The plight of the black entrepreneur

To start off - I am not advocating feeling sorry or making excuses for my fraternity - we are capable, dynamic, innovative and unfortunately in dire short supply.

Politicians constantly advocate for job creation and of late - black industrialists and that most exquisite of meaningless drivel - Radical Economic Transformation (RET)

Transformation based on taking from one to redistribute to others has no foundation in a society that wishes to continue after that handover.

As history tends to - it will repeat, under a different guise but will essentially be a taking from the perceived to have; to be given to a yet undisclosed "not haves".

For RET in any measure to occur - simple access to the economy needs to happen. Economic development and participation needs individuals who are driven to be given space to do what they deem valuable as seem from the study of a viable market, identified and with a willing buyer to pay for that service or product.

Let me make an example - if Aunt Mavis who has been a domestic worker for 25 years and under minimum wage laws earns R4 500.00 a month finds that in the neighbourhood (her target market) there is a gap to service 2 or 3 other clients (employers), she can opt out of the employment contract of the current employer and sign up a service agreement with the other 2 potential clients and the current client.

Thus she can service 3 clients at 1 or 2 day a week service level agreements (SLAs). She can adopt a R250 per day rate and can now earn (with some significant difficulty and harder work) R5 000.00 per month from her clients.

This is an extra a R6 000.00 per annum that can be seen as a 13th cheque compared to income from single employer. 

After a while, one gets a situation where this service from a reputable service provider is spoken about and more clients would like to get it, at the cheaper price of 1 or 2 days a week as apposed to full month employment of someone.

As more clients come onboard, expansion is possible, more staff or resources are needed to effectively supply the service, so Aunt Mavis, hires one then two then three and more as the work load increases. 

She now has a service and a business with a staff compliment to match. 

Now, by law she has to pay her employees the minimum wage as prescribed - this becomes her first snag, she has gone into SLAs on a competitive pricing basis and now has to comply with the same laws that kept her from achieving economic growth. The same law that is purging the growth of her business and the potential employment of someone else. She is branded as a labour broker. 

Her story gets forgotten, she is the same trendsetter that took the risk, created the opportunity and now is offering employment to others. The very same opportunity that did not exist before - the demand may have been there but much like potential, it was sitting meaninglessly. Until an Entrepreneur unlocked it.

Now keep in mind, Aunt Mavis did not set out to create employment, she was trying to better her situation and improve the lives of her children and family, leaving traditional and regulated employment and taking the risk. Employment creation become a consequence of growth of her business. A positive externality as economists would say.

It should be further noted that no venture has ever succeeded if it's main objective or focus is to create employment, not even recruitment ventures have.

Therefore, for economic activity to occur, we need an enabling environment, free of laws that limit creativity and ambition. 

We need the ability to conduct business with whom ever we wish on a basis of agreement that we can live with - thus be entrepreneurial in our pursuits. (This of course is provided that the service or product meets norms of morality and are not illegal in nature)

And offer employment at a price that makes sense for our bottom lines, where the potential employee is comfortable with the price paid for their time and service.

Only then can entrepreneurial ventures flourish, employment created and an ever increasing number of people can access the economy. 

No one accesses at the top. . . Tenderpreneurship, corruption and nepotism has caused us to have that misconception.