strategic consulting report

Strategic Consulting Report

Harnessing the potential in The Gambia to foster development through sustainable business

Zeenith Ebrahim, Mariah Hartman, Mike Quinn, and Jelka Schlagenhauf

2

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Zeenith Ebrahim completed her first degree at the University of Cape Town focused on Finance and Accounting. She began her career at Procter & Gamble in South Africa where she spent four years, most recently as a Brand Manager. At the same time, she assisted a start‐up company aimed at uplifting the lives of artists across the region to market their art internationally. Zeenith’s passion for development also led her to work with a local NGO to set up a Southern African network of young people advocating against exploitation of children, and go on to represent African youth at a number of local and international forums. Zeenith joined Oxford University’s Saïd Business School (SBS) MBA Class of 2008 as a recipient of the Nelson Mandela Scholarship, where she has used her time as a platform to initiate an investment fund for women entrepreneurs in Southern Africa.

Mariah Hartman began her marketing career in 1996 as a Product Manager with CHEMICON International after completing a BSc in Biology (with Honours) at the University of California, Riverside. In 2000, she joined Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics also as a Product Manager. During her seven year career there, she was promoted first to Senior Product Manager and then to Associate Director of Marketing. She has spent 4 years as participant, mentor, volunteer, and community outreach advocate for the Leukemia Lymphoma Society’s Team in Training triathlon group, personally raising over $20,000. As an avid athlete she has competed in 7 half marathons, 2 marathons, countless 10K races, 4 Olympic‐distance triathlons, 5 half iron‐man triathlons, and 1 Iron Man. After completing her MBA at SBS, Mariah will join Space Doctors as Senior Account Director to further pursue her passion for marketing.

Mike Quinn held a Skoll Scholarship for Social Entrepreneurship at SBS in 2007‐08 as he completed his MBA with Dean’s List standing. He also has an MSc in Development Management from the London School of Economics, where his dissertation compared agricultural cooperatives with contract farming in Africa. Prior to studying in the UK, Mike spent 16 months in Zambia and 10 months in Ghana implementing agricultural commercialization projects as a volunteer for Engineers Without Borders (EWB) Canada. He is currently launching a non‐profit venture company called African Enterprise Partners, whose mission is to "build agricultural value chains with African entrepreneurs." Mike’s first degree was in Mechanical Engineering from the University of British Columbia, where he also received the 2006 alumni award for Global Citizenship.

Jelka Schlagenhauf grew up in Germany in an entrepreneurial family and has always been interested in business, especially how technology can be leveraged to improve people’s lives. She completed a Bachelor’s degree in Business at the University of Applied Sciences Cologne in 2002 and went on to work in a software company as a Project Manager focused on the development of new products. It was the chance to set up her own business with an ambitious team that made her leave this position in 2004. She then became the Co‐Founder and Managing Director of nAmbition, a nanobiotechnology company that develops and sells molecular analytic research tools globally. Jelka’s other main interest lies in reading and discovering as many different topics as possible, ranging from historical biographies to multimedia to neuroscience. After completing her MBA at SBS, Jelka will join a medium‐sized company focused on business development.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THE AUTHORS ........................................................................................................................2

TABLE OF CONTENTS .........................................................................................................................3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................................................4

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................5 II. STRATEGIC CONSULTING PROJECT OVERVIEW........................................................................7

2.1 Background on GiG......................................................................................................................7 2.2 Key Issues from GiG’s Point of View............................................................................................8 2.3 SCP Objectives and Outputs........................................................................................................9 2.4 Reconciled Objectives and Outputs .............................................................................................9

III. APPROACH....................................................................................................................................10 3.1 The Strategic Visioning Framework............................................................................................10 3.2 Strategic Visioning Workshop.....................................................................................................12

IV. KEY ISSUES ..................................................................................................................................14 4.1 Is GiG a Business or Development Project? ..............................................................................14 4.2 Foreign Dependency ..................................................................................................................15 4.3 Staff Motivation and Integration..................................................................................................15 4.4 Lack of Decision Making Processes and Tools ..........................................................................15 4.5 Sub-Optimal Communication Systems and Processes ..............................................................16 4.6 Seasonality .................................................................................................................................16

V. STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................................................17 5.1 Strategy 1: Optimise Local Horticulture Production to Meet Year Round GiG Demand ...18

5.1.1 Production..........................................................................................................................18 Introduce the Contract Manager system ............................................................................... 18 Strategically contract Commercial Private Gardens .............................................................. 21 Involve partner organisations in the CM system.................................................................... 21 Identify strategic uses for GiG Farm...................................................................................... 21 Optimise monthly production planning .................................................................................. 22 Guarantee access to inputs to contracted growers ............................................................... 22

5.1.2 Sales and Marketing..........................................................................................................23 Improve demand planning..................................................................................................... 23 Use vegetable profitability as a tool for production choices................................................... 24

5.1.3 Human Resources .............................................................................................................24 Introduce PM reporting system.............................................................................................. 24

5.2 Strategy 2: Optimise Operational Effectiveness and Efficiency ..........................................24 5.2.1 Management.......................................................................................................................24

Map communication paths and processes ............................................................................ 24 5.2.2 Production..........................................................................................................................25

Improve effectiveness and efficiency of garden visits ........................................................... 26 Strengthen communication and teamwork ............................................................................ 27

5.2.3 Quality and Stock Control ................................................................................................27

4

Reduce recorded and unrecorded stock loss ........................................................................ 27 Improve container management............................................................................................ 29 Simplify grading and collection processes............................................................................. 30

5.2.4 Human Resources .............................................................................................................31 Overhaul holiday work policy............................................................................................. 31

5.3 Strategy 3: Build the Right Team with the Right Tools.........................................................31 5.3.1 Production..........................................................................................................................31

Implement production database ............................................................................................ 31 Implement production manager reporting system ................................................................. 32 Create objection handling template ....................................................................................... 32

5.3.2 Human Resources .............................................................................................................32 Develop staff training plan..................................................................................................... 32 Institutionalise business best practices ................................................................................. 34 Ensure access to basic tools for business success............................................................... 35 Implement performance management system ...................................................................... 35 Create career progression chart............................................................................................ 35 Develop incentive packages.................................................................................................. 38 Make theft deterrent a collective responsibility...................................................................... 38 Build on staff insights............................................................................................................. 38

5.3.3 Sales and Marketing..........................................................................................................39 Use the sales representatives to do more business development work................................ 39 Promote benefit of GiG products to customers ..................................................................... 39

5.3.4 Finance...............................................................................................................................39 Develop key performance indicators ..................................................................................... 39 Improve reporting and analysis tools..................................................................................... 40

5.4 Strategy 4: Strategically Pursue New Market Opportunities................................................41 Maximise current peak selling months .................................................................................. 41 Maximise off-season selling .................................................................................................. 42 Investigate adjacencies to aid profitability ............................................................................. 42

5.5 Organisational Structure .........................................................................................................43 5.6 Organisational Culture.............................................................................................................46

VI. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................48

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

SBS – Saïd Business School

SCP – Strategic Consulting Project

GiG – Gambia is Good

CU – Concern Universal

5

INGO – International Non‐Governmental Organisation

BLCF – Business Linkages Challenge Fund

MBA – Master’s in Business Administration

DFID – Department for International Development

D – Dalasi

PPO – Peak Performance Organisation

WR – Western Region

NBR – North Bank Region

S&M – Sales and Marketing

HR – Human Resources

QSC – Quality & Stock Control

CPG – Commercial Private Garden

CM – Contract Manager

PM – Production Manager

NATC – Njawara Agricultural Training Centre

BTC – Besse Training Centre

GM – General Manager

QCM – Quality Control Manager

KPI – Key Performance Indicator

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary

The Gambia currently ranks 155 out of 177 on the UNDP’s Human Development Index, with approximately 60% of the population living on less than $1 per day1, three quarters of whom are engaged in agriculture.

1 UNDP 2007 Human Development Index.

6

Although winter tourism is a major export, much of the economic value has historically been captured by Western‐owned tour operators, airlines and hotels, with few internal linkages and very little trickling down to local food producers.

Gambia is Good (GiG) is a fresh produce marketing company which was conceived as a partnership between Concern Universal (CU) and Haygrove Ltd, a leading horticultural SME based in the UK, with the purpose of linking small scale rural producers with the high value tourist market. With CU’s network of local partners and Haygrove’s commercial acumen, GiG has been able to inspire entrepreneurship at community level and deliver a marketing service which is of equal value to producers and buyers alike. Since it started trading in 2004, with seed capital from DFID’s Business Linkages Challenge Fund, the business has come a long way and now collects from more than 1000 farmers, supplying 20 tonnes of produce per tourist‐season‐month to more than 40 hotels and restaurants.

However, GiG is at a crossroads.

On one hand, it is gaining international recognition as a social enterprise that has catalysed The Gambia’s domestic horticulture sector. Customers have praised GiG for delivering a variety of products that previously had to be imported from Senegal or abroad, and for improving the overall quality of local produce. Farmers have benefited from a stable and growing market outlet for their crops and have realised increased incomes from GiG’s ‘customer‐driven’ business model.

On the other hand, GiG’s current financial situation is one of a fledgling small business. There have only been two profitable months since GiG’s inception, and a budget shortfall of £20k is projected for 2009. The hard reality is that GiG would cease to exist without continued subsidy from foreign stakeholders.

This report seeks to reconcile this contradiction by providing a strategic way forward for GiG to live up to its promise. It contains a holistic analysis conducted by a team of four Saïd Business School (SBS) MBA Candidates in July‐August 2008. The result is both an articulation of GiG’s long‐term vision and a blueprint for how it can meet its short‐term goal of becoming financially self‐sufficient within 18 months.

Achieving this goal is crucial for three reasons. First, financial independence is necessary for GiG’s survival; without it, the newly established shared vision will be short‐lived. Second, it serves as a challenge for all of GiG’s key stakeholders to rise above the crowd and demonstrate an innovative social enterprise model to the world. A profitable GiG would prove not only that a successful business can be built with smallholder farmers in Africa, but also that it can be run by locally‐sourced and internally‐developed management. Third, it would inspire a new role for SMEs in the industrialised world to drive local economic development in the South. Haygrove has been a pivotal actor in the development of the business, and a successful exit in the near to mid future would set a positive precedent for other visionary SME leaders who see potential in similar partnerships.

With strategic support from both Concern Universal and Haygrove, it is up to the GiG team on the ground to execute the following six strategic recommendations:

1. Commit to being a business rather than an NGO project: For GiG to become a stand‐alone business, clear and consistent leadership, communication, and action are required from key leaders and decision makers, along with changes to GiG’s organisational culture and structure.

7

2. Emphasise the development of local management: Local managers must be provided with opportunities to make increasingly important decisions and learn from their mistakes.

3. Motivate local staff to perform: Management must act to foster a team identity, enhance the abilities of GiG staff to succeed in their jobs, and provide incentives for when they do.

4. Establish clear decision making criteria: Decisions should be based on a set of guiding principles with a clear focus on profitability.

5. Formalise and enforce critical processes and communication paths: Where informal processes and systems exist, they should be documented and enforced by management; where they do not, they must be established.

6. Enhance seasonal differentiation strategies: Along with capturing the upside potential in the full tourist season, strategies for reducing operating costs and increasing revenues in the off‐season must be developed.

This report contains a set of specific recommendations broken down by functional area that are intended to bring GiG’s strategic focus, structure, and organisational culture into alignment. These recommendations will need to be implemented diligently, gradually, and simultaneously in order to realise synergies and transform GiG from a development project into a financially independent social enterprise. The goal is formidable but at least the path ahead is now clear.

The SBS Team

II. STRATEGIC CONSULTING PROJECT OVERVIEW

In July 2008, a team of four Saïd Business School (SBS) MBA Candidates travelled to The Gambia to conduct a full strategic review of Gambia is Good (GiG). GiG is a social enterprise that markets horticultural products from smallholder producers to the hotel and restaurant industry.

This report is intended to act as a blueprint for GiG towards its short term goal of achieving profitability within 18 months and its long term goal of becoming an internationally recognised company focused on developing local management.

This section provides a background on GiG’s business model including a list of key issues, objectives, and outputs given by GiG to the SBS team at the beginning of the Strategic Consulting Project (SCP). These SCP objectives and outputs were refined with the GiG team after the SBS team’s arrival in The Gambia on July 1, 2008.

2.1 BACKGROUND ON GIG

8

In 2001, Concern Universal (CU),2 an international non‐governmental organisation (INGO), conducted a study on the high‐value consumption sector of the horticulture produce market in The Gambia.3 It uncovered a market failure: smallholder growers were missing out on trade with high value tourist hotels, restaurants, and supermarkets. Despite interest in buying high‐quality Gambian produce, these businesses were forced to import produce from Europe and neighbouring Senegal because of unreliable local supply, inconsistent quality, and shortages of produce during the peak tourist season. Meanwhile, smallholder growers had no incentive to increase their productivity and quality because they were part of a captive supply chain dominated by market intermediaries who captured a large portion of the profits.4

As a result of this research, CU partnered with the UK’s leading organic fruit producer, Haygrove,5 in 2004 to form GiG with £197,000 in grant seed capital from DFID’s Business Linkages Challenge Fund (BLCF).6 GiG was designed with the mission to become “a pro‐poor, fresh produce marketing company providing tangible economic and social benefits in poor rural Gambian communities by linking them to the main tourism industry.”7 The project had three objectives:8

• To use GiG as a catalyst to stimulate a vibrant Gambian fresh produce market that develops local livelihoods, inspires entrepreneurship, and reduces the environmental and social cost of imported produce

• To establish the best practice and up‐take of low cost, appropriate packing, storing, and grading of fresh produce by small‐scale farmers

• To leverage technical excellence in horticulture as a catalyst to improve the livelihoods of the rural poor and to replicate the GiG approach in other countries in West Africa

Four years later, GiG has achieved some commendable successes and helped CU win the award for 2008 UK Charity of the Year.9 Most notably, GiG has been able to mobilise a core group of up to 1000 smallholder growers (mostly women) for off‐season commercial production where profit margins are much higher for both the farmers and GiG. Hotels and restaurants have warmly responded to the improvement in consistent availability of produce and quality of local fruits and vegetables during the crucial tourist season from October to April. Furthermore, GiG has assembled a talented and extremely dedicated team in The Gambia, and is eager to take the next step to become a self‐sustaining model social enterprise.

2.2 KEY ISSUES FROM GIG’S POINT OF VIEW

2 www.concern‐universal.org 3 Concern Universal, “Horticultural Produce Market in the Hotel, Restaurant and Supermarket Sector – The Gambia,” August 2001. 4 Concern Universal, “A Miracle of Marketing.” 5 www.haygrove.co.uk 6 http://www.dfid.gov.uk/funding/businesslinkages.asp 7 Interview with Andrew Hunt, outgoing GiG General Manager, May 17, 2008. 8 BCLF Final Proposal 9 http://www.concern‐universal.org/index.php?/article/_news/concern_universal_wins_national_charity_award!/30.htm

9

Despite numerous successes, GiG has not achieved hoped‐for commercial viability. There have only been two profitable months since GiG’s inception and a budget shortfall of £20k is projected for 2009.10 From GiG’s point of view, the key issues hindering profitability were:11

• High overheads starting with the need for an international General Manager (GM)

• Seasonality of the tourist market demand and agricultural production

• Excessive wastage and unacceptable unrecorded stock loss

• Ineffective production planning process

• Operational management difficulties

• Low customer loyalty

• Unsustainable cash flow

• Overdependence on donor funding for horticultural capacity building

• Lack of long term strategic vision

• Uncertain role for the internally owned and managed GiG Farm

2.3 SCP OBJECTIVES AND OUTPUTS

An SCP was requested by GiG to investigate the above key issues and achieve the following objectives:

1. Facilitate the development of an inspiring and holistic strategic vision 2. Develop a realistic business plan which, if successfully implemented, will lead to full commercial

viability 3. Appraise the potential for a new ‘tourism’ enterprise

In addition, GiG reduced these objectives into four tangible outputs:

1. Full strategic review and long term strategy development 2. 3‐5 year fully fleshed out business plan 3. Set of recommendations for operational management and internal administration 4. Feasibility study for new pro‐poor tourism enterprise

2.4 RECONCILED OBJECTIVES AND OUTPUTS

Once the consulting team arrived in The Gambia and conducted an independent assessment of what was realistically achievable and most needed, the above objectives and outputs were modified with the GiG team. Specifically, objective 3 and output 4 were excluded, as the feasibility of a new pro‐poor tourism enterprise was deemed outside the scope of the SCP. In exchange, the team agreed to focus more on finding solutions to pressing operational challenges.

The new jointly agreed outputs of this SCP were as follows:

10 Provided by Andrew Hunt (Outgoing GiG General Manager) 11 See the original terms of reference in Appendix A for more details.

10

1. Strategic visioning workshop with key GiG stakeholders to establish a shared vision, long term goal, short term goal, overarching strategies, and guiding principles (see Section III)

2. Strategic consulting report containing operational and strategy recommendations to achieve these goals (this document)

3. 18 month action plan with key recommendations for each functional area (see Appendix B) 4. Set of operational tools for each functional area (see Appendices) 5. Final presentation to CU and Haygrove (at SBS September 5, 2008)

III. APPROACH

The approach taken by the SBS team to meet the above reconciled objectives can be summarised in four steps:

1. Holistically assess the current state of the business. For the first ten days in The Gambia, the SBS team undertook a comprehensive audit of the GiG business model, including its strategic objectives, operational effectiveness and efficiency, human resource capabilities, financial constraints, and developmental goals. This involved field trips to rural areas to meet with GiG suppliers (both individual farmers and community gardens) and to understand (as best as possible given time constraints) the local context. The team also met with a variety of GiG’s customers to gain insights into how GiG could better meet their needs. This audit produced an independent set of key issues (Section IV) and informed functional area strategies (Section V).

2. Conduct a strategic visioning workshop and follow‐up sessions with each functional team (see Section 3.2). The strategic visioning workshop was designed to include all key stakeholders to facilitate the development of a shared vision and devise strategic goals.

3. Develop and implement the most pressing strategies (see Section V). Due to the seasonal nature of the business and its difficult financial position, it was imperative that some strategies (i.e. introduction of production contract system) were implemented immediately to facilitate improved sales and profit margins in the upcoming tourist season.

4. Document process improvement opportunities for future implementation. Throughout the process, a conscious awareness of the need to gradually introduce changes led to a toolbox of recommendations for future implementation along with an 18 month operational action plan (see Appendix B).

3.1 THE STRATEGIC VISIONING FRAMEWORK

A clear shared vision provides a robust framework for all business choices and helps keep everyone working toward a common goal. It is widely accepted that a shared vision with strategies that are aligned throughout an organisation is crucial to success.

11

To facilitate an inspiring shared vision for GiG, the SBS team leveraged the Peak Performance Organisation (PPO) framework12 (Figure 1). PPO theory provides an alternative to the conventional strategic visioning development process by drawing from some of the most successful sporting teams of all time and applying their best principles to business. This framework has been used by a number of the most successful fast moving consumer good and marketing companies in the world.

Figure 1: The Strategic Visioning Framework

Inspirational Dream: A mental image of an ideal state or destiny for the organisation that provides meaning and recognition for the individuals who work there. It relates to why activities are undertaken rather than what must be achieved by those activities. As a consequence – it is not measurable. The inspirational dream must also be common to all areas of an organisation.13

Greatest Imaginable Challenge: The dream in action. It is the most demanding and rewarding tangible event that can be imagined for the organisation. It must be conceivable and feasible, as well as important, stretching and exciting. It must also be measurable, so that the achievement is clear.14

Most Important Goals: The tangible, measurable, shorter‐term goals that drive the day‐to‐day strategic and operational decisions of the organisation. They establish priorities and are used as the basis to measure individual and organisational performance.

12 Gilson, Clive, Mike Pratt, Kevin Roberts, and Ed Weymes. 2001. Peak Performance: Business Lessons from the world’s top sports organizations. 13Ibid. 14 Ibid.

12

Strategic Focus: The concentration of energy on actions necessary to achieve the organisation’s purpose. It provides clear direction and interest for participants, and involves identifying specific actions to be undertaken, rather than targeting the end result required. Strategic focus clarifies priorities and aligns everyday tasks. People focus their attention and energies on meaningful, challenging goals as an essential ingredient to

achieving peak performance.15

It is important to note the order of the framework; it starts by establishing the organisation’s inspirational dream followed by a more measurable challenge and set of goals, and ends by outlining strategies required to achieve these goals. These concepts are mutually reinforcing and, in combination, provide the all important clarity of purpose essential for success.

3.2 STRATEGIC VISIONING WORKSHOP

The Strategic Visioning Workshop was conducted on the 12 and 13th July with GiG’s key stakeholders16 (Appendix C) to develop inputs to the PPO framework described above. The idea was to define a shared vision, outline the building blocks needed to achieve that vision, and initiate a subsequent process to mobilise the GiG team for action. Active participation from all stakeholders was requested to develop a vision, goals, and strategies that were both inclusive and motivational. Throughout the process it was imperative that everyone was listened to and that their input was demonstrated as being valuable; the workshop agenda was designed to facilitate this. The GiG team left the workshop having reached consensus on all four components of the strategic visioning framework (Figure 2), as well a set of guiding principles (Appendix D), and a full summary of discussed strategies and actions (Appendix E). These were subsequently compressed into one document showing ‘GiG on a Page’ and distributed to staff (Appendix F).

15 Ibid. 16 See Appendix C for a list of attendees and workshop agenda.

13

Figure 2: GiG Strategic Visioning Workshop Outcome

The greatest imaginable challenge to become an internationally recognised company focused on developing local management reflects a collective desire for GiG to eventually be run by Gambian management but acknowledges that this is only feasible as a long term goal.

The short term goal of achieving profitability in 18 months means that GiG will become financially self‐sustaining and independent of donor funding for its core horticulture business. It is realised that donor funding will still be necessary for some capacity building activities and to experiment with new opportunities that have long term potential (e.g. fair trade exporting). The remainder of this report focuses on the strategies for how to achieve these goals while ensuring that they are aligned with GiG’s inspirational dream.

14

IV. KEY ISSUES

During the overall audit of the business as described in Section III, the SBS team identified six underlying key issues that must be addressed in order for GiG to achieve the shared vision and goals defined in the strategic visioning workshop. These can be divided into three groups:

• Social enterprise issues (4.1 business vs. development project, 4.2 foreign dependency, , 4.4 lack of decision making processes and tools)

• Young business issues (4.3 staff motivation and integration, 4.4 lack of decision making processes and tools, 4.5 sub‐optimal communication systems and processes)

• Industry related issues (seasonality)

4.1 IS GIG A BUSINESS OR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT?

The most fundamental key issue relates to GiG’s identity: is GiG a business or a development project? To the senior management team, the answer was clear. GiG was established with the goal of becoming a self‐sustaining, profitable business built with Gambian smallholder farmers. However, if GiG was registered as a business, it would immediately have to pay a 30% sales tax (i.e. regardless of profitability), destroying already tight gross margins. In addition, GiG would never have existed (and would possibly cease to exist) without the assistance of grant funding and soft support that it has received because of its status as a development project.

The problem is that a business should be run very differently from a development project and has very different end‐goals. A business is meant to grow by outperforming competitors and capturing market share; therefore its sustainability is measured by its very existence. In contrast, a development project has a finite end date (typically only a few years) with the implementing organisation often moving on to a different project in a different area. Trying to be both at the same time can have perverse effects on strategic decision making and staff incentives. For example, the strategic decision to spread scarce production resources among 11 dispersed community gardens in the Western Region (WR) as opposed to concentrating on better farmers in fewer gardens reflects a conventional development project mentality. Similarly, allocating crucial management time to sourcing and writing grant proposals to meet budget shortfalls (a typical Senior Manager activity in an NGO) comes at the expense of addressing fundamental strategic and operational problems.

Being ‘stuck in the middle’ between a business and development project is a common problem to social enterprise models and often a reason for their failure. Funders eventually grow tired of the need to subsidise critical components of the business model and pull out, which is what Haygrove has indicated they will have to do if GiG is unable to achieve its short term profitability goal. This identity problem can only be solved at the

15

top with clear leadership, communication, and action, and will require changes in strategy, structure, and organisational culture to become reality.

4.2 FOREIGN DEPENDENCY

Most senior decision‐making positions in GiG are occupied by expatriates, leading to tangible and intangible costs. For the former, overhead costs of GiG are disproportionally high mainly because of the GM’s international salary and benefits package. Yet without this, it would be difficult to attract qualified international staff, which has been crucial to GiG´s development thus far. For the latter, expatriate presence may have an adverse effect on the perception of GiG in The Gambia. For example, the SBS team spoke with a customer who said that her local customers have questioned why she is buying from Toubabs (foreigners) who are using GiG’s name to make money for themselves. Though this may be an isolated case, it is a point that GiG must be aware of (especially if any government officials develop this impression). Furthermore, expatriate management may have de‐motivating effects on local staff or at least give the impression of the existence of a ‘glass ceiling.’

Therefore, the gap between decision makers (mainly expatriates) and the team responsible for operations on the ground (mainly locals) must be closed for GiG to progress towards both its short and long term goals. Though a business of GiG’s size (15 direct employees) should not require a layer of middle management at this point, one may be necessary to provide local staff with practical management experience and demonstrate that they are the future of GiG.

4.3 STAFF MOTIVATION AND INTEGRATION

Overall, the GiG team is a close‐knit group and employees are extremely committed to their jobs. However, it was revealed during personal interviews and time spent shadowing staff that the production team felt that they were not respected within GiG and were always placed below sales and marketing (S&M). One of the reasons may be due to history: GiG has undergone a necessary transition from ‘producer first’ to ‘customer first’ over the past few years, which may have resulted in the production team feeling less valued by management. Another reason may be attributed to GiG’s organisational structure, which excluded the production team. GiG’s three Production Managers (PMs) were technically CU employees, reporting to the Horticultural Specialist, and had their contracts renewed on an annual basis depending on project‐specific funding. As a result, while the S&M side of the business was being intensively managed and developed by GiG management, the production side was accountable to a different reporting structure. The production team focused primarily on solving technical problems in the field with less attention paid to how it could work more effectively and efficiently as an arm of the GiG business.

Finally, all staff desire more transparency, fairness, and inclusion. They would like to understand what personal development opportunities are available, why certain people are given funds for training, and would also like to be consulted more on future strategies and key decisions.

4.4 LACK OF DECISION MAKING PROCESSES AND TOOLS

GiG suffers from the typical ‘young business’ syndrome that focuses on increasing sales with little time for developing the processes to facilitate more efficient business practices. The lack of decision making processes

16

and tools results in the under‐use of financial information, lack of dynamic market response, and inability to promptly respond to customer feedback. Generally, it is not always clear on what basis decisions are or should be made. This dangerously masks the effect of unsubstantiated decisions on overall profitability and leads to a large portfolio of considered future actions with the danger of ‘doing too many things at once.’

There appear to be two sources to this problem. First, a young business like GiG tends to have more ‘flexible’ structures and processes as compared to grown organisations. Yet, in these cases there are normally underlying guiding principles (that were lacking in GiG prior to the strategic visioning workshop) that allow an organisation to make decisions based on general business rules in absence of specific ones. Second, GiG’s confused identity on whether it wants to be a stand‐alone business or development project (as described in 4.1) has hindered it from recognising opportunity costs when making strategic choices.

4.5 SUB‐OPTIMAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES

Throughout GiG, communication paths and underlying processes related to daily operational tasks are either missing, not clear, or not properly enforced, which leads to inefficient and even ineffective operations. For example, the existing delivery packing process is suboptimal, often causing confusion and sometimes botched

deliveries. Also, the process for planning the collection of produce involves too many people and is not standardised, leading to backlash from growers when their harvested crops are not collected as promised.

GiG suffers from the widespread phenomenon where management says that processes and communication systems are in place but are simply not followed. On the other hand, GiG employees claim that they are not always aware of the rules and that it does not make any difference whether they adhere to them (especially when the

purpose of the rules is not clear). In order to make GiG profitable, it is imperative that GiG establishes, formalises, and trains staff on clear processes and communication paths and then follows up with stringent enforcement.

4.6 SEASONALITY

An industry related key issue is the seasonality of the horticulture business, which has two dimensions. First, horticulture demand is highly dependent on tourists who come to The Gambia from October – April. Many of GiG’s customers close down outside of these months. Second, local horticulture production is concentrated in the dry‐season from November – March. Despite a tropical climate that is conducive to year‐round horticulture production, GiG has to cope with the technological, capability, and behavioural constraints of smallholder farmers in the context of underdeveloped institutions and poverty. The result is an undersupply of production during the critical period of October – January, an oversupply from February – May, with market prices fluctuating accordingly. Furthermore, the quality requirements of GiG’s customers changes depending on product availability. This all suggests the need for season‐specific strategies that are aligned with GiG’s underlying strategic focus.

17

V. STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS

As discussed in Section III, the strategic visioning workshop produced a consensus on the following strategic focus for GiG on the path towards a shared vision, long term goal, and short term goal:

1. Optimise local horticulture production to meet year round GiG demand 2. Optimise operational effectiveness and efficiency 3. Build the right team with the right tools 4. Strategically pursue new market opportunities

This section contains a set of strategic recommendations for each one of these strategies broken down by the following six functional areas:

• Production

• Sales and Marketing (S&M)

• Quality and Stock Control (QSC)

• Human Resources (HR)

• Finance

• GiG Farm

Although every functional area has responsibilities to contribute to each strategy, what follows is a prioritised list that addresses the crucial changes that are especially necessary for GiG to achieve its short term goal of becoming profitable within 18 months. Therefore, not all functional areas have been addressed under each strategy; this should be done by GiG management on an ongoing basis to ensure that all activities are aligned with these overarching strategies. A full summary of the Strategy‐Function Matrix can be found in Appendix G.

In addition, this section will conclude with recommendations for necessary changes to GiG’s organisational structure and culture in order for them to align with the strategic focus. While the right strategic direction is essential for GiG to ‘leap forward,’ all three components must be aligned for successful execution (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Strategy – Structure – Culture Framework17

17 Tim Morris, Developing Effective Organisations class notes.

18

5.1 STRATEGY 1: OPTIMISE LOCAL HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION TO MEET YEAR ROUND GIG DEMAND

Strategy 1 is to optimise GiG’s core horticulture business by continuing to support Gambian growers to meet demand specified by GiG’s S&M team. It is expected that this ‘GiG demand’ will continue to grow as new markets are sourced (such as regional export markets). GiG will also continue to give preference to its core of smallholder growers, but ‘local horticulture production’ will expand to include commercial private gardens (CPGs) and the GiG Farm. Production and S&M are the main functional areas responsible for executing this strategy. The human resource management involved in this strategy is also crucial.

5.1.1 PRODUCTION

INTRODUCE THE CONTRACT MANAGER SYSTEM

Achieving a secure and reliable supply of the right fruits and vegetables at the right time is arguably the most critical gap in GiG’s current business model. Despite the existence of a monthly production plan that more or less reflects what needs to be produced by targeted growers to meet established demand, there are still shortages of key items at crucial times of the year while the same items are in oversupply at other times. For example, when the SBS team arrived in The Gambia, GiG could not find a supply of tomatoes, its most important sales item, anywhere in the country.

In contrast, growers complained during interviews that GiG would not purchase all of their grade 1 tomatoes in February because they were in oversupply.

There are many reasons for GiG’s sub‐optimal production system. On the surface, these include a lack of execution by the production team, growers failing to deliver on their promises, problems with pests and diseases, and lack of access to inputs for growers at the right time. However, unreliable supply is a problem that is common to agricultural enterprise development projects across Africa that target smallholder farmers. The pattern that emerges is usually as follows:

1) The shift from supply to demand orientation (i.e. from a conventional agricultural development project to an enterprise‐based model) catalyses supply;

2) Demand begins to outpace supply as smallholder farmers struggle to increase productivity and meet quality requirements;

3) The buyer (i.e. lead firm) becomes impatient and begins to look elsewhere for supply;

4) The model either collapses completely or smallholder farmers are replaced by larger commercially‐oriented growers that are easier and more reliable to work with.

If working with smallholder growers is central to the objectives of GiG, the way to avoid this trap is to first recognise that all smallholder farmers are not equal and strategically decide which ones to target; and second

19

uncover and align (as best as possible) their underlying incentives. The former strategy goes against the conventional development wisdom that allocating resources on an equal basis in the field is desirable. Achieving the short term goal of being a profitable business requires selecting only the best smallholder growers and working with them more intensively to improve their productivity. Equally important (but more difficult to implement in practice), it requires consciously choosing not to work with those farmers whom GiG has invested resources in and developed relationships with but who have proved unreliable.

The latter strategy is more difficult; it requires acknowledging that the underlying drivers of smallholder behaviour are complex and oversimplifying them to economically rational terms will produce disappointing results. For example, the best way to get women in community gardens to stake their tomatoes may not be simply telling them how much money they would gain from doing so, but rather trying to understand the underlying reasons for why they don’t stake them and then identifying and training the most influential people (i.e. not necessarily the best growers) to change their behaviour. This requires the development of trust‐based personal relationships with influential growers that must not be taken for granted.

The primary recommendation to begin tackling existing production challenges is to target the best growers with a contract system – the Contract Manager System. This system uses the principle of self‐selection to better align the incentives of growers with those of GiG. In the Western Region (WR), a GiG Production Manager (PM) is freely allowed to choose an individual Contract Manager (CM), who is in turn free to select four other growers to sub‐contract (Figure 4). With technical input from the PM, the CM will choose from a pre‐determined selection of crops (based on demand provided by S&M) for the entire group. GiG will then issue an individual contract (Appendix H) to the CM containing a guaranteed minimum buying price and a promise to pay more if the market price is higher on the purchase day.

In addition, the CM and her sub‐contracted growers will receive purchasing priority over other growers for their secondary crops (i.e. those not under contract) as an additional incentive. GiG can only commit to purchasing Grade 1 quality produce, but will buy any left‐over lower grade produce from contracted growers when a secure market has been sourced.

20

Figure 4: The Contract Manager System in the WR

With the exception of one community garden (FENCES garden), the CM system will need to be modified slightly in the North Bank Region (NBR) where growers are predominantly commercially‐oriented individual males who do not want to work in groups. Here, contracts can still be issued to individual CMs chosen by a PM, but the CMs will not be required to sub‐contract to other growers. However, it is envisioned that they will begin to do so over time, facilitated by GiG offering increasingly larger contracts to the best performing CMs.

The roll‐out of the CM System should be gradual and start with targeted (i.e. scarce) crops at strategic times. It is crucial that contracts only be issued to the best growers who are freely selected by GiG PMs even if the demand from S&M exceeds what is contracted. This will optimise the positive effects of self‐selection and allow for the PMs to be held accountable. Contracts should also be issued seasonally (i.e. twice per year) based on what S&M deems as ‘guaranteed demand’ to strengthen relationships between GiG and contracted growers and facilitate better planning by both parties. As the system becomes adopted and adapted, the selection of crops, number of CMs, and individual contract sizes should be increased with the vision that GiG eventually achieves 100% of its ‘guaranteed demand’ under contract.

The introduction of the CM system will be a major component of Strategy 1 and is likely to address many of GiG’s production problems. However, it should not be viewed as a silver bullet since the contracts are non‐enforceable in either direction. Contracts will not replace the importance of PMs selecting the right growers to work with in the field and providing individualised support to enhance their productivity. The CM system also requires a commitment to favouring some growers over others which may be difficult to execute in practice and result in some negative push‐back from growers in the short term (including the possibility of decreased production). Over the long term, GiG’s supply chain will be much stronger and more reliable with CMs helping to increase agricultural productivity and catalyse development in rural Gambia.

21

STRATEGICALLY CONTRACT COMMERCIAL PRIVATE GARDENS

In addition to the above mentioned smallholder farmers, GiG is currently working with three commercial private gardens (CPGs) that are much larger and more advanced (both managerially and technologically) than the targeted community or smallholder gardens. These CPGs are strategically important for three reasons. First, they can supply crops that are in demand during certain times which smallholder farmers do not like to grow (e.g. cabbage during the rainy season). This will help boost GiG’s sales volume and profit margins. Second, CPGs can be contracted to offset necessary imports from Senegal, reinforcing GiG’s guiding principle of being Gambian First. Third (and most importantly), if GiG does not buy from these gardens they pose a significant competitive threat. One large and well‐managed CPG will always be able to outperform smallholder gardens on quality (if not also price) and could conceivably become a preferred supplier to any of GiG’s existing customers. Therefore, it is recommended that GiG view all CPGs as important suppliers rather than competitors and strives to contract as much produce as possible from them (Appendix I). This implies a need to find alternative markets (including export markets) in order to handle the increased volume and continue giving purchasing preference to smallholder growers.

INVOLVE PARTNER ORGANISATIONS IN THE CM SYSTEM

GiG currently works with two partner organisations, the Besse Training Centre (BTC) in the WR and the Njawara Agricultural Training Centre (NATC) in the NBR. These partners train students in horticulture production and frequently supply GiG with ‘Grade 1’ quality fruits and vegetables. As such, investing in these partnerships should be part of GiG’s long term strategy to improve the capacity of smallholder vegetable growers in The Gambia and groom future CMs. One way to do this is to include BTC and NATC in the CM system so that they can train their students in fulfilling production contracts and adhering to strict quality requirements. The contracts should be issued in the same way as for smallholder growers and CPGs, but should be managed by the Director of the partner organisation.

IDENTIFY STRATEGIC USES FOR GIG FARM

One of the uses of the GiG Farm is to fill holes in the production plan and to produce more highly demanded produce at the right time. With the introduction of the CM system and the recommended strategy to purchase as much as possible from CPGs, the strategic role of the GiG Farm will have to change. It is recommended that rather than acting as a significant source of GiG’s production, the GiG Farm should fall behind contracted smallholder farmers, CPGs, and partner organisations when allocating production targets. This will maximise the proportion of GiG’s total production from local smallholders and minimise competition from CPGs. Two other

22

potential strategic uses for the GiG Farm to meet GiG demand are to commercially produce specialty crops that are in undersupply (e.g. broccoli) and act as a research centre to pilot new crops and farming practices to later disseminate to GiG’s core suppliers. It is important that the profitability of the GiG farm as a separate business entity is considered in the strategic development of its role.

OPTIMISE MONTHLY PRODUCTION PLANNING

Even with production contracts being issued on a seasonal basis, monthly production planning will still be necessary to cope with demand fluctuations, predict and mitigate supply shortfalls or surpluses, and allocate production targets for non‐contracted crops. The recommended strategy to optimise monthly production planning should be implemented in two stages. First, a monthly meeting with the production and S&M teams should be held to update the demand forecast for the coming month and reconcile it with the expected harvest for all crops (i.e. not just those under contract). Next, the PMs should go out to the field and issue short term contracts to growers who have verifiable crops that will be ready to harvest within the specified

period (Appendix J). Preference for short term contracts can be given to smallholder growers and can be used as trials for future CMs before they are issued seasonal contracts. Short term contracts should then be issued to CPGs and partner organisations up to the maximum demand specified at the monthly meeting. GiG should also quantify any remaining standing crops at CPGs with the goal of identifying markets and placing them under contract before they are harvested and sold independently to GiG’s customers.

By contracting standing crops that can be verified in the field, this system will help close the gap between supply and demand while significantly improving the reliability of GiG’s supply chain. GiG should aim to have 100% of its sales demand under contract (either seasonal or short term) by the time of purchase. The proportion of seasonal to short term contracts should gradually increase as the CM system is adopted.

GUARANTEE ACCESS TO INPUTS TO CONTRACTED GROWERS

A reliable supply chain requires growers to have access to inputs (seeds, pesticides, and fertilisers) when they need them. In The Gambia, this is not always the case. Smallholder growers may not have cash or access to credit to purchase inputs, there may be no local supplier, or inputs may simply not be in stock.

A lack of input availability means that growers frequently miss key planting windows (thus contributing to over and undersupply) and do not deal promptly and effectively with pests and diseases, dramatically reducing yields.

For the CM system to work effectively, GiG needs to guarantee access to inputs to selected CMs without increasing its own exposure to bad debt. Two strategies are recommended.

First, the PMs should be supplied with an emergency stock of critical inputs that they can sell to growers on a cash basis. The PMs should also be given the power to source these inputs on their own so that they can be

23

held accountable for ensuring that they are available to growers. It will remain each grower’s responsibility to purchase input from GiG’s PM. This strategy is most applicable in the NBR where there is only one input shop that often runs out of stock.

Second, GiG should set up a revolving fund to provide some inputs on credit to CMs, which can later be directly deducted from crop purchases. Rather than sourcing new funding for this, it is recommended that a portion of an existing revolving fund ‐ currently managed jointly with a partner organisation in the WR (St Joseph’s) ‐ be managed internally. GiG’s credit exposure should be limited to CMs and St. Joseph’s should continue to manage the portion of the fund that remains accessible to non‐contracted growers. In the NBR, growers have access to a separate revolving fund managed by another partner organisation (NATC) that cannot be internalised at this time. However, it is in GiG’s best interests to work closely with NATC to ensure that this fund is managed properly.

5.1.2 SALES AND MARKETING

IMPROVE DEMAND PLANNING

GiG’s existing demand planning process does not adequately reflect market demands and contributes to wastage from overproduction or product shortages at crucial times. The current format, which is limited to a monthly meeting led by the Horticulture Specialist, ensures a thorough review of the production process but does not afford enough opportunity for market‐based input.

Specifically, the demand by month is not specified anywhere. There are two documents that attempt to match demand to production: the budget18 and the production plan. However, these documents are not linked; the budget is not used to determine production and the production plan does not clearly highlight an inability to meet demand. Neither

document provides a base for understanding what products are needed and when.

The ideal system would be for the S&M team to specify the required production with a data‐based understanding of the market. In addition, a product collection schedule (Appendix O) is needed at the container to facilitate better planning of when additional produce is needed. Therefore, the team should implement a regular S&M meeting which reviews a new demand planning spreadsheet and weekly delivery schedule.

18 The budget is a financial plan that commits the most realistic targets and highlights the profitability gap to key stakeholders.

24

USE VEGETABLE PROFITABILITY AS A TOOL FOR PRODUCTION CHOICES

Product expansion decisions (i.e. which vegetables to produce) are currently limited to the market knowledge of individuals. This results in additional complexity with more items being added to GiG’s product line, some of which are not as profitable as perceived. Decisions of what products to offer customers are made based on scarcity and the relative price increases during times of high demand, rather than profitability net of delivery costs. Discussions with the GiG team also highlighted the halo effect (how the availability of one product results in sales of others) of some items, particularly tomatoes. Hence the decision making criteria for evaluating new products should be done seasonally considering both of these elements.

5.1.3 HUMAN RESOURCES

INTRODUCE PM REPORTING SYSTEM

With a new GM set to start in early September, now is the time to incorporate stronger supervision and focus for the production team. The production team will need to submit weekly planning reports to the GM every Friday. These reports should outline their major activities for the following week as well as provide a brief summary from the week past. Items to focus on include farmer visits, sowing dates, input requirements and availability, and harvests. The PMs should also report via text message daily to the GM and Horticulture Specialist (cc’d to other PMs) on successes, issues, and any changes to their weekly plan. To facilitate this, mobile phone agreements (Appendix K) and updated job descriptions (Appendix L) have been put in place.

5.2 STRATEGY 2: OPTIMISE OPERATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY

Strategy 2 is a general strategy relevant to all functional areas to improve GiG’s overall effectiveness and efficiency. Successful implementation of this strategy should enable GiG to make a big step towards profitability.

5.2.1 MANAGEMENT

MAP COMMUNICATION PATHS AND PROCESSES

Even with production from the GiG Farm, GiG is unable to meet the full market demand. GiG works with hundreds of independent and widely‐dispersed farmers with limited communication access. This makes communication and setting up smooth processes more challenging than for a business with an integrated production model. Yet, the lack of formalised processes and communication paths that are found throughout GiG, especially between S&M and production, makes a clear communication and process policy crucial to strengthen operational effectiveness and efficiency. Additionally, GiG sometimes sources product sporadically from suppliers in Senegal and the local market (Serrekunda), which adds to the operational complexity of its

25

supply chain. Overall, the number of parties involved, miscommunication and unclear processes are major drivers of GiG´s poor effectiveness and efficiency.

As a starting point towards a set of recommended solutions, it is necessary to gain an overview of GiG´s functional relationships and the process steps involved in the business model. Figure 5 shows GiG´s ‘business cycle’ and the link between functions, starting with demand and production planning and ending with credit control.

Planning

Production

Collection/ Grading

Transport

Receive

StoreCustomer Order

Pack

Deliver

Customer Feedback

Credit Control

Trips to Dakar

Cash

Float

Senegal

Serrekunda market

ContainerOpportunistic sales

retire sales

Record keeping

Serrekunda market

Production

Quality &Stock Control

Sales & Marketing

Finance

Finance

Human Resources

Management

Figure 5: GiG´s business cycle

The key tasks for management are to improve communication and formalise processes throughout this cycle, and then enforce these changes. This requires developing clear instructions and standardised processes (e.g. collection of produce from growers) and delegating clear line manager responsibility for enforcing them. Appendix O contains the example of a recommended ideal process system for QSC (see “simplify grading and collection processes” for more details). The goal for GiG should be to create similar documents for other crucial functions/process steps like production and S&M.

5.2.2 PRODUCTION

26

IMPROVE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF GARDEN VISITS

The existing GiG production system consisted of working with over 900 growers in 11 community gardens in the WR and 100 individual smallholder growers in the NBR. This system was neither effective nor efficient because the PMs were not able to allocate their time to focus on the best locations and best farmers within them. Furthermore, the distance between the growers and the GiG container varied immensely (Table 1). In the WR, this meant that the PMs would by‐pass many capable growers near‐by to provide extension support to far away growers. As a result, the closer gardens performed sub‐optimally while GiG’s operating costs remained excessively high.

Garden Ranking19 Garden Distance from GiG

1 Ndenban Tenda 78 km

2 Ndenban Japichum 75 km

3 Gunjur 1 46 km

4 Besse Training Centre 73 km

5 Gunjur 2 46 km

6 Kambong 115 km

7 Dobong 130 km

8 Ndenban Jarjuekunda 79 km

9 Kartong 55 km

10 Ndemban Jola 80 km

11 Kandunku 90 km

Table 1: WR Community Gardens as Ranked by PMs

19 As determined by the PMs.

27

An additional challenge was that PM workload was not distributed evenly. In the WR, one PM was assigned four community gardens to support and was stationed permanently in the field so that she could easily move among them on a motorbike. The other WR PM was responsible for visiting seven community gardens that were scattered throughout the region and would travel daily from the office. However, he would also regularly visit the four gardens not assigned to him because he had superior technical knowledge and was more confident in his diagnoses. He was also supporting three CPGs that were strategically important for GiG but outside of his old job description. The NBR PM (who was permanently based in the NBR) was also overloaded, having to allocate his time between visiting many individual growers, the FENCES community garden, collect loan repayments for the NATC revolving fund, and carry out other duties as specified under his CU contract.

STRENGTHEN COMMUNICATION AND TEAMWORK

Despite the geographic limitations, there is considerable scope for the production team to work more closely together. With three PMs and two regions, one idea is for the eventual promotion of one of the PMs to a ‘Team Leader’ role where he or she would work in both regions depending on the time of year and the demand in the field. For example, the NBR is more advanced in off‐season production so it may be more efficient for GiG to allocate two PMs to this region during critical times. The Team Leader could provide an important link between both regions and help to boost teamwork.

Another idea is for the PMs to rotate periodically. This would facilitate cross‐team learning and allow the PMs to face fresh challenges and strike more of a balance between commanding the respect of an outsider with having the trust of an insider.

Finally, the production team should be in regular communication with one another and with the Horticulture Specialist to share ideas and increase their technical capacity to respond to problems in the field. With the introduction of a new reporting system, this should now be more practical.

5.2.3 QUALITY AND STOCK CONTROL

REDUCE RECORDED AND UNRECORDED STOCK LOSS

Addressing the unacceptably high levels of recorded and unrecorded stock loss is a perhaps the most pressing operational challenge that must be solved for GiG to become profitable. The first step to address this issue is to clearly define what is meant by ‘recorded’ and ‘unrecorded’ stock loss. The SBS team noted that different definitions were frequently

28

use by GiG, which is reflected in GiG’s financial reports.20 Here, the following definitions will be used:

• Recorded stock loss = wastage

• Unrecorded stock loss = difference in stock that was not or could not be recorded (i.e. from using different scales, theft, or loss due water being lost from crops (e.g. watermelon))

• Total wastage = recorded stock loss (wastage) + unrecorded stock loss

Though recorded and unrecorded stock losses are related, they have different impacts and relevance on the business and therefore need to be treated differently. Unrecorded stock loss was called “a Gambian phenomenon” by Haygrove during the strategic visioning workshop, and should be nonexistent since it derives either from incorrect recording (which should be accounted for in recorded stock loss) or through theft.

The 12‐month average of GiG´s unrecorded stock loss was 7.9% of purchases, which contributed to 50% of total wastage (13.7% of purchases) between July 07 and June 08 and translated to D 421,527 being lost due to total wastage. Comparing this value to GiG’s overall loss during this period of D 508,244 shows how critical it is to deal with this issue. Total wastage in June 08 alone is approximately equivalent to the salary of four full time employees.

Since there are many functional areas involved, it is important to address the issue from a holistic point of

view. It starts with demand planning, which must be translated into the right amount of production from GiG’s many growers, and ends with collecting the right quantity of produce at the right time to deliver promptly to customers.

In order to find solutions to this issue, it is important to identify the underlying causes, which are:

• Mismatch between production and demand

• Unclear pick up policy (amount of produce, time, and location)

• Improper storage of produce and/or careless handling

• Lack of procedures to turn unrecorded stock loss into recorded stock loss

Figure 6 illustrates that generally unrecorded stock loss accounts for half of the total wastage, which suggests that a certain amount of unrecorded stock loss is actually wastage and not theft. The highest peak is in the beginning of the tourist season (April), which suggests that the GiG team needs to adjust to the change in season and not get careless as they get busier. As an alternative hypothesis, a new Stock Controller started in April 08, which might explain the spike was a result of him getting used to his new job.

20 cf. the ‘Budget Analysis’ sheet in GiG’s Management Accounts.

29

Figure 6: 12‐month overview of stock loss

Solutions to reduce total wastage:

• Appendix M provides a summary of all process steps that are contributing to total wastage and ways to reduce it

• New container policy to avoid wastage due to rotting (see “Container Management / Inventory cold store management/Store” below)

With proper implementation and enforcement of these new processes, it is entirely feasible for GiG to achieve its targets of 5% recorded stock loss and 2% unrecorded stock loss in the short term. In the long term, the target for unrecorded stock loss should be 0%. It is important to note that since it seems that most unrecorded stock loss derives from improper recording of wastage (recorded stock loss) it is likely that recorded stock loss will go up or cancel out some of the positive effects in the short run during this adaptation period.

IMPROVE CONTAINER MANAGEMENT

The storage container is a central element of the GiG business, it functions as part of the store for retail customers and as storage for hotel and restaurant (i.e. wholesale) customers. The current management of the container leads to a number of operational issues:

• Reduced shelf life: The thermometer was ‘permanently’ broken and the container door was often left open, leading to a shorter shelf life of produce

30

• Lower quality for GiG´s primary customers: Retail customers walk into container picking the best quality produce, leaving lower quality produce for wholesale customers

• Order tracking: It is not clear which orders are completed and ready to send to customers and which are still in progress, which leads to delivery mix‐ups and delays

The first step to improve container management was to map out the flow of goods from when they are received to when they are delivered to customers. Recommended layout can be seen in Appendix N. This allowed for a new process to be designed and implemented with the following objectives:

1. Separate wholesale packing from retail sales at the container 2. Better separate activities at the container to minimise confusion over what work has been done and

what still needs to be done 3. Minimise the amount of handling of the produce 4. Minimise the amount of time spent in the container 5. Minimise the amount of time that the container door needs to be opened

SIMPLIFY GRADING AND COLLECTION PROCESSES

The existing grading and collection process is far too complex and rife with inefficiencies.

First, the collection planning process is focused on the producer as opposed to the customer. Instead of visiting a few growers to meet his collection targets, the Quality Control Manager (QCM) visits many widely dispersed farmers (once per week during the off‐season and twice per week during the full season for each region) and purchases a little produce from each of them. He spends much of his time arguing with producers about the quality of their produce and why he cannot buy all of it from them, which is unsatisfying for him and damages long term relationships between GiG and its growers. In the past, this has also created problems of overbuying to appease farmers at the point of purchase.

There are three process improvements that can make this system more effective and efficient.

First, the implementation of the CM system is designed to greatly reduce the number of farmers that the QCM will have to interact with during collection. He will only collect from each CM, who is in turn responsible for collecting and pre‐grading (with training and support from PMs) from the other sub‐contracted growers beforehand. Furthermore, the contracts stipulate that GiG must purchase all ‘Grade 1’ quality crops from CMs, which should significantly improve the collection process.

Second, it is important that the collection planning process will be formalised. This can be done by creating a document (see Appendix O) at the beginning of every week detailing what, when, and from whom produce will be collected in the following week. The existing system is much more ad hoc.

31

Finally, the PMs and QCM should be equipped with a ‘Quality Manual’ containing pictures of what ‘Grade 1’ quality looks like for each fruit and vegetable, as well as a tool for checking shapes and sizes for items where appropriate (e.g. tomatoes)21.

It should be the responsibility of the PMs to use these tools to familiarise growers (especially CMs) with GiG quality standards even before planting. The goal should be for the QCM to simply show up and purchase pre‐graded produce without even having to use these tools.


OVERHAUL HOLIDAY WORK POLICY

Current Concern Universal policy is that the office is closed for Christmas and New Year, Good Friday and Easter Monday, as well as all of the Muslim and national holidays. Given that Christmas is during the tourist season and is an especially busy time, GiG should remain open to take advantage of this market opportunity. Therefore, a GiG policy needs to be established that takes into account the needs of the business (Appendix P). As this is a new process, the GM should continue to review its effectiveness over the first year of implementation.

5.3 STRATEGY 3: BUILD THE RIGHT TEAM WITH THE RIGHT TOOLS

As GiG strives to become a profitable business, it must build a strong foundation of the right human and other resources. Therefore a strategy for ensuring that the right team is in place with the right tools is crucial for success.

5.3.1 PRODUCTION

IMPLEMENT PRODUCTION DATABASE

With the introduction of the CM system to better secure supply of scarce crops throughout the year, a production database is necessary. This database has five purposes:

1. Collect grower‐specific data to track performance over time 2. Plan seasonal contracts for scarce crops 3. Allocate production targets for non‐contracted crops 4. Predict under and oversupply in advance 5. Track crop‐specific technical data

It is envisioned that the production database will gradually expand to incorporate all GiG growers and purchased crops as the CM system becomes the cornerstone of GiG’s production model. The database is meant to be reviewed at monthly

21 This tool was being developed by the GiG Business Development Intern.

32

production meetings where it will replace the old sowing calendar for allocating production targets. It purposely does not include technical data on the allocation of inputs (i.e. chemicals and fertilisers) to increase usability. Any technical data of this nature should be maintained in a separate spreadsheet managed by the Horticultural Specialist.

The Systems Controller is responsible for maintaining this database and preparing it for monthly production meetings. He will also be responsible for continually analysing its contents and sharing this information with S&M, Production, and QSC. Snapshots of the Production Database are in Appendix Q, while the Manual for its use is given in Appendix R.

IMPLEMENT PRODUCTION MANAGER REPORTING SYSTEM

In order to update the Production Database, a new reporting system is required to document and transmit data from the field to the GiG office. The first stage in this new system is for PMs to sign‐up CMs for production contracts for an entire season based on boundaries set by S&M and then give this information to the Systems Controller. The PMs will then be required to submit a weekly report (Appendix S) that contains critical information to continuously enter into the database in order to better predict harvest quantities and timing. To make completing the weekly report easier and to get them in the habit of documenting daily activities, the PMs will each keep a log book organised so that they can easily view the crop history for each individual grower (Appendix T).

CREATE OBJECTION HANDLING TEMPLATE

An objection handling template is necessary for the PMs because they are responsible for directly communicating GiG’s production strategy to farmers (Appendix U). Without standardised responses to common questions and complaints, the PMs may inadvertently pass false information to GiG’s suppliers and damage critical long term relationships. Such a template is also useful to mitigate any misunderstandings that growers have of PMs. For example, a grower may complain that a PM is spending all of his time with contracted farmers. The PM can refer to the corresponding entry on the objection handling template and use it to provide a standardised response for how the grower may qualify for a future contract.


DEVELOP STAFF TRAINING PLAN

The principal HR need under Strategy 3 is for a staff training plan. This is especially true given GiG’s long term goal of developing local management. Currently, there is a lack of formalised training for GiG staff. This makes

33

it difficult for the current staff to step in and help when it gets busy, prevents new staff from coming up to speed quickly, and means that no one is doing things the ‘right way’. Therefore a formal staff training policy needs to be established for current and new staff. Furthermore, all staff should have a training plan put in place by their manager. This should include ‘required training’ such as the processes and tools needed for their job as well as ‘desired training’ for other skills that will be helpful or desired to increase their overall capabilities. The training can be conducted by the manager, other GiG staff, or be sourced from outside as appropriate. A training file should then be kept for each employee that documents their progress on the training plan and is reviewed at least twice per year. The required training will mostly be job specific but should also include the processes and principles that all employees should be operating under, such as the guiding principles document, disciplinary procedures, holiday and vacation policy, and GiG organisational structure. A sample plan is shown in Figure 7.

Training Plan and Report

Employee:Department:

Required Training Process/Class Trainer Date Completed Initials

Review and sign Guiding Principles Amy Hause 25/09/2008 AH

Review and sign disciplinary procedures, honesty policy…

Grading principles of all vegetables

Proper storage temps and conditions for all vegetables

Stock acceptance process and completion of forms

Recorded stock loss process and completion of forms

Desired Training Process/Class Trainer Date Completed InitialsAdvanced Excel skills

English competancy

Figure 7: Sample Staff Training Plan

34

To facilitate the staff being able to support each other in key roles, cross‐training needs to be incorporated into the training plan. Within departments, there needs to be more formalised training on core processes and a back up identified for every person that can step in during periods of leave.

Everyone should be trained on the following key processes at a minimum: • Produce grading • Recorded stock loss processes • Communication process (e.g. Marketing – Production – Producer)

In addition, there appears to be a lack of understanding and thereby respect of production among the GiG staff relative to other functional areas. This is possibly due to lack of visibility of the production field staff, previous separation of GiG and CU staff, pre‐conceived notions of other functions, and general bias toward ‘office’ jobs. To correct this, a job exchange program should be put into place, as outlined in the training policy given in Appendix V. For example, one of the PMs could come into the office and perform stock control at the container for a week. In exchange, the Stock Controller would spend a week in the field to gain appreciation of the work done by the PMs. This should also be established for new employees, with every new employee spending time within each functional area.

Finally, in the past the “GiG employees” have not all been under the same management umbrella and therefore have not all had the same opportunities in terms of training and further education. While there is a logical explanation behind this due to different management, it has left the perception of favouritism and some staff being given more opportunities than others. Therefore a fair and transparent system needs to be established for determining how funds are allocated for external classes for skill development.

INSTITUTIONALISE BUSINESS BEST PRACTICES

General communication has been an issue among GiG staff and is crucial to the success of operating effectively and efficiently and achieving profitability. Clear processes for communication need to be established with the following general best business practices adhered to:

Regular staff meetings: The main functional areas should hold regular staff meetings with an agenda and a summary of outcomes. The timing of these can be determined by each functional area as appropriate, with the outcomes delivered to the GM as a ‘report.’

Monthly management meetings: Management meetings should be held monthly with a focused agenda and all relevant reports (beyond the management accounts) generated ahead of time. Management should also determine what gets communicated to staff after this meeting to facilitate more transparency.

Performance to goals (scorecard): There needs to be regular reporting to staff on performance to goals (such as recorded and unrecorded stock loss). This must be done creatively (i.e. using memos, signs, etc.) to counter staff’s limited access to e‐mail.

Documentation: Official processes and policies need to be placed in writing and employees need to sign off that they have read and understand them via the training plan. Also these documents should have a number and revision so that all changes can be tracked. A very simple system is recommended based on the following:

35

• Master record of all documents (index) kept by GM or Intern, who must ensure access of most recent versions of training plans to staff

• Consistent numbering system o GiG‐XX01 Rev A o XX = 2 letters that stand for the kind of document (e.g. TR for Training policy) o 01 and other numbers will be for the same kind of policy (e.g. TR01 for employee

training policy, TR02 for sales training policy, etc.) o The first version is Rev A, the second Rev, B and so on

ENSURE ACCESS TO BASIC TOOLS FOR BUSINESS SUCCESS

GiG has many attributes that distinguishes it from a typical business, such as its status as a CU project and developmental mission. However, the GiG team is being asked to operate as an efficient business of similar size would, which implies that it must be equipped to do so. This breaks down into a few key areas:

Mobile phones and talk credit: If communication via text or talking on a mobile phone is required for an employee to do his job, then this should be made available to him. At a minimum, employees should receive a ‘talk time’ allowance each month with access to a mobile phone. GiG can provide reliable phones on credit and deduct payments from salaries to assist in purchase. Additionally, where network coverage has the potential to hamper efficient operations, the use of multi‐sim cards phones should be explored.

Personal work space: There is limited office space at GiG, but at a minimum every employee should have some ‘personal space’ – especially those required to spend a significant portion of time on administrative work. Currently, several employees are forced to roam around trying to find an empty desk in order complete required tasks, which is not efficient. Additionally it would be nice if the team could be physically closer together to help foster communication team spirit.

Computers: Although much of the work done at GiG is in the field or outside at the sales container, there are some key activities such as the production database that require a computer. Currently, there is only one available computer for GiG staff and much time is wasted as employees wait around for it to be free. Computers should be sourced for the Systems Controller and S&M Manager.

IMPLEMENT PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

CU has a performance assessment system that is required for all international staff. However no consistent process has been established for local staff. As GiG strives to ‘become an internationally recognised company focused on developing local management,’ it is crucial that this be rectified.

To this end, a performance management system (Appendix W) has been developed as a mechanism for ensuring that GiG staff has the opportunity to explore their personal contributions to the organisation and identify ways in which they can enhance their own skills, performance, and behaviour. While this system is based on the CU system, it includes a few necessary changes to measure the achievement of goals while recommending that all goals be reviewed quarterly as opposed to annually.

CREATE CAREER PROGRESSION CHART

To strengthen staff motivation and commitment to GiG, a visual demonstration of the possible career paths for GiG employees is necessary to demonstrate that they all have a future in GiG with the potential to advance. There should be several possible paths to the GM position (Figures 8 and 9).

Figure 8: Career Progression Chart, non‐field jobs

37

Figure 9: Career Progression Chart, field jobs

DEVELOP INCENTIVE PACKAGES

As GiG moves towards functioning as a proper business, it can increase the productivity of its employees by offering incentives for actions that improve its profitability and performance. Incentives should be put into place for the following functional areas:

Production: PMs should be incentivised to focus on contracted farmers and crops by having the opportunity to earn bonus payments (paid out either in a lump sum payment or distributed throughout the year) according to performance in delivering on production under contract. To calculate these bonuses, the production database can be used to:

• Measure % of Grade 1 purchases and compare to target production • Monitor % to plan for this season, use as benchmark and set % requirement for a bonus higher

QSC: In addition to their basic salaries, the Quality Manager, Stock Controller, and Cold Store Supervisor should have the opportunity to earn bonus payments according to their performance in reducing the overall levels of wastage. The first target will be to help reduce total wastage to below 10% of total purchases. In addition:

• For each % point of total wastage reduced below 10%, a bonus of D200 per month will be paid in the following month, once the GiG management accounts have been published.

• For each % point reduced below 7%, an additional D400 per month (D600 per month in total), will be paid in the following month, once the GiG management accounts have been published (e.g. If total wastage = 5%, the following month’s bonus is 3 x 200 + 2 x 400 = D1400)

In addition to QSC being incentivised on quality, incentives are also necessary to collect the correct quantity requested by S&M and Production. Currently the Quality Manager gets D500 for every % wastage reduced below 11%. It is recommended that this is changed such that QM receives the wastage incentive outlined above, and a different incentive for collecting the correct amount.

MAKE THEFT DETERRENT A COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY

There have been problems in the past of theft in areas where access to cash goes unchecked. For the most part, these should be solved with processes that include daily checks on cash so that there are no opportunities for reoccurrence. In addition, a collective incentive could be offered to reduce unrecorded stock loss, which is often an indicator of abusing the system. Even a small incentive for the whole staff, such as the one recommended below, would facilitate collective responsibility to deter anyone from abusing the system:

• Each employee receives D200 per quarter if unrecorded stock loss remains below 2% for the entire quarter (i.e. an ‘all or nothing’ bonus)

• Each employee charged D50 for every % point over 5%

A suggestion for policing is to implement a negligence card, which would be collectively imposed on an employee found to be in violation of an established process. If negligence is due to the lack of a process, then the employee who made the mistake would not be punished but would be put in charge of seeing that a proper process is established. A collective responsibility policy is given in Appendix X.

BUILD ON STAFF INSIGHTS

In addition to spending time with each staff member as they went about their daily routine, the SBS team also conducted one on one meetings with each employee to discuss (confidentially) issues and desires for their careers at GiG and in the future. The specifics of each interview are confidential to GiG, but Appendix Y contains the questionnaire used while Appendix Z contains a summary of insights with recommendations from

39

each interview. These recommendations should be interpreted with caution given the limited timeframe that the SBS team was able to observe staff.

5.3.3 SALES AND MARKETING

USE THE SALES REPRESENTATIVES TO DO MORE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT WORK. Much of the Sales Representatives’ time is currently spent making deliveries with a driver. They are responsible for handling all cash transactions and numerical calculations, building a relationship with customers, and assisting with any necessary manual labour. However, it is crucial that their time is dedicated to more value added tasks, such as expanding the customer base. This will be more in line with GiG’s increased sales objectives and will provide a more stimulating work experience for the talented sales team. Two recommendations are as follows:

• Sales representatives are to only accompany drivers for cash transactions or when needed to transfer goods from the delivery vehicle to the customer premises

• All other time to be spent 1) expanding the customer base and 2) developing marketing strategies that will drive customer loyalty and overall brand awareness

PROMOTE BENEFIT OF GIG PRODUCTS TO CUSTOMERS

The S&M team needs to ensure that they are promoting the benefits of GiG products to customers as opposed to only the product features. Differentiating between a feature and a benefit is fundamentally important in serving customer needs. One very prominent example is that ‘quality’ is a product feature that is often used to sell to customers. Yet as most customers are hotels, quality is less important than consistency in delivery and price, as the fruits and vegetables are often used on the same day.

It is therefore imperative that the S&M team become familiar with basic customer relationship management techniques to aid customer retention and increase the percentage of goods purchased from GiG. Therefore, sales training is required to inform staff on how to identify product features, handle key customer objections, and execute a consistent sales approach. In addition, the S&M team should carefully document their interactions with customers to 1) track and improve consistency in service to customers; and 2) ensure that new employees are able to leverage acquired knowledge.

5.3.4 FINANCE

DEVELOP KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

The finance department currently operates as an administrative unit rather than a finance department. As a result, financials are used primarily to review the past rather than as the basis for future strategic decisions. This can lead to inefficient allocation of resources and financially suboptimal decisions. Therefore the SBS team generally recommends that GiG should use the finance department more actively in the future to identify the relevant financial drivers of the business. The first step towards this end is the identification of the following key performance indicators (KPIs), which should be displayed next to the container (either on the blackboard or a laminated poster) to provide visual feedback to the GiG team and be updated regularly by the finance department:

40

1. Profit: As it is GiG´s current main goal to become profitable and self sustainable, profit is one of the most important KPIs.

2. Wastage and unrecorded stock loss: As described in strategy 2, wastage and unrecorded stock loss account for an inappropriate percentage of purchases and are avoidable costs. The recommended targets are as follows:

• Wastage: 5% of purchases

• Unrecorded stock loss: 2% of purchases (and eventually 0%)

3. Fulfilment of production plan (budget vs. actual harvest): One of GiG´s problems in the past was a low fulfilment of the production plan (what was planned vs. what was harvested). The introduction of the CM system and the focus on the best farmers should significantly improve this ratio. By measuring the fulfilment of the production plan, GiG will get a feedback on how well the new CM system is performing.

4. Profitability per item: The profitability per item varies across items as well for each item by season. An overview of these profitability changes will help to contract and buy the most profitable items at the right time. However, it must be taken into account that some costumers would like to have a wide selection of items.

IMPROVE REPORTING AND ANALYSIS TOOLS

As discussed in strategy 2 there is an acute need for standardised reporting, planning and control mechanisms. As a result, three tools are recommended:

• GiG´s performance on a page: Although GiG’s current financial report is very rich in information, it is difficult to get a quick overview of how the company is performing. Appendix AA shows a possible summary sheet to achieve this.

• Balanced scorecard: A systematic performance review tool will help to keep track of how the business progresses as a whole along with the performance of each functional area. However, there is also a need for a tool to discuss occurring problems in the different functional areas in a structured way. A balanced scorecard is an easy to use tool in this context; it can function as a guideline for functional meetings and employee performance reviews, as well as act as an information tool for the shareholders to get a quick overview of GiG´s performance. An example for a balanced score card can be found in Appendix BB.

• Monthly financial reporting and planning on a rolling basis: The current reporting tool has the disadvantage that it only reports what has happened but does not predict what will happen in the coming months. This information can only be taken from the budget that has been agreed on at the beginning of a new financial year, but this means that it might become outdated and therefore lose its value as a prediction tool. The current reporting format should be extended by columns that show the planned numbers for the coming month. For example, the report for June would contain 3‐6 more months (July‐Dec.) that show the updated planned figures (or budgeted figures if they are still valid).

41

5.4 STRATEGY 4: STRATEGICALLY PURSUE NEW MARKET OPPORTUNITIES

The active pursuit of new market opportunities is an important part of maximising GiG’s profitability. While it is clear to everyone at GiG that horticulture production and marketing are the core focus of the business, there is also a very clear recognition of the corresponding limitations and challenges, such as seasonality, unreliable production, etc.

The decision to include the strategic pursuit of new market opportunities as a strategy arose as a result of the first three strategies being more focused on the current business. While such focus is imperative to ensure clear decisions of which projects to work on and which to abandon, it is also important to explore new profit generating activities. Furthermore, it is important for the GiG team to continually think about and drive opportunities bigger than their day‐to‐day activities.

The following decision making criteria were agreed upon at the strategic visioning workshop:

1. Is the new opportunity profitable? 2. Is it in line with GiG’s mission? 3. Is there a market opportunity sizable enough to generate consistent sales? 4. Can GiG provide this opportunity with sufficient resources to conduct a thorough market analysis and

take the product/ service to market?

Even though it is important for the whole team to be mobilised around new opportunities, the responsibility for this strategy lies firmly with the senior management team and board of directors.

MAXIMISE CURRENT PEAK SELLING MONTHS

GiG is able to attain profitability in some months of the year due to high demand and corresponding higher margins. However, the increased sales during peak selling months are not sufficient to offset decreased sales during the time when vegetables are in abundance and profit margins are lower. In light of the need to maximise peak selling months, the following opportunities were identified:

• Focus on finding markets for ‘Grade 2’ quality produce, such as at informal markets (e.g. Serrekunda or Bakau market). Grade 2 markets are an outlet for lower grade produce. GiG’s current loyal customer base is primarily the hotel industry, which requires international quality produce. As this quality is more difficult to attain and comes at a premium, it makes sense for GiG to also try to sell lower quality produce to the local market or to try to find an alternative market outlet.

• Attempt to better capture local drive‐by market by establishing a roadside stand close to the office (e.g. next to Fajara Cemetery).

• Look into better capturing vegetable sales from celebrations at auspicious occasions, such as naming

ceremonies, Independence Day, etc.

42

MAXIMISE OFF‐SEASON SELLING

Similarly, it is crucial that sales in the off season are maximised as this is when most produce is scarce. Demand and supply laws dictate that GiG can demand a higher price with a likely higher margin during this time.

• Leverage production strategies to produce more than GiG demand during times of scarcity and explore the possibility of exporting to Senegal.

• Ensure the right pricing margins by putting in place a price check mechanism with the market. This will ensure conscious pricing based on market availability despite GiG not being physically present at the market.

INVESTIGATE ADJACENCIES TO AID PROFITABILITY In addition to the above mentioned opportunities that are directly related to horticulture production and the current business, the following opportunities were highlighted by GiG management as opportunities to expand the current business (Table 2). These should be approached with a level of caution that is cognisant of the additional resources required and the potential deviation from a core business that is still underdeveloped.

Existing Products New Products Existing markets

• Leverage GiG farm to produce more tomatoes by expanding the farm area

• Focus on attracting more tourists and conferences to GiG Farm

• Act on poultry market opportunity for eggs and chicken meat by immediately leveraging the NATC Training centre. Concurrently investigate feasibility of acquiring a larger production facility.

• Develop entrepreneurial ventures with partner organisations/ farmers/ local business people to facilitate better input security, i.e. seeds, manure, etc.

• Other ideas included product expansion to premium fruits to serve the international expat and hotel market such as: Bananas, Mandarins, Dried fruit (mangoes), Herbs

New markets

• Contact the Body Shop to explore the possibility of bulk exporting mangoes. Mangoes are one of the few fruits that can be grown to international standards without much intervention. However, one concern is the storage requirements such as cold storage from the time of picking and refrigerated transportation required.

• Investigate the potential for a farmer upliftment programme (Haygrove South African programme) that trains farmers and provides inputs.

• Investigate the market opportunity for Jatropha seeds as a bio fuel. In light of the global focus on seeking alternative energy sources. Jatropha seeds were highlighted as a key product that GiG or its NGO partners could facilitate the growth for. This is a project that needs a lot more investigation to understand 1) the market opportunity, 2) the capital requirements and 3) the viability given the magnitude of crops needed to produce a small quantity of fuel.

Table2: GiG´s new business opportunities through new markets and/or new products

43

5.5 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE

GiG is technically a CU ‘project’ in partnership with Haygrove. To date its structure has been driven by available resources, grant funding, and CU’s established systems (Figure 9). This has caused issues of cohesion, motivation, and perceived fairness among the GiG team. A new structure needs to be developed to support the above strategies and facilitate GiG’s transition towards a self‐sustaining business

Figure 9 – Past Organogram A new cohesive structure (Figure 10 ) with all GiG employees reporting into the same unit, operating under the same rules, given access to the same funds and opportunities, is crucial to achieving success as a business. In addition, the different functional areas need to be refocused on business functions in order for GiG to achieve its goal of being a profitable and self‐sustaining business.

44

Figure 10: New Functional Ecosystem for GiG

The new structure has all critical GiG team members reporting into the GM under a single umbrella (Figure 11). This allows for closer monitoring of all functional areas and provides an increased opportunity for development and growth of individuals as well as the entire organisation. Additionally important are the future career opportunities of all GiG staff. Implementation of the performance management system and career progression as outlined in strategy 3 should help to enforce this new team structure and enable everyone to see that there are opportunities for advancement.

45

Figure 11: New Organogram for GiG

46

5.6 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE

In addition to establishing the right structure to support the new strategies for GiG, the right organisational culture also needs to be in place for this to be a success. GiG needs to grow from being solely focused on development to being a business for development, which means adhering to established business principles and practices.

There are a few simple ways to help influence a change in the organisational culture to incorporate business thinking. ‘Johnson’s Culture Web’22 helps to identify which areas to assess and change in order to stimulate overall organisational change. This SCP has been the first fundamental step; by bringing in a group of consultants, GiG opened itself up to change and took a step back from day‐to‐day business to develop a vision

for their future. Also, everyone in GiG was involved in developing the vision, which laid the foundation for change in GiG’s organisational culture.

The next steps are to implement the appropriate changes in each sphere of the web to realise the vision within the culture of GiG. This will come largely from the guiding principles and HR policies. The guiding principles outlined a focus on business principles that are meant to guide all business decisions. The HR policies for holidays/vacations, performance management, and collective responsibility all

reinforce good business practices. The holiday and vacation policy is different from that of CU to help draw the line between them. Although GiG remains part of CU, it must adhere to different rules when those make good business sense, such as being open during Christmas time (when sales are strong). The new performance management system is applicable to everyone, reinforcing equality in the organisation and the goal of developing local talent. Also, it will help to keep people on track with the business’ goals as they build their own skills. The collective responsibility policy reinforces zero tolerance for dishonesty and will help the GiG team either benefit or be punished collectively as a unit if the systems are abused. Honesty and trust are essential for any business to be a successful and this policy will help to foster both within GiG.

Figures 11 &12 respectively show the GiG’s old organisational culture and the changes designed to instigate a new one more aligned with its vision and goals. The day‐to‐day business practices, new long term strategies, and investment in training and development will all help to build a strong business culture within GiG.

22 Developing Effective Organisations class notes.

47

Figure 11: Current Development Project Culture at GiG

Figure 12: Changes to Develop a Business Culture at GiG

48

VI. CONCLUSION

GiG is a social enterprise with tremendous potential for development impact in The Gambia. Since its formation in 2004, it has developed an innovative and internationally‐recognised business model that has stimulated the domestic horticultural sector and enabled smallholder farmers to capture some of the value generated from tourism. GiG has invested in a talented local team that is poised to take the next step. But before that can happen, the business fundamentals must be set right in order for GiG to become a profitable, self‐sustaining social enterprise model that can be expanded and replicated elsewhere.

This report has provided a comprehensive blueprint for making this reality. It first descibed the approach taken by the SBS consulting team to successfully facilitate a set of guiding principles, vision, long term goal, short term goal, and strategic focus among a diverse group of key stakeholders. It then diagnosed a number of key issues that, if not addressed, will undermine efforts to achieve these goals. Finally, this report detailed strategic recommendations for each functional area that are consistent with four overarching strategies, as well as discussing necessary changes to GiG’s organisational structure and culture to maximise its chances for success.

Together with the GiG team, the SBS team has already implemented some of the most urgent recommendations. However, the hard work still lies ahead . It is up to the GiG team to accept the challenge and execute on this blueprint. With a new GM and new way of operating, there will undoubtably be difficulties along the way as recommended systems and processes are adopted and adapated. It will be crucial to persevere and continue to invest in key areas of the business. The SBS team strongly believes that the right building blocks are in place to see this plan through, and wishes the GiG team the best of luck in the future.