top of page

Bridging the Compliance Gap: Central Employment Equity Reporting and Divisional Accountability – making the sector targets work for a divisional structure

Writer's picture: Gavin StoneGavin Stone
A diverse team engaging with data on a laptop, symbolic of strategic discussions related to the article titled 'Bridging the Compliance Gap: Central Employment Equity Reporting and Divisional Accountability – making the sector targets work for a Divisional Structure'.

In South Africa's evolving Employment Equity landscape, a significant challenge threatens many organisations: the disconnect between central reporting and divisional accountability. With the amended Employment Equity Act raising compliance stakes, failure to bridge this gap could prove costly for both holding companies and their subsidiaries.


Draft Sector Targets and Holding Company Implications

The Department of Employment and Labour's sector-specific Employment Equity targets have transformed the traditional compliance regulatory framework. For large corporations operating in South Africa, this has the following implications:

  • Centralised Reporting: Holding companies must report against predetermined sector targets.

  • Divisional Complexity: Different divisions may fall under different sector targets; however, only one may be chosen.

  • Compliance Responsibility: The holding company bears ultimate compliance responsibility for Employment Equity compliance.

  • Contract Eligibility: Compliance certification affects eligibility for government contracts.


Driving transformation with the sector targets

The central reporting paradox is that, while holding companies must report centrally, there is an assumption that central reporting alone drives change. However, without specific goals cascaded up from the divisional level, central reporting becomes merely an administrative exercise rather than a true strategic transformation tool.


The mathematical challenge remains: when divisions align to sector-specific targets, the consolidated data may reveal irregularities. The holding company must ensure that the sum of divisional targets produces the required aggregate result, impossible without explicit divisional targets.


The occupational profile matrix illustrates why divisional targets are essential without them:

  • Accountability dissolves and responsibility becomes generalized.

  • Measurement becomes disconnected from operational reality.

  • Divisional leaders can attribute underperformance to external factors.


While measurement happens centrally, actual transformation occurs within divisions:

  • Legal Compliance: The holding company bears legal compliance responsibility.

  • Operational Levers: Divisions control the operational levers that drive demographic change.

  • Operational Accountability: Without divisional targets, central requirements cannot translate into operational accountability.


Quarterly Measurement Drives Progress

As illustrated above, central annual reporting alone is insufficient for driving meaningful transformation. Therefore, organisations must establish quarterly measurements at both holding company and divisional levels:

  • Divisional Level:

    • Review progress toward meeting Employment Equity targets.

    • Document justifiable reasons for not meeting targets.

    • Ensure divisional leadership takes ownership of goals and targets.

  • Holding Company Level:

    • Consolidate divisional reports into an organisational dashboard.

    • Evaluate the alignment of divisional progress to company targets.

    • Provide governance and oversight on divisional accountability.

This quarterly practice establishes Employment Equity as a continuous business priority rather than an annual compliance exercise.


The High Cost of Non-Compliance

Failure to meet Employment Equity targets, particularly without properly documented justifiable reasons, carries severe consequences under the amended Act. Organisations unable to obtain their Employment Equity Certificate of Compliance face: contract disqualification from state contracts and tenders, exclusion from state business, financial penalties of up to 10% of annual turnover, reputational damage, and increased scrutiny during Department of Labour Director-General (DG) reviews.


These consequences are not a mere regulatory inconvenience but rather material business risks that have the potential to significantly impact an organisation's bottom line and strategic growth opportunities.


Closing the Accountability Gap

For holding companies serious about both compliance and transformation, the solution is clear: translate central reporting requirements into specific divisional targets with clear accountability mechanisms, monitored quarterly. The mathematical precision of target-setting, accountability mechanisms, and quarterly performance reviews must work in tandem with central measurement, providing the compliance framework and divisional targets necessary to drive transformation.


Subjects like Employment Equity will be on the agenda at our must-attend Annual Employment Conference (#AEC25) on the 19th of March 2025. Join John Botha, Johnny Goldberg, Craig Kirchmann, Dr. Mark Bussin, and many more speakers at the conference, as well as 250 registered delegates. Set your organisation up for success in 2025 and register today! (Register here: https://globalretailoutlet.co.za/showevent/73)


A promotional banner for GBSs Annual Employment Conference taking place hybridly on the 19th of March 2025.

Kommentare


bottom of page