skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Then of course there is the issue of whether in the future we will even need international NGOs any more. Will people just be able to use social media to directly sponsor a child in the community?
In development there is a tendency to think about trends and gradual change but we need to be aware of the possibility of disruptive change. Development may face a complete sea change at some point – similar to what happened to the music industry where suddenly downloads decimated the CD market. However, preparing for that is more difficult: usually the change that comes is not what you put on your risk register.
Caroline Harper, chief executive of Sightsavers interviewed in the Guardian
5 comments:
The reasonable answer to her question seems to be NO. NGOs act as intermediaries between donors and recipients. Their role is to do due diligence on the recipients and re-assure the donors that their cash is well used. It's difficult to see how social media can end this function although people both in the debt/equity and donations world are trying.
I don't think anyone saw napster coming either, and of course it hasn't got rid of record label intermediaries but it has radically changed the industry and there is ever more direct interaction between buyers and sellers without intermediaries.
My sense is that napster disintermediated not record companies but music retailers. W/ NGOs and aid, you are dealing with "investment" intermediaries rather than "consumption/ retail" intermediaries. I'd agree that, particularly when it comes to small amounts, the line between investment and consumption blurs. What is your view on sites like Kiva etc?
Kiva is not quite what it seems http://www.cgdev.org/blog/kiva-not-quite-what-it-seems
I'd personally be giving through http://givedirectly.org/ if it was registered for gift aid (tax deductibility) in the UK, but I could imagine a kind of Kiva/Givedirectly hybrid through self-generated facebook accounts linked to mobile money...
So where would you put Friends of African Village Libraries in this spectrum? I think if you look around the most developed/rich countries, you have all sorts of intermediaries that coordinate, assure quality, lead, inspire, innovate, develop expertise, manage, etc. The idea that somehow "in the future" everyone will be an expert in everything is one of those ideas that doesn't stand up to 30 seconds of scrutiny... For one thing, if the premise is that there are still poor people and big inequality that motivates empathy, then obviously the problems haven't been solved. What would be the sense of then assuming that each individual could correctly judge and implement the most effective anti-poverty intermediation by himself-herself?
My prediction would be that as soon as "givedirectly" hits the $50million mark, they will become another development NGO, organizing projects, hiring staff (or outsourcing). I think that last point is important- many of the old NGOs are like auto/steel companies, with staff pensions, percs, etc. Not surprising that new NGOs come along, poach the labor market for high quality and highly motivated employees (when was the last time a Harvard grad said "I can't wait to go work for WorldVision and gradually rise through the ranks!"), and seem "disruptive"....
Post a Comment