Dear Editor,
There are some who see Guyana’s demographic makeup one way. That perhaps, explains why they see no need for any changes at GECOM. Moreover, they refuse to recognize that GECOM’s senior management staff, at various levels, should be a microcosm of what Guyana looks like. Thankfully, our own experience has taught us why they do not want any changes at GECOM.
It is in this context, that a disfigured demographic composition of GECOM’s senior management is frowned upon by a significant portion of the Guyanese electorate. It is therefore not mystifying to understand why amongst the populace there is discomfort with GECOM’s past electoral practices, and
underlying skepticism for its conduct of future elections.
It can be easily discerned from the writings of those who oppose change at GECOM that they have a mindset problem. Experts say there are two type of mindset; ‘growth and fixed mindsets.’
Persons with a ‘fixed mindset’ tend to have mindsets that are fixed and unchangeable, while persons with a ‘growth mindset’ possess abilities that can be developed and strengthened by reading widely and a predisposition to new ideas. Based on what the experts say, those who oppose changes fall into the category of persons with a fixed mindset.
But there is yet another dimension to the obstructionists’ perspective. They fail to recognize what is defined as “systems thinking” that is, an appreciation of how systems work independent of individual acts of bias or benevolence.
Looked at in a wider context, systems thinking demands a more rigorous but flexible approach to staff recruitment. It requires an organization to scrutinize its system for any bias that is endemic within the organization. Further, systems thinking calls upon the organization to examine its own workplace culture, policies and practices to identify and uproot any unnecessary biases and/or discriminatory practices inherent in its operations and its relationship with the public as well as the public’s perception of the organization.
This brings us to the issue of workplace diversity which refers to demographic variation of the staff within an organization, and above all, at the level of its senior management.
By proactively hiring diverse staff and leadership across attributes including – race, gender, sexual orientation and personality type, increased levels of professionalism, esprit de corps, peer assessment, innovation and effective problem solving can result. It would not be unreasonable to expect GECOM’s staff to possess these attributes.
In addition, GECOM stands to benefit enormously from diversity were its general staff and senior management to reflect the demographic makeup of the Guyanese electorate who, constitutionally, it is mandated to serve.
While acknowledging that, historically, recruitment at GECOM may have barred access to a wider representation of our country’s demographic makeup, workplace diversity practice does not necessarily mean ransacking the organization root and branch. However, whenever individual acts of prejudice or discrimination in any shape or form against others are uncovered and found to be evidence-based and grounded in fact, they should be addressed condignly and in accordance with established SOP’s and codes of conduct.
Since the voters’ list is generally accepted as a reflection of the ethnic makeup of Guyanese society, it follows that GECOM’s staff should mirror the country’s ethnic diversity but more importantly, must defend the voters’ list it produces as credible, reliable and accurate.
With a change in the face of our democracy following the sordid events of March- August 2020, there ought to be no mismatch nor faulty alignment between the new democratic opening and GECOM, an integral part of that opening.
How GECOM looks is only part of the equation, what matters most of all is its performance and output that should not in any shape or form facilitate a disfigured democratic process nor backsliding of that process.
Attempts to undermine the democratic opening through cynical calls for electoral reforms, the removal of its sitting Chairman, targeting the CEO and unfounded claims about staff being intimidated must be roundly condemned while principled positions, grounded in the struggle for democracy be upheld.
We must, by all necessary means, ensure that GECOM remains steadfast to its constitutional and legal obligations. GECOM must strive continuously to ensure that its performance is in alignment with the legitimate expectations of the electorate, which is, to have free and fair elections, a social and political phenomenon that appears to be anathema to some in our midst.
Yours faithfully,
Clement J. Rohee
