Motive, in the Eye of the Beholder

This past Wednesday two British girls were attacked with acid in Zanzibar, when they were on their way home from a nursery where they had been working as volunteers. Altruism of these two 18-year-old girls were somehow a threat to a certain group inspired by Sheikh Issa Ponda who recently got arrested by the local police. 'Good intentions' are not enough. Something I had to learn from two years spent at the School of International Service at American University with other do-gooders with global, ambitious goals.

We live in such a complex, political world that involves countless evolving perspectives, including judgments that can be forceful and oppressive. Intention can only be truly valid for the person possessing it, and otherwise, it is fully subject to other perspectives that may validate or invalidate it.

Your entry as a altruistic volunteers, non-profit organization, CSR program or a social enterprise into a community is like meeting with the 'future' in-laws for the first time. As in-laws question the potential new member of the family during a dinner and try to influence their son/daughter, a community meets with you and decides whether you are a blessing or a threat, regardless of your bringing in 'goodness'. The community, like the in-laws, will perceive you based on what is familiar to them--their previous experiences and personal worldviews.

Sarjana.co.id enters the community in Indonesia as a breakthrough internet technology that collects admissions information from universities locally and makes it available to Indonesian youth for free. Plain, simple and no harm done, I thought. Surely, I was proven wrong. When soliciting for data, some universities found us untrustworthy (possibly misusing their data) and forcing undesirable transparency (allowing users to compare one university with others). Some others welcome us with open hands and understand that we offer some service (sincerely) for free. And the rest lost our 'invitation' in their own bureaucracy.

Then, we go to those who benefit from our services but not from our mission directly, and they are potential advertisers. We have very few people, out of almost a hundred that we have contacted, who took a leap of faith in us and sponsored our media. Very few, also, took the effort to praise our mission; the rest just saw us as a regular business.

Explaining a social mission and the impact, in an environment where trust is lacking and motive is always questioned, is often obsolete. "What's in it for you?" and "what's in it for me?" are the questions asked silently. Many say that do-gooders have to always be ready for abundant uncertainties, and I say,  they should not let the blaze of passion rip through the passage into the community but be let the community be participating audience of your work. If some community members refuse to participate, excuse yourself and move on to talk to others, without proactively burning bridges.

Because if we do good for ourselves, it often becomes obvious, like 'parenting' the beneficiaries by forcing ideas on the basis of good intentions or not listening to them to identify the real needs, yet coming up with the silver bullet to social problems.

If our work draws resistance or even violence, like girls in Afghanistan who get harassed for insisting to go to school (inspired by international NGOs), we need to stand back and weigh the collateral damage. Our motive should only go so far, not beyond the will of the beneficiaries. Our good intentions are only as good as perceived by the eye of the beholder.