and respect for diversity, accountability, individual & collective effort and innovation. The objectives at the time (2008) were to: ● By building the sport brand ● Getting maximize commercialization ● Giving a preferred student sports experience and professional ● By engaging with the communities through sport and movement initiatives ● Using local, national, and international research and scientific endeavours in sport and

movement by innovative engagements ● Giving and supporting excellence in teaching, learning and assessment in sport and movement The goals for UJ sport to achieve this was through participation, high-performance program, marketing, publicity & recruitment, commercialization and transformation

4.3.3.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2008) As mentioned in the annual report of 2007 about the process of re-structuring and redesigning of UJ Sport that was facilitated by Accenture. UJ sport was filling the new positions that were created through the restructuring and redesigning.

For the position of Clubs Manager the following candidates were matched and place the position: ● Mr. Francois Fouche ● Mr. Johan Rainsford ● Mr. Adrian Carter ● Mr. Michael Dick

For the position of Performance Excellence Manager the following candidates were “matched and placed” in the position: ● Mr. Flip van Zyl ● Ms. Marianne Viljoen ● Mr. Shohn Wormgoor ● Mr. Francois Fouche ● Ms. Irena Nowak

The interview panel for those two positions was: ● Prof Wim Hollander (Executive Director Sport) ● Ms. Sanpat Coetzee (Line Manager ) ● Mr. Frederick Bunitendag (Human Resources for Executive Director) ● Ms. Lorraine Viljoen (Human Resources Specialist)

For the position of Sports Marketing Manager the following candidates were “matched and placed” in the position: ● Mr. Francois Fouche ● Mr. Martin Kock ● Ms. Michelle Cowan

For the position of Commercial Unit Manager the following candidates were “matched and placed” in the position: ● Mr. Francois Fouche ● Mr. Flip van Zyl

The interview panel for those two positions was: ● Prof Wim Hollander (Executive Director Sport) ● Ms. Hannie Sander (Executive Director: Library and Information Centre ) ● Mr. Frederick Bunitendag (Human Resources for Executive Director) ● Ms. Lorraine Viljoen (Human Resources Resourcing Specialist)

The conclusion of the “match and place” was finalized on the 10 March 2008 where all new and existing portfolios were filled as designed in the Accenture process. The processes were advertisement, application and interviews which was all done in February 2008. The new Managerial position (Top Management position of UJ Sport) was as follow:

● Executive Director Sports : Prof Wim Hollander ● Participation Resource Manager: Ms. Sanpat Coetzee ● Commercial Unit Manager: Mr. Flip van Zyl ● Secretariat Manager: Mr. Francois Fouche ● Performance Excellence Manager: Ms. Marianne Viljoen ● Biokinestics Clinic Manager: Ms. Irene Novak ● UJ Sports Marketing Manager: Ms. Michelle Cowan ● UJ Manger Clubs: Mr. Adrian Carter

In the management at that point, there were three staff members who were allocated double 74

portfolios and they were: Adrian Carter, Francois Fouche and Michelle Cowan. The Steering Committee approved the Operational Model which includes the organizational structure. The organogram had one of the units under participation resources with three sub-units which were: Sports Clubs, Performances excellence and Bio-kinetics Clinic.

During the Re-design and Re-structuring that was not finalized in 2007. In 2008 they decided to evaluate the sports clubs and after re-evaluation of sports clubs in October 2008 the continuum for 2008/2009 as shown in table 4.5:

Table 4.5 UJ Sports clubs categorized after re-evaluation during November 2008

There were sports changes which had Basketball upgraded to High Performance and Martial Arts was also upgraded to Competitive Performance. The demand and supply factor led to this being done. As well as, facilities, participation numbers & opportunities, marketing & recruitment value, achievement level and an extension of participation in the sporting code.

Looking for sports club staff that year with regards to resignation and appointment:

● Ms. Michelle Cowan resigned in August 2008 from UJ rowing and UJ Sport marketing positions. ● Ms Ansu Colditz was appointed as UJ Junior Rugby Manager as of 1 December 2008 ● Mr. Grant Dodds was filling the Rowing Manager position and was appointed on a temporary basis for 10months 1 August 2008 to 31 May 2009. ● Ms. Melissa took on the netball manager position on an interim basis till they could fill the high-performance sports code. Due to the Accenture process Phomelo Motse

the previous Netball manager was allocated to UJ sports Secretariat. In December 2008 UJ head hunted, a netball manager due to not finding a suitable candidate earlier on ● Ms. Naimh Faherty was appointed as of 1 September 2008 on an interim basis as UJ Sports Marketing and events manager. Due to Ms. Michelle Cowan’s resignation at the end of August 2008 ● Ms. Lezanne Bruwer was appointed in a joint venture between UJ Alumni and UJ Sport to manage student & staff golf ● Mr. Micky Mkefe was dismissed after lengthy disciplinary meetings. ● Mrs. Lorraine Krugel was diagnosed with cancer in April 2006 and passed away in October 2006 The staff profile of UJ Sport for 2008 as shown in table 4.6. This will indicated the number of staff in the department that year (2008)

Table 4.6: Staff Profile of UJ Sports for 2008

GENDER RACE

UNIT MALE FEMALE BLACK COLOURED INDIAN WHITE TOTAL

SPORT MARKETING 1 2 0 0 0 3 3

PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE 1 2 0 0 0 3 3

BIOKINETIC CLINIC 2 3 1 0 0 4 5

CLUBS 15 4 3 3 0 13 19

SECRETARIAT 6 5 7 0 0 4 11

COMMERCIAL UNIT 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

SUPPORT STAFF 1 3 0 0 0 4 4

TOTAL 27 19 11 3 0 32 46

Temp Contract Non- white White Male Female Total

Temporary 38 90 93 35 128

Grand Total 38 90 93 35 128

4.3.3.2 UJ Sport Clubs results for 2008

This data will show the clubs sports achievement as in Table 4.7 during the 2007/2008 year as stated in the annual report. Also what must be noted the name SASSU Changed to USSA in 2008. So from South African Student Sports Union championship (SASSU) to University Sports South Africa (USSA) Table 4.7: USSA Results of UJ Sport clubs 2008. CODE 2008 Athletics: T/F 2nd Cross-country Men: 1st Women: 1st Basketball Men: 2nd Basketball Women: 2nd Cricket 5th Football Men: 1st Football Women: 2nd Hockey Men: 2nd Hockey Women: 4th Karate Women: 3rd Men: 3rd Netball 6th Rugby Was cancelled Varsity Rugby 5th Golf Competed individually (3rd individual position) Squash 2nd Rowing: USSA Sprints 3rd Table Tennis: Men 3rd Women Did not have women Team Volleyball Women: 9th Men: 2nd

4.3.4 UJ Sport Annual Report (2009). A report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) in March 2010. In this annual report (2009) will only state the changes that might have been adopted or additional data that was added prior to the previous annual reports. The mission, vision, objective and goals with values stayed the same as the previous report.

4.3.4.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2009) As mentioned in the annual report of 2007, 2008 about the process of re-structuring and redesigning of UJ Sport that was facilitated by Accenture. UJ sport was filling the new positions that were created through restructuring and redesigning.

After the re–design and restructuring of UJ Sport that was completed during April 2008. There were a number of vacant posts which were purposefully done so for the period before and during the merger era. The following positions were filled from 1 June 2009 permanent placement: ● Ms. Carol Blignaut as Manager Unit for Sports Psychology in the Performance Excellence unit. ● Mr. Joel Kgokong as Manager Football in the Sports Clubs unit ● Mr. Walter Lutsch as Manager Sports Science in Performance Excellence unit ● Mr. Hitler Dlamini as Assistant Astro Facility in Sports Clubs unit.

The following post was advertised and the closing date was on the 6 November 2009: ● Sports Manager Hockey with the following candidates shortlisted Shani Reyneke, Elize le Roux and Sharmin Naidoo. Ms. Elize le Roux permanently appointed ● Manager Marketing and Events with candidates short listed Zarina Bahdur (withdrew), Niamh Faherty and Mack Sekgaphola. But the content of post to be reconsidered, re-evaluated and advertised

With regards to resignations and appointments for that year, the following happened: ● Ms. Ansu Colditz contract expired at the end of November 2009 and it was not renewed for the following year (2010). 78

● Mr. Grant Dodds was appointed on a temporary basis for 10 months from 1 August 2008 to 31 May 2009 as Manager Rowing. So when his contract expired Mr. Dodds was not re-appointed. Carol Blignaut and Melissa Chaney jointly agreed to assist and manage the Rowing Club in the interim. ● Ms. Gerda Kruger was head hunted for the netball position by the Director of Sport (Ms. Sanpat Coetzee) based on her experience and knowledge in the netball field early in 2009. She was a permanent staff member on the 1 May 2009. ● Ms. Tracy van Ginkel was appointed on a temporary appointment to the UJ Manager Clubs in June 2009 ● Ms. Elize le Roux was a long-time assistant to the hockey manager (Adrian Carter) and since he was appointed as UJ Clubs Manager. Elize was coordinating the hockey club from March 2008 till November 2009 after which the position was advertised at the end of 2009. Elize went through the HR process with an interview, Elize was the successful candidate and permanently appointed from December 2009. ● Ms. Lezanne Bruwer was re-appointed for 2010 ● Mr. Allistar Fredericks resigned at the end of December 2009. He joined the private sector. and Ms. Jamie Fortune took over his portfolio (UJ Squash Manager club) on an interim basis ● Mr. Nicolas Kope resigned at the end June 2009 due to taking up a position in Government at the Department Sport and Recreation. Mr. Amigo Ngcakana was appointed on an interim basis from September 2009 for three days per week consultation at the Soweto campus. ● Mr. Johan Rainsford was transferred from Basketball for another staff member in order to free him up for his new portfolio as Coordinator of UJ Sports Facilities on a full-time basis at the end of 2009 ● Mr. Anton Van Rooyen was the Volleyball, Mind Sport and Martial Arts Manager and was also assigned to manage UJ Basketball as of December 2009. ● Mr. Pieter Botha was re-appointed until November with a motivation as Manager Gymnasia. ● Ms. Michelle Cowan was still involved with UJ sport on a contract basis for 2009 to development and maintain a UJ Sports database. Since her resignation in August 2008 as UJ Rowing and UJ Sport Marketing positions. 79

There were still vacant positions at the end of 2009 which were as follow: ● Manager Rowing: to be advertised or reconsidered in 2010 ● Manager Events: Content of post to be reconsidered, re-evaluated and advertised. ● Co-ordinator: Re-named as Secretary as combination post for administrative support staff with the following duties database, bursaries and etc. ● Sports Manager Athletics: Advertise in January 2010. ● Bio-kinetics: which had a temporary appointment Tiren Govender and was consider advertising in September 2010 ● Sports Scientist: Advertise in March 2010 ● SWC Co-ordinator: which was Considered during 2010 with the development of new sports facilities at Soweto Campus ● Bio-kineticist: Advertise during January 2010 One position was also abolished which was General Assistant Supervisor at Squash Courts.

The staff profile of UJ Sport for 2009 as shown in Table 4.8.Which will indicated the profile of staff within UJ Sport in the year of 2009

Table 4.8: Staff profile of UJ Sports permanent and contract/temporary staff in 2009

Grand Female Male Total Employment Female Male Type Total Total

African Coloured Indian White African Coloured Indian White

Contract 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1 2 5

Permanent 3 0 0 8 11 6 3 0 11 20 31

Temporary 18 1 0 37 56 22 3 2 81 108 164

Grand Total 21 1 0 48 70 28 7 2 93 130 200

4.3.4.2. UJ Sport Clubs results of 2009

The clubs sports achievement as shown in Table 4.9 during the 2008/2009 year as stated in the annual report

Table 4.9: USSA Results of UJ Sport clubs 2009.

CODE 2009 Athletics: T/F 1st Cross-country Men: 1st Women: 1st Basketball Men: 1st Basketball Women: 2nd Cricket 8th Football Men: 3rd Football Women: 1st Hockey Men: 2nd Hockey Women: 2nd Karate Women: 3rd Men: 3rd Netball 5th Rugby 2nd Varsity Rugby 3rd Golf 11th Squash 3rd Rowing: USSA Sprints 3rd Table Tennis: Men 5th Women Did not have women Team Volleyball Women: 5th Men: 4th Waterpolo Women: 2nd Men: 5th

4.3.5 UJ Sport Annual Report (2010). A report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) on 6 March 2011. In this annual report (2010) will only state the changes that might have been adopted or additional data that was added prior to the previous annual reports. The mission, vision, objective and goals with values stayed the same as the previous report. Only thing different that happened was the strategic leadership session UJ Sport had during the year of 2010. Where they identified some key common challenges that they had to address and they were:

● The lack of detail sport specific recruitment plans ● They identified the competitors in regards to the recruitment of student-athlete which were: NWU Potchefstroom (Puk), UP (Tuks), University of Stellenbosch (Maties) and UFS (Kovsies). ● The lack of job descriptions and performance agreement for the coaching staff. ● The lack of planning for succession for the coaching staff. ● The lack of attendance of training and performance of excellence program from student athletes. ● The low percentage of participation competitively in the following campuses ABP, DFC and SWC compare to APK campus. ● Not enough facilities in certain sports codes to provide the unique participation opportunities ● The expectations from provincial/regional as well as national federations

4.3.5.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2010)

There were still vacant positions at the end of 2010 which were as follow:

● Head of Sports TWR (Lorraine Krugel): was be re-considered under new circumstances ● Sports Manager (Allistar Fredericks): was be re-considered within under circumstances

● Co-ordinator: Re-named as Secretary as combination post for administrative support staff with the following duties, database and bursaries ● Sports Manager Athletics: Lettie du Toit’s fixed term contract was not renewed after 31.03.2010. ● Bio-kineticist: which had a temporary appointment Tiren Govender and was consider advertising in September 2010 ● Sports Scientist: Mrs. Ellie le Roux's salary was paid from this post. Her appointment was not renewed after 31.03.2010. The post was not advertised during 2010. Hannes du Toit resigned at the end of December 2010. ● SWC Co-ordinator: which was considered during 2010 with the development of new sports facilities at Soweto Campus ● Bio-kineticist: was going to be advertised during 2010/2011 ● Manager Sports Science:(Walter Lutsch resigned on 30.09.2010): Salary earmarked for 5-year contract: academic and practical international sports scientist (in cooperation with Academic Department)

One Re-allocation of post: Which was re-allocated to the Executive Director Finance (Governance) and this was the Financial Administrator position but Mrs. Margaret Friis resigned on 31.01.2010

The following positions were advertised and filled: ● Sports Manager Hockey: Ms. Le Roux was appointed on a permanent basis from 01.01.2010 ● Sports Manager Athletics: Mr. Moletsane was appointed on a permanent basis from 01.05.2010 ● Sports Manager Event: Content of the post changed from Marketing and Events to Events

The staff profile for permanent/Fixed term for 2010 is shown in Table 4.10. This table (4.10) will indicated the number of permanent/Fixed term for that year (2010)

Table 4.10: Staff profile for permanent/Fixed term 2010 GENDER RACE

MALE FEMALE BLACK COLOURED INDIAN WHITE TOTAL

21 14 9 3 1 22 35

Staff composition – in terms of the type of appointments and portfolios during 2010 was as shown in table 4.11.

Table 4.11: Staff composition in 2010 Type 2010 Permanent Staff members 31 6 – of which 2 were Fixed term contracts not renewed Temporary – core 8 functions Temporary – coaches, etc. 211 Vacancies (end of the 8 year) Resignations 4 Appointments in 2 permanent positions Executive Director 1 Director 1 Senior Managers of Units 5 Managers of Units 2 Sports Managers 8 (permanent) Sports Managers 2 (temporary) Campus Coordinators 2

4.3.5.2 UJ Sport Clubs results for 2010

The clubs sports achievement as shown in Table 4.12 during the 2009/2010 year as stated in the annual report

Table 4.12: USSA results of UJ Sport Clubs 2010.

CODE 2010 Athletics: T/F 3rd Cross country Overall: 3rd Basketball Men: 3rd Basketball Women: 1st Cricket Won B section Hockey Men: USSA did not take place due Hockey Women: to hockey world cup Karate Women: 3rd Men: 3rd Rugby None Varsity Rugby 3rd Golf None Squash 3rd Rowing: USSA Sprints 1st Varsity Beach Women: 2nd

4.3.6 UJ Sports Annual Report (2011). A report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) in March 2012. Looking at the annual report of 2011 this was the year of some changes in UJ Sport. Starting with the process of revising the vision and mission of UJ. UJ Sport aligned themselves to those two critical aspects and would start revisiting the UJ sports goal for the future. They identified senior staff members of UJ sport to steer the strategic framework and they presented it to MEC. The four elements UJ Sport define themselves which were: student- 85

athlete, competition, infrastructure and a winning culture.

Looking at the governances UJ sport was governed by Sports Management of Executive Committee (Executive Director of UJ Sport, UJ Sports Director, and Head of Sports Department of Sport and Movement Studies) and the Sports Committee with all the Senior Managers of the different divisions/ units. A number of policies existing were also continuously revised that year and the format of the UJ Sport annual report also changed.

4.3.6.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2011)

Starting off the UJ Sports HR we look at the UJ Sport organizational structure of 2011. The management structure of UJ Sport constitutes commercialization (and Marketing), Secretariat and Participation Resources divisions, which report to the Executive Director of UJ Sport as well as the Department of Sport and Movement Studies that reported to the Dean; Faculty of Health Sciences. The UJ Sport organizational structure of 2011 as shown in Figure 4.2

Figure 4.2: UJ Sport organizational structure 2011

2011 UJ Sport had 33 permanent Staff of which 20 were male and 13 Female. The composition in term of race there was 20 (61%) white, 9(27%) Black, 3(9%) coloured and 1(3%) Indian as shown in Figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3: UJ Sport Staff distribution per race category 2011

Looking at temporary appointments UJ sport as a whole had 188 temps of which 43 were female and 145 male staff. Based on the composition in term of race there was 135 (72%) white, 46(24%) Black, 7(4%) coloured and 0(0%) Indian as shown in Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4: UJ Sport Temporary appointments per race category 2011

During 2011 there were four vacant posts advertised but could not be filled due to the lack of suitable candidates. There was an induction of PI and Pro resourcing tools within UJ and UJ Sport to make it easier to select the appropriate staff member for the position more scientifically. End the end of 2011 there was ten vacant positions in UJ Sport and they were as follow:

● Biokineticist: to be Advertised end 2012 ● Manager II: Pending ● Manager II: Rowing: to be advertised in February 2012 ● Administrative Assistant I: to be advertised 2012 ● Manager II: Gymnasia: to be advertised 2012 ● Coordinator I: to be re-advertised in February 2012 ● Sports Scientist: to be re-advertised in March 2012 ● Coordinator III (Soweto): to be advertised in March 2012 ● Manager II: Netball: to be advertised in February 2012

● Head: to be advertised in February 2012

It was decided by the MEC to abolish all post that was not filled for two-years or longer, this meant a department would lose that post and funds of that post if not filled in a certain timeframe. UJ Sport had three positions identified that year (2011) and they were: Bio- kineticist, Coordinator III for Soweto campus and Head. Recommendation to the MEC and the Biokineticist post and Coordinator III for Soweto campus was not abolished. But the head position was motivated for and split in two positions which were Project manager and other Administrative Assistants. There was also some fixed term appointments made that year and they were:

● Mr. Tiren Govender as Biokineticist. ● Mr. Jaques du Randt as Strength and conditioning coach. ● Mr. Pieter Cornelius Johannes Botha as the Manager Gymnasia.

4.3.6.2 UJ Sports Participation 2011

In 2011 UJ Sport Modified there Sport Participation strategy in 2011 to be able to give opportunities for all students and staff based on their needs and level of a sport. The model UJ Sport used was that social/recreational events participation was on the one end (+ sport), and high-performance participation (club league/USSA) (sport +) on the other end as shown below in Figure 4.5

Figure 4.5: UJ Sport participation strategy 2011

CAMPUS

LEAGUES

SOCIAL/

RECREATIONAL CLUB UJ EVENTS LEAGUE/USSA SPORT COMPETITIONS

+ Sport 88 Sport +

4.3.6.3. UJ Sport Clubs results 2011

The clubs sports achievement as shown in Table 4.13 during the 2010/2011 year as stated in the annual report

Table 4.13: USSA results of UJ Sport Clubs 2011.

CODE 2011 Athletics: T/F 3rd Cross country Overall: 2nd Basketball Men: 1st Basketball Women: 2nd Cricket 7th Football Men: Did not qualify Football Women: 1st Hockey Men: 2nd Hockey Women: 3rd Karate Women: none Men: 1st Netball 3rd Rugby 1st Varsity Rugby 3rd Golf 6th Squash 2nd Rowing: USSA Sprints 1st Table Tennis: Men None Women Volleyball Men: 2nd Women: 3rd Waterpolo Women: None women team Men: 4th

4.3.7 UJ Sport Annual Report (2012). A report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) in March 2013. Looking at the annual report of 2012 UJ Sport vision was “Setting the trend in university sport” which was designed by their mission statement, “To provide quality multileveled academic and sports opportunities for communities through innovative and integrated 89

professional services and programs". Both these elements (Vision and Mission) were driven by the core values that include sports excellence and accountability. The core values were guided by the UJ values of imagination, conversation, regeneration and ethical foundation.

Looking at governance UJ Sport was governed by a Sports Management Committee. All senior and selected managers of the different divisions and units within UJ Sport are represented (see Table4.14). The committee met quarterly where recommendations from different sub-committees were discussed, approved and/or, referred. This assisted or helped UJ Sport to provide strategic direction from the committee to the different divisions and units to ensure alignment and implementation of activities within the vision, mission and goals of UJ Sport. They met on four occasions during 2012 and below is the full list of the committee as shown in Table 4.14. Table 4.14: UJ Sport Management Committee

NAME PORTFOLIO RACE GENDER Prof Wim Hollander Executive Director: UJ Sport White Male Ms. Sanpat Coetzee Director: UJ Sport White Female Mr. Adrian Carter Senior Manager: Sport Clubs White Male Mr. Anton van Manager: Basketball, Karate & Coloured Male Rooyen Volleyball Clubs Mr. Flip van Zyl Senior Manager: Commercialisation White Male Unit Mr. Francois Senior Manager: Sport Secretariat White Male Fouché Ms. Irena Nowak Senior Manager: Biokinetic Clinic White Female Mr. Joel Kgokong Manager: Football Club Black Male Mr. Johan Rainsford Manager: Sport Facilities White Male Ms. Marianne Senior Manager: Performance White Female Viljoen Excellence Programme Ms. Niamh Faherty Manager: Sport Events White Female Mr. Rian Lombard Senior Lecturer (Sports Science) White Male Ms. Lungisa HR Officer Black Female

Zihlangu

There was also a number of policies within UJ Sport that exist and the table states the different policies UJ Sport had as shown in Table 4.15. Table 4.15: UJ Sport Policies

Policy Responsible Unit UJ Sport Accommodation Clubs UJ Annual Sport Awards Clubs UJ Sport Clubhouse Operations and Human Resources UJ Coaches Appointment Clubs, Operations and Human Resources UJ Sport Commercialisation Commercialisation and Marketing UJ Sport Conference Attendance Sport Management Committee UJ Sport Hiring and Utilisation of Operations and Human Facilities Resources UJ Sport Participation Clubs UJ Policy on Record Management Operations and Human Resources UJ Sport Transformation Charter Sport Management Committee UJ Sport Transport for Staff and Operations and Human Students Resources UJ Sport Asset Control Operations and Human Resources UJ Sport Club Constitution Clubs UJ Sport Recruitment Clubs

4.3.7.1 Strategic Thrusts and Targets 2012 UJ Sport had strategic thrusts and targets set which they announced during 2010 for 2011 to 2020. This was a process that saw UJ vision, mission and values in 2012 which UJ Sport aligned themselves within the critical aspects like the UJ Sports goals for the future. Six strategies were identified by the senior staff members for the purpose of further development and an implementation plan for UJ Sport in 2012. The strategic thrust was aligned with the sport for the purpose and sport for performance with the targets listed for 2012.

4.3.7.1.1 Sport-for-Purpose thrusts

4.3.7.1.1.1 Thrust 1: Work-integrated learning (WIL), research and community engagement It mainly focuses on UJ sport with thrust 1 which was from an academic point of view, to build a relationship between the Department of Sport and Movement Studies and UJ Sport in the form of work-integrated learning and research. As shown in table 4.16.

● WIL Programme as shown in Table 4.16 Table 4.16: WIL Programme Goal Tar get Sport Honours students 47

● Research Programme as shown in Table 4.17 Table 4.17: Research Programme Goal Tar get Research projects 15

● Community Engagement Programme as shown in Table 4.18 Table 4.18: Community Engagement Programme

Goal Tar get Recipients 1 000 Students 35

4.3.7.1.1.2 Thrust 2: Equivalence in sport participation For Thrust 2 UJ Sports core product is to provide sport participation opportunities to all students and staff on all campuses as per the required level (social/recreational, competitive, high performance) and competence. ● Mass participation as shown in Table 4.19 Table 4.19: Mass participation Goal Target Participants 14 000 (24%) Participants per gender Male 60%, Female 40% Active volunteers 400

4.3.7.1.1.3 Thrust 3: Supportive and engaged students, staff and sport alumni Thrust 3 was to mainly get the UJ Sports Alumni involved by engaging with them through supporting sports events as well as participation in sport.

● Student, alumni and staff support program as shown in Table 4.20 Table 4.20: Student, alumni and staff support program Goal Target Students 7 000 (14%) Alumni 1 000

4.3.7.1.1.4 Thrust 4: Leadership that matters in the institution and in civil society Thrust 4 provides professional development opportunities for the respective job environments

which UJ Sport agreed upon in performance management program. This reflected UJ Sports values of its staff within their department.

● Staff in leadership positions as shown in Table 4.21 Table 4.21: Staff in leadership positions Goal Target Staff members 20

4.3.7.1.2 Sport-for-Performance thrusts 4.3.7.1.2.1 Thrust 1: UJ Sport as a winning institution in sports events and competitions Beside UJ taking part in competitions, UJ wanted to adopt the winning culture by being a winning institution in sports events and competitions

● Performance Excellence program as shown in Table 4.22 Table 4.22: Performance Excellence programme Goal Target Recruitment of athletes 330 Academic success rate of 70% bursars (≥ 60%) Team performances: 100% USSA (1st 3 positions) 100% Club

4.3.7.1.2.2 Thrust 2: A national and international profile of UJ Sport With regards to building a UJ sports brand, it was imperative that UJ Sport generates

publicity through individual and team performance in competitions such as USSA, Varsity Cup, provincial and national, which they would participate in

● Sport representation as shown in Table 4.23 Table 4.23: Sport representation Goal Target Provincial 258 National 78 USSA 28

● Publicity generated as shown in Table 4.24 Table 4.24: Publicity generated Goal Target Print 25 000 000 Broadcast 20 000 000 Online 10 000 000 TOTAL 55 000 000

4.3.7.2 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2012)

2012 UJ Sport had 36 permanent Staff of which 21 (58%) were male and 15(42%) Female. The composition in term of race was 21 (58%) white, 9(25%) Black, 4(11%) coloured and 2(6%) Indian as shown in Figure 4.6

Figure 4.6: UJ Sport Staff distribution per race category

6% (n=2) 11% (n=4)

25% (n=9)

58% (N=21)

White African Coloured Indian

Looking at temporary appointments UJ sport as a whole had 197 temps of which 52 were female and 145 male staff. Based on the composition in term of race there was 134 (68%) white, 52(27%) Black, 7(3%) coloured and 3(1%) Indian as shown in Figure 4.7

Figure 4.7: Temporary appointments per race category

During 2012 UJ sport filled successfully five of the nine vacancies while the one post that was divided into two was filled for one position and the other one would be filled the following year 2013. The following positions were filled and vacant still:

● Biokineticist: Tiren Govender was permanently appointed ● Manager II: Robin van Ginkel was permanently appointed ● Manager II: Rowing: to be advertised in February 2012 ● Administrative Assistant I: Appointed - February 2013 (N2810-divided) ● Coordinator II: Mandy Lee Pieterson was permanently appointed(N2810-divided) ● Manager II: Gymnasia: Darshan Raman was appointed on Contract ● Coordinator I: Melissa Chaney was permanently appointed ● Sports Scientist: Tiren Naidoo was permanently appointed ● Coordinator III (Soweto): was Advertised and to be appointed 1 January 2013 ● Manager II: Netball: was Advertised and to be appointed 1 February 2013 ● Biokineticist: to be advertised during February 2013

4.3.7.3 UJ Sports participation (2012)

UJ Sport is structured to accommodate a collaborative strategy and comprises an integrated approach to the provision of sport participation opportunities and experiences, sport-related education and training, as well as professional sports services to all stakeholders within and outside the University. This strategy is based on a + Sport and Sport + model that constitutes a continuum with Sport-for-Purpose (+ Sport) and Sport-for-Performance (Sport +) programmes (see Figure 1). Sport-for-Performance programmes support UJ teams and athletes to perform at the highest level during events and in competitions, while Sport-for- Purpose programmes utilize sport as a medium to obtain strategic goals through sport. As

shown in Figure 4.8.

Figure 4.8: UJ Sport Model

(+ Sport) (Sport +) Sport-for-Purpose Sport-for-Performance

 Teaching, learning and - Performance Assessment (work-integrated learning) programme excellence  Research - Publicity  Mass Participation  Community engagement  Volunteers  Alumni  Commercialization 4.3.7.4. UJ Sport Clubs results of 2012

The clubs sports achievement as shown in Table 4.25 during the 2011/2012 year as stated in the annual report

Table 4.25: USSA results of UJ Sport Clubs 2012. CODE 2012 Athletics: T/F 2nd Cross country Overall: None results Basketball Men: 3rd Basketball Women: 3rd Cricket 7th Football Men: Did not qualify Football Women: 3rd Hockey Men: 1st Hockey Women: 7th

Karate Women: 1st Netball 3rd Rugby 4th Varsity Rugby 3rd Golf 4th Squash 1st Rowing: USSA Sprints 2nd Table Tennis: Men 1st Women 1st Volleyball Men: 7th Women: 8th

4.3.8 UJ Sport Annual Report (2013). A report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) on 21 June 2014.

UJ Sport structure consists of six management areas which are Sports Participation, Performance Excellence, Operations and facilities, Commercialisation and Marketing, Events and the Bio-kinetic Clinic, as stated in the figure with the changes in red for 2013.The reorganization was not discussed previously with the Director of Sport and other line managers due to a bitter divide between colleagues as well as a negative and distrusting organisational culture throughout the years. As Figure 4.9 shows the organizational design of UJ Sport from June 2013.

Figure 4.9: The organizational design of UJ Sport from June 2013

It was done to promote UJ Sport staff as the “reorganization” of the divisions and mainly to include sports codes in the Varsity Cup and Varsity Sports competitions, which would separate them from the sports code that was not in Varsity Sports/ Varsity Cup.

2013 UJ Sport also took a new approach to having each unit in UJ Sport having its own internal governance structure in the form of a committee or forum consisting of the line manager and staff members. The five (5) sub-committees consist of all staff members in each unit and there were Sports Clubs, the Bio-kinetic Clinic, Operations and Facilities, Performance Excellence, Marketing and Events

UJ Sport offers sports participation continuously on all four campuses on recreational, competitive and high-performance levels. Therefore UJ Sport main goals did not only provide the overall student experience for students by providing sport participation opportunities on all levels (recreational to high performance) on all four campuses. But also 100

gave the opportunities for students through work integrated learning specifically in student studies at the Department Sport and Movement Studies.

4.3.8.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2013)

UJ Sport had 40 permanent/fixed term staff members in 2013 of which 24 were male and 16 female. The staff composition in terms of race was 20 white (50%), 10 black, (25%) 5 coloured (12.5%) and 5 Indian (12.5%) as shown in Figure 4.10.

Figure 4.10: UJ Sport Staff distribution per race category

Looking at temporary appointments UJ sport as a whole had 216 temps. Based on the composition in term of race there was 146 (68%) white, 60(27%) Black, 7(3%) coloured and 3(1%) Indian as shown in Figure 4.11

Figure4.11: Temporary appointments per race category

There were, however, five (5) vacant positions at the end of 2013 and they were:

101

● Coordinator: Scholarships: Ms. M Chaney resigned from 31 December 2013 ● Manager II: Athletics: Mr. TB Moletsane services was terminated from 12 April 2013 ● Administrative Assistant: was vacant since 31 March 2010 ● Manager II: Rowing: was vacant since 31 December 2009 ● Biokineticist: Ms. Clanden Pillay resigned from 31 December 2013

The Athletics Manager position could not have been filled due to lack of suitable equitable candidates and would be addressed in 2014. One vacant post was advertised during 2013. Although 3 appointments were made during 2013, the resourcing process already started in 2012. The PI and PRO resourcing tools that were introduced in UJ and in the UJ Sports resourcing process made the selection and appointment process more scientific.

There were also appointment made in 2013 which were as follows: ● Administrative Assistant: Ms. Nomcebo Sibongile Ngema was appointed from 2013/02/01 for 7 months. ● General Assistant II: Ms. Susan Maluleke was appointed from 2013/06/01 for 3 months ● Manager II netball manager: Dr. Charlotte Latitia Scholtz was appointed from 2013/01/21 for 9 months

4.3.8.2 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2013 as shown in Table 4.26 & 4.27

Table 4.26: USSA results 2013

CODE 2013

Athletics: T/F 3rd

Cross country Overall: 1st

Basketball Men: 3rd

Basketball Women: 4th

Cricket 5th

102

Football Men: 8th

Football Women: 3rd

Hockey Men: 1st

Hockey Women: 5th

Judo Men: 1st

Netball 4th

Rugby 1st

Golf 3rd in B section

Squash 1st

Rowing: USSA Sprints 3rd

Table Tennis: Men 1st

Women 1st

Double 1st

Table 4.27: Varsity Cup/Sports results of 2013

CODE 2013 Varsity Sports

Athletics: T/F 3rd

Netball 5th

Varsity Rugby 3rd

Varsity beach volleyball 2nd Women:

103

4.3.9 UJ Sport Annual Report (2014). Report was done by S Coetzee (Director UJ Sport) on 13 May 2015

In 2014 UJ Sport had a challenging year as many staff changes were made within the department where it saw the line managers changing. Mostly in the top management structure, of the UJ Sports Bureau. The results were that clubs environment underwent notable changes where Mr. Adrian Carter (UJ Clubs Manger) resigned in December 2013 and Prof Wim Hollander (Executive Director of UJ Sport) moved to the academic environment. The Department was also informed that Ms. Sanpat Coetzee (Director of UJ Sport) would also be removed, which meant the remaining line managers would continue to manage the Sports Bureau. The department was without top management and leadership.

4.3.9.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2014)

Based on the realignment of UJ Sport no vacant permanent positions were advertised and this left UJ Sport with seven vacant positions which were filled with specialist personnel to sustain and maintain our high-performance environments.

UJ Sport had 37 permanent/fixed term staff members in 2014. The staff composition in terms of race was 19 white (51%), 10 black, (27%) 5 coloured (14%) and 3 Indian (8%) as shown Figure 4.12.

104

Figure 4.12: UJ Sports Staff distribution per race category

8% 14% (n=3) (n=5) White 51% African (n=19) 27% Coloured (n=10) Asian

Based on temporary employees during 2014 UJ Sport had 262 temporary appointments of which the majority (74%) were made in the Club environment as coaches. The composition in term of race there was 178 (68%) white, 71(27%) Black, 10(4%) coloured and 3(1%) Indian as shown in Figure 4.13. Figure4.13: Temporary appointments per race category

Resignations/redeployment and retirements during 2014:

● Coordinator ii: Mr. Gerrie Germishuys retired 31 December 2014 ● Director Sports Bureau: Me Sanpat Coetzee was redeployed on 30 October 2014 ● Executive Director of UJ Sport: Prof Wim Hollander was redeployed on 30 March 2014 105

● Manager Clubs: Mr. Adrian Carter resigned 31 January 2014

There were other shifts and moves within the department in 2014 and they were as follow: ● Ms. Melissa Chaney resigned 28 November 2013. Which meant UJ Sport started 2014 with no financial coordinator. ● Mr. Adrian Carolan one of the foremost experts on video analysis was approached to head up the new Video Analysis Unit. He accepted the position in November 2013 and would commence his responsibilities as of 06 January 2014. ● Mr. Richard Das Neves was appointed as head coach for the UJ cricket club replacing the previous coach (Andre Seymore). ● Mrs. Emmarie Fouche was appointed as full-time head coach for the UJ athletics club after discussions with Mr. Jaco van Schoor. ● Mr. Phillip Lemmer was appointed as a full time junior coach of the rugby club after discussions with Mr. Jaco van Schoor. ● Ms. Tracey van Ginkel resigned in May 2014 to take up a position with the GLRU. Her responsibilities were given to the Sports Management Intern Ms. Kelly Boyack.

4.3.9.2 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2014 as shown in Table 4.28 & 4.29

Table 4.28: USSA Results of 2014

CODE 2014

Athletics: T/F 3rd

Cross-country Men: 1st

Women: 3rd

Basketball Men: 4th

Basketball Women: 8th

Cricket 5th

Football Men: Did not qualify

Football Women: 2nd

106

Hockey Men: 1st

Hockey Women: 4th

Beach Volleyball 8th

Netball 6th

Rugby 2nd

Rugby 7’s Men: 4th

Rugby 7’s Women: 3rd

Golf A – Division: 5th

Squash 1st

Rowing: USSA Sprints 2nd

Overall 2nd

Table4.29: Varsity Cup/ Sports result 2014

CODE 2014

Athletics 3rd

Cricket Lost semi-finals (4th)

Football Men: 2nd

Football Women: 1st

Hockey Men: 1st

Hockey Women: 1st

Netball 6th

Rugby 7th

Beach Volleyball DNP – Cancelled

Rugby 7’s DNP

107

4.3.10 Report of UJ Sports Annual Report (2015). Report was done by Nomsa Mahlangu (Senior Director UJ Sport) on March 2016

2015 started off with new leadership to the UJ Sport where Ms. Nomsa Mahlangu was employed as the Senior Director of Sport. The strategic conversation was hosted at UJ Sport with internal and external stakeholders.

The main focus for UJ Sport was to ensure that staff and students were able to enjoy sport at different levels. Also that High-Performance code achieves to finish top 3. There was a new proposed UJ Sports structure from the old one as shown in Figure 4.14:

Figure4.14: new proposed UJ Sport structure

108

A prioritized list of sports code was done too, which had A, B and C. as A being the priority as shown in the table below. This saw rowing moving to B in the B-Competition grouped sports codes and this was the following criteria they used to reprioritize sporting codes as shown in Table 4.30.

Table 4.30: Sporting Codes Classification

There was a criteria they used to reprioritize sporting codes and it was as follow:

● Use Gauteng Sports Arts, Culture and Recreation priority codes. ● Use the National Department of Sport and Recreation guidelines. ● The ability of the code to receive publicity through television coverage. ● The ability of the code to attract sponsorship. ● Mass participation within the code. ● Social responsibility of the code. ● Does UJ Sport have the human and capital resources to run the code? ● Gender equality (does the code cater for both men and women)? ● Potential to give a return on investment. ● Does the code have the ability to attract national coaches?

4.3.10.1 UJ Sport human resources/staff (2015)

Given the nature of UJ Sports environment, needs and challenges, the bulk of Staff are comprised of the temporary appointment. UJ Sports Structure had two positions in their structure, which were vacant (Executive Director and Director) and the two vacant positions were merged to create one position as Senior Director.

109

UJ Sport had 32 permanent/fixed term staff members in 2015. The staff composition of 15 female and 17 male. In terms of race was 14 white (44%), 17 black (56%). Noting that the race group coloured and Indian were added under black race group. As shown in Figure 4.15.

Figure 4.15: UJ Sports Staff distribution per race category

RACE GROUP IN %

White 53% 47% Black

Table 4.31: Equity ratio of UJ Sport 2015: Black 56% v White 44%

Employment Type Gender Race Total Foreign Nationals Total Grand Disabled

Total

Black White African Other

Permanent Female 7 8 14 0 0 0 14 0

Male 11 6 18 0 0 0 18 0

Permanent Total 18 14 32 0 0 0 32 0

56% 44% 100% 100%

Based on temporary employees during 2015 UJ Sport had 115 temporary appointments where 19 (17%) are female and 100 (83%). The composition in term of race there was 72 (61%) white, 43(36%) Black, and Foreign African 4(3%). As shown in Table 4.16.

110

Figure 4.16: UJ Sports Temporary Staff distribution per race category

Vacancies at UJ Sport

UJ Sport had eight (8) vacant positions due to contracts against them, they could not be advertised. Also the nature of coaching UJ Sports could not appoint coaches permanently but rather on fixed term contract, but were in the process of converting some permanent positions into fixed term contracts which would allow flexibility and job security for the coaches.

UJ Sports also had resignations of two permanent staff which were Mr. Michael Dick (The Acting Senior Manager Sports Clubs) in November and Robin van Ginkel (Sports Scientist) in December 2015

4.3.10.2 UJ Sport Clubs results of 2015 as shown in table 4.32 & 4.33

Table 4.32: USSA Results of 2015 CODE 2015

Athletics: T/F 1st

Cross-country Men: 1st

Women: 3rd

Basketball Men: 3rd

Basketball Women: 4th

Cricket Did not play – Cancelled

Football Men: 8th

111

Football Women: 5th

Hockey Men: 5th

Hockey Women: 1st

Beach Volleyball DNP – Cancelled

Netball 5th

Rugby 1st

Rugby 7’s Men: 3rd

Rugby 7’s Women: 2nd

Golf B – Division: 2nd

Squash 1st

Rowing: USSA Sprints 3rd

Overall 2nd

Table4.33: Varsity Cup/ Sports result for 2015 CODE 2015

Athletics 4th

Cricket Lost semi-finals

Football Men: DNQ

Football Women: 4th

Hockey Men: 1st

Hockey Women: 1st

Netball 6th

Rugby 6th

Beach Volleyball DNQ

Rugby 7’s 4th

112

4.4 UJ Culture Survey 2016 done by University of Johannesburg Human Resource and Transformation Department in October 2016

The Human Resource and Transformation Department at UJ conducted a culture survey across the university to all the staff within UJ. For the purpose of these studies, only relative information (questions, results, and outcomes) were used from this 2016-Survey. The studies will only look at the response of UJ Sport departments. This results would analysing the working environment and how the employees within UJ Sport experience or see the department/UJ.

UJ Sports had 31 staff members that participated in the 2016-Survey and the outcomes of the questions will show in Figures 4.17 to 4.23 of UJ Sport staff experiences in the department.

Factor 1: General Positive Management as shown in Figure 4.17

Figure 4.17: General Positive Management

Number Wording UJ Sport

UJ managers create an enabling environment for their staff to achieve their 59.4% 51 full potential

52 UJ managers are supportive 58.6%

53 I trust UJ managers to act in our best interests 52.3%

54 If I raise a concern with a UJ manager, it is attended to 49%

55 I am treated with respect by colleagues 72.2%

56 UJ managers treat their staff respectfully 65.3%

57 The needs of employees with family responsibilities are accommodated 61.8%

In matters of mutual concern, a consultative approach is followed in 47.1% 58 decision-making

113

Number Wording UJ Sport

Opportunities exist for all staff to engage in constructive dialogue with each 56.3% 60 other

62 UJ managers “practise what they preach” in respect of responsible conduct 54.4%

63 Decisions affecting staff members are fair 39.4%

64 UJ staff can report unethical practices without fear of victimisation 43.4%

65 Staff are held accountable if they violate UJ’s ethical standards 53.2%

The importance of workplace ethics (good/responsible conduct) is 65.2% 66 communicated

The performance management system enhances a culture of high 34.9% 69 performance

70 Excellent performance is appreciated at UJ 45.1%

71 Leaders demonstrate commitment to constructive change at UJ 61.3%

UJ managers make an effort to understand individuals from diverse 57.3% 72 backgrounds

UJ managers actively promote a diverse workforce (race; gender; culture; 65.3% 74 etc.)

76 UJ managers communicate (speaking and listening) effectively 61.1%

78 All staff are treated with respect, regardless of their positions 58.3%

79 My ethnic background is respected 57.6%

81 There is a culture of trust at UJ 38.2%

82 Staff from different racial groups trust each other 36.7%

83 Discrimination is not tolerated at UJ 57.2%

84 UJ leaders set an example of ethical behaviour 59.4%

85 UJ leaders recognise a good job being done 45.5%

Total average 53.9

114

Factor 2: Enhancing the UJ core business as shown in Figure 4.18

Figure 4.18: Enhancing the UJ core business

Number Wording UJ Sport

20 UJ encourages independent thinking 70.8%

22 UJ actively promotes diversity 80.1%

24 The UJ encourages creativity 70.1%

25 UJ is doing regular introspection to ensure growth/renewal 62.1%

UJ staff are fairly treated by their colleagues (regardless of race; gender; 52% 27 religion; sexual orientation; etc.).

28 Being honest is valued at UJ 67.1%

33 Adequate opportunities for self-development exist 64.6%

Total average 66.7%

Factor 3: Fairness as shown in Figure 4.19

Figure 4.19: Fairness

Number Wording UJ Sport

30 The performance management process is applied fairly 38.2%

31 There is a feeling of unity at UJ 41.0%

32 Remuneration is fair (equal pay for equal work) 31.8%

Total average 37%

115

Factor 4: Absence of victimization as shown in Figure 4.20

Figure 4.20: Absence of victimization

Number Wording UJ Sport

10 Sexual harassment of staff occurs 33%

11 Victimization of staff occurs 24.3%

12 A culture of blaming others (for incidents) exists at UJ 18.2%

13 Stereotyping of staff takes place at UJ 18.2%

14 Verbal abuse against staff takes place at UJ 29.1%

15 Humiliation of staff happens at UJ 27.5%

16 “Back-stabbing” takes place at UJ 17.6%

44 “Bullying” of staff occurs 28.5%

Total average 24.6%

Factor 5: UJ as preferred place of employment as shown in Figure 4.21

Figure4.21: UJ as preferred place of employment

Number Wording UJ Sport

34 If I had a chance, I would again choose to work at the UJ 63.5%

35 I am satisfied with my career opportunities at UJ 58.2%

36 I feel proud to be working for UJ 64%

38 I promote UJ as employer of choice 51.8%

116

39 I enjoy being at work 60.5%

Total average 59.6%

Factor 6:Non-abusive managers as shown in Figure 4.22

Figure 4.22:Non-abusive managers

Number Wording UJ Sport

18 Misuse of positional superiority (“rank pulling”) takes place at UJ 48.5%

Some managers use “fear/threat” tactics to get what they want 35.1% 73 (intimidation)

Total average 41.8%

Factor 7: Non-factor variables as shown in Figure 4.23

Figure 4.23: Non-factor variables

Number Wording UJ Sport

40 My job is very demanding 83.6%

41 UJ promotes work-life balance 52%

42 Leadership potential is recognized at UJ 47.3%

43 UJ is receptive to staff with a different sexual orientation 60.1%

77 New employees are made to feel welcome at UJ 68.5%

Total average 62.3%

117

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter will comprise of primary and secondary data that was collected over in chapter 4. This chapter will state the results over the years and will show the changes of the adoption that was implemented with their affects positively or negatively. Also to note that in chapter 4 there were no observations but it was fully discussed at the end of this chapter (5) in the observation part. This was done to give an overall view based on observations of the study while conducting it especially, what was noted while collecting the data, which would be relative to this chapter.

5.2 Results of Primary Data

In the results of the primary data, all the interviewees (15 responses) answers for each question were analysed and given in percentages of the general responses, which would give an indication of general outcomes of the question. Interviewees were selected on the basis of them being present when the merger process happened (2004) and that they were still around/part of the environment (UJ) especially in UJ sports. All questions (1 to10) responses were given a short discussion below after every question for primary data.

5.2.1 Primary date from the interviews done

The ten (10) questions was broken down to three (3) structured part question 1 to 3 that was the background of the each institutions before merger in 2004, questions 4 to 7 that was the process that was adopted or done among the institutions to become UJ/UJ Sport and the questions 8 to 10 that is the current/present/post-merger at UJ/ UJ Sport. An overall review of each structured part would be given at the end of the last question of that structure.

5.2.1.1 Question 1: 47% (7 out of 15) were from TWR (TWR Sport) and 53 %( 8 out of 15) were from RAU (RAU Sport 7 and 1 other department from RAU)

Discussion: This result states that the selected candidates were almost balanced between the two form institutions TWR and RAU. In order to give clear and objective outcomes

5.2.1.2 Question 2: In this question, there were comparisons between two responses given as

118

similar with the small differences and differences with big factors. (As shown in Table 5.1)

Table 5.1: Question 2 listed factors

Similar way with the small differences Different with big factors

53% (8 of 15) said was similar. 47% (7of 15) said was different Due to Due to ● Just more efficiency & worked as a team back then. ● Most of the support staff was off campus ● Good Communication channel & great working environment ● Was not part of sport & external service ● Change in report line ● Function well and productive ● More simple ● Did not exist ● Bursaries allocation was more equal ● was a flat organizational structure

● Student part of decision ● High-Performance Sports are driven making and involvement

Discussion: This was indicated that the ex-institutions within the department functioned similarly to now which 53% said it did with few differences as stated in the column on the left (Table 5.1). Based on the outcome that 47 % functioned differently due to the statements pointed out in the column on the right.

5.2.1.3 Question 3: 67% (10 of 15) heard about the merger of their institutions, 13% (2 out of 15) announced by the High Educational Minister and 20% ( 3 out of 15) from media sources like TV, radio, and newspapers.

Discussion: Majority (67%) heard about the merger from their department or was communicated to them via their institutions. The remainder came across it via the media (20%) or announced by the Educational Minister (13%) at first. Then later heard it from their institutions. Based on the outcome that each of their ex-departments were 67% effective in a

119

communication channel to them

Overall review of the background question 1 to 3

It was a fair, balanced amount of respondents among former institutions (TWR Sport and RAU Sport) that took part in the interviews. They stated that both previous departments operated similarly beside that RAU was high-performance driven and the operation structure was more complicated to TWR sport. Which was focus on student sport (mass participation) and had a simple organizational structure. Also, the majority of staff from both ex-sports departments heard about the merger through the own department, which meant there were proper communication channels amongst themselves within their individual departments they came from.

5.2.1.4 Question 4: 20% (3 of 15) was not happy about it, 7 % (1 of 15) did not matter to them and 73% (11 of 15) were comfortable with it. But what must be noted, is that the majority of them were uncertain about their jobs and did not know what to expect at end of the process.

Discussion: 73% were comfortable with the merger happening for a better future but still had a lot of uncertainty about their jobs, so this points out that a merger was a big change for the institutions and fear of job security amongst the employees would be high. The biggest concern for them was the focusing process and having smooth transition

5.2.1.5 Question 5: In this question the majority had similar answers saying there were meetings at the sports department and sports clubs with negotiation in some cases, except the basketball which did not exist at the time in RAU sport. It must be noted that these meetings and negotiation happened (2004- 2005) before the Accenture process took place in 2007 in UJ Sport. This process happens in UJ sports after the merger took place already.

Discussion: This indicates that the department or organization went through two major changes within 5 years. Firstly, the merger itself between 2004 to 2005 and secondly 2007 to 2008 the Accenture process

120

5.2.1.6 Question 6: 33% (5 of 15) was highly involved in the process and 67% (10 of 15) was involved on a minimal scale or in some form. When meant highly involve they sat on the steering committee or were part of the decision making process.

Discussion: This outcome shows that 33% were physically involved with the planning, implementing and adopting process of the merger within the department merger process and the rest (67%) give input when they were required to do so. This would beg the question if everybody’s thoughts were taken into consideration since the majority was involved on a minimal scale

5.2.1.7 Question 7: Looking at Table 5.2. 53 % (8 of 15) of the respondents said it was not fair and 47% (7 of 15) said it was fair

Table 5.2: Question 7 listed factors

53 % (8 of 15) said it was not fair 47% (7of 15) said it was fair

Due to Due to

● Ex-RAU got the better ● It was a positive change position. ● They retain their position ● People were looking for their own interest or gain ● From their personal point of view was fair to them ● After merger in 2008 Accenture process was not fair ● They were senior management

● Ex-TWR staff was done in

● Some staff got the rough end of the stick

● Lead to a certain direction

● The was favoritism shown to certain people

● Same RAU management

● Match and place was not a fair 121

process.

● Certain people got positions they were incapable of doing and are still unable to perform in it

Discussion: Majority (53%) said it was unfair due to the reason indicated in the right column (Table 5.2) would strengthen the previous questions discussion, which, if very majority interest was taken to hand based on the few of them being involved in the process. The percentage (47%) that said it was fair was due to them retaining their previous positions or getting better ones within newly formed institution or UJ Sports department.

Overall review of the process and adaption of the merger/Accenture process question 4 to 7

Majority of respondents stated that they were comfortable with the merger of a better future but had doubts about the job or position. They said that they had many meetings and negotiations before the merger (2004- 2005) so that they could operate as one department. They also stated soon after the merger they when into another process in 2007 the Accenture process, and in this process, the majority of staff were involved in a low scale of input to the process. This states that two-thirds of department staff engaged on a moderate level were they contributed on minimal bases or none at all to the Accenture process. Less than half of the employees felt that it was a fair process and it was due to them either retaining the position or they became a senior manager. What was noted is that Accenture process was not favoured amongst the ex-TWR staff because they felt they won't involve in the process and their ex- RAU staff secured most of the top positions, and it was a process that favoured them. This would suggest that the Accenture process was not properly conducted across the whole of UJ Sport

5.2.1.8 Question 8: Based on the observation as shown in Table5.3. 53 % (8 of 15) of the respondents said it’s not working and 47% (7of 15) said its working

Table 5.3: Question 8 listed factors

122

53 % (8 of 15) said it’s not working 47% (7of 15) said its working

Due to Due to

● The politics of the former ● From the High-Performance point institutions and if they leave it behind of view, it is working. that it could actual work. ● UJ is in a good position because ● It was a forced merger and we of the merger need to revisit the strategy ● It's working but not effective ● Worked in the first 5 years (2005-2008) in UJ Sports and stopped ● It is because we would not know after Accenture process. what would have happened to the old institutions if they were still around ● Don’t know what motivates the changes ● Under the circumstance, it is but has room for improvements ● Does not think its effective and efficient anymore

● It was a rushed strategy

● Individuals use the process for their own agendas in UJ Sport

Discussion: 47% said it was working but it’s not effective or efficient and it’s working to a certain extent within the department. Where 53% said it’s not working for the reason stated in the right column. Which indicates that somewhere the process in practices failed or was not adopted properly or fairly as the previous discussion stated? It does not allow the full potential output of the department or departmental function to its fullest.

5.2.1.9 Question 9: Judging from the Table 5.4. 33 %( 5 out of 15) of the respondents said they were better off without merger, 40% (6 out of 15) said they are better with merger and 27 %( 4 out of 15) were unsure.

Table 5.4: Question 9 listed factors

123

33% (5 out of 15) said they were better off without merger because

● Lack of transformation

● RAU was financially well off or on a better level

● Due to poor leadership

● Cannot combine a Technikon with a University

● Once you start restructuring or dividing resources you don’t get the full potential

40%(6 out of 15) said they are better with merger because

● It was good for the long run or long term

● Because merger happened for a reason which top management wanted

● The is a sense of belonging after the merger took place

● It was good from a student perspective

● The employee got empowered

● The new established UJ is more inclusive to serve a border community and individuals. Where the old one was only looking at a certain race group.

27% (4 out of 15) were in between of the two because (Unsure)

● In terms of numbers it was better but the way we operating we better off without.

● Start off better and now we better off without due to the current leadership and no sense of direction in UJ Sport.

● The TWR had a good model but with the Accenture process, a lot of people got appointed one sided by senior management in UJ Sport.

● Just start working as the merger took place so would not know if it would be better off or better with merger

Discussion: Only 40% said they better off with the merger for the reason stated in the columns (Table 5.4), which gives 60% of them saying they’re not or are unsure the two looking at the current situations within the department that could have been caused by not

124

adopting the merger properly from the start or not adapting it as the environment changes.

5.2.1.10 Question 10: Based on the observation shown in Table5.5. 47 %( 7 out of 15) of the respondents said they were unhappy, 47% (7 out of 15) said they were unsure and 6 %( 1 out of 15) felt it was perfect.

Table 5.5: Question 10 listed factors

47 %( 7 out of 15) said they were unhappy due to:

● Need to get to a point where everybody understands what they need to do and the need to clarify certain policies in UJ Sport.

● UJ Sport moved away from the winning culture and sport has a phase out in a unit that gets branded.

● Leadership because their needs to be a clear strategy and managers need to know their roles and be empowered in doing them

● Due to coaches not being looked after and there is no trust in them.

● Too much favouritism in certain parts of process and there was no combined decision-making from both parties (RAU and TWR)

● There are financial challenges

● Need stronger leaders that understands the different sport codes

47% (7 out of 15) said that they were unsure due to

● UJ Sport has good policies but don't always follow protocol on them and some individuals still are holding on to the past

● UJ is in a good position but need to look at the organization as a whole to move forward and become the best

● Have to keep on working and changing the mentalities of people making the changes

● Transformation is necessary but the way it’s currently being done, it’s not working

● Not perfect yet because changes and adoptions, needs to be implemented fairly and correctly.

● Academically its good but from a sporting point of view it is not because UJ

125

Sport can provide a service on all four campuses (APK, APB, DFC and SWC)

● The institution is driven by broad goals and objectives and should be managed that way and not driven by individuals agendas

6 %( 1 out of 15) said yes we(UJ) perfectly fine because

● They negotiated labour and was able to provide a service to the clients with the best conditions

Discussion: In this question only 6% said they (UJ/UJ Sport) are perfect where majority (94%) said they (UJ/UJ Sport) not or sort of which means that there needs to be some changes within in the department, or make the working environment more employee friendly by addressing the issues at hand and adapting it to the new environment by reviewing the current culture within the department.

Overall review of the current/present/post-merger question 8 to 10

Majority of the respondents’ stated that Accenture process that was implemented is not working and their rest said it was working to an extent (that it’s not efficient). Where the majority of them stated that the university or department is better off with the merger that was implemented due to the current environment universities find themselves in. The mass majority of the respondents also said that were either unhappy or unsure of executed strategy that UJ Sport adopted from the Accenture process and needed to be re-evaluated. In this section, it was noted that the issue was with the Accenture process and not much with the merger. Where everything was fine with merger up until they adopted the Accenture process and this caused a lot of inter-fighting amongst the employees within UJ Sports and the process was not transparent

The primary data would be discussed further in the observation and what will be noted about the primary data results, as all the comments in these results were from the responses.

5.3Results of secondary data

Looking at the secondary data, the focus will be on the human resources, results at USSA/Varsity Sports of clubs and strategies used or adopted over the years (2007 to 2015).

126

Starting with a short summary of the years from the annual report dated 2007 to 2015. Followed by the UJ culture survey of 2016 which would focus only on UJ Sport responses. The last part of this chapter would be the observations of this studies.

5.3.1. Short discussion and summary of UJ Sport annual report dating from 2007 to 2015

2006/2007 UJ Sport was in the first phase project in the renewal and integration that was facilitated by Accenture (which was the Accenture process). They had three different levels Social/Recreational Performance, Competitive Performance and High Performance of which 85% of the budget was allocated to those High-Performance sports codes. 2007 was mostly spent on strategic planning sessions and they kept all vacant positions till the final redesign and restructuring was completed or implemented. This was the second time in the space of 5 years that UJ Sport had to go through a lot of changes and implementations

2007/2008 they continued with the process of re-design and restructuring in the UJ sports department but it was more of an implementation or adaptation stage of the process. They had a new mission and vision; they also added different positions to the structure to make the unit more functional. 8 Top management positions(Executive Director Sport, Participation Resource Manager, Commercial Unit Manager, Secretariat Manager, Performance Excellence Manager, Biokinetics Clinic Manager, UJ Sports Marketing Manager and UJ Manager Clubs) where filled with 2 of the 8 coming from the ex TWR and the rest were from the former ex RAU

2008/2009 was the year of all the adoption and the UJ Sport was slowly stabilizing the environment after all the changes of the previous 2 years. The mission and vision stayed the same and this was the time the UJ Sport functioned as a unit.

2009/2010 In this year UJ Sport had a leadership break away session were they identified UJ Sports weakness which was:

● The lack of detail sport specific recruitment plans,

● They identified the competitors in regards to the recruitment of student-athletes which were: NWU Potchefstroom (Puk), UP (Tuks), University of Stellenbosch (Maties) and

127

UFS (Kovsies).

● The lack of job descriptions and performance agreement for the coaching staff.

● The lack of planning for succession for the coaching staff.

● The lack of attendance of training and performance of excellence program from student athletes.

● The low percentage of competitive participation in the following campuses APB, DFC and SWC compare to APK campus.

● Not enough facilities in certain sports codes to provide the unique participation opportunities

● The expectations from provincial/regional as well as national federations

2010/2011, in this year UJ Sport reviewed their mission and vision to align themselves with the rest of UJ. They also revisited their goals and policies and worked closely with the Sport and Movement Department. Where they started a working integrated learning program (WIL students), it provided the Sport and Movement students with work within UJ sport to gain working experience.

2011/2012, UJ Sport looked at the governance, where they selected a committee of 13 staff members to work together and provide guides for the department. The department had also the four trusts under Sport-for-Purpose and three trusts under Sport-for-Performance. Which stated a top 3 finish amongst their peers (other Universities) across the sports codes and adopting a winning culture?

2012/2013, UJ Sport did some adjustment that year, where they reorganized the structures which was not discussed previously with the Director of Sport and the other line managers, due to a bitter division between the colleagues, as well as negative and distrust amongst them throughout the years. UJ Sports structure consisted of six management areas which were Sports Participation, Performance Excellence, Operations and facilities, Commercialisation, Marketing and Events and the Bio-kinetic Clinic.

2013/2014 This year was very challenging for UJ Sport due to many changes within the 128

department especially in the top management structure of the UJ Sport Bureau which caused the club environment to undergo changes resulting in club managers resigning, the Executive Director of UJ Sports was moved to an academic position (no longer UJ Sport Executive Director) and the Director of UJ Sport was also removed. The department was without key leadership that year.

2014/2015 UJ Sports started the year with a new proposed structure where the two positions in their structure top management positions that were vacant (Executive Director and Director) was merged into one which becomes a Senior Director. UJ Sport had a new leader as the Senior Director and the sports codes had 7 codes in the A priority (high-performance sports code) Rowing moved to B priority (competitive sports codes). The eight vacant positions in UJ Sport could not be advertised due to them having contract appointments against them.

5.3.2. UJ Sports Human Resource comparison from 2007 to 2015

In this specific part of the studies, the employment figure of UJ Sports over the years will be shown in Tables 5.6 to 5.8. Which would give an indication of the workforce, working environment and stability of the department? These results were collected from the UJ Sport annual reports and the data combined into the tables below (5.6, 5.7 and 5.8)

5.3.2.1 Equity Comparison Permanent Staff of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015(as shown in Table 5.6)

Looking at the secondary data as shown below in Table 5.1, based on UJ Sports equity comparison of permanent staff within the department between the years of 2007 to 2015. The year 2007 had the less (28 staff) permanent/fixed term staff in the department due to the Accenture process being conducted that year after the merger is in place already for 2 years. In 2008 UJ Sport had the highest (46 staff) permanent/fixed term staff, which was the adoption stage of the Accenture process and additional positions were added to the organizational structure as per the recommendation of Accenture. After 2008 the

129

permanent/fixed term staff numbers dropped to where in 2015 it was at 32. This could be due to the employee retiring, resigning, being dismissed, been moved to a different department and contract not being renewed.

Looking at the gender base of permanent/fixed term staff number it was mostly dominated by male staff in the early years. In 2008 there were 27 male and only 19 female permanent/fixed term employees. And looking at 2015 the difference was 18 male to 14 female which means the difference was 4 whereas in 2008 it was double that (8). This could be that more males have left the department and that the female stayed longer or was pushed for employment within the department over the years based on the table, that shows the male counterpart dropped by 9, from 27 (in 2008) to 18 (2015). From the female counterpart, it only dropped by 5 which was from 19 (in 2008) to 14 (in 2015).

Looking at race non-white was a combination of Black, Coloured and Indian added together. This is a clear indication that the department was mostly dominated by white, but over the years the table shows that transformation was gradually implemented within the department. The figures on the table (5.6) show that white was in 2007 on 32 compared to non-white 14 and wherein 2015 the figures show 14 white versus 17 non-white. So transformation is transparent within the department but on a small scale. Because if there

is a breakdown of non-white figures where they each would be put in their only race categories (Black, Coloured, and Indian) the majority would still be white within the department.

130

Table 5.6: Equity Comparison Permanent Staff/Fixed Term Contract of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015

Equity Comparison of Permanent Staff/Fixed Term Contract 50 46 45 40 40 37 35 35 36 33 35 32 32 28 30 27 23 24 25 22 21 21 20 20 21 21 2020 20 19 1918 18 20 17 17 15 15 16 14 14 13 14 13 13 14 14 15 11 10 5 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Total Staff White Non-White Male Felmale

5.3.2.2 Equity Comparison Temporary Staff of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015(as shown in Table 5.7)

It must be noted that temporary staff includes the number of coaches, administrators, and technical officials that are either contracted on a contractual basis or volunteers that are engaged in UJ Sport as shown in Table 5.7.

UJ Sport consists mostly of the temporary contracted staff and depends on them due to the environment that the department is in. Looking at the Table 5.7, it shows that the number of the temporary contracted staff had grown from 128 in 2008 to 262 in 2014 but decreased drastically in 2015. This could be due to the department having budget cuts, the new temporary employees being hired somewhere else or permanently employed elsewhere, contracts not renewed, or temporary employment got riskier in the university environment

Looking at the gender base of temporary staff there is a clear indication that it is dominated by the males, 52 more than their female counterparts in 2009 (108 male and 56 female) and most would be 102 more males than the female counterpart in 2011 (145 male and 43 female). This shows that it’s a male-dominated environment when analyzing the years

131

2008,2009,2011,2012 and 2015 (that was the only data provided which showed gender base). This could be that there are more males interested in sports than females, that more males take part in sports than females and that there are more male qualified coaches in the environment than female.

In the temporary contracts, the non-white race was combined as in the permanent staff (Black, Coloured, and Indian added together). The results found that there was a bigger gap between white and non-white race appointed temporary staff within the department as shown in Table 20. The results show that the biggest gap was in 2014 with 92 (178 white and 84 non-whites) more than the non-white group, and the smallest gap was in 2015 with the gap 25 (72 white and 47 non-whites). This could be due to a change of leadership within the department. Less temporary staff was appointed in 2015 which was 119 compared to 2014 that was 262 and that there are not a lot of non-white coaches in the environment like the manager in the section above. This showed that the department did minimal in the early years of development or appointment of the number of non-white in the environment.

Table 5.7: Equity Comparison Temporary Staff of UJ Sport 2007 to 2015 (*note 2007 and 2010 no data or breakdown of data was found)

Equity Comparison of Termporary Contract

300 262 250 211 216 197 188 200 178 164 145 145 146 150 128 135 134 118 119 108 100 90 93 84 100 70 72 56 62 46 53 52 47 38 35 43 50 19

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Total Staff White Non-White Male Felmale

132

5.3.2.3 UJ Sport Appointments, Resignations, Retirements, and Vacant Positions from 2007 to 2015 (as shown in Table 5.8) (Note the number of appointments, resignations, retirements and vacant positions was based on the permanent staff/fixed term contract or the positions (permanent positions) within the Department (UJ Sport).

Looking at the appointments as shown in the Table 5.8 below it shows that the most were made in 2008 which were 13 employees. This was after the Accenture process that created new positions to fit the structure in order for the department to function effectively. There were no appointments made in 2007 and 2015 which was a 0 (none).In 2007 the department was undergoing the Accenture process whereby they froze all the positions until the process was completed. And in 2015 UJ Sport had a change in top management, a new Senior Director of Sports was appointed so that the department could not just approach and appoint without the blessing of the Senior Director. On average over the 9 years, UJ Sport appointed at least 5 (4.5 round off to the nearest decimal is 5) new employees a year.

The most resignations in UJ Sports came in 2010 with 5 resignations, this could have been due to the changes in the department, employees getting better job offers, they were not happy with the working environment and maybe due to leadership within the department. The least was 2011 and 2012 none, this could be because the working environment was more stable after all the changes were adopted, or that the employees were happier at that period. On average over the year 9 years, UJ Sport had at least 2 resignations a year. Looking at the permanent positions at UJ Sport, there can be a conclusion drawn that UJ Sports has a low employee retention.

Looking at vacant positions within the department the most positions that were vacant was in 2010 and 2011 standing on 10 vacant positions in those two years. The least was in 2008 which was 1, but that year UJ Sport also made the most appointments. On average over the 9 years, UJ Sport had 6 (6.3 rounding off to the nearest decimal) vacant positions within the department. This could be that the department cannot find suitable candidates because of the specialized environment they are in, could be that people don’t want to work there because of the working environment, the rewards are not appealing as others in the same environment or maybe the top management did not want to hire certain people in the position and kept it vacant.

133

Looking at retirement UJ Sport had the 1 retirement in 2007 and 2014. So the department has a fairly young workforce.

Looking at dismissals or non-renewed contract UJ Sport had the highest was in 2009 and 2014 with 2 employees. The average over the 9 years are 1 (0.7 rounding off to the nearest decimal) which is also fairly low. These employees do the job and the department does not really have any discipline issue with their employees.

Table 5.8: UJ Sports Appointment, Resignation, Vacant Position, Retired and Dismisses/No renewal of contract/Moved from 2007 to 2015

5.3.2.4 UJ Sport Club Performance at USSA (as shown in Table5.9)

Looking at the Department performances against their peers or other Universities as shown in Table 5.9. UJ Sport set the performance target to achieve top 3 across all sport codes taking part in USSA competition. The best year that UJ Sport was in 2011 where they achieved 2.3 to the placing average across 18 sporting codes that took part in USSA. The worst year was in 2007 where they achieved 3.8 placing across 22 sporting codes. 2007 was also the Accenture process year, which could have affected the department’s performance due to all the changes.

The most sporting codes that participated at USSA competitions was in 2009 which were 23. The least was in 2010 with 11 sporting codes, this could be due to UJ Sport having the 134

highest vacant position that year that were not filled. Resulting in not having staff arrange sporting codes to go to USSA or UJ sport did not offer that sporting codes at that time period or that USSA competition was cancelled for some sporting codes.

Looking at the averages over the 9 years. UJ Sport took 17 (17.1 rounding off to nearest decimal) sporting codes to USSA. Reaching the goal of making top 3, UJ Sport only achieved these 6 years out of 9 years (2008, 2010,2011,2012,2013 and 2015) and the total placement of all the years was 3.1 which shows that they sort of achieved their goal to a certain extent. But when comparing them to the winning culture that they wanted to adopt as UJ Sport, they are way off based on the results. Where the best results were in 2013 with 8 teams winning out of 18 and the worst was in 2007 with 3 teams winning out of 22. Looking at the total average of all the years put together, the Department only achieves 22% of that goal or culture.

Table 5.9: UJ Sport Clubs Performance at USSA

UJ SPORT CLUBS PERFORMANCE AT USSA

Toatl Sport Team in USSA Teams Place 1st Teams Places in Top 3 Teams Below 4th Places Average place of the Total Teams Results

22 23 20 18 18 18 18 16 17 14 14 15 12 12 11 10 10 11 8 7 8 8 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 6 3.8 3.5 3.6 3 3 3 2.6 32.3 3.3 2.8 3 3.1 2 1

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

5.3.2.5 UJ Sport Club Performance at Varsity Sport/Cup (as shown in Table 5.10)

Varsity Sport is a bit different to USSA the competition where only the top 8 Universities in South Africa in a particular sport code qualifies to take part in the competition. It was a fairly new competition that gave universities big media exposure by being nationally televised. (On

135

Supersport).

Looking at UJ Sports performance in Varsity Sport/Cup as shown in Table5.10, the most teams they had participating in Varsity Sports/Cup was in 2014 with 8 teams, the worst was in 2013 with 4 teams, but at that time the competition just started off and not many sports codes were offered.

UJ Sport reached the goal of making top 3 in Varsity Sport/Cup, UJ Sport only achieved this 2 years out of 3 years (2013 and 2014) and the total of placement of all the years was 3.5 which shows that they did not achieve their goal in this competition, they were below par. When comparing them to the winning culture that they want to adopt as UJ Sport are further away from that goal, based on the results. Where the best results were in 2014 with 3 teams winning out of 8 and the worst was in 2013 with 0 teams winning out of 4. Looking at the total average of all the years put together, the Department only achieved 21% of that goal or culture.

Table 5.10: UJ Sport Clubs Performance at Varsity Sport/Cup

5.4 UJ Culture Survey 2016

Looking at the 2016-Survey as shown early in Figures 4.17 to 4.23, that was conducted in 2016 by the Human Resource and Transformation Department of UJ. For the purpose of this

136

studies, the focus would be on the UJ Sport responses of 31 staff members that participated in the 2016-Survey. The focus will be on the seven (7) factors and its questions which were taken out of the survey.

Looking at first factor which was the general positive management. Based on UJ Sport Total average responses that were a 53.9%, which felt there was a positive management from a total of 27 questions that was responded in this factor. With the lowest recorded question within this factor was the “decision affecting staff members are fair”, which 39.4% said that it was fair and 60.6 did not feel it was fair. The highest record question in this factor was the “I am treated with respect by colleagues”, 72.2% felt they were respected by the colleagues.

The second factor was enhancing the UJ core business. With the total average of 66.7% felt it does from a total of 7 questions. With the lowest percentage in the question of “UJ staff are fairly treated by their colleagues” 52% feel they are fairly treated by their colleagues. The highest percentage recorded was in the question of “UJ actively promotes diversity” with 80.1% saying it does, UJ actively promotes diversity.

The third factor was the fairness which UJ Sport total averages were 32% that felt there was fairness from a total of 3 questions. This is a very low average for the department and shows that 68% felt there is no fairness.

The fourth factor was the absence of victimization with a 24.6% total average saying its absence from a total of 8 questions. With the very lowest percentage in the question of “Back-stabbing takes place at UJ” recording 17.6% saying it does not and the 82.4% said it does within the department. With the highest percentage question recorded in this factor was “sexual harassment of staff occurs” were 33.0% said it does not occur.

The fifth factor was UJ as the preferred place of employment with 5 questions under this factor and UJ Sport record a total average of 59.6% saying it is the preferred place of employment. The lowest recorded question was “I promote UJ as employer choice” with a 51.8% saying they do promote them within UJ Sport. The highest recorded question was “I feel proud to work for UJ” with a 64% saying they are proud within UJ Sports

The sixth factor was the non-abusive managers with 2 questions, under this factor and UJ 137

Sport recorded a total average of 83.6% saying they are non-abusive managers.

The seventh factor was the non-factor variables with 5 questions under this factor and UJ Sport recording a total average of 62.3%. With the highest recorded question was “My job is very demanding” with 83.6% saying their jobs are demanding within UJ Sport. The lowest question recorded was "Leadership potential is recognized at UJ" with a recording of 47.3 who felt they were recognized in UJ Sport.

When taking all seven factors to account for their questions and adding all the averages together, gives an indication of the how conducive the working environment is within UJ Sport. UJ Sport scores an overall average of 54.7% working environment based on the factors and responses to the questions in the 2016-survey.

5.5 Observation of the studies.

The observations were left for last section in this study, they include all the observations that were made while conducting these studies. The observation will state all relative information that was put up during these studies and based on first-hand experiences within the UJ Sport department over the years (from 2007 to present 2017).

Starting off the observation by looking at the merger itself that was created or adopted by the Higher Educational Department, to reduce the amount of tertiary institutions (36 to 21 institutions) and to have standardized quality of tertiary standards. Due to some institutions getting into financial debt, being mismanaged and not being able to have the same quality of standards as other institutions.

RAU, TWR, and Vista were merged to create UJ. In this merger process, there was an agreement drafted among RAU and TWR that both parties will play a 50/50 role in merging, which was filtered down to all departments within the two institutions. UJ Sport came into existences in 2005, where all the sports codes of the two ex-institutional departments (ex RAU Sport and ex TWR Sport) were incorporated. During this process what was observed from the primary data, is that the TWR Sport staff were positive about the merger but uncertain about their jobs and RAU Sport staff was mostly against the merger but had no choice, felt it was forced on them. Also, most senior positions at UJ Sport were occupied by the ex-RAU Sport staff members. 138

Another point that was observed was after the merger in 2005 as the employees started to settle in UJ Sport, another process of changes started in the environment, which was the Accenture process in 2007. It was implemented in 2008 and this is where most of TWR staff felt that they were done in because they felt they got led in a certain direction. Accenture took the staff out of their positions that they were put in after the merger and reshuffled the positions to adopt the new organizational structure.

The process “match and place” placed most of the staff into positions, which caused a lot of bitterness amongst the employees. Due to some being placed where they did not want to be, or did not get the positions they wanted. Some felt they got demoted when they got moved out of their original positions, while others were promoted to the senior position, which showed favouritism of some employees. The senior positions were available to apply for them, but they felt that those positions had been allocated already. This process also seemed like it had overwritten the original agreement that was drafted while the merger took place in 2005.

While conducting the interviews, it seemed there was a spilt in UJ Sport when listening to some of the responses from the interviewee’s. As if there was ex-RAU staff and ex-TWR staff, that there is an RAU way of doing things and a TWR way, as if the past is still present in UJ Sport and that the differences amongst them have not been resolved based on what has transpired within the department in the Accenture process.

139

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Introduction

This last chapter of the study would conclude this research. The conclusion would be based on the findings of this study, from the all data that was gathered, analysed and discussed in the previous chapters. A recommendation would also be suggested at the end of this chapter after concluding all the findings. In order to give suitable recommendations, this would assist the department with their current affairs. This chapter focused on what has been gathered from this study and provide possible suggestions

6.2 Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to see if the merger within UJ Sport was effective and efficient, looking at the outcomes of this study. The merger within UJ Sport does not realise its effectiveness and efficiency of its full potential or capacity. This is due to the way it was implemented or adopted by the department in the earlier stages of the process, which led to a negative culture in the working environment of UJ Sport and was caused by too many changes in a short space of time (Three years after merger and Accenture process). Due to this the working environment is tough and the employees bear the brunt at UJ Sport where:

● UJ Sport has low employee retention.

● There is an interdivision within the department

● There is no trust among employees and line managers

● The employee’s opinions do not matter regarding decisions which are made without their consideration

● There are leadership issues, where top management does not lead by example but rather enforcement

● The employees felt the system let them down base on the favouritism to certain employees

● The environment is unstable because there are constant changes within the department

140

● The adoption of policies get adopted when suited

● The employee's morale and motivation is low

● The empowerment to middle management is low

● The Department is understaffed to a certain extent based on the number of vacant positions

The merger within UJ Sport in theory is sound but when it was adopted in practice it was a very slow process and one sided. Which caused the department to perform to a certain capacity, which is not efficient enough and the culture that was supposed to be in UJ Sport with the merger has not completely manifested. Where now the department is in a risky state and is not operating to their full potential.

6.3 Recommendations

Some recommendations that would assist the Department in improving their current environment would be: That UJ Sport adopts a constructive culture proposed to their current one which is a combination of passive and aggressive culture (both are defensive cultures).

Burnes (2014:188) defines the terms as follows. That constructive culture encourages the employees to interact with each other and their attitude toward a particular task is more to the satisfaction needs. Passive culture is when employees have confidence in interacting in a defensive way, in order for them not to threaten their own securities. Aggressive culture is a culture that the employees have the expectation of enforcing their tasks to ensure that their status and securities are protected.

The way they can adopt this culture is by using Cummings & Worley`s six steps of culture change. Based on Cumming and Worley (2001:509-11) the steps are as follow:

Step 1: UJ Sport must formulate a clear strategic vision. UJ Sport would have to create a vision that would share the values and behaviour needed for the Department to work. This would give them a clear direction the culture they needed within the department and changes they need to make to it.

Step 2: UJ Sport Senior Management (Top Management) have to show commitment. This 141

cultural change will have to start in UJ Sport top management by them committing to the new values and pushing for the change.

Step 3: Model culture at the highest level: This is where UJ Sport Senior Management shows their new culture by their own action and leading by example.

Step 4: Modifying UJ Sport that will support changes within. UJ Sport will have to modify some policies and supportive processes to enhance the culture.

Step 5: UJ Sport needs to select and socialize newcomers and terminate deviants. The best effective way to change culture in any organization is to change the organizational members. So UJ Sport will have to select/hire staff or people that will fit their new culture and having inductions that will indicate attitudes and behaviour within the department. The staff within the system that does not want to adapt to the new way will have to be moved or have their employment terminated.

Step 6: UJ Sport will have to develop ethical and legal sensitivity. This will have to promote the value of UJ Sport Staff with control, equitable treatment, and job security.

Generally, UJ Sport Senior management will have to practice authenticity and with integrity in order to change the prospects of their employees and the current working environment that they are in. According to Graham and England (2004:4) Authenticity is when top management means what they say and integrity is when they do what they say they would.

6.4 Summary of this chapter

This chapter indicated the findings of the research that was discussed in depth in chapter 5 and some recommendations were proposed to the Department. They would have to address the recommendations, if the department would want to be more effective and efficient within their environment and in order for them to operate to their full potential or capacity.

With the current culture, it would be pointless for them to try and solve or address the different issues present. Based on the current attitudes of the employees within the Department that will stay the same, they would end up at the same place where they started off. A positive working environment leads to a constructive one and can address any challenges that they maybe face together. 142

REFERENCE LIST

Asmal, K. (31 January 2002) The Restructuring Of The Higher Education System In South Africa , Available at: http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/he_restructure_0.pdf (Accessed: 18th Septmeber 2015).

Asmal, K. (JUNE 2002) Transformation and Restructuring: A New In situational Landscape for Higher Education , Available at: https://www.dhet.gov.za/Reports%20Doc%20Library/New%20Institutional%20landscape%2 0for%20Higher%20Education%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf (Accessed: 18th September 2015).

Adriaanse, M., Kulati,T., Möller, A., and Symes, A. (November 2004 ) South African Higher Education in the First Decade of Democracy, Available at: http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/SA_HE_10years_Nov2004.pdf (Accessed: 2nd Septmeber 2015).

Amos, T., Hellriegel, D., Jackson, S.E., Klopper, H.B., Louw, L., Louw, M., Oosthuizen, T., Perks, S., Slocum, J., Strain, G. and Staude, G. (2004) Management 4th South African edition, 4th edn., South Africa: .

Baligh, .H.H., (2006) Organization Structures Theory and Design, Analysis and Prescription, : Springe-US.

Bengu, S.M.E (24 July 1997) Education White Paper 3: A PROGRAMME FOR THE TRANSFORMATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION, Available at: http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/White_Paper3.pdf (Accessed: 16th September 2015).

Bhattacharyya, D.K (2006) Research Methodology, 2nd edn., New Delhi: Excel books.

Brousseau, K.R. (1989). Navigating the merger transition. Journal of organizational change management.

Brown, D.R. (2011) An Experiential Approach to Organization Development, 8th edn., New Jersey : Prentice Hall.

143

Bryson, J .M. (2004) Strategic Planning for Public & Non-Profit Organisation: A guide to strengthening & sustaining organisation achievement, 3rd edn., San Francisco, CA: Josey Bass.

Burnes B (2014) Managing Change, 6th ed. Harlow: Pearson.

Campbell, A. and Faulkner, D.O (2003) The Oxford Handbook of Strategy: A Strategy Overview and Competitive Strategy, 1st edn., New York : Oxford University Press.

Carter, L., Giber, D. & Goldsmith, M. (2001) Best Practices in Organisation Development & Change: Culture, Leadership, Retention, Performance, Coaching, 1st edn., San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Coffey, J., Garrow, V. and Holbeche, L (2002) Reaping the Benefits of Mergers and Acquisitions: In Search of the Golden Fleece, : Butterworth-Heinemann.

Conger, J.A. & Kanungo, R.N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy

Cooper, D., Dhiri, S. and Root, J. (2012) Winning operating models, Available at: http://www.centromarca.it/media/87381/bain_winning_operating_models.pdf (Accessed: 21th November 2015).

Department of Education (1997). Education White Paper 3: A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education. Pretoria

Department of Education (2001). National Plan for Higher Education. Pretoria de Jong, T., Wiezer, N., de Weerd, M., Nielsen, K., Mattila-Holappa, P. and Mockałło, Z., 2016. The impact of restructuring on employee well-being: a systematic review of longitudinal studies. Work & Stress, 30(1), pp.91-114

DODD, N.M and THERON, A.V.S. (2011) '', Organisational commitment in a post-merger situation, 14(2222-3436.), pp. 335 [Online]. Available at: http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/sajems/v14n3/v14n3a06.pdf (Accessed: 15 November 2015).

144

Doman, F. (2007) The Integration and Renewal of the Support and Enabling Functions, Johannesburg: Accenture.

Doman, F. (2008) The Integration and Renewal of the Support and Enabling Functions: Job Profile, Johannesburg: Accenture.

Eastman, J. and Lang, D. (2001) Mergers in higher education: Lessons from theory and experience, 1st edn., Toronto Buffalo London : University of Toronto Press Incorporated .

Estermann, T., Mason, P. and Pruvot, E.B. (2015) Define Thematic Report: University mergers in Europe, Available at:http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage- list/DEFINE_Thematic_Report_2_University_Mergers_in_Europe_final (Accessed: 30 September 2015).

Faulkner, D. & Campbell, Andrew. (2003) The Oxford handbook of strategy Volume 2: Corporate Strategy, 1st edn., United States of America: Oxford University.

Ferguson, P .R. & Ferguson, G .J. (2000) Organisations: A Strategic Perspective, : MacMillan.

Foster, S.T (2013) Managing Quality: Integrating the Supply Chain, 5th edn., Brigham Young University: Cloth.

Gamble, J.E., Peteraf, M.A. and Thompson Jr, A.A. (2013) Essentials of Strategic Management, 3rd edn., New York : McGraw-Hill/Irwin .

Graham, R. J. & Englund, R. L (2004) Creating an Environment for Successful Projects, 2nd edn., San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hall, M., 2015. Institutional culture of mergers and alliances in South Africa. In Mergers and Alliances in Higher Education(pp. 145-173). Springer International Publishing.

Hall, M., Luesche, T. and Symes, A. (2004) 'The Council on Higher Education', Council on Higher EducationThe Governance of Merger in South African Higher Education, (1-919856- 39-0), pp. 15 [Online]. Available at: file:///C:/Users/rogerh/Downloads/The_Council_on_Higher_Education%20(1).pdf (Acces sed: 18 November 2015 ). 145

Hough, J., Nieman, G. and Nieuwenhuizen, C. (2010) Entrepreneurship, 1st edn., Pretoria: Van Schaik .

Jeston, J. & Nelis, J. (2006) Business Process Management: Practical Guidelines to Successful Implementations, 2nd edn., Oxford: Elsevier.

Krajewski, J., Malhotra, M. and Ritzman, B. (2010) Operations Management: Processes and Supply Chains, 9th edn., New Jersey : Pearson Education .

Kruger, S.J. and J C Welman, J.C. (2001) Research methodology: for the business and administrative sciences, 2nd edn., Cape Town : Oxford university press.

Lee, T.W. (1999) Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, 2nd edn., Thousand Qaks, London and New Delhi : International Educational and Professional Publisher .

Leedy, P.D. and Ormrod, J.E. (2010) Practical Research: Planning and Design, 9th edn., New Jersey: Merrill.

Martin, F. and Thompson, J. (2010) Strategic Management: Awareness and Change, 6th edn., Bath : Thomas Rennie .

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (FEBRUARY 2001) NATIONAL PLAN FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, Available at: http://www.justice.gov.za/commissions/FeesHET/docs/2001- NationalPlanForHigherEducation.pdf (Accessed: 30th September 2015).

Ministry of Education (21 June 2002) TRANSFORMATION AND RESTRUCTURING: A NEW INSTITUTIONAL LANDSCAPE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, Available at: http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/23549_0.pdf (Accessed: 11 November 2015).

Nath, R and Singh, Y.K., 2010. Research methodology.

National Working Group (2001). The Restructuring of the Higher Education System in South Africa. Report of the National Working Group of the Minister of Education. Pretoria

Pearce, J.A. and Robinson, R.B. (2011) Strategic Management: Formulation, Implementation, and Control, 12th edn., New York : Mcgraw Hill Higher Education.

146

Reddy, T. (February 2004) HIGHER EDUCATION AND SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION: South Africa Case Study, Available at: http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/HEandSocialTransformationReport_25F eb2004.pdf (Accessed: 15th September 2015).

Tian, T. and Tran, Q. (2013) 'Organizational Structure: Influencing Factors and Impact on a Firm ', American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, (2013.32028), pp. 229-236 [Online]. Available at: https://file.scirp.org/pdf/AJIBM_2013042513413585.pdf (Accessed: 2 December 2015).

University Of Johannesburg, 2004. Memorandum of the Agreement between TWR and RAU. Unpublished internal document. University of Johannesburg.

University Of Johannesburg: UJ Sport Department (2007-2015) UJ Sport Annual Report, Johannesburg: UJ Sport.

University Of Johannesburg: Transformation Unit (2016) UJ Culture Survey 2016, Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg.

William, R.T (1998) The Hum an Resources Glossary: The Complete Desk Reference for HR Executives, Managers, and Practitioners, 3th edn., Boca Raton London New York Washington, D.C.: ST. Lucie Press .

147

APPPENDIX

Appendix: A1 interviewee questions

Question 1: What was your position and role before the merger?

Question 2: How did your department (RAU Sport or TWR Sport) function before the merger?

Question 3: When and how did you find out about the merger within the department?

Question 4: what was your reaction and feeling toward the merger happening?

Question 5: How did the process take place in your environment, how was it implemented and when did the process take place? (How did the department go about it?)

Question 6: what role did you play in the process/implementation of the merger within the department?

Question 7: Do you think or feel the process that was adopted was fair and equally implemented right across the department? (Equal and fairly to all from both institutions)

Question 8: After 11 years of the merger do you think it’s effective and efficient? (Is it working?)

Question 9: Do you think or feel your institution was better off without or with the merger and why do you say so?

Question 10: Currently do you think we perfectly fine with all the adaptations in place? If no please explain why and where we can make changes/ adjustments?

148

Appendix B1: Interview with Joel Kgokong on 14 February 2017 on APB campus at 12:52

Question1: Joel stated that he was Student Sports Council president and a student of TWR

Additional Question: what exactly did you do in this position (As Student Sports Council president)?

Joel stated: Mainly it was a Student body like the SRC but mostly focused on sports. Basically, all the sports clubs would get together and discuss issues which they would try to solve for sports students. They would also create some sports days for students which are recreational activities for the general students organized by the Student sports body of TWR

Question2: Joel said we had similar procedures as current but TWR had more student involvement of running a sports bureau. The sports bureau was run by the sports administrator who reported to the Sports Director who in turn reported to the dean of student affairs. They had sports clubs which were on the elite level and performed at the highest level and there was recreational sports for students who wanted to partake on a recreational/social level. The recreational sports was mostly run by the Student Sports Council which was on a daily basis and more student orientated

Question 3 said that he found out at first by the announcement of the Minister of Education that certain institutions would merge. Later on, he found out that TWR will merge with RAU, which had already merged with Vista campuses (Soweto and East Rand). So the last merger was going to happen between TWR and RAU.

Question 4. He said that he thought the merger did not go well with certain institutions because they were better aligned than others and the Minister decided which institution would merge with others. In their opinion, it appeared as if RAU was taking over the merger from TRW, because he felt RAU staff had an attitude towards TWR staff members. They could see there were two different camps pairing up with one having the best interest of the previous institution instead of both sides. So to him, it was negative.

Question 5: He thought that each institution had met within themselves to discuss how things were going to happen, and that follow up meetings was with both departments (TWR and RAU sport) getting together and to get to know each other. He thought meetings between the

149

clubs should also have been organised as there was duplication of clubs due to the merge and this needed to be discussed. Joel found there was still the tug of war between the institutions, where an institution took over certain teams (Clubs). This happened following the merger, where certain sport codes positions were given to certain people from an institution, even though there were other better-qualified candidates that could get the position? This did not go down well with some of the staff especially from the TRW side.

Question 6: The role he played based on him being sports council member was to communicate the merger to the students by making them aware of it, understand that this was something the government wanted, and they going to implement it. He also explained to the students that it would be suitable for the students in the long run with the negatives and positives of the merger and why they losing their identity as TWR and becoming UJ, with the implementations for the merger to happen. This merger was a difficult environment for Sports Council (TWR sports council) to survive. Basically, the role he played was on a student platform by communicating to students the merger process.

Question 7 he felt that some institutions benefited more from the merger than others based on their resources, facilities and finances like Vista. From the sporting codes, both institutions (TWR and RAU) benefited. However, there were issues on the human resources side where RAU staff members were given their better positions than TWR because there were two existing sport bureau’s. Vista, Soweto campus did not have a sports bureau but had a sports officer at campus so they benefited there, where that sport officer learnt how to run the sports business. They ran the sports side on Soweto Campus and built new facilities there.

Additional question: how do you think TWR benefited if any, because it seemed like Vista consistently benefited?

Joel said if you consider what was available at TWR prior to the merger regarding resources in terms of sport facilities, then TWR would be the loser as no building or development happened at the APB campus to accommodate sports there. Even DFC campus ( Former TWR Doornfontein campus) struggled with sports facilities where there is nothing compared to the multi-million Rand track installed at the former RAU facility and the former Vista campuses (Soweto) also had new sports facilities build on their campus. But TWR had nothing built beside the Biokinetics centre which only happens recently but it's not even 150

under sport anymore it's under the sports and movement department (academics department). So basically there wouldn't have been any benefits for TWR.

Questions 8: Joel said politics aside, of the former institutions that it has actually worked from his point of view as UJ. There is always strength in numbers and people brought their own ideas with their experiences to form the University Of Johannesburg. That’s why you see UJ as one of the competitive institution in sports (athletics, football, Hockey, Rowing, and rugby) and well known that that UJ takes their sports seriously. So it's actually a positive one and better than it was previously with many successes to come.

Question 9: he (Joel) stated that: he does not think it was better off in a sense. When he started at TWR, he remembers that there was a lack of transformation as he and one other student-athlete were the only black students in the athletics team. But the following year TWR implemented transformation and there were only 3 white student athletes in the team. Then you have former RAU who in the main was a white Afrikaans institution and with the merger they had to start with transformation. His observation in the rugby varsity cup back then, you mostly found white students in the stadium supporting the team (UJ Rugby team) and presently you would notice different demographics of students supporting the team. So the institution has now slowly transformed them from being a predominately white institution to a South African institution which is open to all who want to attend UJ. Even on the aspect of sports management, you would see that UJ Sport has African women as the Senior Director of sport, where previously this would never have happened and it was very positive that the institution is going in the right direction regarding transformation as the previously racially disadvantaged staff is given the opportunity to prove themselves. So yes the institution is better off with the merger based on the transformation that has happened at the university.

Question 10: Joel: felt there was a need to get to a point where everybody understood what was required of them. Up till today he has not received his job description.. So it needs to be clarified and certain things like policies in the UJ sport seem to be like top secret because we were running on the basis on what you know and what you learned. So it needs to be clarified and clear to us so that we can apply the policies and stay within them. He has noticed on occasions that certain staff have been doing what they have all along and when

151

they overstep their authority then policies are used against them. The policies need to be clear and concise and needs to be applied accordingly

152

Appendix B2: Interview with Anton Van Rooyen on 14 February 2017 on APB campus at 13:15

Question1 Anton said he was in charge of volleyball cricket and war games (mind sport) at TWR sport.

Question 2: Anton stated: Basically the same as at UJ sport, where every sports manager was responsible for their own budget, but the only budget they did not run was the bursaries which were allocated in a central account and managers would meet and allocate the bursaries to students in different sports code based on the highest sporting achievements/performance. Bursaries were allocated equally throughout each sporting code and not as currently where each sports code gets different amounts.

Question 3 Anton said: he started with TWR in 2004 and in the second or third month he heard about a possible merge with TWR and RAU. Later, they were preparing for the merger. All this was communicated to them by the Head of sport for TWR.

Question 4 Anton stated that he just started and was in the sports industry. So he did not mind either way.

Question 5 Anton stated as he remembers correctly there were people selected from both sides (TWR and RAU sport) to work on the steering committee. He was not part of the steering committee because he was fairly new to the environment but they would hear now and then from the steering committee what is happening and the progress based on their reports.

Additional question 1: Do you think the steering committee was equally selected between TWR sports and RAU Sports?

He stated yes it was.

Question 6 he said he did not really play a role, the steering committee did most of the role playing in the process but they would ask them some specific question to their environment they were in. So he worked behind the scenes.

Question 7 Anton said when it came to normal sports managers it was fair, but some coaches

153

in different sports codes did not get their positions because of them having two teams for one position. For instance, in his case he was no longer involved in cricket but then previously in TWR he was the cricket manager. He feels it was unfair when it came to top management side because there was only one from TWR that was in top management in UJ Sport.

Additional questions 2: why do you feel it was unfair in top management?

Because the TWR was outnumbered in top management, they (RAU) were three in top Management and only one from TWR.

Question 8: he said when it comes to high-performance sports its working in a sense because TWR did not really have High-performance sports. They concentrated on competitive and social sport. So the merger gave an opportunity to students to compete on that level where TWR was more on a mass participation level

Question 9: Anton stated due to him not being that long at TWR. He would not know the circumstances prior to the merger because he started in that year when the merge was being introduced and could not give a comparative opinion.

Question 10: He thought that UJ Sport has good policies but UJ sport doesn't always follow protocol on them and that some individuals still hold on to the past which they need to let go of. But we do have more opportunities created for athletes. UJ sport will have to work on transformation not in a sense as of race classification but by transforming the person to do the work in the environment and getting the experience.

154

Appendix B3: Interview with Francois Fouche on 14 February 2017 on APB campus at 14:00

Question 1; Francois was RAU Athletics Manager

Question 2: Francois stated that firstly it was more high performance and it was about the output. The strategy was based on the three categories in which the sport codes fell in, they were High-Performance Sports, Competitive Sports, and Social Recreation sports. They also had a high-performance fewer funds centre where the quality of sports output was the core drive of RAU sports, and it was built on a strong hostel sports culture and high-performance sports. They had a strong recruitment structure, getting the best of the best from provincial, local and national sports structures.

Question 3: Francois said that the merger already started one to two-year prior the official merger which was 2005. The Vice-Chancellor (VC) had summoned staff to the Auditorium and announced the merge with the process going forward. The merger program was tabled in parliament by the Minister of Education at that time Professor Kader Asmal and his team, which include Prof Iron Rensburg (VC) and Prof Angeina Parekh (DVC: Academic) who are currently part of the top Management structure at UJ.

Question 4 Francois thought there was uncertainty about their jobs, because it was a deal structured that ran on different levels of performances. He indicated had he been a TWR staff member he would have been fearful of his job prospects as the organisational culture at RAU was different to that of TWR. TWR sport had a very strong student influence based management system. While RAU did have such systems through the club management structure with portfolios. Students could voice their concerns at the differences in the levels of competitions that were difficult, especially in sports. The TWR students were included into teams on more of social level for development while RAU sport based it on performance, considering the number of athletes they RAU in the Olympic Games in 1992 and 1996 compared to TWR. As well as on other sport levels like rugby and the different sport cultures TWR and RAU sport had, specifically in athletics, rugby and hockey as it was run differently.

Question 5: He stated previously the process started in 2004 between the Heads of sport TWR and RAU. When the merger happened, it was a dual management structure for an

155

interim period. Which had an executive director with two directors of sports that had different sports codes divided among them in their portfolios for an interim period, which was till the restructuring could take place? An external company Accenture re-evaluated UJ Sport which had changed the look and feel of UJ sport into different sections with different focuses. They were clubs sports, High-performance sports, Biokinetics clinic, High-performance program, commercial unit and secretariat unit which were an operational support unit. During the Accenture process UJ sport we advertised five senior positions while all the other staff had to go through a “match and place” system in the restructuring. If the was no suitable candidate for “match and place” the staff member would go into the university system.

Question 6: Francois said he was part of a steering committee which involved TWR and RAU sport staff members, in order to build a new structure for UJ Sport as a collective to merge the environments. They have gone through a process where a mission, vision and a strategic direction had been formatted.

Additional Question: when did Accenture into the process?

Francois: they came into the process in 2008.

Additional question 2: was this the time the implementation process happen from them, or were they facilitated processes started by UJ sport?

Francois stated; that the process had already started in 2007, finalized 2008 with implementation in 2009 and for another year or so there was still some dual functions in the changeover phase to hand over portfolios and positions.

Question 7: Francois it depends on where you were coming from and where you were placed in the system. In some cases when you were in the RAU environment, they thought they got the short end of the stick. TWR felt that way too due to RAU being high performance driven. On the other side of the fence, TWR staff felt inferior to RAU sports because of the resources they pumped into sport and the quality of the performance in that environment. TWR staff felt they were hard done by the system because they would feel they got fewer positions as RAU staff got the better positions. From a performance aspect when you consider the mission and vision you are going to go for stronger environments, where there is already quality performance structures established. From that aspect, there could have been different point 156

of views, some feeling that RAU got more positions than TWR.

Question 8: Francois believes and maintains that it was a forced merger if he thinks back to his discussions about merger. There was a lot of reluctance of the idea as to why RAU? He thinks the entire process needs to be revisited to establish if it was a good or bad thing. In hindsight UJ has lost a lot of elements in the academic mix where they were preparing for a Technikon system, while in RAU they were feeding the system with academia. There was a place for each of them in the current South African environment and he thinks it was wrong because a lot of students were eliminated from the system. Some of the national diploma and B-Tech programs within academics were cut. Also practical experience these days count more than just the academic input. Due to the merge he felt that South Africa lost those students that needed to do the jobs in practices in some sectors and needed practical experience. This reflects that we fail some economic sectors having more academic students than practical students to the economy due to having fewer institutions but we end up having more now. There were only two institutions that merged with Technikons, and for them, it was a cultural shock. Where we look at the quantity of learning and not the quality of learning.

Question 9: Francois said due to RAU having excellent financial management they were on a better financial level then TWR and from a sporting performance or from high-performance aspect RAU was better off as opposed to TWR as they wer more a social and recreational approach to their sport..

Question 10 Francois responded by saying that from a sports perspective UJ Sport is not in a good place, because, we are moving away from the winning culture and we must remember sport has a phase in phase out process in a unit for branding purposes.. People or students align themselves with a quality and a winning brand, so on the road that we currently on we can lose a lot of high-performance sports people and staff because we moving from that system to a recreational system. He said that this has become is an academic institution where sport is getting less funding from the university than in previous years due to the change in the environment and “fees must fall”. This caused the university to have less marketing from the sports side due to availability of fewer funds to the department. So we eliminate some elements that were originally in place that provided sustainable performance, we need to

157

make adjustments because our recruitment systems are currently not working. . Our collective vision and mission where we want to be in UJ Sport are on different levels, our leadership, experience and implementation experience are two different environments, we have to more away from high performance output base. The lowering of standards and financial resources are due to the social economic environment we living in, which influences the performance output and you are unable to draw high-performance students to this institution.

Francois added additional that the merger will never be completed due to the changes of environment and vision of leadership. When leaderships changed the process still continued. UJ Sport has been in a 10 year limbo that was stable with the same management structure, but as soon as management changed the whole vision mission changed with it which can change the whole culture.

158

Appendix B4: Interview with Phemelo Motse on 17 February 2017 on APB campus at 09:10

Question 1: Phemelo said she was appointed as sports manager for Athletics, Netball and later on coordinator for bursaries and accommodation for TWR was included in her portfolio.

Additional Question: how did the allocation work in TWR for bursaries?

Phemelo said: they had criteria like a pyramid which went from level one downward to the lowest. Athletes were rated on their level of performance and rated according to national colours, provincial colours to best team athlete. All the sports managers would meet and consider the budget each sport code would be allocated. An amount of bursaries to their sports code. This was done so it could be fair and that sports managers’ award bursaries fairly and to the athletes who deserve it. .

Question2: Phemelo stated that they had a straightforward structure where you had the Director of sport as the head and all the sports managers on one level below. Sports managers each had the responsibility of their sports club and adopted the policies of the university and national/ provincial bodies. They had a good working environment and working relationship with each other.

Question 3: she said the merger was announced in 2004 all over the media (Radio and TV) and later it was stated that RAU and TWR will merge. RAU at that point had already merged with Vista University.

Question4: Phemelo said it was stressful for her but also she was looking at a brighter future where she could grow coming from a small institution.

Question 5: Phemelo said regarding communication, their Sport Director (TWR) said they were still in negotiation as to how they going process the positions as there were a duplication of manager positions. .It was communicated to her that positions might change. In her case she was the athletics and netball manager at TWR and was moved to netball and accommodation as a result of the merge. The other sports managers followed a similar process. It was a smooth process in her opinion.

Additional question: why do you say it was a smooth process?

159

She said in 2008 there was another change, which was the Accenture process and they all had to reapply for their positions after having settled in their positions in 2006 after the merge. The “matched and place” process was adopted and they had to re-apply for positions that they were already in. People were reshuffled into positions which they had no clue of how it functioned. She was reshuffled and given Judo which she did not know how the sporting code functioned, but she had to adapt and did well but only to be moved again. There was a constant moving about, which did not make sense, and to add to the confusion, external staff would be hired into certain positions while there were managers within the system that was fully capable of filling the position.

Question 6: Phemelo said from her side she was not really involved. In her opinion it was like a dictatorship where people were told, “you take the position or you don't” and it came from senior management

Question 7: Phemelo feels it was not fairly implemented because people were considering themselves for the senior management positions and were able to do so, others were favoured within the department. There was no equal representation on the committee because there were more RAU members, and with the “match and place” process (Accenture process) there was no representation from TWR.

Question 8. Phemelo stated that from 2005 to 2008 all was well and in 2009 the performances dropped and some of the policies were enforced. Managers lost their empowerment due to strict policies in place.

Question 9: Phemelo said that change will always happen but we need to look at leadership as it is very important in change. So saying, that if they remained the same as back then it did not mean they would have been better off. But, if you don't have strong leadership that knows where they going. Then she would say we would be better off being TWR on our own. .

Question 10: Phemelo said that all was not well, because the previous of leadership they had consisted of an executive director and director of sport in the structure. People had a strategy and a vision in place, and knew where they were heading. Without that we would be floating around not knowing where we going. Leadership she maintains is important, so that there is clear strategy and managers would know their roles and be empowered by this.

160

Appendix B5: Interview with Mandla Ngema on 17 February 2017 on APB campus at 10:24

Question1: Mandla said he was a basketball coach for both the men and women’s team at RAU; he also studied from 1996 to 2000 at RAU.

Question 2: Mandla stated that he will specifically speak about how basketball was run. From 1996 to 1998 basketball was independent of RAU sport because bursaries were not offered for basketball. They had their own sponsor and in 1998 they became part of RAU sport. When that happened things changed as the committee no longer had power of the club. Instead it became the duty of the sports manager who replaced the committee. The clubs took control and were overseen by the sports managers. That is how RAU functioned where clubs got sponsors.

Question 3: Mandla said that they were caught by surprise in basketball as found out through a TWR basketball coach in 2004 that they had to merge. Basketball at RAU that year was closed down due to a lack of funds. That’s how basketball ceased at RAU but was doing well at TWR where most of RAU player moved to.

Question 4: Mandla stated that he was personally excited, based on what they experienced with basketball at RAU. They were excited and felt that it would be better for the club.

Question 5: Mandla said 2005 he was brought in by the sports manager of basketball to help merge the clubs since he was at a professional club. So for him, it was a smooth transition also the fact that basketball in RAU already ceased to exist.

Question 6: Mandla said as a coach he had to bring in players to downplay the rivalry between the teams from RAU and TWR. He felt it was not a big challenge because he believed basketball would benefit by this.

Question 7: Mandla said no it was not. He was under the impression that RAU had taken over and he felt comfortable because he came from RAU where other did not. Players were treated the same as those RAU years and the bursaries were not there, because they won't seen as High-Performance sports code, but more of competitive sport code. The TWR staff felt they were left out due to the majority of line manager and top positions were awarded to RAU staff.

161

Question 8: Mandla said that he thought it was not working efficiently. He feels as a department they took a step back and we were doing so every year. The process is continuously changed, and as a coach, he does not know what motivates the changes and how they are implemented. . He remembers as coaches they use to do the recruiting of players by networking with the different departments. Whereas now it has changed, which is a challenge, because when he recruits a player and after the club secures and processes the player he loses control of the situation.

Question 9 Mandla stated that the merger in terms of numbers was good because we have more player data within the system and from a recruitment point of view was an advantage. However, the environment they in operated and the way they operating it created a disadvantage because the players know their worth and get recruited by competitors.

Question 10: Mandla said he would like to see the clubs being empowered to manage and coaches entrusted to run them. He felt that they are not trusted and are not looked after. Contracts are short (year to year) causing an unstable work environment as they are disadvantaged by not having a long term contract which he finds incapacitated personally.

162

Appendix B6: Interview with Pieter Durandt on 17 February 2017 on UJ Rugby Club house (UJ Stadium APK) at 17:50

Question 1 Pieter was a Senior Student Marketing Manager at RAU.

Question 2: Pieter said that it was simple function that time because within the department they tested with potential students like your grade 11 and 12 scholars. They would also attend expo’s and do marketing at schools.

Question 3 Pieter said that he became aware mainly via the media that certain universities would merge.

Question 4: Pieter stated that he was a bit shocked because there was a study done by the High Education Department in which they stated that RAU would stay the way it was and they would not have to merge with any institution. He also felt anxious and insecure about the whole brand image of the university that could be jeopardized, and that it was done for political purposes.

Question 5: Pieter said that the university merger process that was implemented, started by a having task group assigned to explore which departments should merge. There was also a process of consultation between the parties where they sat and looked at job descriptions and discussed the merger. Pieter said it was a lengthy process that lasted 2 years and on occasions, it was unpleasant as it was a give and take situation, and one would have to protect your own position.

Additional question: when you say it was a 2-year lengthy period what years was it?

Pieter answered that it was 2003 and 2004 and that it was hectic with the merger.

Question 6: Pieter said he was part of the steering committee that looked at the structures; he was also involved in evaluating the different positions and job descriptions. . He remembers that there was a template they had to follow which took a lot of time to incorporate in the process. Representatives from Vista, TWR and RAU formed the steering committee thereby creating an equally balanced committee.

Question 7: Pieter stated that the process had to happen, so you would either fight it or be part

163

of it and make the best of it. It affected his position in the sense of that he had to move from student service to marketing. He was moved to a new environment but felt he could still play an important role in that environment as well.

Question 8: Pieter said he thought they were in a good position presently as things are working, but he says he felt there were some things that were better, for example: the communication channels and their job was much simpler than now. Where as now we are in a more complex environment and times have changed. He believes there is a positive and a negative to it, but at the end he thinks its working and we in a good position.

Question 9: Pieter said he thinks the question had two sides, previously it was simpler to now but he still feels the merger was good for the University. Because, in the long run we in a better position than RAU was in those year going forward to the future in a changing environment.

Question 10: Pieter stated that it's also two side questions because if you think you perfect then you make a mistake. So he thinks that we are in a good position but we need to look at the whole organization to move us forward to being the best in South Africa, and what we can do for the nation. We should also not just do transformation for the sake of it, we need to implement the best for the university moving forward, and being the best for the South African nation.

164

Appendix B7: Interview with Johan Rainsford on 23 February 2017 at ABP UJ Sport on 11:00

Question 1: Johan said that he was with TWR sport as a Rugby manager and after a year he received two more sports code to manager which was dance and basketball.

Question 2 Johan said TWR sports functioned very well, they had one head of sport followed by each of sporting code manager and they had a departmental meeting every Monday discussing the week’s productivity and any other issues. It was a one unit show.

Question 3: Johan stated that he found out when the head of sport told them and later it was formally announced by the Higher Education Department Minister at the time.

Question 4: Johan said he had mixed feelings because of many of the portfolios they held was similar to those in the RAU sports department. He also had a feeling of uncertainty and of being swallowed by the bigger university. He was uncertain and positive because sport is positive.

Question 5: Johan stated that there were steering committees, there were also two committees TWR and RAU which were not big committees. They communicated with each other and reported on the processes. Within this committee they also indicated their preference of portfolios later on in their process. These committees started talks before the merger.

Question 6: Johan said that each person tried to clarify their role that she or he had to play, and they met their counterparts to see what they could do as the merger was going to happen That was the beginning stages of merger.

Additional question: how was the decision-making process in the steering committee that you were in?

He said that they as TWR Sport contributed, but whether they (TWR Sport) were taken up seriously to the decision making was hard to say because they felt like decision were already decided by them (RAU Sport) beforehand.

Question 7: Johan said that the process that he recalls clearly was later in 2008 when the Accenture process was introduced. They all had a meeting and at that point they felt that they

165

were being lead in a certain direction. The appointed Executive Director and Director who could have been anyone other than the appointed persons in those senior positions appeared to have an agenda to guide the process.

Question 8: Johan said he does not think it's effective but it is working to a certain extent but the productive is way below what it should be. There came a time where a lot of student assistants and assistant positions were created which was not needed in certain sports codes. It felt like staff was not heard by the senior management who was not listening to the staff members below them and to what they were saying was happening on the ground, but rather telling them what to do.

Question 9: Johan stated it's a difficult question to answer in the light of being productive, efficiency, happy as sport department with the students because TWR also had a sport student, which involved all the captains of the different sport codes and they were present or had an input of decision making that happened in sport department. So TWR always sat together and made it work where with UJ sport that student body never took off the ground. And Johan felt that the TWR model was a good one compare to now and that with the Accenture process a lot of people were appointed by senior management which comprised mostly ex RAU staff. That did not boost the confidence of the staff because the whole senior management of UJ Sport was ex RAU except one staff member who was from TWR. They had more confidence in their own people which were the ex RAU staff, Johan stated.

Question 10: Johan said that he felt that there was too much favouritism to certain part of this process because discussion on the table was “us and them” which did not put it on a sound footing. Why did they make same sports codes small which had national athletes and did well but because it was more TWR orientated it like downgrade.

Johan added that there is a lack of trust and we need to work together as unit and not for any individual gain

166

Appendix B8: Interview with Marianne Viljoen on 10 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 09:00

Question 1: Marianne stated that she was Biokineticist for TWR

Question 2: Marianne said that the serviced the sports department (TWR) and external clients. At that time they were not involve with TWR sports.

Question 3: Marianne said that she found out through the department in a meeting

Question 4: Marianne said that she was positive about the merger because with the Biokinetic centre they mostly worked with external people and now it was going to be on a big scale and more sport orientated.

Question 5: Marianne said that they had strategic planning session which they decided that they would have two Biokinetic hubs one at APB and other at APK. The APK one was going to service mostly sport since the majority of the sports activities were at APK campus. So she was placed at the APK hub.

Question 6 Marianne said that they had a lot of strategic planning sessions where she played a role from a sports sciences point of view. She also assisted in planning to build a high- performance sports centre on the APK campus. She also remembers the Accenture process where they had to decide what positions they want and one would apply for it.

Question 7: Marianne said that being part of the management at that stage. She had to also apply for the new position that was created and with her position, anyone could have applied for it, so to her, it was fair she had to go for interview for the position. Whereas some of the positions it was “match and place”. Some staff members felt it was not fair because they would have liked to be placed somewhere else. Maybe it would have been better to also let them go for interviews for that position because it seems like ex RAU staff was up there compared to the TWR staff. She also added in this process it depended on how a person got themselves involved with the new structure and if they wanted to be involved in the process which would have assisted them by wanting to be there. This would have assisted them to adapt to the change because the change was going to happen and you could not just sit back and expect to have a position.

167

Question 8: Marianne said that she thought it works because after 11 years it must be effective and efficient. She feels it works because you would not know what would have happened to RAU or TWR if they were still around now.

Question 9: Marianne said that the merger happened for a reason from the top management side, and thinks that its a good thing especially now with the “fees must fall” campaign. It makes the institution bigger and more efficient where a small institution would not make it through.

Question 10: Marianne said that she does not think that we perfectly fine because there are challenges like from a financial point of view it can be a struggle. And that the environment constantly changes where people want high tech equipment but the budgets get cut yearly which makes it difficult. She also said that they need to a review of policies not only in UJ Sport but in UJ to adapt to the changes and challenges.

168

Appendix B9: Interview with Itumeleng Mogotsi on 10 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 09:30

Question 1: Itumeleng said that he was a student and an under19 rugby player at RAU

Question 2: Itumeleng said as an u19 rugby player at the time was mostly at training sessions, lived in residence and attended class. But he did state that at the time RAU did not have a gym on campus it was off campus. He was on a bursary which covered his studies and accommodation. He indicated that there was a close relationship with sport and residents, so if you did not stay in the residence at RAU you did not really partake in sports. He also said the residence competitions were of a very high standard with top quality sports students partaking compared to now.

Question 3: he said that was in his second year towards the end of the year. The TWR team became the RAU second team RAU Second team was the TWR team and they sent ex-RAU rugby assistants over to TWR to assist with the merger. This all happened in 2004 where he also heard for the first time from the club that they are going to merge.

Question 4: he stated that he thought it was a good thing because TWR had a strong first team and under 21 teams with good players. But he was very uncertain how a rugby player from TWR first team was going to play in RAU first team because RAU had a very strong team with quality big names players.

Question 5: He said that at the time, there were few rugby matches and students were asking how to think we're going to work. It took time because the first time they played at UJ was at the national club championships which were held in April2005l and he was one of the first players to play on that team and none TWR first team players were in the team, all were RAU.

Question 6: he said that he did not play a role in the merger besides being the first player to play for the UJ first team. RAU had a strong rugby culture. They started with that culture as UJ rugby where they won the tournament

Question 7: He does not think it was fair because rugby was given basically to RAU and soccer to TWR. The personnel did not change at RAU Rugby, but the name changed to UJ

169

rugby club. TWR players were more in the background and RAU rugby players had the majority of the votes in the club than TWR players. RAU had the players and facilities where TWR was a small club and at the end and they were shrinking. He felt the rugby was more a takeover than a merger.

Question 8: he stated that he thought it was working slowly but surely and what he felt was that the merger killed off the old culture and they had to adapt a new one which took a long time to develop the staff and player mind-set. The new culture adopted was a plus for players. When they ended their time at the university they would have qualified academically as well, whereas in the RAU days if they left or failed they would have no academic qualifications.

Question 9: he said the institution is much better after the merger and he has a sense of belonging. Under RAU he did not have the same sense, He believes that the overall culture and unity is better and students want to be a part of it.

Question 10: he felt that if we keep on working and changing the mentality of people by making the changes physically, and building on that culture to become bigger. The university needs to be promoted to all students.

170

Appendix B10: Interview with Karel Mouton on 16 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 09:55

Question 1: Karel stated that he was the RAU Cricket Manager

Question2: Karel said that when he started at RAU it was before the days of electronic media (internet), resulting in all paperwork having to be done by hand and typed out later. He use to coach and manage, whereas now he thinks it is more complicated. His office was where campus square is now and RAU sports used to be in C ring.

Question 3: Karel said the merger came to light in 2003 after many surveys and the Higher Education Minster at the time announced that higher education institutions would merge. This caused a lot of unhappiness leading to protests. He heard about the intent to merge via the old RAU structure in 2003 with planning and negotiations in 2004 and finalised in 2005.

Question 3; he said at the time he was against it because he was at RAU and you can understand that the majority of RAU staff was against it. He became positive when he discovered that he was not affected as under Prof. Wim Hollander they were pro-active as they had negotiated the merge of TWR and RAU sport in 2004. On the contrary he believes they benefited from it with the acquisition of extra fields and players. He felt that the first 6 years after the merge they were strong and that it was a good thing. There were a lot of critics with lots of talks from a staff perspective in terms of pension funds. But from a club's point of view, it was good up until these past 4 years.

Question 5: Karel said as he mentioned in the previous question that they started early with the merger from the cricket club under the head of sport from RAU Prof Wim Hollander. The two cricket clubs had already merged before implementation. They were running cricket as a unit from 2004 already. Later on they decided who would be the cricket club manager.

Question 6: Karel said that he did the ground work and was not really involved with the merger and he did not apply for any positions that required him to be involved with the merge process at UJ Sport.

Question 7: he stated that he was happy with the merge, but other people might have seen it differently due to them not getting their previous positions they had. But he was fine with it because he retained his position, so yes from his side it was fair.

171

Question 8: Karl said that he does not think its effective and efficient anymore because politic plays a bigger role now than before after all the changes that took place at UJ Sport. These changes entailed Prof Wim Hollander (Executive Director of UJ Sport) who lost control of the staff in 2012 and a year later Ms. Sanpat Coetzee (UJ Sports Director) was removed from UJ Sport, these removals were never explained. UJ Sport was a shamble and it was a miracle that they still achieved in some sports codes with no leadership in place. He also feels that he questions the leadership we have now because its not working, there is no mission, no focus and no guideline for us, where we exposed in our environment and there is no protection for us. It's not a happy working environment and he feels that none of us come to work looking forward to what the day holds. He no longer does what he’s supposed to do but he survives. And now that he looks back to merger it a downward spiral..

Question 9: Karel stated that at the time when they started off it was for the better.. But with the current leadership and current state of affairs he feels its far more negative from the sports perspective, but for the University as a whole, it was good thing. He is not blaming the merger but the current affairs, leadership, and the current influences from outside of our leadership

Question 10: Karel said no, because we need a stronger leader that understands the different sports codes and we all manage different sports that find themselves in different environment with different politics. And sport cannot be seen as an analytic agenda because every sporting code has its own challenges that each one needs to tackle.

172

Appendix B11: Interview with Henriette Vermaak on 16 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 10:50.

Question 1: Henriette stated that she was the Manager for the Hockey Astro facility at RAU.

Question 2: Henriette said: that it worked well, there was a good communication channel with an open door policy and in general we were very successful with a great working environment that everybody supported each other.

Question 3: Henriette said that she was in a fortunate position where she was stationed at the Hockey Astro which hosted many functions and strategic planning sessions. She was present when they work shopped and discussed what happened there about the merger at the Hockey Astro and was aware that it was going to take place.

Question 4: Henriette stated that she liked change and it also keeps people on their toes and makes her perform better so she was fine with it. But what was a bit unsettling was the fact that people were not sure of their position and she felt that some people were appointed in positions who were not the best candidates. This caused trust issues and few disagreements among the staff.

Question 5: Henriette said that it did not affect her much because she was off campus and only later managed the water polo and disabled sports. She did say that people left in that time or just before the merger, some sport codes did not appoint new or replacement managers and those sports code were left manager less (like Swimming). It did not affect her and she just did everything that she could in the process.

Question 6: Henriette said that she did not play any role in the processes of the merger; she was only informed where she should assist.

Question 7: Henriette said no, she did not think it was fair at all. There was certain manager that won't acquire in doing that position and still current are not acquire to do the job but still in those position. There were other candidates from TWR that could have done better in that position which were not gave the position. In some positions, both TWR and RAU did have the right people in certain position and UJ Sport did not appoint externally. So from her point of view, “match and place” were the best options in getting staff positions.

173

Question 8: she thought that the original strategy that was implemented was rushed, that we should have decided then what we wanted to be. But they maintained a good balance and integration at the time and the last three years was a total mess at UJ Sport.

Question 9: Henriette said it's not whether we better off of not but what created the confusion was the fact that we were not a university anymore but more of a glorified Technikon College. You can never combine a research component and a highly academic qualification from a specific institution with a Technikon that has one-year certificate courses. It does not work for sport either because the programs are different.

Question 10: she thinks that transformation is necessary but currently the way it being done through the management system is not working and that UJ Sport will implode. This is as a result of the unhappiness and mistrust in the department.

174

Appendix B12: Interview with Reedwaan Asvat on 16 March 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 11:20.

Question 1: He was a Squash Manager for TWR

Question 2: Reedwaan said that it was done in a similar way as now, but he felt that they were very efficient and worked as a team. They also had a lot of support from management.

Question 3: He found out through communication of their head of sports because she always communicated to them on a daily basis

Question 4: He said that he felt both excitement and uncertainty but not in a major way because you did not know what to expect but there was more excitement from his side.

Question 5: He stated that before the merger they had a lot of meetings to calm everybody down and so that they would not get carried away with fear or uncertainty. In those meetings, they also got to meet with RAU staff and to make the transition smooth into the merger.

Question 6: Reedwaan said that he would not say that he was not directly involved but when they had their meetings between the two universities, each one gave their input and ideas which he shared.

Question 7: He thought that there were certain positions that went to certain individuals. If you look at some senior positions and the experience of those people in those positions, he would say it was little bit unfair. But looking at his position he thought his one was fair.

Question 8: He thought that there is still room for improvement and people are trying under the circumstances to make it work. It is still a work in progress and a lot can be done to improve. We just need to work together.

Question 9: he said that it was better off with the merger. TWR was a great institution and a lot of great things were done then. They are better off with the merger if you look at it from a student's perspective and that we as UJ are being placed on the map and we going to places.

Question 10: he said that he does not think that we perfect yet and it will still take time. We also need strong management. It's one thing to talk about changes and adaptations but it needs to be implemented fairly and correctly. We all need to agree and get on board in order 175

for change to work. We sometimes need communication from top management and to set an example for their employees. It can't be the other way around, where employees set the example for them. He also said that UJ can be one of the great universities not just in South Africa but in the world if we put our minds to it and work together.

176

Appendix B13: Interview with Jimmy Potgieter on 10 April 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 13:30

Question 1: Jimmy stated that he started off as a student assistant to the rugby manager at RAU and he was also a team manager for a rugby team. He was also the TWR rugby manager toward the end of the year just before the merger happened.

Question 2: he said that they use to compete against TWR and it was a rivalry especially in the junior teams in rugby. There were times when TWR beat us at RAU, and in the final year as manager at TWR, there were two rugby teams and they were playing in the lower league. TWR rugby was disappearing as the years were going on.

Question 3: he said he found out through his manager and in the department because it was a topic discussed “why and what’s going to happen” and so on.

Question 4: Jimmy said he was not directly involved because he was still a student and he was managing TWR and he was being paid by the Lions Rugby Union. He was not affected as he was still going to work there, but was aware of the tension amongst the sport staff members that time.

Question 5: he said that at the time the RAU Rugby Manager was told that he would run UJ rugby and the guys from TWR were told that they will move rugby this side to APK campus. Rugby moved to APK so guys trained on the old RAU fields.

Question 6: he stated that his role was minimal because he was still a student and a student assistant. His only contribution to the talks in the meetings was him expressing his opinions and spreading the information to the players and staff at the TWR campus that rugby has moved to APK campus.

Question 7: Jimmy said he honestly felt that it was not fair because some guys got the short end of the stick. There was no scientific way of measuring who should get what positions. If you consider the results of the teams it was mostly based on resources, which RAU had a lot of and TWR did not, but still did well in some areas. He thinks that process was not fair and that they should have drafted document that they would not only look at results but other criteria as well.

Question 8: he said that no, its not because Bunting road has one rugby team and has no field 177

for training, same goes to DFC. There was sports staff at DFC and now there is no sports staff there. The merger wanted us to promote mass participation at all four campuses but DFC did not have sports fields. The system that was introduced did not work as a lot of sports equipment and sports facilities went to waste.

Question 9: Jimmy said that he felt that the institution was better off separated, because once you start restructuring or dividing resources you don't get the full potential and people can say what they want, but RAU /TWR did not just merge because RAU was seen as a white place. At the time RAU was more pro black, coloured and Indian then your other universities like University of Pretoria (UP), North West University (NWU Potchefstroom) and University of Stellenbosch (US) which did not go through a merger as we did. It was more of a financial bailout for TWR who was in big debt and they had lost a lot of quality staff because they could not cope with the merge and having to move campus.

Question 10: he said that he thinks that UJ was a great brand and from the educational point of view it was good and working. But from the sport aspect, it was not good, because sport cannot deliver a service to all four campuses just from one person. We need to assign more people to the campuses to push the different sports codes. He felt they needed to decide what sport was going to be promoted at which campus because being all over is not working. We need to take the approach as the academic department that has only one department on a specific campus and classes happen on that campus. We need to revisit the systems and work on the small stuff now.

178

Appendix B14: Interview with Sekgoari Lashaba on 19 April 2017 at APK UJ Sport on 15:00

Question1: Sekgoari said he was a supervisor of the sports grounds of TWR

Question2: he stated that it was not different to now other than he reported to TWR Sport where now he reports to UJ Operations but in terms of operation they doing the same thing.

Question 3: He said that it was announced on national television and he was involved in worker union activities. TWR management called in all the union leaders like him to confirm what was announced.

Question 4: he said he felt the uncertain, but on a positive note he saw it as challenge that they had to ensure it happens

Question 5: he said that there were a lot of challenges but the first thing that happens is the line of reporting changed from reporting to sport, he is now reporting to operations. Then the person he was reporting too was a director that managed managers. His job description then was similar to all those managers and the line manager promoted him to manager.

Question 6: he said he was tasked with reporting how they would want to see unity and how their units were going to run. So they decided that each one would have their own staff and budgets

Question 7: he said yes, he felt justice was done with the positive changes that went smoothly.

Question 8: he stated that looking back he would say yes but we do have to make improvement here and there. In terms of the role they play in servicing the clients they do their best.

Question 9: he said personally he felt it better off with the merger because finance was he was given his own budget to work with where previously he never saw it and had not much control of it. With the merger, he was more empowered and can do what’s best for the clients and sports grounds at ABP campus.

Question 10: he said that he always says we the best in the country compared to other 179

institutions with their merger and challenges. In our case we could negotiate labour and be able to service the clients under the best circumstances and conditions.

180

Appendix B15: Interview with Chris Fortuin on 21 April 2017 via email.

Mr. Chris Fortuin answered the questions as follow:

Question 1:

Chris: Lecturer/Researcher from RAU in The Department of Sport and Movement Studies is an Academic Department

Question 2:

Chris: The Department of Sport and Movement Studies is an Academic Department and acted as a support for RAU Sport, which focussed more on the participation in sport of the RAU students

Question 3:

Chris: It was publicly announced by the Council of Higher Education

Question 4:

Chris: I felt it was a good idea as there were severe imbalances between the institutions. RAU obviously had more resources than the other institutions and could, therefore, afford more professional services needed for a University to function optimally. The merger would ultimately merge all the resources for a greater output

Question 5:

Chris: It was a difficult process as staff feared being retrenched and that they would be deployed somewhere else. There was a lot of uncertainty and many feared the change would short change them. A private company Accenture was consulted to oversee the change and implementation of the merger

Question 6:

Chris: Well, we did not have much choice or could not play a role as it was top down instruction and we as individual Academics had no choice. You either accepted the changes or you had the option of leaving

181

Question 7:

Chris: No, the process was extremely flawed as it favoured certain people and the perception is that it was driven in a certain way to frustrate and get rid of certain individuals.

Question 8:

Chris: The Merger politically, was necessary for a more structured Academic program and can be effective if the aims and objectives are driven to be achieved, but where individuals use a process for their own agendas it can defeat the purpose and can be detrimental to the Institution. This is evident in UJ Sport

Question 9:

Chris: No I don't. The newly established UJ is more inclusive as it serves a broader community and individuals, whereas the old institution only looked at developing certain race groups

Question 10:

Chris: The Institution is driven by broad goals and objectives and should be managed in that way. When individuals within an institution drive their own agendas which are contrary to that of the institution it can be dangerous and doom to fail.

182