South Africa’s unemployment rate has hit a new high, with
36,4% of working age people out of work or no longer looking for a job.
In the current environment of flat or no growth, with large
firms slashing jobs and small firms just hanging on, any talk of new jobs may
seem wishful thinking. A negative attitude towards the future is
self-fulfilling, so we must craft a future of positive outcomes based on
realistic scenarios.
In the NDP’s scenario, 90% of the 11 million new jobs we
need by 2030 will come from small business. The NDP is already 5 years old,
written at a time when SA’s economy was growing at around 3%. Now growth is
less than 1% and a further ratings downgrade in December (or earlier) would
undoubtedly keep it there, or worse. So is it realistic to expect small
businesses to hire people in such depressed conditions?
Growth will eventually return, and when it does more
businesses will be created and with them new jobs will come. As a policy-maker,
I am constantly thinking about ways of stimulating small businesses and
entrepreneurship, and what interventions are likely to have the biggest impact.
Should we be aiming to increase the number of start-ups in
the economy or rather direct our efforts at assisting fast-growing businesses
to grow even faster?
In this respect, there is a big gulf between two of the most
influential indices of small business and entrepreneurship – the Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and the Global Entrepreneurship Index (GEI).
The GEM, in measuring the health of a country’s
entrepreneurial ecosystem, examines the Total Early-Stage Entrepreneurial
Activity Rate, (TEA-rate) as the main indicator. This is a measure of the rate
at which an economy is producing start-up businesses. The higher the rate,
supposedly, the healthier the ecosystem.
GEI, on the other hand, measures the rate at which new
businesses are growing, suggesting that an economy with more fast-growing
businesses will show up positively in other measures of a country’s economy
such as GDP growth.
The GEI is highly critical of a fixation on the TEA-rate for
two main reasons. First, newly created businesses, especially in sub-Sahara
Africa, tend to be in the informal economy and contribute little to economic
growth or job creatio. And secondly, the high failure rate of small businesses
means new business creation per se does not lead to growth.
In my view, both the GEM and GEI contain valuable insights
which can be helpful for policy-making. To measure the health of our
entrepreneurial ecosystem we need to measure three things – the number of
start-ups, the survival rate of these start-ups, and the number of fast-growing
businesses emanating from these start-ups.
We need to do this both in the formal and informal sector
and using longitudinal measures, in other words tracking individual firms over
time so we can see how they perform on all three metrics.
Perhaps the most important measure is the survival rate.
Currently, according to statistics from the DTI, only two out ten new
businesses survive three years after forming. The DA-led City of Johannesburg
has recognised this key statistic and has set a target of increasing the
survival rate to five out of ten. If achieved, this will have a massive impact
on the economy.
If we assume a new business, within three years, employs an
average or five people, achieving a survival rate of five out of ten means the
number of new jobs created will increase by two and a half times over three years.
If we then focus on stimulating the number of start-ups, and
increase South Africa’s TEA-rate from its 2016 rating of 6,9% to 20% within
three years, then compound that with the improved survival rate over ten years,
we begin to shift the dial on new jobs created. Unemployment will fall
dramatically.
Finally, if we can take 10% of the surviving businesses
after three years and grow them at 30% a year, the potential exists to
massively increase employment as we begin to see more and more businesses employing
100, 500, 5 000 people.
Government should be setting targets by all three measures.
Without targets it’s impossible to get to grips with policy measures that are
likely to boost the numbers on any of the measures. The Department of Small
Business Development, when questioned on this, does not have any answers. While
its programmes supposedly support start-ups (the Seda incubator programme) and
fast-growing businesses (the National Gazelles Programme) it cannot give us any
national statistics beyond its own very meagre efforts.
Measures of impact and longitudinal performance are
seemingly alien to this Department. Until it begins to think in these terms it
will never be able to identify and massively replicate its programmes because
it won’t have any measures of long-term performance.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome but will be moderated before being published.