Whose agenda is it Anyway?

In our work at Sanjog, a crucial question we continually ask ourselves is: Are our actions driven by the felt needs of the communities and systems we engage with, or are they propelled by our convictions and beliefs in the relevance of those actions? We believe neither approach is wrong or right, in absolute. Sometimes, actions driven by one's convictions and agenda, even against the grain of the context, may eventually turn out to be 'right'. And sometimes, such actions can be brutal, violence and exploitative, However, clarity about the nature of dilemmas in decision taking, acknowledgment of the grays and the unintended consequences, and awareness of risks are essential. It may lead to slower decision making and action, and that may be criticised as lack of responsiveness.

Consider this scenario: An organisation working on education in Rajasthan discovers a high incidence of sexual transgressions between teachers and students, particularly girls. This organisation faces a dilemma: addressing sexual violence is beyond its mandate and expertise. Furthermore, intervening might jeopardise its collaboration with schools on educational initiatives. Here, the contextual need is stark; girls have confided these incidents to the organisation but have not disclosed them to their families, fearing their parents would withdraw them from school for protection. Would the organisation's decision not to intervene be seen as willful negligence and dereliction of duty?

On the other hand, let's examine an organisation dedicated to child rights that rescues children from labor situations. These children may be forced into labour or may 'consent' due to beliefs about employability or guilted by familial financial necessity. Rescuing children and returning them to contexts of poverty and inadequate welfare services often leads to them returning to labor. The organisation operates on the conviction that any situation is better than child labour, despite differing opinions from the children and their families. While human rights laws aim to guide such decisions, they often fall short in practicality and may not always serve the best interests of the individuals or communities involved. These scenarios present complex dilemmas.

A cornerstone of social sector work is becoming aware of and engaging with dilemmas. Dilemmas are never strictly personal or organisational; they resonate with others who may have felt similarly but may never have been able to articulate. Sharing dilemmas can lead to resonance, support, collaboration and empathy. On the other hand, sharing dilemmas makes organisations vulnerable, potentially perceived as 'weak' by some and judged or trolled by the self-righteous. However, we at Sanjog believe that for any organisation aiming to grow and build meaningful context, engaging with dilemmas is not only par for the course but a critical capability for credibility. Therefore, it also takes judicious discerning for the organisation to decide where do I express and share my dilemmas, with whom, and how. What are the spaces of trust where one can disclosure and share one's dilemmas?

Engaging with dilemmas openly fosters a culture of shared understanding and collective problem-solving. It encourages organisations to reflect on their motivations and align their actions with the genuine needs of the communities they serve. In doing so, they build trust and foster a deeper connection with those they aim to support.

In conclusion, acknowledging and addressing dilemmas is a testament to an organisation's integrity and commitment to its mission. It is through this engagement that we find true resonance and support, paving the way for meaningful and impactful work in the social sector. So, whose agenda is it anyway? It's a shared agenda, built on a foundation of clarity, awareness, and a willingness to navigate the complexities of our work together.

#decision #leadership #culture #indic #choices #dilemmas