When will Kuwait be successful?
Successful localization in any country and on any continent is built on a phased approach: first, preparing the national workforce; second, transferring expertise to them; and finally, replacing foreign personnel, with no step preceding another for any reason. Why? If the state’s objective is to localize expertise and knowledge—not merely to achieve localization on paper—then these are the correct steps that yield satisfactory results.
We cannot deny that successful localization typically begins with an assessment of national expertise, whose performance outcomes are not adversely affected by the absence of foreign experts, without setting a fixed, pre-determined percentage target. The success of localization is not measured solely by asking: “What is the percentage of nationals in this or that field?” Rather, it is measured by focusing on the level of service quality and productivity. If productivity does not increase, it remains stagnant; if it does not decline, that is acceptable. It is also crucial to openly and clearly acknowledge the continued need for rare expertise that is not available locally, which necessitates continuing to attract such expertise from abroad for a longer period.
It is a mistake for nationals to learn “after” assuming sensitive positions, because training and experience are highly required in specific fields such as medicine and education, as well as in certain other technical specialties—not after foreign contracts have ended. It is also very important in this context to link localization to performance, and to evaluate national performance and productivity from one phase to the next. It is erroneous to treat localization as a single administrative decision that applies uniformly across all sectors, with the same pace of implementation. Sectors such as education and health, and other vital areas of life, should not be treated like ordinary administrative matters.
In my view, education and teachers are greater than merely graduates holding degrees in specific subjects according to the required material. Education requires training, knowledge, and the ability to communicate and interact with students in all their circumstances, both inside and outside the classroom, as well as to assess student performance. It is this that determines the level of an entire generation.
It is self-evident that we should ask a simple question: If a sector is fully localized, but the quality of its services declines by 20%, do we consider that a success and in line with our aspirations? Conversely, if another sector is localized at 85%, with 15% of foreign expertise remaining to train nationals, transfer knowledge, and monitor them simultaneously, and in the end the sector’s quality and productivity improve—which of these two scenarios represents more successful localization?
It is commendable that Kuwait strives toward the day when it relies on its sons and daughters in all state sectors, and that we reach a stage where doctors, engineers, teachers, university professors, experts, and technicians are Kuwaiti—not merely because of their nationality, but because they possess the knowledge, experience, and competence that make them the best suited for their positions. This is the difference between “Kuwaitization” as a national goal and “Kuwaitization” as a target number we seek to reach at any cost.
Iqbal Al-Ahmad
