(First published in The Dominion Post, May 5.)
I thought it significant that in Consumer’s
recent comparison of emergency survival kits on the market, the one that scored
worst by far was marketed by the St John Ambulance organisation.
Its “Emergency Grab Kit” got a scathing
“fail” from Consumer, with a score of 38% – far below any of the six other kits
tested. How humiliating for an organisation that traces its history back to the
12th century, when the Order of Knights of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem
looked after sick and injured pilgrims to the Holy Land.
What was almost comically ironic was that
the St John emergency kit didn’t even include a first-aid kit – this from an
organisation that’s synonymous with emergency medical assistance – or food
rations. And to make matters worse, the pack wasn’t cheap ($200 compared with
one at $85 and another that costs $139).
In a sense, it’s a betrayal. People buying
an emergency kit bearing the name of St John are entitled to expect that it
will set the standard for all others. In fact it appears the reverse was true.
You have to ask: how could an organisation
with St John’s proud record end up in such a state?
Let me hazard a guess. It’s been
corporatised.
What typically happens is this.
Organisations like St John start out as voluntary. They are run on the smell of
an oily rag by enthusiastic, committed amateurs whose only reward is the
satisfaction that comes from doing good for the community.
No doubt that’s still true at the grassroots
level. But what happens as such organisations grow is that they reach a point
where enthusiastic amateurism no longer cuts it at the top level. They evolve
into bureaucracies.
They adopt all the trappings of the private
sector. They acquire a flash office in Wellington and they hire professional
managers, public relations consultants, fundraisers, marketers, website
designers, health and safety trainers and HR advisers. They also recruit university-educated
careerists whose lack of life experience doesn’t stop them from wanting to
re-invent the wheel.
In other words they get corporatised. With
this come expense accounts, corporate credit cards, business-class travel and
company cars. Along the way, the purity of purpose that originally motivated
them tends to get diluted.
They also get contaminated by the deathly cult
of managerialism, with its key performance indicators, meetings, values
statements, general control freakery, risk avoidance, more meetings, arse-covering, preposterous
jargon, more meetings and bitchy office politics.
Of course an organisation as large and
complex as St John requires an appropriate management structure. The danger is
that as these organisations grow bigger and more unwieldy, they became so
pre-occupied with the minutiae of management that they lose sight of their core
functions. Management becomes an end in itself.
If they are partly funded by the state, as
many are, things get more complicated, because government bureaucrats create
hoops for them to jump through. So they hire more people to ensure compliance with
the government’s requirements – which might include, for instance, paying
someone to come up with Maori names for everything they do, even though no one
ever uses them.
Under the headline Vision and Values on the St John website, for example, you see
things like: “We Make It Better – Whakawerohia. We find solutions – step up,
own it, do it.”
There it is, right there: management
psycho-babble that means whatever you want it to mean.
All this, needless to say, gobbles up money
that might otherwise be used for whatever purpose the organisation nominally
exists for.
In the meantime, the faithful and tireless
people at the grassroots go on doing what they have always done. But the
corporate head office grows gradually more distant and disconnected from its original
ethos, and the people at the grassroots feel powerless to influence decisions
and policy.
I’m not saying this has happened at St
John, but it has certainly happened to other organisations in the
not-for-profit sector – for example the IHC, a $280 million-a-year behemoth whose
head office sometimes gives the impression of being unaccountable to faithful,
long-serving members.
Some would say New Zealand Rugby has gone
down a similar path, moving ever further from the game’s muddy amateur roots.
Is the same true of St John? I admit I can’t
be sure, but the fact that the organisation couldn’t put together a basic
emergency kit – or worse still, perhaps couldn’t be bothered – suggests it may
have lost sight of what most of us assumed it existed for.
7 comments:
At leas some of the change in the charity sector can be attributed to the shortage of volunteers - the old days when lots of people joined committees are over, ditto for Rotary clubs and other service organisations. Second, we now have the Charity Services division of Internal Affairs, the former Charities Commission, which imposes corporate responsibilities on charities' officers, but of course they do not get corporate rewards. Quite what's the answer is not clear - you need high standards but with a shrinking pool of charity board members and penalties for errors, getting people to take part is going to be difficult. Fundraising is another factor. In my experience, volunteers do not like it. Charities therefore need to hire staff or they simply cannot get the funds to provide their mostly essential services. Yet nobody gives to a charity to pay for fundraising. But they do appreciate the services.
Good post Karl. Thanks.
The feedback I've been getting - some of it from dispirited St John volunteers - is that a them-and-us culture has developed between managers and the grassroots, and that the mere act of recruiting volunteers has been greatly complicated by bureaucratic nitpicking.
Some of the nitpicking might be a response to the new Charity Services requirements (which are stringent, enforced and, in my opinion, unrealistic) but of course some may well be due to the managerialism of which you write. My experience is that volunteers are invaluable (literally, they are free!) and much appreciated. St Johns needs to change its approach, then.
Excellent summation, thank you, Karl.
Could be applied equally to many organisations or even to NZ as a whole.
My thoughts echo Glenn and did when I first read this great piece in the DomPost. Private, Public, Straddlers - they are all susceptible to the ghastly "corporatisation".
How about this as a 'service' role description? Area Committee Relationship Manager and Communications Advisor South Island St John. Ignoring the conjunction, ten words to describe someone's job simply tells any thinking person what administrative staff at St John have become.
Post a Comment