Day 10 of 10: Reconciling Stakeholder Interests
From the previous theme, it was evident that the current status and relationships, particularly between Consumers and Operators is not too healthy. Similarly, the existing relationship between Govt and the Regulator came into question and various models and frameworks for improving on
<<<I must stay that the previous theme 'Projected Impact of OFC on Stakeholders' has been quite turbulent. We did recieve about 20 postings on this theme(during 4 calender days) and it has been a challenge trying to sieve through them in order to create a brief and reasonable account of the issues, proposals and predictions. In the interest of moving forward, I would wish to introduce the next theme and but will provide the summary of issues in the final report.>>>. In general, the Operators have an obligation to maximize profit for their shareholders by virtue of having taken a risk and committed funds into a particular line of business (OFC included). The Consumer on the other hand will always want services at the lowest cost possible (including free services). The Regulator is mandated - in part - to provide a level playing field for the Operators and a protection mechanism for Consumers. Finally, the Government's main role would be to improve the livelihoods of its citizens e.g. providing essential services, conducive policy, legislative and regulatory environment for all the stakeholders. Indeed, the above brings out the automatic tensions that come to play because each stakeholder wants to pursue their interests which in most cases would be in conflict. E.g. Private sector would naturally follow the lowest path to profit e.g. charge highly, concentrate in high-income zones and recoup their investments in the shortest time possible. Nothing illegal with that, but if the Government intervention is lacking in such a situtation, then certain parts of society (citizenry) would be excluded from accessing some of the (essential) services provided by the Businesses. On the other hand, forcing Business to provide these services to low income communities, or forcing them to under-price without compensatory schemes (incentives) would be the quickest way to run down the business (denying Govts Tax Revenues). these was proposed. Infact, if all things remain constant and the OFC was delivered tomorrow, I suspect that the tensions between the stakeholders may go a notch higher, possibly compouded by intense Operator(with OFC access) vs Operator(without OFC access) wars. How then can these wars be pre-empted? What are the top three things, each Stakeholder (Operators, Regulators, Consumers and Govt) should do in order to provide a win-win situation for everybody in the new OFC dispensation? Two days on this conclusive phase...start talking along this theme keeping in mind some Netiquette as recommended by the list administrator. walu. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail
From the previous theme, it was evident that the current status and relationships, particularly between Consumers and Operators is not too healthy. Similarly, the existing relationship between Govt and the Regulator came into question and various models and frameworks for improving on
I think you have done a good job in summing up the objectives of the various participants and stakeholders. I think all the objectives can and should be met if all parties understood each other's key objectives and operating environments (including an understanding of the costs to achieve them). I think we have progressed a great deal in the last 4 years with operators, the regulator and the Government beginning to understand and appreciate each other roles. To improve matters, more honest dialog with each other in an environment where no one is superior to the other, where the "big whips" are packed away, and hopefully a new framework in terms of the new ICT bill where the roles and expectations of each stakeholder is clearly spelt out. Sounds like Utopia but that that's my opinion. Regards, Michael CEO Safaricom Limited -----Original Message----- From: kictanet-bounces+mjoseph=safaricom.co.ke@kictanet.or.ke [mailto:kictanet-bounces+mjoseph=safaricom.co.ke@kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of John Walubengo Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:03 PM To: Michael Joseph Subject: [kictanet] Day 10 of 10: Reconciling Stakeholder Interests <<<I must stay that the previous theme 'Projected Impact of OFC on Stakeholders' has been quite turbulent. We did recieve about 20 postings on this theme(during 4 calender days) and it has been a challenge trying to sieve through them in order to create a brief and reasonable account of the issues, proposals and predictions. In the interest of moving forward, I would wish to introduce the next theme and but will provide the summary of issues in the final report.>>>. In general, the Operators have an obligation to maximize profit for their shareholders by virtue of having taken a risk and committed funds into a particular line of business (OFC included). The Consumer on the other hand will always want services at the lowest cost possible (including free services). The Regulator is mandated - in part - to provide a level playing field for the Operators and a protection mechanism for Consumers. Finally, the Government's main role would be to improve the livelihoods of its citizens e.g. providing essential services, conducive policy, legislative and regulatory environment for all the stakeholders. Indeed, the above brings out the automatic tensions that come to play because each stakeholder wants to pursue their interests which in most cases would be in conflict. E.g. Private sector would naturally follow the lowest path to profit e.g. charge highly, concentrate in high-income zones and recoup their investments in the shortest time possible. Nothing illegal with that, but if the Government intervention is lacking in such a situtation, then certain parts of society (citizenry) would be excluded from accessing some of the (essential) services provided by the Businesses. On the other hand, forcing Business to provide these services to low income communities, or forcing them to under-price without compensatory schemes (incentives) would be the quickest way to run down the business (denying Govts Tax Revenues). these was proposed. Infact, if all things remain constant and the OFC was delivered tomorrow, I suspect that the tensions between the stakeholders may go a notch higher, possibly compouded by intense Operator(with OFC access) vs Operator(without OFC access) wars. How then can these wars be pre-empted? What are the top three things, each Stakeholder (Operators, Regulators, Consumers and Govt) should do in order to provide a win-win situation for everybody in the new OFC dispensation? Two days on this conclusive phase...start talking along this theme keeping in mind some Netiquette as recommended by the list administrator. walu. ________________________________________________________________________ ____________ Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mjoseph%40safaricom.co.ke The information in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the use of the named addressee. Emails are susceptible to alteration and their integrity cannot be guaranteed. Safaricom Limited does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this email if the same is found to have been altered or manipulated. The contents and opinions expressed in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Safaricom Limited. Safaricom Limited disclaims any liability to the fullest extent permissible by law for any consequences that may arise from the contents of this email including but not limited to personal opinions, malicious and/or defamatory information and data/codes that may compromise or damage the integrity of the recipient's information technology systems. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender and immediately delete this email from your system.
Sounds like utopia but realisable. In this day and age, no one sector can deliver the complexities of sustainable development alone. Therefore, partnerships between government, businesses, civil society and media (what is referred to as multi stakeholder partnerships) have become a growing feature world wide. Additionally, the interactions of ICTS with development and poverty reduction goals are so complex that a range of resources and competencies need to be brought together to create solutions to specific challenges. One of the reasons that the UN WSIS process adopted multi stakeholder process and now others like the ITU are following. Kenya ICt Action network is based on this philosophy and one of the lessons we have learnt is that diversity is a reality and it is important to understand different values, encourage dialogue and integrate views into joint solutions. And I believe that with the amount of discussions, e-mail reading, listening, etc we are all in a position to understand and reconcile our various interests to shape/build consensus. alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Joseph" <MJoseph@Safaricom.co.ke> To: <alice@apc.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 7:25 AM Subject: Re: [kictanet] Day 10 of 10: Reconciling Stakeholder Interests
I think you have done a good job in summing up the objectives of the various participants and stakeholders. I think all the objectives can and should be met if all parties understood each other's key objectives and operating environments (including an understanding of the costs to achieve them). I think we have progressed a great deal in the last 4 years with operators, the regulator and the Government beginning to understand and appreciate each other roles.
To improve matters, more honest dialog with each other in an environment where no one is superior to the other, where the "big whips" are packed away, and hopefully a new framework in terms of the new ICT bill where the roles and expectations of each stakeholder is clearly spelt out.
Sounds like Utopia but that that's my opinion.
Regards,
Michael
CEO Safaricom Limited
-----Original Message----- From: kictanet-bounces+mjoseph=safaricom.co.ke@kictanet.or.ke [mailto:kictanet-bounces+mjoseph=safaricom.co.ke@kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of John Walubengo Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:03 PM To: Michael Joseph Subject: [kictanet] Day 10 of 10: Reconciling Stakeholder Interests
<<<I must stay that the previous theme 'Projected Impact of OFC on Stakeholders' has been quite turbulent. We did recieve about 20 postings on this theme(during 4 calender days) and it has been a challenge trying to sieve through them in order to create a brief and reasonable account of the issues, proposals and predictions. In the interest of moving forward, I would wish to introduce the next theme and but will provide the summary of issues in the final report.>>>.
In general, the Operators have an obligation to maximize profit for their shareholders by virtue of having taken a risk and committed funds into a particular line of business (OFC included). The Consumer on the other hand will always want services at the lowest cost possible (including free services). The Regulator is mandated - in part - to provide a level playing field for the Operators and a protection mechanism for Consumers. Finally, the Government's main role would be to improve the livelihoods of its citizens e.g. providing essential services, conducive policy, legislative and regulatory environment for all the stakeholders.
Indeed, the above brings out the automatic tensions that come to play because each stakeholder wants to pursue their interests which in most cases would be in conflict. E.g. Private sector would naturally follow the lowest path to profit e.g. charge highly, concentrate in high-income zones and recoup their investments in the shortest time possible. Nothing illegal with that, but if the Government intervention is lacking in such a situtation, then certain parts of society (citizenry) would be excluded from accessing some of the (essential) services provided by the Businesses. On the other hand, forcing Business to provide these services to low income communities, or forcing them to under-price without compensatory schemes (incentives) would be the quickest way to run down the business (denying Govts Tax Revenues).
From the previous theme, it was evident that the current status and relationships, particularly between Consumers and Operators is not too healthy. Similarly, the existing relationship between Govt and the Regulator came into question and various models and frameworks for improving on these was proposed. Infact, if all things remain constant and the OFC was delivered tomorrow, I suspect that the tensions between the stakeholders may go a notch higher, possibly compouded by intense Operator(with OFC access) vs Operator(without OFC access) wars.
How then can these wars be pre-empted? What are the top three things, each Stakeholder (Operators, Regulators, Consumers and Govt) should do in order to provide a win-win situation for everybody in the new OFC dispensation? Two days on this conclusive phase...start talking along this theme keeping in mind some Netiquette as recommended by the list administrator.
walu.
________________________________________________________________________ ____________ Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mjoseph%40safaricom.co.ke The information in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the use of the named addressee. Emails are susceptible to alteration and their integrity cannot be guaranteed. Safaricom Limited does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this email if the same is found to have been altered or manipulated. The contents and opinions expressed in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Safaricom Limited. Safaricom Limited disclaims any liability to the fullest extent permissible by law for any consequences that may arise from the contents of this email including but not limited to personal opinions, malicious and/or defamatory information and data/codes that may compromise or damage the integrity of the recipient's information technology systems. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender and immediately delete this email from your system.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org
Walu: "What are the top three things, each Stakeholder (Operators, Regulators, Consumers and Govt) should do in order to provide a win-win situation for everybody in the new OFC dispensation?" In my humble opinion and this is of course from a consumer perspective I would list priorities as follows: 1)As was pointed out the Operators, Regulators and Govt have been working closely for the past 4 years, clearly missing was the consumer in this relationship, and this needs to change. I am glad the current discussions have highlighted the need to include the consumer as an important stakeholder in all policy making etc. 2)The consumer association that is yet to be registered for reasons not clear to me needs to be a reality -- The consumer needs a face, so there is an entity to negotiate, partner, and hold the various bodies accountable on behalf of consumers, and the consumers need to know they have an entity that will address their concerns. 3)I am confident I speak for many consumers when I say that we are all looking for quality and affordable telecommunciation services so whatever model the OFC adopts needs to ensure the consumer gets closer to achieving these objectives. LK
<<<I must stay that the previous theme 'Projected Impact of OFC on Stakeholders' has been quite turbulent. We did recieve about 20 postings on this theme(during 4 calender days) and it has been a challenge trying to sieve through them in order to create a brief and reasonable account of the issues, proposals and predictions. In the interest of moving forward, I would wish to introduce the next theme and but will provide the summary of issues in the final report.>>>.
In general, the Operators have an obligation to maximize profit for their shareholders by virtue of having taken a risk and committed funds into a particular line of business (OFC included). The Consumer on the other hand will always want services at the lowest cost possible (including free services). The Regulator is mandated - in part - to provide a level playing field for the Operators and a protection mechanism for Consumers. Finally, the Government's main role would be to improve the livelihoods of its citizens e.g. providing essential services, conducive policy, legislative and regulatory environment for all the stakeholders.
Indeed, the above brings out the automatic tensions that come to play because each stakeholder wants to pursue their interests which in most cases would be in conflict. E.g. Private sector would naturally follow the lowest path to profit e.g. charge highly, concentrate in high-income zones and recoup their investments in the shortest time possible. Nothing illegal with that, but if the Government intervention is lacking in such a situtation, then certain parts of society (citizenry) would be excluded from accessing some of the (essential) services provided by the Businesses. On the other hand, forcing Business to provide these services to low income communities, or forcing them to under-price without compensatory schemes (incentives) would be the quickest way to run down the business (denying Govts Tax Revenues).
From the previous theme, it was evident that the current status and relationships, particularly between Consumers and Operators is not too healthy. Similarly, the existing relationship between Govt and the Regulator came into question and various models and frameworks for improving on these was proposed. Infact, if all things remain constant and the OFC was delivered tomorrow, I suspect that the tensions between the stakeholders may go a notch higher, possibly compouded by intense Operator(with OFC access) vs Operator(without OFC access) wars.
How then can these wars be pre-empted? What are the top three things, each Stakeholder (Operators, Regulators, Consumers and Govt) should do in order to provide a win-win situation for everybody in the new OFC dispensation? Two days on this conclusive phase...start talking along this theme keeping in mind some Netiquette as recommended by the list administrator.
walu.
____________________________________________________________________________________ Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/lkimani%40comnews.co.ke
----------------------------------------- This email was sent using Communicatons Solutions LTD WebMail. " " http://www.accesskenya.com/
participants (4)
-
alice＠apc.org -
John Walubengo -
Lucy Kimani -
Michael Joseph