Introduction
In the northwest Indian state of Rajasthan, the rural development sector is booming. In response to a lack of infrastructure and the slowness of government initiatives, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have emerged as major actors in the region. Many aspects of this field of work are the subject of much study and criticism, both from within NGOs and by outside researchers and academicians. Much emphasis is put on the study of different programs, approaches to development, the interaction between NGOs and the people they seek to serve, and cooperation among NGOs and between NGOs and the government. While all of these subjects are worthy of study in the greater context of the eventual success or failure of development efforts, they usually miss an integral factor in the operations of NGOs: humans.
Little research has been done to date about the people who do development. The purpose of this paper is to further understand the issues these people face from their own perspective. The paper is built around an examination of the people who work for and with Seva Mandir (temple of service), an NGO active in and around Udaipur, India. The central guiding question is: "Why do you work for Seva Mandir?" Through this approach, I have been able to explore individualsí personal motivations, the aspects of the work environment that affect these motivations, and peopleís thoughts and feelings about doing development.
Methodology
My approach to this study consisted of observation of and participation in a variety of Seva Mandirís operations. Although my activities as a volunteer with SM reached well beyond the contents of this paper, I consciously strove to maintain reasonable standards of impartiality when gathering information. My central focus was with the permanent employees based at the block office at Jhadol. I also spent time at zonal offices and at SM special events in villages. In addition, I participated in a five-day SM "Foundation Course for Development Professionals."
Because of the highly personal nature of my study, I knew that it would be important to gain the trust of my informants. Most of the information I sought was qualitative in nature, in that I was essentially asking informants for their own analyses of themselves and their situations. Interactions were affected by unfamiliarity, a significant language barrier with some informants, and my (unfortunately) frequent status as observer rather than participant. To ease communication, I developed a questionnaire (Appendix A). My technique of conducting formal interviews remained flexible. I made every attempt to follow the flow of the informantís thoughts, sometimes rearranging questions or improvising as appropriate to follow a train of thought or to ask for elaboration or explanation. Supplemental information was gathered through reading, casual conversations, and considerable discussion with my advisor.
The decision to focus on a sample of individuals in a single block office was made primarily because of the limited amount of time for information gathering. Jhadol is the largest block within Seva Mandir, and my presence there allowed me to meet a diverse group of employees and observe a wide range of operations. The employees who work in the block office represent a good variety of the possible backgrounds and outlooks among the entire workforce, while the limited range of relative hierarchical standing within the organization provided a controlled context for the study. By so limiting the pool of informants, I did neglect two significant groups of SM workers, namely high-ranking executives and village-level paraworkers. Also, the presence of only one woman at Jhadol is not representative of the SM workforce as a whole.
It should be acknowledged that the fact that I am an American placed limitations on my ability to understand of certain aspects of Indian society, viz. educational systems, the job market, and family dynamics. Another potential bias arose from my confusion about my role in the organization, given that my idea of volunteerism that differed markedly from Seva Mandirís reality. Seva Mandir utilizes volunteers for their potential intellectual offerings from the vantage point of interested outsiders rather than merely as helping hands in the manual work of the organization.
An interesting twist that this study took was the result of a frequent misunderstanding of my objectives. My study was not infrequently introduced as focused upon "motivation" and "efficiency." While I initially rebelled against these descriptions, they worked to my advantage, both in the level at which workers opened up to me with their complaints, and because I was essentially asked to come to some conclusions and judgments about Seva Mandir.
Probably the single most detrimental factor to the success of this study was a limitation in time. The project was entered into with the understanding that the best that could be hoped for was an introduction to the pertinent issues of the topic. This is mentioned not as an excuse, but instead as a call for others to explore with more depth the issues I have introduced.
Background Information
Seva Mandir was founded by educator Dr. Mohan Singh Mehta in 1966, and is now the largest rural development organization in the region (Map 1). While SMís originally focused on the objective of increasing the abysmally low education levels (thought then to be the cause of poverty) of the rural inhabitants of the Udaipur district, the organization has gradually adopted a more holistic approach toward alleviating poverty. Among the issues presently addressed by SM are practical issues of infrastructure development and land use, and social concerns focused around the building of capacity for participatory democracy. SMís scope of operation includes 535 villages divided among 6 administrative blocks. The central administrative offices are located in Udaipur City (Overview:3). Employing over 200 full time workers and encompassing such a wide variety of initiatives, Seva Mandir is unlike any grassroots action organization in America.
Udaipur district covers an area of 12,500 square kilometers in southern Rajasthan, amid the Aravalli mountain range. The land has been heavily deforested and much of the cropped area suffers from degradation and lack of irrigation. 2000 was the third consecutive year of severe drought, and many farmers were forced to migrate to nearby cities or mines for seasonal wage labor. Most of the population lives below the poverty line.
Staff Profile
Seva Mandirís block-level staff consists of a team leader and sector in-charges for various fields from forestry and watershed development to health and education, as well as various professionals such as engineers and accountants. The staff based at Jhadol has 17 members.
Different factors that can be used to classify staff members are job title, relative place in the bureaucratic structure, location of employment, age, level of education, duration of service, domicile, gender, and salary (3CP:135-7) The two most important factors with regard to the work atmosphere are age and "professional" or "non-professional" status.
The most common courses of study among my professional informants were humanities at the Bachelorís (or "graduation") level and social work or development studies at the Masterís (or "post-graduation") level. All of my informants fell into the categories of "young professionals" and "established workers," a group among whom occupational status depends upon factors such as experience and longevity with Seva Mandir regardless of professional- or non-professional classification. Each group has its own peculiar traits and concerns, as elaborated below.
Theoretical Background: Issues and Assumptions
This section provides a context or frame of reference for the rest of the paper, exposing some existing assumptions about development work, the societal conditions that inform those assumptions, and providing introduction to some theoretical issues affecting development workers.
In Seva Mandir literature, workforce-composition and worker-motivation issues are discussed in a very realistic and sometimes quite depressing manner, emphasizing the societal obstacles to the work. In the Third Comprehensive Plan it is stated that "[development] is not a career that attracts people nor are the values associated with successful development work considered as being pragmatic and worthwhile" (3CP:30). Former SM chief executive Ajay S. Mehta wrote that some development workers "are undermined in their self-confidence when they canít get jobs commensurate with their expectations and social needs. Most people who work in the field are people of this background. It is only slowly that they discover the value of their own skills and ideas and develop self-esteem in doing development work." (Mehta:10). With Indiaís increasingly competitive professional climate, it is only recently that development has become an acceptable choice for some job seekers.
The fact that social change work is devalued by society underscores the issue of the ideals needed to successfully operate such an NGO. An underlying, and probably correct, assumption is that in order for development (or any type of) work to be successful, the worker must be convinced of its importance and motivated to see that it is done right. Ideally, then, doing development can never be "just a job" to the employee. Does it follow that the best potential employees would be those who have chosen the field from the outset, or are those who have "fallen into the work" equally capable of doing the work to its ultimate potential? It makes sense that those who enter the field deliberately have a longer-standing intellectual investment. However, the accompanying expectations may leave these workers disappointed when faced with the difficulties of implementation. Also, a greater degree of ideological investment, backed with class-taught theory, can lead to significant differences between individuals of different backgrounds within an organization.
Creation and maintenance of ideals and respective views on results and efficiency form the basis of the professional/non-professional partition. Seva Mandir Development Associate Poonam Abbi, in her article "Empowering Civil Society," wrote:
"Modernization, with its premium on expertise, exacerbates this segmentation and centralizes leadership with the professionals. The non-professionals come to the sector with a baggage of insecurity and inadequacy endemic to their socio-economic situation and their entry is more out of necessity than choice. The limited definitions of leadership and efficiency further alienate them and corrode their motivation and sense of self-worth....
There are not many professionals who gravitate towards this sector, and among those who join the rate of turnover is high ... because they aspire for a wider range of experiences and more responsible positions which are accompanied by greater status, remuneration, and knowledge. ... [T]hese two sets of people derive their motivation from different sources (for non-professionals, social association is an important factor, for professionals, visible and recognizable work output is an important factor)..." (Abbi:10-11).
It is clear that "Seva Mandir [is] a middle class formation, consisting of ordinary people with insecurities and dilemmas" (Nayakheda:42). The further recognition that "we [SM] share the social background of those who constitute the structures of dominance and exploitation in our society" (3CP:30) points toward the discrepancy between the development worker and his target population. "[T]here are strong internal contradictions in respect to the agenda of empowering the poor" (Mehta:10). Closely tied to the practice-what-we-preach phenomenon, these act as constant tests of the inculcation of ideals.
Findings and Analysis
A note on my presentation of findings
In this section, I present the backgrounds of various people in Seva Mandir, with the goal of understanding if there are significant background characteristics that lead to an interest in doing development, and once employed, what aspects of the work have an influence on the individual's motivation. This information is arranged not as answers to specific questions but as a compilation of ideas and thoughts.
A key assumption in the phraseology of this paper is that what I speak of as motivating and demotivating factors, as applies to those people already working in development, are the same factors that can lead one to pursue such employment instead of a career in the government or corporate sectors.
My arrangement of different aspects of the work is in the interest of flow and retention of cohesion. This ordering of these factors should be read neither as a hierarchy of relative importance of factors nor as an artificial separation of issues which are in reality quite intertwined. It is important to realize that for different people different aspects are important, and different combinations of interrelated factors determine each person's feelings. In some cases I have tried to explain an individualís internal weighing of these factors.
A note on anonymity: Because of the nature of some comments and the audience for which this paper was originally written, I have chosen to leave all quotes and paraphrases unattributed. In some cases where it may be beneficial to trace the comments of one individual, the informant is referred to by a one-letter pseudonym; i.e., "A," "B," "C," etc. In other cases I have used the horribly impersonal term "informant" for lack of a better word.
Background characteristics
Young Professionals
Young professionals at Seva Mandir come from Indiaís emerging urban middle class. They have grown up with fathers in professional positions, sometimes transferable government jobs. This leads to a cosmopolitanism and economic independence that is unusual for Indians. However, familial and societal expectations can be felt as a detractor from the pursuit of NGO work, as parents tend to expect their children to go on to established, prestigious, and lucrative careers. To many parents of young development professionals, the low social status and income of the development sector as compared to that of civil servants or those working in the corporate sector is damning. Likewise, predictable complications arise when a civil servantís son chooses non-government work. "A" told me that his father always "tried to present the model of a bureaucrat" and consequently he feels that by choosing to pursue a non-government career he cannot live up to his father's expectations.
Another significant effect of an affluent background is the balance between needs and expectations. "A" summarized the situation nicely: because of his background, he expects a certain degree of luxury in life- accommodations, transportation, long-distance telephone calls to remote family, etc. But he does not need to be rich. For him, the income at Seva Mandir is adequate to supply him with his basic requests. However, this points clearly to the discrepancy between the development worker and his target population.
Established Workers
Most of Seva Mandir's employees who are over 30 have spent many years in the organization and are more or less settled and stable in their jobs. Often a feeling of contentment with employment at SM came after a few years' work while concurrently seeking another, often government, job. "E" told me that he now is satisfied because he feels that he is "doing something good for himself and others."
Because of this experience, established workers have a clear understanding of the internal workings of Seva Mandir and of their place and relative power within the organization. Also, among them the level of education is of less importance than practical field knowledge--a sort of knowledge that is highly regarded by their younger co-workers and sometimes rewarded by those who determine promotions. It is important to note that many of the established workers are professionals by merit of diploma as well as experience.
Family considerations often differentiate established workers from young professionals. All of the established workers with whom I spoke are married. While their spouses' knowledge about and reactions to the job are various, and the problems that arise due to some of the factors described below are of constant concern, my informants have reached an acceptable compromise through experience in balancing family and work demands.
Experience within Seva Mandir has taught established workers the harsh realities and difficulties of implementation. This is understood as the opposite of youthful idealism. An understanding of the dynamics of rural politics and of the success or failure of previous intervention efforts is common among these established workers. This understanding comes from a combination of work experience in rural areas, and for many (and notably absent in the group of young professionals), the background of having been raised in a village or on a farm. A significant difficulty with these employees is the propensity to lose motivation when results are often incongruous with the amount of work expended. Conversely, these workers have seen results in the past and want to taste that elation again.
Experiences with Poverty
Some individuals' experiences with and reactions to poverty, in combination with family and community reactions, had a clear effect in their eventual employment in rural development work. Even for those who seem to have wound up at Seva Mandir for lack of any other employment, previous experiences with or reactions to poverty are likely to have some bearing on the individuals' feelings about the work. The exposition of a few specific examples will show these various backgrounds:
"C" remembers a shopkeeper in her urban neighborhood who was diagnosed with cancer at the age of 35. Because of the severity of the illness he had to close his shop. The "hand-to-mouth" economic situation of the family necessitated his children drop out of school and support the family. This drove home to "C" the interrelatedness of issues such as health and education with poverty; if the funds had been available, the shopkeeper could have afforded proper treatment and his children could have continued their education.
"F" remembers a constant conflict between his urban upper-middle-class community and the shanty-dwellers who occupied his neighborhood's footpaths. He remembers the idea of wanting to help poor people to help themselves.
"E," who is from a village, said that he and his family felt pity for the poor but couldn't do anything significant about it because of their own economic situation. He described to me an instance when he was young and working in a stone mine. An older child, an orphan who had no food, asked him for a loan of 150 rupees. The orphan has since gone on to become a civil servant, but still feels indebted to him.
Aspects of Work
Work Atmosphere
-General Characterizations of the Work Atmosphere
One motivating point that was explained to me by almost every informant is what could be described as the general climate of the workplace--usually explained in comparison with the atmosphere of the corporate or government sectors. "Freedom," "informal," and "supportive" are words frequently used to describe Seva Mandirís atmosphere, while "rigidity," "formality," "bureaucracy," "bureaucratic waste," and "paperwork" seem to be peoplesí general impressions of the other sectors. The presence at SM of several people with some experience in the private sector emphasizes the pull of this laid-back approach to work.
Several employees expressed their happiness at the freedom to "work at their own pace," a situation which "A" tied in with a greater emotional and intellectual investment with both the process and the outcomes. However, "A" mentioned that some of SMís steps to formalize the structure of the work environment tend to detract from this freedom. For example, at Jhadol there has been some recent emphasis put on employeesí presence in the office by 10 a.m., which "A" sees as having an effect of "creating a hurdle to workersí creativity," in essence causing an artificial separation of work time from the rest of life--and rendering the off hours a waste of time. "Aís" solution was for each individual to have clearly outlined job responsibilities to be completed at oneís own pace. In my analysis, it is clear that nobody can be expected to be ëoní all the time, and live his work 24 hours a day. But "Aís" suggestion for institutional support of leisurely progress without reasonable guidelines seems counter-efficient; would this necessitate an even more labor-intensive system for the monitoring of employees?
-Bureaucratic Relations within the Block Office
While hierarchies among the different positions within Seva Mandir are understood and respected, the nature of the work at the block office leads to cooperative rather than confrontational or competitive relations. While a bureaucratic structure is in place, there is a fundamental belief in the need for democratic participation of all employees. There is a general understanding that the success of the organization depends on the input of all workers--input which is frequently solicited. All of my informants expressed their occasional frustration about the difficulties of balancing opinions and suggestions among a diversity of personnel, but it seems that employees have much respect for these opinions and the different backgrounds and experiences that have informed them. In fact, I observed a general understanding among most employees that this is the main difference between the internal operations of NGOs and of the government.
Commitment to democratic decision-making can also be a source of much internal strife. A common feature among democratic institutions is a certain inertia, which can lead a worker to complain about the slowness of getting any significant changes done. "A" told me that although there are six or seven meetings per month to discuss suggestions and changes, it is always the same grievances that are brought to the floor.
-Relations Between Headquarters and Field Offices
Relations among workers from the central office in Udaipur and block or zone workers takes on a somewhat more formal flavor. Several block workers expressed their discontent at the frequency of interaction between unit and block workers. Some block workers complained that the relationship is similar to a common perception of government development work: those who have the final word on policy decisions do not have adequate experience in or contact with the field and implementation efforts. Due to this perceived lack of understanding, some block workers felt that too much of the infrequent interaction with Udaipur staff is negative or accusatory.
Another factor of the informal bureaucratic structure within Seva Mandir is some discontent with the process and frequency of evaluations, incentives, promotions, and pay raises, possibly stemming from the lack of a clear understanding of (or existence of?) a formalized procedure for these actions. Similarly, it is easy to see how some ambitious young professionals can become disheartened at how this structure differs from their expectations for professional advancement.
-Composition of the Workforce
A major aspect in the creation of the work atmosphere is the composition of the workforce. Employees tend to have similar priorities, outlooks, and personalities. Traits that are often named are "highly motivated" and "sensitive." Many of my informants mentioned the support of their coworkers as a major motivating factor. Because much of the work is done on a cooperative or team/unit basis, one is rarely left to feel unsupported or that his work is without the backing of the organization. "B" expressed his pleasure at the fact that he knows that if he must leave for a few days, a coworker will pick up his project where he left off. In my analysis, I can see how this could be a minor motivating factor but I could also see the possibility of some disenfranchisement surfacing; when an individualís personal stake in a project is shared, so is his stake in the ownership of the results.
-Working in Rural Areas
For those workers who were raised or educated in metropolitan areas, the adjustment to working in a small town or village can be a barrier. Most of my informants spoke highly of the benefits of working in "the field," for reasons ranging from general happiness to the accumulation of experience and understanding that will be critical in the attainment of career goals. One young professional who had previously worked as a corporate civil engineer described emphatically his pleasure at the challenges of working in desolate rural areas... where the jeep cannot go, take the motorcycle; where the motorcycle will not reach, approach on foot.
Another issue of working in the field is the makeup of the population for whom Seva Mandir is working--a population that is diverse in itself but generally somewhat foreign to the previous experience of many of Seva Mandirís block-level workers. Some of my informants expressed enthusiasm for the opportunity to gain insight into the ways of life and community relations among rural residents, or just to find out "who rural people are" ("C"). A common lamentation is the frustration of trying to change societies and traditions that have hundreds of years of grounding in local politics.
-Living in Rural Areas
One issue of working in rural development is the physical location not only of the workplace but also of the residence. The Jhadol team is composed of a mixture of Jhadol permanent residents, people who keep homes in Jhadol and Udaipur, and a few who commute daily. It is clear that the issue of continuity of work is a consideration among both the Jhadol team and those who have the authority to ask an employee to change his residence. This has been requested of some workers, and met with varying degrees of enthusiasm.
It is my observation that for some young professionals holding two residences has a positive effect in attitudes. For instance, young professionals who stay in Udaipur on the weekend are able to keep a comfortable tie to their urban roots and reinvigorate themselves for the coming week. "A" told me that initially staying in the villages was challenging, but now if he is in Udaipur for four or five days he starts missing the village. In the village, he is more approachable to people. The nature of the work requires him to be close.
However, several of the established employees with whom I spoke expressed some dissatisfaction with the separation from their spouses and children. "D" spoke at length about his decision to ask his wife and children to remain in Udaipur, citing the quality of the schools for the children and the comfort of city life for his wife as the main reasons. If they were to live in Jhadol, they would see him only a little more frequently, as he spends many nights in villages. In my analysis, this once again brings to the table the issue of the discrepancies between the development worker and his target population. In this case, "D" has made the practical rather than ideological decision.
It is important to keep in mind that my informants are people who have successfully adapted. I cannot speak for the number of people for whom the adjustment to village life has been detrimental to the future of their work. However, the relatively low importance of these previous two aspects did surprise me. That said, I would not be surprised to find that these aspects played a greater role in the eventual departure of those who had greater problems in personal adaptation.
-Career-building Experience
Many of the young professionals view their employment at Seva Mandir as an experience-gathering step in the building of a career. Most of these individuals do not have a specific goal or ultimate job, but clearly see Seva Mandir as a stepping stone toward greater things. This attitude has understood but hard-to-quantify effects on the work that is done and the general atmosphere of the workplace. An initial issue to address is how to coalesce people of different motivations around the central objectives of the organization--a process which Seva Mandir seeks to accomplish through a combination of routine planning meetings, occasional training sessions or retreats, and other formal and informal venues for the discussion of problems and voicing of suggestions.
A significant aspect of Seva Mandir's work that is valuable to those with upwardly-mobile aspirations is the practical experience of implementation. For many, working in the field with Seva Mandir is a chance to apply theories that they have learned in school, effectively putting them to the test. Again, the preparedness of today's policy-makers comes into question. For some with aspirations to be tomorrow's policy-makers, they feel this experience will put them more in touch with the realities of the field.
Another issue affecting individuals' motivation levels is the breakdown of their work responsibilities. Some Seva Mandir employees are very focused on field work and interaction with the people they are working for, while others are more inclined toward administrative and office-type work. Most of my informants are kept engaged, if not fully invested, in the challenges of the type of work they do not particularly favor. For instance, "D" is perpetually frustrated at the difficulty of coordinating so many people with different reasons for involvement and speeds of work. But the challenge keeps him thinking and experimenting with new approaches. This issue becomes particularly tricky when asking employees to talk about their career objectives: in the instance of "F," his career objectives involve attaining a position that consists mostly of administrative work (and the accompanying authority), the type of work he claims to detest. Among my informants, this perennial confusion seems to be a source of motivation rather than stagnation--it keeps an emotional investment in the work and the desire to keep the work situation changing and new. Dissatisfaction results when the powers that be in the organization stifle the possibilities of a change in scenario ("G").
-"Self-Actualization"
This is the most descriptive term that I was told to describe the personal growth that is for many a significant factor in their motivation to do development work. Most of my informants described their adult lives as a process of ideological growth, clarification, and often confusion. As each new phase comes, be it education level or employment, the things that one deems important for personal fulfillment change. Two specific examples illustrate the variety of backgrounds:
"B" began his graduation course in commerce with the intention of eventually teaching children. After teaching Class XI and XII for one year, he decided to study for a post-graduate diploma part time, along the way picking up and following an interest in law to a degree in that field as well. Upon completion of these courses, he found himself doing freelance legal work for a dairy cooperative, at which point he followed a lead into a college-level business law professorial post. While experimenting with pedagogical and curriculum changes in his professional capacity, he developed a personal interest in environmental issues. Through discussion with colleagues he eventually was led to explorations into the development field, and when he heard of the chance to prepare a manual for the training of grassroots workers for environmental issues, he entered the NGO sector. His process has been one of continual exploration, professional networking, and pursuit of employment commensurate with personal interests.
"D" came from a village, and was determined to work for the welfare of his own community instead of pursuing work in an urban setting like many other educated villagers. Immediately upon completion of his graduation he ran for sarpanch (head of the rural government body), a position he pursued not because he wanted to be a politician but because it is a position from which he knew he could have significant influence. He was defeated, but soon found Seva Mandir and became sure that it was better than the sarpanch position; it was an opportunity to provide service without politics. His tenure with SM involved ten years in a single village--a post from which he had to fight being transferred. His dedication to the village and investment of such time made the village one of SM's largest success stories. His subsequent two years spent at the Udaipur office were great for his family, but his professional drive eventually took precedence and led him to a block coordinator position.
-Seeing Results
The nature and speed of results are the most significant divergence between individuals' expectations for development work and the realities thereof. Within Seva Mandir, significant emphasis is put on the deliberation of what those results should be and how to go about achieving them, but in reality changes are so slow in coming, and often so subtle, that it is easy for workers to become disheartened. This plays at the same time contradictory roles in the extended employment of individuals.
The day-to-day activities of Seva Mandir are conducted with the objective of fomenting change over time. Because of the slowness of visible changes to emerge, other factors become more important in each individual's satisfaction with the daily work, sometimes causing the ultimate goal to be hidden in the process. When an employee does think about the goal's failure to appear, and re-appraises all the work that has been done, disappointment is likely to occur. However, when some visible changes are evident, their long time (and hard work) in coming makes the success that much sweeter.
-Income
While income levels vary widely and the importance of income carries a different weight among my informants, most people at Seva Mandir have a realistic attitude about income and the potential for changes therein. The NGO sector is known to pay very little compared to corporations and the government. Seva Mandir is known to pay well among NGOs, but "A" told me that even if he climbed to the top of SM he would not be making as much as his friends modestly placed in the corporate world.
Behind any discussion of income in NGOs lie aspects such as efficiency of institutional expenditure, accountability to the population served and to funding agencies, and the consideration of the discrepancy between the development worker and his target population. However, I was disturbed to hear these issues rarely spoken of (never is too strong a word; my Hindi is minimal and English is sparse in Rajasthan). Likewise disturbing was the discussion about corruption and its incidence at Seva Mandir. This discussion was prevalent enough to make me know that the issue is on people's minds, but the tone of it was rather guarded. I got the impression that people's comments were a reflection of their wanting me to have a good impression of the organization. For instance, I heard from multiple informants, and once in depth, about a specific block worker who "left" and how that affected peopleís work, but it wasn't until later that I found out he had been forced to leave upon discovery of his embezzlement of Seva Mandir funds.
-Seva Mandirís Reputation
Many employees expressed pride in the fact of Seva Mandir's reputation in the Udaipur area and the development sector. For those interested primarily in building a resume, Seva Mandir is a recognizable name with an established presence in a field filled with less-proven organizations (and concurrently, SM pays higher salaries than most other NGOs). Many of my informants expressed pleasure at SM's history of 30-plus years of experience in the field. For those with dedication to SM, this experience means security and permanence. Along with this history come some charismatic individuals within the organization's founding family. The founder's son, Jagat S. Mehta, presided over the final day of the "Foundation Course for Development Professionals," and the following day visited and congratulated all of the Udaipur-based employees--an occurrence which "B" found particularly inspiring. Likewise, "D" is inspired that when the founder's grandson, Ajay S. Mehta, was Chief Executive of Seva Mandir, he told "D" that he wanted to come to the field and work beside him.
Conclusion
The workforce of Seva Mandir at the Jhadol block office is composed of young professionals and established workers, each group having particular characteristics. The interaction between these groups of employees has effects on workers' attitudes toward the work and the work environment, and on the process of doing the work. Some employees have made a conscious decision to pursue a career in rural development, sometimes specifically at the grassroots NGO level, while some employees have ended up at SM by chance and/or necessity. A common characteristic among all employees is some level of intellectual and emotional dedication to the cause of rural development, entailing sensitivity to poverty and the motivation to be a part of the remedy thereof. Those who are most highly motivated derive their motivation mostly from their ideals, which are built primarily through the work itself, but also on past experiences, environment, and education. Issues that affect this motivation include the opinions, desires, and needs of people close to them, aspects of the work environment, and especially goals for career improvement and self-actualization.
Unfortunately, I was unable to get the sort of individuals' analyses of their own pasts that I expected as pertains to the construction of ideals. This may be more a factor of my expectations than the availability of data. The most obvious reason for this, which I discovered through a few frank quotes and a gradually-built understanding of the situation of the workforce in India, is that for most people at Seva Mandir the necessity of employment minimizes the level of choice involved in the pursuit of a career (compared to my American frame of reference). This is true especially for the established workers, but also for the young professionals, who often chose their subjects of study based on the availability of jobs for professionals with degrees in the field. Because of the booming job market for development professionals in India, the NGO field has significant need and supplies ample opportunity for these graduates.
I found that few people view their employment at Seva Mandir as "just a job." This points to SM's success in the process of developing ideals in its workers. The differences between professionals and non-professionals seem to be an accepted evil of the work. However, steps taken to make the established workers and non-professionals feel valued are often insufficient. The organizational emphasis on pleasing and (usually unsuccessfully) retaining professionals, through remuneration and other more subtle means, has an effect of disenfranchising many established workers and non-professionals.
While this paper has successfully identified some traits of employees in the rural development field, the level at which it has succeeded in its goal of really analyzing the ideals and internal inspirations of employees is relatively superficial. Further study needs to be conducted with a wider variety of individuals, especially at the two extremes of the range of relative power within the sector; i.e., upper management and village-level paraworkers. The ideal analyst would have experience in the fields of psychology and human resources.
This paper comes out looking like a philosophical exercise of classification. Please do not take it as such. The style of a formal paper has an impersonal quality as one of its inherent limitations. Please read between the lines my enthusiasm about the work being done at Seva Mandir, about the cause of rural development, and especially about the people involved. And appreciate my belief in the value of the process of self-understanding, and the beauty of the confusion inherent in the human condition. Does even the person with the firmest ideals most passionately pursued understand himself completely? Understood or not, may there be countless more like him!
References
Abbi, Poonam. "Empowering Civil Society."
Seva Mandir, Udaipur, 199?.
An Overview, Seva Mandir, Udaipur, 2000.
Annual Report, Seva Mandir, Udaipur, 1999.
Informants Numbers 1-8. Seva Mandir employees.
Udaipur and Jhadol, 26-30 Nov, 2000.
Mehta, Ajay S. "The Micro Politics of Development:
An Anatomy of Change in Two Villages." Seva Mandir, Udaipur,
199?.
"Nayakheda: A Study of Inpact of Social Capital and Contextual
Factors on Success of Development Interventions." Seva Mandir,
Udaipur, 199?.
Third Comprehensive Plan, Seva Mandir, Udaipur, 1999.
(in text: 3CP)
Appendix A: Questionnaire