Future of INGOs | Part 1: the INGO operating system needs an overhaul after four versions.

Positive Minds | Positive Stories | Edition 033

After four iterations of their operating system, INGOs have progressively moved from an era of opacity and total power control to an era of transparency and progressive power shift. However, the path to achieving the balance of power between the "Global North" and the "Global South" or between aid providers and aid clients is still long and bumpy. But it is an irreversible path.

The 5 versions of the INGO transformational journey

I have been working in international development and humanitarianism since I graduated from university almost 30 years ago; in other words, all my adult life. During these years, I have experienced four major versions of INGOs ‘operating system’; the fifth is in the making. And yet the system is still not fit for purpose.

Version 1: the era of white saviours with unlimited powers

They were known as "overseas expatriates". They held virtually all senior management and key staff positions, including in remote field offices. It was a clear signal to the ambitious young engineer I was back then that these positions were the apple in the Garden of Eden. Unless you had fallen under the influence of Satan, it was forbidden to eat it, even in your dreams. It could not be otherwise. I had three handicaps, perceived or real. I was black; therefore, not trustworthy. I had studied at an African university; therefore, not competent enough. I did not have grey hair; therefore, not wise enough. Sadly, these perceptions still exist today. So, habits die hard.

In those days, the words of these "overseas expatriates" were the gospel, and their behaviour was the golden standard to be replicated by everyone, all the time and everywhere.

They decided which projects to fund, where, when, for whom, and the budget to allocate. For them, internal controls were a luxury not to be bothered with; audits were a rare commodity.

Then financial scandals rocked the industry, forcing it to change its hardware and operating system. The glory days of the trustworthy white saviours were on the wane.

Version 2: the era of financial accountability and operational rigour

In the fall of 2010, USAID suspended the Academy for Educational Development (AED), one of its largest subcontractors, for mismanagement of funds. AED was dissolved, sold its assets, and transferred its programmes to FHI, which has since been rebranded as FHI360. After the AED scandal, USAID tightened its policies and procedures for disbursing funds and moved to results-based payments. Other donors followed suit.

Under pressure from their donors and their boards, INGOs established internal audits and anti-fraud & anti-corruption departments, all-powerful watchdogs. They started using the services of accounting firms, mainly the big four (Ernst & Young, Deloitte, KPMG, and PricewaterhouseCoopers - PwC), to certify their financial statements. Nowadays, not having your financial statements certified by an accounting firm is a death sentence.

Focused on results, financial stability, and transparency, INGOs have failed to address the organisational culture inherited from white saviours: vertical, toxic, abusive, and colonial, with a division of roles between two worlds.

On the one hand, the "Global North": those who have the money and power and give orders. On the other hand, the "Global South":  those who are poor and powerless and must carry out the orders.

The #MeToo movement has changed the game and challenged INGOs to rethink their ways of working and business models.

Version 3: the era of human-centred development activism

When social activist and community facilitator Tarana Burke launched the #MeToo movement in 2006, no one could have expected the global shockwave it would create ten years later. With her #MeToo tweet in October 2017, Alyssa Milano made the movement global. Film director Harvey Weinstein was among the first powerful men to be brought to his knees by #MeToo. Since then, #MeToo has brought down hundreds of other powerful men and brought their businesses to the brink of bankruptcy.

The INGOs were delighted to see the movement gaining momentum and applauded from afar. After all, they had been campaigning against sexual harassment and abuse for years, albeit with little success. As self-proclaimed do-gooders, they were too busy looking outwards and pointing fingers at others, forgetting the most crucial thing: looking in the mirror.

That changed on 9 February 2018, when the British newspaper The Times ran a front-page story under the headline: 'Oxfam staff paid [earthquake] survivors in Haiti for sex'. The #MeToo shockwave had finally and inevitably landed in the do-gooders' backyard, hitting them hard. Oxfam was on the front line and absorbed most of the shock. INGOs were ill-prepared and panicked. Their uncoordinated and self-protective strategies backfired quickly and deeply. As in the business world, many members of their senior leadership teams have been forced to step down.

Thanks to #MeToo, all major INGOs now have whole and well-resourced safeguarding departments and have adopted a survivor-centred approach pioneered by Oxfam.

As they recover from the shockwaves of #MeToo and its aftershocks, INGOs have been hit hard by the #BlackLivesMatter storm. They quickly realised that their operating systems were exposed to internal and external attacks, requiring a major upgrade.

Version 4: The era of Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (DEI)

#BlackLivesMatter or BLM was founded in 2013 in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin's murderer in the US. But it gained momentum and became a global movement after the agonising and indifferent murder of George Floyd by a white police officer on 25 May 2020. Floyd's murder was the straw that broke the camel's back. The BLM outcry went global, and the shockwaves shook the foundations of the major INGOs. They were criticised, including and primarily by their own people, for not being diverse and inclusive enough; and sustaining white supremacy and other systemic discriminations.

In response to #BlackLivesMatter, most INGOs developed DEI strategies, policies, and procedures. They created DEI departments to carry the organisational agenda on the issue. Some made high-profile appointments of so-called ethnic minorities to their senior leadership teams and boards.

These efforts are commendable; however, they fail to address the structural and systemic challenges created by organisational culture.

A profound shift is required. It has a very fashionable name: the decolonisation of aid. I am not a big fan of this terminology. It reminds me of Africa's painful past (Refer to my LinkedIn post). I will call it shifting the power from "Global North" to "Global South"; two terms I don’t like either. They reinforce the era of neo-colonialism. But to make myself understood, I adopt them; for now.

The ship of change is leaving the dock with free and spacious seats for INGOs. The ticket to travel is called "shifting the power".

Stay tuned for part 2 of this blog. It will cover version 5 of INGOs in the making: the era of shifting the power [from "Global North" to "Global South"). I will talk about the five hard choices INGOs must make to shift power and remain relevant in environments where their legitimacy and credibility are more than ever challenged.

Did I miss or distort an era or version of INGOs? I am interested in your views and opinions. The debate is now open.