Getting beyond mere description
There are libraries of data that describe what is wrong, but rather less about
how and why there is relief and development failure. It is impossible to
address problems with much hope of success until there are some honest
attempts to figure out the how and why.
How?
I have been asking the question “How has relief and development failed?” for a
very long time. I used to ask a similar question when I had profit
responsibility in the corporate world and when I was a corporate CFO. When
you know “how” something is happening it becomes relatively easy to figure
out what to do about it.
After looking at this question from many, many different viewpoints over a
period of 30 odd years and working to “connect the dots”, I have concluded
that there are two big reasons. These are: (1) that some of the fund flow has
never been delivered to practical activities because it got mis-applied on the
way ... in other words corruption and fraud; and, (2) the resources have been
used legitimately but in a very ineffective manner. These two reasons explain
how the relief and development sector performance has been so poor.
In the relief and development sector organizations the “How?” question seems
to be “off limits”. I remember (in 1978, now almost 30 years ago) being
briefed by a World Bank staff person about the expectations they had of other
staff and consultants ... “you NEVER criticize other staff or other
consultants.” It did not seem such a bad rule or modus operandi at the time,
because, after all, we were a team, and we were doing important work for
the benefit of society. But like so many rules, the abuse of the rule became the
norm, and used to avoid addressing important professional issues.
In my own work in the relief and development sector I have been asking
“How?” whenever I have been on an assignment, and just as often when I see
things that put me on inquiry. With so much money flowing into
development ... recently some $50 billion a year and now growing, by some
accounts, to upwards of $100 billion a year in 2006 ... and yet so little to see
for it. How has the fund flow converted into so little tangible benefit?
How? In part it is corruption. In part it is incompetence. In combination, and
with weak accounting and financial controls, there is great scope for diversion
of funds and for using funds ineffectively.
Why?
Why has the relief and development performance been so poor? Why has
corruption and fraud not been stopped? Why have ineffective activities not
been terminated and replaced by effective activities? Once again there are two
big reasons: (1) senior people in the relief and development sector
organizations just do not want to go head to head to stop fraud, corruption
and ineffective activities; and, (2) the leadership and the staff do not know
how to change the prevailing practices that are failing to produce good
results. Both of these reasons are bad reasons.
Bluntly put, people are making the sorts of choice that suits them, without
shaking up the system so that it can make the relief and development sector a
success.
I contend that some of the staff in relief and development sector organizations
just do not want to go head to head to stop fraud, corruption and ineffective
activities because it is not in their self interest. There are a whole range of
levels of not wanting to rock the boat, and a big range of personal self
interest. Few people in big jobs in the relief and development sector want to
put their salaries and retirement benefits on the line, and those that are
heavily into ripping off the system do not want to end the gravy train.
The general public does not know very much about the type and the scale of
the rip off in relief and development sector organizations. These organizations
have a history of using government style fund accounting (cash based)
systems. This accounting makes it relatively easy to make rip off look like a
regular approved transaction. As long as the accounting stays this way rip off
will be facilitated, and those on the gravy train can go on living happily.
Society gets to pay the bills and the disenfranchised poor quietly suffer the
catastrophe of failed development.
But while it might be expected that the general public does not know, the
internal management information in relief and development organizations
does not inform the staff very much about performance either. Most of the
staff have no information about the “performance” of the organization as a
whole, even if they have some data about the work they are engaged on
themselves. Good loyal staff honestly believe that they are working hard and
doing a good job ... and are going to go on believing this as long as decent
management information is non-existent.
But it gets worse. There are big questions about corporate ethics, and the role
that the corporate world has in facilitating inappropriate aspects of the global
economy. It takes a lot to explain how people can be in so much poverty
when their land is being exploited by international oil and mining companies.
Something ... actually many things are clearly wrong.
As long as there is nobody to rock the boat the system can sustain itself, but
the results in terms of relief and development progress will not be very good.
And as things are at the present time, and have been for a long time now,
those that do not want change do not need to be much concerned.
The people that want change for the most part do not know how to change
the prevailing practices that are failing to produce good results. Making
change is not easy, and certainly making change in big and bureaucratic
institutions is really tough.
Making change that is going to have a significant impact on the prevailing
corrupt gravy train and international corporate profit bonanzas is not going to
be easy, nor is it going to be safe. But it is surely worth doing.
|