Posts Tagged ‘staffing’

Unpaid Internships, Glampers, and the Grade School Gum Dictum

Tuesday, July 19th, 2011

There is a brilliant short story by Kurt Vonnegut called “Harrison Bergeron.”  In a future America, all citizens are declared equal. To ensure this equality, those who are gifted are purposefully handicapped. The beautiful must wear masks; the swift must carry weights. It is very much worth the five minutes it would take you to read it (here).

"She must have been extraordinarily beautiful, because the mask she wore was hideous.''

The villain of the piece is Diana Moon Glampers, the US Handicapper General. And, while she remains a work of fiction, there are many mini Glampers among us. I met some on twitter this week.

The issue that provoked the Glampers was “the dilemma” of unpaid internships.

At PDT we have an intern program. We accept 3-6 interns a year, mostly for posts in New York and Ottawa.  They work both part time and full time, depending on the time of year and their class load. They do pretty much anything, except for “busy work” or custodial duties. Examples of recent tasks include (to quote from our website):

  • Write a detailed report on the demographics of Haitian businesses.
  • Compile research on economic development in Liberia and suggest new ways of driving growth.
  • Fly to Kabul to assist our Afghan team as they host a large conference.
  • Find a sat phone and a bag of military rations, in Midtown Manhattan, in 90 minutes, on a Friday night.
  • Track down a quote from an obscure 16th century Persian poet celebrating Kandahari pomegranates.

The interns obtain unique career experience in development, while substantially helping our efforts to build markets and create jobs in some of the world’s poorest nations. In more than one case, they have gone on to long-term jobs with PDT. An example is our own infamous Kavya-The-Intern, Kavya-The-Executive-Assitant, Kavya-The-Project-Officer.

But here’s the rub. It’s widely acknowledged that unpaid internships favor the wealthy students over the poor. Poor college students must work at paid jobs in order to cover their costs, and therefore they can’t afford to take on internships. Thus, the Glampers proclaim that unpaid internships are unethical and should be abolished.  If all cannot participate, none should participate. Let’s call this the Grade School Gum dictum: if there isn’t enough for the entire class, spit it out.

Here’s an important point: PDT (as with most NGOs) is not sitting on hidden sacks of cash that we could otherwise use to pay interns. Our budget is finite and is emptied paying our salaried staff. But we do have some open desk space. So we fill them with unpaid interns. Therefore, the options are twofold:

  1. Host unpaid internships, which tend to be filled by the wealthy or middle class. Or,
  2. Cancel all internships and leave those desks empty.

Consider the consequences of both these actions on the various people involved.

Exhibit A

In every case, Option 2 either produces no effect, or a negative effect for each stakeholder. The poor students are in the exact same position in either case, albeit a disadvantaged one. The only thing that could possibly be said in defence of the second option is that “everyone is equal (in their level of disadvantage).” From the perspective of the Glampers, this is the most important goal. But, from my perspective, the most important goal is to “get shit done” and get on with the business of trying to reduce poverty.

I will concede that I have not studied ethics, nor have I read St. Augustine. At Sunday Mass, I tend to marvel at the stained-glass windows instead of paying attention to the sermons. Therefore, I may be getting this all wrong. So I will defer to my readers, but from my perspective, I say to the Glampers that there is no possible way to see unpaid internships as an ethically complicated dilemma.

In other words: if there isn’t enough gum for the entire class, too bad for them.

Challenging Down with the People

Wednesday, February 16th, 2011

Last week PDT bossman Scott Gilmore went on a rant about volunteering.  This week Habitat for Humanity Ireland’s Executive Director Karen Kennedy sent us this response.  In it she asks, what if:

1) As a rule construction professionals manage the volunteers, and ensure the required standard and quality of work is achieved and not compromised

2) Volunteers cover their own expenses and contribute a significant donation to the project

3) Volunteers expectations are managed (they attend training, briefing and team buiding sessions before they travel, they understand their role and why they are there, they are aware of their potential impact on the community and discuss issues like ‘cultural awareness’, ‘attitude’ etc before departure. i.e. They sign up to the “Volunteer Charter” and their sending organisation follows the “Code of Practice”)

4) Local construction professionals are hired and local materials are used as much as possible where the quality is available

5)‘Building something’ wasnt the only goal of the exercise, instead – bringing people together (breaking down barriers), raising awareness of the issue first hand (creating life long ambassadors) and learning from another culture (fostering understanding, appreciating difference) were bigger aims…

No doubt Scott will have a few thoughts on this most thoughtful response.  I’m putting it out there to make sure that we hold true to our mantra of open dialogue and transparency.  If we’re going to improve aid, then we need to have honest, tactful and constructive dialogue, which is exactly what Karen’s letter is.  I’m definitely a fan.

Volunteers vs Interns – Getting it Right

Monday, February 14th, 2011

When I posted my spittle flecked rant last week, I expected that the reaction would be negative. After all, volunteering is a sacrosanct element in our concept of charity (it even gets a shout out in the bible.)  But the tweets, comments, and emails were all very supportive except for some cranky teachers (but frankly, in my experience, there is no other kind of teacher).

Thou Shalt Volunteer Wisely Or Risk the Holy Wrath of Chuck Heston (and various bloggers)

There was one point raised a few times, though, that bears addressing.  Tom from the great A View From The Cave blog puts his finger on it when he makes the counterpoint: “I learned a lot in the experience and it has provided me with a much stronger understanding.”  I’m sure this is true. Tom’s current constructive contribution to improving aid is directly a result of this. I get it. But then let’s make that clear from the beginning, that volunteer experience was more an internship for him and training for him. That was the reason he went. That was the value. The flow of benefit was to him, not from him.  This is fine, and useful. Let’s just be honest about it.

Which brings me to the important clarification I should have included, which is that there is an important value in volunteering as training for the volunteer.

I am actually a latecomer to this and some very smart people have been thinking and debating the problem for a long time.  One group in particular that deserves plaudits for their contribution to the issue is Engineers Without Borders. The founders Parker Mitchell and George Roter have often grappled with the problem that while sending volunteer engineering students overseas is critical for turning them into responsible global citizens, it can’t be done at the cost of creating an ineffective mess overseas.  They are explicit about this, and in their work to refine EWB’s volunteering programs, they have actually led the industry on important innovations like the recently celebrated Failure Report phenomena.

George put it best himself in the comment section of last week’s blog:

In EWB we’ve been debating the value we bring since our early days, with many moments of “let’s just stop sending people.” This has led to a considerable evolution in how we operate, with the result that the ‘volunteers’ we hire are called African Program Staff and treated as such, and they have progression opportunities as standard staff would.

We had a good online discussion a few years ago spurred by Illich’s speech that I thought would be relevant: http://my.ewb.ca/posts/17216/

EWB: Smart folks balancing volunteerism with impact

Another example that I like is the charity Canadian Lawyers Abroad (disclaimer: coincidentally c0-founded by my wife Catherine McKenna).  They have a student internship program that sends law students overseas to assist legal clinics, human rights and development organizations.  They, too, are aware of the limits of this model and are careful to tailor their programs in such a way that the students bring real value that would not otherwise be available locally. And they are also upfront about it being an internship program, not a volunteer program. It’s right there in the title.  The program is about the interns, about getting them trained. It’s not about the kids.

Canadian Lawyers Abroad: Ditto

There are a couple other points from the comments section of last week’s post which are worth noting:

  • Ned Breslin, the CEO of the great charity Water for People, makes a good point, that volunteers are often expensive because there work actually creates problems. As he says “Truth is we spend an enormous amount of time fixing failed projects done by well meaning volunteers”.
  • Shava Nerad argued there is a benefit if you send “volunteer trainers to teach people to train, organizers to teach people to organize”.  I agree in theory, but for all the same reasons listed above, wouldn’t a paid professional trainer do a better job at this?

So, yes, it’s complicated. But I’m still scoring volunteers as the losers in this match.

Bringing some sex appeal to the aid industry

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011

A few years ago (actually, over a decade ago), I was in the old and infamous Dili Club on the beach in Timor, talking to a Californian woman working at the UN mission.  She was telling me about her screen play.  The story was about a heroic young doctor who finds love and conquers inner demons while saving starving children and dodging bullets in Africa.  When she finished her elevator pitch, I rolled my eyes, turned my back, and ordered another beer.

The old Dili Club: Rick's Bar meets Star Wars Cantina

You’d have done the same thing, right? Because, hey, we’re the real deal.  Real aid workers don’t believe in happy endings with perfect windswept hair and orchestral soundtracks. No, we turn our nose up at this “Hollywood bullshit” and sneer when George Clooney rocks up with his Raybans, some sat photos, and the Vanity Fair photographer.  The mere presence of Sean Penn in Haiti is enough to get us in a snit (although, you’d think in Haiti we’d have more pressing things to worry about.)  We’ve even played to the cheap seats here on the PDT blog by providing a satirical flow chart for celebrities who “want to help”

Celebrity? Want to save the world? Click here.

So, like you I’m sure, when I saw the promo for Off the Map, I rolled my eyes, cleared my throat, and began to rant about this “Hollywood nonsense which glamorizes and trivializes a serious and nasty world blah blah blah.” In my morning paper, the synopsis made it sound even worse:

“Six doctors will go to the ends of the earth to remember the reasons why they wanted to become doctors in the first place”

or

“Lily is half Emergency Medicine Resident and half Girl Scout, which is the perfect combination for La Clinica Cruz del Sur. Whether she’s climbing on ziplines or catching coconuts, Lily will do whatever it takes to save her patients, even if it means risking her own life.”

YouTube Preview Image

(By the way, ziplines? Has anyone ever seen a zipline used in an aid mission? Anywhere?)

But on the walk to work, I began to think about it, and I changed my mind.  I may never watch this show, but I’m glad it exists.  Here’s why:

The biggest problem facing aid and peacekeeping? Human resources.  Way too few genuinely effective and efficient people work in the industry.  As anyone who has needed to staff up in an hurry knows, finding the right person at the right time is very very hard.  This is a supply problem. Smart people are not joining this labor market in the same numbers that they are Wall Street or Main Street.  If shows like this can add some glamour to the industry, and as a result more people consider it as a career option, then this is a good thing.  In fact, it’s a great thing.  And I really am not that worried about motivations.  If a brilliant young engineer joins the UNDP because he mistakenly thinks there’ll be ziplines and babes, fine. What matters is that he’s joining the labor pool and bringing his badly needed skills to the field.

Add sex appeal, change the supply and demand. Easy.

The second reason why this show is good news for the aid industry? Donor attention.  Individuals tend to be very generous while Anderson Cooper is reporting from the tarmac of the latest disaster zone.  But, giving quickly drops off as the story moves off the front pages.  If they are gently reminded that the world is a mess, that there are good doctors out there trying to change that, then it’s possible they’ll reach into there pockets a little more frequently.

The lesson: Giving and TV coverage are linked

And, if the show runners at ABC want to really do some good, they should make a plug for MSF or another MercyCorps at the top and bottom of each show with an SMS number to make instant donations.  That would be good karma for those Hollywood bastards, no?

And now, a word from our sponsors?

There you go. My kinder, gentler strawman: Off the Map is good for the aid industry. Tear away.

Pareto Principle and the United Nations

Monday, October 18th, 2010

The PDT staff in New York held a fundraiser for Timor Leste last week.  It went until about 4 am, which is remarkable, since it was a Wednesday night.  Even more remarkable, all the staff were in the office bright-eyed and bushy-tailed the next morning. Anyway, there were several UN staff at the event and in speaking with them I was reminded of the axiom “Ninety percent of the work in the UN is done by 10% of the people.”

If you’ve worked around Turtle Bay or in a peacekeeping mission you’ve heard and seen this.  In most organizations there are people who stand out for their ingenuity, perseverance, and personal drive.  Within the context of the United Nations, which also has more than its fair share of unmotivated people, those who do work hard appear as superstars.  And here is the fascinating thing: this off-hand saying, passed around the halls of the Secretariat like a piece of cynical folk wisdom, actually exists, is widely observed, and has a name. Economists call it the Pareto Principle.

Vilfredo Pareto: Engineer, Sociologist, Economist, Philosopher, and predictor of UN dysfunction

It was originally proposed by a business management guru at the turn of the 20th century, who believed that 80% of the effects were due to 20% of the causes.  He named it after Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian engineer and sociologist, who had noted that (circa the 1800s) 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the families.  Interestingly, the same observation has been made by the UNDP regarding global distribution of wealth, namely that 20% of the world’s population controls 80% of the wealth.

Henry Theil: Econometrician and measurer of UN dysfunction

The degree to which the Pareto Principle is exhibited, in land or wealth distribution for example, is measured by the Theil Index.  If 50% of the land is owned by 50% of the people, you have rough equilibrium with a Theil number of 0.  If 80% is owned by 20%, the Theil number approaches 1.  In the case of the United Nations, if we are to believe the saying that 90% of the work is done by 10% of the people, you get a Theil number of 1.76, which suggests a significant imbalance and a work environment that is unstable.  (Sound familiar to any of you UN staffers out there?)

The Pareto Principle is also called the “Law of the Vital Few”.  The higher the Theil index, the more vital those few become.  I was reminded of this at the fundraiser.  Some of the UN staff there I have known for a long time.  They are among the smartest folks I’ve met, and their reputation is well known for being behind the UN’s few but important reforms and successes recently.  In fact, if some of you reading this currently work in DPKO, I’m sure you could guess their names.  Every time there is a crisis, be it Timor, or Afghanistan, or Haiti, these are the folks who arrive first, the UN’s “A Team”.  They get things done, they do it well, then they move on to the next disaster or war or crisis and hand off to the “B Team”, otherwise known as the other 90% of the UN.  That’s usually when things begin to go off the rails.

Which is why the Pareto Principle is an important problem for the UN.  When most of  your success is coming from a precious few of your staff, it tells you two things:

  1. It isn’t doing a very good job in selecting staff if 90% of them are dead weight. The personnel problems of the UN are legion and infamous, and its Theil number is a direct result of this.
  2. The UN’s “vital few”, its most important staff, are at risk of burning out.  When the same people are being called upon again and again to set up new missions or fix broken ones, they get worn down and eventually leave prematurely.

The Pareto Principle is not unique to the United Nations.  In fact, every organization manifests it to some degree or another.  But it is acute in the UN and the effects are greater.  So how do we increase the number of the “Vital Few”?  I really don’t know.  At PDT we are developing some project ideas to support them.  For example, we are trying to fund fellowships that would allow the UN’s best and brightest to take a year’s leave to catch their breath, and share their ideas.  We’re also looking at mechanisms that would make it easier for the UN to find and deploy new staff from other industries who can provide the same level of ingenuity and effectiveness.  But it’s an uphill battle, and in the meantime the lonely 10% continue to work beyond their breaking point to keep the UN standing.  Here’s to them.

Great things in the pipeline

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010

One of the perks at PDT - Bryant Park

There’s a bounce in my step these days, and the entire office is noticeably more chipper than usual.  Even the over-worked under-loved interns are twittering (metaphorically, not digitally).  Spring is not the cause, though sunny lunches in Bryant Park tend to put a smile on one’s face.  No, the buzz around here is because PDT has some great things in the pipeline.

PDT has grown between 50-100% every year since we formed in 2004.  The pace of expansion has been exhausting, and necessity has often forced us to delay launching various new initiatives or innovations.  But after winning the Skoll Prize, adding new staff, and securing some more long-term donor funding, we are waiting no longer.

So watch this space.  Over the next few months we will be:

-Opening a new country office

-Expanding our Afghan presence

-Throwing out our current websites and launch something entirely different

-Totally revamping the Building Market’s online platforms

-Hiring a team of Guerilla Blogger Ninjas (to borrow a phrase from Ben Popken)

-Hosting a fundraising event in NYC

-And something super cool, super secret, which could be huge, and which I can’t even talk about.  Let’s call it “Project Farol”

Nothing makes us happier around here than new ideas.  No wonder we’re giddy.

Which reminds me, we need more people on the team to help us to do all this.  We’re hiring.  So if you’re interested, take a look here.  Have fun. Change the world (and eat lunch in Bryant Park).

Change is afoot. We can feel it...

Not Wanted: Mercenaries, Missionaries, and Madmen

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010

We’re hiring.  Again.  We need a Development Manager in New York, a research analyst for some work in Sierra Leone and the Solomon Islands, a project assistant in Ottawa, and a light dusting of interns.  In a few weeks we will be also be adding some communication staff in New York (after some “constructive” criticism from an anonymous colleague – it’s been decided I need a ghost blogger).  Shortly after that we will likely be looking for several new people to join our Afghan team.

So if you are smart, a lateral thinker, and would not be fazed by a last minute request to fly to Kabul, then please take a look at our listings.  We’d love to have you join the team.

Finding someone who meets that description, though, is surprisingly hard which is one reason why the aid industry is such a mess. This is because 90% of the people who apply for these jobs are almost guaranteed to be a disaster.  They fall into three categories:

Mercenaries:  These folks heard you could make twice as much money in Kandahar as you can in Kansas, so they quit their job as dispatcher at their uncle’s trucking company, added “Logistician” to their resume, and promptly landed a job “inside the wire” overseeing a $30m road construction project.  While our hero around the PDT offices may be a Mercenary, the problem with hiring them is that they only stick around long enough to find a slightly more lucrative contract and they really aren’t that interested in the country or the job, just the paycheck.  The Mercenary can be identified by the dozens of DXB security stickers on his bag (he is careful never to remove them), the Leatherman tool on his belt, and the frequent Facebook updates highlighting his semiannual trips to Phuket.

Missionaries: While the Mercenary was laboring his way through an undergraduate business diploma, the Missionary was valiantly skipping classes to protest in front of the Chinese Embassy.  She is the first to arrive in a mission, and the last to leave, sustained throughout by her fervent empathy for “the people”.  For some reason, they are typically the only ones to contact dengue or dysentery, the details of which they garrulously share, believing it demonstrates their solidarity with the Timorese.  The problem with hiring the Missionaries is that while God has blessed them with passion, he has not been as generous with competence (and a lot of classes were missed to play hacky-sack in the quad).  Their good intentions are not enough, and the resulting drag on the project team can be disastrous.  The Missionary can be usually be spotted wearing local garb with a macramé shoulder bag slung across their chest, talking passionately about “empowerment”.

Don't Touch the Red Stapler

Madmen: This is the most dangerous of the three species and should be  approached with caution.  The Madman just weathered a significant personal crisis.  A nasty divorce.  A serious illness. Unexpected job loss. Their response is to leave everything and either “test themselves” or “save the world”. Both instincts bring them to places like post-earthquake Haiti like moths to a flame.  The problem with employing a Madman is that inevitably, like clockwork, they will explode after six months in-country.  The resulting drama will derail even the most well-managed project team, leaving everyone rattled.   The Madman is almost impossible to spot, until he is shouting at a colleague in a purple-faced rage because she borrowed his red stapler.

Bring your field glasses to the Gandamack in Kabul, or the Mamba Point Hotel in Monrovia, or the Esplinada in Dili and you’ll see all three of these species, guaranteed.  The aid industry is full of them.  It operates in a very inefficient labor market.  It’s hard to compete with Wall Street and even Main Street, when the most you can offer is a slightly higher salary, longer hours, some good med-evac insurance, and all the frequent flyer miles you could need.  But don’t let that dissuade you.  You can have fun, and change the world, which is worth something, no?  So, take another look at our job listings.  We need you, because there is a line up out our door of Mercenaries, Missionaries, and Madmen.


Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Youtube button