Doing Business in Africa: How Culture Changes How We Work Together
If we want to break the dependency cycle, we must better understand the cultural context where we want to do business and ministry.
Abstract
Failure to take insufficient cognisance of local contexts leads to outsiders’ encouraging business in Africa resulting in a trail of dependency. Pertinent differences between African and Western contexts addressed in this article include; understandings of magic, orientation to feasts, recognition of mystical forces, language background, family arrangements, understanding of money, philosophy; dualism vs. monism, the penetration of ‘corruption’, awe of Whites, and more. Such differences are best compensated through a process of immersion in the foreign context. This can be achieved if a foreigner determines to confine themselves to local resources and languages in their operations.
Note: in his references to Africa and Africans the author draws on personal experience. Clearly, not all of Africa and not all Africans are the same.
Introduction
This article shows how worldview differences between Africa and ‘the West’ impact on business practices. Their impact is often such as to result in efforts at instigating and guiding business by the West leaving a trail of dependency. Extant differences are very complex in their practical outcome. Because of this complexity, it is not possible to design a strategy for dealing with them from a distance. The wise businessperson wanting to avoid creating dependency will plan and implement their activities in such a way as to remain vulnerable to and thus able to adjust to contextual surprises. A crucial way of doing this is to confine one’s business intervention in a foreign context to the use of local languages and local resources. Such practice is known as vulnerable mission. This is not a guaranteed strategy, but a means of maintaining sensitivity to local stresses. Following such strategy can result in business success being rooted in the local market. Such a business can continue without outside subsidy or control.
Differences
Westerners want to believe that African people are no different from ‘us’. The prospect of finding differences between African and Western people’s cultures can be terrifying. That is why racism is so broadly condemned in the West. Yet in fact there must be differences, and those differences are likely to affect the functioning of business. Some differences in socially overt behaviour that affect how someone engages in business arise from deep variations in ontological understanding. For example, very unlike Western dualism that distinguishes material from spiritual forces (classically by means of science) in African monism things and even being itself are defined by the ‘spiritual’ forces inherent in them (Tempels 1959:51).
“Once someone has prayed for you, say you are healed” the preacher said to this congregation. “You may feel no different, and you may notice no changes, but there is no point in being prayed for and then denying the power of prayer” he explained. This rather radically counter-scientific approach to healing is widespread in parts of Africa familiar to me. “Better to ask than to say nothing, because you have nothing to lose by asking and might just get something” said an African person to me, explaining part of the reason why African people are quick to ask for assistance from foreign visitors. Critiquing the prosperity gospel can be countered by some African people’s saying “but we believe God can indeed bless some people with riches.” It is hard for a Western Christian to know how to respond to such a comment; does one want to deny people blessing?
A slightly more difficult point to explain is African people’s proclivity towards feasting. Marcel Mauss (1967) noticed a central role for feasting and celebrations in many non-Western communities. From Mauss’ research, a feast is not simply an excuse for a knees-up; it is a central and in many ways necessary part of the normal peaceful functioning of many pre-modern communities (Mauss 1967:10). Failure to attend a feast can be like declaring war (1967:11) or conceding that one is a witch (Shamala 2008:135).[1] A system whereby big men compete with one another by setting up elaborate feasts self-perpetuates and becomes the vital focal point or hub for numerous activities, if not the whole of social life. The arranging of feasts typically requires the mobilisation of all available resources (Maranz 2001:50-51). That may include resources that are supposedly earmarked for other priorities. The use of such resources for funding feasts and celebrations is a major part of what is in the West known as misappropriation of funds. (For more on feasts see Harries, in press.)
What is business?
In dealing with Africa, a Westerner is always involved in translation. There are very few monolingual African people in Africa. The language African people use to engage in trade with Westerners is for the vast majority neither their first language, mother language, nor heart language. It is not always realised that because of this African people’s understanding of (say) English is invariably affected, if not determined, by indigenous understandings. The rules and customs of trade may be very different according to indigenous custom than in native English-speaking countries. For example, negotiation on price is much more widely practiced in much of Africa than in England. Another example that is significant for a lot of business relationships is that African people are particularly prone to trying to conceal the wealth or resources that they have (Maranz 2001:139). Non-disclosure or a wrong disclosure of information can be preferred in Africa. Amongst the reasons for this is that revealed facts can increase the likelihood of magical attack that it is feared could in turn deplete accumulated resources. This is because jealousy acting through mysterious powers is interpreted as witchcraft attack. Such a lack of openness can appear to be deceitful. It can contribute to differences in levels of trust between members of a community in Africa, where mystical forces abound, as against in dualistic Europe that has been influenced by, amongst other things, centuries of commitment to the Christian faith.
It is worth re-emphasising that the very widespread use of non-indigenous languages in business contexts in which Westerners are involved conceals information. The status quo in much of Africa in which a non-native language is used in formal business relationships easily leads to numerous misunderstandings. Such misunderstandings are especially sharp between Westerners and Africans whose use of the language concerned is rooted in vastly different contexts. Close comprehension of African business-customs requires a depth of cultural knowledge that can only be acquired through a close familiarity with African languages and how they are used.
Something that could be known in English as ‘magic’ infiltrates a lot of African relationships. Having mentioned ‘magic’, it is only fair to add that Western people’s widely held implicit belief that their own language penetrates other cultures like a legendary silver bullet is in a way just as ‘magical’ as are African beliefs. The belief that a language can have an objective quality that crosses intercultural spaces may be as deeply rooted in belief in magic as are African beliefs in the efficacy of mystical forces. This is because language and context always mutually engage and determine one another. Language is never a ‘silver bullet’ (Gutt 2008:15).
Is a lady who spends two hours a week sitting on the side of the road selling oranges that have fallen from her tree a “business-woman”? To Western uses of English, perhaps she is not, but in Africa quite likely yes: for example in Dholuo, a language of Western Kenya, doing business is most often rendered as loko hala. (This could be translated back into English as “turning profit”.) An African woman selling oranges on the side of the road, dhako moloko hala, could easily be described as jahala which seems to be in English ‘businesswoman’ or businessman. The western use of the term business tends to presuppose a role for bureaucracy – some kind of superior rational planning processes and procedures designed for ongoing perpetuation of the process concerned (Weber 1947:329-337, Bendix 1977:426). Weber suggests that the basic nature of peoples thinking about business and economics was once very different than it is now (Bendix 1977:424-426). So also Henaff, who points out that for many centuries retail trading and certain other trades were very much despised by the wider community (2010:75). We can add that there were once many traditional prohibitions of usury (Exodus 22:25). Given the historical hegemony of such objections to what may now in the West be considered normal ‘business’ practice, we should not be surprised to find parallel contemporary issues in certain parts of the world.
Other questions regarding ‘what is business’ surely relate to the link between family and one’s activities. What for a family business is normal, preferring family members, is in some other contexts known as nepotism. This is very much related to the question of trust and honesty. Perhaps there are circumstances when it is only family members who can truly be trusted. Finally, something I’ve considered in more detail elsewhere, questions arise regarding the compatibility of business with Christian ministry (Harries 2014). Paul’s preferred activity of tent-making (Acts 18:3) presumably kept him close to and accessible to people and able to listen and talk to them as he manoeuvred with his needle. Other styles of business activity, that function on the back of European languages, that take a lot of time doing high-pressure administrative activities while confined to computer and office are rather different; they are ways of cutting oneself off from indigenous contexts of witness and discipleship. The latter style of business easily associates its executives with the higher classes in a community that tends already to be Europeanised. This means that any approach to the Gospel will not be contextualised to any non-European people (Harries 2014). This leads us to the next section of this article.
Business, the Prosperity Gospel, and Monistic Philosophy
There may be some truth in the saying that ‘money makes the world go round’. There is little doubt that money has become an essential commodity for almost anything anyone might want to undertake. It is also widely recognised that money is a complex creature that causes problems and can distort human society. The breadth of the implications and impacts of money should be borne in mind by the conscientious businessman.
African people’s understandings of money are without doubt complex. While in some ways resembling those of Western people, books like African Friends and Money Matters by David Maranz (2001) also show that they are different. African monistic worldviews affect their understanding of money. Rather than something largely distinct from the ‘spiritual’, in many African worldviews the material and financial are considered to be in the same category as the spiritual. The resulting widespread notion that financial success arises from spiritual blessing is the basis of the much discussed and much condemned prosperity gospel. Whether unfortunately or otherwise, enrichment of African people, especially when the enrichment process is in some way associated with the sharing of the Gospel of Christ, is likely to be interpreted as being the prosperity gospel. While it is true that many Westerners may want to temper this association, such is not always possible.
The full depth of the implications of the monistic worldview for money and business are vast. I will not be able to exhaust them here. I can mention just one or two repercussions. Mauss (1967) points us to some impacts of gift giving that are common in traditional societies but that seem to have been lost in modern Europe and America. Gift giving, especially that associated with feasts/celebrations, seems to be very common in Africa. The obligation-of-return set up by such giving become a part of the spiritual/physical dynamic of the monistic ontology concerned. The spiritual and financial are not so much interchangeable as indistinguishable in this dynamic. To use Tempels’ terminology describing African philosophy; being is force and everything that is has its force including of course money and wealth in general (1959).
It is in practice very hard for any Western originated business venture on the African scene not to be influenced by the above dynamic. As a result, business transactions do not flow in the way that they do back home in the West. The causes for such non-flow are often considered under the general heading of corruption. Use of the term corruption seems to imply that an otherwise functional system contains anomalies. More accurately we could say that, in Africa and probably elsewhere in the majority world, people’s understanding of material wealth, especially in its relation to spiritual powers, results in an approach to business and finance that can in the West be considered ‘corrupt’.
The above is certainly related to trust/honesty or its lack in monistic communities. In the absence of objectivity and in the presence of spiritual powers who are setting out to deceive; honesty and truth can be very slippery concepts. Standardisation practices (i.e. accurate and trusted means of assessing weight, volume, quality and so on of a product) may be highly unreliable. Pre-literate societies do not have the means of providing written records; recently pre-literate societies often still prefer the methods of their oral predecessors. The way to ensure that important transactions are appropriately noted is therefore to engage them openly and in front of as many witnesses as is practical. The way to attract a crowd of witnesses is to offer to feed them; to give them a feast. Feasts themselves of course cost, they do not just happen for free. For key transactions to occur, a proportion of available resources must be allocated to feasts; hence the well-known African metaphor of ‘eating money’. Because agreements are consumed with food, it can be worthwhile to enter into agreement over non-workable arrangements, providing funding is available. Although it is aid relationships that are most vulnerable to this kind of thinking, businesses are not immune to it.
Modelling Business as Deception
Business models are designed to work in particular contexts. Transferring a model of operations from one context to another (e.g. one country to another, or one time period to another) will require adjustments. These could be considered to be compensations for the environment. Westerners are accustomed to functioning in Western contexts. What they do can succeed when they come to Africa, only in so far as Westerners remain in charge and/or in so far as Africa has imported a Western context. In parts of East Africa, the Western sector is often run largely by Indians, plus some Arabs and some Chinese and so on. It is not necessarily what it appears, especially when considered at depth. My main point here however is to say that this Western sector is not necessarily accessible to local Africans. This is for various reasons. It is in this sense especially that advocating a Western business model to Africans may be a deception or a lie. A bit like taking a baby push-chair into an African village. A pushchair may be a great asset where all surfaces are firm and smooth but useless amongst muddy village paths, over streams and rocks and around trees. I want to consider below more specific reasons for non-functionality of Western business models in Africa.
One reason Westerners may succeed in business in Africa is because of their well-to-do contacts/friends and relationships overseas. African people typically do not have these. When African people realise that having such overseas relationships are a necessity for success in business, they attempt to acquire them. Unfortunately efforts at acquiring them can be very fraught. (Part of the reason they are fraught is of course because Africa’s understanding of business and finance is different from that in the West – see above. Westerners “do not want to contribute to waste and failure” is how Maranz explains why many Westerners are reluctant to cooperate in business with Africans (2001).) Even with an educational system largely using European languages, it still remains difficult for African people to acquire the kind of native fluency in the same that will put a foreign business partner at ease. (The pragmatics of how to use a language in relation to a variety of different contexts may be as important as knowledge of vocabulary, phonetics, and grammar.) We can add access to start-up capital; a Westerner entering business is likely to have access to more of this than would many African people. I would add however, that in the light of the rest of the content of this article, the issue of capital is not as much the bottleneck as is often thought.
Family structure is another critical concern for business. In monistic societies, at least many African ones, the size of the extended family that will be seeking the financial help of a businessman can expand as his access to wealth increases. That is to say – the norm in the West whereby someone is primarily responsible only to their immediate nuclear family generally does not apply in Africa. Instead, extended family’s demands on a successful businessman can grow exponentially in a way that is bound to affect possibilities of re-investing into the expansion of a business. I have already above looked at the implications of monistic thinking being much the norm in Africa, whereas Westerners are dualistic. Coming back to issues of so called ‘corruption’ it has often been my experience here on the ground in Africa that Westerners are not required to engage in the types of corruption that is expected of Africans. This is related to a general awe of Whites in Black Africa. Such awe can certainly close some doors – especially of informal relationship. But it can also open others. Someone with white skin or clear European/North American identity (typically revealed through one’s accent) is much more likely to be trusted than a fellow African. Their words are taken differently; often with a much higher expectation that a verbal promise will be fulfilled in practice, for example. This awe of Whites opens doors to Westerners entering into business arrangements that would remain firmly closed to Africans.
To re-iterate; my main point in this section is that the above and other factors mean that a business model set up by a Westerner may not be one that an African person can imitate. For this reason, supposedly leading by example on the part of a Western businessman can often be a deception.
‘Vulnerable’ Business
The answer to the question of sustainability in business is in a sense easy. If, as appears to be the case, Africa’s following Westerners results in a trail of dependency, then Westerners need to determine what it is in their practice that is not sustainable in Africa. Then they should adjust accordingly. I have pointed to many of these factors above.
There are some things that a Westerner cannot do easily. For example, if one has fair coloured skin, then it is not easy to turn one’s skin black. What a Westerner can consciously do is to imitate and run their business without drawing on the ‘advantages’ that their white and European identity gives them. A very straightforward, but at the same time difficult way to do this, is to follow what we could call vulnerable mission practices. That is to initiate then to manage one’s business without taking advantage of one’s superior knowledge of European languages and access to outside resources. What a foreigner can do using only local languages and resources is much more likely to be something that a local can do as well. By operating in this way, one can be learning how business can succeed locally, and one may be setting an example that nationals can follow.
My reader may baulk at the above suggestion. It seems to cancel what are often the very things that a Westerner has to offer. Well, there of course is the problem and the source of the likelihood of leaving behind a string of dependency; the Westerner wants to succeed in business on a basis of that which they can do that nationals cannot.
I can perhaps just add that the above is an over-simplification. There are differences in ways of thinking and understanding (some would say ‘worldview’) between Westerners and Africans that will continue to be carried forward even by a Westerner who has refused the help of outside languages and resources. Fundamentally though, even if it remains difficult, bringing these kinds of differences into view rather than smothering them with heavy doses of money/foreign tongues, does begin make them visible, such that they can be tackled. Positively doing such can help nationals perceive what they ought to do. Negatively it can discourage them from practices that hinder business. Being bound to so-called ‘irrational’ taboos and witchcraft fears comes to mind by way of example.
Teaching the Mother Tongue
This section may seem a little tangential to my main argument. I include it as a means of pointing towards some understanding keys to looking at this whole issue in more depth. I do not have the space to fully explicate the argument that I want to here examine, but point my reader to Illich (1980).
People have traditionally had a kind of awe for sophisticated foreign-sounding languages, and a relative low evaluation of their own tongues. Hence in history, many respected religious practices have been engaged using obscure languages (Prah 2009:4-5). Up to 1500, ancient languages were studied and learned at depth through and with their grammars by people who studied them meticulously. Ironically the same scholars never turned the same attention to their indigenous tongues. That was until the Spaniard Nebrija came along. Nebrija made a revolutionary suggestion: that a people should be taught a standardised and clearly articulated version of their own language. This, says Illich, was to result in the creating of a platform of understanding that subsequently enabled the social and economic advances that we see ever mushrooming and spreading in the world today.
I was struck on reading Illich with parallels between what he describes in 15th century Europe with contemporary Africa. Many African people have expressed to me a low valuation of their own language, along with a high valuation and intense interest in learning a foreign language, typically (in Anglophone Africa) English. Many African people see economic development as something that others (original owners of these wonderful languages) can do for them. At the same time they are, by despising their own languages, missing the opportunity to understand themselves as they are on their own terms. According to my reading of Illich, a foundation for profound self-understanding is achieved when one studies oneself and one’s people. Such self-understanding can be turned into advantage in enabling, amongst other things, effective business practices. A prime means of encouraging business success without leaving a trail of dependency is to encourage people to understand themselves. As an outsider this means taking an interest in them-as-they-are using the means they use themselves; their language.
Remarkable Africa
The relative uniformity of approaches taken by the West to Africa is to me amazing. I ask: if there is even one Western business interest or person that attempts to engage in an African language, never mind also indigenous resources? I have not found such. Instead every approach from the West ignores most of the impacts that translation into local contexts/languages/cultures will have on the practices that they advocate. This is comparable to playing a game of soccer while following the rules of cricket (Harries 2011)!
Doing the above, intervening on the basis of local languages and resources, is not a guaranteed formulae to success. It is a means of beginning to bring into view the issues and difficulties that commonly result in outside oriented business interventions leaving behind a trail of dependency. Once the difficulties concerned are in view, then they can begin to be addressed instead of being ignored.
Conclusion
This brief survey of the kinds of contexts faced by Western business people wanting to invest in Africa has articulated and emphasised the need for businesses that intend not to set up dependency to be built on local resources and local languages. It has done this by considering; vagaries of translation, the practice of magic, some very different understandings of the nature of business, and ways in which the introduction of Western models of business can be deceptive. Confining oneself to local languages and resources will result in a Westerner being able to identify the kinds of difficulties faced by local business people. These are in turn likely to be the bottlenecks that are preventing indigenously powered economic advance.
PR
Notes
[1] “In fact, when an individual is absent from a communal ceremony, he or she endangers the cohesion of the group and runs the risk of being suspected of wanting to destroy it” (Shamala 2008:135).
Bibliography
Bendix, Reinhard, 1977, Max Weber: an intellectual portrait. London: University of California Press.
Gutt, Ernest-August, 2008. ‘The so-what Factor and the New Audience.’ 2nd keynote paper presented at the Bible Translation Conference February 2008, “The Bible translator and audience considerations”, 5-6 Feb 2008, ETP, UK Campus, Horsleys Green, UK. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ernst-august.gutt/The%20so-what%20factor%20and%20the%20new%20audience%20pre-pub.pdf (accessed July 2, 2011).
Illich, Ivan, 1980. ‘Vernacular Values.’ http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/Vernacular.html#VERNACULAR (accessed December 11, 2012).
Harries, Jim, In Press, ‘Intercultural Generosity in Christian Perspective: the ‘West’ and Africa’, transformation: an international dialogue on mission and ethics.
Harries, Jim, 2011. ‘Is it Post Modern, or is it just the Real Thing? Challenging Inter-cultural Mission – a Parable’ Global Missiology Vol 3, No 8 (2011): April). (http://ojs.globalmissiology.org/index.php/english/article/view/585) (accessed 10th May 2011).
Harries, Jim, 2014, ‘Tent-Making in an Uneven World; some implicit difficulties for Westerners in Africa’, World Evangelical Alliance, Mission Commission, https://mc.worldea.org/news/tent-making-in-an-uneven-world-article-by-jim-harries (accessed November 6, 2014)
Henaff, Marcel, 2010. The Price of Truth: Gift, Money, and Philosophy. Translated by Jean-Louis Morhange. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Maranz, David, 2001, African Friends and Money Matters: Observations from Africa. Dallas: SIL International.
Mauss, Marcel, 1967 (1923), The Gift. Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. (Tran. Ian Gunnison, intro. By Evans-Pritchard.) New York: The Norton Library. http://www.econ.uba.ar/www/institutos/economia/Ceplad/HPE_Bibliografia_digital/Mauss%20ingles.pdf (accessed August 30, 2012)
Prah, Kwesi Kwaa, 2009. ‘Introduction: winning souls through the written word.’ 1-34 In: Kwah, Kwesi Kwaa, (ed) 2009. The Role of Missionaries in the Development of African Languages. Cape Town: CASAS.
Tempels, Placide, 1959, Bantu Philosophy. Paris: Presence Africaine.
Weber, Max, 1947, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. London: Collier Macmillan Ltd.
This paper was first presented as, “Doing Business in Africa – a contextual approach” at the Faith Reliance Symposium, sponsored by the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, the Acton Institute and TWR (also known as Trans World Radio). The theme for the symposium was “Instilling Healthy Interdependency Together” and was held October 8-10, 2013, at the TWR international offices in Cary, North Carolina. https://www.twr.org/news_and_blogs/2013/05-29/faith-reliance-symposium-2013-explores-businesspeoplersquos-role-in-counteracting-dependency?
