OVERVIEW
MANAGEMENT
PERFORMANCE
POSSIBILITIES
CAPITALS
ACTIVITIES
ACTORS
BURGESS
|
RETHINKING ACCOUNTABILITY
THE SOCIAL EDGE ORGANIZATION Special Event for Social Edge Members ...1/20/2004 http://www.socialedge.org Peter Burgess COMMENTARY I am pulling this material from the archives to assess its current value. Much of what I have archived in the dim and distant past has value today in ways that were not apparent when the material was first prepared! Peter Burgess |
|
Subj: Special Event Invitation for Social Edge Members
Date: 1/20/2004 3:44:47 PM Eastern Standard Time From: socialedge@skollfoundation.org To: peterb@afrifund.com Sent from the Internet (Details) Dear Social Edge Colleagues & Friends, You are invited to join Social Edge members today as we discuss the challenges of civil society accountability and governance in a special online event called “Rethinking Accountability.” From January 19 to 30, key leaders from around the globe are convening on Social Edge to ask each other such questions as:
Click here to join the discussion: http://www.socialedge.org/events.html See you on The Edge! Keely Stevenson Community Manager, Social Edge The Skoll Foundation http://www.socialedge.org P.S. Please encourage others to participate by forwarding this email to friends and colleagues who might enjoy and benefit from this provocative discussion. You have received this email because you are a member of Social Edge, the online community for social entrepreneurs. If you'd like to be removed from this email list, please reply to this message with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line. Social Edge Discussions Social Edge Online Events Rethinking Accountability Welcome & Introduce Yourself Search Social Edge: Members: 2383, Topics: 232, Posts: 69 Hello profitinafrica | Click to Logout ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Welcome & Introduce Yourself Welcome! Please share with us your interests in this topic and background. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postings 1 - 10 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Si - Jan 19, 2004 12:28 am (Message 1 of 69) Posts: 2 Facing the Music Important in this debate is that we do not ask the question 'whether there should be more or less civil accountability', but 'how and to what effect'. Accountability is not 'good in itself', but a driver of what happens. Accountability is the basis on which performance is established, whether for good or bad, or often some blend of the two. Different patterns of accountability result in different types of performance, so the 'more or less' spectrum is unhelpful to say the least. One way of framing the debate is to distinguish and debate accountability for reasons of (a) legitimacy (individual organisations and the overall civil project; (b) resourcing, the basis on which we build/solicit resources to build action and outcomes; (c) performance (see above); (d) valued in itself. Most of all, this debate must happen, and it must lead to action, not armchair reflection. Good luck over the coming days. Simon Zadek David Bonbright - Jan 19, 2004 6:14 am (Message 2 of 69) Posts: 19 Its a structural problem I suppose that I have been interested in the relationship between performance, resourcing and accountability in the social sector for my entire professional life. For over 20 years now – yikes! – I’ve been funding, advising, managing, and shamelessly promoting support organizations in the developing world. It has long seemed to me that the leadership, training, information and other support services that these “apex” organizations provide is critical to the overall effectiveness of citizen groups and to the advance of democracy and social justice generally. Most of my effort has gone directly into these support organizations to strengthen their services – to create training programmes; to provide information services; to organize new leadership vehicles and ideas. In the last few years, I have become convinced that there is a major structural problem that constrains the independent citizen sector from making a quantum leap in terms of mission effectiveness. While good support services are needed, it is time to tackle this structural problem head on. Working with a wonderful group of people from social entrepreneurship, international grantmaking foundations, public development agencies, commercial finance, business consulting, and corporate social responsibility, we have embarked on a quest to build ACCESS -- a generally accepted reporting standard for nonprofit organizations. I look forward to unpacking our diagnosis of the social sector doldrums and our prescription over the course of this SocialEdge event. For those interested in a detailed depiction, please check out the ACCESS materials at www.accountability.org.uk. Replies to this message Steve Rudolph (Jan 19, 2004 12:50 pm) Marilyn Wyatt, self, - Jan 19, 2004 6:36 am (Message 3 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 8 What's Governance Got to Do With It? I agree with Simon--it's time to move beyond debates about whether accountability is a good or bad thing in itself to finer definitions of what it involves and how to recognize it. Case in point: the term 'accountability' is often accompanied seemingly automatically by the words 'and good governance.' But what are we talking about here? Is good governance what governments do or what governing bodies do? Is it regulation or self-regulation? If the former, what kind of good governance do NGOs want? (A newspaper circulating at the World Social Forum states that for NGOs 'all governments are the target,' which doesn't leave much room for debate.) If the latter,is it time to start insisting on universal expectations for boards' performance? I look forward to hearing the ideas of others about good governance and its relation to accountability. Replies to this message Caroline Hartnell (Jan 19, 2004 10:28 am) Caroline Hartnell, Alliance Magazine, - Jan 19, 2004 10:28 am (Message 4 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 9 Replying to: Marilyn Wyatt (Jan 19, 2004 6:36 am) What's Governance Got to Do With It?: I agree with Simon--it's time to move beyond debates about whether accountability is...... re: What's Governance Got to Do With It? I have to plead guilty as charged - to being one of those people who automatically add 'and governance' after accountability. When talking to Marilyn about the December feature on accountability and governance in Alliance Magazine, she took me to task (in the nicest possible way) for not giving the 'and governance' bit sufficient focus in the issue. Alas, there is never time to cover everything one wants in any single issue of a magazine. That's why I'm so pleased to have the chance to carry on some of the discussions in this Social Edge event. I'm looking forward to having all the December contributors and others, hopefully from all over the world, taking part in this next phase of the conversation. Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 19, 2004 12:50 pm (Message 5 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 301 Replying to: David Bonbright (Jan 19, 2004 6:14 am) Its a structural problem: I suppose that I have been interested in the relationship between performance, resourcing and accountability in...... Awareness and Education needed Hi David, Steve Rudolph here, co-founder of Jiva Institute http://www.jiva.org in India, a nonprofit social enterprise that creates sustainable, scaleable programs in education and health. Let me start by saying I think that the materials that the Aga Khan Foundation created for NGO Enchancement are the best I have seen so far. I look forward to reading more about ACCESS. http://www.akdn.org/agency/akf_ngoenhance.html More NGOs should know about them, and someone should really do something to enable nonprofits to attend these courses. Regarding accountability, over the last few years, I've been actively promoting the virtues of social enterprise, and the need for accountability and good governance--within our own organization, to other Indian nonprofits, and also to the foundations that we have sought funding from. We have held workshops, and even developed a set of software tools to promote accountability and transparency. During this time, I have found that awareness levels related to these ideas are extraordinarily low among most NGOs, and are even more so when it comes to foundations. Most of the established foundations are deeply entrenched in traditional ways of thinking. So young, fiery social enterprises that boast avant garde approaches to their nonprofit practices are not only NOT encouraged, they are potentially not entertained. Exhibiting an interest in or ability to demonstrate greater accountability can actually complicate their existing processes. Ironically, they don't necessarily see a value addition in it. I implicitly believe that accountability is absolutely critical on many different fronts. However, I wonder if we are heading toward a social sector divide between NGOs/Foundations that adhere to traditional practices (where personality, politics, and persuasion are more critical to getting support than is demonstrating accountability), and those organizations that embrace the need for more modern practices that include greater accountability. I look forward to discussing these and other thoughts during our time online. Best, Steve ----- Steven Rudolph President, Jiva International www.jiva.org Check out my blog on Social Enterprise and Development in India http://steve.populog.com Replies to this message Marilyn Wyatt (Jan 20, 2004 12:55 am) Jan Masaoka, Executive Director CompassPoint Nonprofit Services, - Jan 19, 2004 10:28 pm (Message 6 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 17 Let's be real about accountability Jan Masaoka here, of CompassPoint Nonprofit Services (a nonprofit consulting/training firm to nonprofits). How accountable is anyone in our society, anyway? To what degree are professional corporate managers truly accountable to stockholders? To what degree are our elected officials--especially collectively--truly accountable to their constituents? I'm looking forward to this discussion about nonprofit and foundation accountability . . . but let's keep the context in mind. Marilyn Wyatt, self, - Jan 20, 2004 12:55 am (Message 7 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 8 Replying to: Steve Rudolph (Jan 19, 2004 12:50 pm) Awareness and Education needed: Hi David, Steve Rudolph here, co-founder of Jiva Institute http://www.jiva.org in India, a nonprofit social enterprise...... re: Awareness and Education needed Hi Steve, I just returned from a week in India where I conducted several workshops on governance and NGO boards in Mumbai and New Delhi. This workshops were part of an 18-month project I've been doing in India with the Center for the Advancement for Philanthropy, funded by a grant from Ford to BoardSource. Participants in our trainings have included chief executives from the broadest range of organizations, from very grass-roots efforts in rural villages to national-level funding organizations. I wish I'd known about the accountability and transparency tools you've developed--they would undoubtedly have helped us in our work. Is there anyplace online to check them out? My experience throughout the project has been that there has been very little disagreement on the general need to be accountable. I guess this is a given when people show up at my workshops. But real differences emerge when we begin to talk about the degree of accountability needed. The smaller the organization, the simpler the accountability measures they find appropriate and seem comfortable with. For example, one grass-roots activist told me last week that boards simply have no role in the rural village projects he works with. I have no doubt this is true (and this is a tough admission for someone whose work is devoted to promoting the importance of boards!). So I wonder if the obligation to be accountable shouldn't also be viewed in terms of the size, budget, and complexity of the organization itself (...Sometimes 'stage of development' is also included in this matrix, though last week I was also reminded that not all NGOs think believe in 'bigger is better,' and that some quite mature organizations remain totally grass-roots, thank you very much.) Perhaps what's needed is for someone to come up with a sort of sliding scale of accountability measures to reflect the fact the NGOs come in all different sizes. Replies to this message Steve Rudolph (Jan 20, 2004 8:19 pm) David Bonbright - Jan 20, 2004 3:48 am (Message 8 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 19 re: Awareness and Education needed Hi Steve, Thanks for your kind words about our AKF 'NGO enhancement' products. In fact, we have recently changed the name of this area of our work to Civil Society Programme to reflect the need to hvae a more inclusive lens when promoting citizen initiative for public benefit. We are also looking at ways to make the prototype resource mobilization course (in a distance learning format) more widely available in partnership with ACCESS. More on that later I hope. On accountability, and picking up from points made in the 'new era of scrutiny' thread, I also find it useful to consider the extent to which market-like forces of competition can be performance drivers. Nonprofits have been sheltered, most do have a very conservative attitude toward change and innovation (paradoxically), and, as I argued in my opening salvo, I think that this is a structural feature, a systemic issue -- as Simon and Peter argue in their December Alliance articles. Yes, education is needed. But we also need to change the shape of the playing field. This is why ACCESS argues that the way forward may be in looking at the three way linkage between accountability, performance and resourcing. We ask how to line up all three in a mutual feedback loop, as in the ACCESS logo (attached) PeterS, Independent Sector, - Jan 20, 2004 4:37 am (Message 9 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 2 Introduction My name is Peter Shiras and I am the senior vice president for programs at Independent Sector, a national association of nonprofit organizations, foundations and corporate giving programs based in Washington DC. My particular interest in this topic has to do with what I do believe is the new era of scrutiny that the nonprofit sector is facing, not only in the United States, but around the world, and our collective failure so far to address the issues of accountability on which we are being challenged. As I discuss in my article, I think our failure is at the individual level of our own organizations and at the collective level of developing strong systems of self-regulation. In the U.S., we have also failed to hold government accountable for its role in providing adequate oversight and enforcement of existing regulations. Sorry to get in a little late to the discussion and I'm glad to see that it is off to a good start. dbenhorin, CompuMentor, - Jan 20, 2004 9:39 am (Message 10 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 3 Accountable to whom? Daniel Ben-Horin here, founder and President of CompuMentor. This is going to be interesting, I can tell. Accountability, for me, can tend to be one of those 'motherhood and apple pie' concepts that infest the nonprofit sector. Who could be *against* accountability? Yet as Jan M. says, 'let's be real.' I feel accountable to a variety of constituencies. The IRS, for our tax status. Donors, for their investment and trust. Our Board, which oversees my performance. Our staff, whose livelihoods we managers are the stewards of. Our clients, of course. And even beyond our direct clients, that huge amorphous constituency of the 'under-resourced', not just in this country but throughout the world, concern for whose equitable treatment got me (and our staff at CM) into this kind of work in the first place. Here's a question for you all: Are accountabilities ever in collision? And if so, on what basis do you resolve? Replies to this message Michael Chertok (Jan 20, 2004 11:50 am) Postings 2 - 10 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion dbenhorin, CompuMentor, - Jan 20, 2004 9:39 am (Message 10 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 3 Accountable to whom? Daniel Ben-Horin here, founder and President of CompuMentor. This is going to be interesting, I can tell. Accountability, for me, can tend to be one of those 'motherhood and apple pie' concepts that infest the nonprofit sector. Who could be *against* accountability? Yet as Jan M. says, 'let's be real.' I feel accountable to a variety of constituencies. The IRS, for our tax status. Donors, for their investment and trust. Our Board, which oversees my performance. Our staff, whose livelihoods we managers are the stewards of. Our clients, of course. And even beyond our direct clients, that huge amorphous constituency of the 'under-resourced', not just in this country but throughout the world, concern for whose equitable treatment got me (and our staff at CM) into this kind of work in the first place. Here's a question for you all: Are accountabilities ever in collision? And if so, on what basis do you resolve? Replies to this message Michael Chertok (Jan 20, 2004 11:50 am) Keely Stevenson, Social Edge Community Manager, - Jan 20, 2004 10:19 am (Message 11 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 266 A Warm Welcome! Greetings! I am Keely Stevenson, Program Manager for Social Edge. It is great to see everyone here! I look forward to connecting with each of you through this conversation. Special thanks to our Moderators and Special Guests for the time and expertise they are sharing with us over the next two weeks. Event Moderators: Alliance Magazine's Anand Shukla and Caroline Hartnell Special Guests: --Barbara Kibbe, Vice President of Skoll Foundation. --David Bonbright, Director, Civil Society Programmes with the Aga Khan Foundation. --Jan Masaoka, Executive Director of CompassPoint Nonprofit Services. --Kumi Naidoo, Secretary General of CIVICUS --Peter Shiras, Vice President of Independent Sector. --Simon Zadek, Chief Executive of AccountAbility, London. --Woodrow W. Clark II, Author of 'Corporate Governance: the Enron fiasco in America.' --Marilyn Wyatt, who specializes in nonprofit governance as a consultant. --Peter Reynard, Editor of the Accountability. --David Kalete, Programmes Director, CIVICUS Also, for those of you interested in background reading for the event, please visit 'event resources' at this link: http://www.socialedge.org/events.html Michael Chertok, Social Change Consulting, - Jan 20, 2004 11:50 am (Message 12 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 49 Replying to: dbenhorin (Jan 20, 2004 9:39 am) Accountable to whom?: Daniel Ben-Horin here, founder and President of CompuMentor. This is going to be interesting, I can tell....... re: Accountable to whom? Hi, I'm Michael Chertok, Principal of Social Change Consulting. Among other things, I work with social enterprises that employ earned income strategies. Revenue generation is by no means a panacea for the sector...and for many organizations it is not an appropriate strategy for full or even partial funding of for a variety of reasons. However, I think there's a lot to be learned in the area of accountability from organizations that incorporate paid membership or product/service fees into their model. Payments to an organization are perhaps the best proxy for actual value delivered to the constituencies we serve. I'm therefore a bit surprised, Daniel, that you didn't mention your DiscountTech and other customers as one of your constituencies. Yes, they are clients...but they are also customers! sista_sista - Jan 20, 2004 3:27 pm (Message 13 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 34 introduction hello- social edge member, sista_sista here. i am a volunteer within a nonprofit, but I don't know too much about this subject of accountability. thanks for hosting the event. i'm eager to learn more. Caroline and others, if you had to explain what you hope to happen in this event, how would you do it? Replies to this message Caroline Hartnell (Jan 21, 2004 5:57 am) Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 20, 2004 8:19 pm (Message 14 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 301 Replying to: Marilyn Wyatt (Jan 20, 2004 12:55 am) re: Awareness and Education needed: Hi Steve, I just returned from a week in India where I conducted several workshops...... re: Awareness and Education needed Hi Marylin, Wonderful. I'm really glad to hear about the workshops in India--and I would really love to know more if you are free to tell (who, what transpired, etc.). Here's a link to a webpage on our Jiva website that features the tools we created for accountability and transparency: http://jiva.org/enterprise/softwaretools.asp These were tools that I worked on sedulously for over a year. Our board unanimously agreed that this initiative was ahead of its time. We were unable to interest foundations nor NGOs, and could secure funds to fuel the initiative. And I tried HARD! So we decided to focus on other projects until the field caught up. Shame, because I think they hold so much promise. I attribute the lack of uptake to a lack of perceived need: Foundations receive their money from donors who usually do NOT want to know the nitty gritty details of what the foundations do with the money. So there is no push from the top down. Board members of foundations have not embraced accountability with conviction--because there is no pressure for them to do so. Non-profits don't embrace it passionately because the foundations that fund them, their donors, and other stakeholders don't demand it. So even though it SOUNDS like a good idea, if there is no movtivation (an incentive or a threat), it will be very very hard to get people through the value chain to embrace accountability in the ways that are being proposed. Anyway, if after reading the web page you are interested to know more, contact me, and I'll see if I can dig up a ppt file with more screenshots, and perhaps can reactivate our online demos. I fully agree with your thought regarding the matrix. I'd be very much interested to see what you come up with. I'm a big fan of the continuum and matrix. Best, Steve ----- Steven Rudolph President, Jiva International www.jiva.org Check out my blog on Social Enterprise and development in India: http://steve.populog.com Replies to this message Marilyn Wyatt (Jan 21, 2004 2:50 am) Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 20, 2004 8:45 pm (Message 15 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 301 Replying to: David Bonbright (Jan 20, 2004 3:48 am) re: Awareness and Education needed: Hi Steve, Thanks for your kind words about our AKF 'NGO enhancement' products. In fact,...... ACCESS Model Hi David, Do keep me informed about the course as it develops. I'm very interested. Regarding the model you have presented, I would first like to point out that the image is an optical illusion, which might therefore render your model impossible ;) (just kidding) I just spent time on the Accountability website. It is obvious that some really hard work and deep thinking has gone into the ACCESS model. And I must congratulate you on it. Things I would like to know: 1. Is anyone using/implementing the model? 2. What is the incentive? Have you been able to demonstrate how, by implementing it, organizations have benefitted (financially? in terms of social impact?) 3. If I want to implement it, what do I have to do? 4. Is funding available to nonprofits who are interested to implement the model to enable them to implement it? You're talking to a die-hard early adopter. I'm ready to try anything--(not once, but at least 4-5 times). But these days, one would sure like to know that the time invested on implementing anything new yields returns in the not too distant future. Best, Steve ----- Steven Rudolph, President, Jiva International www.jiva.org Check out my blog on Social Enterprise and development in India http://steve.populog.com David Bonbright - Jan 21, 2004 2:14 am (Message 16 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 19 Growing ACCESS Thanks for your interest and questions re ACCESS Steve. There is a short answer to your questions. The ACCESS Reporting Standard is now being developed through largescale action research field trials with clusters or nonprofits in Latin America, South Africa, Philippines and India. There is a parallel 'global dialogue' to engage widely with others evolving accountability mechanisms. We believe that those using ACCESS (again, this has to be future tense as we are in the development stage now) will derive three kinds of benefits. First, they will enhance performance. Second, they will gain access to new financial resources through links to funders relying on ACCESS reports. (ACCESS has a parallel process with funders to this end.) Third, they will be able to improve accountability to stakeholders through clearer and better reporting. There is funding in the ACCESS budget for costs of implementing ACCESS for the pilot project partners. We love die-hard early adopters -- so let's follow up offline about the possibility of JIVA participating in the Indian pilot group. Cheers, David Marilyn Wyatt, self, - Jan 21, 2004 2:50 am (Message 17 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 8 Replying to: Steve Rudolph (Jan 20, 2004 8:19 pm) re: Awareness and Education needed: Hi Marylin, Wonderful. I'm really glad to hear about the workshops in India--and I would...... re: Awareness and Education needed Steve, Thanks for the URL. I totally agree with your point that without sufficient external pressure accountability rarely moves from theory to practice. Expecting NGOs to behave accountability when no one is really demanding they do so is as pointless as telling NGOs to raise money locally when there is no local culture of giving. The two are connected, of course. yvonne morgan, Charities Aid Foundation Southern Africa, - Jan 21, 2004 3:18 am (Message 18 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 1 an NGO Code of Good Governance for Southern Africa CAF Southern Africa is about to launch a research project designed for NGOs in Southern Africa and intended to produce a draft Code of Good Governance for the Non-Profit Sector. The burning issue of NGO accountability to stakeholders will feature prominently in discussions. The research process will kick off with an Accountability conference in May in Johannesburg followed by several regional workshops. Replies to this message David Bonbright (Jan 22, 2004 8:27 am) venkat - Jan 21, 2004 5:10 am (Message 19 of 69) Reply | Tell a Friend | Bookmark this Message Posts: 4 The Credibility Alliance in India The Credibility Alliance is a 3-year effort in India at nonprofit self-regulation that sets norms/standards for credibility [spans accountability, transparency, performance, governance]. We're all set to incorporate it shortly and get it rolling here. You can get a quick glimpse at the www.credibilityalliance.org website. Postings 10 - 19 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Posts: 77 Documenting impact Hi everyone - Twice in the past week I've been asked whether I agree with Desoto's premise in 'Mystery of Capital,' apparently (I haven't read the book) that the viability of developing economies is hindered due to a lack of documentation. If this is indeed the premise DeSoto makes, I could not agree more. Being a proponent of online technologies for Africa, I believe that the new levels of transparency that are possible thru internet technologies will drive the social sector in developing economies toward aspiring to new, impact based definitions of accountability. We need to document our work in order to achieve the public's trust. Christina http://piecetrain.com Life in Africa (Uganda) Replies to this message Steve Rudolph (Jan 27, 2004 11:18 am) KUMI, CIVICUS:World Alliance for Citizen Participation, - Jan 25, 2004 8:35 am (Message 39 of 69) Posts: 6 Issue Based Accountabilities and such Dear Peter, Absolutely right. The accountability threshold for membership based organisations is more onerous or at least more onerous. A good example, is Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, the latter being a membership based organisation and thus having to slow down policy making and sometimes even strategy development to take into account members views and so on. With regard to issue based specificities, this again is critically important with particular areas of work. I am currently in Malaysia at a meeting of CSOs doing advocacy work around International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and it is so evident that the accountability challenges for the northern based NGOs are different and more challenging than southern based organisations given that the IFIs impact are felt primarily in the south and the power within these institutions are held primary by the wealthy countries of the north. Best wishes, Kumi Peter Raynard, AccountAbility, - Jan 25, 2004 1:44 pm (Message 40 of 69) Posts: 6 Who's winning the accountability race? Dear All As we enter our second week of debate, I wanted to introduce a more light-hearted aspect, and get people thinking about accountability across the sectors, as well as within them. So, out of the different sectors, who do you think is winning the accountability race? Public sector bodies and governments always claim they have the democratic mandate, and are therefore accountable to the ballot box. Non-profits, who have the 'moral mandate, derive their accountability through their social mission and engagement with 'communities'. And as for the private sector, they have sustainability reports coming out of their ears. And that's not to mention the UN, World Bank, WTO....etc. I know that one cannot truly answer the question, but go on have a go. Best wishes Peter marjolein brouwer, Novib Oxfam Netherlands, - Jan 26, 2004 7:00 am (Message 41 of 69) Posts: 4 greetings from Novib, the Netherlands Organsiation for International Development Cooperation greetings from the Netherlands. one of my colleagues pointed this e-mail discussion out to me, and since I have some time to spare this week, I am happy to join you. by way of introduction: I work with Novib's Research and Development bureau as adviser on issues around social and political participation. I just finalised a paper of Novib's vision, policy and practice on civil society building. tara4biz, Good Governance India, - Jan 26, 2004 9:24 pm (Message 42 of 69) Posts: 2 Good Governance India Hello there.... I would like to introduce you as a worker of Good Governance India programmes in India where we invite all stake holders in the Governments, NGOs, Corporates, Semi-Government, Individuals to participate in contribution to magazine. A International conference and a concurrent Exhibition is also held with participation of target audience and Exhibitors wishing to promote their profiles. More details can be obtained from www.goodgovernanceindia.com Tel: +91 22 26372883 ktreakle, Mott Foundation, - Jan 27, 2004 6:12 am (Message 43 of 69) Posts: 2 Accountability at the World Bank Greetings. I just recently learned about Social Edge and this discussion, and it appears that there is some interest in this topic as it relates to the World Bank. I and my colleagues Jonathan Fox and Dana Clark recently published a book entitled 'Demanding Accountability: Civil-Society Claims and the World Bank Inspection Panel' (Rowman and Littlefield, 2003), which compiles nine case studies of inspection panel cases and analyses both how each case turned out for the claimants, as well as how the cases contributed to accountability at the Bank. Our study is the first non-bank assessment of the effectiveness of the Inspection Panel as a mechanism for citizens to hold the World Bank accountable for the harm caused in projects it finances. The Panel -- which was established in 1994 -- has been an important tool for affected people in terms of gaining some official standing in relation to Bank management and project officials, but in many of the cases, problems identified by claimants and confirmed by Panel investigations have persisted. The question of Bank accountability to the people affected by projects is one that we tried to grapple with -- what does accountability actually mean when the Panel's procedures only allow findings of fact, but do not include provisions for solving problems that they do uncover. There are a lot of facets to this discussion, but for me, the bottom line is that findings of fact, while often affirming that affected people are not exaggerating the harm they've experienced, are not enough to actually trigger the Bank to take responsibility for fixing the problem, or providing reparations. The accountability question seems to be related to responsibility, and that piece of the equation is currently missing. Looking forward to checking in on these issues. Replies to this message Anne Perlman (Jan 29, 2004 2:38 pm) David Bonbright - Jan 27, 2004 8:09 am (Message 44 of 69) Posts: 19 Replying to: Peter Raynard (Jan 24, 2004 2:05 am) re: Individual Organisational Accountability Versus Sector Wide Accountability: Kumi There are then issue based accountabilities (e.g. People in Aid on...... mapping current initiatives to add to the growing list, there is the effort by child sponsorship organizations to create a certified standard called Child Sponsorship Certification Standard 8000 Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 27, 2004 11:18 am (Message 45 of 69) Posts: 301 Replying to: C Kirabo (Jan 25, 2004 4:56 am) Documenting impact: Hi everyone - Twice in the past week I've been asked whether I agree with Desoto's premise in...... Limitations to Transparency Hi Christina, Your reference to De Soto is an excellent one. I think the Mystery of Capital was an excellent book, and I whole-heartedly agree with De Soto's premise that many poor could be benefitted if land records were formalized, and made easier to get so people could get access to credit. It is the 'transparency' aspect that you have hit on. A year ago, I co-developed an idea called 'e-Jameen' (Jameen means 'land' in Hindi) with Sandy Pentland of the Media Lab at MIT, which was based on De Soto's concept. We wanted to explore the possibility of creating digital maps of villagers' land using GPS and GIS, to help the villagers get an accurate account/depiction of the properties they rightly owned. However, what we found out was that if the government departments don't WANT transparency (keeping things obscure is what 'keeps them in business'), then transparency is of little consequence. In another project, we created a system that enabled villagers to send e-mail to government officials regarding complaints, corruption, etc. However, one of the villagers pointed out, 'It doesn't matter how the official sitting there gets that message--by word of mouth, paper, or email; until he gets something in his pocket, nothing will happen.' So my feeling is that unless there are stakeholders for whom transparency is meaningful and needed, all of the effort that goes into creating transparent systems might not yield significant results. Said positively: Using technology to enhance transparency is most beneficial when the transparency that is created is of high value to the stakeholders. Best, Steve ----- Steven Rudolph President, Jiva International www.jiva.org Check out my blog on Social Enterprise and development in India http://steve.populog.com elarroude, ABCR - Brazilian Fundraisers' Association, - Jan 28, 2004 9:06 am (Message 46 of 69) Posts: 2 greetings from São Paulo, Brazil My name is Elisa Larroudé and I am glad to take part in this discussion on behalf of ABCR, the Brazilian Fundaisers' Association (www.abcr.com.br). Our members are commited to honoring and spreading the 'Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice' (Portuguese text attached), which covers accountability to donors and publicizing financial statements but does not yet refer to any sort of downward accountability. This document is a reflection on more traditional Brazilian civil society practices: we are quite used to reporting to donors and society as a whole, but involving beneficiaries in this is a more recent approach. I understand many countries in the South face similar challenges (especially regarding changes in long-standing practices) and would appreciate learning of more examples. Best wishes, Elisa elarroude@terra.com.br Attachments: Cdigode tica-ABCR-versaorevisada.doc (50 KB) (0 Downloads) Postings 37 - 46 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Discussions Member Tools Social Edge Contact Us Anything Goes Lounge | Social Sector Soapbox | Best Practices | Events | Social Edge Feedback Login/Logout | Register | Change Preferences | Help | Member Directory About Us | Community Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Moderators | Terms of Use | Copyright Contact Us | Email Webmaster | Job Openings | Partnerships | Media & Press Copyright ® 2003 Skoll Foundation Social Edge Discussions Social Edge Online Events Rethinking Accountability Welcome & Introduce Yourself Search Social Edge: Members: 2383, Topics: 232, Posts: 1 Hello profitinafrica | Click to Logout Welcome & Introduce Yourself Welcome! Please share with us your interests in this topic and background. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postings 46 - 55 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion elarroude, ABCR - Brazilian Fundraisers' Association, - Jan 28, 2004 9:06 am (Message 46 of 69) Posts: 2 greetings from São Paulo, Brazil My name is Elisa Larroudé and I am glad to take part in this discussion on behalf of ABCR, the Brazilian Fundaisers' Association (www.abcr.com.br). Our members are commited to honoring and spreading the 'Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice' (Portuguese text attached), which covers accountability to donors and publicizing financial statements but does not yet refer to any sort of downward accountability. This document is a reflection on more traditional Brazilian civil society practices: we are quite used to reporting to donors and society as a whole, but involving beneficiaries in this is a more recent approach. I understand many countries in the South face similar challenges (especially regarding changes in long-standing practices) and would appreciate learning of more examples. Best wishes, Elisa elarroude@terra.com.br Attachments: Cdigode tica-ABCR-versaorevisada.doc (50 KB) (0 Downloads) Replies to this message David Bonbright (Jan 29, 2004 10:19 am) bewing - Jan 28, 2004 9:53 am (Message 47 of 69) Posts: 1 Greetings Greetings, I am dropping by a bit late but have been busy setting up a new cooperative here in Thunder Bay, Ontario. Accounability is a must, the more transparent a process is the more accountability there is. It is vital to see how decisions are amde and how funds flwo through an organization. This increases the public's confidence. Richard Diaz, L.A. Junior Chamber of Commerce, - Jan 28, 2004 10:06 am (Message 48 of 69) Posts: 1 Greetings My name is Richard Diaz and I am director of a leadership program in Los Angeles that prepares young professionals to become board members of nonprofit organizations. After reading Peter Shiras' article, one point that he failed to make as a possible solution was working with the corporate sector, encouraging and preparing young leaders to take on leadership roles in the nonprofit world. Just a thought Richard Diaz rdiaz@lajcc.org Replies to this message o_carolyne (Jan 29, 2004 11:20 am) rickncg, NCG, - Jan 28, 2004 10:52 am (Message 49 of 69) Posts: 2 --Nice to join in My name is Rick Smith and it's nice to be part of this intersting and important discussion. I am currently the interim executive director of Northern California Grantmakers, a regional grant maker association in San Francisco Bay Area. I have spent most of my career (last 20 years) in the management support field. Two big ideas come up for me on the issue of accountability: first, we need to come to grips with the serious shortcomings of our governance system, that is a system of very part time volunteers in the role of primary overseers of nonprofit enterprise. It's the rare nonprofit board that effectively protects the public interest through its oversight efforts. I'm not sure what we can do about this but I'm surprised by the lack of alternative approaches discussed. Second, we need to develop better (more accurate?) standards of effeciveness both on program and management criteria. My sense is we need specific nonprofit industries to work together to develop meaningful indicators. Even in the area of finance where we have functional accounting (program, management, fundraising) no one plays by the same rules, and thus the information is not terribly helpful. We're not really comparing apples to apples. I don't mean to sound so pessimistic---the accoutability challenge is huge and I'm hopeful we'll make significant progress in the years ahead. Thanks for hosting this discussion. Replies to this message David Bonbright (Jan 29, 2004 10:32 am) Conrad (Jan 29, 2004 6:51 pm) o_carolyne, George Washington University, - Jan 28, 2004 7:46 pm (Message 50 of 69) Posts: 6 o_carolyne Hallo Folks , Its never late to share a thought. I am Caroline Odhiambo currently a Graduate Student at the George Washington University . I am taking MSc in Project Management and upon completion in December 2004 will look for a job in the Non profit sector where I worked in the past 6 years. I have therefore had a chance to come face to face with Non-Profits in the South (Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania)and will share my views in order to make better this sector. So far it has been kind of difficult to even get a Graduate Student who has any vision for non-profits. Am glad you folks are out there and share my passion. To professionalize the Non-profit sector! Keep it Up! Replies to this message Steve Rudolph (Jan 29, 2004 8:37 pm) o_carolyne, George Washington University, - Jan 28, 2004 7:52 pm (Message 51 of 69) Posts: 6 o_carolyne: Yes , We must be accountable! Here I am: Ms. Caroline Odhiambo, currently an MSc in Project Management Student at the George Washington University (USA)-has worked for the past 6 years with Public Benefit NGOs and CBOs in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. I hope the comments on accountability will contribute in professionalizing the Non-profit sector in response to the global associational trend and improve the much needed accountability of the social sector. Hope my thought trail was not too long folks! The social sector is certainly in a new era of scrutiny because of the following reasons among others. First and foremost is that “there is increasing concerted efforts geared by other actors such as the private sector towards addressing challenges that were regarded as the domain of social sector such as poverty reduction issues ”. This has thereby resulted in greater demand for accountability by the social sector from both the donors and partner citizens, and other stakeholders. The partners citizens commonly referred to as the ‘grassroot communities’ for instance were in the former era assumed to be voiceless recipients/beneficiaries. Other factors such as technology and subsequent globalization also force NGOs to change their way of operations for instance the use of internet to raise funds . This change also calls for greater accountability. Persistent socio-economic challenges that were perceived as solvable have also changed the perception of all the actors. This therefore means that all the actors must change their mode and manner of operations hence the call for efficiency to the social sector. Hence the new era implies that the social sector will be under scrutiny at all levels whether international or national or community level. A time has come when the social sector or atleast part of the social sector that has been instrumental in calling for accountability has awakened all parties concerned to also point a finger at the social sector to be accountable. Time has come for the social sector to merge mission driven accountability and contractual accountability to all its ‘now informed’ stakeholders. At the international/institutional level scrutiny will be from the mighty and those who call the shots economically, At national level there ought to be close monitoring by the state and even the market sector , the latter has increasingly begun getting involved in social welfare matters. At local level, the individual donors and respective beneficiaries are demanding output from the social sector too! While NGOs have been quiet quick in clamoring for accountability by the state for instance, most Southern NGOs for instance have not been accountable at all. Their business has remained secret and few of the social service institutions have any tangible or publicly declared blue print of which they can be judged on in terms of performance. In my 7 Years of working with NGOs in Kenya for instance, only Action Aid-Kenya publicly launched its 5 year strategy paper (2002) before members of the Government and the public sector. NGOs and the entire social sector need to follow suit and be accountable in its daily operation mechanisms and performance. 2. Some lessons that the NGOs and the corporate can learn from each other are: NGOs need to be public about their financial statements just as much as the private sector corporations do. This is because a large amount of the funds in the NGOs are public money and yet the public is never informed about the finances. There is need for the social sector to harmonize its institutional vision. Frankly speaking, the Vision of the Non-profit sector is unclear and is never static. There is need for the social sector to have an agreed upon set of values e.g. staff qualifications and tittles. It is in the NGO sector where I have for instance come across consultants with 1 year on working experience and officers will all manner of job tittles for instance Markets Facilitator and with embarrassingly low pay! The NGOs need to borrow a lot from the private sector in so far as solving the agency problems. They need to have explicit rules of engagement and clear cut power relations just like the situation is in the Private sector. A lot needs to be done on NGO board and governance matters. This can reduce conflict of interest a major problem in Southern NGOs, where founder Directors of the NGOs wield so much power and control both the staff and the Board of Directors whom he/she handpicks to serve in the Board of his/her My Own NGO(MONGO). JOBI, HUMAN ANGLE, - Jan 29, 2004 1:53 am (Message 52 of 69) Posts: 8 Accountablity? Yes Caroline. Hi everyone, This is Josephine Nzerem Ashoka fellow from Nigeria,working in the area of the protection of socio-economic rights of women.I have worked in this area for the past six years. MY THOUHGTS: I agree totally with Cristina Kirabo. Accountabilty should be a must in the social sector. If we all agree that we are change agents, accountability must start with us.It is not possible to influence or change a society that is currupt when the person or group of persons championing the change joins the band wagon. Also partnership between the social and business sectors can be achieved when the two parties have a track record of transparency.We[the social sector] must all strive to use everything at our disposal to entrench transparency in our work and lives,especially as the society has entrusted 'change' to us.Or did we entrust it on ourselves? David Bonbright - Jan 29, 2004 10:19 am (Message 53 of 69) Posts: 19 Replying to: elarroude (Jan 28, 2004 9:06 am) greetings from São Paulo, Brazil: My name is Elisa Larroudé and I am glad to take part in this discussion...... Brazilian experiments in multidirectional accountability Dear Elisa, ACCESS (see article attached on the kick off page for this event) plans to have pilot development activities in Brazil over the next three years. These will certainly tackle some of the issues you raise. Let me know if you would like to be involved in our pilot activities in some way. Ciao, David David Bonbright - Jan 29, 2004 10:32 am (Message 54 of 69) Posts: 19 Replying to: rickncg (Jan 28, 2004 10:52 am) --Nice to join in: My name is Rick Smith and it's nice to be part of this intersting and important...... re: --Nice to join in Dear Rick, Two seminal points. No need to be pessimistic in the face of BIG challenges, however. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. I believe that we are close to the tipping point on this set of issues. The corporate sector has largely accepted the need for sustainability reporting. Government and donors are asking for more accountability from citizen organizations/social activists. The technical issues are completely solvable. There is a wave of innovation in social investing that is ready to take the necessary risks and provide some venture capital. I can go on but you get the point! David AlisonWise, Sea Change Sustainable Business Interest Group, - Jan 29, 2004 11:19 am (Message 55 of 69) Posts: 1 New trade association for enviro. resp. businss Hello- My name is Alison Wise and I am the executive director of a newly formed trade association (Sea Change Sustainable Business Interest Group)for businesses focused on services or products that are building an environmentally sustainable economy. That is, we will be lobbying for legislative initiatives that will seek to internalize external costs associated with environmentally irresponsible business practices so that responsible ones will gain competitive advantage in the marketplace. Thus, accountability is facilitated by better information in the market...consumer purchases are better informed and thus the true price of goods and services with reinforce accountable practices. The ultimate goal, I believe, is to help responsible businesses to be more profitable than irresponsible ones. Postings 46 - 55 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Discussions Member Tools Social Edge Contact Us Anything Goes Lounge | Social Sector Soapbox | Best Practices | Events | Social Edge Feedback Login/Logout | Register | Change Preferences | Help | Member Directory About Us | Community Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Moderators | Terms of Use | Copyright Contact Us | Email Webmaster | Job Openings | Partnerships | Media & Press Copyright ® 2003 Skoll Foundation Social Edge Discussions Social Edge Online Events Rethinking Accountability Welcome & Introduce Yourself Search Social Edge: Members: 2383, Topics: 232, Posts: 0 Hello profitinafrica | Click to Logout Welcome & Introduce Yourself Welcome! Please share with us your interests in this topic and background. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postings 55 - 64 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion AlisonWise, Sea Change Sustainable Business Interest Group, - Jan 29, 2004 11:19 am (Message 55 of 69) Posts: 1 New trade association for enviro. resp. businss Hello- My name is Alison Wise and I am the executive director of a newly formed trade association (Sea Change Sustainable Business Interest Group)for businesses focused on services or products that are building an environmentally sustainable economy. That is, we will be lobbying for legislative initiatives that will seek to internalize external costs associated with environmentally irresponsible business practices so that responsible ones will gain competitive advantage in the marketplace. Thus, accountability is facilitated by better information in the market...consumer purchases are better informed and thus the true price of goods and services with reinforce accountable practices. The ultimate goal, I believe, is to help responsible businesses to be more profitable than irresponsible ones. o_carolyne, George Washington University, - Jan 29, 2004 11:20 am (Message 56 of 69) Posts: 6 Replying to: Richard Diaz (Jan 28, 2004 10:06 am) Greetings: My name is Richard Diaz and I am director of a leadership program in Los Angeles that prepares young...... re: Hallo Dear Richard, Your program sounds interesting. Do you have a website ?? Thomas George, Stanford University, - Jan 29, 2004 12:02 pm (Message 57 of 69) Posts: 7 re: Limitations to Transparency Hi Steve, How well said, you are exactly right! Unless transparency brings incentives with it for the stakeholders, it is not going to work in my opinion. Corruption exists not because people don't know that it exists, but rather because there are all the incentives to be corrupt and no incentives to make an honest living. So, when the only choice to make a better living (or advance one's self interest) is to be corrupt, then that is what people would tend to do. To give an example, the village 'middleman' trader is commonly considered as a 'bad guy' in the rural developing world. Therefore, it is a common perception that giving price information to the poor will help the poor in keeping the village trader honest. Well, that could happen. But, what if the only choice for the village trader to make a better living is by paying the poor less than the market price and the only outlet for the poor farmer to sell his produce is the village trader? In this case, the transparency brought about by the technology delivered information on price will have a very limited value. For the village trader, it is either advance his self interest of making a better living by paying less or be poor like the rest. In other words, unless government institutions themselves will create and protect the right incentives for everyone to advance their self interest, technology may only end up exposing but not fixing the transparency problem. Thomas mlfoxellison, Interplast, - Jan 29, 2004 12:49 pm (Message 58 of 69) Posts: 1 Can Our Systems Become Too Unwieldy? Hello--My name is Marie Fox Ellison and a latecomer to the discussion though my tardiness has allowed me to look through all the responses. I am with Interplast, an organization based in California that provides reconstructive surgeries to people in developing nations. Fully half (and growing) of our programming is working with surgeons overseas to build surgical capacity in their own communities. I agree with all the statements that accountability and measurement need to be defined within our own sectors, so that we are portraying a true picture of what works and what doesn't, enabling funders and others to make true and objective/subjective decisions. This growth in accountability has served to encourage organizations like ours to develop meaningful metrics from the ground up when creating our programs. However, developing measurement tools that can be used up, down, and sideways and be meaningful to each, takes no small amount of time. Working with one stakeholder to create a metric to respond to another stakeholder takes precious time away from the real task at hand, and I think we all work very hard to not have the creation and dissemination of metrics distract us from our primary goals. My point here though is that I am reading comments from a number of people whose focus is to study, monitor, and assist ngo's and/or the philanthropic community, and that sector seems to be growing at an astounding rate. In my 20 years of fundraising, I have seen the areas where we can turn for information, training, and assistance grow from several to many hundreds if not thousands including the burgeoning number of university-based programs in philanthropy. Where there were just one or two watchdog groups there are now many who seem to apply quick judgment using flat numbers off of a 990 form. As several people have already mentioned, ngo's quickly learn to play the game of portraying numbers where they are most advantageous. My hope is that the growing sector of organizations developed to assist the social sector take into account that this becomes a stress factor for the organizations working directly in the field as well. Right now there are almost too many places to turn for membership, advice,and modeling. I feel there is an opportunity here for social sector assistance organizations to join forces with one another as well. In this way, when a useful tool for measurement is created there are only one or a few that are commonly accepted from the social sector community at large. We don't want to replicate the government grant proposal system when monitoring ourselves. Replies to this message David Bonbright (Jan 29, 2004 1:45 pm) David Bonbright - Jan 29, 2004 1:45 pm (Message 59 of 69) Posts: 19 Replying to: mlfoxellison (Jan 29, 2004 12:49 pm) Can Our Systems Become Too Unwieldy?: Hello--My name is Marie Fox Ellison and a latecomer to the discussion though my...... re: Can Our Systems Become Too Unwieldy? I agree with you, Marie. Perhaps we can all come together to create a single generally accepted reporting standards framework. Such a framework would enable diverse reporting standards to meet minimum standards for assurance for and currency with grant givers. Replies to this message Steve Rudolph (Jan 29, 2004 9:20 pm) Anne Perlman - Jan 29, 2004 2:38 pm (Message 60 of 69) Posts: 101 Replying to: ktreakle (Jan 27, 2004 6:12 am) Accountability at the World Bank: Greetings. I just recently learned about Social Edge and this discussion, and it appears that...... re: Accountability at the World Bank Thanks so much for your comments about your research. If finding that affected people are actually harmed by World Bank-funded projects is not enough to trigger the Bank to take responsibility or provide reparations, what could cause the Bank to do so? Conrad - Jan 29, 2004 6:51 pm (Message 61 of 69) Posts: 9 Replying to: rickncg (Jan 28, 2004 10:52 am) --Nice to join in: My name is Rick Smith and it's nice to be part of this intersting and important...... re: --Nice to join in Financial compensation for nonprofit board members? Hey Rick et al. I’m Conrad and currently the ED of an intermediary organization that connects social entrepreneurs and activists in the U.S. and Japan. I’ve been involved with a number of social venture projects and trade groups in the bay area and was part of an interesting discussion about a week ago on Founding Executive Director Syndrome and transitions. Why I mention this is that most of our solutions to the dilemmas facing an ED in this transitional situation came down to the need for an experienced board of directors to support/guide the organization through the transition. I personally am blessed with two (of seven) very experienced board members but many of my colleagues have ended up transitioning into an ED position where most of the board members are friends of the founding ED and know little about board governance and even less about their fiduciary responsibility for the organization. This may primarily be a small young “start up” organizational problem but it does point to the need for more attention, particularly regarding accountability for the organization, to be given to training and developing active, dedicated, dare I say professional, board members. Kudos to Richard Diaz rdiaz@lajcc.org from another posting who is apparently doing just that. To the point-- does anyone have ideas or opinions on compensation to nonprofit board members like that of their corporate counterparts? That might be a little radical but I wonder if we can creatively explore the need for some kind of increased incentive for nonprofit board members so as to help motivate them to take their responsibilities very seriously. (I know there are very responsible board members out there as well and my intention is not to dis them). I simply agree with Rick that it's probably “the rare nonprofit board that effectively protects the public interest through its oversight efforts” and working to bring more accountability to board members of organizations might be a step towards solving the general accountability concerns this forum is addressing. Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 29, 2004 8:37 pm (Message 62 of 69) Posts: 301 Replying to: o_carolyne (Jan 28, 2004 7:46 pm) o_carolyne: Hallo Folks , Its never late to share a thought. I am Caroline Odhiambo currently a Graduate Student at...... We need more students! Hi Carolyne, It is a thrill to see a graduate student in the discussions--I have been secretly hoping that some students would participate on SocialEdge so there would be some diversity in our community. Please do jump in and post more, and invite your classmates in as well. Perhaps we can expand their horizons and ignite their passion a bit! It's strange, because social enterprise is such a hot area--you'd think more schools would create innovative programs and excite students to join. I've met so many young people--students and young professionals who are not interested to go the for-profit route, who want to do something more meaningful with their lives, but who wouldn't consider nonprofit work, b/c they don't believe they could earn a decent living doing it. However, I believe that with social enterprise, a person CAN have the best of both worlds--personal satisfaction and financial security. So let's catch some young folks and stir them up!! Best, Steve ----- Steven Rudolph President, Jiva International www.jiva.org Check out my blog on social enterprise: http://steve.populog.com Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 29, 2004 9:20 pm (Message 63 of 69) Posts: 301 Replying to: David Bonbright (Jan 29, 2004 1:45 pm) re: Can Our Systems Become Too Unwieldy?: I agree with you, Marie. Perhaps we can all come together to create...... Win through demand Hi David, Ideally, it sounds like a good idea for people to come together to work on an accepted reporting standards framework. However, I don't think that is necessarily that best path forward. First, you could face the tragedy of the social commons, where everyone is ready to partake, but few are ready to give to the cause. There is also the risk that it becomes little more than an academic exercise, or that it falls apart because of power struggles. Even foundations need to keep their funding coming in. I am a social entrepreneur through and through, and hold the same measures up to everyone in the process--foundations, think tanks, and so on. I therefore present the challenge to Access or any other organization that is promoting a particular flavor of accountability standards to demonstrate its worth through demand--by virtue of its value to the community:
For instance, what if Access provided not only the framework, but also a service to donors and foundations to guide funds to organizations that met its standards. The nonprofits would have the incentive of implementing the standards in order to gain exclusivity and to have a better chance at getting funding... Instead of trying to become the standard by proposing to become the standard, I suggest becoming the standard by winning over users one by one. Once early adopters begin 'sneezing' (singing the glories of the framework and offering), the 'early and late majority will come en masse, and it will eventually 'tip' and automatically become the standard. If anyone is interested in books related to the topic of how things spread, I highly recommend these books:
Steve Replies to this message David Bonbright (Feb 1, 2004 1:22 am) Oz, http://www.call4tech.com/np, - Jan 29, 2004 9:59 pm (Message 64 of 69) Posts: 13 What about the clients !!! Reading most of this thread I find it sad that no mention of accountability to clients. Maybe it's that the NPO's product in the end is people and I feel that I need to hold my self accountable to the people. After all that could or should be the ultimate accountability and the true test of success or failure ??? Which to me, seems the same as doctors saying they are accountable to everyone except the patients. ?? Maybe I am missing something here ???? Is it like quality control. You cannot engineer it,should be a by-product of a job well done. If the focus becomes quality control the humans tend to worry more of the numbers than the product. then the QC numbers look good but the products sucks..heh I would assume if the total focus was on the clients served,then the accountability becomes a by-product oz Replies to this message C Kirabo (Jan 30, 2004 3:19 pm) Postings 55 - 64 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Tell A Friend. | Print this Page Discussions Member Tools Social Edge Contact Us Anything Goes Lounge | Social Sector Soapbox | Best Practices | Events | Social Edge Feedback Login/Logout | Register | Change Preferences | Help | Member Directory About Us | Community Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Moderators | Terms of Use | Copyright Contact Us | Email Webmaster | Job Openings | Partnerships | Media & Press Copyright ® 2003 Skoll Foundation Social Edge Discussions Social Edge Online Events Rethinking Accountability Welcome & Introduce Yourself Search Social Edge: Members: 2383, Topics: 232, Posts: 1 Hello profitinafrica | Click to Logout Welcome & Introduce Yourself Welcome! Please share with us your interests in this topic and background. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postings 64 - 69 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Oz, http://www.call4tech.com/np, - Jan 29, 2004 9:59 pm (Message 64 of 69) Posts: 13 What about the clients !!! Reading most of this thread I find it sad that no mention of accountability to clients. Maybe it's that the NPO's product in the end is people and I feel that I need to hold my self accountable to the people. After all that could or should be the ultimate accountability and the true test of success or failure ??? Which to me, seems the same as doctors saying they are accountable to everyone except the patients. ?? Maybe I am missing something here ???? Is it like quality control. You cannot engineer it,should be a by-product of a job well done. If the focus becomes quality control the humans tend to worry more of the numbers than the product. then the QC numbers look good but the products sucks..heh I would assume if the total focus was on the clients served,then the accountability becomes a by-product oz Replies to this message C Kirabo (Jan 30, 2004 3:19 pm) C Kirabo, Conductor, LiA4 Piece Train, - Jan 30, 2004 3:19 pm (Message 65 of 69) Posts: 77 Replying to: Oz (Jan 29, 2004 9:59 pm) What about the clients !!!: Reading most of this thread I find it sad that no mention of accountability to...... re: What about the clients !!! I would assume if the total focus was on the clients served, then the accountability becomes a by-product Very well said, Oz. I believe we are very conditioned in the way we view systems as necessary to accountability. In fact, it's people we must be accountable to. Unfortunately, our clients tend to be perceived as disadvantaged. Far too many practitioners in my part of the world truly do not believe their clients are capable of assessing information, and so do not provide it. A case in point is the argument I have heard time and again from microfinance practitioners for charging flat versus declining interest rates. Clients don't understand interest rates, so charging a flat rate 'simplifies' things. It also increases the effective rate dramatically, and does NOT follow standard global financial sector lending practices... 'but our clients are lucky to have credit at all.' So the argument goes, and this incenses me to no end. It seems to me that much of this discussion has focused on accountability to donors, agencies, foundations from the perspective of seeing the social change sector as a recipient of (financial) help. I look forward to the day when that money oriented perspective has fully evolved to a holistic perspective that puts our disadvantaged beneficiaries on proportional footing with other stakeholders. Thanks for your important reminder! .piece Christina ktreakle, Mott Foundation, - Jan 31, 2004 3:18 pm (Message 66 of 69) Posts: 2 re: Accountability at the World Bank The inspection panel is a worthy attempt to hold the World Bank accountable to stakeholders. It’s a necessary but not sufficient mechanism, because ultimately, what we found in our research was that, when confronted with citizen claims and panel findings that support allegations – and that are made public— the Bank management has rarely responded by taking responsibility. Instead, their tendency has been to first blame the government, second, avoid admitting mistakes, and third, if mistakes were made that they had to 'own', then to pledge not to make the same mistakes again. Since there is no responsibility that comes with the accountability function -- ie no sanctions on staff, no enforcement mechanism, nor mandatory follow up actions --the Bank continues to have impunity. As an international institution, the Bank cannot be sued in court. So, to answer the question: what will cause the Bank to take responsibility? My answer is that there need to be consequences for causing harm. Staff could be reprimanded, not promoted (which often happens), or even fired if they are responsible for violating policies that result in harm to people affected by Bank-financed projects. Or loan agreements could contain performance bonds with provisions to cover damages in the event of serious environmental or social disasters. But without enforceable consequences, then the best we get is what the Bank now calls risk aversion. In other words, the risk to their reputation of having a high profile public campaign accompanied by an internal investigation can perhaps prevent staff from financing highly risky projects. We haven’t done the work yet to really analyze whether risk aversion actually leads to better decisions, or better projects, but the Bank does say that they are more rigorously applying their environmental and social policies, and it’s our assertion that this is a result of the highly public drubbing they get every time there is an inspection panel claim. So this is where we are. Public watchdogs, the press, and officials of donor and borrowing governments need to simply continue to put pressure on the institution so that its mistakes continue to be exposed; while new concepts of accountability need to be developed that extend the “findings” function of the panel to something that at the very least includes problem solving. It’s important to mention also that the other conversation about accountability here – that of NGOs – is something that is currently challenging the watchdog NGOs, who often help affected people navigate the onerous process of bringing a claim to the Panel. Borrowing governments continue to ask the question – who elected you? – when NGOs are involved in high profile campaigns that often accompany the claims. NGOs that are trying to change policy and practice at the Bank by championing claims need to ensure that they continue to advocate for affected people and work with in-country NGOs; otherwise, their critique can lose its legitimacy. What we found in our research was that of 28 claims brought between 1994 and 2003, 17 were led by exclusively southern actors, 10 were brought in south/north coalitions of actors, and only one was brought by a northern NGO. And that one was a very special circumstance in that it was brought by the International Campaign for Tibet on behalf of Tibetans in Qinghai province, in Western China, who could not advocate for themselves for fear of reprisals. The question of legitimacy in that case had to be understood in the political context of China and Tibet. At the end of the day, the Inspection Panel at the Bank has brought the concept of accountability to a new level that, even without enforceability, has great value. The function of independent, third party investigations into projects that cause harm can at the very least legitimate the concerns of affected people. Panel reports are made public, and can be used by local people to argue for improvements (which have been forthcoming in some limited cases). Similar inspection functions are beginning to be established at the other multilateral development banks. We are, I think, gaining ground in the struggle to hold international institutions accountable, and more work needs to be done. David Bonbright - Feb 1, 2004 1:22 am (Message 67 of 69) Posts: 19 Replying to: Steve Rudolph (Jan 29, 2004 9:20 pm) Win through demand: Hi David, Ideally, it sounds like a good idea for people to come together to work on...... re: Win through demand Steve, All good actionable points to bear in mind as we move forward on ACCESS. I suspect that it is/will be a bit of both supply side and demand side strategies here. The thing about reporting standards -- as opposed to better reporting practices that any individual organization might adopt -- is that an important part of the value for all organizations that use it is in the fact that it is a standard. Yes, standards can emerge organically through a gradual process of converging practice. But I guess it is my sense that it is both possible and desireable to accelerate that process with purposeful, participatory promotion of the idea of reporting standards. We'll find out over the next few years. Its bound to be humbling! David aitabu - Feb 2, 2004 12:36 pm (Message 68 of 69) Posts: 1 hi all hello i'm andrea and i come from italy nito to meet you all i'm a certified public accuontant and i'm a counsultant of busines ethic i'm here to improve my knowledge and help other to imprve theyr, if anybody have a question don't whait ask me Keely Stevenson, Social Edge Community Manager, - Feb 2, 2004 4:16 pm (Message 69 of 69) Posts: 266 This Forum is Now Closed Postings 64 - 69 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Tell A Friend. | Print this Page Discussions Member Tools Social Edge Contact Us Anything Goes Lounge | Social Sector Soapbox | Best Practices | Events | Social Edge Feedback Login/Logout | Register | Change Preferences | Help | Member Directory About Us | Community Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Moderators | Terms of Use | Copyright Contact Us | Email Webmaster | Job Openings | Partnerships | Media & Press Copyright ® 2003 Skoll Foundation Social Edge Discussions Social Edge Online Events Rethinking Accountability Welcome & Introduce Yourself Search Social Edge: Members: 2383, Topics: 232, Posts: 0 Hello profitinafrica | Click to Logout Welcome & Introduce Yourself Welcome! Please share with us your interests in this topic and background. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postings 69 - 60 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Keely Stevenson, Social Edge Community Manager, - Feb 2, 2004 4:16 pm (Message 69 of 69) Posts: 266 This Forum is Now Closed aitabu - Feb 2, 2004 12:36 pm (Message 68 of 69) Posts: 1 hi all hello i'm andrea and i come from italy nito to meet you all i'm a certified public accuontant and i'm a counsultant of busines ethic i'm here to improve my knowledge and help other to imprve theyr, if anybody have a question don't whait ask me David Bonbright - Feb 1, 2004 1:22 am (Message 67 of 69) Posts: 19 Replying to: Steve Rudolph (Jan 29, 2004 9:20 pm) Win through demand: Hi David, Ideally, it sounds like a good idea for people to come together to work on...... re: Win through demand Steve, All good actionable points to bear in mind as we move forward on ACCESS. I suspect that it is/will be a bit of both supply side and demand side strategies here. The thing about reporting standards -- as opposed to better reporting practices that any individual organization might adopt -- is that an important part of the value for all organizations that use it is in the fact that it is a standard. Yes, standards can emerge organically through a gradual process of converging practice. But I guess it is my sense that it is both possible and desireable to accelerate that process with purposeful, participatory promotion of the idea of reporting standards. We'll find out over the next few years. Its bound to be humbling! David '''ktreakle,''' '''Mott Foundation,''' - Jan 31, 2004 3:18 pm (Message 66 of 69) Posts: 2 re: Accountability at the World Bank The inspection panel is a worthy attempt to hold the World Bank accountable to stakeholders. It’s a necessary but not sufficient mechanism, because ultimately, what we found in our research was that, when confronted with citizen claims and panel findings that support allegations – and that are made public— the Bank management has rarely responded by taking responsibility. Instead, their tendency has been to first blame the government, second, avoid admitting mistakes, and third, if mistakes were made that they had to 'own', then to pledge not to make the same mistakes again. Since there is no responsibility that comes with the accountability function -- ie no sanctions on staff, no enforcement mechanism, nor mandatory follow up actions --the Bank continues to have impunity. As an international institution, the Bank cannot be sued in court. So, to answer the question: what will cause the Bank to take responsibility? My answer is that there need to be consequences for causing harm. Staff could be reprimanded, not promoted (which often happens), or even fired if they are responsible for violating policies that result in harm to people affected by Bank-financed projects. Or loan agreements could contain performance bonds with provisions to cover damages in the event of serious environmental or social disasters. But without enforceable consequences, then the best we get is what the Bank now calls risk aversion. In other words, the risk to their reputation of having a high profile public campaign accompanied by an internal investigation can perhaps prevent staff from financing highly risky projects. We haven’t done the work yet to really analyze whether risk aversion actually leads to better decisions, or better projects, but the Bank does say that they are more rigorously applying their environmental and social policies, and it’s our assertion that this is a result of the highly public drubbing they get every time there is an inspection panel claim. So this is where we are. Public watchdogs, the press, and officials of donor and borrowing governments need to simply continue to put pressure on the institution so that its mistakes continue to be exposed; while new concepts of accountability need to be developed that extend the “findings” function of the panel to something that at the very least includes problem solving. It’s important to mention also that the other conversation about accountability here – that of NGOs – is something that is currently challenging the watchdog NGOs, who often help affected people navigate the onerous process of bringing a claim to the Panel. Borrowing governments continue to ask the question – who elected you? – when NGOs are involved in high profile campaigns that often accompany the claims. NGOs that are trying to change policy and practice at the Bank by championing claims need to ensure that they continue to advocate for affected people and work with in-country NGOs; otherwise, their critique can lose its legitimacy. What we found in our research was that of 28 claims brought between 1994 and 2003, 17 were led by exclusively southern actors, 10 were brought in south/north coalitions of actors, and only one was brought by a northern NGO. And that one was a very special circumstance in that it was brought by the International Campaign for Tibet on behalf of Tibetans in Qinghai province, in Western China, who could not advocate for themselves for fear of reprisals. The question of legitimacy in that case had to be understood in the political context of China and Tibet. At the end of the day, the Inspection Panel at the Bank has brought the concept of accountability to a new level that, even without enforceability, has great value. The function of independent, third party investigations into projects that cause harm can at the very least legitimate the concerns of affected people. Panel reports are made public, and can be used by local people to argue for improvements (which have been forthcoming in some limited cases). Similar inspection functions are beginning to be established at the other multilateral development banks. We are, I think, gaining ground in the struggle to hold international institutions accountable, and more work needs to be done. ---- '''C Kirabo, ''' '''Conductor, LiA4 Piece Train, ''' - Jan 30, 2004 3:19 pm (Message 65 of 69) Posts: 77 Replying to: Oz (Jan 29, 2004 9:59 pm) What about the clients !!!: Reading most of this thread I find it sad that no mention of accountability to...... re: What about the clients !!! I would assume if the total focus was on the clients served, then the accountability becomes a by-product Very well said, Oz. I believe we are very conditioned in the way we view systems as necessary to accountability. In fact, it's people we must be accountable to. Unfortunately, our clients tend to be perceived as disadvantaged. Far too many practitioners in my part of the world truly do not believe their clients are capable of assessing information, and so do not provide it. A case in point is the argument I have heard time and again from microfinance practitioners for charging flat versus declining interest rates. Clients don't understand interest rates, so charging a flat rate 'simplifies' things. It also increases the effective rate dramatically, and does NOT follow standard global financial sector lending practices ... 'but our clients are lucky to have credit at all.' So the argument goes, and this incenses me to no end. It seems to me that much of this discussion has focused on accountability to donors, agencies, foundations from the perspective of seeing the social change sector as a recipient of (financial) help. I look forward to the day when that money oriented perspective has fully evolved to a holistic perspective that puts our disadvantaged beneficiaries on proportional footing with other stakeholders. Thanks for your important reminder! .piece Christina Oz, http://www.call4tech.com/np, - Jan 29, 2004 9:59 pm (Message 64 of 69) Posts: 13 What about the clients !!! Reading most of this thread I find it sad that no mention of accountability to clients. Maybe it's that the NPO's product in the end is people and I feel that I need to hold my self accountable to the people. After all that could or should be the ultimate accountability and the true test of success or failure ??? Which to me, seems the same as doctors saying they are accountable to everyone except the patients. ?? Maybe I am missing something here ???? Is it like quality control. You cannot engineer it,should be a by-product of a job well done. If the focus becomes quality control the humans tend to worry more of the numbers than the product. then the QC numbers look good but the products sucks..heh I would assume if the total focus was on the clients served,then the accountability becomes a by-product oz Replies to this message C Kirabo (Jan 30, 2004 3:19 pm) Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 29, 2004 9:20 pm (Message 63 of 69) Posts: 301 Replying to: David Bonbright (Jan 29, 2004 1:45 pm) re: Can Our Systems Become Too Unwieldy?: I agree with you, Marie. Perhaps we can all come together to create...... Win through demand Hi David, Ideally, it sounds like a good idea for people to come together to work on an accepted reporting standards framework. However, I don't think that is necessarily that best path forward. First, you could face the tragedy of the social commons, where everyone is ready to partake, but few are ready to give to the cause. There is also the risk that it becomes little more than an academic exercise, or that it falls apart because of power struggles. Even foundations need to keep their funding coming in. I am a social entrepreneur through and through, and hold the same measures up to everyone in the process--foundations, think tanks, and so on. I therefore present the challenge to Access or any other organization that is promoting a particular flavor of accountability standards to demonstrate its worth through demand--by virtue of its value to the community:
For instance, what if Access provided not only the framework, but also a service to donors and foundations to guide funds to organizations that met its standards. The nonprofits would have the incentive of implementing the standards in order to gain exclusivity and to have a better chance at getting funding... Instead of trying to become the standard by proposing to become the standard, I suggest becoming the standard by winning over users one by one. Once early adopters begin 'sneezing' (singing the glories of the framework and offering), the 'early and late majority will come en masse, and it will eventually 'tip' and automatically become the standard. If anyone is interested in books related to the topic of how things spread, I highly recommend these books:
Steve Replies to this message David Bonbright (Feb 1, 2004 1:22 am) Steve Rudolph, Social Edge Moderator / Director, Jiva, - Jan 29, 2004 8:37 pm (Message 62 of 69) Posts: 301 Replying to: o_carolyne (Jan 28, 2004 7:46 pm) o_carolyne: Hallo Folks , Its never late to share a thought. I am Caroline Odhiambo currently a Graduate Student at...... We need more students! Hi Carolyne, It is a thrill to see a graduate student in the discussions--I have been secretly hoping that some students would participate on SocialEdge so there would be some diversity in our community. Please do jump in and post more, and invite your classmates in as well. Perhaps we can expand their horizons and ignite their passion a bit! It's strange, because social enterprise is such a hot area--you'd think more schools would create innovative programs and excite students to join. I've met so many young people--students and young professionals who are not interested to go the for-profit route, who want to do something more meaningful with their lives, but who wouldn't consider nonprofit work, b/c they don't believe they could earn a decent living doing it. However, I believe that with social enterprise, a person CAN have the best of both worlds--personal satisfaction and financial security. So let's catch some young folks and stir them up!! Best, Steve ----- Steven Rudolph President, Jiva International www.jiva.org Check out my blog on social enterprise: http://steve.populog.com Conrad - Jan 29, 2004 6:51 pm (Message 61 of 69) Posts: 9 Replying to: rickncg (Jan 28, 2004 10:52 am) --Nice to join in: My name is Rick Smith and it's nice to be part of this intersting and important...... re: --Nice to join in Financial compensation for nonprofit board members? Hey Rick et al. I’m Conrad and currently the ED of an intermediary organization that connects social entrepreneurs and activists in the U.S. and Japan. I’ve been involved with a number of social venture projects and trade groups in the bay area and was part of an interesting discussion about a week ago on Founding Executive Director Syndrome and transitions. Why I mention this is that most of our solutions to the dilemmas facing an ED in this transitional situation came down to the need for an experienced board of directors to support/guide the organization through the transition. I personally am blessed with two (of seven) very experienced board members but many of my colleagues have ended up transitioning into an ED position where most of the board members are friends of the founding ED and know little about board governance and even less about their fiduciary responsibility for the organization. This may primarily be a small young “start up” organizational problem but it does point to the need for more attention, particularly regarding accountability for the organization, to be given to training and developing active, dedicated, dare I say professional, board members. Kudos to Richard Diaz rdiaz@lajcc.org from another posting who is apparently doing just that. To the point-- does anyone have ideas or opinions on compensation to nonprofit board members like that of their corporate counterparts? That might be a little radical but I wonder if we can creatively explore the need for some kind of increased incentive for nonprofit board members so as to help motivate them to take their responsibilities very seriously. (I know there are very responsible board members out there as well and my intention is not to dis them). I simply agree with Rick that it's probably “the rare nonprofit board that effectively protects the public interest through its oversight efforts” and working to bring more accountability to board members of organizations might be a step towards solving the general accountability concerns this forum is addressing. Anne Perlman - Jan 29, 2004 2:38 pm (Message 60 of 69) Posts: 101 Replying to: ktreakle (Jan 27, 2004 6:12 am) Accountability at the World Bank: Greetings. I just recently learned about Social Edge and this discussion, and it appears that...... re: Accountability at the World Bank Thanks so much for your comments about your research. If finding that affected people are actually harmed by World Bank-funded projects is not enough to trigger the Bank to take responsibility or provide reparations, what could cause the Bank to do so? Postings 69 - 60 of 69 total. << Start of Discussion Tell A Friend. | Print this Page Discussions Member Tools Social Edge Contact Us Anything Goes Lounge | Social Sector Soapbox | Best Practices | Events | Social Edge Feedback Login/Logout | Register | Change Preferences | Help | Member Directory About Us | Community Guidelines | Privacy Policy | Moderators | Terms of Use | Copyright Contact Us | Email Webmaster | Job Openings | Partnerships | Media & Press Copyright ® 2003 Skoll Foundation |
|
|
| The text being discussed is available at and |