Comments

One theme seems to consistently flow through the article and subsequent comments and that is an expectation to see results from an assignment. This is a reflection of the industry's misplaced focus, largely driven by outsiders, on measurable outputs. Capacity building. What does that include? Would Ashlee's six months of wearing down her older male counterpart by persistently presenting herself, presumably, as a capable colleague eventually create a change of opinion in six months or six years time that won't appear evident until the next volunteer or younger local female staff member applies for a promotion? Is that not worthwhile? I think that especially in the 'volunteering' sector in which the capacity building is just as much for the benefit of the Australian 'volunteer' as it is for the local agency results shouldn't be judged solely upon measurable outputs. There are some axioms that we can live by and one of them is that the more intercultural exchanges we have the more trust and knowledge is build that flows through to both societies involved.

Brendan, I have to say I was really impressed by some of the work that Palms volunteers were doing in TL, particularly a couple who were friends of mine. It's very different to the AVID program and has a very different set of incentives for participation. I'm sure it depends very much on finding the right people, as well as receptive, engaged and interested communities.

Thanks for sharing your experience -- I'm glad to hear that you were able to be placed in another more suitable assignment. I think my greatest frustration was that I was unable to get intervention from the ICM (since there was a rotating cycle of temporary ones) to help sort things out. Even when assignments aren't working, at least if there is adequate support then alternatives or solutions can be worked towards.

"young women sent into organisations to ‘build capacity’ of those older than them and sometimes male in organisations or societies with strong hierarchical/patriarchal values, unless someone with some perceived authority intervenes to work through problems or to negotiate the terms of the role and try to define expectations, they often just face roadblock after roadblock." You can add me to your list of testimonies - you've just put into words an experience I've had. Actually most of your posts really resonated with me. And I see that some of the commenters don't fully understand what you've said - sometimes, there are things a person can't solve on their own. No matter their abilities or initiative. Let's all agree that some situations are just bad. I find it terrible the mindset that it's always the volunteers' responsibility and they could always have done more... if you sound the alarm, ask for help, try different strategies, and it's not working, how can you be to blame? I think you have great courage for writing this post and seems like you have processed your experience very appropriately. It's a struggle to not feel de-valued or have diminished self-worth based on a 'bad seed'.

Hi Cy, I would say you need to remember the other perks of Peace Corps -- many returned Peace Corps volunteers are able to attend grad school for greatly reduced tuition and have a range of scholarships available to them. This, along with the career boost from being part of the PC alumni, does create incentives for them to stay on. Sure, they are living on a lot less, but there are benefits for them to reap from making it to the finish line. The level of living allowance is definitely an interesting area for discussion.

SvM - I think you have made a very good point regarding the term 'volunteer'. As 'volunteers' we are often paid significantly larger amounts than our locally engaged counterparts and yet many 'volunteers' act like 'martyrs'. I brought this up with another volunteer and their response was "Yeah, but we are expats and therefore have a higher cost of living". Honestly, if that is the elitist attitude 'volunteers' are going to have, I question how they are going to effectively build the capacity of their counterparts and the organisation whilst giving those around them a good impression of Australia. The bottom line is, we are not volunteers and we are receiving a considerable amount of money which could be used effectively in other areas of the Australian Aid Program. We need to ensure that these 'volunteer' positions are effectively developed and that 'volunteers' are made to be accountable with better performance management from both Austraining and the local organisations. As a recently returned volunteer, I am extremely concerned that Austraining International are following a policy of 'quantity not quality' in the development of assignments and selection of volunteers. It is important to remember that Austraining International is not a not-for-profit organisation and the more volunteer positions they are able to create, the more profit they are able to make. I truly care about the Australian Volunteers Program but since returning and attempting to provide constructive criticism, which as others have mentioned above seems to have fallen on deaf ears, I am concerned for the future of this program and the impression it will give of Australia.

A great article Ashlee, thanks for sharing. I was particularly surprised and disappointed by Austraining's response. This struck me as typical bureaucratic-speak, with almost no substance at all. In particular, no reason is given for the organisation's lack of response in this instance. They don't even assert that Ashlee's private feedback reports were in fact read, which in my mind all but confirms that they weren't. Also, if volunteers are told to be ready to "tear up assignment descriptions", then in my opinion it's highly questionable not to provide enough flexibility for someone like Ashlee to change the terms of her assignment under these circumstances.

Hi Les, That is an interesting comment but I don't think you're being at all fair to Ashlee. And I think you've obviously been very lucky with the development work you've done to date. Otherwise I doubt your horse would be quite so high. 1. A lot of aid work fails to produce sustained development benefits. This is not the same as saying aid doesn't work full stop: some aid does a lot of good, and a lot of aid does some good, even if only in the short to medium term. But sustained improvements are hard. And yet this, I think, is the yardstick that Ashlee is holding herself against here. Which -- to state the obvious -- is not the same same as not contributing at all, which appears to be the charge you're levelling at her. 2. To me Ashlee's post reflects the fact she did take initiative. She decided the the costs of her being there outweighed the development benefits (which, I repeat, is not the same as doing no good whatsoever) and left. Would that other development actors were so ethical and decisive. 3. Have you really never encountered intractable problems in your own work? My reading of Ashlee's post is that the problem she faced really was, owing to its nature, one she really couldn't solve. Given this, the decision she made strikes me as good development practice. And her writing this post is also good development practice -- this isn't 'whinging' it's reflecting and suggesting improvements. Which, I would think, is how we make things better. Terence

I'm currently on assignment and can contribute several points. My placement was disastrous for several reasons, not least because the host organisation had not had active programs for a long time. It was disappointing to me that the organisation was not better vetted by the in country manager before the post was advertised, as there were many warning signs. That said, the in country team have been very supportive in quickly redeploying me to a good organisation where I am able to contribute. I think we need to realise that there are many reasons assignments can go wrong, but better safe guards in the process would certainly help.

Garth - there is no shortage of needs or effective mechanisms, but there is a shortage of political commitment to the 0.5% target. I can see why NGOs continue to campaign on 0.5%, but in my view it would be better to get consensus on a more modest target rather than lip service to a more ambitious one. The danger is that 0.5 will become the new 0.7: an aspiration only, never to be got near let alone achieved.

Whether the masses agree or disagree with this article aside, I am pleased to see some dialogue (ahem, excuse the development buzzword) around the validity, impact and cost-effectiveness of the (now) AusAID volunteer programs from which many of us have benefited. Oh, and hopefully through which we've even slightly contributed... Cy Nic's supposition that a reduction in allowances would create any sort of positive change is jaundiced and naive. Let's not strive for anything close to a Peace Corps model with it's 30% drop out rate and average 22 (alleged) sexual assaults of volunteers each year. Australia's volunteer programs should endeavour to be professional, supportive, mutually beneficial partnerships, and ones volunteers and taxpayers can trust will be underpinned by humanitarian concerns first, but know will involve - inevitably - political interests second. Just as all aid is highly political. What I am uncomfortable with is our deliberate misappropriation of the word 'volunteer', which should be replaced in the interests of accuracy, transparency and to help avoid the 'martyrdom' situation to which Ashlee rightly refers. A well-remunerated human resource does not qualify as a 'volunteer' simply by virtue of the fact that the host organisation is not the one paying. I second many of Roger's comments relating to expectation management and the disturbing lack of clarity about such seemingly exorbitant costs. I found the AYAD recruitment process highly flawed, and as I looked around the room during what I experienced as a lowest-common-denominator pre-departure training, found Austraining's repeated saccharine overtures about our being the creme de la creme of our field and generation questionable at best. This was reinforced in-country, during which time I was astounded by the arrogant, unethical and self-interested behaviour of some volunteers. I should say that I have also met grounded, pragmatic, talented people well worth their allowance (if not the additional $50k or so!) and clearly of value to their hosts, but not enough to suggest that this isn't happening as a result of mere luck. Finally and most personally, I share Russell's experience of Austraining's unwillingness to acknowledge or accept feedback from volunteers, even where this was provided constructively, repeatedly and with relevance to the immediate safety of volunteers. With one notable exception in the form of a very dedicated and helpful In-Country Manager (since left), I felt consistently disregarded by Austraining and found no evidence that feedback from volunteers ('volunteers') was considered to hold any value. In this respect at least I suppose they did show themselves to be like your average aid agency... practicing monitoring and evaluation for the sake of ticking the box (apologies for the cynical finale). I make these comments with some residual frustration as each a former AYAD and an Australian taxpayer, but more importantly, as a person with a belief in humanitarianism, ethical conduct and the responsibilities of the global north. I enjoyed your take on things, Ashlee, and certainly believe the program has merit. Like you, I hope that some open discussion can lead to positive changes.

Les - in line with your comment about the people that are volunteering pulling the finger out, I'd go as far to say that it's the way that some of the placements are set up that attract that exact behaviour you are describing. Looking at AYAD for a start, we have relatively inexperienced professionals thrown into the deep end with often very little support and then set up as the expert in their field, with the prime concern of "capacity building" one counterpart. This promotes one way learning and the expectation that when the volunteer says jump, everyone in the organisation should be leaping for them. There's very little about the placement that forces the volunteer to think about the strain they put on the organisation. One other thing - you queried why some volunteers can't take initiative. This is just wild stab in the dark (having never participated in such programs) but could it be because they have their hands held from day one? Right from Pre Departure Training in the Berra, all the way through to (in Cambodia) being told that volunteering outside Phnom Penh and Siem Reap is too dangerous?