I’ve been floating around my hometown of southern KZN lately.
Decay going through its renewal phase, much like much of South Africa.
But the energy feels different this time.
I find myself asking: what happens when we concentrate skilled economic activity into a few economic hubs within a country?
The towns and cities generating the most impactful talent – the very people who could be change agents – lose those skills, and retain what’s left to try build generationally.
On a broader scale, I find myself asking: what happens when developing nations lose critical skills they’ve invested in to other countries?
Who am I to speak though – I’ve been part of the problem.
After visiting my old school, where my mum was also a lifelong career teacher, I started thinking more concretely about value – especially the intangible kind in education.
I originally went in thinking the key was teaching tiny humans how to educate themselves – how to challenge themselves, encourage healthy debate, and think independently. If everyone has access to a device these days, and kids are already hooked on social media, then maybe the real issue is: how do you get them excited about learning?
From that conversation, I started simplifying the problem. And then came up with a potential solution I wasn’t planning.
How do you make education accessible?
Start with the numbers.
The school has a shortfall R2.5 million a year to run its operations after government funding.
Now layer in reality:
500 students. R3500 in school fees annually. (Current fees)
Most can’t afford to eat and are already subsidised through feeding schemes.
And if you’re hungry, don’t count on school fees to flow.
So here’s my pitch for generation leaps.
50 students from high-income groups contributing R5,000 per month over 10 months = R2.5 million.
→ That covers the entire government shortfall and stabilises the foundational infrastructure.
200 students paying R350 per month over 10 months = R700,000 annually. (Current fees)
→ That maintains base school fees and supports a wider build-out.
That’s effectively 50% of the school capacity generating enough revenue to support 50% subsidised school community thats representative of the immediate community. Practically a wealthy family of two kids schooling at one private school rate, while donating places to two additional students.
In return, that donation goes towards:
- Classrooms that better represent the diversity of the population and learning how to collaborate early
- More economically capable people leaving the schooling system, and potentially reducing decay, education redistribution at scale, unemployment, crime and unplanned pregnancies.
- Building infrastructure and systems that move us forward, at scale.
Now we have a base that works.
From there, you start building.
To kit out a digital library in a school:
50 students with devices at ~R12,000 each = R600,000.
In one year, that’s a functioning digital library.
But infrastructure alone doesn’t create change.
Bring in talent and experience that now resides in the community and rotate volunteer classes sharing real world skills once a month. Over time, that becomes a generational leap.
In year one alone, you could generate an extra R100,000 directed toward underpaid governing body staff – through structured programs that reward impact, fund further studies, and create pathways where to better opportunities and free-ing up entry positions for fresh faces.
Funding flows toward those building from the ground up.
It’s a small price to pay.
Its all about sustainability.
But once you solve the baseline, new problems emerge: security, staffing, and sustainability.
If you build a programme that supports a truly diverse student base – and shape it through strategic involvement – you create deeper relationships that sustain communities over time. Those schools begin to propagate impact beyond themselves.
Now imagine year two (And a mental note of a 5 year depreciation cycle on the library assets).
R100,000 diverted to sporting
R100,000 diverted to drone building equipment – perhaps the science club can figure out who to get cheap drones up in the air – skills redeployed to agriculture, private/public security, national defence.
R100,000 to drama classes
R100,000 to infrastructure maintenance and building
R200,000 to challenge kids with resources, mentors and support to make communities thrive. Perhaps boreholes and solar outlays over time in a central hub that people need to come to.
Compound this over a generation (12 year programme), and perhaps we could have a generation that does not need a tertiary education for most roles that don’t need certification, but experience.
Now we teach people independence, value creation and sharing
School halls rented out to the private sector (perhaps discounted for the key community groups – senior citizen clubs, night schools, tuitions, community functions, religious groups)
Vacant space and facilities rented out to private security control rooms. Now you have a 24/7 presence closer to key community assets.
Prioritise placement of students to parents in in low income faculty and private security so the community has a vested interest making the system work.
Share the matured formulas with neighbouring communities.
Now people aren’t just part of the system – they see themselves changing it. That effect propagates outward.
Back to the bigger question.
Johannesburg has been good to me these past 15 years. It’s put me in rooms that sharpened my skills – especially across business and sustainable change management over time.
But maybe the real question is this:
If the corporate environment is built to bring people in when needed and discard them when they’re not…
And communities are the lifeblood of sustainable change…
Am I in the wrong place?