Increasing Productivity through process redesign and automation in the National Consumer Tribunal of South Africa - A Case Study
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Increasing Productivity through process redesign and automation
in the National Consumer Tribunal of South Africa – A Case Study
By: Joseph Mandla Maseko;1 John R. Simpson2 and Bax Nomvete3
Neutral citation:
Maseko, J. M., Simpson, J.R. & Nomvete, B. (2021). Increasing Productivity through process redesign
and automation in the National Consumer Tribunal of South Africa – A Case Study. Research Gate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354371129_ DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12217.90725. Also
from https://independent.academia.edu/JosephMandlaMaseko/Analytics/activity/keywords
Abstract
While as a public entity, at the height of budget cuts and the Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns,
the National Consumer Tribunal (NCT), notwithstanding an 8.5% reduction of budget from
R66 215 000 in 2019/20, to R60 594 000, in 2020/21, met its objectives and recorded an
R8548000 surplus. This feat can only be attributed to the quick thinking of its management
and staff in combining process redesign and automation.
This paper advocates that any public entity, staffed with technocrats and professionals with
caring attitudes, can achieve similar or better results, given the autonomy the right sets of skills
and attitudes towards public funds. The NCT, being an administrative court, is headed by an
Executive Chairperson (effectively a board of one), who is also the Accounting Authority under
the Public Finance Management Act No. 5 of 2007. Crucial decisions are rapidly made and
virements processed, where needed – with the requisite approvals by National Treasury.
In this case, 30% of the part-time tribunal members' budget covers DRA matters, while 70%
of the part-time tribunal members' budget covers non-DRA. The Non-DRAs, being a meagre
0.7% of all the cases of the NCT, chew up 70% of the adjudication budget of the NCT. Due to
automation alone, the NCT was able, up to the second half of 2020 to have the cost of
adjudicating one DRA matter at R78.61, but during the commencement of 2021, that unit cost
was reduced further to R39.31; because of process reengineering and automation. This is a feat
that can be emulated by other public entities, capitalising on the 4th Industrial Revolution (4IR)
and conscientious process reengineering.
Key Words:
Process reengineering – automation – excellence – public entities – technocracy – leadership –
legal procedure – debt counsellors – debt review – adjudication.
1
Prof. Joseph Mandla Maseko is the Executive Chairperson of the National Consumer Tribunal
and an admitted Advocate of the High Courts in South Africa.
2
Adv. John R. Simpson is a Full Time Tribunal Member (Adjudicator) of the National
Consumer Tribunal and admitted to practice in the High Courts of South Africa.
3
Mr. Bax Nomvete is the Chief Information Officer of the National Consumer Tribunal in
South Africa.
11. Background
The NC T was established under sect ion 26 of t he National Credit Act, No. 34 of 2005
(NCA). It is one of 17 public entities falling directly under the Executive Authority of the Minister
of Trade, Industry, and Competition (DTIC) in South Africa. In its meeting of 18 June 2021, the
Regulatory Cluster meeting of the 17 entities resolved to have the NCT prepare a presentation
briefing for sharing with the other 16 entities how it had managed to double its efficiencies on
the under 30 000 cases processed during the Covid-19 global lockdowns. Instead of producing
a self-made video clip of under an hour, the NCT opted for ease of circulation and distribution.
That video has since been loaded to the NCT website.
The rationale for publishing this paper has been the dire need to infuse technocratic approaches
to the management of public entities, stem the tide of failing institutions resulting in failing
states, and nourishing professionalising, rather than politicising, the public sector management.
The rationale for studying the phenomenon in this case study, the authors decided to pursue
possible solutions to the current decay in public services in public sector institutions like
airlines, public utilities, municipalities, health care facilities, public schools, and others. At
times the prevalence of such public organs' failures appears to court state failures. All right-
thinking citizens must apply their minds to making public institutions thrive and deliver on
their mandates. Privately owned entities are not a problem as they are run by their owners
directly or through competent managers and leaders. Failure to appoint the correct people to
run such institutions immediately punishes the owners in their bottom line, where it matters –
dividends and losses.
It is clear, for instance, that when flying between New York (USA) and Johannesburg (South
Africa), only suicide bombers would appoint an unqualified pilot out of nepotism or jobs for
pals, as they would immediately meet their maker sooner than later. Even if the leaders were
to seek certain people with particular affiliations, they would ensure that they have the
qualifications and skills required for the flight to be successful.
Despite its strong hand governance, Singapore has been cited as an example of a successfully
run economy at a political level. Rulers in Singapore have not hoped for the ability of the
public to determine long-term public policy limitations. Singapore is fettered for curtailing
public interference in tough economy impacting determinations (Hendrie, 2015). But that
approach is not sufficient if applied only to political leadership. The same method must also
use at the entity level. Even in political parties, members should be members of the political
parties rather than members of members; within those political parties. This approach can
ensure that the leadership and management of public entities do not habitually and predictably
run those entities to the ground at every opportunity.
2. Introduction
The NCT under the Executive Authority of the Minister in the DTIC achieves its objectives
and ultimately meets its mandate. In 2021, it has already attained its 9 th clean audit. Such
2an achievement is a rarity in public entities in the country. Public entities that achieve
clean audits are fettered even though it sounds like praising fish for swimming and
birds for flying. The NCT's mandate as a national body (adjudicator to be precise) is to
adjudicate court applications and referrals before it a n d make any orders provided for; in
respect of such applications and referrals. These may also be allegations of prohibited conduct.
And in such cases, it determines whether prohibited conduct has occurred; and, if so, imposes
appropriate remedies.
The Tribunal consists of an Executive Chairperson (accounting authority) heading an
institution consisting of operations and adjudication wings. The adjudication side consists of
about 18 Tribunal Members, of which four (4), including the chairperson, are full-time
(employees), while the rest are part-time office bearers (not employees).
The process of appointing Tribunal Members, including the Executive Chairperson and the
Deputy Chairperson, is prescribed in section 26(2) of the NCA, commencing with a published
invitation for nominations. Once the public has nominated, the Department of Trade, Industry,
and Competition publish the names of all nominees for public comment. It then later shortlists
possible candidates, interviews them, and makes recommendations to the President.
Once the President, in Cabinet, has accepted any of the names listed, a Cabinet memorandum
is issued confirming the names of the appointed Tribunal members. The Minister of Trade,
Industry, and Competition, by delegation of the powers in section 26 of the NCA, then effects
the appointments. This process applies to both full-time and part-time Tribunal Members,
despite the differences that some are employees under section 200A of the Labour Relations
Act and s 83A of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act No. 75 of 1997.
Governance and decision-making are rapid at the Tribunal due to the leanness of its structure.
With only one individual discharging the role of an accounting authority, as opposed to a board
of governors or directors, decisions and policy approvals flow more rapidly, which ensures
efficiency. Governance Committees assist the accounting authority for Human Resources
(HRC), Audit and Risk (ARC), and Information and Communications Technology (ICT).
Rapid decision-making is the trademark of the NCT. A quarterly informal coordinating
committee called Accounting Authority Committee also exists, chaired by the Executive
Chairperson (EC) and attended by all the Full-time Tribunal Members, the Chief Operating
Officer (COO), and the Chief Information Officer (CIO). The latter individual attends because
of the centre stage that automation has assumed and is increasingly occupying.
The adjudication side has two full-time members coordinating certain functions over and above
doing the work of adjudication. The coordination work is for the opposed matters, colloquially
referred to as Non-Debt Review Applications (Non-DRAs) and the other, Debt Review
Applications (DRAs). The coordination includes ensuring the smooth running of cases
allocations to all Tribunal Members and their timeous turn-around times. All Tribunal
Members report directly to the EC, while the operations side is headed by the COO, leading
3Executive Committee (EXCO) Members consisting of the CIO, the Corporate Services
Executive (CSE), Registrar, and the Chief Finance Officer (CFO).
3. The rationale for Case Study Method
In qualitative research, which the case study method is a part, the epistemological questions of
the relationship between the knower and what they know; shows that while in the quantitative
approach, the researcher discovers reality as it is outside of the Researcher; the constructivist
angle is that knowledge is established through meanings attached to the thing researched
(Krauss, 2005). Only one conclusion can be reached. Furthermore, in this writer's view, there
is one research method, the combined or pragmatic method. To be pragmatic, the quantitative
approach can be combined with the qualitative way to plug a knowledge gap, where appropriate
(Bryant, 2011).
Unicaf University (2019) correctly categorised quantitative research as inclusive of the case
study method. And Zucker (2009), quoting Bromley (1990), characterises the case study
method as a methodical investigation into an event or chain of connected events aiming to
explain the thing of interest (Coughlan et al., 2007).
The philosophical aspects we have guarded against include eliminating our own biases; since
we see things as we are; and not as they are. The Interpretivism approach (in qualitative
research) is concerned with what things seem to mean and represent in the social construct
(Cohen et al., 2013). Researchers in the qualitative research approach unwittingly influence the
sample being studied while interacting with it. To be pragmatic, the quantitative approach can
be combined with the qualitative method to plug a knowledge gap, where appropriate (Bryant,
2011). As already mentioned above, we combine both approaches in this paper to ensure that
portions amenable to quantitative methods are treated as such even in a qualitative research
endeavour.
4. The Leadership Element
The human element in organisations always ensures that even where technology is best utilised,
technology is programmed as to what solutions to generate. In this sense, both the information
and communications technology personnel and user experts must collaborate to automatise and
optimise the process redesign that the automation enhances.
Work in the public sector, as in other sectors, occurs between people. The work environment
includes both leadership and the led. Apart from executive leadership, individual managers in
their units also need space to lead. This goes for all the aspects that constitute management.
Alase (2017) reveals that while cross-cutting, the concept of leadership originated from theories
in the physical sciences. Its quest, as a complexity leadership theory (CLT), emanates from the
social sciences. The community on a scholastic approach to leadership was especially
pioneering in the leadership theory. Uhl-Bien, et al. (2007) are the ones who pioneered this
theory (Uhl-Bien et al., 2011). In the latter source, the authors saw leadership through the lens
of a facilitative role. This was a marked departure from the erstwhile autocratic and driving
force of a controller. This was also contrasted to the swarm leadership model derived from an
4Al-Qaeda structure in which no single person assumed the leadership role (Marion & Uhl-Bien,
2003).
5. Leadership Styles
The question of leadership style cannot be left out of the equation in examining the performance
in a case study. Management cannot be seen in isolation from its style and how it presents in
the eyes of the led. Bass (1997) ascribed four dimensions to the concept of transformational
leadership. These consisted of idealized influence (Charisma), inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Uhl-Bien et al., 2011). The theory
for this approach is for the leader (manager) to guide, facilitate, and set the boundary settings
in which self-organization becomes possible.
The adaptive leadership theory seems to meet the requirements of an idea, which is the ability
to apply in most daily situations (Alase, 2017). CLT appears to have endeared itself by meeting
this critical criterion as a theory of leadership. This has been done (Sharpe & Creviston, 2013)
through a combination of adaptive leadership styles. This combination of techniques includes
innovative, adaptive symmetry, and traditional military forces approach. INCIDENTALLY,
the CLT approach requires fluidity and adaptability of the connection between leader and
followers accompanied by suppleness and agility.
This study, therefore, enjoins both the transformational and adaptive styles of leadership. It
transforms the workplace by departing from the manual traditionalist legal environment of
working to the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) era. On the other hand, it is adaptive in that
the NCT had to adapt to the demand of spiking caseloads (which was out of its control) in the
face of reducing and diminishing budgets at the time.
6. The Problem and Hypotheses
The first hypothesis in this study is that even in the face of dwindling resources, public entities
can still maximise gains in productivity and continue to meet their mandates, even under
serious constraining factors like the Covid-19 intervening pandemic. The second hypothesis is
that, through the combination of Automation and Process Redesign, productivity can be
doubled despite severe constraints. The third hypothesis is that the combination of genuine
interest on the part of individuals and their innovative mindsets, with a genuine will to meet a
public mandate, to solve real-life dire needs of fellow humans (consumers in this case), coupled
with high competence and intelligence, ensure solutions at all costs.
The null hypotheses consist of any empirical evidence from the facts of this case study,
showing that:
(1) Some or any of the three hypotheses not being borne out by the empirical and measurable
evidence;
(2) In the face of dwindling resources, public entities cannot maximise gains in productivity
and fail to meet their mandates, especially under serious constraining factors like the
Covid-19 pandemic;
5(3) Despite the combination of Automation and Process Redesign, productivity cannot be
doubled, mainly due, in part, to severe constraints like the Covid-19 pandemic; and
(4) There is a lack of evidence that even assumed or claimed a combination of genuine
interest from individual innovative mindsets, with a will to meet a public mandate, using
competence and intelligence, does not guarantee solutions at all costs.
7. Debt Rearrangements Applications
Over the five years 2016/2017 to 2020/2021, the number of DRA matters filed with the
Tribunal consisted of:
Number of DRAs for five years 2016/2017 to 2020/2021
YEAR 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020
DRA Applications received 18266 35073 34219 24717 28292
Completed cases Unavailable Unavailable 27012 22228 25709
Cases carried over to next year Unavailable Unavailable 5442 9702 12915
Number of cases /day/Adjudicator 10 32 40 40 80
The efficiencies cannot be seen in the table above from the applications received or even
completed, for that matter. It is partly because while the completed cases cover the entire
financial of 2019/2020, the doubling from 40 to 80 cases per day per adjudicator only
commenced in the late second half of 2020 – which was not for the full financial year. Only
the numbers of cases per adjudicator per day provide an account of the improvement that
doubled. The overall output and gains in the bottom line will show correspondingly in the years
2021/2020 onwards.
The cost of adjudicating DRA matters is simple as there is a daily rate of 80 cases per
adjudicator. That is the amount of R 6 280,08. This and other rates are a matter of the public
record as they get published in annual reports to parliament. It gets complicated when it comes
to non-DRA matters as these are staggered in some way to cater to their differences, especially
in the amount of work involved and the time it takes to complete a specific case. For instance,
section 165 cases deal with applications for recissions and variations for already existing and
previously adjudicated matters.
8. Non-Debt Review Applications
Over the five years 2016/2017 to 2020/2021, the number of non-DRA matters filed with the
Tribunal consisted of:
62016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021
476 245 167 245 191
Several applications could arise within a single case before the Tribunal. There could be an
application for leave to refer a matter. Once allowed, there could be applications for
condonation to file apers late after specific legally defined deadlines and timelines have n=been
missed. There could also be requests for postponements for various reasons, applications to
join other enter entities, intervene, discovery, and a whole range of others.
Type of Case Portion of Daily rate Daily Rate R Actual R Type of Process
S 165 Applications 1/6 6 280,08 1 046,68 Preparation
1,00 6 280,08 6 280,08 Hearing
1/3 6 280,08 2 093,36 Judgement writing
Total per s 165 matter adjudicated 9 420,12
The above means that if there are no postponements and other interlocutory processes in an
ordinary s 165 case, the cost will be R9420.12 per case. But if there are interlocutory
applications such as those for condonation for late filing of pleadings and postponements, the
rate could double or even treble for a single s165 matter. This must be borne in mind, given
that these are amounts paid by the taxpayer as parties to not pay for the services of Tribunal,
save for minuscule filing applications. But once a matter is allocated a case reference number
and allocated to panels of the NCT, it can only be terminated by abandonment, final
adjudication, withdrawal, and out-of-court settlement, and court interdict was obtained by any
of them the parties.
Type of Case Portion of Daily rate Daily Rate R Actual R Type of Process
S114 Applications 0,08 6 280,08 523,34 Preparation 1/12
1,00 6 280,08 6 280,08 Hearing
1/6 6 280,08 1 046,68 Judgement writing
Total per s 141 matter adjudicated 7 850,10
Section 141 matters are those concerning applications for leave (permission) to refer the matter
to the Tribunal. Leave (permission) seeking applications must also be considered as they must
be determined. The NCT must first consider the authorization to allow the applicant to refer
the matter directly to the Tribunal before the merits of the matter can be referred. That is the
crisp description of these types of applications. A plain s141 matter costs R7850.10 if there are
no other intervening issues such as postponements and condonations. And just as in the s165
matters, any additional complications increase and could even double or treble the amount
shown.
7However, since s141 applications do not necessarily end there, as leave to refer is only a start,
the complete processing of the case in its merits and any other interlocutory challenges
adjudications in the interim could end up very far from the initial cost of the leave application.
In Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd v Summit Financial Partners & Others (Case no 314/20) [2021]
ZASCA 91 (25 June 2021), the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) interpreted the NCA and
concluded that the NCT has a broad, and unfettered discretion to permit or refuse a direct
referral whenever the NCR has issued a notice of non-referral to an applicant. It further held
that the NCA neither required a formal application to the Tribunal nor an open or closed public
hearing to decide the matter. It also added that the NCA did not require the satisfaction of any
test in determining leave applications. Finally, the SCA concluded that a decision by the
Tribunal about a direct referral was not appealable.
The Lewis decision has implications for the provisions; of section 71(3) of the Consumer
Protection Act 68 of 2008 of which provides that:
"If the Commission refers a matter to a consumer court in terms of subsection
(2)(a), any party to that referral may apply to the Tribunal, in the prescribed
manner and form and within the prescribed time, for an order that the matter
be referred to the Tribunal."
On 26 June 2021, the Tribunal acquiesced to the Lewis Stores decision, revised its handling of
leave applications. The revised system set s 141 matters down to be considered in chambers
(not in an open public court like others). Before this Lewis decision, even though the Tribunal
had already started hearing these matters via virtual platforms like Zoom and Teams, it still
had to incur recording expenses as they had to be heard on the record. Parties still had to adduce
evidence in a platform where it had to be tested with numerous postponements at times
interrupting. Points in limine would be raised, argued, and interim rulings made (as these are
cases within cases). As a result, the main case would cost the Tribunal in the region of
R100 000.00 per case (Alwar, 2021).
From this point on, the Tribunal schedules these s 141 matters for consideration on the papers
and chambers. This change was because section 141 (NCA) matters alone, which are NCR
non-referred, cost in the region of R100 000.00 per case. The section 75 (CPA) applications,
in a similar vein, cost around R70 000.00 per case. The rough estimate at the time was for the
Tribunal to save about R15 million for the remainder of the 2021-2022 budget year alone
(Alwar, 2021). All this is merely from being prudent, paying attention to saving opportunities.
And the SCA presented one such cost-saving opportunity in the Lewis case.
From a cost perspective, Section 141 matters require a three-panel, which amounts to
approximately R100 000 per case for the leave and merits. Section 75 points cost around
R70 000. With this approach, the NCT could potentially save about R1.5 million and complete
the cases much quicker.
Type of Case Days Daily Rate R Actual R Type of Process
Other Hearings 1 6 280,08 6 280,08 Preparation
1 6 280,08 6 280,08 Hearing
1 6 280,08 6 280,08 Judgement writing
Total per application in other matters adjudicated 18 840,24
8For the year 2021 / 22 alone, the budget split between DRA and non-DRA adjudication
component alone has been forecast as follows:
Split between DRA and Non-DRA Matters 2021/2022
Fees for Adjudicating DRA Matters for Part-time Adjudicators 1 860 637.00
Fees for Adjudicating Non-DRAs for Part-time Adjudicators 4 341 486.00
Total Budget for Part-time Adjudicators (excluding Full-time Adjudicators) 6 202 124.00
The above split formulae indicate that 30% of part-time tribunal members' budgets are for
DRA, and 70% of part-time tribunal members' budgets are for non-DRA. Other features of this
cost spread are that the NCT pays R6281.00 per day for a Tribunal Member to adjudicate 80
DRAs, which makes the cost of a single DRA R78.61 for the year 2021/2022. The same
Tribunal Members (adjudicators) up to the second half of 2020, before reengineering the
process over and above the automation, were producing only 40 (50%) of that output on DRAs.
That means that for the same budget, the NCT is now able to adjudicate each DRA for R39.31.
The Non-DRAs at times spread over more than a single day, and the preparation and judgment
writing also range from one to several days depending on ten issues involved, the numbers of
witnesses called, and lever arch files of bundles of documentary evidence adduced. While the
budget is fixed and finite, the numbers of cases (non-DRAs) are unpredictable, and their
duration per case is also unpredictable. For that reason, the NCT must always strive to increase
its efficiencies even though the demand of cases is forever skewing.
The Summary of the Case volumes and their percentage mix
2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021
Non-DRAs 476 245 167 245 191
DRA Matters 18266 35073 34219 24717 28292
Total Cases 18742 35318 34386 24962 28483
Percentage of Non-DRAs 2,5 0,7 0,5 1,0 0,7
Percentage DRAs 97,5 99,3 99,5 99,0 99,3
Total Percentage 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0
The above table must be contrasted with the actual percentage of the budget, at least for the
ongoing financial year 2021/22.
Split between DRA and Non-DRA Matters 2021/2022 %
Fees for Adjudicating DRA Matters for Part-time Adjudicators R1860637 30
Fees for Adjudicating Non-DRAs for Part-time Adjudicators R4341486 70
Total Budget for Part-time Adjudicators R6 202 123 100
9The two tables above show that while 99% are DRAs, this stream of cases chews up only 30%
of the adjudication budget of the NCT. And less than one percent of the non-DRAs wipe off as
much as 70% of the budget due to the nature of the law. Even though the NCT has already
gone a long way in alleviating the cost of non-DRAs, the intricate legal processes involved
remain high in hearing many hearings via platforms like Zoom and Teams. And these are
usually very highly contested cases, which could take years, with attorneys and counsel
(advocates) on both sides challenging at the Tribunal.
The law of procedure is key to these constraints on the budget necessitated by the strict legal
processes. The notion of the Tribunal, as an administrative court, adopting more relaxed
procedures than the judicial courts, is more fictitious than practical. That legal debate is best
left between lawyers, as this paper is more about management and leadership than the
technicalities of the law.
The courts have held it to be unfair to deprive a party of a reasonable procedure at hearings.
Unreasonableness may be latent or patent. Latent unreasonableness is a ground that undermines
a party's right to a fair hearing [Goldfields Investment Ltd v City Council of Johannesburg &
Another 1938 TPD 551 at 560]. A point in limine is a hearing on a specific legal point, which
takes place before the actual case referred, can be heard. It is a process that addresses the
technical legal points raised before getting into the case's merits and can even relate to matters
of jurisdiction.4Once a point in limine has been submitted, it becomes a preliminary issue
warranting attention as a case within a case. It then immediately commands a hearing within a
hearing to determine the legal point raised before a matter can proceed on its merits. The point
in limine has the potential to even stop the case from proceeding altogether.
It is trite that adjectival law, which is ``procedural law'', exists for the sake of something else,
namely substantive law. Ultimately, the law of procedure enforces substantive law rules and
provisions of substantive law. It would not be sensible to grant a person a right in law and
regulations without implementing them, using procedural rules. No presiding entity in a
hearing should overlook or ignore or downplay or commit a flagrant disregard of such rules of
procedure. Consequences of such a possibility would annul and undermine the substantive legal
rules being enforced. Adjective law (management) is an accessory to substantive law because
"the existence of substantive law creates the need for rules of procedure to enforce substantive
provisions." (Faris et al.,2000-2008).
Because of the interventions of process reengineering and automation at the height of the
Covid-19 pandemic and its lockdowns from 2020, the NCT overall results have shown:
2020/2021 Financial Year 2019/2020 Financial Year
Program Budget Actual Surplus Budget Actual Over/Under
R000 R000 R000 R000 R000 R000
Adjudication 25324 23810 1514 25397 26232 (835)
Administration 35270 28237 7033 40818 31805 9013
Total Budget 60594 52047 8548 66215 58037 8178
4
http://www.cwao.org.za/downloads/In%20Limine.pdf
10The above table shows that while the NCT was in the highest budget crisis of the pandemic,
and its budget reduced in two chunks from R66 215 000 in 2029/20 to R60 594 000, which is
8.5%, it still went on to meet all its objectives and had an R8 548 000 surplus. This is
reminiscent of the feeding of 5000 with five loaves of bread and two fishes and still having 12
barrels leftover (John 6:1-5). This was all thanks to process reengineering and automation
combined.
9. Role Players
Frequent Filers to the NCT include individual consumers, 8595 Credit Providers, 1632 Debt
Counsellors5, the National Credit Regulator (NCR), and the National Consumer Commission
(NCC). Suppliers of goods and services also file, though usually when challenging applications
against them. Interlocutory applications such as postponements, applications for condonations
are also applications. Even though suppliers of goods and services do not file applications
against consumers, once a matter has been filed against a supplier, the latter is also able to
apply for such things as declaring certain parts of the evidence to be adduced; confidential,
consider condonations, late filings, joining parties and even interventions in matters not directly
involving them.
10. The Automation Project
When the National Consumer Tribunal was established, processes needed to be put in place to
receive and process applications in terms of the relevant legislation on behalf of the relevant
stakeholders. Most applications received by the Tribunal are applications for debt review,
which are termed DRAs, as the tables above show.
In the case of DRAs, the applications received were initially delivered by hand or email to
reception where a manual recording would take place. From this point, the application would
then be physically moved to the Registrar's office, who in turn would record the application on
an Excel spreadsheet and manually assign a unique case number to the file. A Case officer
would check each application to ensure the relevant supporting documents were attached. If all
were in order, the Registrar personnel would construct an email message sent to the filer
indicating the case number and that it was a complete filing. The application would then be
sent by courier or physically delivered to the target Tribunal member to adjudicate and generate
a paper-based order. This order would either grant or refuse the prayers of the Applicant. It
would be sent to the Registrar's office for recording on a spreadsheet and then forwarding via
email or courier back to the original filer.
The steps above for processing applications were cumbersome and, to a large extent, were done
manually, which created many exposure points for errors. In addition, the recorded case
information about the submitted applications on a spreadsheet was located on several laptops,
which meant that the data was fragmented. And since there was no mechanism to determine if
5
Presentation of NCR Report to Portfolio Committee on 7 September 2021.
11the spreadsheet had been updated correctly and timeously, the reliance on information accuracy
was severely compromised.
During this early period, there was a recognition that with the ever-increasing volumes of these
DRA applications being received for processing, the manual practices of execution were
unsustainable in the long run. So, in 2013 the organisation began looking at ways to improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of the management and processing of these applications using
ICT.
After careful analysis and looking at the best approach, the automation project was divided up
into several vital phases; the main advantage was building an ICT system for case management.
When perceived from the number of components to be created, such a system was a complex
task. But by breaking it up into smaller "bite" size manageable chunks, where each of its
"moving parts" would fit perfectly with the others.
Below are each of the critical phases conceived, designed, programmed, and deployed to bring
into play an ICT system to enable efficiencies to be introduced into the Case Management
processes for these DRA applications.
Phase 1 – Central database and electronic forms for data capture
The first phase was to create a central electronic database where case data could be captured,
stored, and updated; thus, eliminating the problem of having multiple spreadsheets on different
platforms. This approach ensured that there was "one version of the truth" at any point in time,
given that this central repository is the only place where case record information would be
created, updated, and reported on to the relevant stakeholders. Each time an application would
be received either hard copy, or by email, all the details would be entered into the central
database by a set of internal data capturers. The capturers used electronic forms, which
validated the information entered to ensure data integrity. In addition, any supporting
documents accompanying the application could be uploaded onto the system and linked to the
appropriate case record. A validation process was also in place for the uploading of documents
in line with the legislative requirements. This validation ensured that the case record would not
be complete if a particular document was missing, such as a copy of a consumer Identity
Document (ID) example.
As part of the first phase, the system automated generating a unique case number for a
successfully captured complete application and in Realtime sent this information to the original
filer electronically for their records and tracking purposes. This uniquely generated case
reference number is linked to the case record permanently.
Phase 2 Electronic Filing of applications and Reporting
The second phase of the development of the system was to create the functionality for the filer
to capture and upload documents for their applications via electronic forms. This capture and
uploading would be opposed to NCT internal data capturers receiving the applications and
capturing them on the filer's behalf. Such internal recapturing would duplicate what the
applicants would also have already done in their operations. The considerable advantage
inherited at this point was eliminating "double capturing" (once by the filer then again by the
NCT data capture) and getting the information at the source. This innovation also stopped the
potential for multiple capturing errors and the time it took to register an application on the
12system. This also drastically reduced the need for a sizeable internal data capturing capability
within the NCT as applications were now captured at source.
In addition, a reporting system was developed both for NCT internal staff to view and track
relevant Case Management; operational information needed to assist in performing their
functions. The system was further developed for external stakeholders (Debt Councillors and
Credit Providers) to view submitted applications. The major ones were the ability to view the
status of their applications via the efiling interface. They could also see at what stage the
application was, in terms of being in the queue for processing or adjudicated upon and an order
issued.
Phase 3 Electronic Payments System.
The third phase was to develop the ability within the system for Debt Counsellors to make
electronic payments through the system for filing Debt Rearrangement applications. When a
DRA application is filed, a filing fee tariff needs to be paid before the NCT processes that
application. Traditionally filers would have to deposit at a Nedbank branch for cases they
wished to file. Then they would add the deposit slip to the submitted application as proof of
such payment. In turn, the Registrar's office and Finance departments would need to verify
payment through a cumbersome manual process before processing that application.
Implementing an electronic epayments system meant that filers would transfer funds
electronically and have a unique payment reference number issued to them to load pre-
payments onto their Case Management System user profile. Then the file against the prepaid
amount would appear. As they file, the system would automatically deduct the filing fee
amount for that application. Once the balance in the filers system user profile reflects an
amount less than required to file and application, the system prohibits any further filings. Apart
from this intervention, introducing a prepay system which means no filer can ever have an
application processed if no funds are available in their Epurse account, also made the entire
process simpler and much easier to reconcile payments. For the filer, it also did away with the
requirement for deposit slips. It allowed them to effect an electronic funds transfer over the
internet in the comfort of their surroundings where filing fee payments were concerned.
Phase 4 Online adjudication
The fourth phase was to develop the electronic capability for Tribunal Members to receive the
allocation of applications they needed to adjudicate on. Then it would be for them to review
the application, grant/refuse the order and issue the order directly to the filer. All these tasks
would be performed online. This meant that the entire value chain was now electronic from the
filing of the application to the allocation of the application to a Tribunal member and finally to
the adjudication and issuing of the order back to the filer.
This function eliminated the need to physically move files through this process, which
drastically reduced the turnaround times for the finalisation of cases. A substantial reduction
in the cost per case finalisation was also achieved as the improvement pushed up the number
of cases. This reduction ensued because a Tribunal member could process a higher number of
cases per day for the same fees rate. This, coupled with some leading adjudication business
process reengineering, streamlined this automation even further in capturing these applications
onto the system. And the approach to adjudicating is made paved the way for an 8-fold increase
13in the daily throughput of finalising these applications. This process is explained elsewhere in
this paper.
As the system was developed, security was of paramount importance given that these
applications hold sensitive information such as consumer ID numbers and consumer financial
information. And some of the critical interventions built into the system to address this include:
(a) Data and password encryption;
(b) Watermarking of issued orders;
(c) Registration system with data partitioning for each user; and
(d) Audit Trails for all transactions.
Summary walkthrough the above Case Management System diagram
Below is a high diagrammatic representation of the automated value chain in production and
now known as the NCT Case Management System.
As depicted in the above diagram, the filing party will register as part of the security vetting
process. If the registration process is successful, then they will have a user profile created on
the system. They will then be able to sign on from anywhere in the country; and apply, validated
in real-time. This approach ensured that if any errors are encountered, the system will
immediately indicate to the filer to be corrected.
14Once the application is captured correctly, the accompanying supporting documents are
submitted and electronically work-flowed to the Registrar's office. The latter will be alerted to
the fact that a new application is waiting to be processed. At the same time, after successfully
applying, the filer will immediately be notified; and given a unique case number; for the
application; for tracking purposes.
The registrar will then sign on to the system and allocate the application to a Tribunal member
for adjudication via the electronic workflow system. This approach is enacted in conjunction
with the oversight Tribunal member for DRAs.
Once the application has been allocated to a Tribunal member, they, in turn, will receive an
alert to indicate they have cases waiting in their Case Management System workspace awaiting
adjudication. The Tribunal member will then sign on to the system from any remote location
and view all applications assigned to them for adjudication. The Tribunal member then selects
the case and can view the application details and all the supporting documentation to decide.
Once they reach a verdict by clicking a button, they can generate an order granted or refusal;
and issue the same directly to the filer. The generated order also gets sent to the affected Credit
Providers who are party to the application to complete the process. The case management
system is already fully populated with the addresses of the 8595 registered credit providers.
The filer and credit providers linked to the application, in turn, will receive an alert and can
sign on; to retrieve the resulting order for the following steps to take effect. The system, now
the automation "backbone" of the DRA case management process, also handles the electronic
storage of non-Debt rearrangement matters. That storage includes records of hearings and the
relevant information about these. The NCT is also continuing to enhance the system in several
areas to capitalize on further efficiency gains introduced. An example of this in the immediate
is to allow filers to submit withdrawal applications electronically.
11. Process Redesign
The case for process redesign can be likened to changing the process from transporting ice
through a pipe to simplifying the ice by melting it. Even when the water in its solid form is ice,
it is still water and can move through a line designed as a conveyer belt carrying ice blocks.
But the process is excruciatingly slow and measured. Process redesign entails converting the
ice first into the water. Then the flow becomes much more accessible. Link this redesign to the
actual packaging, then the efficiency doubles. In our metaphor, this would mean shortening
and straightening the pipe over and above liquifying the ice into the water.
DRA applications arise from section 86(8)(a) of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (NCA).
Once all the consumer's creditors have accepted the debt counsellor's (DC) repayment proposal,
the debt counsellor may file the agreed repayment plan with the Tribunal to be confirmed as
an order of the Tribunal.
The application is filed remotely by the DC on the Tribunal's Case Management System
(CMS).
The application filed with the Tribunal is typically composed of the following documents –
(1) Form TI.138 (completed and signed by the debt counsellor);
15(2) Copy of consumer's identity document;
(3) A signed document granting the debt counsellor power of attorney to bring the
application to the Tribunal;
(4) A signed document from each credit provider granting permission for the application
to be served by email;
(5) A signed letter from each credit provider agreeing to the debt counsellor's repayment
proposal;
(6) A draft consent order setting out the agreed repayment terms for each credit agreement;
(7) Proof that the application was served on every credit provider;
(8) A copy of the repayment proposal form which was sent to the credit providers; and
(9) A form setting out the income and expenditure for the consumer.
The Tribunal member checks every aspect of the application to ensure that all the required
documents are attached and correctly completed and signed. If the debt counsellor made any
error, the application is formally refused, and the debt counsellor must file a new corrected
application.
Each form and document in the application contains unique information and requires a specific
checking process to ensure correct and acceptable. For example, interest rates must be
scrutinised to ensure that they fall within the regulated limits. The power of attorney forms
must specify the DC's authority and be signed clearly and legibly. For purposes of this paper,
only the draft consent order will be considered.
The draft consent order and the accuracy of the information it contains is the essence of the
order issued by the Tribunal. Therefore, it forms the core of the checking process and
constitutes the most time taken by the Tribunal member when checking an application.
Before the change, the draft consent order contained a table reflecting all the repayment
information for every credit agreement. This information was obtained from the credit provider
acceptance letters. The table mirrored the following information for each credit agreement –
(a) Credit provider name;
(b) Current Outstanding balance;
(c) Payment Period;
(d) Annual Interest rate;
(e) Monthly Instalment; and
(f) Monthly fees/Insurance.
All the relevant information had to be accurately reflected in the draft consent order. This aspect
presented the biggest challenge for DC's. DC's found it very difficult to copy (and interpret)
financial information from the acceptance letter and insert it into the draft consent order table.
16Tribunal members were forced to check that the information in the table matched the
information contained in the acceptance letters. Any numerical error would have a material
impact on the consumer's repayment plan. Therefore, any mistake made by the DC would result
in the application being refused.
12. The New Consent Order Process
The extensive time spent checking the consent order table formed the project's focus to improve
the DRA process. The original aim of the table was to present a neat and clear summary of the
repayment agreements in the consent order itself. The original consent order was developed
when applications were manually printed and filed with the Tribunal. Although the table
achieved this aim, it resulted in a very challenging process for a DC to enter the financial
information in the table.
The introduction of CMS allowed DCs to file their applications electronically; this made it
easier for the DC to enter the financial information in the table. Still, the challenge of capturing
the information accurately remained. The new consent order project aimed to try and remove
the requirement to enter financial information entirely.
Ultimately, this change required a straightforward but significant step. The source of the
agreement between the credit provider and the consumer always remains the acceptance letter
from the credit provider. The letter also contains further information relating to the agreement
between the parties.
Simply attaching the acceptance letters to the consent order would avoid presenting the
information in a table. The new consent order template was designed and then distributed to
Tribunal members and staff for input and comment. The proposed change to the format and
process was sent to staff, Tribunal members, and debt counsellors for their input and analysis.
The response was overwhelmingly positive.
ICT then designed the change to the system, and a full-time Tribunal member tested it. Once
testing was complete and approved, it was implemented on the live system. That change
resulted in a dramatic increase in productivity and a decrease in cost. The full-time Tribunal
members tested the new consent order system and found that 80 matters could now be
adjudicated per day per member. The process reflects a 100% increase from the previous 40
matters per day per member.
The new process was implemented in May 2021 and immediately resulted in a substantial
improvement in DRA adjudication. The Tribunal receives approximately 2000 new DRA
matters per month. In 2016 the Tribunal had a caseload of about 20 000 cases pending
adjudication at any given time. In July 2021, the pending caseload was 2500 matters. Any new
DRA matter filed must remain on the system for 15 business days before it can be adjudicated.
The period allows any party to file an answering affidavit opposing the application. Essentially,
this means the Tribunal is mainly up to date with its DRA matters.
The earlier checking points before process redesign were:
(1) DC Application;
17(2) Tribunal Member (Adjudication):
o Accuracy;
o Legality;
o Interest rates;
o Completeness (inclusion of all acceptance letters); and
o Whether it solves within the economic life span of the consumer;
(3) The number of columns and specimen columns and rows of Drat Order:
o DC populating it – time-consuming;
o Tribunal checking it – time-consuming point;
o The legal requirement of the lawfulness of the content of orders as a severe
constraint;
o Checking points of the likes of interest rates legal curbs, Reserve bank
determination of upper limits, and how they are determined – Gazetted; and
o Various levels and types of regulated loans/credit that are regulated i.e., secured
and unsecured credits, are extracted from the table from annual circulated rates
when they change. We list them without mentioning the actual rates as they are
subject to change and other components.
13. Conclusions
It has been established in this case study that 30% of the part-time tribunal members' budget
covers DRA matters, while 70% of the part-time tribunal members' budget covers non-DRA.
The Non-DRAs, which are only 0.7% of all the cases of the NCT, chew up 70% of the
adjudication budget of the NCT. Due to automation alone, the NCT was able up to the second
half of 2020 to have the cost of adjudicating one DRA matter at R78.61, but during the
commencement of 2021, that unit cost was reduced further to R39.31 because of adding the
component of the process reengineering on top of the automation. This is a feat that can be
emulated by other public entities, capitalising on the 4th Industrial Revolution (4IR) and
conscientious process reengineering.
The summary table for 2019/2020 and 2020/2021, on page 11 of this paper, indicates that while
the NCT was in the highest budget crisis of the pandemic, and its budget was reduced in two
chunks from R66 215 000 in 2019/20 to R60 594 000, in 2020/21, which is 8.5%, it still went
on to meet all its objectives and had an R8 548 000 surplus. The Biblical feeding of 5000 with
five loaves and two fishes with 12 barrels leftover (John 6:1-5) comes to mind. This "miracle"
resulted from combining process reengineering and automation.
The winning and requisite formula to achieve such feats, even in the industrialising world, is
the combination of brilliant 4IR skills and a conscientious professional cohort at technocratic
18skills and leadership levels. Excellence cannot be concealed in existence despite even rampant
acts of sabotage in political backstabbing that many fear in public entities.
The panacea to the cash shortages and increasing demands of the services of public entities can
be mitigated and indeed defeated, not by seeking more funding but by working smarter and
simplifying the workstreams. Automating the simplified work processes assures one of the
gains as if the budget has indeed been increased, even though all that must be done is eliminate
the wasteful working methods and speed what remains up. Every work area can achieve this
when the operators, both management and staff, decide to put their minds to it and avoid petty
squabbles and political machinations that never get anything done.
It all starts with the appointment of leaders, managers, and staff as well as the adjudicators.
Appointments made based on political or nepotism type bases are the first fault line to guard
against. Even politically affiliated persons appointed to ensure that they will push and not
sabotage the will of the elected formations in given manifestos should be drawn from skilled
and well-heeled consummate professionals. Even family businesses logically fund and even
import skills even from other countries. There is no deeper self-interest than appointing a
manager in a family business. But hiring cousins or friends of the family without the skills and
the will to perform is courting disaster.
The first hypothesis in this study was that even in the face of dwindling resources, public
entities can still maximise gains in productivity and continue to meet their mandates, even
under serious constraining factors like the Covid-19 intervening pandemic been proven.
The second hypothesis that through the combination of Automation and Process Redesign,
productivity can be doubled, despite severe intervening constraints, has also been proven.
The third hypothesis is that the combination of genuine interest in individuals and their
innovative mindsets, with a simple will to meet a public mandate to solve real-life dire needs
of fellow humans coupled with competence and intelligence, ensures solutions at all costs; has
also been confirmed. In the result, all the null hypotheses fall away in the result
14. Recommendations
All state-owned entities should combine automation and process reengineering to maximise
efficiencies and optimise savings on expenditure. In some areas, the dwindling tax base, mired
by continued threats of corruption and institutionalised looting, should be given a reprieve by
the leaders, managers, and staff of public entities. But the leaders matter more ins setting the
tone and freeing the led to innovate and excel with accolades flowing to that excellence.
It is also recommended that when the Debt Relief stream of cases is triggered by the
implementation of the National Credit Amendment Act No 7 of 2019 (NCAA), it should also
be handled along ten lines of the current Debt Review Applications (RDAs). While the DRAs
enter the NCT as consent orders applications, to be made orders of the Tribunal, the same will
by and large happen for Debt Relief matters. Where such matters fail to resolve as already
agreed settlements being made orders of the tribunal, they change their nature into non-DRAs
and become some of the fewer but budget guzzling matters before the Tribunal. Therefore, the
atomization budget should match the existing and even overlap the case management system
already handling DRAs. This aspect requires the Department of Trade, Industry and
19Competition, the National Credit Regulator, the National Consumer Tribunal, and the National
Treasury.
15. Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge inputs of raw data from ten records of the NCT on case statistics and
budgets from Neema Govan (Acting Chief Finance Officer), Ms. Hazel Alwar (Full-time
Tribunal Member), Mr. Lucky Rabotapi (Registrar). Without the inputs, of these individuals,
this paper would not have been possible and as detailed.
16. References
Alase, A. (2017). The Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA): A Guide to a Good
Qualitative Research Approach. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies
(IJELS). ISSN 2202-9478. Vol. 5 No. 2; April 2017. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.2p.9
Alwar, H. (2021). Lewis Appeal judgment - implications for decisions on leave to refer.
National Consumer Tribunal. In internal Email to Tribunal Executive Chairperson.
Bass, B.M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend
organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2), 130-139.
Bryant, A. (2011). Leading Issues in Business Research Methods. Academic Conferences
Limited. Available from http://academic-publishing.org/business-research.htm
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research Methods in Education. Routledge.
Retrieved from https://gtu.ge/Agro-Lib/RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok.pdf
Coughlan; M.; Cronin, P.; & Ryan; F. (2007). A step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part
1: quantitative research. British journal of nursing (Mark Allen Publishing). 16. 658-63.
10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6260347_
Faris, J.A., Hurter, E., Cassim, F. and Sibanda, O.S. (2000-2008). Civil Procedure – Only Study
Guide for CIP 201G. University of South Africa.
Hendrie, D. (2015). In praise of technocracy: Why Australia must imitate Singapore. University
of Melbourne. https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/in-praise-of-technocracy-why-australia-
must-imitate-singapore
Krauss, Steven. (2005). Research Paradigms and Meaning Making: A Primer. Qualitative
Report. 10. 758-770. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224909183_Research_Paradigms_and_Meaning_M
aking_A_Primer/citation/download
20Marion, R. and Uhl-Bien, M. (2003). Complexity theory and Al Qaeda: Examining complex
leadership. Management Department Faculty Publications. 9. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/9
Unicaf University, (2019) Lecture's Notes on Quantitative Research Methods, UU-DOC-801,
Retrieved from https://zm-vle-uu.unicaf.org/mod/folder/view.php?id=35615
Uhl-Bien, Mary; Marion, Russ; and McKelvey, Bill,(2007). Complexity Leadership Theory:
Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Institute Faculty
Publications. 18. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/leadershipfacpub/18
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R. (2011), Complexity leadership theory. In: Bryman, A., Collinson,
D., Grint, K., Jackson, B., Uhl-Bien, M., editors. The Sage Handbook of Leadership. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Van Rooyen & others v The State 2002 (5) SA 246 (CC), L D M du Plessis obo L Pretorius v
Department of Justice Unreported award number GA 26670 considered by Commissioner P J
van der Merwe 17 December 2002, and President of SA & others v Reinecke 2014 (3) SA 205
(SCA); (2014) 35 ILJ 1585 (SCA).
Zucker, D. M. (2009). How to Do Case Study Research. Teaching Research Methods in the
Social Sciences. 2. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/nursing_faculty_pubs/2
21You can also read
