HR and Capacity Issues within NGOs - Report of study (PHF) June 2008

Report of a study on

Human Resources and Capacity Issues within NGOs in India

for Paul Hamlyn Foundation, UK

R V [email protected]

+91 94475 94765

June 2008

Human resources and capacity issues within NGOs

Table of contents

1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................41.1 Methodology....................................................................................................................41.2 A note on the survey of NGOs.........................................................................................4

2 Changes in the NGO context and implications on HR............................................................62.1 Growth in the NGO sector...............................................................................................62.2 Changing environment of NGO work..............................................................................8

3 Changes in the HR profile of NGOs.....................................................................................113.1 Change in staff composition...........................................................................................113.2 Organisational preferences for recruitment ...................................................................133.3 Retention of staff............................................................................................................133.4 Career growth in organisations......................................................................................153.5 Human Resource challenges before the NGO sector – opinions and perceptions.........163.6 Systemic challenges of NGOs affecting HR..................................................................17

4 Capacity building of NGO staff............................................................................................194.1 Data from the study........................................................................................................194.2 Capacity building Needs of NGOs.................................................................................204.3 Perceptions of challenges in capacity building..............................................................21

5 The ways forward..................................................................................................................216 What needs to be done?.........................................................................................................23

6.1 What individual organisations could do.........................................................................236.2 What organisations could do jointly...............................................................................236.3 What donors could do....................................................................................................246.4 What training institutions could do................................................................................24

June 2008 2


List of tables

Table 1 Profile of sample organisations...................................................................................5Table 2 Financial size of organisations....................................................................................6Table 3 Sectoral spread of organisations..................................................................................7Table 4 Staff size of organisations...........................................................................................7Table 5 Growth in staff size.....................................................................................................8Table 6 Distribution of staff by educational qualification.....................................................11Table 7 Distribution of staff by educational qualification - Rural.........................................11Table 8 Distribution of staff by educational qualification - Urban........................................11Table 9 Change in staff strength by educational category.....................................................12Table 10 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Rural focused organisations.....12Table 11 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Urban focused organisations....12Table 12 Preference for sources to recruit people....................................................................13Table 13 Proportion of staff by educational qualification continuing from 1995 to 2007.......13Table 14 Retention of Staff between 1995 and 2007 by educational category........................14Table 15 Proportion of those continuing since 1995 in total staff in 2007 .............................14Table 16 Reasons for people leaving as % of positive responses recorded.............................14Table 17 Proportion of senior staff to total staff......................................................................15Table 18 Proportion of senior staff started career in the organisation itself............................15Table 19 Reasons for promotion to senior positions................................................................16Table 20 Work Experience profile of senior positions.............................................................16Table 21 Benefits to organisations from capacity building of staff.........................................20Table 22 Who pays for staff capacity building?.......................................................................20Table 23 Capacity Building Needs...........................................................................................20Table 24 Limitations of the existing service provision by institutions....................................21

June 2008 3


1 Introduction

This report documents a study of human resources and capacity issues within NGOs. The study was initiated by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, UK (PHF) in January 2008 in response to the concerns raised by its partner organisations in attracting and retaining ‘good’ people. Based on this PHF identified five key questions related to the human resource situation within NGOs in India:• To what extent, and in what way, have human resources needs changed for NGOs over the

past few years?• Who are the people that NGOs would like to attract? Why? Which institutions do they

come from? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in joining the development sector? What can be done to address these?

• Who are the people that NGOs would like to retain in the medium/long term for senior management roles? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in achieving their ambitions and potential from within the NGO sector? What can be done to address these?

• What are the institutional resources available for educating and training entry and middle level people in the NGO sector to meet future requirements? Are there gaps? What can be done to address these?

• Is there a role for PHF, given its mandate and resources, to work towards addressing the problem of human resources (if there is one) within its partners in particular and within the NGO sector in general in a meaningful way?

1.1 Methodology

The study incorporated a broad spectrum of inputs from across grassroots NGOs, donor representatives, and people associated with NGOs with its focus on understanding both the objective and subjective facets affecting human resource and capacity issues of NGOs, and combined the enquiry with both quantitative and qualitative methods. A questionnaire schedule was administered to selected NGOs to collect data. This was complemented by recording the perceptions on the concerned issues from NGOs through open ended interviews. Personal conversations through visits, telephone and email discussions were carried out with select key informants with a check-list of questions. Relevant literature was also surveyed.

1.2 A note on the survey of NGOs

The survey was carried out through a questionnaire schedule sent to a select sample of organisations. Most of those selected were partner organisations of PHF. A few organisations who were not PHF partners were also contacted in order to draw a broader as well as comparative picture. A total of 27 organisations responded to the schedule, 24 of which were PHF partners.

For parameters where temporal comparison (then and now) was required, 1995 and 2007 were selected as the reference points. The reference point for ‘then’ was fixed at 1995 considering the fact that it was sufficiently old to facilitate meaningful comparison, at the same time not so long in the past that meaningful data would not be available. With some significant changes in the NGO sector having come about in the 1990’s, it was felt that 1995

June 2008 4


as the reference point would lead to inputs facilitating meaningful comparison. 2007 was the reference year for ‘now’.

Table 1 Profile of sample organisationsNumber of participating organisations 27Single-State focussed organisations 17Organisations working in more than one State 10Organisations with Rural focus 20Organisations with Urban Focus 7Organisations with focus on one work sector 8Organisations with multi-sectoral focus 19Organisations operating commercial activities 11

Comparing the organisations in terms of the geographical spread of work, 17 organisations focused their work in one State. Three worked in two States, two in five states, and one each in three, four, six, nine and twelve States.

Twenty of the sample organisations focused their work on rural areas. A majority of the organisations worked in multiple sectors. Less than half of the sample organisations carried out any commercial (income generating) activity.

Chart 1 Distribution of organisations according to their age

Less than 12 years old

26%

21 to 30 years old15%

More than 30 years old

19%

13 to 20 years old

40%

A quarter of the sample organisations were established after 1995, while a third dated back to before 1987. Thus the sample provides a fair representation of the sector in terms of age of organisations. The youngest of the lot was 6 years old and the oldest 56.

June 2008 5


2 Changes in the NGO context and implications on HR

Available literature and people consulted suggest that there have been several changes in the context in which NGOs operate. These are elaborated at a later stage. In the changing context, the general trend is that NGOs, particularly the ones at the implementing end have grown substantially in size and complexity.

2.1 Growth in the NGO sector

The survey of NGOs tried to understand how NGOs have grown in size. Three parameters were used to identify growth trends:• Financial size, indicated by annual expenditure figures• Work spread, indicated by sectors which the organisations work in• Staff strength

2.1.1 Growth in expenditure

Table 2 Financial size of organisations1995 (N=24) 2007 (N=27)

Number Percentage Number PercentageLess than Rs.1 million 18 69 2 7Between 1 and 5 millions 3 12 5 19Between 5 and 10 million 1 4 3 11Between 10 and 100 million 3 12 14 52More than 100 million 1 4 3 11

(N=Number of organisations reporting)

• The large proportion of organisations (69 percent of the sample) with annual expenditure less than Rs.1 million in 1995 has to be seen in conjunction with age of these organisations.

• There were 6 organisations that reported expenditure below Rs.100,000 in 1995. Five of them were established between 1992 and 1995.

• Four organisations that reported expenditure above Rs.10 million in 1995 had already completed more than 20 years of existence.

• In 2007 63 percent of the sample reported expenditure in excess of Rs.10 million, tilting the scale in the opposite direction, as compared to 1995. Only two organisations reported expenditure below Rs.1 million in 2007.

• However, the minimum reported by any organisation was 44 times the minimum reported in 1995. After accounting for a halving in the real value of the Rupee (Consumer Price Index for 1995-96 was 295 while in 2006-7 it was 593, RBI sources), this represents an increase by twenty times.

• Maximum expenditure reported was Rs.240 million in 1995 and Rs.1.65 billion in 2007.

Examining the rate of growth in expenditure of organisations between 1995 and 2007, it emerges that more than half of the sample organisations (14 out of 24) experienced growth of more than ten times. Between rural and urban focused organisations, urban organisations have grown more than their rural counterparts. 83 percent of urban organisations reported growth more than five times, while the corresponding proportion for rural organisations is only 62%.

June 2008 6


2.1.2 Growth in work diversity

The questionnaire schedule had a list of 9 work sectors that respondents were asked to choose from, as relevant to their organisations. They could also add up to three areas that were not listed. The nine listed sectors covered almost all key areas of development work. Two areas that the list did not have and came to be indicated as important were advocacy and capacity building.

Table 3 Sectoral spread of organisations1995 (N=27) 2007 (N=27)

Number Percentage Number PercentageOne sector 1 4 0 0Two sectors 4 15 1 4Three to five sectors 14 52 7 26Six to ten sectors 8 30 18 67Twelve sectors 0 0 1 4


• About a fifth of the organisations reported working in one or two sectors in 1995• In 2007 the proportion of organisations working in two sectors or less was down to one

out of 27. • More than two-thirds of the organisations reported working in more than 6 sectors,

indicating the very wide spread in terms of activity areas.• Micro Finance is one sector where the largest number of organisation diversified into. In

1995 eight organisations reported to have work in micro-finance; in 2007 the corresponding number was 16.

• Similar growth was also reported in Health - 12 in 1995 to 20 in 2007, and in Livelihoods - 14 in 1995 and 22 in 2007.

Analysis of the changes in work spread, present the following results.• Two organisations reduced their work spread• Five organisations reported no change• About two-thirds of the organisations (of the sample of 27) increased their work spread by

more than two sectors.

2.1.3 Growth in staff strength

Table 4 Staff size of organisations1995 (N=25) 2007 (N=27)

Number Percentage Number Percentage Less than 10 15 58 1 4Between 11 and 50 5 19 8 30Between 51 and 100 1 4 8 30Between 101 and 500 4 15 8 30More than 500 1 4 2 7


• In 1995 more than three-fourth of the organisations reported staff strength below 50.• By 2007 the proportion of such organisations had come down to 34%. • The proportion of organisations with more than 100 staff members almost doubled during

the same period.

June 2008 7


Table 5 Growth in staff size(N=25) Percentage

Reduced 2 8Less than two times increase 5 20Up to five times increase 5 20Five to ten times increase 8 32More than ten times increase 5 20


• 20 out of 27 organisations reported doubling or more of staff between 1995 and 2007. • In absolute numbers, the 27 sample organisations employed 1903 persons in 1995, this

number increased to 4593 in 2007. • Effectively, the number of persons employed by the sample organisations as a whole grew

two-and-half times in twelve years.

The survey also attempted to compare changes in gender composition of NGO staff.

Chart 2 Change in Proportion of Female Staff to Total: 1995 and 2007

65

8

3

7

10 10

00

2

4

6

8

10

12

Less than 25% Between 26% and50%

Between 51% and99%

All staff arewomen

Proportion of women in total s taff

Num

ber o

f org

anis

atio

ns

19952007

While in 1995 some organisations were staffed entirely by women, none were in 2007.The proportion of organisations that had less than one-fourth of its staff as women was not different during the two reference years, roughly a quarter of the organisations.

Overall, the proportion of women in staff reduced from 40 percent in 1995 to 35 percent in 2007, among the total staff of the sample organisations. • 12 of the 22 organisation with relevant data reported drop in proportion, with five of them

reporting more than 25 percent drop, while 10 reported increase in the proportion of women staff.

2.2 Changing environment of NGO work

Literature abounds with analysis of the rapid changes that have taken place in the context of NGO work. Fowler (2004) lists four sets of areas affecting the working of NGOs.

June 2008 8


• The first set is to be found in a general predominance of goal-based poverty reduction as the objective for international aid, thereby focusing and ‘harmonizing’ NGO work with that of official aid.

• Another cluster of external forces stem from concerns about legitimacy and accountability that place stricter demands on the way that NGOs are governed and retain public trust. Responding to these demands will require a much better ability to demonstrate performance.

• Relationships are a third source of pressure for change. Here, two trends are particularly noticeable. One is the drive to form complex ‘partnerships’ that combine NGOs (of the North and South), government and businesses. Another is the displacement of NGOs as agents of structural change by member-based activist and other civic entities.

• Fourth, NGOs face major changes in terms of raising money for their work. Common sense suggests a strategy of financial diversification, but strategic choices to ensure resource continuity may not be straightforward.

The study also sensed similar perceptions among NGO stakeholders. Questions about the role and relevance of NGOs have been asked in the public domain for several years, but increasingly within and by NGOs themselves.

Diversity - Complicating matters is the heterogeneous spectrum of organisations occupying the space of NGOs and their myriad functions, ranging from grassroots based activist groups, community based organisations, service delivery organisations (providing economic, health, education services, etc.), donor agencies, micro credit institutions, agencies promoting livelihood strategies, organisations engaged in capacity building, advocacy, etc.

Competition - The environment in which NGOs operate has seen large scale changes, and NGOs can no more claim to occupy a niche in what they do. Occupying the development space today are bigger players including the Government and Corporate organisations, which have their own interpretation of the context and what needs to be done. The conjecture is that large scale changes will require new ways of working. This places significant demands on the development orientation of NGOs and in the processes and systems they work by.

Historically, NGOs in India have kept themselves away from the influences of the larger socio-political-economic frameworks. They were meant to influence these frameworks in what was considered to be 'one-way traffic'. The reality has changed substantially and NGOs find that the nature of their work is increasingly determined by the external environment. There is also a tendency within the sector and outside to label and define action as service delivery, welfare orientated, rights based, public-private partnership, etc. Amid all the ambiguity and conjecture, it is important for NGOs to make sense of the changing environment and state the choices for action and the principles that guide them.

Scale/impact - While there is the grudging recognition of contributions made by NGOs in localized contexts, the concern is that there has been no significant dent in absolute poverty. The claim of NGOs to be agents of social change is widely questioned, as not all are positioned to do so. NGOs play out a range of roles as collaborator, contractor, watch-dog and at times antagonistic to the state and/ or market. It is harder for NGOs today to sustain

June 2008 9


claims that “they know better” or that “processes are more important than results”. The onus is on showing demonstrable impact in an effective and efficient manner.

Resources - New age donors appear to value market oriented, business perspectives to development, contrasted with the development perspective that NGOs claim to champion. The reality also is that while there is evidently a lot of money to be spent, there are limited ideas to what can be done. At the same time there is very little that is untested, new or innovative that is being proposed to tackle fundamental problems of poverty and under development.

2.2.1 Implications of changing environment on human resources of NGOs

In the changing environment, a vital ingredient of NGOs, human resource, is significantly affected. The job market has changed dramatically in recent decades. Options and opportunities have exploded making choice complex and difficult. Aggressively consumerist lifestyles continuously fuel aspirations and needs of people. With the arena expanding thus, working in development is also often equated with another option for employment rather than being based on any ideological or value driven commitment. Very often it is the last resort, or at best a stop gap arrangement before a better opportunity works out.

Opportunities for working in development have increased manifold in the past decades. Corporate and para-statal organisations engaged in development have a high demand for people with a wide range of education qualification and skills. For NGOs this has meant that they are often not able to attract and retain the best of talent as they are priced out by the competition. While earlier it was largely people with higher qualifications seeking better options, there is greater movement today across ranks. NGOs have tried to nurture local catchments, but even this is becoming difficult as aspirations even among local sources have changed towards further objective advancement. Grappling with issues of recruitment and retention, there is a widespread feeling that NGOs are saddled with mediocre talent.

The changing demands on and expectations from NGOs have meant that new skills are needed, especially in how information is collected, analysed and used. There is a greater expectation on NGOs to professionalize, to demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness, sustainability, scalability, and the ability to generate and manage large, complex investments.

A more subtle and fundamental change is being witnessed in the leadership of NGOs. Displacing and at times complementing the champions of non government development action who emerged in the 80s and 90s, many of whom came from urban middle class backgrounds, is the growing local leadership, often representing constituencies that were the focus of benefits of development processes. While being locally rooted and with an acute awareness of the changes in the development context they face significant challenges in articulation, and are inhibited by the limited exposure they have had to other contexts. The changing leadership also faces a challenge in its ability to inspire, motivate and champion causes in the way an earlier generation of leaders were able to.

June 2008 10


3 Changes in the HR profile of NGOs

The increasing diversity in work of NGOs and complexities of the context have led to substantial changes in type of people working in NGOs. It is worthwhile to understand how these changes manifest and what their implications are. The issues examined include: • Changes in the composition of staff over time across different categories of staff• Preferences of NGOs in recruitment of personnel• Retention of staff• Factors related to promotion of staff to senior positions

Attempt has been made to understand both the objective, data-supported aspects and more subjective matters related to perception of various stakeholders. Educational background is probably one of the better parameters to reflect staff profile from an objective viewpoint. The interactions with other stakeholders have focussed on inputs related to other characteristics, albeit from a subjective point of view.

3.1 Change in staff composition

The survey used six categories of staff based on their educational qualification - not schooled, those with some schooling, those who completed schooling (10th/12th), graduates, post graduates and staff with professional education. Data was collected on composition of staff in 1995 and 2007 and compared between these two years.

Table 6 Distribution of staff by educational qualification 1995

(N=1903)2007

(N=4593)Not schooled 5% 2%Some schooling 33% 12%Schooling completed 20% 32%Graduate 25% 31%Post Graduate 10% 16%Professional 7% 7%

(N=Total number of staff with respondent NGOs)

• Proportion of those who completed schooling, graduates and post graduates increased among NGO staff, while proportion of those with some schooling went down two-thirds.

• Notably, the proportion of total staff with professional education has not changed. • Analysis was also done separately for organisations focusing on rural and urban sectors

with the following results:

Table 7 Distribution of staff by educational qualification - Rural

1995 (N=1579)

2007 (N=3811)

Not schooled 1% 2%Some schooling 26% 8%Schooling completed 23% 34%Graduate 31% 31%Post Graduate 12% 18%Professional 7% 7%(N=Total number of staff with respondent NGOs)

Table 8 Distribution of staff by educational qualification - Urban

1995 (N=324)

2007 (N=782)

Not schooled 18% 7%Some schooling 54% 32%Schooling completed 11% 19%Graduate 8% 29%Post Graduate 4% 7%Professional 5% 6%(N=Total number of staff with respondent NGOs)

June 2008 11


This analysis is important as the location of work has implications on who NGOs can recruit or retain. In both groups of organisations, the proportion of staff with graduation or more increased, and that of staff with only school education came down. Among rural organisations the ratio between staff with only schooling and staff with higher education changed from 50:50 in 1995 to 44:56 in 2007. Similar ratio for urban organisations was 83:17 in 1995 and 68:32 in 2007. This reflects the difficulty NGOs face in getting people with higher education, especially in urban areas where options and opportunities are wider.

3.1.1 Change patterns across different educational categories

The changes in staff strength by educational categories across organisations were analysed.

Table 9 Change in staff strength by educational categorySome

Schooling(N=15)

School completed

(N=20)

Graduate

(N=26)

Post Graduate

(N=24)

Professionals

(N=23)Reduced share 33% 29% 23% 32% 52%Increased share by up to 20% 47% 52% 50% 56% 39%Increased share between 21% and 50% 13% 10% 23% 12% 4%Increased share by more than 51% 7% 10% 4% 0% 4%


• Graduates are the most common category of staff across organisations, with all 26 organisations which reported relevant data having graduates as staff members.

• It is also this group that showed the least amount of reduction, with only 23% of the organisations reporting reduction in proportion of graduates in their rolls.

• The proportion of reduction was the highest for those with professional education, 12 of the 23 organisations reporting reduction. This has to be seen along with the fact that proportion of NGO staff with professional degrees, in total staff strength did not change between 1995 and 2007 (7% in both years). Thus, while some organisations have been able to attract more professionals, a majority have actually not been able to increase or even maintain the proportion of such staff.

• Same data related to rural and urban organisations analysed separately is as follows:

Table 10 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Rural focused organisationsSome

Schooling (N=9)

School completed

(N=14)

Graduate

(N=19)

Post Graduate

(N=17)

Professionals


(N=Number of organisations reporting)Table 11Growth in staff strength by educational category – Urban focused organisations

Some Schooling

(N=6)

School completed

(N=6)

Graduate

(N=7)

Post Graduate

(N=7)

Professionals



June 2008 12


• Rural organisations experienced higher reduction in proportion of staff in all categories except post graduates.

• The drop in proportion of professionals indicate that rural organisations have greater difficulties in getting such people.

Considering the fact that only two of the 27 organisations reduced total staff strength over the decade, the disaggregated figures in the above tables, provide interesting insights. • Higher number of rural and urban organisations found it easier to attract graduates than

post graduates or those with professional degrees. • Urban organisations had greater increase in the proportion of staff with professional

degrees, as compared to rural organisations. The reverse is true in case of post graduates.• People with only school education continue to be important human resource for NGOs.

3.2 Organisational preferences for recruitment

The schedule asked respondents to rank five possible sources of people on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 showing very high preference for that source and 5 showing very low preference. The ranking was done with a ‘then’ and ‘now’ comparison.

Table 12 Preference for sources to recruit people(N=27) High Low Medium 1995 2007 1995 2007 1995 2007Local 85% 74% 7% 11% 7% 15%Regional 81% 81% 0% 7% 19% 11%State 41% 48% 52% 44% 7% 7%National 37% 33% 63% 56% 0% 11%Walk ins 81% 74% 7% 4% 11% 22%


• There is no significant variation in preference of organisations between 1995 and 2007. • Sources closest to the organisations, within the region/ operational area, were ranked

higher by more than four-fifths of the organisations. • A large number of organisations ranked walk-ins (people who came to work on their own)

high in their preferences. • Recruiting staff from campuses, within the State or nationally has low preference.

3.3 Retention of staff

The survey looked at staff retention in the organisations between 1995 and 2007 across categories based on education qualification.

Table 13 Proportion of staff by educational qualification continuing from 1995 to 2007As % of total staff in the category in 1995

Not schooled (N = 104) 6%Some schooling (N = 624) 14%Schooling completed (N = 381) 33%Graduate (N = 477) 27%Post Graduate (N = 188) 29%Professional (N = 129) 36%Total (N = 1903) 24%

(N=Total staff in the category in 1995)

June 2008 13


• 24% of all staff who worked in the organisations in 1995 continue to work in 2007. • The retention proportion of staff with higher levels of education is higher.

Retention trends were also analysed in terms of occurrence across organisations.

Table 14 Retention of Staff between 1995 and 2007 by educational categoryTotal

(N=24)

Some schooling

(N=9)

Schooling completed

(N=15)

Graduate

(N=20)

Post Graduate

(N=10)

Professional

(N=15)Less than 25% retained 13% 33% 0% 10% 10% 0%Up to half retained 25% 22% 20% 25% 10% 13%More than half retained 25% 22% 27% 10% 30% 27%100% retention 38% 22% 53% 55% 50% 60%


• More than a third of the organisations reported retaining all staff from 1995 in 2007. • 63% of organisations have retained more than half the people working with them in 1995.

Table 15 Proportion of those continuing since 1995 in total staff in 2007 (N=26) Percentage

Less than 5% 7 27Between 5% and 15% 10 38Between 16% and 25% 6 23More than 25% 3 12


• Staff members continuing to work in the organisations for more than a decade constitute only 10% of the total staff strength of the organisations in 2007.

• Splitting this figure into bands, it emerges that in more than one-third of the organisations, the old-horses constitute more than 15% of the current staff.

• The implications on institutional learning and memory hence probably are important issues for all the organisations, more so for the two-thirds of the sample where older people constitute less than one-sixth of the organisation.

3.3.1 Reasons for people leaving organisations

Examining the retention trends leads naturally to enquiring about reasons for people leaving the organisations. The study schedule had a list of statements which the respondents were to rank in terms of their significance. This section does not make use of any objective data provided by the organisations, but is based entirely on what the organisations perceived as reasons for their staff leaving.

Table 16 Reasons for people leaving as % of positive responses recorded

(N = 116)Proportion of total responses

Is a significant reason

Is one of the reasons

Better prospects 53% 25% 75%Unhappy with work 10% 0% 100%Personal reasons 18% 10% 90%Unable to cope with conditions 3% 0% 100%Terminated 16% 21% 79%

(N=Total number of responses)

June 2008 14


• Better prospects, is the strongest reason for people leaving. This includes better jobs in another NGO, development project, government or donor agency.

• Some organisations also cited better prospects in the corporate sector, as a reason for some of its staff leaving. Among the responses that cited this as reason, a quarter ranked this as a very significant reason for people leaving.

• Personal reasons, like family pressure, health related issues, marriage etc. were cited as the second most important cause for people leaving.

• One-sixth of the responses cited the organisation terminating employment of persons as a reason. This includes both termination on account of poor performance or other such reasons and the project in which the people were employed coming to an end.

• Dissatisfaction with work or inability to cope with conditions, were cited as other reasons for people leaving NGOs.

The reasons for staff turnover have been analysed only from the organisational point of view. To what extent organisational systems, leadership issues and other factors that affect people’s motivation to work were not examined in the survey.

3.4 Career growth in organisations

Career growth within NGOs is a critical factor contributing to retention of staff. The study tried to look at the different issues in this regard.

3.4.1 Senior staff in organisations

Organisations were asked to define senior position as relevant to each of them. They stated the proportion of staff occupying senior positions.

Table 17 Proportion of senior staff to total staff(N=27) Percentage

Less than 2% 3 11Between 3% and 10% 5 19Between 11% and 25% 13 48More than 26% 6 22


• In about half of the organisations that responded, one-tenth to a quarter of people occupied senior positions.

• In 22% of organisations senior positions accommodated more than quarter of total staff.

The study tried to asses the reasons accorded for people reaching senior positions and their career within the organisation.

Table 18 Proportion of senior staff started career in the organisation itself(N=27) Percentage

None 4 15Less than 25% 2 7Between 26% and 50% 11 41Between 51% and 99% 6 22All 4 15


June 2008 15


• In about 75% of the organisations, more than one-fourth of those occupying senior positions started their working career with the organisation itself.

• In 4 out of 27 organisations everyone who occupied senior positions had worked all their working life with the organisations.

• In a similar number of organisations, all those in senior positions had started their working life elsewhere.

Table 19 Reasons for promotion to senior positions

(N = 108 )As % of total

responsesMost likely

reasonLikely reason

Is one of the reasons

Experience with organisation 25% 15% 59% 26%Total experience 20% 32% 41% 27%Need of the position 19% 40% 30% 30%Educational qualification 23% 20% 48% 32%Recommendation from reliable sources 8% 0% 11% 89%There is no alternative 5% 0% 20% 80%


• Work experience and educational qualification are the most important factors that organisations consider in promoting staff to senior positions.

• In case of work experience, total work experience was cited in fewer cases than experience with the organisation, but in terms of ranking the factors, total work experience was cited as more important than experience with the organisation.

• Similarly, though comparatively lower overall response was accorded to the need of the position factor, it had the highest ranking in terms of importance.

Analysis was done contrasting total work experience of personnel against work experience with the organisation itself. This was based on the data provided by organisations on the work experience profile of some of their senior staff members.

Table 20 Work Experience profile of senior positions

(N = 26)Total Work Experience

Experience with organisation

Number Percentage Number PercentageLess than 5 years experience 0 0 3 125 to 10 years experience 4 15 11 4211 to 20 years experience 18 69 9 35More than 20 years experience 4 15 3 12


• All organisations have people with a minimum total working experience of at least five years occupying senior positions.

• The total work experience of people in senior positions is above 11 years in more than 80% of the cases

3.5 Human Resource challenges before the NGO sector – opinions and perceptions

Over time, it has become increasingly difficult to attract and retain people from outside and those with specialised education, making NGOs focus largely on local catchments for recruitment. These catchments are also becoming increasingly sparse with increased opportunities and changing aspirations, as discussed earlier. Approaching the human resource

June 2008 16


issue in a reactive rather than a strategic manner, NGOs have often settled for sub-optimal human resources solutions. There is evidently a need for fresh strategies to attract and retain people in NGOs. There is a need for more people in across different categories.

A desirable cultural fit - In recruiting staff, there are people with specific cultural traits who are considered in sync with the type of expectations and demands NGOs have. These include a willingness to locate and work in remote areas, adherence to institutional norms and systems and are affordable by NGOs. While specific skill sets and education are valued, these are seen in conjunction with ability to work in complex teams with people from diverse backgrounds, age and experience.

Maintaining diversity - Most NGOs value staff diversity in terms of background and skills. The diversity is dictated by specific needs (mobilisation of local communities, idea generation, analysis of complex data, communication, liaison with diverse stakeholders, etc.). This plurality in staffing is fraught with complexities and has been a one of the key organisational struggles for most NGOs. Plurality and diversity among staff is valued especially as this is seen as vital in generating new ideas and in strengthening debates and discussions, as well as exchange of knowledge and skills.

Organisational development - NGOs have seen significant scale up in their operations in the past decade, evidenced in expanding staff, budget and diversity of activities. This by itself calls for internal reorganisation, task delegation and a transition from an informal work culture and development of appropriate systems and procedures. Organisation growth ideally is conjunct with organisation development, particularly in investing in training and capacity building of the employees for future development and growth, and setting up systems and procedures to manage growth. Translation to practice is often hindered due to a lack of financial resources and willingness of the leadership to invest adequately towards these.

3.6 Systemic challenges of NGOs affecting HR

Human resource challenges before NGOs are by no means a result of the changes in the environment alone. Several difficulties of systemic nature contribute to the challenges in recruiting, nurturing and retaining adequate human resources. Several systemic challenges were identified in course of discussions with various stakeholders. These are listed below:

A great deal of staff dissonance is related to low pay and low appreciation. There is a skill-gap crisis in all sectors of work and this is acutely felt in NGOs which are unable to make the pitch both in terms of wok content and price. Most NGOs guided primarily by fund availability, work with a project orientation leading to low priority for investing in nurturing human resource capacities and staff security measures.

For young people joining NGOs there is not enough mentoring while simultaneously there is a pressure to learn and deliver. The senior leadership, saddled with aspirations to expand, and often caught up in day to day running of the organisation, does not have enough time for mentoring and guiding. This responsibility falls on the middle-layer which is not always prepared to do this.

June 2008 17


Working in traditional and established NGOs poses a common yet significant challenge of integrating people with age and experience with youth armed with new knowledge and ideas. This gets further complicated as NGOs are often not able to clearly define who does what and expect everyone to do everything, creating 'jacks of all trades' and 'masters of none'. It becomes harder for younger people with higher aspirations to imbibe social skills and the patience necessary to create their own space and nurture these relations. A strategic perspective towards human resource will include defining who does/ can do what based on what capacities they have and how they can be nurtured.

There is also a tenuous relation between field teams and support teams (usually located at the head-office). There is need for sensitive collaboration and supportive supervision which does not in anyway undermine the operational autonomy of field teams.

Staff are bothered by a general lack of transparency and weak systems in most NGOs. There is a lack of readiness and ideological willingness among NGOs to professionalize as a whole, and looking at professionals primarily to write proposals and reports.

There are usually no clear career directions within organisations. Decisions in this regard are often not transparent. Inhibiting factors in career growth include lack of understanding and a mismatch of organisation and individual aspirations. For people at middle and senior levels, the inhibiting factors are often an unwillingness to relocate or learn new skills, added to family commitments.

There is need to arrive at an optimal match of organisational expectations and personal aspirations vis-à-vis operational autonomy, professional challenge and opportunity for growth. There is also a need to understand salary expectations and match it with resources available on a sustainable basis.

There are limited spaces to share ideas and concerns, and the absence of peer groups is acutely felt. Though most organisations appear flat, there are clear hierarchies and limited room for criticism. Critical questioning by staff is often taken as interference and the leadership is often unable to handle it, leading to dissatisfaction and dissonance.

Giving voice to the aspirations of marginalised people is considered one of the core strengths of NGOs. They however falter when it comes to practising this as an organisation. Staff members feel the need to be heard and allowed to invest in personal growth. That said, even if open spaces are designed, the ability to articulate in front of seniors/ elders is not common. This needs facilitation and could be established as a culture over time.

In addition to institutional responses, the onus is again on senior and middle levels to create informal responses especially in nurturing the emotional quotient. This needs to be renewed on a continuing basis. There is also a need to invest in people who have been around for long periods in the organisation to counter the increasing sense of dissatisfaction and distancing from the vision.

June 2008 18


4 Capacity building of NGO staff

Capacity building of the staff is recognized as a critical need of NGOs. The key informants were clear that present challenges in this regard have to do both with the attitude of NGOs towards capacity building and the suitability of current focus of service providers in capacity building.

4.1 Data from the study

The study tried to understand various issues related to support for staff capacity building needed by NGOs and what is available at present. It became clear in course of the survey and the discussions that a significant component of capacity building in NGOs happens through in-house training programmes with their own staff or external resource persons. This was not captured in great detail. NGOs also rely significantly on practical learning within the organisation.

Most NGOs also support practical learning though visits to other organisations. This has euphemistically been labelled 'exposure visits' in NGO parlance. The practise of organisations in formalising these learning process varies widely in this regard.

The focus of questions in the survey was on capacity building programmes offered by various training institutions. All 27 organisations that responded to the schedule reported use of capacity building services provided by training institutions. The schedule had a question about the numbers of staff members who took part in such programmes, but the responses to this were patchy and incomplete in most cases. As a result, the intended quantification of use of capacity building services could not be achieved.

The data however appears to point to the following:• Less than 30% of the training is through established training or educational institutions

(the list includes IRMA, IIFM, TISS, XIDAS, BIRD, NIRD, EDI, CSE, PRIA, DHAN Foundation, Practical Action, Account Aid, etc.).

• Training programmes offered by government organisations account for about 5% (CAPART, OREDA, NABARD, APMAS, etc. are in this list)

• The rest of the training programmes (65%) are offered by NGOs, NGO networks and donors. A large bulk of this is perhaps in the nature of practical learning through exposure visits.

It is reiterated that this area needs to be further explored and the present study has not been able to capture adequately the availability of capacity building services available and accessed by NGOs.

The study was able to generate relevant data in trying to understand the challenges that NGOs face in obtaining relevant capacity building services. The study asked questions pertaining to the following issues:• benefits to organisations from staff attending capacity building programmes• who pays for capacity building services• organisational needs for capacity building• limitations of existing capacity building services.

June 2008 19


Table 21 Benefits to organisations from capacity building of staffAs % of responses

(N= 137)Benefit inall cases

Benefit inmost cases

Benefit insome cases

New skills gained 36% 24% 44% 32%Improved motivation to work 17% 30% 48% 22%Prepared for taking bigger responsibilities 34% 11% 48% 41%Led to leaving organisation 7% 0% 11% 89%No benefit 7% 0% 0% 100%


• Staff gaining new skills and taking bigger responsibilities were reported among the biggest benefits.

• It also emerged that not always has sending staff for these programmes been in the interest of the organisation. A few instances of either the staff member leaving the organisation or gaining little from attending the programme have been reported.

Table 22 Who pays for staff capacity building?(N= 79) Always Mostly Sometimes

Organisation paid from own general funds 28% 5% 45% 50%Paid from specific project funds 27% 48% 52% 0%Sponsored programme 29% 17% 17% 65%Free programme 16% 15% 8% 77%


• In more than half the cases, organisations have cited paying for the capacity building programmes from organisational funds, either project specific or organisations’ general funds.

• More often organisations were paying for training from specific project funds than own general funds.

4.2 Capacity building Needs of NGOs

The study tried to identify the areas where NGOs need capacity building for their staff.

Table 23 Capacity Building Needs(N = 101) Very Essential Important

Specific sectoral areas 27% 48% 52%Leadership and Motivation related 27% 67% 33%Communication abilities 28% 64% 36%Needs specific to the organisation 19% 58% 42%


• Leadership and motivation related capacities and communication skills were cited by most organisations as the most essential area.

• Inputs in specific sectors also ranks high. • Many organisations listed the need for customized training programmes.

June 2008 20


Table 24 Limitations of the existing service provision by institutionsAs % of responses

(N = 62)Location of the service providers 6%Cost of the programmes 39%Language related constraints 31%Absence of good agencies 5%Duration of programmes 6%Inadequate contacts 5%Uncertainty about benefit/relevance 8%


• Cost of the programmes and language constraints were cited as the most important limitations with the existing lot of capacity building services provided by various institutions.

• Several organisations highlighted that there was little common between what they needed and what was being offered.

• Contextual relevance is among the key issues that respondent organisations raised as limitations.

4.3 Perceptions of challenges in capacity buildingThe key informant discussions revealed opinions similar to what the data suggests. A general sense of dissatisfaction with what is presently available for building staff capacities in training and education institutions was palpable. This was not seen as weaknesses of training institutions alone; NGOs’ ability to plan for capacity building of their personnel and demand relevant services from the training institutions was highlighted as a serious issue.

The typical approach in NGOs towards capacity building is also reactive and opportunistic rather than strategic. The calendar of training programmes of educational and training institutions determines the areas in which staff capacities are built. Information on this is also not complete with most NGOs unaware of the range of capacity building services offered by the range of education and training institutions. Staff are often sent for these programmes as a token of appreciation or reward for services rather than any specific need. Budget availability is also a serious consideration in participation in these training programmes. Another limiting factor is language. There is need to understand specific capacity building needs of NGOs.

Capacity building needs to be seen as an overall process and not skill building alone. There cannot be one organisational response to capacity building of the entire organisation. Individual needs need to be taken care of in an ongoing basis. Capacity building is a continuous process of enhancing staff capabilities. There has to be a willingness and readiness among leadership of NGOs to initiate this. This need not necessarily hinge on recruiting specialised people for managing human resources, which is a challenge for most organisations.

5 The ways forward

NGOs find themselves at the crossroads on the issue of human resources. Factors in the external environment as well as those inherent to the sector have combined to create this situation. While NGOs have to respond to the changing environment within their limitations,

June 2008 21


there is much that can be done in creating a more positive environment for human resources. A few areas that could be considered emerged in discussions with key informants.

Re-thinking leadershipA majority of NGOs have expanded in size and scope in the past decade. To sustain effectiveness in work while responding to the complex external environment the organisational core needs to be strong. It is a recognised reality that the charismatic and motivational leadership of the founders is increasingly inaccessible due to multiple pressures. A committed and dynamic senior and middle level leadership has to be nurtured to motivate the team and to provide good quality development support. Several NGOs have seen attrition at senior levels due to the lack of space offered by founders/leaders. The onus for this is on the founders/ leaders, in what and how much they are willing to ‘let go’. The core of organisations which is able to provide nurturing and support needs to be expanded and strengthened. While consciously creating this space, there is need for building capabilities of new leadership to take on these roles.

Sharing resources and looking beyond young peopleThere are several functions such as accounts, communication, fund raising, etc., for which resource sharing arrangements can be drawn up between NGOs drawing on resources from local areas. These decentralised talent pools may be able to service many organisations on a time-share basis. This is characteristically difficult for NGOs (especially those within the same region) which are divided on ideological lines.

Another possibility it to tap retired people who have the energy and drive to engage in such work, or mid-career people in the corporate sector who are looking for newer challenges. Internet based resources could be developed to connect people with the willingness and interest to work with NGOs, with the varying needs NGOs have.

In these options there is need for significant investment of time by senior people especially in the initial stages. There are mixed experiences in this regard, with concerns on the level of involvement of such resources in organisation strategies and decision making processes. Often it is the inability of NGOs to define tasks and boundaries that leads to dissatisfaction.

Better capacity building programmesNGOs have to be supported to identify capacity building and training needs and for carrying them through. Training programmes on general management modules are needed for all organisations at different levels. These need to be tailored to local contexts and to the extent possible available in a mix of English and vernacular.

The multitude of rural development/ rural management/ social work programmes appear to be focussing largely on the enterprise aspects of development. Decentralised academies of Social Development with sound principles for recruitment, training and positive placement can provide a continuous stream of human resource supplies to NGOs within specific catchments. Processes for continued contacts with persons placed in NGOs as well as with NGOs may help create a more positive experience.

June 2008 22


6 What needs to be done?

There is need for concerted action from all stakeholders in the NGO-led development process in responding to the challenges related to human resources. There is probably little that individual organisations can do on their own to address some of the larger issues. NGOs, donor agencies and other support institutions will have to come together for joint action in many cases. There are steps that individual organisations can take to improve their situation.

6.1 What individual organisations could do

Ensuring continued staff motivation is an area that needs to be addressed particularly by the senior leadership of organisations. It is of little value to blame better prospects for the attrition that organisations experience. Interactions during the study indicate that the lack of sensitivity or high levels of complacency in matters of human resources management is an issue that organisations, especially the leadership need to overcome. Conjunct with this are the issues of definition of roles, levels of operational autonomy, feedback processes, and platforms for sharing ideas and concerns (both formal and informal), that play a significant role in staff motivation. These need sustained attention.

It is also perhaps prudent to estimate the minimum levels of attrition in different categories of staff, even with adequate human resource support systems in place, and plan for recruitments accordingly. Organisations need to approach the HR issue more strategically, rather than adopt reactive positions. This, of course, calls for adequate availability of financial resources on a sustained basis.

NGOs often tend to communicate one-sided and insular views of development, focussing more on the rhetoric, making claims, rather than the realities on the ground. The current generation that is prepared to work with NGOs need facts to base their decisions and probably have little patience for the rhetoric of ‘poverty’ and ‘good cause’ alone. Re-configuring communications about their work is an important step in this regard. On the other hand there is also need for NGOs to perhaps increase the visibility of their work and communicate in a clear and transparent manner through mainstream media and other platforms, establishing credibility and creating interest within the larger society.

It may not be possible for many organisations to offer higher levels of remuneration in general and especially for people with specialised skill sets. The minimum that organisations need to do is to ensure fair terms of employment. Coverage of staff under social security provisions like provident fund or pension benefits; having well-documented and properly implemented service conditions including leave rules; and reducing apparent arbitrariness in personnel related decision making, are steps that cost the organisations very little, but result in higher motivation for people to continue working.

6.2 What organisations could do jointly

Sharing resources between organisations has been suggested by many as a feasible idea. This however needs strong coordination between organisations, including a commonly accepted mechanism to implement it. Such common platforms may need the initiative from an external agency like a donor agency supporting several organisations in the same location,

June 2008 23


to take-off. But continued operations will need commitment of time and preparedness from the part of the organisations themselves. Pooling of funds will also be necessary.

Human resource issues are not on the agenda for discussions in common platforms of NGOs. It is left to be the problem of individual organisations and not considered worthy of joint action of any kind. This is an area where organisations could jointly discuss and debate work and evolve solutions. This is particularly important in dealing with matters related to capacity building and negotiating with training institutions.

6.3 What donors could do

Financial support agencies have for long considered staffing an issue for the implementing organisation to worry about. In many cases, issues of how the organisation would recruit-retain-rejuvenate the human resources needed for the projects are not discussed and understood. Most donors also do not respond positively to organisations’ demands for higher outlay in project budgets to meet personnel costs, or the need for associated infrastructure. Standard ratios of personnel costs to programme costs are applied and often this forces the organisations to sub-optimal choices. Donor agencies need to become more sensitive and pro-active to human resource challenges of their partner implementing organisations.

Several established NGOs have good human resource management strategies, spanning recruitment, induction, management of attrition, capacity and career development. Many field based NGOs also have well structured staff capacity building programmes blending practical and theoretical inputs. Donors can initiate the process of documenting and sharing these good practices within the sector. Specific support for NGOs for carrying out these training programmes may also be considered by donors.

Donor agencies can play a crucial role in improving the staff capacity building services that are offered by training institutions. Together with their partner organisations, they can demand better programmes and also help training institutions by giving more effective feedback. These can be done without over-stepping the boundaries that donor-doer relationships entail and without affecting each others’ autonomy. Improved communications with partners on human resources and capacity building issues, beyond standard project monitoring questions are required to achieve this.

6.4 What training institutions could do

There is a range of training programmes that NGOs end up with each calendar year, both through in-house and external trainings. However, the correlation between training programmes and built capacities is quite weak. Training institutions often fail to read the market for their services adequately. Standard training programmes are designed and offered, and more often than not, there is good response in participation. In sum, there is a great amount of dissatisfaction, both with the suppliers and customers.

It is evident from the staffing patterns of NGOs that there is a diversity of experience and educational background. Standard training programmes often do not take into account these differences. In fact in most cases organisations themselves are unable to adequately map the training needs of their staff. Training institutions need to work more closely with NGOs in

June 2008 24


mapping, designing and conducting training programmes both of a general nature and those tailor-made for the organisations needs, catering to different categories of staff.

Cost concerns are cited by most organisations in availing training programmes offered by institutions. It is quite clear that it is not the money cost of the programme per se, that organisations are concerned about. It is the issue of value from such training programmes that is of higher importance. The value proposition of the programmes offered need to be convincing and communicated properly. Institutions need to have a mechanism for ascertaining this.

Training institutions that cater to small NGOs need to develop skills to offer programmes in vernacular languages. Organisations need programmes that will help build skills and knowledge of their regular staff and these inevitably are in areas where vernacular inputs are not easily available. Reasonable investments need to be made in developing these options.

June 2008 25


Annexes

1. Terms of reference of the study2. Questionnaire schedule for NGOs3. Check-list for key informants4. List of respondent organisations5. List of key informants6. References

June 2008 26


Annex 1 – Terms of Reference

A STUDY ONHUMAN RESOURCES AND CAPACITY ISSUES WITHIN NGOs

Background: The Paul Hamlyn Foundation (PHF) is a UK-based donor agency that supports local Indian NGOs for implementing development projects within its India programme. It currently puts in about Rs. 5 crores a year into its India programme, and supports 27 different NGOs across the country. Relationships typically range from one to seven years, and annual grant amounts range from Rs. 3 to 40 lakhs.

PHF had hosted a meeting for its partners in February 2007. One of the matters brought up by the partners was the difficulty in attracting and retaining ‘good’ people – a problem being faced by their organisations and by the NGO sector as a whole, and a problem particularly because development projects are increasing in size and complexity and require suitably qualified and motivated people to manage them.

We at PHF would like to enquire into this – is it really such a problem, who are the people that NGOs would like to attract and retain, and why are they unable to do so? And can the PHF do something about this?

Key Questions:1. To what extent, and in what way, have human resources needs changed for NGOs over

the past few years?2. Who are the people that NGOs would like to attract? Why? Which institutions do they

come from? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in joining the development sector? What can be done to address these?

3. Who are the people that NGOs would like to retain in the medium/long term for senior management roles? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in achieving their ambitions and potential from within the NGO sector? What can be done to address these?

4. What are the institutional resources available for educating and training entry and middle level people in the NGO sector to meet future requirements? Are there gaps? What can be done to address these?

5. Is there a role for PHF, given its mandate and resources, to work towards addressing the problem of human resources (if there is one) within its partners in particular and within the NGO sector in general in a meaningful way?

The Way Ahead: We at PHF would like to commission a study that addresses these questions to be undertaken by an independent consultant who is familiar with human resource and capacity issues within the Indian NGO sector.

The consultant would be initially expected to write a proposal to PHF outlining a methodology, time frame, budget (with details on consultancy fees and operational expenses), expected outcomes and a dissemination strategy. Once approved by PHF, work can begin. The Adviser – India for PHF will be the link person within PHF.

June 2008 27


Annex 2 - Questionnaire schedule for NGOs

1 Organisation Profile

1.1 Name of the organisation – ______________________________________

1.2 Year of founding – _______________

1.3 Number of staff working in the organisation:

In 1995*

In 2007*if organisation is newer, a year after its founding

1.4 Annual Expenditure (based on audited accounts of the respective year)

In 1995* Rs.

In 2007 Rs.

*if organisation is newer, a year after its founding

1.5 Geographic spread of work

No. of States No. of districts No. of Blocks No. of villages

1.6 Primary focus of work: € Rural € Urban

1.7 Areas of workPlease put a tick mark against areas/ sectors of intervention in the respective years

Area In 1995* In 2007Education

Health

Natural Resource Management

Livelihoods

Infrastructure

Disaster Response

Micro Finance

Village Organisations

Women’s Organisations

Others (specify)


June 2008 28


1.8 Does the organisation run income generating activities (Production, marketing, trading) on its own?

€ Yes € No

1.8.1 If yes, please specify what types of activities are being run

____________________________________________________________

2 Human Resources related issues

2.1 Please provide a gender break up of your staffPlease give number of staff members belonging to each category below

Category in 1995* in 2007Male

Female


2.2 Please give details of educational qualifications of staff membersPlease give number of staff members belonging to each category below

Category in 1995* in 2007Not schooled

Some schooling

Matriculate

Graduate

Post Graduate

Professional Degree


2.3 Where are staff members of the organisation recruited from?Please rank from 1 to 5 where 1=Most preferred and 5=Least preferred

Source in 1995* in 2007Locally, using local contacts

From within the area (district, region)

From campuses within the State

From campuses nationally

People came to join interested in the work


June 2008 29


2.4 How many persons who worked in the organisation in 1995 (or a year after its founding, if the organisation was formed after 1995) continue to work in 2007?

Please give number of staff members belonging to each category belowCategory Number of persons

Not schooled

Some schooling

Matriculate

Graduate

Post Graduate

Professional Degree

2.5 What, according to you, are reasons for people leaving the organisation? Based on your experience in the past five years, please tick the appropriate boxes against each reason cited below; please add other reasons, if relevant, in the space provided

Reason

Almost 100% of the people who

left

More than 50% of the people who

left

Some of the people who

left

Not a reason at all

Better job in another NGO

Move to a Donor Agency/Consultancy

Move to a Government job

To get Married

Unhappy with the job

Asked to leave

Other (please specify in the space below)

2.6 How many persons occupy senior positions (as defined by the organisation) in your organisation?

____________

2.7 How many of the persons occupying senior positions started their working career with the organisation itself?

____________

June 2008 30


2.8 Please give some details about staff members who occupy senior positionsPlease give details in the table below for up to five such positions

Sl. No. Position occupied / Designation Total work experience (years)

Experience in the organisation (years)

1

2

3

4

5

2.9 On what basis does the organisation appoint people to senior positions?Based on the experience during the past five years, please tick the appropriate boxes against each category listed below; please add other factors, if relevant, in the space provided

Basis of appointment In all cases

In many cases

In some cases

Not a basis

Experience within organisation

Total work experience

Specific need of the position

Educational qualification

Recommendation from respected sources

Recommendation from donor or resource agency

There were no alternatives

Other (please specify in the space below)

June 2008 31


3 Capacity Building of Staff

3.1 Has your organisation used the services of training institutions for capacity building of your staff members?

€ Yes € NoIf Yes, please continue to 3.2 If No, please go to 3.5

3.2 How many people from the organisation have participated in training programmes in these institutions?

Please give names of the institutions and number of staff persons who have undergone programmes there

Sl. No. Name of InstitutionNumber of persons trained in the past

five year

Number of persons trained in

20071

2

3

4

5

3.3 How do you meet the costs of sending staff members to such training programmes?Based on experience during past several years, please tick the appropriate box against each statement

Source In all cases

In many cases

In some cases

Not applicable

Organisation paid from its own funds

Organisation paid from specific project funds

Sponsored by another organisation

Free programme

June 2008 32


3.4 What do you think are the outcomes to the organisation from sending staff members to such training programmes?

Based on experience during past several years, please tick the appropriate box against each statement; please add other statements, if relevant, in the space below

Outcomes from capacity building programmes at outside institutions

In all cases

In many cases

In some cases

Not applicable

Gained new skills to manage day-to-day matters

Improved motivation to work

Gained skill to do/manage a new programme/activity

Groomed persons to take up larger responsibilities

Improved functioning in their current jobs

Led to person finding another job

No benefit to the organisation at all

Other (please specify in space below)

3.5 What kind of capacity building programmes are most needed in your organisations context

Please tick the appropriate box against each item listed; please add any other item in the space provided

Type of programme needed Very Essential Important Not

importantGeneral Management skill development

Specific programme in Sectoral areas (Livelihoods, Health, Education, Natural Resource, Micro-finance, etc)

Capacity in Leadership and mobilisation

Skills in communication

Need programmes specifically designed for our organisation

Other (please specify in space below)

June 2008 33


3.6 What constraints does the organisation face in obtaining capacity building support for the staff?

Please tick appropriate options; please add other constraints in the space belowConstraint Please tick if true in your case

Location of the organisation

Cost of the programmes

Language constraints

Other (please specify in space below

Name of the respondent

Designation

Date

Please send your responses by March 15, 2008 either:By email at [email protected] orBy post to R V Jayapadma,

‘Marigold’ Mercy Bungalow, Christ Nagar No.86,Vazhayila, Karakulam P.O., Trivandrum 695564

For clarifications please contact By email [email protected] orPhone 094475 94765

June 2008 34

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Annex 3 – Check-list for key informants

1 Changing HR needs of NGOs between 1995 and 2007

• What are the changes in the profile of human resources (expertise, experience, education, orientation, value-system) needed by NGOS?

• What factors have influenced these changes?

2 Changing motivation and challenges?

• Are there differences in the reasons why people join NGOs between 1995 and 2007? If yes, what are they? What factors account for these differences?

• Are there differences in the types of challenges faced by people who join NGOs, between 1995 and 2007? If yes, what are they? What factors account for these changes?

3 Growth within organisations

• Are there specific qualities needed for people to occupy senior positions in NGOs? Are such qualities generally found?

• What factors in the NGO sector aid/inhibit young people who join NGOs in/from achieving their aspirations?

4 Capacity building

• Is there a dissonance between supply of capacity building services (for staff) by various training institutions/support agencies and the actual demand for such services?

• What suggestions do you make to make capacity building services for staff more meaningful and relevant?

5 Solutions

• If there is a real HR related problem that the NGO sector is facing today, what would you suggest as the solutions?

June 2008 35


Annex 4 – List of respondent NGOs

1. Anandi, Gujarat

2. Aravali, Rajasthan

3. Action for Social Advancement, Madhya Pradesh

4. BISWA, Orissa

5. Chetna, Delhi

6. Chintan, Delhi

7. Chirag, Uttarakhand

8. Delhi Council for Child Welfare, Delhi

9. Gram Vikas, Orissa

10. Manav Kalyan Trust, Gujarat

11. Margdardarshak Seva Sansthan, Chattisgarh

12. Myrada, Karnataka

13. National Association for the Blind, Kerala

14. Nari Utthan, Madhya Pradesh

15. Nav Bharat Jagriti Kendra, Jharkhand

16. Rural Educational Activities for Development, Orissa

17. Social Action for Association and Development, Maharashtra

18. Saath, Gujarat

19. Sathi, Karnataka

20. Salam Balak Trust, Delhi

21. Setu, Gujarat

22. Seva Mandir, Rajasthan

23. Shaishav Trust, Gujarat

24. Samaj Pragati Sahyog, Madhya Pradesh

25. Srijan Foundation, Jharkhand

26. The Action North East Trust, Assam

27. Vardan Samajik Sanstha, Chattisgarh

June 2008 36


Annex 5 – List of key informants

1. Anjali Agarwal, Sathi, Lucknow

2. Ashish Kumar Sahu, SELCO, Bangalore

3. Kumar Rana, Pratichi India Trust, Kolkata

4. Lata Sachde, Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan, Bhuj

5. Liby T Johnson, Trivandrum

6. Manoharan, ACCORD, Gudalur

7. Priyanka Singh, Seva Mandir, Udaipur

8. Rahim, Sathi, Bangalore

9. Rajeev Kahndelwal, Aajevika Bureau, Udaipur

10. Ram Esteves, ADATS, Bagepally

11. Sajith Sukumaran, Trivandrum

12. Saleela Patkar, Myrada, Bangalore

13. Shubham Singh, Srijan India, Bangalore

14. Siddhi Mankad, Catalyst Management Services, Bangalore

15. Suvojit Chattopadhyay, CMFR, Chennai

16. Swati Bhogle, TIDE, Bangalore

17. Veena Joshi, SDC, Delhi

June 2008 37


Annex 6 – References

1. PVO and NGO futures - A framework for reflection and dialogue, Alan Fowler, August 2004

2. The Power Shift and the NGO Credibility Crisis, James McGann and Mary Johnstone The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law Volume 8, Issue 2, January 2006

3. Development, NGOs, and civil society: the debate and its future, Jenny Pearce, Development in Practice

4. Understanding the Human Resource Challenges in Not-for-profitOrganisations from a Lifecycle Perspective - Vasanthi Srinivasan, Journal of Health Management 2007; 9; 189

5. Human resource needs of the rural development NGOs in India – S.N.Biswas and Upasana Aggarwal, Working Paper 187, Institute of Rural Management, Anand

June 2008 38

Documents

HR and Capacity Issues within NGOs - Report of study (PHF) June 2008