Seth Godin nails it again. He asks, Who is the world’s worst boss? The answer is “you.”

If you had a manager that talked to you the way you talked to you, you’d quit. If you had a boss that wasted as much as your time as you do, they’d fire her. If an organization developed its employees as poorly as you are developing yourself, it would soon go under.

I’m amazed at how often people choose to fail when they go out on their own or when they end up in one of those rare jobs that encourages one to set an agenda and manage themselves. Faced with the freedom to excel, they falter and hesitate and stall and ultimately punt.

The encouraging part is that we have a choice. Tomorrow I start with a new language teacher, and I face the question: Will I make choices that enable me to succeed? It’s so much easier to lower the bar, take the dignified way out.

I also liked this article about a young writer here in Phnom Penh. It’s a refreshing story; she’s going for it. She needs to lose the “V” sign though.

Comment »

We love to use the words “partner” and “partnership” in cross-cultural and development work, but do people on the other side feel like partners or means to an end? Do we really want partners, or do we want locals to help translate and implement our ideas and projects? We need to honestly ask.

If that catches your attention, see what Vinoth Ramachandra wrote this week.  He’s writing about Christian mission,  but it’s a short step to apply these thoughts to development work as well. Here’s something to wet your taste.

It is troubling that mission has been reduced to what we (the relatively well-off) do in other cultures and places, and does not seem to apply to what the poor can do for us and what we can do for them where we are. Those who live in the poorer South are constantly at the receiving end of “packaged” gospels, discipleship courses, leadership seminars, church-growth “gurus”, even sermons and “worship” DVDs from rich churches abroad. The latter have no desire to learn from others and, ironically, have little impact in their own societies…..

“Partnership” has been a buzz-word…cynics will say that it is simply a disguise for neo-colonial mission. Like “development” and “empowerment”, the gulf between the rhetoric and actual practice is enormous. Foreign organizations divert people as well as funds away from locally-initiated projects and ministries… Local staff are…merely the people who implement the programs started and funded by foreigners…

The problem is that what is “sexy” to donors in the U.S is often far removed from the real needs in the countries concerned. That some American donors may want to be educated does not seem to register on the thinking of local leaders.

We often turn to Western writers and intellectuals for guidance. But wise men and women in the Global South, like Vinoth Ramachandra, in Sri Lanka, are reduced to requesting an audience. If we listened to people like him more, and sought them out, we’d be better off.

Read his book to learn more, Subverting Global Myths: Theology and the Public Issues Shaping Our World. I just added it to my “wish list” at Amazon. It’s a scholarly work, not for everyone.  There are no reader reviews, but Stanley Hauerwas says, “I have read few books from which I have learned more.” That’s enough for me.

Vinoth Ramachandra, like the authors I referenced yesterday, writes from a Christian perspective about Christian mission and development work. Even more than yesterday’s authors, I think both Christians and non-Christians will value what he has to say.

Comment »

I’ve been reading When Helping Hurts, a book about how many international aid and development efforts end up harming the recipients.

This isn’t a new idea, but I think this is the first book to address the issue from a Christian perspective. Christians play a huge role in relief and development work around the world and in their home countries, mostly with the best of intentions, but the sad truth exposed in this book is that many of their efforts have more negative effects than positive ones. The positive message is that we can do better and be part of genuine development and change; but it’s not going to be quick or easy.

[Update: To be clear, negative effects are an issue across the board, not just in Christian aid efforts.]

I had a conversation once with someone who asked why I would criticize well-meaning people. My short answer: Because they hurt other people. I think people who really have good intentions want to know this and change course.

But how can this be? How can professional agencies created to help people in need become complicit in their suffering and injustice? How can a caring student in Texas start a project for AIDS orphans in Africa (or for poor immigrants in her local community) that does more harm than good? Read the book to find out.

Here is one way to understand the problem (that I read about here): Who are the clients of international relief and development agencies? Who do they have to please? Who are they accountable to? Donors!

The donors are the de facto clients. But in almost all cases, the donors are too far away to see the results themselves, so they get stories and pictures carefully prepared by the agencies they support (paid for with the money they gave).  Now if the donors are happy, it really doesn’t make a difference in economic terms whether aid recipients benefit or not.

Of course, it would make sense to have aid recipients participate in solving their own problems, put them in positions of authority, and let them hold aid organizations accountable. It would also make sense to have relationships in local communities and learn about their capacities and how to support them before showing up with pre-packaged solutions–what this book calls “McDevelopment.”  These simple steps would change international aid from the inside out, both in its organizational or grassroots forms.

But these steps are inconvenient. Building relationships takes time and it’s messy. Changes in the aid industry would probably cost jobs and alter careers. Using money to fund projects according to formulas is easy, fast, and safe.

Imagine with me, MegaAid Organization has to spend their budget this year. Time is running out, and they need proposals they can fund and launch quickly. Not to mention, Angelina Jolie is scheduled to do an appearance in two weeks, and they need a fresh project to show. Alternatively, Joe and his friends want to help the poor somewhere. They can a) go build a house for poor people in Mexico, b) collect used sneakers to ship to Africa, or c) go to Haiti for two weeks as volunteers. They are giving up their vacations for this and want to really make a difference.

In both of the cases above, what is the role of the poor in the process? Where is their voice in the planning? Who asks them what they want? In order to change anything in a lasting way, the poor must take charge of their own solutions at some point, but when? But often they are treated as passive recipients, and the system works better if they stay that way.

These questions cut to the heart of what I’m doing here. I am in Cambodia to make a difference, but I know real change must emerge from Cambodians themselves. Will I learn the language so I can build good relationships? Will I trust Cambodian leaders and make genuine partners? Will I refuse to take roles that would validate my own ego, status, and career so Cambodians can take those roles and shine instead? Will I accept that lasting changes happen slowly and resist speeding up (and ruining) the process?

The truth is that people with power almost never give it up. We always see ways to maintain control, even without making it obvious. At the end of the day, most of us help ourselves first (our egos, families, and futures), and then we help the other guy.

Acting differently, whether as individuals or organizations, really does require costly changes from the inside out.

Again, the book is When Helping Hurts. It’s a Christian perspective that draws from the Bible and Jesus’ teaching about justice and the Kingdom of God. If you’re a Christian, I strongly recommend it.

If you’re not a Christian, I sympathize with any cynicism you may have about Christian justice and compassion. You’d be surprised how many followers of Jesus, who may or may not identify with the religion, would agree. Many followers of Jesus understand that justice and faith and love go hand in hand or don’t go anywhere at all; and many are working on the hard, practical questions of how to live this out, not just in words or programs but in reality.

Comment »

If you or I agreed with everything Peter Rollins says, then probably we hadn’t been listening long or closely enough. Yet he’s a man who often says things that resonate, they may actually shatter glass in some quarters. I love this short interview and wouldn’t mind having a transcript to underline and reference.

Normally, I would quote a teaser or two. I just don’t know where to begin. There’s the story about Hitler serving milk and  cookies (okay, something like that), or the part about how he would be a liar if he claimed to believe in Jesus Christ.  His message is disturbing for anyone inside the box of traditional Christianity, but it’s a breath of fresh air for those who are ditching the box or at least thinking about it.

Comment »

I skim quite a few blogs using Google Reader, but I can count on one hand those that I read carefully. Seth Godin’s blog is on my shortlist (and I know I’m not alone). He consistently has insights that cut through my senses and call me to attention. Today he struck twice.

First, in typical Godin style, he reminds me to dare. One large “success” outweighs dozens of failures. I use quote marks, because we all have different ideas of success. Still, the principle holds. As Godin writes,

If you spend your days avoiding failure by doing not much worth criticizing, you’ll never have a shot at success. Avoiding the thing that’s easy to survive keeps you from encountering the very thing you’re after.

Simple, right? Well, I need reminders like this almost every day. That’s about how often I find myself tempted toward doing things I can’t fail at.

But it gets better. His next post speaks directly to something I’ve long believed. The best choices in life are not always the rational ones. Love, faith, art…such things don’t require rational explanations. In fact, something vital is lost when forcing such realities into rationality. We can celebrate the irrationality of something without sacrificing its truth.

Godin asks, “Are you rational?”

Yeah, sometimes, but I’m probably less overtly rational than the average person. Yet I’m pretty intense about why I do things and about what is true (even if I don’t see truth clearly but from a distance).

What I appreciated was Godin’s closing thought:

There’s room for both rational and irrational decision making, and I think we do best when we choose our path in advance instead of pretending to do one when we’re actually doing the other. The worst thing we can do is force one when we actually need the other.

This is both reasonable and encouraging for someone like me. There are times for both rational and irrational decision making, and it’s best to discern and acknowledge which mode I’m in and have the tenacity and/or courage to follow through.

Fortunately, failure is not the worst case scenario. If it was,  I suppose the world would be led by rational decision makers alone, and it would be quite a bit less interesting.

Comment »