The recent high-profile “spat” between Central Bank of Barbados Governor Dr DeLisle Worrell and International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Christine Lagarde has attracted much local clamour centred on the unpegging of the Barbados dollar.
This is understandable because in times of economic crisis, Barbados typically gets put under pressure to devalue its currency.
It is as though the IMF has a “one solution fits all” remedy for developing countries, and ties its blessings and resources to having this advice followed. Certainly many Caribbean nations and other developing economies have found this to be a familiar refrain.
In Barbados, even those who have been critical of Dr Worrell for his Central Bank stances applauded his frank, unflinching rejection of the IMF position. It resonates in a country whose national heroes share a common trait – feistiness.
For me, what stood out was his declaration that Barbados was receiving “bad advice”. I have been based in Barbados for 20 years and have found many examples that confirm this statement.
In the sphere of management consulting, more than 90 per cent of all fees paid in the Caribbean leave the region in the pockets of non-regional consultants.
This represents a very substantial import bill and a drain on foreign exchange, because these international consultants receive transportation, accommodation and per diem, as well as fees that are significantly higher than those paid to local consultants.
Left in their wake is a litany of studies, reports and other initiatives of questionable value and sustainability.
The question is, are we getting our money’s worth?
Over the past 14 years I have addressed this issue directly and the Caribbean Institute of Certified Management Consultants is an outgrowth of these efforts.
Consider a report prepared by a London-based consulting firm which concluded that management consulting in Barbados was too fragmented and won’t contribute more than $5 million in service export revenue over a five-year period.
Consequently, this trillion-dollar global industry has been relegated to a position of insignificance in the nation’s export strategy. As a result, the industry has been deprived of the developmental resources that are accorded to “priority” industries.
Local and regional consultants have long complained that governments and organizations utilizing international consultants don’t recognize that local and regional consultants are equally or better qualified than those they import.
Since local consultants are called on to provide both orientation and local context, why aren’t their contributions and expertise recognized and rewarded?
The Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the European Union and CARIFORUM has a development component that has placed hundreds of millions of dollars in the region over the past five to seven years.
These funds are intended to help the region transform its economies since the special treatment accorded sugar, bananas and so on was successfully challenged at the World Trade Organization. It is estimated that at least 50 per cent of the EPA funds are spent on consulting services.
Generally, the large “framework contracts” that are drawn up for the expenditure of these funds are led by non-regional firms using recycled templates from interventions developed for and used in other countries. Regional and local consultants are mainly used in support roles on projects that are defined by funders’ criteria.
It must be said that this is being done with the acquiescence of recipient governments. Why? How do we change it?
• Dennis Strong is founding president at the Caribbean Institute of Certified Management Consultants.
