Background
Though in the coming days we’ll be posting more about the results I thought it might be useful for some to hear about the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of our survey work on Filipino aid workers.

Methodology notes
One of the weaknesses of the survey that J (Evil Genius) and I circulated in spring 2014 was that only 5% of the total sample (n = 1010) self-identified as ‘local’ aid workers.  After publishing a post describing a small survey of Zambian aid and development workers in February I was contacted by Arbie Baguios. We worked together to construct a survey the intent of which was to generate meaningful -but mostly
suggestive and exploratory- data from Filipino aid and development workers.  Included on the survey were, with some wording modifications, some of the same questions that were asked in 2014.  We beta tested the survey with some of Argie’s Filipino colleagues and redrafted to the final version.  After securing IRB permission from my university we began collecting data.  The survey opened with a detailed explanation of the intended purpose of the survey and an informed consent statement.  All respondents were voluntary.

Here is how we articulated the purpose of the survey to the respondents as part of the introduction:

Being a local aid worker is not the same as being an expat aid worker. Working in your home country, local aid workers face unique opportunities and challenges. The goal of this survey is to hear your voices, so that your stories can be told. Your participation will help us have a better understanding of how Filipino aid and development workers view their own jobs, their non-Filipino colleagues, and the wider aid and development sector.

Spreading the word using social media targeting Filipino aid and development workers (e.g., Facebook, emails, Twitter), the url for the survey was made available, with the survey remaining open for just over one month, late March to late April, 2017.  Our’s was a convenience sample using an ‘open’ survey and ultimately yielded 115 responses.  There were 28 questions total, 3 open-ended and 25 closed-ended with 8 of those allowing for open-ended comments.  While only 31% completed the entire survey -the last three questions were open-ended- over 80% completed all of the closed ended questions.  The average respondent spent just over 20 minutes working on the survey.

By comparison, the oft sited Carr, et al research focused on 6 nations and solicited responses from both expats and locals with their sample size ranging from 150 individuals (Solomon Islands) to 249 (China). All said and done, the results of our modest sample, I believe, merit note.

Some overall results describing the respondents
Virtually all (99%) counted the Philippines as their home nation and the vast majority -91% reported having inside knowledge of the aid, development, or charity sector/industry.  A fairly young sample, 60% have been in the sector 5 years or lass, the remaining 40% more than 5 years.  Reflecting what appears to be the demographics of the target population, 63% of the respondents were female.

A big majority -78%- worked for an international organization with its HQ based outside of the Philippines and only 5% worked for local organizations with its HQ based in the Philippines, working only in a specific barangay, municipality, city or region.

Most -60%- reported that their home organization did a mix of both relief and development, with 16% reporting just relief-type work and 14% doing development (community development, poverty elimination, etc.).

More to come very soon including views on LGTBQ aid workers, dealing with corruption, and views regarding the future of ‘localizing’ the aid sector in the Philippines.

You can contact me via email or Arbie on Twitter @arbiebaguios.

 

 

 

Maybe local aid workers could do most expat roles better and more cost-effectively 

by @arbiebaguios

Tom and I recently launched a survey that solicited the perspectives of national and local Filipino aid workers on a range of issues within the aid sector – in particular, the (in)equalities that exist between expat and local staff.

In a previous blog, we highlighted the ever-present issue of expat vs local staff salary. Our survey’s preliminary findings suggest that local Filipino aid workers think they are being paid less than their expat equivalent for doing the same work. Throughout the years, many blogs, articles and research have attempted to dissect this issue – and as the most recent Guardian piece from Tobias Denskus says, it’s complicated.

His article is one of the most nuanced ones to date to discuss this: it recognises the increasing ‘localisation’ of aid; highlights the changing dynamics of labour in our globalised economies; and acknowledges the pragmatic considerations of expat pay (being away from home, working longer hours, etc). I actually agree with most of what he’s written, especially with the crux of his analysis: “We need to think about how we can move the debate forward beyond salaries.”

I concur, so let’s.

Here’s my hypothesis: local aid workers can do most expat workers’ job just as well, in a more cost-effective manner, and in a way that maximises aid programmes’ ownership and accountability.

Although this is only a hypothesis – I do not have scientific evidence to back this up (yet), apart from my own observed and lived experience; and also, well, I could be wrong – and therefore would appreciate constructive discussions around this issue.

Now, let’s go back to the question from the survey: “Which statement below best describes your perception concerning any pay differences between Filipino aid workers and that of expat (non-Filipino) aid workers doing the same or similar jobs in the Philippines.” Key phrase: the same or similar jobs.

What this tells us is that it’s not just that local aid workers are aware that they are being paid less than their foreign colleagues, but that they think they are being paid less for virtually doing the same job as expats. So, looking beyond why expat staff are being paid more than local staff, I would like to ask: why hire expats?

I pose this question in the context of the Philippines where this survey was taken: it is a newly industrialised country whose economy (per GDP) is 36^th largest in the world, above Singapore, Finland or Luxembourg. Of course that is not to say that the Philippines’ level of development by conventional measures is at par with those countries – after all, it still has a high rate of poverty, high rate of inequality, low per capita income, and generally weak public welfare systems  – although this does give us an idea of the capacities that exist within the country. As Tobias wrote in his article, “Skilled professionals for project management, IT and creative industries are already in demand in growing economies across Africa and Asia, and the relatively small aid industry will have to offer incentives to attract and retain local talent. A new generation of internationally educated, global professionals with local language skills is sought in many sectors.”

Full disclosure: I am a Filipino. And yes, I’d like to believe I could do an expat’s job in the Philippines just as well. In fact, I’m an “expat” now, although I went the other way: I am one of only a handful of Global South citizens working at a large humanitarian organisation’s headquarters in London; I have worked in my current role for close to a year now, after having been promoted from my junior position. And this is despite the fact that I started out my career as a local staff in the Philippines, and I’m not even internationally educated (I only have a bachelor’s degree from a university in Manila – which, for non-work related purposes, I had to pay £200 for so that it can be recognised as equivalent to a UK degree)!

Here’s the thing: I am not an exception. I personally know so many well-educated, adequately-skilled, highly qualified fellow Filipinos who could fill – and excel in ­– “expat” positions within international NGOs in the Philippines. The country is especially teeming with eager, passionate, capable young people who are keen to contribute positively to their own society.

But the reality is this: international NGOs offer a pitiable salary compared to, say, the private sector. Now – in this globalised economy where people from both Global North and Global South alike want iPhones or aspire to backpack around the world – suppose you’re a young Filipino fresh out of a really good university: would you rather begin to build your career as a local staff for an INGO and receive a low pay, or work for a multinational corporation and receive generous compensation that affords the products of a globalised economy? For many of the Philippines’ competent young labour force, the choice is easy to make. (Although the good thing is, despite the pay differences, many still choose to work for non-profits out of their motivation to help others).

So, I go back to the question I earlier posed: why hire expats? I imagine that even if an INGO matches a multinational corporation’s salary for local staff, it would still be cheaper than paying for an expat. At the same time, local staff provide the added benefit of understanding the local context and culture; potential for greater engagement with target populations (instead of beneficiaries feeling “obliged to be grateful” to foreign aid workers); and greater ownership of aid programmes.

Then again, it’s complicated. The humanitarian sector is part of wider complex social, political and economic systems; at this very moment, I wouldn’t be able to say what the full far-reaching implications are if INGOs hired local staff for expat roles. I also acknowledge that in the business of emergency response (particularly in sudden onset disasters), there is still an added value from expats’ technical proficiencies.

But I am bringing up this relatively radical idea to highlight that contexts like the Philippines now have strong existing capacities (which I’m sure the many years of INGOs’ “capacity building” has improved – so if anything, those interventions in the past worked!); and that maybe we need to rethink how current INGOs operate in these particular contexts.  Maybe it’s time to imagine an alternative to the default configuration of what Evil Genius calls the “humanitarian ménage a trois” of donors, implementers and beneficiaries, to wit, where are the local actors in that?

One phrase from Tobias’s article caught my attention: he wrote that despite the increasing localisation of aid and the rapidly changing world we live in, “expat aid workers will continue to exist.” I can’t help but wonder: is he saying that as long as low-income countries receive international aid funding, then expat aid workers will continue to exist? Or is he saying this in a broader sense – that expat aid workers will continue to exist indefinitely?

As a citizen of the Global South, I am motivated to work within the international development and humanitarian sector towards the goal that aid-receiving countries such as my own will progress in such a way that we won’t need international assistance in the future anymore (or as much) – just like the US or the UK or much of the “developed world.” I’d like to think this is what my fellow countrymen aspire for, too. In fact in our survey, a slight majority of Filipino aid workers think that the aid sector in the Philippines is “very quickly becoming more ‘localized’” as opposed to continuing to be “dominated by international aid organizations.”

And I hope our partners and colleagues from the UK or US or Japan or other traditional donor countries envision the same outcome for our society.

So does my hypothesis – that local aid workers can do most expat roles better in the Philippines – prove true? TBC, needs further research! But I definitely think it’s high time to acknowledge the changing, increasingly stronger existing capacities in countries like the Philippines, and have a frank, honest and constructive discussion about the international development and humanitarian sector’s way of working in the future.

I look forward to hearing others’ thoughts!  You can contact me on Twitter @arbiebaguios or Tom via email or Twitter @tarcaro.

---

Note: Our survey of aid and development workers in the Philippines closes on Monday.  Very soon after that we will be doing some posts about the results.

 

 

[updated 19-4-17]

Tweet explained

Tweet
A few days ago I tweeted “Local aid workers more satisfied, perceive higher work impact than expats despite seeing compensation disparity.”  Here’s some clarification.

I based this statement on data from the survey J (Evil Genius) and I began in 2014 and more recent data from a survey focusing exclusively on aid and development workers in The Philippines.  Elsewhere in this blog I wrote about the compensation disparity here and the job satisfaction and perception of making an impact here.  I put those two posts together and composed the tweet.  If you have time read these posts for detail and background.

One size does not fit all
What I did not do in the tweet -I am a symptom of the problem- is add any qualifiers and/or contextualizing modifiers.  Hey, with a 140 character limit how much you can say?

The bottom line is that I presented a generalization that raised more questions than it answered. My tweet added mud to already pretty charged and unclear waters, namely the issues surrounding the expat versus local worker discussions that appear to be a steady source of rancor –or at least discussion– within the sector.  Here my colleague Tobias Denskus gives his sage views. He says, in part, that “Aid work is professionalising and that will mean more opportunities for local workers and changing roles for expats.” Indeed, that the sector rapidly continues evolving, morphing and adapting necessitates continuous discussion, reflection and, yes, policy changes including within HR departments.

Here’s the deal regarding any ‘local’ versus ‘expat’ worker comparisons:  there is no ‘one size fits all’ explanation. Each region of the world and each type of aid/development environment is unique and needs to be examined as such.  The Philippines are not Jordan, Syria, DRC, Cambodia or the Sudan.  Innumerable historical, sociocultural, bureaucratic, and economic context dependent variables must come in to play in any discussion of ‘expat v. local’ disparities.  That there are disparities is a given, but again these differences are context dependent.  Two critical questions seem to be (1) why this is the case and (2) is it ‘fair’?

In response to the above Evil Genius added,

“I would also argue that motivations for working internationally, as an “expat aid worker” are a critical piece of the picture because those motivations drive assumptions and expectations about what constitutes “fair” compensation. And I would further argue that those motivations are shaped by one’s life experience, which in turn is rooted in where they are from in the world. It is not enough to dissect the specifics of the contexts that expats work in, but also where they’re from.”

I could not agree more. In addition to the variables I cite above, any thoughtful discussion regarding expat versus local anything must reflect that fact that neither ‘expat aid workers’ nor ‘local aid workers’ are monolithic, static, homogeneous or, critically, that their motivations are immaterial.

From top to bottom and in different locations -urban and rural- the complex array of personnel that is takes to keep any projects moving is staggering to comprehend, let alone make blanket generalizations about.  And as J points out above, the lived experience of any single worker (expat or local) is going to be complicated and involve many factors such as the stage in one’s career, marital/partnered status, children (and ages thereof), where ‘home’ happens to be, and on and on.  All of these factors come into play as the question of ‘fair’ compensation gets aired.

Indeed, the very phrase ‘expat versus local’ infers a neat binary categorization scheme which increasingly is hard to define let alone defend.

History lesson
One of the earliest serious discussions of how to address the compensation packages for staff from a variety of nations was held in meetings among those who first populated the League of Nations a century ago.  It was in this context that the Noblemaire and Flemming principles were first articulated.  Here is a very pity summary of the Noblemarie principle, and below is one version of both principles.

The League of Nations became the United Nations in 1945 and inherited, among other baggage, these guiding principles.  This 1997 statement below from the UN/International Civil Service Commission gives detail and is instructive.

“ICSC noted that the Noblemaire principle had a universal focus while the Flemming principle focused on local conditions of service. It was therefore difficult to compare a methodology that needed to be responsive to local labour market conditions, which could at times be volatile, with a methodology that needed to respond to the application of uniform conditions of service on a global basis. The reference labour markets of the Noblemaire and Flemming principles were essentially different, the former being linked to the public sector of one Member State and the latter linked to the overall labour market of individual Member States. In view of the linkage of the Noblemaire and Flemming principles to different labour markets, it was to be expected that the resulting measurement of conditions of service would be different.”

Though what is described as the ‘aid sector’ is made up of many kinds of organizations, big and small, I think that at least one fundamental issue regarding ‘local v. expat’ compensation is articulated fairly well using the Noblemaire and Flemming principle language.

Does a ‘duel compensation’ structure have negative impact?
Research initiated in New Zealand by the “ADDUP  project (Are Development Discrepancies Undermining Performance)” lead to the publication of “International–local remuneration differences across six countries: Do they undermine poverty reduction work?”  by Stuart C. Carr and Ishbel McWha, Malcolm MacLachlan, Adrian Furnham in 2010 and this update just a year ago.  Carr and McWha-Hermann’s sum up their findings with this statement “…the fall-out from pay disparities can damage relationships in the workplace and thereby interfere with aid effectiveness.” 

I am not positive that our data from The Philippines supports this statement.

Whenever there are compensation disparities, it will be noticed by those on the short end of the deal.  This is not an ‘aid sector’ phenomenon.  Just the opposite, recognition of ‘compensation disparities’ even transcends our species.  Here is researcher Frans de Waal (short; 2:39 play time) explaining our sense of fairness.  If you can invest a bit more, here is a longer version.

Yes, in one sense I lied above when I said there is no ‘one size fits all’ explanation.

Our data
So, back to the question, does a ‘duel compensation’ structure have negative impact?  In terms of the Filipino aid and development workers -as I stated in my tweet- our data indicates that they like what they do and feel that their work makes a positive difference in their nation, this despite recognizing -and some of them carping about- a compensation disparity.

As a footnote I’ll add that at my home academic institution there are significant disparities in pay between the various schools within the university.  For example, Law school faculty get paid, on average, much more than Arts and Sciences.  Fair?  Perhaps yes.  Faculty get paid in large part based on simple supply and demand; what the market will bare.  I may carp, on occasion, but not loudly.  I like what I do and I think that it makes a positive impact. And so it goes.

Dialectician’s prayer
In sociology we talk about ‘real culture’ versus ‘ideal culture.’   Ideal culture is what we say things should be -official documents like the US Constitution or the UN Charter, for example.

Real culture is how things are:  at times ugly, unjust, and a bare imitation of our ideals.

The question faced by any organization at whatever level is how to minimize the gap between the real and the ideal.  A tough and never-ending job, that, especially when it comes to satisfying people’s sense of ‘fairness.’

In the case of the aid and development sector, closing that gap means more discussion, more collection of data, more stories shared, and ultimately, perhaps, revised policies both within specific organizations and even sector-wide. Changes will not come about quickly or to the satisfaction of everyone, but just engaging in the process of articulating and then working on the issue is the least we can do.

Questions or comments?  Contact me.

 

 

A quick look comparing new Filipino data with (mostly) expat data from 2014

Context
In spring of 2014 25+ year veteran aid worker J (Evil Genius) and I launched a survey that ultimately had over 1000 responses from aid and development workers globally.  Most who responded were ‘expat’ aid workers, and a majority of those from the global north. The results of that survey were the original basis for this blog and my book Aid Worker Voices.  In this short post I compare the responses from the 2014 data and the responses now coming in from aid and development workers in the Philippines where we currently have well over 100 respondents.   For the most part I will present the ‘what’ and not the ‘why’, leaving deeper analysis for when we close the current survey in a couple weeks.

What difference am I making?
Though the question and response option wordings were slightly different in the two surveys, the contrast between the Filipino aid and development workers and our larger, mostly expat responses are dramatic.  The vast majority -95%- of the workers from the Philippines reported that their work makes a big positive (76%) or at least a moderate positive (20%) impact. Here is the data so far from our survey in the Philippines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By contrast, only 46% of the expat workers reported believing that their efforts make a big positive or moderate difference. Demographically the two samples are similar in terms of gender and years of service.  So, how to explain this huge difference with almost all -95%- to less than half -46%?  I’ll leave deeper analysis on that until we have all the data and examine the responses to more questions, but my impulse now is to attribute a portion of the difference to cultural factors and another portion to the fact that, well, Filipino workers feel like they are making significant impact with their work, a clear sign of overall job satisfaction.

So, let us turn to that question.

 

 

 

Like what you do?

Another, more straightforward question related to job satisfaction is “Do you like what you do [as an aid or development professional]?  On the left below are the Filipino results indicating again an overwhelming majority -90%-signaling that they like what they do “a great deal.”  On the right are the 2014 results indicating a much less robust 57% saying they like their job to “a great extent.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, why do Filipino aid workers appear to like their jobs more and feel that they are making a bigger impact with their work than do (mostly) expat aid workers?  Future research efforts are needed to (1) confirm the above and (2) to probe deeper into the ‘why’ as to these differences.

Why are you where you are?
A third question which provided an addition contrast had to do with why the respondent was in the aid sector to begin with.  Here are the results, again with the recent data from the Philippines on the left and 2014 survey on the right. As I mentioned above, the question and response option wordings were slightly different in the two surveys, but both offered a “help the less fortunate” option.  Of the three comparisons I make in this post, this one is more ‘apples and oranges’ than the other two in that there is a big difference between “other” and “None of the above.”  That said, the data offer big differences.

Among the Filipino aid and development workers a clear majority -57%- indicated they entered the sector because they wanted to “help the less fortunate.”  The 2014 data show only about a third -32%- indicating the same motivation.

More to come
Describing results is always easy compared to explaining what patterns and differences appear.  As a mentioned above, some variation may be attributable to cultural differences, but I think there are other factors at pay. As is the nature of exploratory research such of this my hope is that these preliminary data can help us move forward in better understanding both local and expat aid and development workers.

Soon to come more thoughts on the ‘dual compensation’ issue.

As always, if you have comments or feedback reach me here and Arbie on Twitter @arbiebaguios.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preliminary results from survey of aid and development workers in the Philippines

The gap
Among the questions addressed in our survey is the much discussed pay gap between local -in this case Filipino- aid workers and their expat counterparts. Other researchers have begun to drill down into this question, and the work teams based at Massey University/University of New Zealand (MU/UNZ) provide very useful data and insights specifically on the question “Are Development Discrepancies Undermining Performance?”

In a recent research note based on data generated by the MU/UNZ Project Add-up, Carr and McWha-Hermann said, “Expatriates are often quick to dismiss dual salary systems as a non-issue. But local workers told us a different story. They said disparities created significant feelings of workplace injustice. They felt less valued than their expatriate colleagues.”

Our current research in the Philippines is beginning to provide support for this statement.  As you can see below, most -77%- agreed that “Filipino aid workers generally get paid less than expat (non-Filipino) aid workers doing the same or similar jobs in the Philippines.”

So far most of the comments about working with expat aid workers is that it is a “…very positive experience.” That said, there are some respondents  who appear to feel acutely the differences between how locals and expats are treated regarding pay and other benefits.

One respondent was very pointed,

“Mostly, expats get paid like 10x higher than the local workers and enjoy all the benefits like free board and lodging, higher per diem when doing field work, and they can demand good and high class hotels for accommodation, but for the local they need to justify all this to enjoy these benefits. In terms of risk and security, during field work if it like dangerous, it is okay for expats not to go to the area, but for locals it a must to deliver your expected result even you are doing same job. Expats can hire good vehicle or they are provided of good transportation when sometimes locals should take the local transportation.”

The relationship
How do Filipino aid workers feel about working with expats?  Over 84% indicated that “I generally have a positive working experience with foreign colleagues.”

They are generally happy dealing with non-Filipinos because, in the words of one respondent,

“Working with non Filipino colleagues is a great experience in my life because we share our ideas freely and we gain more knowledge from them and they are kind to us.”

I am troubled by the last phrase “… they are kind to us.”  Another said,

“Its a great previllege working on them … such an honor.”

Again, I am troubled by the language being used here and sense a pattern indicating a distinctly asymmetrical power dynamic. This survey question “Which comment best describes the way your foreign colleagues interact with you? gets to my point, perhaps.

As you can see to the right, well over a third so far feel that [foreign colleagues] think they are superior to local aid workers.

We have no specific data as to the research question cited above (“Are Development Discrepancies Undermining Performance?”), but my sociological instincts lead me to suspect at least a slight impact on performance.

As more data come in there will be more posts and comments. The survey will remain live for the next few weeks giving the chance for more Filipino aid and development workers to have their voices heard.  In the meantime my collaborator, Filipino aid worker Arbie Baguios, and I will continue reviewing the data looking for patterns and notable quantitative results.

An additional thought on the gap 
The question, “Is the wage gap between expats and locals a function of the market – or plain old discrimination? is certainly worth asking, but the answer will, I hazard, more complicated than a yes or no.  All organizations -both inside the aid sector and well beyond- struggle to determine what is fair in terms of compensation packages and then finding a way to balance doing what is fair and doing what is practical, and that may mean cutting overhead by minimizing ‘local’ wages based on the blind logic of the market.  The driving logic may be that the money saved, after all, can be used to provide more aid.  And, yes, some might argue, this is ‘plain old discrimination.’

So, to conclude on an anti-neoliberal note, a truly just world will never happen as long as we allow an acephalous, amoral (and, hence, immoral?) system to determine how most decisions are made.

Comments or feedback?  Reach me here and Arbie on Twitter @arbiebaguios.