Blame each other

"…perfection can wait till next year."

Dear X

I am sorry on behalf of my team for the misunderstandings which have messed up your programme this year. Introducing the new systems has indeed been a trial - and not merely for yourselves.

Almost everything we do in development work involves compromise - I am sure you find that. You remain right in principle that a gentle roll out is needed but unfortunately I am being asked to move quickly. And whilst it is admirable that you have asked your managers to finalise plans for next year in early May, we had not expected such zeal, aiming as we had mentioned last year, for July. Indeed, I understand that not all your programmes will have to convert to the new systems this year (despite earlier pressure on us to make everyone do so this year.)

Of course, I also recognise everyone's immense frustration; but you have said little that was not said by one or other programme manager the last time we changed the documentation. It is annoying enough to want to pull one's hair out at times, I know. And suffice to say that I'm sure my colleagues here are as frustrated trying to introduce changes as you are in swallowing them. We are all frustrated in fact. And we all feel like blaming each other.

Of course, you are the programme director and you must decide what is and what is not possible. If you are telling me that you are unwilling to attempt to manage the new project planning system this year, then I will have to accept that. As you suggest, there will then be more time to prepare. However, I would much rather that we start the transition now and look at this year as a first attempt rather than a final maximal quality production; perfection can wait till next year.

Yours patiently

Me

Demotivation

“I take comfort in junk mail…”

Call me a cynic but I take deep pleasure in reading demotivational posters, e.g. "Quality: the race for quality has no finish line – so technically it’s more like a death march." But for me, it's real. And I've been depressed - multiple times as a teenager and young adult and this isn't it.

I couldn't write this yesterday. I had 'school refusal': a tightening abdomen, mild nausea, butterflies in the stomach, slight anxiety, creeping dread, excessive sighing, blanking out introspection; not enough to stay in bed (anyway, after three weeks traveling and lieu time that would only increase the work backlog). But enough to know that I don't often enjoy my job anymore; I take comfort in junk mail - it's a way to tell me I have less e-mails per day than it would otherwise seem (though I was lucky yesterday just to get through reading all the real ones backed up over three working days and respond to some of the easy ones).

I call it 'school refusal' because I'm not depressed and not burned out and it reminds me of my childhood (and my children!) Demotivated yes, but fully functional - better today than yesterday anyway. Often overwhelmed by work to the point of major compromise (don't talk to me about quality - please!) But still going after several years and no worse - in some ways better - than much of the last four.

Do other development workers feel something similar? Or is it just me?

Gender Debate

"I also believe in workshops."

THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THAT GENDER ISSUES CAN NOT CURRENTLY BE PRIORITISED IN OUR ORGANISATION'S FIELD WORK.

We have competing major priorities: we are trying to reach a critical mass awareness of the value of 'rights' and 'participation' per se amongst our staff and field partners; later we can break it down to specifics like gender.

You are quite simply a misogynist; you hate women.

Donor partners feel obliged to move themselves (and their partners by default, i.e. us) fast down this track to maintain credibility in their own fund-raising environment, but the pace is too fast for our operating context and is damaging our programme cohesion as diverse elements (not merely gender) are expected to be fast-tracked.

You are a closet saboteur of gender-related rights; you have some hidden vested interests in trying to muddy clear waters with your stirring, detours and questions.

Our staff and field partner cohorts contain significant and not easily remediable reactionary elements; we are not prepared to stop or slow our programmes in order to root them out rapidly since beneficiaries will be hurt and structures (even assets) damaged.

I am amazed that you were appointed to your job or allowed through your probation period; you are just a sign of your organisation's structurally entrenched biases. Just look at the gender composition of your organisation's senior management team for evidence: prejudice there is inevitable. I suspect your organisation has a hidden agenda; you are just their front.

Projects aided by donors with a more advanced emphasis are welcome to channel the requisite additional resources required to get 'their' projects over the gender hump, but these will be 'ring-fenced' special cases and subject to agreement by implementing teams without management coercion.

You are making excuses for your own poor management; your organisation could easily enough progress as quickly as gender-related rights (i.e. we) demand.

Our strategy will eventually get us to gender, so relax; there is much more distance to catch up than you assumed.

You are not taking this seriously; this is not a theoretical debate; you should be acting, not talking.

We are entitled to determine our own rate of progress, since we are the ones making the sacrifices needed to do the implementation in the first place; if you don't like it then leave your comfort zone and work out there yourself.

Your assessments about your context are mistaken; in fact staff and partners in your field areas could easily and readily absorb gender-related analyses without any disruption.

It looks to me like you might have been co-opted by your own government's political agenda since they are your most significant source of funds: they insist on gender as a priority; you say gender prioritisation is your own idea, but I think you are in denial, or maybe your politics are reflected by your government, in which case stop blaming them for so much else.

You have framed this all wrong: it's not about the dichotomy you appear to describe; it's not either/or but both; you're in a process, a journey; you have the capacity to weave it all together.

You are devaluing my genuinely held beliefs; I am not a worse 'person' than you; you are a hypocrite regarding human rights if you disallow my world view.

You only have the impression of external pressure but in fact we recognise your desire to progress and accept it; we are just contributing clarity to your strivings; you are slightly paranoid; we welcome your partnership and celebrate your commitment, and we stand alongside in solidarity ready to offer the capacity building inputs you need.

Stuff you, I'm resigning; I don't need this harassment.

It's so hard recruiting committed people for secondment to work in difficult places, or to find local partners who have overcome the shallowness of their own cultures and risen above the vagaries of their own environments. Let's increase our money supply by dependancy on a single donor source.

Hi, I used to work for a reactionary organisation but I resigned and was jobless so I got myself reconstructed; I also believe in workshops. And no – the ‘international development industry’ is just an illusion.

The Evolution of Evangelicalisticism

"I believe in evolution. Are you prepared to reject me for it?"

I'm almost ashamed to admit that I used to be a Christian creationist. It began as a teenager in what I would now characterise as a fundamentalist church scene; back then I would just have said we were right.

Simultaneously my Biology classes took me down into the technical details of evolutionary theory. I reveled in the contrasts: reading about natural selection from one book in one hand, and about the 'evolutionarily impossible' Lewis overthrust from another. I stopped resisting evolutionary theory at University - I'm not sure when. It wasn't so painful then.

But increasingly, the world is polarising around the issue (see Economist). I have myself been challenged to accept that creationism is an essential Christian creed. My response had been to be meek and mild and hide behind my development work. But recently, I told a strident pastor, "I believe in evolution. Are you prepared to reject me for it?" He admitted the answer was no.

It is what I call 'evangelicalisticism' (the religion OF being an evangelical) - or 'folk evangelicalism' - which I believe gives passion to some of the growing problem. Not carefully considered Theology. In fact, creationism is not a fundamental tenet of Christian belief. I want to start saying so more and more loudly (though to be honest, I'm afraid to). And no, I won't try to argue the case for evolution. I will simply resist the aggressive sycophancy which is making this issue more and more problematic. (See Christianarchy by Dave Andrews.)

Why the rant here? Because oppressive, facipulative motives for 'doing development' make me sick, and I can smell them from some of my kin. Go ahead and accuse me of conspiracy-related delusions; but I know, because at times I've not resisted: even helped launch some on such endeavours.