The Value of Chambers

Andrew Layman:  PCB CEO

Prospective members of chambers of commerce ask about the value proposition.   Accordingly, chambers prepare lengthy lists of benefits. Most of these are valid only to the extent that they are accessed.    Networking is an obvious example of this.   The benefits of making contact with other business people at chamber functions cannot be questioned provided, of course, that there is some strategy around the contacts being made.    In common with other chambers, we have numerous networking functions and events and it has been interesting to note over the years that some people have really accelerated their businesses as a result of the networking they have done.  Others have been less successful, but that’s usually because their networking is less strategic.  But no networking is possible by someone who is not present. 

For my part, though I also recognise the necessity for membership benefits to be clearly understood by both the member and the chamber itself, the question “why should I join the chamber?” should be answered with another question: Do you believe that Business needs a representative voice to advance its interests to government at various levels?    It is doubtful whether anyone would deny this need.    And then my response is: if you consider it necessary, then you should be willing to contribute towards the cost of this representation.   It is a simple fact that the more resources chambers have, the more effectively they can present the voice of business.   

Financial capacity is not the only determinant, however.   In my experience, all representative bodies, including trade unions (although one wouldn’t think so when they make public statements), find the collection of mandates very challenging.    In order to formulate a policy position that accurately reflects the views of the constituency, the constituents must play their part by putting their perspectives forward.   It is for this reason that members should engage with their chambers in order to assist in the shaping of the standpoints that are going to be presented.   I am aware of the fact that the Durban Chamber has a long tradition of extremely active standing committees in which the leadership is given direction as to what they should say on behalf of the members.   As a matter of interest, it is not the members alone who will be represented.   Since business people have similar fundamental agendas, discounting sectoral or size considerations, whether they are chamber members or not, the representative body assumes a public role as a vital element of civil society.   While chambers owe priority allegiance to their members, in the contemporary world, especially in South Africa, they must accept that they are challenged by public expectations.    They cannot pose as the voice of Business, and then retreat into a laager where the interests of members alone occupy their attention.   Thus, while the advancement of businesses within a chamber’s membership is a critical demand, the advancement of Business, generally, is also a valid expectation.   It is for this reason that chambers have an important role to play in economic development, whether local, provincial or national.   In campaigning for the optimal environment in which Business may flourish, a chamber is serving the interests of both its members and others, and, indeed, the broader community whose poverty or prosperity is inextricably linked to the rate at which the economy will grow. 

In the field of development economics it is not appropriate for either sector, public or private, to assume to have the monopoly of insight into how best to facilitate development.   Both have their roles to play, like actors in a duologue.   This will reach its acme of success only when each actor plays his own part but, in doing so, harmonises with the other so that the audience is conscious of an holistic performance which is far superior to the simple sum of the parts.   I suggest that such synchronisation of capacity is not evident in our country.   It is even less so if one brings Labour into the mix.   Just as a dramatic production is spoilt when one or other of the actors sets out to upstage his co-performers, the country cannot afford this kind of disharmony when economic growth is so crucial to our future.   This is not to suggest that weak, unsatisfying compromises must be sought; rather I am arguing for robust debate and rigorous presentation of different views with the objective of enhancing mutual understanding and insight.    Such rigour must not blind any party to the merits of alternatives.   In such a spirit of honest engagement, and with commitment to a constructive outcome that goes beyond the limited horizons of the individual parties, direction may be found. 

By embracing the advocacy role in this way, chambers of commerce will continue to flourish and honour the values that resulted in the foundation of the very first one over four hundred years ago.                

Leave a Comment