Losing Out

“Mana, siapa rugi [1]? Whose loss is it?” I snapped.

The conversation started pleasantly enough with an enquiry, from the MD of the NGO I have been placed with, as to why I stopped the English classes for her staff. I did not stop the class, I corrected her, it has been put on hold indefinitely as it seems that neither she, nor her staff, can fit me into their ‘very busy’ schedule. I reminded her that they were given the liberty from the start to pick the day, time and duration for the classes. But the arrangement lasted only three sessions; classes were being cancelled one after the other. And after five cancellations in a row, I was left to wonder about their interest in learning the language. Rather than shut the door on them, I told them to call me when they are ready to start again.

She told me that I erred in that respect; I should have told them when the next session would be and not leave the decision to them! In the same breath, she queried about the failure of the business planning sessions Esther and I were supposed to be conducting with her staff. And when told it was again the problem of one delay after another; Esther and I can fix a day to continue the session but, inevitably, they are not ready and it had to be postponed... and postponed… till we decided to stop waiting on them and told them to call us when they are ready to start again.

We were then chastised for giving her staff too much latitude, that we should be the ones setting definite deadlines for her staff!

I sought her illumination on a few things: firstly, are we dealing with adults? If so, are we expected to take the rod to them if they refuse to comply with our wishes? Yes, we can set the time, but if that is not respected, what then? Secondly, has she forgotten that she also cancelled or postponed some of the sessions when she planned staff meetings at the same times? In spite of the fact that she admitted that agreed on dates were ignored by her and her staff, but not Esther or I – who always showed up on time to empty rooms, and empty promises, it still did not deter her from her original contention: we should be the ones establishing the deadlines.

I was exasperated. But not, I felt, without good reason. We are just mentors and advisors, I reminded her, and if we are to assume administrative responsibility, then we should be granted the authority to fulfill it. And that was when I posed the rather pointed questions: Does the NGO feel we can bring anything into the organisation? If it does, who will be the real losers if they chose not to learn what they could from the knowledge, skills and experience we possess? Siapa rugi…?

We felt this ‘loss’ for the NGO all the more because of our ‘dual’ placement: we have to effectively serve two organisations – the NGO and the Diocese of Maliana. This ‘dualism’ have allowed us access to two different cross-sections of East Timorese society, putting us in a unique position to instantly compare and contrast the behavioural traits or quirks we are presented with regularly. Or we might just enquire about it directly from the religious in the Diocese who welcome such enquiries; they seem to prefer approaching matters directly, and not obliquely, as is normally the case here. Being able to sieve out what is attributable to cultural norms and differences from what is attributable to an inability to understand, or a deficiency of the language, or simply a propensity for work avoidance have, we felt, allowed us to work more effectively and not be overly concerned about tiptoeing over what are, supposedly, cultural sensitivities.

And what is all the more frustrating is that after nine months with the NGO, we have achieved NOTHING. Perhaps it better be made clear from the onset, this sentiment is not the result of any task and/or result oriented culture/environment we worked in for a major part of our lives. We knew from the experience of our previous placement in PNG: its all about baby steps, tapering one’s expectations to local conditions, sowing the seeds of change but not seeing the change etc. etc. Furthermore, this placement has been a demanding one as we need to juggle the demands of both organisations (i.e. serving two masters) with finite resource (i.e. our time); we have to do so by establishing realistic goals, for ourselves and the organisations, so that we can pace ourselves and not burn out.

We felt the way we do because we feel that the most of basic concepts we are attempting to introduce were not being embraced by the NGO: transparency and accountability. The concept of being honest and responsible in one’s dealings had gained no traction in the NGO.

And to make matters worse, we feel this has manifested itself in disastrous ways: after 10 years in operation, the NGO’s organisational structure does not allow for, and neither does it have, a system of internal governance; they have no accounting system in place to track income and expenditure; they do not know how to prepare a budget – they have been using budgets prepared by other NGOs as a template for their proposals; and not understanding budgeting, they have no idea how to manage projects. The feedback we have got from their remaining funders have not been too flattering; they have been clamoring for transparency and accountability from the NGO for years, but their calls have not been heeded.

Our cards were laid on the table at the end of that little altercation; that we put the wasted nine months behind us and start anew with no hidden agendas, being honest, respectful and speaking directly with each other. The MD was, seemingly, in wholehearted agreement and wanted the business planning sessions with the staff re-initiated as soon as possible.

We had two very fruitful sessions within two weeks after our little spat. Hope springs eternal…

The sessions were revelations in themselves. We discovered that business and management principles are not alien to the staff of the NGO; most of the NGO’s facilitators have university degrees or are in the process of obtaining one. SWOT analysis, 4-Ps of marketing, business costing and capitalisation were subjects a few of them covered in business study courses in the university or elsewhere. We queried their need for ‘capacity building’ in these areas; evidently they have latent talent that they have not bothered to tap! It was decided that our focus would be to teach them how to apply these principles, and how to put it all together into a coherent document (i.e. proposal).

We were the also mindful of the NGO’s other problems: some of the business ventures they intended to, or had, embarked on were not viable. Part of the problem, we discovered, was that they were struggling with the concept of costs due to the deficiencies in the language [Read ‘Just Semantics?’ for more.] In getting them to understand the importance of ‘costs’, we managed to show that some of the ventures were just not feasible – when we did a cost analysis with them on their pet project, it was discovered they were losing money from the get go.

Ultimately, we steered them into doing a SWOT analysis on the NGO itself. And when that was done, it was discovered that: firstly, the educational level of the facilitators is relatively high – most are graduates and are all computer literate. Secondly, there is a dire need in the sucos (villages) for language and numeracy training; seemingly, this hinders the progress of sustainability projects, as there is no way to gauge the viability of projects when there are improper, or no, records made. Thirdly, the NGO’s facilitators are experienced trainers and pride themselves on being trainers of trainers. Lastly, they have the equipment (video projectors) and, after the renovations and extensions to the office building, extra space that can be used for classrooms. With strengths and opportunities staring them in the face, we initiated a shift in mindset: they can become local trainers – they understand the needs and obstacles of the sucos, and can design business-training courses pegged at the literacy levels of the average suco. This in turn can help them understand and manage sustainability projects better.

In this endeavour, there was also no need to re-invent the wheel. We managed to download the 'Simple bookkeeping and business management skills' training course material used by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in Africa; it was designed to teach totally illiterate women in remote African villages how to manage a business. The material could be freely used and/or adapted for local conditions, and it was shown to the facilitators. They were enthusiastic and agreed that the material was suitable and could be readily adapted.

Evidently, there is a demand for training of this nature as international NGOs wanting to engage in sustainability projects with sucos are hindered by this lack of basic skills in the local populace. Furthermore, in our discussions with a few International NGOs, they indicated they would gladly outsource business skills training, if they can find suitable organisations / persons to do it, rather than handle it themselves.

The time to engage in strategic planning is now ripe, and the focus is how to turn THE NGO into a training organisation: to re-image themselves as capacity builders. All went away excited to work on the plan and we were supposed to meet in a week’s time. The expectant buzz we felt at the conclusion of that last meeting made us believe that we turned the corner at last. Or so we thought.

Esther and I showed up at the appointed time for the strategic planning session to find no one in the office…

Reference

[1] – Bahasa Indonesia. Directly translated: Who lose?