Organizations

Abstract

If education is the best prevention, then organization is a best solution to the issue of poverty. Organizations are quite literally a missing link in poverty reduction policies and plans. Yet we know that any two organizations can differ greatly from each other in terms of climate, leadership, and culture—and that these differences make a difference to performances by NGOs, businesses, schools, and government departments. Knowing what makes the difference is highly informative for organizing anti-poverty initiatives. A cross-sector review of organizational effectiveness in poverty reduction highlights at least four core elements for anti-poverty success: (a) clear organizational goals, (b) some latitude to set them, and (c) valued incentives to reach them. These three processes at work can combine to help (d) internalize the plan—organizational cultures of purpose and performance. Broadly speaking, those human factors are socio-political (a) and (b); socio-economic (c) and socio-cultural (d). The four elements combine to moderate how successfully organizations combat poverty, directly through decent work and indirectly via decent services. Take the institution “dual salaries”, where international workers are remunerated differently from often equally skilled and qualified local counterparts. Research on dual salaries shows that they increase poverty absolute and relative; and that the extent of damage depends significantly not on country or sector but rather on the organization. Some of these organizations are taking such evidence seriously and boldly reforming the dual salary system for greater alignment and harmonization. Determining what works versus not is a challenge and opportunity for cross-sector partnerships.

“Mutu umodzi susenza denga” (one head does not carry the roof).

-Malaŵian proverb.