Imagine there are two NGOs and both their mission is to teach arithmetic to underprivileged children.
NGO A is a very honest and transparent NGO. It follows the Credibility Alliance norms, it publishes Annual reports every year and is run by an upstanding team. NGO A has been able to teach the children addition and subtraction, as measured by an external benchmarking test.
NGO B is not transparent and does not follow the Credibility Alliance norms. It is run by a team that skims Rs25 from every Rs100 they get, BUT with the remaining Rs75 they have taught the children multiplication and division along with addition and subtraction, as proven by the same external benchmarking test.
As a donor how does this make you feel? On the one hand, the instinct is to say that NGO A is better because they are honest but on the other hand if the end goal is to see that the children learn arithmetic, then NGO B is doing a better job.
Say you had Rs100 to give to either NGO A or NGO B (there is no NGO C available) who would you give it to and why?
It's a very tough choice between integrity or competence, but I would choose the NGO with integrity.
Trust is very important for me and I would not be able to give my money to an NGO I did not trust. If they skim 25% of the money today, there is a culture of mistrust and nothing to stop the from skimming 50% tomorrow and 75% the day after.
Transparency is crucial in a charity setting.
It is not only transparency but also growth which an NGO should aim at. If one has to cater to some unavoidable problems, it is inevitable that dishonesty seeps in. However, am not speaking for the NGO B. But, I guess it is a mixture of both honesty and hardwork which is needed. One on its own would look like a crippled man.
I would definitely be inclined to choose the NGO with integrity. Every penny counts. It's important for any one making a donation to know that all of the money donated has been used very carefully and honestly. Money wisely and honestly appropriated towards a particular fund or cause goes a long way.
Ok, so far everyone leaning towards NGO A, the one with integrity.
Are there any devil's advocates out there who want to make a case for NGO B?
Let me change the situation: You have a Builder A and Builder B.
While Builder A is honest but has less competence. He constructs your house as specified but there are lot of technical problems left unattended.
While Builder B is corrupt and used less quality cement then mentioned - used less steel but brilliant technically so you have a better building with no technical problems
Where do you go? Builder B I guess.
So why should the child learn less. Does he really care how much was spent on them.
Transparancy and competence do matter. You need to work on them.
So if you have transparant NGO you need to improve their competence. Similarly you can work on NGO transparancy.
Were companies closed because they were corrupt you work on their corporate governance..
ok .. I sign off..
Interesting point of view Praveen. Are you saying that after having financially supported a NGO, you would be less upset if you found out they were dishonest rather than incompetent?
I would certainly donate to NGO B, if its really trustable.
The end result is more important..
Some NGO really do nice work to help people but some NGO are starting by politicians only just to make publicity of their party.
Invitation letter