Message-ID: <19980711035112.20570.rocketmail@send1a.yahoomail.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 20:51:12 -0700 From: sam mwoko <mailto:samie_1001@YAHOO.COM> Subject: Re: Consultancy Problems (Was BAD EXPERIENCES) To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
Bravo!If this is not specific, I do not know what is!
You want specific. will you accept this. Should you want I wil give you names and addresses to verify. 1. I have worked in the Economic Ministry of a low income country. I have seen $ 35 million poured into studies of food security which basically only served to get 3 of the consultants into the World Bank. The money spent did nothing for the people. Had the money been just randomly distributed among the peasants, they would have been better off. 2. I have seen AID sink millions of dollars into a storage project and leave behind only computers and jeeps that were hungrily consumed into private property. 3. I have seen at least 5 projects where consultants from a big US firm consumed $ 15- 30 million for setting up research cells in agricultural ministries, central banks and such like leaving behind nothing.
I could go on but I think that the S_P_E_C_I_F_I_C point has been made.
Before some of you jump down my throat. In contrast, let me also say that there was life before donors. Many countries were able to lay down large infrastrucutre without donor help. India is a prime example where a communication network almost as vast as the US was laid out by a inidan civil service.
---Dr Richard Heeks <mailto:mzdid10@FS1.EC.MAN.AC.UK> wrote: >
> As I consultant, if I want repeat business from either the
> recipient or the donor, there is a simple first rule: 'Find out who's
> in charge; find out what they want; write that down in the report'.
>
> At least that's a bit better than some whose first rule is: 'Find a
> similar consultancy in our files; cut and paste to make it appear
> relevant; churn around for a few days pretending to gather data;
> submit cut/pasted report; claim large fee'.
>
> One of our study fellows had work like this from one of the 'Big
> Five' - they'd got almost all the cut and paste right, but had missed
> out the footnotes and diagrams, which still referred to Kenya (this
> was in Zambia). In a number of other cases, I've worked alongside
> consultants who'd written their report before the plane landed.
>
> But...don't heap all the blame on consultants (some of us do try to
> do a decent job, not always looking for repeat business). Whenever I
> go out, I ask for recipient counterparts who will work alongside with
> me, and then take ownership of problems and solutions. This hardly
> ever happens. Partly because recipient organisation staff are
> disempowered by donor money - the donor is seen as running the show
> and agenda (see Eberhard's previous message). But partly because
> recipient staff play their own games - using donor money to improve
> their organisation frequently seems to come well down a list of
> objectives that is headed by things like getting overseas trips and
> overseas training, getting cars, IT and other equipment, and (for a
> few) getting kickbacks on related contracts.
>
> So, to misquote an old phrase, it takes three to tangle - the aid and
> consultancy game continues and continues to produce limited results
> because, in the main, it suits everyone: donors, consultants, and
> recipients.
>
> Richard
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Richard Heeks
> Lecturer, Information Systems & Development
> Institute for Development Policy & Management
> University of Manchester
> Precinct Centre
> Manchester M13 9GH
> U.K.
> Phone: +44-161-275-2870
> Fax: +44-161-273-8829
> Email: mailto:Richard.Heeks@man.ac.uk
> IDPM Web: http://www.man.ac.uk/idpm
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
_________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free mailto:@yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com