A former Peace Corps volunteer (Former PCV) sent me an e-mail just after I arrived in Querétaro. She has become a bit disillusoned with the Peace Corps and international development in general over the years since she had served in Africa and particularly after getting an M.B.A. I have saved her questions until now since I had no miles on the odometer back then.
I am not well-versed on matters related to development and my experience to date in that line of work has jaded me badly. Those civilians that are good at it are among the very best Americans you will meet; they, sadly, are in the minority.
Former PCV: My questions to you are as follows. Could such techniques (performance measurement tools as articulated in recent development literature) be applied to evaluating the level of success or lack thereof with regards to the Peace Corps operating in many countries and the degree of making an overall difference in people’s lives within these countries?
Ned: This reminds me of an interview I had with USAID for being a finance trouble-shooter in conflict zones. I was good to go…until the last question: “Mr McDonnell, what would you do to bring Afghan contracting standards up to international best practices in two years?” One of the funniest one-liners I had heard.
¡Wuppps!
This question was serious. I started out by saying, “First, I would scratch out the word 'years' and write in the word 'generations'…” GONG sounded; end of interview.
If a longitudinal study -- of which I would be hopelessly unaware -- evaluated various programs (i.e., USAID, Peace Corps, Catholic Charities, GTZ, etc.) over time, I suspect the Peace Corps would rate comparatively well in that catch-all caregory of "sustainability".
Former PCV: In other words, are American taxpayers getting enough return on their invested tax dollars or are these 'beneficiary' countries doomed to always be in a third world of under-developed states of existence? Really, is the money spent truly raising the quality of life or making a lasting or significant difference for citizens in these countries or protecting their natural resources? Does JFK's vision amount to little more than a feel-good opportunity for renegades of the good life?
Ned: First, this activity represents what we call Goal-1 of the Peace Corps: providing grass-roots technical and educational assistance to under-developed countries. Since México is a proud member of the OECD, she represents an outlier in the Peace Corps portfolio of beneficiary countries.
So, again, answering this question comes down to calculated bloviation by me. That said, and in response to this question, we have to keep in mind of what we are up against in poorer, conflict-ridden, poverty-stricken countries.
These peoples face a double-whammy of a culture of poverty (as seen in "The Other America") positively reinforced each day by getting by on a dollar or two. Thus, many programs are bound to fail if they are evaluated in terms of manifest results documented in the time-frame of implementation.
After all, cultures take two generations to change. Patterns reinforced over a lifetime will not change. Largely unchanging parents exert a strong influence on the next generation. But the grandchildren then will have options as the cultural bias attenuates.
¿Don´t believe me? Look at Viet Nam. We started there in 1954; resorted to covert war in 1960; went overt in 1965; started getting out in 1970; and, saw our policy collapse in 1975. Yet by 1995, Viet Nam was already far more like a Western nation than a bucolically freeze-dried dictatorship (i.e., life under communism).
Former PCV: Or is each Peace Corps volunteer simply a mini-ambassador -- there to show-off American culture and altruism to the people of some village, town or city?
Ned: This question resembles what we call "Goal-2" -- representing U.S. culture to others unfamiliar with it. The cynical side of me thinks that this Goal-2 is a catch-all for dead-beat volunteers. Just follow the money. Most of the money flowing outside of the U.S. to the developing world comes from the private sector (¡Great Caesar's Ghost!)
Many Americans represent our country admirably all over the world, mainly through the private sector, just by doing their jobs. Beyond companies like G.E., I.B.M., Apple, 3M, Heinz, et al., many small businesses are doing the same, often with a human touch.
A Choate Rosemary Hall classmate started and has flourished with a travel company which, among other activities, leads good-will working tours to places like Haiti. These efforts, like those of the Peace Corps, have a bigger impact after the fact than many high-profile programs. People, poor people, desperate people will remember the help that these very special Americans gave.
Those seemingly trivial efforts do plant some seeds of self-help to sprout in villages around the world. Why do these inexpensive small-scale programs hold such promise? They recognize two facts about poverty: its maddeningly incremental rate of improvement and its structural violence. One calls for patience and the other for compassion.
Former PCV: Of course, the Volunteer will have many unique experiences to take home and talk about, if anybody is willing to listen. As I found out years ago after returning from Africa as a PCV, you start to talk about your experiences and after 3 or 5 minutes, the listeners' eyes glaze over. Most Americans just don't really want to hear the stories you have to tell about the culture you lived in!
Ned: These days, bringing these cross-cultural experiences home relates to what we now call Goal-3. My take is that most Americans care about these experiences but are simply too busy with mortgages, insecure jobs, kids, looming college tuitions, the frenzy of the information age to have the time, energy, attention or inclination to indulge my travelogues.
Better for me to rehearse a sincere spiel of inward impact and renewal...in three minutes or less. My friend is a great lady whose idealism has faded somewhat and probably for good reason.
To her I would close with just one observation: never under-estimate the power of example. The work of many people in and beyond the Peace Corps have made their mark over the years.
Thirty-five years ago, when I first toyed with the idea of the Peace Corps, I would have been one of the last people in town to think that, just a generation later, Coca Cola would seriously be trying to find ways to help water-stressed areas.
I think we can -- at least in part -- thank people of generations past in the Peace Corps and other out-reach agencies for success stories like that of Coke. Others, large and small, truly abound.
To the volunteers of today, including very brave young men and women in uniform serving our country under wretched circumstances, I say with pride: imagine how high your seeds will grow in the next thirty-five years?
I am not well-versed on matters related to development and my experience to date in that line of work has jaded me badly. Those civilians that are good at it are among the very best Americans you will meet; they, sadly, are in the minority.
Former PCV: My questions to you are as follows. Could such techniques (performance measurement tools as articulated in recent development literature) be applied to evaluating the level of success or lack thereof with regards to the Peace Corps operating in many countries and the degree of making an overall difference in people’s lives within these countries?
Ned: This reminds me of an interview I had with USAID for being a finance trouble-shooter in conflict zones. I was good to go…until the last question: “Mr McDonnell, what would you do to bring Afghan contracting standards up to international best practices in two years?” One of the funniest one-liners I had heard.
¡Wuppps!
This question was serious. I started out by saying, “First, I would scratch out the word 'years' and write in the word 'generations'…” GONG sounded; end of interview.
If a longitudinal study -- of which I would be hopelessly unaware -- evaluated various programs (i.e., USAID, Peace Corps, Catholic Charities, GTZ, etc.) over time, I suspect the Peace Corps would rate comparatively well in that catch-all caregory of "sustainability".
Former PCV: In other words, are American taxpayers getting enough return on their invested tax dollars or are these 'beneficiary' countries doomed to always be in a third world of under-developed states of existence? Really, is the money spent truly raising the quality of life or making a lasting or significant difference for citizens in these countries or protecting their natural resources? Does JFK's vision amount to little more than a feel-good opportunity for renegades of the good life?
Ned: First, this activity represents what we call Goal-1 of the Peace Corps: providing grass-roots technical and educational assistance to under-developed countries. Since México is a proud member of the OECD, she represents an outlier in the Peace Corps portfolio of beneficiary countries.
So, again, answering this question comes down to calculated bloviation by me. That said, and in response to this question, we have to keep in mind of what we are up against in poorer, conflict-ridden, poverty-stricken countries.
These peoples face a double-whammy of a culture of poverty (as seen in "The Other America") positively reinforced each day by getting by on a dollar or two. Thus, many programs are bound to fail if they are evaluated in terms of manifest results documented in the time-frame of implementation.
After all, cultures take two generations to change. Patterns reinforced over a lifetime will not change. Largely unchanging parents exert a strong influence on the next generation. But the grandchildren then will have options as the cultural bias attenuates.
Former PCV: Or is each Peace Corps volunteer simply a mini-ambassador -- there to show-off American culture and altruism to the people of some village, town or city?
Ned: This question resembles what we call "Goal-2" -- representing U.S. culture to others unfamiliar with it. The cynical side of me thinks that this Goal-2 is a catch-all for dead-beat volunteers. Just follow the money. Most of the money flowing outside of the U.S. to the developing world comes from the private sector (¡Great Caesar's Ghost!)
Many Americans represent our country admirably all over the world, mainly through the private sector, just by doing their jobs. Beyond companies like G.E., I.B.M., Apple, 3M, Heinz, et al., many small businesses are doing the same, often with a human touch.
A Choate Rosemary Hall classmate started and has flourished with a travel company which, among other activities, leads good-will working tours to places like Haiti. These efforts, like those of the Peace Corps, have a bigger impact after the fact than many high-profile programs. People, poor people, desperate people will remember the help that these very special Americans gave.
Those seemingly trivial efforts do plant some seeds of self-help to sprout in villages around the world. Why do these inexpensive small-scale programs hold such promise? They recognize two facts about poverty: its maddeningly incremental rate of improvement and its structural violence. One calls for patience and the other for compassion.
Former PCV: Of course, the Volunteer will have many unique experiences to take home and talk about, if anybody is willing to listen. As I found out years ago after returning from Africa as a PCV, you start to talk about your experiences and after 3 or 5 minutes, the listeners' eyes glaze over. Most Americans just don't really want to hear the stories you have to tell about the culture you lived in!
Ned: These days, bringing these cross-cultural experiences home relates to what we now call Goal-3. My take is that most Americans care about these experiences but are simply too busy with mortgages, insecure jobs, kids, looming college tuitions, the frenzy of the information age to have the time, energy, attention or inclination to indulge my travelogues.
Better for me to rehearse a sincere spiel of inward impact and renewal...in three minutes or less. My friend is a great lady whose idealism has faded somewhat and probably for good reason.
To her I would close with just one observation: never under-estimate the power of example. The work of many people in and beyond the Peace Corps have made their mark over the years.
Thirty-five years ago, when I first toyed with the idea of the Peace Corps, I would have been one of the last people in town to think that, just a generation later, Coca Cola would seriously be trying to find ways to help water-stressed areas.
I think we can -- at least in part -- thank people of generations past in the Peace Corps and other out-reach agencies for success stories like that of Coke. Others, large and small, truly abound.
To the volunteers of today, including very brave young men and women in uniform serving our country under wretched circumstances, I say with pride: imagine how high your seeds will grow in the next thirty-five years?
