As the age-old adage goes, the more things change, the more they remain the same. What this means is that turbulent changes do not affect reality on a deeper level and serve to cement the status quo.

Arguably, there is no adage that is more relevant to present-day South Africa than this one. One might easily be taken in, or even confused, by the flurry of ‘economic activity’ in South Africa, but, alas, it does not equate to productivity.

I still vividly recall the first time I visited my father’s office. As a youngster, I was impressed by the frantic activity that characterised the very existence of the office – that was prior to the advent and domination of computers, when paper still reigned supreme. As I expressed my admiration of what I was seeing, my father turned to me and said: “Never confuse activity with productivity.” These words live and resonate with me. I have since come across a variant: “Don’t confuse activity with being productive – many people are simply busy being busy.”

The thing is that, when you pick up a South African newspaper or visit a South African news site – the electronic variety of a newspaper – and start reading the economic and business section, there seem to be a lot on the go. But is there, really? Is there more noise than action, more action than noise, noise and action in equal measure, or is it all just noise?

Well, it is definitely not the South Africa spring. I am, of course, not referring to the weather; I am rather referring to South Africa in the context of the Arab Spring, which occurred in the spring of 2011.

As an observer, the impression that is apparently being created and nurtured is that there is change in the country – that is, real and rapid change. But is there, really? Or is it merely the cementing of the status quo? Come to think of it, what has really changed?

If South Africa could be compared to a television series, it might well be my present favourite, The Walking Dead. Admittedly, a few of those that constitute the cast might have been bitten, possibly crossed over, or even subjected to a more horrible demise – but the script remains largely unchanged. As in the series, there are the core characters, those that have been bitten or about to be bitten, and their replacements, the ‘new ones’.

As I write this piece, the trials and tribulations of the infamous State-owned enterprises (SOEs) continue to dominate the headlines, and so too does the South African Revenue Service. You are by now, without a doubt, punch drunk after having been subjected to more than your fair share of news of the sorry state of these public entities. Truth be told, none of the prominent SOEs were created after 1994 – they were merely renamed (you might read rebranded) and managed. You may add the adverb of your choice to ‘managed’, but, to make an informed choice and to guard against forming a subjective opinion, why not consider the SOEs’ financial statements?

When you do so, you will find consistency in the results, with a merry-go-round of managers joining and leaving, seemingly without real sanction for their lack of performance. Even more worrying and surprising, in equal measure, is that there are people who were part of the management teams – the executive, if you will – who somehow want to distance themselves from the lack of performance. If you were to believe them, or in them, they will change that to which they were, by the very definition, party to. Are these now the few good men? The use of the word ‘men’ is nongender-specific.

Although you might consider this adage to be extreme, but it does make a lot of sense: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” Take ‘nothing’ to mean ‘activity without productivity’.