David Jones: public relations 1, common sense 0

By not forgiving, the victim’s anger and desire for revenge could poison her entire being. She could end up focussing on the offence to the exclusion of the compensation (both monetary and say a direct verbal apology from Mr McInnes).

Sometimes, victims believe that hatred, to the point of wholesale humiliation of the other party, will satisfy their thirst for vengeance and will somehow bring them healing. Fat chance.

Forgiveness, is a problem for many, because they are unclear about what forgiveness really is. All too often forgiveness gets confused with reconciliation.

The act of reconciliation comprises two parts: paying reparation and granting forgiveness. And reparations itself is a three-act play.

To recap: when spoken to and/or interfered with in an unacceptable manner, Ms Fraser-Kirk must have thought: “what was that?” She was undoubtedly uncomfortable, not knowing where to turn for help. Her heart sank. She felt dirty. She was sad, astonished and embarrassed, as well as fearful of the ramifications of reporting the CEO for his unacceptable conduct.

With respect to reparations, Act I is the confession by the victimiser: admitting the act (“Yes Ms Fraser-Kirk, I acted improperly”). The act has to be admitted, aloud, to the person offended, or the entire process stops and no one gets anywhere. Speaking to the alleged victim via the megaphone of the print media or through the Chairman of the board just doesn’t cut it.

Act II is the act of repentance: asking for forgiveness (“I am sorry”). The Chairman of the David Jones board, Mr Savage, was quick to acknowledge the wrongdoing. But the sin is fundamentally not his to atone.

Act III is the penalty: accepting the penalty (“OK, I will pay the price”). After all, humiliation and inappropriate behaviour is, well just, humiliation and inappropriate behaviour. If we believe the media reports, no murder took place. We aren’t talking International Criminal Court cases after all. And the damage to Ms Fraser-Kirk has to be fixed. And can be fixed.

If Mr McInnes or the corporation ignore Act III, then the confession and repentance aren’t worth a hill of beans. It goes without say that Ms Fraser-Kirk must ensure that the extent to which she wants to be compensated reflects the hurt she suffered. Suing David Jones for an obscene amount plucked out of thin air would indicate to many, including this non-lawyer, that she has crossed over from being victimised into that damp, dark, dingy den of greed and revenge often called “victim anger”.

Once the former CEO confesses his sins, pays reparations, seeks forgiveness and forgiveness is granted then the two are reconciled and both can go back to working for their stockholders.

But getting to the point of reconciliation is often difficult given the egos involved. Just ask national French soccer team whose egomaniacs cost France its chances of success in South Africa.

The easiest thing for the David Jones board to do was to bypass reconciliation and instead trumpet an outstanding CEO’s departure.