campaign manager David Plouffe Barack
pr? presents a slide show? about the state of the race and the resources to battleground states to win. “Please donate to www.barackobama.com / strategy Video Rating: 5.4
Robert Gates does not believe that the July date is 2011 sign f
There are three ways to respond to an organizational crisis. One possibility is to invert, to ignore the situation and hope that it (good luck! To resolve). Another possibility is to run around in a panic-induced cost-cutting frenzy that could seriously undermine the organization’s long-term growth potential and future state. The third and, of course, most intelligent method is to recognize the threat, both the top and bottom line and quick adaptation to the strategic direction of the organization and the business model to the new environmental conditions. So, to answer the question is this: “What are the decision makers in your company right now? Are links take the strategy of the organization with their innovative approach to a successful future Picture?” But what if you are as a manager with a difficult struggle , influence others to your point of view and to reconsider it and to re-invent the strategy of the organization forward as the circumstances change and the economy quickly. If you are experiencing this challenge, here is some advice to help to win over your people on the battlefield of the transition. I’m thrilled to State over the last few years that has continued in a world where the pace of change been hypercritical, is now the most important race in the race for transformational leadership and organizational renewal. It is the race to change as fast as the environment around you is changing, reinventing the race to positive organizational behavior and race affect your strategy and your business model is new, before they become obsolete. If the economy is in a state in the river, most companies and their professional development efforts tend to favor cost reductions as a strategy that will preserve the future move. This is a serious mistake that the future of the organization in a manner likely to kill the spirit of the management team are hoping to preserve, is impaired. Their efforts during the difficult times will only prolong the inevitable, ultimate destruction, once the current crisis is diminished. The lesson here is a successful business model to break almost overnight, when the waves of the ocean to begin train crash against the pillars of the pier, where leaders do not remain on a continuous, but discontinuous approach to the organization’s greatest asset – people. So what exactly is Strategic Organizational Renewal (SOR)? Organizations undergo change to enhance their productivity. Changes can be made in various areas of the organization, including culture, strategy, mission, team and organizational structure. SOR is a framework for the role, responsibilities are defined and held the power of human capital across the organization and planning for it must only be in the organizations “War Room.” To declare war room concept, leadership appoints a special room, to be defined as the place where the organizations strategy. This place has to remain under lock and key to ensuring the organization of intellectual capital offers an uncompromising agenda that positive influence outcomes. SOR is the resultant effect that is birthed from the War Room. This is possible only if ordered to the war every room of the importance of establishing the organization, “Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – understand the principles of achieving professional mastery. user down the principles for achieving personal mastery – People First, then the organization / p> Now you have before you the option of the steps that a high level of professional dominance, to make that organic growth achieved. It requires the adoption of a “code” as a living, breathing organism at every level of organization. How can people sharpened awareness, to use their experience to implement a new approach to posture and develop a strategy to solve this and includes ethical behavior? This is the task that lies before them. It sounds like the normal work that we all know and do the same. But be warned, it is not! When individuals fail the code in combination with rules and regulations, reporting and accountability to compliance standards in place, they – changes in the way of fear is not to oppose what is required. Rather, the achievement of professional knowledge of a continuous pursuit of ethical behavior, manifested in a search for the ultimate improvement of the human spirit to pursue the well to do the right thing throughout the workplace. The code says that those who should always accept it in his / her life will be, have a degree of courage – both physically and emotionally – the necessary task, the performance at the highest level of personal and professional belief drives exemplify run. live Why a Code? The answer is simple, via a code or set of principles to ensure a level of conduct (Code of Conduct) added that the life cycle of the organization. This Code is what I’m referencing was – the “Memorandum of Understanding.” As a code of conduct, the agreement is a resource for people in their personal development support, growth, guidance and assessment in the management of Self. The MOU provides a perspective of strict instructions for successful practices, theories and beliefs that people in achieving a successful future drives (as you are in the future, want to emulate the behavior of others). The Memorandum of Understanding is designed for people to learn broadly, to inspire generosity to the service of others and prepare them to lead courageously systems in the future. An agreement must be to promote a perspective that is firmly established in the potential for successful growth through the following constructs: § § The strategy forward – creation of professional mastery § The Center of Gravity The Cardinal Rules . The cardinal rules are a set of guidelines, which will be invaluable for people and organizations to follow during the planning and implementation of strategic or tactical level. These rules, once the person (s are established), or teams, the rules that govern our movement and must not change. The Guiding bids . The Guiding commandments are designed to inform people what they should be and not in line with the execution does a well designed strategy to win. Also the reasons “why” will enter an action and the consequences should be to inform the individual and / or organization from fulfilling this task. The forms of disposition . The forms of disposition offer a substantive transformation in “thought” about how people get a perspective on the things in life. It refers to an orchestrated, systemic and revolutionary new world view to a “change” of societies, cultures and markets because of behavioral problems perspective. This is often seen as “systems theory”, which provides a network of relationships coalescing, slightly larger than the individual parts. The individual must be able to see things from a perspective that they are always changing and developing in new ways – thinking “out-of-the-box!” We are condemned to a slow death unless radical change occurs in the way we think. Change your way of thinking or to die a slow death. The General Orders . The General Orders are broad, community-wide need “statements designed to” cover a wide range of issues in the life of a person or within the life cycle of a company. These questions are referred to as “guiding principles” that are specific elements that must be addressed. The Guiding Strategies (developed to fit your current and future circumstances) are the methods for addressing the key objectives identified, and the orientation of the policy are the steps specific actions recommended to implement the Guiding strategies. The General Orders, all eleven of them, offer the possibility of effects in an open and reflective way to explore and reinforce each other in creating coherence and wholeness often lacking in life cycles. In summary, I see the Memorandum of Understanding (once established for the organization), as an opportunity to the free actions of human beings as servants, but also develop them as opportunists encouraged. It is authorized, it is so, and it grounds people in a public way on the basis that they all share, to benefit the organization. There are no ethical malaise. It is important to recognize that the new challenge the finding of what has been lost. Rather, it is like the journey of the scarecrow in “Wizard of Oz in search of a brain (brain power in this context), the Tin Man in search of a heart and the lion intact in search of courage. People’s values system and the Most cases have been during the journey of personal growth. The MOU simply formulated and reaffirms the fundamental values and practices that are already based perspective to achieve their personal and professional appearance and behavior to a significant growth. And all this is from the effects of War stimulated area, so the influences that lead to significant strategic organizational renewal at the end. The Memorandum of Understanding was developed to answer four fundamental questions an organization to develop and help , plan to run an effective strategy forward. The questions are: / p> § Where does the organization want in the future?
§ What the organization will apply its resources to counter the image of the future? § How will the organization use these resources? reach
§ When and under what conditions, the organization ‘exit from their current strategic plan? / p> It is the act of the dynamic adaptation of business models and strategies to the profound changes at work in the external environment. requires particular it offers the innovation and the Memorandum of Understanding definitely an innovative perspective for most organizations. In a 2003 article in the Harvard Business Review titled “The Quest for Resilience,” wrote Gary Hamel, “strategic renewal is creative reconstruction. “Dissect It’s all about the traditional business model and its test for imaginative ways to reconstruct it, to considerable intellectual and emotional thoughts to create space for value added to the positive influence on the internal and external customers of the organization. This is all the more urgent in difficult A display of Nokia, stood in contrast. The headline: Can “someone cost solutions that work today?” My answer is yes. Now there is an organization that seems to get it. But wait a minute. Did that headline sound more than a little like Barack Obama? Nokia seems to understand, have the lesson from the past month U.S. election campaign between Barack Obama and Senator John McCain: Whether you are to overcome the organizational policy or training people to stay on top in their careers, the winners are those that the game has changed himself known, and that “same old stuff cut not just you not any longer. The world processes altered in a way that the world is much different from what it looks like a year ago (unemployment is around 47% in 2007 by 2008, residential property by 26% and the statistics is still dark). The way to make effective decisions require innovative thought and those who will miss the opportunity to change behind. The best rate I teach that fits in great here, ” When to reach the people they had never even try, they must be willing to do what they did before. “ As a U.S. Marine turned business professional, responsible for the management a dynamic team of specialists in the lion’s belly, when the team a customer who tries to business and process is to overcome challenges, innovation engages precedent takes as a strategic starting point. defines our team the importance of the war room, helps his situation identify and then begin the work – in the newly organized innovation War Room. Without this component added, the mixture, there is no need to start because without them, the potential for error increases incredibly. How do we create this critical strategy room, teach Unpack we company, its business model in five areas: leadership, infrastructure, processes, populations and Action Units. These five are used to positive Organizational take Behavior of the leadership responsibility for the decisions, impulses drive influence: who they are, to serve, what they provide on performance, as they offer it, as they generate revenue and how to differentiate them and to get a strategic advantage. Then we will show how the Centers of Gravity used to re-order radical each component with the “Six lenses of Innovation” – the most modern military-style suicidal thoughts and methodology, “Battle Plan for pre-emptive strike” are outlined in my latest book “Business Warfighting For great team.” So, we Get The strategy team (1) Set achievable goals; challenge deeply-held orthodoxies about who their customers how they interact with them how they define their products or services as to configure the value chain, and so on; ( 2) Identify means; harness emerging trends and discontinuities to change significantly the way things are done in their industry, (3 locations) sure to generate intelligence, leverage core competencies and strategic assets in a novel way, new growth, (4) Implementation of security understanding, and unfulfilled address deep needs of the customers that currently are, (5) Engage the strike, a conscious Battle Plan through a strategic and numerically inferior force to head off a situation where the final defeat inevitably would be used, and finally (6) perfectly to the exit strategy, just as everything has a beginning, everything has an end. Leaders are instructed how to handle exit-point-centric solution with 32 rules to severe challenges in a short time with the help of frames . Damian D. ?Skipper? Pitts, A United States Marine turned business professional is the author of Building GREAT Teams: Charting the Path of Organizational Politics, Building GREAT Teams: The Monograph (Book Surge Publishing, 2007) and the co-author of Business WARFIGHTING For GREAT Teams (Book Surge Publishing, 2008) and Founder and Chairman of the Bison Group Corporation, a management consulting and training firm. He has also authored The Process of LeaderShaping, a cultural transformational program and university course of study that includes 12 modules, hands-on exercises, and a lecture series. He has consulted or presented to numerous leading U. S. and foreign corporations, helping them to realize increased integrated talent management strategies, team building maneuvers, and decision-making skills to compete in today?s highly uncertain business environments. He has also authored four additional publications with his most successful title, The Art of Detachment: Breakthrough Principles to Transformational Leadership (Kendall Hunt, 2007). His works allowed him to be chosen as the technical, military and development specialists by the U. S. film industry to the feature film ?Stateside? that released in theaters in May 2004 where he trained and acted onscreen with ?A-List? talents Val Kilmer and Jonathan Tucker along with 75 -other actors, teaching them the principles of leadership, team development, and influence for the production. He is now teaching his programs at Temple University.
For additional information, please email Dpitts@thebisongroup. com.
Over the course of George Bush’s six years in office it has become abundantly clear that Mr. Bush and his cronies are in a state of “willful denial” about the worsening situation in Iraq…. and so is a large chunk of the American public, willingly or due to misleading partisan information.
As the temperature rises and with less than 5 weeks left to the mid-term elections, some of the most zealous backers of this administration in the Republican Party are running scared leaving Mr. Bush trapped holding the “hot plate. “
With the on-going “Sex & Pedophilia” scandal involving now resigned Republican Congressman, Mark Foley (R – FL), the focus on this administration has switched gears mid-stream—from a wanton catastrophe to a circus of “Catastrophilia. “
A homosexual Republican Congressman with Pedophilic tendencies is like “manna from heaven” for the Democrats. They can’t ask for a better gift so close to the elections—an opportunity to expose Republican hypocrisy. You can bet that mothers of all political persuasions will get an earful of this.
These revelations of the activities of Mr. Foley has prompted an all out “Circular Panic Shootout” amongst Republicans, with each and every one facing the electorate this November distancing himself/herself from Foley.
This “October Surprise” could be the final nail in the coffin for the Republican Party. The “chickens have come home to roost,” and the “Values” and “Faith” Party is in deep trouble.
“I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me,”—George Bush, speaking to a group of Republicans in the White House, according to Bob Woodward (Award Winning Journalist) in his new book: State of Denial. Barney is one of the Bush’s two dogs.
In May 2003, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld while speaking to a cheering congregation of U. S. troops in Qatar said, “So when people are writing the history books, you’re going to be in it. Thank you very much. ”
The Vice President Mr. Dick Cheney in an appearance on September 14, 2003 in a “Meet the Press” weekly show with NBC’s Tim Russert said, “My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. ”
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) recently, sounding much like CNN’s Lou Dobbs, linked immigrants to terrorist and criminal gangs by saying: “Illegal’s crossing our borders are gang members who cross to injure our citizens. This is a daily struggle in some towns. “
These four statements and many others I have not listed here sum up the dysfunctional, hypocritical and deceitful “Republican Mentality” that readily permeates the party from top to bottom.
If you read in between the lines, the intimation is that Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney have been fighting this war for the sake of “history,” . . . . and that “illegal immigrants” and by extension “legal immigrants” are just a bunch of criminals and terrorists—dangerous and deceitful rhetoric expressly intended drive an “immigration wedge” to divide America, and instill fear all the way to the November ballot box.
Like seasoned predators Republicans have in the last couple of years skillfully capitalized on a basic human instinct of “fear of the unknown” to weave a national security policy of “fear” into the psyche of the American public, with incredible effectiveness.
A few weeks to the mid-term elections, the “Kings” of “Wedge Issues” and partisan smears are at it again, even though they are clearly on the ropes this time around.
While Bush has been choreographing the “Terrorist Fear Branch,” the right wing of the Republican party led by xenophobes like Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, George Allen and James Sensenbrenner among many others have been “stroking” the locals by holding anti-immigrant town-hall style hate meetings to “rally the base” of the Republican party, a base comprising of maniacal extremists still hanging on to America’s bloody and racially intolerant past.
The so called “House Republican Immigration Field Hearings” conducted in the recent months supposedly explored the “societal and governmental costs of illegal immigrants,” use of health-care facilities, welfare and “the criminal consequences of illegal immigration. ” These meetings turned out to be “Distortion Dens” in which immigrants were mercilessly vilified. Manufactured videos of immigrants crossing in from Mexico superimposed with images of Osama bin Laden and Zacharias Moussaoui were played to “fearful” Town-Hall congregants, and are still appearing on TV screens in numerous family living rooms across America.
Needless to say that the “positive” contributions of immigrants (illegal & legal) have been totally blanked out in favor of blood-letting, high-stakes demonizing, irrational and rampant xenophobia aimed at “the disease carrying homeland invaders. ” Also, totally swept aside is the Senate bill that would have been a workable starting point from which to work on this complex issue, in order to reach a rational and comprehensive solution.
In order to placate their “base,” the Republican dominated U. S. government has been conducting sweeping immigration raids across the country, inhumanely separating children born in The United States, who are constitutionally American citizens, from their immigrant mothers and fathers …. well meaning “Economic Refugees,” from third world nations racked with incompetent and thieving governments…. . some with the assistance of greedy U. S. multi-national corporations whose “colonial” and corrupt profit motive is legendary.
Even Tom Kean, former Republican Governor of New Jersey and a respected ex-911 commissioner has joined the fray for the sake of “Dear Party,” pulling a “Michael Moorer” on Democrats. Sources indicate that Mr. Kean was hired as a pre-production consultant for the movie “The path to 9-11″ a TV miniseries which grossly misrepresents the facts in the 9/11 Commission report and portrays the Clinton administration in bad light.
Clearly, a desperate attempt by Republican operatives in collaboration with a “ratings hungry” media powerhouse (ABC/Disney) to influence the electorate.
If this movie were not a sneaky political move why was an advance copy of the film given to right wing extremist radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh – a self-serving demagogue who has a penchant for monstrous distortions and extremist hyperbole.
Other reports from Washington indicate that the Republicans are planning to unload their significantly superior financial war chest on Democrats in the form of negative TV and Radio ads over personal issues and local controversies. According to these reports, the Republican Congressional committee has dispatched operatives to comb through personal records to find damaging information on their Democratic opponents.
Even though mud-flinging is a political staple for both parties and in-fact almost everywhere else in the world, the Republicans are masters at this game and can ratchet it up to ludicrous levels.
Look out for Republican candidates to become meaner and more twisted in the coming few weeks.
But will the moderate “swing” voters in both parties buy into this charade this time around?
According to a CNN Poll conducted on September 6, 57% of Americans without a high school education believe that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 911 attacks (a fact most recently denied in a news conference August 21, when President Bush said Hussein had “nothing” to do with the attacks), 54% of High School graduates believe likewise. Only 39% of college graduates believe the same. The number dwindles dramatically to 19% for postgraduates.
Are Americans that ill informed? If so then we should expect another Republican win this November.
Will red baiting terror, using politics of deceit, fear and hate work this time?
Will the Republican party successfully energize their “intolerant” right wing base and also scare the pants off moderate Republicans, Independents and even some Democrats…. again?
Is the Republican Party running on fumes?
Cheap political scores that violate the core of internationally revered American values like hurriedly establishing military commissions that will utilize “alternative forms of torture” in order to claim the mantle as the “toughest in the war on terror” are very troubling, notwithstanding the fact that these measures have been implemented in other countries before with little or no success.
Piecemeal measures that are politically targeted and principally bankrupt, without any long-term solutions is not the way to govern this great nation.
Coercion, “bribery,” and scare tactics have destroyed the good standing of America in the eyes of the rest of the world during this administration’s tenure.
On moral, political and pragmatic grounds the Democratic Party or even better non-aligned independents should wake up and right the American ship, for the Republicans have failed miserably…. they have bamboozled the citizenry, betrayed their trust and misappropriated their hard earned tax money in an unnecessary “imperialist” war.
Another Republican majority in both houses will be a disaster. America’s standing as measuring rod for the rest of the world has been severely compromised and stands to diminish even further if Republicans are given a blank check to continue with their “pillaging sham. ”
The American people need to wake up too and send a strong message to both Parties, that partisan politicking without principle is damaging to all and sundry, party faithful or no party.
Perhaps we need a “rational” third party?
What should be the defining principle of the Koroma administration National Development Strategy is balance. President Koroma cannot expect to eliminate national development challenges through a unilateral political agenda, to do everything and coordinate everything based on his All People’s Congress (APC) party ideology. His APC party with its “corporate agenda” for Sierra Leone rolled over the incumbent Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) in a run-off that reflected the expectations and desires of a majority of Sierra Leoneans for far-reaching socio-economic change, institutional reform and full inclusion of the mostly youth and indigenous poor. If Koroma is to succeed to reduce Sierra Leone’s grinding poverty and the creation of a more effective, inclusive and just state, however—and he must if his leadership is going to be different from the SLPP administration it replaced—he will need to set priorities and consider trade-offs and show understanding and offer support as he grapples with explosive issues of judicial reforms, corruption and development policy.
The strategy strives for balance in three areas: between trying to prevail in eliminating corruption in his government and preparing for other contingencies; between institutionalizing capabilities such as nongovernmental engagement and supporting the relevance of NGOs as development stakeholders and maintaining NGO’s existing organizational independence and strategic edge in terms of advancing national development objectives through community involvement; and between retaining those cultural traits that have made grassroots involvement in development work possible and discouraging behaviors of NGOs that hamper their ability to do what needs to be done. “In its broadest sense, the term “nongovernment organization” [NGO] refers to organizations (i) not based in government; (ii) not created for financial or material gain; but (iii) created to address concerns such as social and humanitarian issues of development, individual and community welfare and well-being, disadvantage, and poverty, as well as environmental and natural resources protection, management, and improvement” (Asian Development Bank).
Strategic Thinking
The Koroma administration’s ability to deal with performance problems of NGOs will depend on its capacity in handling corruption in government. To be blunt, to fail—or to be seen to fail—in addressing corruption in government would be a disastrous blow to the APC party credibility, both among party supporters and voters and among opposition adversaries. Sierra Leoneans want to see serious effort to address corruption and the injustices of the legal system in the country—and the people of Sierra Leone have lost all patience in this regard. Still, there will continue to be high expectations for Koroma’s zero-tolerance against corruption to be seen to work in Sierra Leone.
Given its endemic nature, corruption, poverty, and the tragic history of violence, Sierra Leone in many ways poses an even more complex and difficult long-term challenge—one that, despite a strong rhetorical effort, will require significant determination and commitment to punish drastically for crimes of corruption for some time. And given the country’s ever changing political game, the resounding victory of Ernest Koroma in the 2007 run-off elections could prove just another wrong turn along the road going nowhere. Sierra Leoneans have already started to question the leadership of Koroma, who in his inauguration in September 2007 announced his zero-tolerance stance against corruption, but “has not had a lot of luck with his cabinet” (The Africa Report). The instances of presumed corruption and shady dealings [the controversial Income Electrix power deal, the suspended Transport Minister Ibrahim Kemoh Sesay 700kg haul of cocaine deal, and the Attorney General Abdul Serry-Kamal Seventy Five Billion Leones Wanza saga] confirm the self-seeking and predatory activities of APC officials, “and that despite the best intentions announced by President Koroma, he [seems to] lack the moral standing and political backbone to implement his ‘zero-tolerance’ policy for corruption and his call for accountability of his cabinet” (The New People Newspaper). Koroma still has to demonstrate he is following a drummer different from that of every Sierra Leonean leader of the past 45 years.
What is dubbed the war on corruption is, in grim reality, a prolonged, nationwide conventional campaign—a struggle between the forces of blatant corruption and those of moderation. Direct ACC engagement will continue to play a role in the long-term effort against corrupt officials in government and the private sector. But over the short term, a determined leadership may have to use draconian rules of engagement to ending corruption in Sierra Leone. Where possible, what the ACC calls prompt service in addressing corruption cases should be subordinated to concrete measures by a strong presidency aimed at definitely promoting better governance, economic programs that spur development, and efforts to address the grievances among the discontented which justified the civil conflict that so badly destroyed the social fabric of Sierra Leone over the years. It will take the active engagement as well of NGOs in a collaborative effort over a long time to educate, rebuild and advance infrastructural development objectives.
Sierra Leone is unlikely to experience another civil war—justifiable by the injustices resulting from bad governance and rampant corruption—anytime soon. But that does not mean it may not face similar challenges in a variety of locales. Where possible, a government strategy is to employ indirect approaches—primarily through building the capacity of partner NGOs and their administrative processes—to prevent festering problems from turning into crises that require costly and controversial direct civil conflict. In this kind of effort, the capabilities of the government’s allies and NGO partners may be as important as its own, and building their capacity is arguably as important as, if not more so than, the partisan bickering the government has to deal with.
The recent past vividly demonstrated the consequences of failing to address adequately the dangers posed by bad governance. Rebel networks found sympathy among Sierra Leoneans and strength within the chaos of social breakdown. The small-arms infested State quickly collapsed into chaos and criminality and the worst of catastrophes befell the Sierra Leone homeland—towns and villages were reduced to rubble by rebel attacks as a result of the failed State. The kinds of capabilities needed to deal with such a historically dismal scenario cannot therefore any longer be played down with political rhetoric. Even the smallest of crimes of corruption should require stringent and uncompromising methods of investigations and punishment to avoid this failed State scenario. As Transparency International chair Huguette Labelle has noted, “Stemming corruption requires strong oversight through parliaments, law enforcement, independent media and a vibrant civil society. When these institutions are weak, corruption spirals out of control with horrendous consequences for ordinary people and for justice and equality in societies more broadly” (NGLS Go Between).
In many ways, the country’s national development capabilities are still coping with the consequences of the 1990s, when, with the complicity of the civil war, key instruments of the government of Sierra Leone regulatory mechanisms were reduced or allowed to wither on the corridors of power.
“Sierra Leone has been a major recipient of foreign aid since the end of a devastating 11-year civil war in 2002. But government, donors and citizens are all questioning how effectively this aid is being used. Allegations of misappropriation of donor funds, both by government actors and NGOs, threaten this inflow. One of the government’s principal partners, the British Department for International Development, withheld aid in protest against such anomalies, for most of 2007 and early 2008 (Fofana/IPS, Freetown). Besides, the Government of Sierra Leone has not maintained a constructive relationship with NGOs. However, the global push towards reducing poverty has created a new convergence among development practitioners and policymakers as the means of increasing access to new initiatives that will promote good governance and help reduce poverty. Citizen participation has increasingly been taken seriously to increase opportunity for lower income and other excluded populations whose interest are marginalized in classic representative institutions to influence policymaking processes. The government is beginning to appreciate the relevance of civil society in development—that community development lies at the heart of a strong, association-based civil society.
In this regard, the Koroma administration can assume more of the tasks of fostering effective collaboration with local and international NGOs for peace, security and development. To truly achieve victory as the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness defined it –“to bring new voices into a review of how aid is managed, and to sketch out a course for greater transparency, accountability and ultimately impact on the lives of the world’s poor—to attain a political objective” (Fofana/IPS, Freetown)–the Sierra Leone Government needs an NGO Coordination Unit whose ability to facilitate the diversion of huge donor funds to the NGO community is matched by its ability to use active evaluations and reviews as learning tools for itself and its development partners. “The role of the Sierra Leone Association of NGOs (SLANGO), formed in January 1994, to coordinate NGO activities in order that efforts are not duplicated and resources not wasted” (BNET Business Network) has to be differentiated from what the NGO Unit at MODEP is doing; also to understand SLANGO’s relevance in development work.
Given these realities, the NGO Unit of MODEP has, however, been seen to make some impressive strides in recent years. “The revised National NGO Policy following the wide range of consultations held at national and regional levels with the involvement of all stakeholders especially the NGO Community, Line Ministries and Civil Society in the preparation of the policy [was a laudable effort]. The NGO Unit facilitated several meetings with other ministries particularly the Ministry of Finance, the National Revenue Authority (NRA), the Ministry of Labor and other stakeholders to discuss among other things: Duty Free Concessions, Resident/Work Permits and Taxation etc. ” (NGO Unit/MODEP).
It can also be suggested that a New Development Operations Manual for a New National Development Strategy is developed to incorporate the lessons of recent years in NGO service delivery doctrine. “Train and equip” programs will allow for quicker improvements in the development capacity of partner organizations. And various initiatives should be undertaken that will better integrate and coordinate government efforts with civilian society agencies as well as engage the expertise of the private sector, including nongovernmental organizations and academia.
Organizational Problems in Perspective
Even as international NGOs hone and institutionalize new and modern management methods, the Sierra Leone Government still has to contend with the organizational challenges posed by local NGOs. The images of NGOs seen by many local people as corrupt and undeserving of support are a reminder that these Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and their management processes do still matter. NGOs in the country should be seen to improve their and several partners’ documentation of results, including the development of good monitoring indicators.
In addition, there is the potentially toxic mix of inadequate financial management of NGOs and inadequate reporting on budgetary issues to the Government of Sierra Leone’s NGO Unit. What all these problems portend is that the monitoring of development aid continues to be a major challenge for Sierra Leone and that a thorough framework of monitoring both recurrent and development activities must be put in place. The Government of Sierra Leone cannot take these organizational issues of NGOs for granted and needs to invest in the programs, platforms, and personnel that will ensure their relevance as development stakeholders.
But it is also important to keep some perspective. As much as the MODEP’s NGO Unit has come up with revised policy regulations with collated information in respect of funds disbursed by donors to NGOs for the implementation of programs it must be remembered that what is driving MODEP is a desire to exorcise the sloppy performance of NGOs over the years and to make them more relevant as development stakeholders—not an ideologically driven campaign to micro manage NGOs in the country. “Understandably, the logic behind massive NGO presence in Sierra Leone was to create a civic culture, pluralize the political, economic and social arena and bridge the gap between the masses and the State. So NGOs thus act as intermediaries between, what donors call ‘the unorganized masses’ and the State and are expected to represent the people and express their voices in policymaking. In fact, among NGOs is a small sector of voluntary organizations that genuinely monitor regimes, engage in advocacy on behalf of the poor and serves as watchdogs in ensuring that government contractors deliver services”.
It is true that the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) with clear link to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is the main focus of Government and its development partners. “The PRSP calls for pro-poor sustainable growth. However, achieving this means maintaining macro-economic stability IMF-style with low inflation and strict fiscal deficits, despite research by CSOs and development agencies which seriously question the poverty impact of these types of policies” (European Network on Debt and Development). NGOs’ participation was recognized in the process. NGOs could now play an active role in the implementation process by shifting their interventions and assistance from relief/humanitarian programs to sustainable infrastructural development programs. Answerability and transparency, adequate financial management and adequate budgetary reporting are to be the watch words in the new dispensation.
NGOs in Sierra Leone may have their organizational problems, but they can be quite relevant stakeholders in promoting people’s participation in poverty reduction programs. Use of funds has not been cost effective for most NGOs but the thematic areas most of these NGOs focus on (health, education, skills development, micro-finance, skills training, etc. ), are relevant for the end users that are often poor and vulnerable children, youth and women. These are priority support areas that are in accordance with Sierra Leone’s development priorities and the PRSP as well international development agencies’ priorities.
Now that the performance bar has to be raised for the government and NGOs following their dismal performance in terms of handling aid money, the Sierra Leone Government must now endeavor to maintain a credible strategic relationship with NGOs through effectively evaluating, reviewing and monitoring their activities. Toward this end, the steps the NGO Unit at MODEP is taking to return excellence and accountability to NGO stewardship are commendable. Presidential and Parliamentary oversight may also be necessary for a more reliable and sustainable NGO Unit coordination effort.
When thinking about the range of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of non-governmental organizations as development partners in Sierra Leone it is reasonable to understand that NGOs come in many shapes and sizes. Data used in the SWOT analysis stem from multiple sources including statistical reports, literature review, regulations and policies, and research articles by NGO professionals. These findings should provide a valuable reference for the Government and the international development community who are interested in developing excellence in the civil society organization which interestingly can provide some feed back into the effectiveness aspects of the development analysis.
Strengths
Grassroots (local) NGOs
Have a positive presence on the ground.
Demonstrate ability to seek common ground and commitment to poor and marginalized grassroots populations.
Enjoy confidence and trust of local populations.
Have experience-based knowledge of cultural, political and socio-economic conditions of indigenous populations.
Understand vulnerabilities unique to local beneficiaries.
Can achieve extreme flexibility with fewer resources and lower costs.
Possess valuable experience, content and fundamental working knowledge about local trade issues and business contacts in their field.
International NGOs
Have global appeal and have developed industry-wide reputation for positive work.
Good at generating and mobilizing resources and core competencies for their operations.
Ability to resolve issues of legitimacy and to address political and policy constraints.
Ability to harness expert opinion to influence public opinion and policy-makers.
Have paid core staff to ensure the quality of project work.
Possess valuable experience, content and fundamental working knowledge about international trade issues and the labor market and business contacts in their field.
Weaknesses
Grassroots (local) NGOs
May have limited financial and expert resources to support end-user development.
May have limited strategic perspectives and weak linkages with other actors in development.
May have limited managerial and organizational capacities.
May sometimes miss the big picture on macro perspectives on capital markets, economy and geopolitics vis-à-vis community development.
Indigenous NGO operators may be prone to corruption.
Because of their voluntary nature, there may be questions regarding their accountability and credibility.
May have difficulty managing operations on financially sustainable basis.
Are not sustainable on membership fees alone.
International NGOs
Some advocacy NGOs working to influence the policies and practices of governments, development institutions have limited implementation capacity.
Questions sometimes arise concerning their motivations and objectives, and the degree of accountability they accept for the ultimate impact of policies and positions they advocate. Sometimes accused of “selling out” when they work with government or corporations.
May find it hard to placate or manipulate special interests.
Suffer fluctuations in maintaining non-profit donations revenue streams.
May have limited experience with poor populations and operations may not reflect the needs of communities.
Opportunities
Grassroots NGOs
Can effectively work with community partners to assess local problems and opportunities and to promote export development programs.
Ability to implement successful training programs and advance participatory development.
Ability to integrate their local expertise and experience in health and education initiatives in community development programs.
Can be clearing-houses for local trade information.
International NGOs
Ability to work out credible partnerships with government and private corporations to mobilize public opinion to increase influence on poverty reduction programs and trade issues.
Effective at bringing the voice of efficient organizational practices into NGO work in developing countries.
Ability to contribute sector-specific expertise to help producers add value, improve quality and find new export markets.
Quite familiar with political and social accountability mechanisms that complement their interventions and advocacy work.
Threats
Grassroots NGOs
Isolated and poorly coordinated efforts may have negative program outcomes.
Lackluster relationship with trade and export development corporations causing unsustainable initiatives and lack of trade development solutions.
Lacks technical capacity to connect poor people with trade and export opportunities. I
International NGOs
Tendency to ignore the voices of the poor represented by the experience and professional input of local agencies when defining the dialogue and public understanding of trade and development issues.
Inclination to compete by lobbying against one another thereby distracting policy-makers on major issues.
Often accused of hijacking the macroeconomic policy making dominated by technocrats and external consultants in the process.
Overall, by sorting the SWOT issues of grassroots (local) and international NGOs into planning categories one can obtain a system which presents a practical way of assimilating the internal and external information about NGO work in Sierra Leone, delineating short and long term priorities, and defining and developing coordinated, goal-directed actions, and allowing an easy way to build management teams which can achieve the objectives of development growth and the essence of civil society. In reality, as the philosopher Michael Ignatieff has noted “without civil society, democracy remains an empty shell”. One can expect to see the efficacy of Civil Society Organizations to influence members of the wider public that adhere to their values and beliefs to engage in development programs at State and community levels.
Therefore, notwithstanding local NGO’s relatively dismal record they are still clearly quite relevant to the development equation. NGOs strengths can be harnessed with well coordinated capacity building programs. Conversely, international NGOs can develop a partner strategy of supporting and working through strong professional local partners as an effective tool for having a greater development impact than being a self-implementing agency. NGOs can also be very effective as learning organizations by providing important support to build their own staff’s and partners’ capacities, through individual training activities, annual partner meetings and conferences, learning exchange between partners, and partner self-assessments of training needs. Moreover, NGOs can also be very effective with regular active evaluations and reviews as learning tools for themselves and their partners.
Just as one can expect learning should be at the heart of these organizations, so too, should the Government of Sierra Leone seek a better balance in the portfolio of capabilities it has—the types of programs against corruption in government fielded, the punishment in place for crimes of corruption, the training done.
Moreover, given the development challenges Sierra Leone is struggling with—and given, for example, the struggles to field up hospitals and clinics, schools and colleges, maintenance of urban and rural roads, and the HIV threats to the society—the time has come to think hard about how to institutionalize the capabilities of NGOs and get them adequately fielded quickly. The NGO policy modernization programs of the NGO Unit at MODEP should seek a 99 percent solution to the organizational limitations of NGOs in the country and to build the kind of innovative thinking and flexibility capable of supporting rigid development processes.
Sustaining Organizational Performance
The ability to fight corruption in government and empower NGOs sometimes simultaneously fits squarely within the finest traditions of good governance, more so because adequate financial management, including adequate reporting on budgetary issues is key to sustained organizational performance of NGOs. For most NGOs in Sierra Leone, unsatisfactory practices with regard to vehicle and fuel use, procurement procedures and weak financial reporting and accounting are weaknesses which are also typical issues in bad government. Improving documentation of results, including the development of good monitoring indicators is also essential for sustaining organizational performance. The non performance of NGOs is coming at a frightful human, financial, and political cost. There has to be organizational improvements in government so that NGOs can be more resourceful and relevant to the development equation.
One of the enduring issues the NGO Unit at MODEP’s struggles with is whether personnel and organizational systems designed to coordinate the work of NGOs in the country will be able to reflect the importance of advising, training, and equipping NGOs in Sierra Leone—something still not considered a career-enhancing path for the best and brightest organizational development experts. Another is whether the revised policy regulations can be adapted well enough and fast enough to empower NGOs—or, more significant, to build the capacity of local NGOs to make them more resourceful.
One can make the argument in favor of institutionalizing NGO skills and the ability to conduct stability and support operations. This has to be done and is necessary for maintaining the current advantage of the relevance of NGOs as development partners. Apart from recent revisions of NGO policy regulations there has been no strong, deeply rooted constituency inside MODEP or elsewhere for institutionalizing the capabilities necessary to support NGO work in Sierra Leone—and to quickly meet the important needs of civil society organizations engaged in development work in Sierra Leone.
Think of the important work of NGOs in Sierra Leone. NGOs often make the impossible possible by doing what governments cannot or will not do especially when new challenges crowd the national agenda. Increasingly, NGOs operate outside existing formal frameworks, moving independently to meet their goals and establishing new standards that governments, institutions, and corporations are themselves compelled to follow through force of public opinion.
Some humanitarian and development NGOs, for instance, have a natural advantage because of their perceived neutrality and experience. Amnesty International – Sierra Leone Section, for example, (as listed on the webpage directory of NGOs maintained by UNDP Sierra Leone promotes and protects human rights through advocacy and human rights education—maintaining documentation on human rights abuses and violations carried out during the ten year rebel war in Sierra Leone which proved helpful to the TRC in Sierra Leone. Other groups such as the Campaign for Good Governance (CGG) is a democracy-supporting NGO in Sierra Leone which promotes the building of democratic institutions, transparency and accountability in government, active citizen participation in the political process, voter education, human rights, and the rule of law. The Catholic Youth Organization (CYO) organizes religious, educational, social and cultural programs to meet the spiritual, mental and recreational needs of members. The Centre for Coordination of Youth Activities provides training in leadership, peace building, skills development, and community development. The Kailahun District Development Foundation (KADDF), a district-wide non-governmental organization offers viable solutions to the pervasive problems of poverty and serves as a clearinghouse for outside agencies interested in carrying out programs in the Kailahun district. The Sierra Leone Adult Education Association (SLADEA) helps to reduce the high rate of illiteracy among adults in the non-formal sector; to enlist the co-operation and support of other NGOs with a view to motivating various forms of people’s participation especially women and youth in national development; to achieve public recognition and support for non-formal education sector. FORUT’s thematic areas (health, education, skills development, micro-finance, skills training, etc. ), are relevant for the end users that are often poor and vulnerable children, youth and women. Action Aid is one of the largest NGOs operating in Sierra Leone promoting food security through agricultural programs to ensure seeds are available and crop production continues.
There is no doubt, therefore, that modernization programs will continue to have, and deserve, strong institutional and parliamentary support. There has to be the enabling environment needed to make sure that the capabilities needed for the complex organizational issues of NGOs also has strong and sustained institutional support over the long term. The need for an NGO Unit establishment that can make and implement decisions quickly in support of NGOs working in Sierra Leone is necessary.
In the end, the NGO capabilities needed cannot be separated from the cultural traits and the management structure of the institutions the Sierra Leone Government has: the signals sent by how funds are managed, what projects are funded, what skills are used to implement projects and how personnel are trained. As Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy has said, “Clearly, one can no longer relegate NGOs to simple advisory or advocacy roles. . . . They are now part of the way decisions have to be made. “
As Yale professor Steve Charnovitz has observed, NGO involvement seems to depend on two factors: the needs of government and the capabilities of NGOs. A good democracy encompasses all NGOs which strive to create formal but flexible systems fostering dynamism and self-adjustment. NGOs ought to be a part of the alternative development paradigm, because the State, its institutions, and public policy, are unable to address a host of issues of underdevelopment all alone.
Evidently, there are many NGOs today in Sierra Leone in different shapes and forms with substantial amounts of donor and individual funds being diverted through them for developmental purposes. These NGOs are thought to be participatory, community-oriented, democratic, cost effective, and better at targeting the poorest of the poor, although in recent years, the nimbus of righteousness around NGOs has almost disappeared, and there is wide acknowledgement of their inability to deliver what is expected from them. Many lessons, however, about NGOs in Sierra Leone present themselves. Two of the most important are an understanding of organizational challenges and a sense of determination to change. The determination and national reach of NGOs has been an indispensable contributor to national peace and stability. The NGO Unit at MODEP should be clear about what effective organizational management by competent operators of NGOs can accomplish. No matter what their aims, all organizations share two things in common: They are made up of people, and certain individuals are in charge of these people. NGOs therefore need strong managers to lead its staff toward accomplishing development goals. And these managers are more than just leaders—they are problem solvers, cheerleaders, and planners as well.
Think of the intricacies of management, for instance. No matter what type of organization they work in, NGO executives are generally responsible for a group of individuals’ performance. As leaders, they must expect their fellow workers to work earnestly to reach common NGO goals. As the management guru Peter Drucker said, “Executives owe it to the organization and to their fellow workers not to tolerate nonperforming individuals in important jobs. ”
In national affairs, “aid can work where there is good governance,” the United States Congressional Representative Lee H. Hamilton wrote in his book on – A Legacy of Honor: The Congressional Papers of Lee H. Hamilton, U. S. House of Representative 1965-1998 Indiana Ninth District, “. . . and usually fails where governments are unable or unwilling to commit aid to improve the lives of their people. ” It is thus believed any responsible National Development Strategy for Sierra Leone should provide a balanced approach to enhancing responsibilities and preserving the relevance of NGOs as development partners.
Kenday S. Kamara is a freelance development consultant in administration, policy development and capacity building. He can be reached at kenday. kamara@waldenu. edu.
For Entrepreneurs Looking To Exit The Business, This Outline Provides Direction In Following Several Alternatives To Maximize The Owners Return.
Business Exit Strategy Options Guide.
Barack Obama angry at General Stanley McChrystal speech on Afghanistan
The relationship between President Barack Obama and the commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan has been put under severe strain by Gen Stanley McChrystal’s comments on strategy for the war.
http://www. telegraph. co. uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6259582/Barack-Obama-angry-at-General-Stanley-McChrystal-speech-on-Afghanistan. html
White House: Leaving Afghanistan not an option
By BEN FELLER
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) – The White House said Monday that President Barack Obama is not considering a strategy for Afghanistan that would withdraw U. S. troops from the eroding war there.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that walking away isn’t a viable option to deal with a war that is about to enter its ninth year.
“I don’t think we have the option to leave. That’s quite clear,” Gibbs said.
http://www. breitbart. com/article. php?id=D9B53AL82&show_article=1
Translator
recent comments