Reflections of an old Socialist (8a)
------------------------------------
After reading Anthony Klouda's excellent Reflections (7) of Nov. 20,
I felt compelled to dig out a piece of an old paper I had written
with Marc Catlett during my Kenya years entitled "Institution Build-
ing": The Achilles Heel of Development Projects* (see footnote) which
appeared in Public Admin. and Development a few years back.
It deals with underlying realities in health projects in the Third
World. It explores the real alter-egos in this game we are all in. I
would agree it charicaturizes the situation of who we really are. But
a charicature is only good if it lets you recognize the character be-
hind the real life that is being exaggerated. Let's see if you agree
with me. I wait for your comments.
(Those that are interested in the full text of the paper can write to
me giving me their postal address to post it by snail mail).
EGOS/ALTER EGOS IN ODA HEALTH PROJECTS
--------------------------------------
(Part one of two)
1. The "Expert"
He has recently arrived in the country and is busy moving into his
new house. Part of his shipment has arrived; the rest has been de-
tained by customs. He must acquire an automobile, finalize housing
arrangements, acquire furniture, interview a housegirl for his chil-
dren, find a good school for them, hire a watchman. He is busy get-
ting acquainted with other expatriate colleagues, discussing his fu-
ture role, finalizing administrative chores such as his work permit
and his duty free status. He is concerned that his wife should be as
comfortable as possible.
Meanwhile, anxious to put his abilities to work, he dives into his
assigned duties. Very likely, his first task is to prepare a needs
assessment to analyze the problems of the client institution. This he
does with enthusiasm, since he wants to demonstrate his abilities to
the project team. Before he begins, he must acquaint himself with the
problems and his work environment. Many people are interviewed, but
most of the creative input comes from him, who, at this stage, still
has few people to rely upon for candid advice. Lacking colleagues
with whom he might consult, not knowing whom to trust, and with lit-
tle understanding of the complexities of the local problems, he is a
bit on his own.
As the expert, he feels pressure to act as an expert. Experts don't
seek advise from subordinates. Experts have answers. Because of his
own desire to *do a good job* and have his work appreciated, he tends
to push others to work just as hard. His expectations of his ministry
counterparts exceed their ability to produce, *not* because they are
incapable, but because they lack the incentives which drive the ex-
pert. He tends to push them harder than is considered acceptable. He
sets deadlines which allow little room for taking a breather. He him-
self is ready to work hard and produce, so why shouldn't the people
he has come to help feel the same way?
His poor sensitivity to his counterparts' needs and abilities begins
to annoy them, and his relationship with them begins to deteriorate.
After a short while, they become less responsive to his requests.
Their initial *wait and see* attitude is eventually transformed into
resentment. The expert's level of frustration also rises. He can't
understand the source of such hostility on the part of the people he
has come to help.
The expert's response to this frustration can take many forms, de-
pending on his social skills and sensitivity to others:
1) He can continue to push his counterparts hard, creating further
animosity between them and himself.
2) He can take up the problems he has been having with his counter-
parts' superiors.
3) He can take up his problems with his counterparts directly and
openly.
4) He can retreat into his own office (experts are usually provided
with their own offices) and focus on the work that he can accom-
plish individually without much assistance. This may lead him to
do things which were clearly earmarked for counterparts or co-
workers to do.
5) He can lower his expectations of what can be accomplished, recog-
nizing that whatever he does must be done with the counterparts,
and that he may have overestimated the energies and resources
which they are willing and able to contribute to the project.
The first two responses are clearly the worst, and are bound to
irreparably damage his relationship with the people he must work
with if the project is to succeed. The third option may be cultur-
ally offensive to his counterparts, or interpreted as direct con-
frontation. The fourth and fifth are also unsatisfactory. If he
retreats into isolated, individual work, he will be ineffective
since, for change to take place, many people have to be involved.
Finally, as an outsider, he lacks important (local context) knowl-
edge needed to plan and implement the project successfully.
The last two options seem the best, though, if the expert is to
retain his sanity. However, they are not really solutions. If he
simply resigns himself to the perception that little can be done,
his own enthusiasm will diminish, and he will probably not be very
effective in his work. Caught up in a difficult situation, his
recognition that, like it or not, he must work with counterparts
who have, so far, shown little energy to devote to this project
may push him into seeking a better solution:
6) He can seek advice from those around him who are more knowledge-
able about the people and the institution he is working for. Based
on their advice, he may be convinced that there is need to start
afresh, this time working closely with his counterparts in all
phases of project development, including its re-conceptualization.
It takes an unusually sensitive person to come to this conclusion.
Even so, he still must convince his expert colleagues and the consul-
tancy's management of this need. The project's scope of work has al-
ready been approved by senior management within the ministry and the
donor agency. People have been hired and perhaps some equipment and
supplies have been procured. By the time the *expert* realizes that a
mistake has been made, significant resources have already been ex-
pended. The enlightened expert faces an uphill battle to convince his
colleagues that there is need to start afresh.
2. The Consultancy's Management
The management of the consulting firm faces its own pressures which
go against starting afresh. On a regular basis, they are required to
submit progress reports to the funding agency detailing what was ac-
complished during the preceding months. Donors want to hear that the
project has made progress in achieving its stated objectives, and
project managers feel pressure to create that impression, whether or
not it is true. The longer the project has been in existence, the
more difficult it is to change course. If too much time has passed,
managers may feel that a radical change in approach is impossible to
justify both to the ministry and to the donor.
Yet it generally takes some time before an expert comes to the reali-
zation that his initial strategy has been wrong. If such a realiza-
tion does occur, the project may be approaching its mid-term donor
evaluation, at which point substantial project resources are fre-
quently devoted to preparing for the evaluation. To satisfy the do-
nor (who in turn must satisfy its home office), large documents are
prepared detailing what has been accomplished during the past 12 to
18 months. Since expert advisors tend to be prolific writers, there
is a great deal of paperwork to compile. Summary documents must be
prepared according to formats required by the donor. These go through
several reviews and after several iterations the document is final-
ized. All this consumes substantial project resources. Furthermore,
after 10-16 months have passed, it becomes difficult to reassess the
project's approach and perhaps begin certain work again from scratch.
This is particularly the case after having submitted all of these
documents which collectively tend to paint a rosy picture of the pro-
ject's progress.
Project management is interested in a good midterm review that might
improve the chances for a project extension. The manager's livelihood
is based on the project, and his performance is often assessed by the
consultancy's management based on his ability to win his project an
extension. The experts on the project would also be pleased to have
it extended, so when they are asked to assist in preparing for the
mid-term evaluation, they do not complain. If little of sustainable
value was accomplished by the project to date, substantially more ef-
fort is required to prepare for the evaluation. Staff is formally
oriented regarding how to present themselves to the evaluators.
This defensive posture can bring productive project work to a stand-
still for a period of time. Worse, it can create among the consul-
tancy a 'modus operandus' in which thick, impressive documents are
considered products, and detailed reporting begins to take up a con-
siderably larger percentage of the expert's time.
--
* "Institution-building", a goal so many projects have as an ex-
plicit objective, is here used to depict a process bringing about
desirable organizational change; desirable here means that change
is to be welcome by both the organization's management and techni-
cal staff and by the donor agency involved in fostering such a
change mainly in terms of streamlining the organization's opera-
tions and improving its effectiveness. The subject of this change
cuts across many of the institution's characteristics, such as, for
example, its culture, its structure, the skills of and the social
relations amongst its staff. "Institutionalizing" such a change,
on the other hand, pertains to sustaining it in the long run. One
should keep in mind, though, that even if desired changes are in-
troduced, the organization is not necessarily automatically
strengthened.
--
Claudio Schuftan
Hanoi, Vietnam
mailto:aviva@netnam.org.vn
--
Send mail for the `AFRO-NETS' conference to `afro-nets@usa.healthnet.org'.
Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-afro-nets@usa.healthnet.org'.