by Paul Giammalvo
I have just returned from the 1st Asian Project Management Congress, sponsored by the Project Management Institute in Singapore. During that well organized and well attended event, I had the opportunity to participate in several discussion groups relating to how Project Management can or should mobilize to help the victims of the December 26th Tsunami which devastated parts of South and Eastern Asia.
To set the stage, the three countries most impacted by the Tsunami (Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Thailand) are ranked 137th (Indonesia) 70th (Sri Lanka) and 66th (Thailand) out of 146 countries as being the “most” corrupt. Meaning that all of the countries involved are in the upper half, and Indonesia in particular, the most heavily impacted, ranks in the highest 10% in terms of corruption. Not only are these countries impacted, but overall, Transparency International’s “Barometer” on corruption indicates that nearly 69% of people from the developing nations expect that corruption will stay the same or GET WORSE in the coming years.
What implications does this have for any professional, not-for-profit organizations in terms of responsibilities to their member/owners in terms of how the organization management demonstrates the prudent use of the dues dollars entrusted to them?
First, as evidenced by the UN Food for Oil program, any “project” with large sums of money involved that is poorly monitored on the ground represents the temptation for illegal/unethical use of that money. Human nature being what it is, this temptation applies equally to people from the developed and developing nations.
Secondly, as has been evidenced by innumerable studies, as well as first hand experience of this author, the more direct the aid, the less likelihood that some portion will be misappropriated, either in terms of excessive overheads or “hanky-panky”. Each time the aid passes through another set of hands, not only does the legitimate overhead costs increase, but also the opportunity for “skimming”.
Lastly, the real challenge in disaster relief does not lie in the initial response, (which in many instances is both overwhelming and sometimes inappropriate) but in the period from 6 months to 5 years after the event, long after the disaster has been archived in history and forgotten by the media. This is where organizations and individuals representing Project Management can and should focus their expertise and resources.
How to do this? One of the most successful and sustainable programs in support
of “projects” in the developing nations has been “micro-finance”
or “micro-credit”. Under this program, relatively small amounts
of money, often less than $100 are made available directly to local people
for the purposes of purchasing the tools they need to start up small businesses.
Examples would include fishing nets or other equipment for fishermen, sewing
machines, carpentry tools, farm equipment or any other tools enabling poor
people to increase their productivity and output. To preserve the dignity
of the borrowers and provide sustainability, these funds are not gifts, but
low or no interest loans, with repayment expected.
Given the fact that Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Thailand are recognized as having
corrupt governance, I would urge any professional organization interested
in making a positive difference at the grass roots level, while upholding
the highest ethical and moral standards, consider micro-finance/micro-credit,
along with donated expertise in the management of projects.