Like most South Africans, I find the continued failings of Eskom bewildering. When are they going to put this right? And then the related question: What is the actual problem? Is it management? History? Capacity? Wet coal? Please, Eskom, can we get just one explanation that doesn’t sound like a bumbling, generic, completely made-up, half-disclosure.

In the absence of actual facts — because, as we all know, there is a difference between facts and actual facts — I have a new speculative theory. The problem is middle management.

The thought was sparked by an anonymous email sent to Daily Maverick by a frustrated employee, inviting us to investigate what the writer saw as a big internal problem. We get these a lot. People get frustrated and angry, and they want something to be done. In desperation, they email the news media anonymously.

But for the news media to report on an issue, we need to verify it. Typically, we need someone identifiable to stand up and make the allegation publicly. People expect the news media, justifiably, to expose wrongdoing, and we do the best we can, but there are many circumstances when we just can’t tell people’s stories even though we would dearly love to. The reason, of course, is that we are under a duty to check the facts, provide the people fingered an opportunity to respond, and so on. It’s tortuous.

None of that is possible without supportable proof, and an anonymous accusation makes that extremely difficult. But this particular case intrigues me for different reasons. Without disclosing the specific accusations, I think it’s fair to say what is publicly known is that, recently, part of the chimney structure at the Kusile Power Station collapsed. The fault was caused by an exhaust vent into the chimney pipe which was not properly connected, causing ash particles to build up inside a huge duct. The duct eventually buckled and tore away part of the chimney.

Eskom explained this problem as part of an apparent lack of maintenance, bad management and design problems. Well, you know, that’s like saying, the specific issue here is everything. Of course it is, but what part of everything is specifically the problem? Anyway, that means one of the units at this newly constructed plant, which cost huge, huge amounts of money, will not be working for months. And the one next door has been switched off too, just in case.

Visit Daily Maverick’s home page for more news, analysis and investigations

The unidentified writer of the email has a different explanation, which we can’t test, but which sounds to me a lot more specific. The claim is — and just to repeat, I have no idea whether this is true or not, but it sure sounds plausible — that during the construction process, brokers were hired to examine the construction. They did so by hiring quality inspectors to provide an audit of the process. Logical. And the person responsible apparently hired his or her relatives. Inevitable.

This all makes perfect sense to me. Presumably, this happened because all they had to do was sign a form that said the work was done properly. The construction companies were presumably delighted at the prospect of having their work audited by someone who didn’t have the foggiest clue about what constituted quality work. This all happened years ago, in 2017, and here we are, having to pay for yet more exorbitant costs to fix a relatively newly built power station. So, excuse me for passing on unverified information, but it just sounds logical.

And it illustrates a larger issue for business: the crucial role played by middle managers. In general, I think the senior executives are the only ones who can and should set broad direction — and be held accountable. But when it comes to execution, all businesses are effectively in the hands of their middle managers. The CEO conceives and middle managers implement. Without either, you are stuffed.

Middle managers have a far trickier job than most people imagine, because they are in the odd position of being managers and the subject of management. They are both leaders and led.

To me, middle managers are a little like middle children: consummate pleasers, because they are always being called on to mediate between older and younger siblings.

The biggest failing of middle managers is pushing their problems upwards while at the same time failing to find solutions downwards. The natural desire to push your problems upwards means there is a huge incentive to keep on the good side of senior managers. And that explains why there is quite a lot of arse-creeping involved in corporate structures.

Like many organisations in South Africa, there has been endless staff churn at Eskom and, I’m willing to bet, many middle managers were turfed in the process. If this supposition is true, Eskom’s problems run much deeper than we know and we shouldn’t pin too many hopes — if we have any left — on a quick turnaround. 

A depressing thought, but one we may need to confront. DM/BM