Excluding SA professional firms from B20 could dishonour work, costs and outcomes of Zondo Commission
Running for just shy of two years and costing the South African fiscus almost R1 billion, the Zondo commission of enquiry into state capture once loomed large in the hearts, minds and media of South Africans across the political, business and civil divides. Its repugnant revelations of back-room deals and a systematic cleansing of honesty, accountability and scruples from the public sector – often aided by private sector players – finally laid vital truths bare.
For those professionals and professional services firms that had taken a principled decision not to contract with the state during the state capture years, the decision to follow our instincts and gut feels that something wasn’t right, and having to repeatedly justify this to shareholders, was finally validated.
All of us came to see the evidence of how individuals and project teams at multiple international professional services firms undermined and wrecked vital state institutions to deliver so-called value in furtherance of nefarious agendas. And months later, when firms including McKinsey, KPMG, Bain, SAP and more issued admissions, repaid fees and extended apologies, there was a collective sense of “so what” across a nation that had been left reeling with the consequences of a no-growth, no-jobs economy on a fiscal cliff.
Beyond South Africa, from Brazil to Australia, the US to the UK, cases involving unethical business decisions by many international firms have regularly highlighted a troubling pattern: big global consulting firms can find it tough to prioritise ethical considerations over profitability, sometimes (even inadvertently) enabling practices that harm societies and economies.
Which is why I was astonished to learn that at least one of these firms that paid “over $122M in connection with bribery of South African government officials” is part of the B20, the official private-sector engagement group of the G20 which South Africa presides over until 30 November this year.
According to the B20 website, this group is “the business voice of the G20, advocating for policies that drive economic growth and development”. The B20’s task forces’ areas of focus rightly include employment and education; trade and investment; energy mix and the just transition; digital transformation, integrity and compliance; finance and infrastructure; sustainable food systems and agriculture; and industrial transformation and innovation.
Late last year, the Presidency issued a statement expressing its “concern” over McKinsey’s appointment and asked business to reconsider “more suitable partners”. That does not appear to have initiated a change as yet.
But what’s more perplexing than the inclusion of tainted international professional services firms is that South African-established or independent professional consulting firms are absent from the group of knowledge partners and supporting stakeholders assisting the B20 in its work here in South Africa.
I have enormous respect for my colleagues and peers across professional services, and especially those who are trying to rebuild the legacy of international firms and personal careers tainted by corruption and related allegations in those firms.
But the South African public and wider business community have a legitimate expectation that the representative body driving socio-economic change in lockstep with G20 goals to address global economic challenges should at the very least comprise of local experienced professionals and consultants who managed to build excellent independent firms and ethical careers without needing to dabble or delight in state capture.
If the Zondo commission taught us anything, surely it’s that we need as many locally-invested, principled and hard-working experts as possible to clear out the festering rot that still remains, and rebuild our economy and hopes on rock-solid transparency.
More fundamentally, we must look to the future impact of the B20. The work of this group needs to be complemented by the depth of expertise and innovative perspectives that independent and local firms can bring. Particularly when it comes to understanding the nuanced socio-economic landscape of emerging economies, including South Africa’s own, our practical experience in understanding why economic transformation must be inclusive, and exactly how we will reduce inequality and drive meaningful socio-economic progress that creates jobs, can offer unique insights into the challenges the G20 seeks to address.
This is not about fees (the B20 work is apparently pro-bono). We certainly don’t have all the answers, but our proximity to the realities of doing business and growing economies also means we are uniquely positioned to offer solutions for the Global South. These are both pragmatic and locally relevant, challenging the often top-down, one-size-fits-all approaches set abroad by some international firms.
If the B20 and its task forces want serious change – if they want to “get s**t done” – they should focus on a marked improvement in the quality of basic education, and enabling job creation initiatives and infrastructure investments to lift millions from poverty.
The G20 agenda must see the region accelerate its transition to renewable energy, reducing dependence on fossil fuels and creating sustainable green jobs and skills for the future. And finally, the reduction of trade barriers and increased foreign investment in local industries would enhance South Africa’s position as a continental hub for trade and industry.
By 30 November, if South Africa’s essence isn’t imbued in the B20 and its outcomes, we have not only missed a massive opportunity but dishonoured the work and costs of the Zondo commission. Let’s not keep making the same mistake.
First published in the Sunday Times on 16 February 2025. Available online here.
Author: Adam Craker, CEO of iqbusiness
INSIGHTS
