Opinion / Columnist
Is the Dominance of Accountants and Lawyers on Boards to Blame for Zimbabwe's Industrial Collapse?
4 hrs ago |
119 Views
I write this article not as an academic observer, but as a former, experienced investment analyst and investment banker, and as a minority shareholder in the majority of Zimbabwe's listed companies. Over the years, I have analysed balance sheets, sat through annual general meetings, reviewed board reports and watched, with growing concern, how governance choices have steadily undermined Zimbabwe's industrial base.
Zimbabwe's industrial collapse did not occur overnight, nor was it inevitable. It is the direct outcome of boardroom decisions taken by people who, in many cases, do not understand the technical systems that underpin industry. Today, most industrial and parastatal boards are dominated by accountants and lawyers, while engineers and technologists, the professionals who actually design, operate and sustain industrial assets are largely excluded from strategic decision-making.
Industry is not an abstract financial construct. Power stations, factories, mines, railways and water treatment plants are complex engineering systems. In industrialised economies, boards reflect this reality. Engineers and technical specialists play a central role in defining industrial strategy, with accountants and lawyers providing essential support on finance, compliance and risk. In Zimbabwe, this hierarchy has been inverted and the results have been catastrophic.
As an investment analyst, I was trained to look beyond headline profits and interrogate sustainability, asset condition and long-term value creation. Yet in Zimbabwe, board reports are heavy on financial ratios and legal compliance, but light on technical performance, plant integrity and maintenance strategy. Capital expenditure decisions are frequently deferred, maintenance budgets cut and equipment upgrades postponed all in the name of short-term cost savings that ultimately destroy shareholder value.
Accountants are, by training, cost controllers. Lawyers are, by training, risk managers. Neither profession is equipped to lead decisions on production efficiency, system reliability, technology selection or lifecycle costing. When such professionals dominate boards without strong engineering leadership, the inevitable outcome is asset stripping by neglect. Machines fail, plants underperform, and industries collapse quietly while financial statements continue to be signed off as "going concerns."
From a shareholder's perspective, this is is not right. Zimbabwe's listed companies have seen their productive capacity eroded year after year, not because markets failed them, but because boards failed to understand the businesses they were entrusted to govern. As a minority shareholder in all of these companies, I have watched value destruction disguised as prudence and decay rationalised as austerity.
The difference with industrialised nations is completely obvious. There, engineers sit on boards not as technical advisors, but as strategic leaders. They understand that maintenance is not a cost but an investment, that reliability drives profitability and that innovation is essential for competitiveness. Finance and legal professionals then ensure that these technically sound strategies are funded and compliant.
Zimbabwe once had a formidable industrial base, exporting manufactured goods across the region. The decline is not due to a lack of talent or resources. Zimbabwe continues to produce engineers who run complex industries abroad with distinction. The failure lies in governance choices at home choices that consistently sideline technical expertise in favour of administrative dominance.
If Zimbabwe is serious about reindustrialisation, board composition must be urgently reformed. Industrial boards should be competency-based, with engineers and technologists occupying a central role. This is not an attack on accountants or lawyers, their roles are indispensable. However, in an industrial economy, they are support functions, not the drivers of production and innovation.
Until Zimbabwe confronts this uncomfortable truth and restores technical leadership to its boardrooms, industrial recovery will remain elusive. From the perspective of an engineer, an investor, an analyst and a shareholder, the message is clear to all, without engineers at the centre of governance, Zimbabwe's industry will continue to decline and shareholder value will continue to be destroyed.
Engineer Jacob Kudzayi Mutisi
+263772278161
Zimbabwe's industrial collapse did not occur overnight, nor was it inevitable. It is the direct outcome of boardroom decisions taken by people who, in many cases, do not understand the technical systems that underpin industry. Today, most industrial and parastatal boards are dominated by accountants and lawyers, while engineers and technologists, the professionals who actually design, operate and sustain industrial assets are largely excluded from strategic decision-making.
Industry is not an abstract financial construct. Power stations, factories, mines, railways and water treatment plants are complex engineering systems. In industrialised economies, boards reflect this reality. Engineers and technical specialists play a central role in defining industrial strategy, with accountants and lawyers providing essential support on finance, compliance and risk. In Zimbabwe, this hierarchy has been inverted and the results have been catastrophic.
As an investment analyst, I was trained to look beyond headline profits and interrogate sustainability, asset condition and long-term value creation. Yet in Zimbabwe, board reports are heavy on financial ratios and legal compliance, but light on technical performance, plant integrity and maintenance strategy. Capital expenditure decisions are frequently deferred, maintenance budgets cut and equipment upgrades postponed all in the name of short-term cost savings that ultimately destroy shareholder value.
Accountants are, by training, cost controllers. Lawyers are, by training, risk managers. Neither profession is equipped to lead decisions on production efficiency, system reliability, technology selection or lifecycle costing. When such professionals dominate boards without strong engineering leadership, the inevitable outcome is asset stripping by neglect. Machines fail, plants underperform, and industries collapse quietly while financial statements continue to be signed off as "going concerns."
From a shareholder's perspective, this is is not right. Zimbabwe's listed companies have seen their productive capacity eroded year after year, not because markets failed them, but because boards failed to understand the businesses they were entrusted to govern. As a minority shareholder in all of these companies, I have watched value destruction disguised as prudence and decay rationalised as austerity.
The difference with industrialised nations is completely obvious. There, engineers sit on boards not as technical advisors, but as strategic leaders. They understand that maintenance is not a cost but an investment, that reliability drives profitability and that innovation is essential for competitiveness. Finance and legal professionals then ensure that these technically sound strategies are funded and compliant.
Zimbabwe once had a formidable industrial base, exporting manufactured goods across the region. The decline is not due to a lack of talent or resources. Zimbabwe continues to produce engineers who run complex industries abroad with distinction. The failure lies in governance choices at home choices that consistently sideline technical expertise in favour of administrative dominance.
If Zimbabwe is serious about reindustrialisation, board composition must be urgently reformed. Industrial boards should be competency-based, with engineers and technologists occupying a central role. This is not an attack on accountants or lawyers, their roles are indispensable. However, in an industrial economy, they are support functions, not the drivers of production and innovation.
Until Zimbabwe confronts this uncomfortable truth and restores technical leadership to its boardrooms, industrial recovery will remain elusive. From the perspective of an engineer, an investor, an analyst and a shareholder, the message is clear to all, without engineers at the centre of governance, Zimbabwe's industry will continue to decline and shareholder value will continue to be destroyed.
Engineer Jacob Kudzayi Mutisi
+263772278161
Source - Engineer Jacob Kudzayi Mutisi
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
Join the discussion
Loading comments…
