PERSPECTIVE
5.6 DISCUSSION
What does the above discussion and analysis bring to the fore in terms of the role of Vincent as a founding leader? How did his version of the mission, interpretation of the environment, what he considered as relevant competencies and perception of stakeholders play such an influential role of the basic assumptions of the NPB over time?
The foregoing sections have shown that the mission of the NPB was initially strictly about conservation in the traditional sense (i.e. protection of certain species) in what was considered a generally hostile environment. And originally, the competencies deemed necessary were those that could enhance achievement of the mission - mainly enforcement and science related. The notion of engaging with stakeholders was not tenable under such circumstances.
The study shows the founding assumptions to have been very persistent. Persistence of the founding assumptions can be ascribed to a number of factors, not the least being the fact that all the subsequent leaders 'cut their teeth' under Vincent's leadership. This is consistent with the observation that founders not only choose the basic mission and the environmental context in which the new group will operate, but they also choose the group members and bias the original responses that the group makes in its efforts to succeed in its environment and to integrate itself (Schein 1992). Having begun their conservation careers under Vincent's leadership and in essentially the same organization, region and within a short space of time (1951-1961), subsequent leaders were heavily influenced by Vincent and they subscribed to his version of the mission: conservation through protection and enforcement.
Over time, and as the environment imposed different pressures, each leader had a preferred version of the mission. Despite this, the founding basic assumptions, values and beliefs, e.g. a focus on species and a militaristic approach to conservation persisted and remained influential, in varying ways and to different degrees. Thus, for example, a military, command and control structure endured. Considered from the perspective of Schein's framework, it is arguable that Vincent's interpretation of the mission and the environment both had decisive influences on what the NPB regarded as competencies, stakeholders and also strategies for attaining the goals associated with the mission. A question to ask, therefore, is how did this situation occur? Also, what can be deduced as the consequences of Vincent's imprint on the mission? In short, how did the founding basic assumptions come to exert so much influence?
Following on Schein's lead, it can be argued that Vincent's values, solutions and ways of perceiving the world became part of the shared assumption pattern which can be outlined as follows. Vincent started off with some beliefs, values and assumptions that he taught to his new subordinates. With this 'teaching', Vincent's basic reality became part of the interim values of his group of subordinates. In short, Vincent planted the seeds of founding basic assumptions that were reinforced by the interplay among the understanding of the mission, environment, stakeholders and competencies. Founding
basic assumptions informed the NPB's strategic processes and priorities. The same founding assumptions functioned as a rationale for strategic decisions and activities under Vincent's leadership and to a lesser extent by under Geddes-Page's. I say to a lesser extent under Geddes-Page's leadership because by the time he took office, cultural assumptions had already 'kicked in' and had been reinforced many times by past successes during Vincent's tenure.
Nearly fifteen years at the helm of the NPB ensured that Vincent's values and beliefs were adhered to, if not entrenched. A command and control structure, coupled with his authoritarian management style and the fact that he carefully chose his subordinates, and was quick to dismiss non-conformists helped this process. Consequently, actions and behaviours based on Vincent's influence generally produced results which then validated his values, beliefs and assumptions amongst his subordinates on how conservation was to be pursued. Success in the number of prosecutions, numbers of protected areas established, gaining political support, growing international and national recognition and even the home grown initiatives such as the 'Operation Rhino' all coalesced to form the basis of an organizational culture whose effects laid the foundation of its initial success.
And those basic assumptions leading to success were the very assumptions later thast prevented change in the organization from occurring. Paradoxically, however, commitment to the mission and the successes associated with it placed an intrinsic limitation in later years as shown by the difficulties in dealing with an evolving mission.
Those limitations can also be traced to the leadership and management styles reminiscent of Vincent's influence.
Many aspects can be mentioned in respect of Vincent's influence. Primary among these was the approach to management. A command and control system implied that decisions were made at the top where information and knowledge was presumed to be available. As management went about this approach, they laid down a codified system of enforcement rules that were to be followed. Consequent upon this was an outline of a command control with central planning capacities and follow-up procedures where violations were detected and reported to upper management who could act upon information, for
example, rewarding conformists and punishing deviants. Such a system was clearly a mechanistic control approach to management. Tasks were divided into distinct duties, power was allocated unambiguously among employees, hierarchical arrangements were promoted and the whole organization was co-ordinated from the top, where information was presumably available. Managers made decisions within fairly familiar expectations.
Formal hierarchies were entrenched and management always knew best.
In summary, the founding circumstances under Vincent and also inherited by Page led to the development of certain basic understandings of the mission, the environment, stakeholders and competencies with which agency officials collectively identified. Those beliefs were in essence the premise of a 'conservation culture' which affected how NPB employees implemented the shared mission. With a complement of enforcement inclined staff, and later joined by those who were scientifically inclined (biologists and ecologists), there was no room for social scientists simply because the definition of responsibilities and roles was such that they did not need them. Consequently, with few or no social scientists or staff experienced in participatory procedures dealing with communities became a challenge which the NPB needed to face. As Hughes acknowledges, by 1991 when the NPB initiated its community outreach programme, not only did it seek the partnership of a community development organization (the Rural Foundation), "it committed a small number of staff who were enthusiastic [arguably neither qualified nor experienced] about the challenge of turning hostile communities into supportive communities" (Hughes 2001: 38).