- To read former Eskom chairman Bobby Godsell's full resignation statement - click here
Two documents submitted last month to Eskom's board by chairman Bobby Godsell - who quit suddenly yesterday - and chief executive Jacob Maroga highlight the pair's conflicting approaches to securing the future of the state-owned enterprise.
Maroga's analysis of the problems besetting Eskom focused on race problems and organisational transformation, while Godsell's assessment homed in on a host of technical matters and unfulfilled management mandates.
The board is reported to have considered both documents before backing Godsell, who subsequently said in a memo to staff that Maroga had resigned.
Maroga's strategy document submitted to the board emphasised racial undertones within the organisation and "technocratic arrogance" - although he made no specific mention of race with regards to Godsell.
However, the chief executive's aversion to the technical approach outlined by Godsell was apparent in Maroga's call for "a new leadership paradigm and organisational transformation rather than superficial technical problem solving".
He disclosed that due to the need for a new paradigm, he had eschewed traditional business consultants in favour of advice from US-based Telein Group, experts in "leadership and organisational effectiveness".
Maroga revealed that last year a group of white former executive directors calling themselves the "sherpas" approached him with the desire to advise him through Eskom's difficult period.
"While I initially accepted this good gesture at face value, it became clear that their motivation was driven by the mentality of white supervision rather than a genuine desire to support the leadership of Eskom. We have since parted ways," Maroga said, alleging that the former managers had since launched a "campaign of criticism" against Eskom's leadership and the government.
By comparison, Godsell's notes on the roles of Eskom's shareholder, board and management made no reference to race, but expressed concern at management capacity to respond "effectively and quickly" to Eskom's major challenges.
"This concern does not arise in any way whatsoever from a sense that management are unwilling to do so. Nor... not working hard enough. Indeed, I have very real concerns on the time, responsibility and stress burden being carried by our chief executive and his executive team," Godsell wrote.
"The concern arises simply from a sense that we are failing to deal decisively with a number of important issues," he said, calling for the appointment of a chief operating officer to whom Maroga could delegate responsibility.
Godsell identified 41 outstanding issues that Eskom's executives were late in completing: including a national energy strategy, a business model, a funding model, required government guarantees, a list of customers with which Eskom had engaged about energy savings, the effect on price increases on the economy and the sale of non-core assets.
Both Maroga and Godsell attempted to provide clarity on the role of Eskom's board.
Maroga advocated redefining its role to be "more strategic with greater external collaborative leadership".
In what may have been veiled criticism of Godsell, he said: "The chairman and the board members are appointed on the basis of their extensive networks in these environments and they should use them on behalf of Eskom."