27928239

Negotiating the Boundaries of Voluntarism: Values in the Indian NGO Sector
Author(s): Tanya Jakimow

Source: Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 21,
No. 4 (December 2010), pp. 546-568
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27928239 .
Accessed: 24/12/2014 11:11
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Voluntas: International
Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Voluntas
(2010) 21:546-568
10.1007/sl 1266-010-9154-4
DOI
ORIGINAL
FAPEE
the Boundaries
Negotiating
of Voluntarism:
Values
in the Indian NGO Sector
Tanya Jakimow
online: 26 August 2010

International Society for Third-Sector
Published
?
Research
and The John's Hopkins
University
2010
Values are an essential part of the identity of non-government organi

Abstract
zations (NGOs), distinguishing them from other sectors and contributing to their
legitimacy. Values are neither uncontested nor wholly self-determined, but rather
are products of the broader social and political environment. The meaning of values
must be negotiated with multiple actors, such as funding agencies, the state, and the
general public including their "clients." This paper looks at the ways that the
negotiated and contested in
meaning of a particular NGO value?voluntarism?is
India. I argue that conceptualizations of voluntarism are neither singular, nor static,
that NGOs
and
draw
on
these
to claim
legitimacy,
or contest
them
through
counter
narratives. These struggles over the meaning of voluntarism are in themselves

productive, shaping organizational identity,and functioning. Values can thereby be
a useful analytical tool to understanding NGOs.
Les valeurs sont des ?l?ments essentiels de l'identit? des organisations
Resume
non gouvernementales (ONG), ce qui les distingue des autres secteurs et qui con
tribue ? leur l?gitimit?. Les valeurs sont ni incontest?es ni totalement auto
d?termin?es, mais sont plut?t des produits issus de l'ensemble de l'environnement
social et politique. Le sens des valeurs doit ?tre n?goci? avec plusieurs acteurs, tels
que les organismes de financement, l'?tat, et le grand public, y compris leurs
? clients ?. Cette ?tude examine les fa?ons dont le sens du b?n?volat, une valeur
sp?cifique aux ONG, est n?goci? et contest? en Inde. Jemontre que les conceptu
alisations du b?n?volat ne sont ni singuli?res, ni fig?es, et que les ONG s'en in
spirent pour revendiquer leur l?gitimit?, ou les contester ? travers des contre-r?cits.
T. Jakimow
School
of Philosophy, Anthropology
of Melbourne, Melbourne,
University
and Social
Australia
Inquiry,
T. Jakimow (ISI)
6/8 Bryce St., St Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia
e-mail: Tanya.Jakimow@csiro.au
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
547
21:546-568
Ces luttes sur le sens du b?n?volat sont en elles-m?mes constructives, en fa?onnant

l'identit? des organisations et leur fonctionnement. Les valeurs peuvent de ce fait
?tre un outil d'analyse utile pour la compr?hension des ONG.
sind ein wesentlicher Bestandteil der
Zusammenfassung
Wertvorstellungen
was
sie von anderen Sektoren
Identit?t nicht-staatlicher Organisationen,
unterscheidet und zu ihrerLegitimit?t beitr?gt. Die Werte sind weder unumstritten
noch g?nzlich selbstbestimmt, sondern sie sind vielmehr die Produkte eines
weitl?ufigeren gesellschaftlichen und politischen Umfelds. Die Bedeutung der
Werte muss mit mehreren Akteuren verhandelt werden, zum Beispiel mit
F?rderstellen, dem Staat und der allgemeinen ?ffentlichkeit, einschlie?lich ihrer
?Auftraggeber". Dieser Beitrag betrachtet die Art undWeise, in der die Bedeutung
eines speziellen Wertes nicht-staatlicher Organisationen - der Voluntarismus - in
Indien ausgehandelt und bestritten wird. Ich behaupte, dass die Konzeptionali
sierungen des Voluntarismus weder singul?r noch statisch sind und dass die nicht
staatlichen Organisationen sich entweder auf diese st?tzen, um Legitimit?t f?r sich
zu beanspruchen, oder sie durch Gegennarrativen bestreiten. Allein die Ausei
nandersetzungen ?ber die Bedeutung von Voluntarismus sind bereits produktiv und
formen die Identit?t und Funktionalit?t einer Organisation. Werte k?nnen dabei ein
n?tzliches analytisches Werkzeug zum Verst?ndnis nicht-staatlicher Organisatio
nen
darstellen.
Resumen
Los valores son una parte esencial de la identidad de las organizaciones
no gubernamentales (ONG), distingui?ndolas de otros sectores y contribuyendo a su
legitimidad. Los valores no son ni indiscutibles ni autodeterminados, sino m?s bien
productos de un entorno social y pol?tico m?s amplio. El significado de los valores
debe negociarse con muchos interesados, como los organismos de financiaci?n, el
estado y el p?blico general, incluyendo sus clientes. En este trabajo se analiza c?mo
se negocia y se cuestiona el significado del valor (voluntarismo) de una ONG
particular de La India. Lo que argumento es que los conceptos del voluntarismo no
son ni singulares, ni est?ticos, y que las ONG se basan en ellos para reclamar
legitimidad o para discutirlo con contraargumentos. Estas batallas sobre el signifi
cado del voluntarismo son en simismas productivas, ya que conforman la identidad
y
el
funcionamiento
organizativo.
As?,
los
anal?tica ?til para comprender las ONG.

Keywords
NGOs
?Values
?Voluntarism
valores
pueden
ser
?India ?
Corruption
una
herramienta
?
Legitimacy
are an essential part of non-government organizations' (NGOs') identity,

distinguishing them from other sectors and contributing to their legitimacy. As neo
institutional theories propose, such legitimacy comes from the social environment
"Values"
of which they are a part; pressures to conform to expectations results in institutional

isomorphism, and the adoption of certain characteristics despite at times negative
gains in effectiveness (DiMaggio and Powell 1991). Despite their importance,
values are often examined superficially in the literatureon NGOs, with normative
Springer

548
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
approaches suggesting a set of values intrinsic to the sector, or critiquing NGOs for
failure to live up to them.The nature of the value is taken for granted, assumed to be
self-determined, easily defined, and uncontested. This ignores how the broader
social and political environment, including NGO relations with multiple stakehold
ers, influence, if not shape the values that underpin organizational legitimacy.
This article examines these processes, viewing organizations as products of
widespread understandings of social reality, and as an actor in the production and
re-negotiation of that environment. Specifically, I examine the value of "volunta
is understood not as concept to be
rism" in the NGO sector in India. "Values"
debated theoretically, but rather is grounded empirically, with the actors'
perspective shaping its use and meaning. While important as an NGO value and
descriptive of the sector, the fuzzy contours of voluntarism defy a clear definition or
singular understanding. I examine the ways the meaning of voluntarism is

constructed and re-negotiated, how this shapes the institutional environment for
NGOs in India, and how NGOs respond to this environment.
Analysis of these processes raises several issues overlooked in the literature.
First, I argue that greater attention needs to be placed on how meanings are
negotiated in several social settings. Institutional "logics" are not singular,
providing NGOs both the dilemma of conflicting expectations, as well as the space
to negotiate different meanings. Second, values are not necessarily unifying
concepts for theNGO sector; contests over themeaning and desirability of certain
values reflect intra-sectoral competition, and result in differentorganizational forms
and identities. Third, and most importantly, there is a need to rethink the concept of
voluntarism in theNGO sector in India, recognizing thatas a "productive concept,"
it shapes organizations in ways not always conducive to the achievement of
development
effectiveness.
It is important to note that although I am discussing the value of voluntarism, my

analysis is restricted toNGOs working in the field of "development," rather than all
organizations in the voluntary (or third) sector.NGOs refer to organizations separate
(though not necessarily independent) from the state,which receive funds to directly
implement development interventions.They are thereforea part of what Bebbington
(2004) describes as the international aid chain, whose members share a common
conceptual underpinning. The voluntary sector in India is diverse, and includes non
party political formations, people's associations, and regionalist, ethnonationalist,

and communalist movements. Although important, these organizations operate
within different institutional fields, and can be expected to hold to different values
and claims to legitimacy.
Non-Government
Organization
Values
as Legitimacy
and Identity
Non-government organizations are arguably, values-based organizations: dependent

on values for their identity, their legitimacy, and by extension survival. Criticisms
thatNGOs are indistinguishable from their donors, the state or market, or offer no
alternative (Edwards and Hulme 1997; Kamat 2003; Bebbington 1997), have made
it essential that NGOs
forge a separate identity that provides them a role in
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
549
21:546-568
need to constantly
development. Fowler (1997, p. 37) believes that NGOs
rearticulate and share theirvalues, beliefs, philosophy, and organizational principles
with key groups. This articulation and adherence to certain values is their
in their
distinguishing feature, which can be the "springboard" for NGOs
interaction with the state,market, and civil society (Fowler 2000, pp. 589, 598,
see also Edwards and Hulme 2002). Distinct values are NGOs'
comparative
advantage in relation to other development actors (Hailey 2000, p. 402).

Values, therefore,are an important component of NGO claims to legitimacy. As
development actors, it is adherence to certain values that ensure that they are
working in the best interests of the people in what are seen as appropriate ways
(Kilby 2006, p. 952). According
aspects of legitimacy.
to Edwards
(1999), values underscore all other
...legitimacy is claimed and maintained through demonstrated conformity

with locas and regulations, accepted practice standards, public expectations,
the terms of the contracts they sign and the values they espouse. The
expectation (inmuch NGO rhetoric and writing) is that it is conformitywith
values in this list thatprovides the bottom line in claiming legitimacy in this
way (Edwards 1999, p. 258).
Values
and
are the articulations that show adherence to acceptable modes of behavior
adherence
to social
norms.
Considering their importance NGO values have surprisingly remained under

theorized. The literature has tended toward exploration of values particular to, or
desirable in the sector, or have critiqued NGOs for not living up to these ideals. The
values themselves are taken for granted, and often based on "Northern"
perspectives. Missing from normative and critical accounts is an analysis of how
certain values come to take on particular meanings, and the processes of negotiation
in their construction and rearticulation. The implications go beyond the values

themselves: contestations and conflict over meanings reveal hidden transcripts.
These transcripts illuminate aspects of NGO work thathave not been considered, or
that remain hidden under the "rhetoric" and public face of organizations. Values are
thereforenot only a subject to be studied, but can be considered an analytical tool.
Neo-institutional approaches to organizations provide a useful avenue for
values. These
articulating a more theoretically informed account of NGO
as
arena
to
draw
broader
environment
the
in
which claims
attention
the
approaches
to legitimacy and subsequent values are produced and negotiated (DiMaggio and
1991). Organizations, situated within a social arena, "seek to establish
congruence between the social values associated with or implied by their activities
and the norms of acceptable behaviour in the larger social system of which they are
Powell
a part" (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975, p. 122). This congruence provides organizations
with legitimacy, without which relations with actors upon which organizations are
dependent break down, undermining survival (DiMaggio and Powell 1983, p. 150).
This is perhaps even more so the case with NGOs, as legitimacy is a key
requirement for the receipt of funds.
The need to be compatible with norms and social values results in similarity, if
not homogeneity across organizations within the same sector (DiMaggio and Powell
?

Springer
550
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
1983). The environment inwhich organizations operate shape the cognitive frames
of actors, "creating the lenses throughwhich actors view the world and the very
categories of structure, action and thought" (DiMaggio and Powell 1991, p. 13).
Organizations operating within the same field, start to resemble one another,
resulting in institutional isomorphism, which "results from both formal and
informal pressures exerted on organizations upon which they are dependent and by
cultural expectations in the society within which organizations function" (DiMag
gio and Powell 1983, p. 150). This results in the adoption of certain practices
and procedures regardless of their immediate utility in order to survive (Meyer and
Rowan
1983). This explains the seemingly irrational organizational form and
behavior, where compatibility with sectoral norms takes precedence over organi
zational
effectiveness.
(1998) makes such an observation in the NGO sector. He argues that

responsiveness to donors has resulted in NGOs
communicating in the same
and
the
values
of
their
donors
and
each other. The result is
language,
adopting
institutional isomorphism: a sector of NGOs thathave all come to take on the same
form, rather than reflect the plural values of the people they are said to represent.
NGOs are required to adopt values compatible with the perceptions and worldviews
Tvedt
of their donors, in the process losing their identity (Edwards and Hulme 1997).
Values in this sense are a productive mechanism, throughwhich NGOs start to take
on
a certain
form.
While the emphasis has been on similarities across organizations, early writings
in neo-institutionalism also demonstrate how organizations resist or circumnavigate
particular values. Dowling and Pfeffer (1975) argue that while organizational
legitimacy
and
thereby
behavior
is tied
to social
norms,
these
norms
are
not
static,
and can be contested. They suggest that organizations can take several approaches
to legitimacy:
First, the organization can adapt its output, goals, and methods of operation to
conform to prevailing definitions of legitimacy. Second, the organization can
attempt, through communication, to alter the definition of social legitimacy so
that it conforms to the organization's present practices, output and values.
Finally, the organization can attempt, again through communication, to
become identified with symbols, values, or institutions,which are strongly
believed
to be legitimate (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975, p. 127).
Contestations and negotiations over themeaning of symbols and values have not
been explored in relation to theNGO sector. This is despite the potential of such
analysis to identify those values with which NGOs face particular difficulty or
display reluctance to conform to, and their strategies in overcoming subsequent
threats to their legitimacy.
The NGO sector in India presents an interesting case study for neo-institutional
approaches to organizations due to the trans-national nature of themultiple actors
involved in producing social meanings. The social arena in which NGOs in India
operate includes villages on the local level, national media and state institutions,and
a global development "community." The "cultural" perspective in neo-institution
alism highlights the global nature of the cultural and symbolic patterns that shape
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
551
21:546-568
institutions, resulting in increasing standardization and homogenization across

national boundaries (Djelic and Quack 2003). This is a defining feature of
globalization. Such patterns are particularly evident in the development sector, as
trans-national
actors
and
discourses
shape
the
norms
that
determine
what
are
appropriate development activities and institutional forms. Research that examines

the trans-national nature of institutional fields, tends to focus on the emergence of
global institutions, or institutional system change at the global level. What is
missing from these accounts, are theways thatglobal cultural and symbolic patterns
are experienced by organizations that are embedded in localized or national
institutional fields.What are the changes that occur within these organizations as a
result of their involvement in trans-national social areanas?
Such an analysis needs to incorporate the relative power of different actors to
shape meanings, while at the same time paying attention to how weaker groups (or
fringe players) resist or challenge these. The development sector seemingly adheres
to a dominant mode of institutional building (Djelic and Quack 2003), in which
powerful actors have greater influence shaping institutional fields to suit their
interests.Lister (2003, p. 188) draws attention to the power relations inwhich the
symbols (and values) bestowing legitimacy acquire theirmeaning, arguing that
organizations do not construct theirown legitimacy, but rather it is "the 'reward' for
activity which conforms to dominant discourses." While Tvedt (1998) argues that
this results in institutional isomorphism, this ignores the multiple ways that
institutionalnorms are incorporated.Attention to the diversity ofNGOs' values, and
subsequent clashes over meaning, therefore highlights these power relations and
struggles.
The theoretical insights of neo-institutional and discourse analysis have not been
applied to interrogate themeaning of values in theNGO sector. Analysis of the
contestations and rearticulations of the value of voluntarism in theNGO sector in
India can yield important insights intoNGO identity, theirworking environment,
and their relations with others. This article seeks to do precisely this, in the process
arguing that the analysis of values can assist in furtheringunderstandings of the
NGO sector. Further, by highlighting the heretofore unrecognised contested nature
of those values, I demonstrate the productive power of different conceptualizations
of voluntarism.
Research
Approach
Lister (2003) argues that clashes over themeaning of legitimacy highlight areas
where related issues matter. It is therefore important to note that the identification of
voluntarism as an importantand contested value came through engagement with the
NGO sector, rather than as a pre-identified topic. This is characteristic of the
qualitative methods employed, which enabled issues to emerge from the research
process.
In 2008,1 spent 10months researching theNGO sector in a state inNorth India.

During this time, I conducted participant observation with an NGO over 8 months,
and was associated with a second. This participant observation was supplemented
Springer

552
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
with previous experiences working for three other NGOs

in three states in India:
6 weeks in Assam in 2002; 3 months in Tamil Nadu in 2003; and 8 months in
Uttarakhand in 2006. These experiences also enabled me to engage with NGO
workers from different organizations, extended through participation at NGO
gatherings such as workshops and fairs.Working for and researching NGOs was
also a topic of conversation with people outside the sector, providing their own
experiences with, and perspectives of NGOs.
The analysis of contestations over meanings and categories requires an insiders'
view of reality (or an "ernie" perspective). Although this can be elicited in
interviews (see below), actual meanings can be obscured by different languages, and
the perceived need to provide the "right" answers. This is particularly problematic
in the NGO sector, when NGO actors will often see foreign researchers as an
opportunity for funding, turning interviews into discussions designed to impress,

rather than enlighten. The most illuminating observations were the discussions
amongst NGO actors, where they spoke candidly about the difficulties they faced
adhering to certain values. As will become clear, the difference in terms is
important, and Hindi was an important asset I brought to the field.
In addition to participant observation, I conducted 80 interviews, with 132
directors or middle management, 44
included 60 NGO
respondents. This
fieldworkers, and 25 donor agency staff,experts, and government officials. Again,

the importance of voluntarism emerged through initial interviews (conducted at the
beginning of 2008), and was included in subsequent semi-structured interviews. The
format of interviews in which respondents were given maximum flexibility in
responding to broad questions, enabled them to make connections and articulate
their own meanings to related concepts. The final method entailed document
analysis of the printmedia (predominately inEnglish) and related NGO documents
including brochures and annual reports. This provided data on the way themedia
portrayed
NGOs,
and NGOs'
self-representation.
important form of data resulting from these methods were the narratives
related to voluntarism, and related concepts such as corruption and professionalism.
I used narratives in much the same way as Gupta (1995, 2005) who relayed
narratives of corruption to demonstrate how people interactwith state institutions,
and to reveal the moral universe of subjects. Stories illuminate people's
expectations of the state, and the role it plays in their lives. Such narratives are
An
productive, in that they not only reflect people's understandings, but also shape
them (Gupta 2005, p. 190). Sharing narratives between peers and in themedia are a
mechanism throughwhich "public expectations" are voiced, and formed.
Likewise, attention to processes of legitimation (de Sardan 1999) can highlight
how actors will try to negotiate these boundaries. As de Sardan (1999) notes, the
perpetrators of "corruption" will rarely define theiractions as such, but will identify
corruption amongst other actors. NGO actors' stories and representations were often
the ways through which they legitimated their actions, illuminating how they
attempted to refashion the identityof their organizations. I use the term "counter
to present themselves as "legitimate"
narratives" to capture attempts by NGOs
despite their non-conformity to voluntary ideals.
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
Voluntarism
553
21:546-568
in the Indian Context
Voluntary has a dual meaning: undertaking action of one's own accord; and
undertaking service without payment. Both meanings have resonance in theNGO
sector.
It
is
person's
free
choice
to become
involved
or
a member
of
an
organization; often, this involvement, even when undertaken in a professional

capacity, has no, or only token remuneration. This distinction is at times used as the
basis of identification of NGOs. Lewis (2007, p. 68) uses Etzioni's conceptual
framework that distinguishes between organizations based on ways of achieving
compliance. These include coercive (the use of physical threats or violence);
remunerative (material resources and rewards); and normative: "based on the

manipulation of symbolic rewards and deprivations, the use of the power of
persuasion, and on appeals to shared values and idealism" (Lewis 2007, p. 68).
People working in theNGO sector in thismodel are ostensibly not motivated by
salary or wages, but by normative ideals of undertaking action they believe is right.
Hindi has an equivalent, but not synonymous term for this second meaning: seva.
refers to selfless service performed without expectation of reward in this
earthly body. It has a religious significance; as God is said to reside in each person,
serving others becomes a form of devotional practice. Voluntarism appeared as a
Hindu concept as early as 1500 bce in the Rig Veda (Sen 1999) and is related to
Seva
ideals of dharma (personal obligations) and jeev day a (humanitarian concern). In

order to suggest that it is a Hindu ideal, however, is to ignore the resonance that it
has across different religious communities in India. It has a similar meaning in
Urdu, and is an important concept in the Sikh religion.
Seva was, and continues to be, an important concept for welfare organizations
since ancient times. In ancient India up to the colonial period, the

worked
without payment in the provision of education, health, disaster
bourgeois
so
on
and
in the absence of state provision (Sen 1999, Gangrade 2005).
relief,
the
colonial
During
period and following independence, social activists and spiritual
leaders such as Gandhi, Vinoba Bahve, and Gopal Krishna promoted selfless service
as a means of spiritual awakening and national service. The Servants of India
established by Gopal Krishna attracted a wide range of followers that committed to
working for minimum remuneration, pledging their life to social work (Dhavse
and NGOs
2002).
Seva
remains an important concept to the NGO

sector, with many NGOs
actors still claim seva is
term
the
into
their
and
NGO
name,1
many
incorporating
their primarymotivation forworking in the sector. Seva has influenced the sector,
the continuation of NGOs embodying its ideals helps maintains seva's

in India today. The context in which seva is practised has, however,
changed significantly. In the past, Indian society was largely supportive of such
while
relevance
efforts,providing basic needs to support these "servants" of the community. This

not only enabled people to undertake such activities, but also demonstrated the
1
include the Self Employed Women's
Association
Seva Foundation,
Seva
(SEWA)
Examples
International, Nari Sewa Samiti, Adarsh Sewa Sansthan, Seva Sangha, Seva Trust to name but of few.
It should be noted sewa is an alternative spelling for seva.
Springer

554
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
general population's respect for voluntary work and seva as a life-choice. Two
factors have changed this situation. The first is growing skepticism of "voluntary
workers"?an
issue elaborated upon inmore detail below. The second factor is the
in the past, ostentatious
growing importance of money for class status. While
a sign of success. As
was
seen
as
more
of
wealth
wealth
is
distasteful,
display
today
and Scrase (2009, p. 11) argue, "conspicuous consumption has

Ganguly-Scrase
become an increasingly important determinant of status."
A more cynical reading of the NGO sector suggests, therefore, that seva has
become littlemore than a label; organizations are empty of the ideals thatunderpin
it.The "mushrooming" of NGOs in the 1980s and 1990s as a result of increased
funding opportunities, and high unemployment, resulted in many NGOs being
established merely as a means of livelihood (Sen 1999). Although seva is often
noted as an ideal, it ismore common thatpeople expect to earn a living from their
work. As noted above, this is linked to the class structure in India, which, especially
since the early 1990s, is increasingly driven by money. Further, as the private sector
has taken a larger role in the provision of social services including education and
health, these have become more expensive. The middle class, forwhom education is
an important component of the reproduction of their class status (Fernandes and
Heller 2008), can literally not afford to take on work voluntarily, without risking the
futureof their children. As seen below, several NGO workers explicitly raised these
concerns.
It is important to note that although similar, the English concepts of

"voluntarism" and seva have different connotations. Voluntarism, as it is
understood in the third sector in theNorth, relates to activity that is voluntary in
nature, both in terms of payment, and being a person's free choice. Seva relates to
service, working for the community. In the trans-national development community,
these nuances are often lost, or the two terms taken as interchangeable. NGOs
dealing with international donors may conceptualize voluntarism differently, but

may be constrained in how it is operationalized in order tomeet donor expectations.
For example, Jenkins (2009) observes thatdespite the different context and form of
labor in a Peruvian health program, the conceptualization of "voluntarism"
meaning no or limited payment prevailed. This was despite the long hours involved
for the predominately female and poor workforce, and the importance of theirwages
to support their family. As will be seen below, this dominant (and Northern)
conceptualization influenced NGOs' relations with theirdonors.
It is partially the conceptual mixing of seva and "voluntarism" as understood in
the global development "community" that has shaped its current contours and
ongoing relevance in the Indian context. The Voluntary Action Network of India
in the country?partly identifies
of the largest networks of NGOs
(VANI)?one
potential members through theiradherence to values of "voluntarism" (VANI 1999,
pp. 7, 8). With or without explicit reference to values of voluntarism, many NGOs
identify themselves as voluntary agencies or voluntary organizations (VOs). The

Government of India has also recently shown a preference for the termVO over that
ofNGO. The National Policy for theVoluntary Sector passed by theGovernment of
India inMay 2007 relates toVOs that are organizations engaged in public service
(Government of India 2007).
The
term was
adopted
after consultation with
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
555
21:546-568
representatives from the sector, who stated itwas their preferred label to refer to
themselves,2 compared to other terms such as NGOs, non-profit organizations, or
the "third
sector."
Beyond labeling, government regulations require the adoption of voluntary

characteristics, at least in the initial period afterNGOs are established. An NGO
must be registered under the Societies Registration Act (1860) for a period of
3 years before they can obtain a Foreign Contributions Certificate (FCRA) that is
required to accept overseas funds. NGOs are also not eligible for government
funding during this period. In practice, thismeans thatmany organizations must
initially survive without any, or only minimal funds. The founding stories of many
organizations talk about this period, with reference to the founder's volunteer labor
performed for the organization. Often, such stories relate to a "purer" period,
reflecting the "real" values of the organization. In glorifying a past of volunteer
labor, the desirability of this as an NGO characteristic is identified, even when it is
longer a guiding principle in practice. In this instance, the regulatory

environment requires adherence to voluntary norms, at the same time that the
adoption of these norms is represented as reflecting certain organizational values.
no
This shows the productive element of values, inwhich norms and ideals come to
shape organizational practice. Not all NGO actors agree, however, with the adoption
of voluntary as their key identifier,nor adhere to voluntarism as a positive value.
The "NGO or VO: the problem with labels" section presents empirical evidence
thathighlights these tensions, demonstrating how NGOs actors often need to adopt
such labels as values, regardless of theirmeaning to the organization, in order to
retain legitimacy.
NGO
or VO:
The Problem with Labels
Organizational labels were often the first issue confronted in interviews with NGO
directors. The beginning of interviews inEnglish consisted of negotiating the term
to use to refer to the sector. Often both VO and NGO were problematic. The
following exchange occurred in the opening minutes of an interview:
Author: Do you prefer the termNGO,
Respondent:
[interrupts]
I hate
or...
it...voluntary
organization,
or
non-govern
ment, NGO, No, really the concept is not NGO. NGOs, thatkind of respect. It
does not command any respect. I don't like it. because every Tom Dick and
Harry has come into this field. And people who have not got any vision, have
not got any, their only motivation
director).
is tomake money from some way
(NGO
The director acknowledges that the label NGO has lost legitimacy, and therefore,
the need to present their organization in a differentway. While many respondents
used the term "VO," often this was in reaction to the negative connotations
Personal conversation with government official in the National
Planning Commission.

Springer
556
Voluntas
associated
with NGO,
rather than a positive
connotation with
(2010)
21:546-568
the value
of
voluntarism.
Other NGO directors were less concerned about the organizational label, but
wished to voice their apprehensions about public perceptions of voluntarism more
generally. As one director animatedly exclaimed:
voluntary organizations and NGOs, they are taken up as people who are totally
volunteers; they should not work for anything, they should do everything, you
on
know,
free
basis.
I keep
telling...volunteer
organizations
are
a group
of
expertise,who are people who work for thewelfare of thecommunity, on no profit

no loss basis?not on freebasis. This has tobe put on paper everywhere, thatplease
don't take us thatway. Nobody can do; nobody can survive (NGO director).
This statement is indicative of a number of comments, complaints, and narratives
related to the difficulty of working for very limited money. It suggests that the
expectations forNGO actors to work voluntarily are incompatible with their own
wants
and
needs.
to be seen in the context of fast economic change in India.

Privatization has increased wages for a select few, while consumer goods have
created new desires and wants. Education has become more important for future life
chances, at the same time as more expensive. In this context, ithas become difficult
forNGO actors to retain a lifestyle thatkeeps pace with theirmiddle-class status.
NGO directors risk losing class status, or the social position of their children, if they
This
needs
continue towork in the sector. One friend and director of an NGO established in the
1990s talked of the regret they he felt in not providing his children with the same
opportunities that his children's friends received. Despite his ongoing commitment
to social work, he wondered if his decision to leave the information technology
sector was harming his family. This illustrates the changed context inwhich NGO
actors
now
work;
actors'
narratives
suggest
that no
longer
does
"voluntary"
work
provide themwith an adequate livelihood.

Amongst NGOs, the term "voluntary organization" is used less to refer to certain
values, and more as a way to distinguish theirorganization from others. This is often
accompanied by a range of characteristics that refer to each organizational type. In
an interview, an NGO worker distinguishes between VOs and NGOs, and attaches
certain characteristics with both:
The newer NGOs tend to just implement what the government says, and they
will provide kickbacks. They [the government] won't work with VOs as they
are scared theywill ask toomany questions and will be critical. They will also
not give government officials money (NGO worker).
label VO in this case does not suggest values of voluntarism, but rather
distinguishes corrupt organizations from non-corrupt, and critical from non-critical.
He refers to his organization as a "VO," used less to identifycertain values, but as a
The
package of characteristics in someway distinguishable fromNGOs.

It is noteworthy that interviews inHindi overcame the issue of labeling through
themore neutral use of the term, sanstha (simply organization or association). This
is not to suggest that notions of voluntarism were absent in these discussions. If
Springer

Voluntas
557
21:546-568
(2010)
anything, the concept of seva was more pronounced as these NGOs

smaller
and
more
therefore
reliant
on
volunteer
labor.
The
value
however, used as a descriptor of the organization. Likewise

NGOs tended to use the term sanstha.
The
adoption
of
"VO,"
or even
values
of voluntarism,
are
of
were often
seva
was
not,
the "beneficiaries" of
therefore
not
always
an organizational characteristic based on beliefs. Rather, related terms are used

strategically, and as distinguishers, in a bid for legitimacy that the label "NGO" has
lost in the public eye. That is not to state that all NGOs do not ascribe to ideas of
voluntarism, but rather to suggest that the meanings attached to "voluntarism"
differbetween NGO actors. Looking at the negotiations between different interfaces
at these boundaries can reveal how values attain a certain meaning, and what these
meanings reflect about the role NGOs have for different actors.
Corruption
and Defining the Limits of Self-Benefit
talking to people outside of the development sector about the topic of my

research (NGOs), I was met with a familiar response: NGOs, the first thingyou must
know is that they are corrupt. This was often the start of a tirade, in which the
wrongs ofNGOs were relayed tome in passionate terms.These included "briefcase
NGOs," who existed only on paper; NGO leaders who lived in large houses; NGOs
When
set up by former bureaucrats (or theirwives) to get government contracts; NGOs

who siphoned money from development projects. NGOs are "just like businesses,"
was themost commonly voiced opinion.
Similar stories and observations are also found in the general media thathas been
energetic in exposing NGO corruption. The title of an article about NGOs in the
field site reads: "The hills are alive with the buzz of self-seeking NGOs, many
existing only in name" (Das 2003). The article goes on to talk about organizations
that are non-functional
or divert
funds.
They
cite
as evidence
organizations
that are
no longer at their registered address, that have accounting discrepancies, or which

take funds for work not delivered. The fascination with corruption in the NGO
sector is evident in the press coverage thatCouncil forAdvancement of People's
Action and Rural Technology receives when it periodically releases its list of
blacklisted NGOs. Subsequent stories encourage readers to investigate the claims of
the organizations they give money to, as "not all the charitymoney reach [sic] the
"right" individual" {Economic Times 2007).

is common. Ninan (2007) in her
Such media representation of Indian NGOs
India
Hindi
media
in
Northern
of
the
found that journalists often had
print
analysis
She quotes a respected NGO
leader from
unrealistic expectations of NGOs.
Rajasthan who states:
much of themedia remains fossilised in its notion of what a voluntary agency

should behave and look like. The sympathy that themedia had forNGOs is
fading. They have preconceived notions about NGOs. That we should be
poorly clad, eat only once a day. We
(quoted inNinan 2007, p. 235).
are expected to conform to those notions
Springer

558
Voluntas
has tended to present simplistic accounts of NGOs
The media
expose,
or
prosaic
account
of development
activities,
rather
than
(2010)
21:546-568
in a manner of an
try to understand
the nature of thework they undertake (Ninan 2007, p. 236). In doing so, they have
shaped public conceptions of what NGOs should be, and how they fail to live up to
these expectations. As noted in the above quote, these expectations often involve
extremes of self-sacrifice. NGOs, in the popular imagination, appear confined to
their historical record as comprised of selfless individuals engaged in a spiritual
quest through service to others.
The general public in India also includes the poor and marginalized, who as the
supposed "beneficiaries" of NGO work also have theirown expectations of selfless
service from NGOs. NGOs must be seen as legitimate for the "beneficiaries" in
order to have access to a "field site" to conduct theirwork. This involves meeting
people's expectations and acting in accordance with norms thatprovide legitimacy.
Such trustbuilding exercises take time, and people are suspicious. As one NGO
director reflected in their initialwork in development, people were used to outsiders
coming in and saying they are working for them,while only the organization reaps
the benefits. In order to gain the trustand cooperation of thepeople, theyfirsthad to
prove that theywere working for the people's benefit, and not their own.
Public expectations ofNGOs?whether
belonging to themiddle-class, themedia,
a
or "beneficiaries"?are
on
belief
thatNGO actors should not benefit
premised
from the work themselves. Subsequent legitimacy is negotiated on a boundary of
selfless service and self-benefit: popularly labeled as corruption. As the debates
about the definition show (Williams 1999), corruption is not a neutral concept.
Corrupt practices cannot be objectively identified, as they are dependent on the

cultural context and the perceptions of the "perpetrators" themselves (de Sardan
1999). What is considered as corrupt practices from an "etic" perspective may be
considered as legitimate from an "ernie" perspective. This does not, however,
diminish the utility of studying corruption, as attention to the boundaries delimiting
deviant behavior within a particular context is a good way to understand society
(Shore and Haller 2005). Paraphrasing L?vi-Strauss, Shore and Haller (2005, p. 9)
suggest that corruption is "good to thinkwith."
I argue that the narratives about NGO corruption indicate how people view
NGOs, and through these expectations, how NGOs come to take a particular form.
The core themes in people's critique of NGOs are: they are self-seeking; theydo not
do thework forwhich they receive funds; and they siphon offmoney, which should
be wholly directed to "beneficiaries." These themes not only tell us of how people
define corruption, but their expectations of NGOs: expectations that are built on a
certain understanding of voluntarism. The criticism thatNGOs are "self-seeking"
and operate like a business indicates that values of seva (in which service is
undertaken without reward) are expected. In pointing out assets such as money and
houses as proof of corruption, people indicate that theirexpectations of NGOs are of
individuals who live frugally and simply.
The boundary between selfless service and self-benefit is not fixed, but rather is
constantly negotiated within the sector and with other stakeholders. Many NGO
actors reject the pauperism and inability to survive that extreme selfless service
implies. At the same time, no NGO actor condones corruption publicly, as it is seen
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
559
21:546-568
as a threat to the sector as a whole. Instead, they engage in shifting the boundaries
through theirown narratives and descriptions, to provide a response to the question:
what is the justified standard of living forNGO workers and their families? At what
stage does an organization stop being "voluntary," and start being corrupt, or
selfless service turn into self-benefit?
In their interactionswith others,NGO actors negotiate these boundaries and offer
proof of their containment within the norms of "voluntarism." Consider the
following quotes by NGO
directors:
are poor and honest. Why don't you talk to all those relatives of
government officials who have also started their own NGOs? (in Das 2003).
We
The NGOs, which have had themost success in theirwork, and achieved the
most good, have the least money. Look at us [indicating her humble home],
we are also poor, and we do not have money. The NGOs who have a lot of
money are not doing good work. I look at theseNGOs and wonder how they
can have such nice cars, and big houses. Look at our house! (NGO director).
In these instances, poverty is seen as proof of honesty.Modest surroundings and the
lack of comforts are taken as evidence of theNGO's adherence to norms. However,
what is basic and what is excessive:
What aremy needs? NGOs need perhaps a vehicle and an office and a computer.
But these should be a means to an end. For many NGOs these means have
become the ends, and they are working to secure the nice car and themultiple
computers and nice office space, these should not be themost important things.
And so ideological organizations are able tomaintain themselves with very
little funding, othersmake theNGOs serve theirown and theirfamily's needs. I
see how some NGOs have large houses and nice lifestyles and I wonder how
they can afford it,and if theirown needs are basic (NGO director).
These NGOs actors suggest a distinction between "basic needs" that are legitimate,
and wants that are excessive. A claim to being within thesemodest means is a claim
to legitimacy.
However, what happens when an NGO is seen as going beyond thatwhich is
minimally required. The following quote comes from a worker of one of the largest
NGOs in the field site. This NGO was a subject of much gossip circulating in the
community. One of themost frequent comments referred to their large office
building. The respondent referred to these below:
NGO
People think theywe are a big NGO, but in realitywe are always experiencing
a shortage. People point to our large building.. .butwe need it to accommodate
the four organizations. Further, the guest house has been essential to ensure
thatwomen can come and stay in-house, away from distractions and able to
interact with each other after the [training] session ends. It is also much
cheaper than accommodating them in hotels (NGO worker).
The respondent justifies theNGO's quarters by claiming that it only just meets the
minimal needs of the organization. She stakes a claim for a definition of corruption
Springer

560
Voluntas
that looks not at size, but at what
(2010)
21:546-568
is required to achieve certain (development)
objectives.
The rumors and surveillance of other NGOs cannot be understood only in

reference to values, however, and must be seen in the context of a competitive NGO
sector. Facilities and assets such as cars and buildings not only signal possible
corruption, but also almost certainly indicate the success of the organization in
in India are numerous, and are in direct competition for
attracting funds. NGOs
funding. NGO actors often suggest that successful NGOs are "too big," and that
their very size is evidence of their deviance from the values of VOs. As one
respondent put it in reference to a medium-sized NGO, "they have built a house."
This referred to not only theirprioritisation of building the organization over thatof
theirwork, but their corruption in doing so as was evident by their "more than
adequate"
living
arrangements.
Values, in this case voluntarism, are thereforenot only a way to claim legitimacy,
but also a way to question the legitimacy of competitors. These struggles are
indicative of a sector that has seen fast growth, and subsequent increasing pressure
on established NGOs. Many older organizations?based
on seva ideals?have
seen
their traditional roles usurped by newer NGOs based on "professional" managerial
(see below). Their response is to claim the higher moral ground of

voluntarism, which they represent as an essential value for theNGO sector. Labels
such as NGO or VO therefore reflect contestation over the terrain of NGO work,
including desirable (and legitimate) forms and behavior.
The boundary between selfless service and corruption is thereforenegotiated both
within the sector, and in reference to public expectations. Voluntarism is not a
quantifiable value, but rather is contested on multiple interfaces (general public,
skills
beneficiaries,
premised
on
donors,
adherence
state, etc.). An
to
subsequent
individual organization's
norms.
These
can
be
legitimacy
transgressed,
but
is
at
risk to the legitimacy of the organization, and ultimately their survival.

An alternative is "to alter the definition of social legitimacy" (Dowling and
Pfeffer 1975, p. 127). This, I argue, is attempted throughcounter narratives that seek
to use past and present sacrifice as evidence of their selfless service, and to
legitimate what might otherwise be considered as "self-benefit." NGO actors often
evoke early and ongoing tales of struggle and individual and familial sacrifice in
their stories. The founding story of one NGO spoke of a period of 2 years inwhich
the husband and wife team would walk house to house in theHimalayan foothills
with littlemoney and nothing to offer people. Throughout their20-year history, this
organization had grown and provided the founding family a comfortable standard of
living. Sacrifice remains a central theme, however, in describing their current
situation. The director noted the objective of a 20-year history of organization was
to show other organizations theirmistakes and problems, and particularly how much
they had suffered throughout this period.
Often the selfless nature of this sacrifice is given more gravity by referring to the
children as bearers of the costs of their parents' social work. The same NGO
director related her problems combining family and NGO work:
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
561
21:546-568
the lives of people in the family suffers.All the attention is placed on the
organization, and so you cannot give the attention required to the family and
personal life. Also, as there are not so many resources, then you struggle
financially as well. The organization disturbs your personal life, and your
relationship with your children and others, as in our case, the organization is
the top priority.All the attention from the start is on the organization, there is a
constant struggle and personal effort and this can be a problem (NGO
director).
The NGO director not only describes the sacrifice her family has made, but states
thiswas a result of putting theirwork before their own personal needs.
These narratives tie inwith public perceptions of volunteerism and corruption by
making a moral claim for self-benefit.One NGO director said that people would
look at him and wonder why he was able to maintain a good home and make
sizeable donations. He
said his response is that
I work in twelve projects, even if I get 3000 or 4000 [Rs a month from each
64-85USD], then I am able to. But can you imagine the amount of work I put
into it; the amount of sacrifice that I have [made] (NGO director).
These narratives seek to alter public expectations and social norms about what NGO
workers deserve, and their right to benefit from their work. They suggest an
alternative way to look at the characteristics and values ofNGOs thatdo not rely on
extreme notions of selfless service. It is a moral claim for self-benefitby redefining
"selfless service" to entail sacrifice rather than extremes of deprivation. Corruption
becomes redefined rather than justified, by changing the expectations of NGOs. The
"Voluntary labor and cost-effective delivery" section looks at how the persistence
of voluntary ideals creates the institutional environment thatmakes corruption a
response
to continued
Voluntary Labor
unrealistic
expectations
related
to cost-effectiveness.
and Cost-Effective Delivery
Voluntarism is not only tied to narratives of corruption in the public imagination,

are more cost-effective in
but has partly driven the presumption that NGOs
implementing development interventions (Fowler 1997, p. 28). Although NGOs'
actual greater cost-effectiveness relative to other development actors has rarely been
proven, the general perception is thatNGOs have lower administrative costs, partly
achieved through their use of voluntary labor. The expectation thatNGOs can
deliver development interventions with minimal labor costs have shaped the
institutional environment in which theymust compete for funds. Public expecta
tions, both within India and abroad, are thatNGOs should operate on minimal
budgets to ensure that themaximum benefit can reach the "poor." Heralded as a
comparative advantage, NGOs must conform to this image of cost-effectiveness,
reducing their administrative budgets to be inline with donor expectations.3
3
For example:
budget"
(ARC
an Australian Red Cross (ARC) AusAID

of
funded project has "cost-effectiveness
2009, p. 4) as one of the criteria against which NGOs'
applications are assessed. The

Springer
562
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
In this instance, donor's conceptualization of voluntarism have set the standard for
NGO work, and helped to justify donors' reluctance to contribute anythingmore than
minimum wages. NGO workers often are paid a fraction of thewages available in the
private sector, and receive no benefits such as health insurance or superannuation.
Padaki (2007, p. 74) highlights the ironyof a sector thatworks to ensure the rightsof
workers tominimum wages, decent working conditions and basic entitlements,while
expecting their own staff to be noble, humble, and not grumble.
links this situation directly to expectations of values of
Padaki
(2007)
voluntarism. He states one difficultymanaging human resources in the development
sector is:
...the (often unarticulated) conflict between the value of voluntarism and the
value of professionalism. Should people expect advancement, growth, rewards,
and career prospects? Many NGOs are wary of 'reward systems' on such
grounds...The bare minimum is that increments in compensation should be
enough to cover increases in the cost of living. Anything more calls for
decisions thatgo beyond arithmetic (emphasis in original, Padaki 2007, p. 71).
The increase inwages requires a value judgement: a balance between the voluntary
values of the organization and the rights to entitlements of theworker. Wages must
not only fit the values of the organization, but also donor and public expectations of
appropriate remuneration for development/social work.

Even NGO directors that desire tomaintain a voluntary character appreciate the
necessity for a liveable wage.
At the time we startedworking, the ideology and the nature of working was
Gandhian. Work was undertaken in this spirit, and this resulted in a lot of
motivation. The negative side of such an organization is, however, that
financially they do not operate well. The salaries they give are very low: for
[amonth]. This is due to theGandhian philosophy, but
example 500-1000Rs
it is wrong to think that the workers do not also have to fill their stomachs
(NGO director).
The respondent's ideals are found to be unrealistic when faced with the survival of
his own, and his staffmembers' families. Respondents often evoked the vision of an
empty stomach to argue for a liveable wage, usually in critique of donors'
unwillingness to pay for anything but a bare minimum wages or honorarium. As one
NGO
director vented his frustration: "everybody needs bread, everybody needs

clothes, everybody needs to feed their family." Voluntarism as a value is seen to be
unsustainable
when
taken
to mean
no,
or minimum
wages.
Non-government organization actors make both practical and moral arguments to

forward a different understanding of voluntary work. Practical arguments were
Footnote
3 continued
Australian High Commission

(AHC) in India states in the requirements for theDirect Aid Program which
supports Indian NGOs that "DAP funding cannot be used for routine administrative expenses and running
costs must be the responsibility of the NGO"
(AHC 2009). The Department for Interna
tional Development
based on cost-effectiveness
(UK) recommended that they should evaluate NGOs
(National Audit Office 2006, p. 9).
costs...These
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
563
21:546-568
regularly evoked in interviews and conversations, and are largely recognized in the
sector. It is very hard to retain staffdue to the low wages in the voluntary sector
against the high wages available in the private sector. Staff turnover is high. For
example, one NGO lost three staffmembers in the space of a month, one of whom
started a job earning 45,000 rupees a month (957USD): a fivefold increase from his
9,000 rupees (191USD) wage at theNGO. The people with the best skills are no
longer attracted to the sector, or do so only as a stepping-stone formore lucrative
positions. The people who work for the sector are often the people who cannot
obtain work at a higher wage;
often
poorer
socio-economic
that is, people with the lowest educational status and
background.
This scenario raises moral issues as to the exploitation involved in voluntary

work. An NGO director voiced his dissatisfaction with the expectations of donors,
stating that the wages they provide are insufficient.He relates the irony of a
situation in which a project to promote livelihoods will only provide a minimum
amount for wages: "livelihood, only that the unemployed people, they are being
exploited. You will not find a single male here, because female staffdo not have to
feed their families." Voluntary values have created the conditions thatmake self
denial and exploitation of staff possible, or even necessary, resulting in at times
in Tamil Nadu
ideals. For example, an NGO
hypocrisy against other NGO
advocated for equal wages, holding regular protests about women's relatively lower
daily wages: 40 rupees a day compared to the standardmale rate of 70-80 rupees a
day. The women working for this organization were paid an "honorarium" of 36
rupees a day, forwhich theyworked 6 days a week, 8-10 h a day. These women
were selected from the "beneficiaries" of theNGO's programs. They accepted this
low wage not out of a sense of "service," but for employment.
Appeals to a broader sense of justice also enter into conversations with NGO
directors about their own positions. As donors generally fund distinct, time-bound
projects, they will only pay the wages of staffmembers directly involved in the
project. This leaves NGO directors, who often oversee several projects at a time,
with essentially no income. One NGO director critiques this situation in relation to
government-funded projects. His appeals are based on what is "fair":
should I not be paid on thatproject...I
for
the
project.
I am
the
one
who
able...but on paper? (NGO director).
am the one who isworking everything

is
responsible
for
that...I
am
answer
This situation results in the necessity to employ "creative" accounting, skimming

from several project budgets, in order to provide theNGO director and his or her
family a livelihood. Donor expectations of voluntary labor create the conditions in
which corruption is a necessity for survival.

This "corruption" can come inmany forms, and NGO management have found
theirown methods tomaintain a minimum standard of livingwhile presenting their
organizations as living up to voluntaristic ideals. For example, the above NGO in
Tamil Nadu did not pay the secretary a wage, but rather covered his "expenses."
rather fluid amount was
used to purchase his family's food, educational

and
family holidays. A more common scenario is the sharing of
requirements,
resources between theNGO, and the director's family. This includes vehicles, office
This
Springer

564
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
equipment and even staffmembers. Although directors/secretaries may not receive

an income, or only a minimum one, they are able to maintain their class status
through access to resources such as cars and domestic labor available through the
NGO. They can therefore claim to be working with voluntary ideals, reducing wage
costs, while at the same timemaintaining a standard of living to which they are
comfortable.
Another approach is to attempt to redefinewhat are seen as valuable NGO traits.

Just as NGO actors talk about sacrifice as a means to overcome criticisms of self
benefit and corruption, NGO directors evoke professionalism as a counter to donor
expectations of voluntary labor and efficiency. As one director related:
we
don't
have
that many
resources
with
us...a
are made
lot of expectations
on
are there, who are very

but if you see, just how many NGOs
is
have
is
how
NGOs
many
capacity building, how
important
capable...What
many have built their capacity, they have awareness, they have resources with
them, they have technical expertise (NGO director).
NGOs,
statement was made
in relation to theminimal funds available for capacity

building and wages, subsequent high staff turnover and his own frustrationsof the
lack of capacity of his organization. Minimal wages and cost-effectiveness was in
his opinion at the cost of his ability to be "professional."
Professionalism was also used to distinguish between organizations. In contrast
to the above use of professionalism as a derogatory term to identify those NGOs
This
who operate only for theirown employment, professionalism was also evoked in the
positive sense. NGO directors using professionalism in this way contrasted the
knowledge base of theirown organizations with the lack of understanding of NGOs
thathad sprung up with littlemore than enthusiasm. Selfless service was presented
as not being enough without the know-how of how to do development work, which
is "harder then it looks."
...now
that
so
many
people
have
reached
in
name
of
NGOs,
almost
ut we know, only five or six good NGOs that understand what

should be the activities, what should be built upon - the learning requirements,
the potential problems etc. So very few.
e verywhere...
At the same time thatNGO actors evoke ideas of "professionalism" as a deviance

from norms related to "grassroots" voluntary approaches, professionalism is for
others a mark of competency and effectiveness.
The struggles over labels and desired characteristics reflects the differenceswithin
the sector in regards to what comprises a legitimate development organization.
Contestation over meanings and the positive connotations of terms such as "profes
sionalism" are evidence of broader struggles over legitimacy in theNGO
Implications
for Theory
sector.
and Practice
The discussion about the value of voluntarism in the Indian NGO sector has both
theoretical and practical implications. Attention to the different conceptualizations
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
565
21:546-568
of voluntarism demonstrates two aspects of organizational legitimacy that both

confirms, and challenges neo-institutional theory.First, the necessity to conform to
the expectations of stakeholders for organizational legitimacy (DiMaggio and
Powell 1983) is confirmed in the Indian NGO sector.NGOs must either conform, or
present
counter-narratives
to claim
legitimacy
are in this sense a "productive" mechanism,

NGOs.
in a competitive
environment.
Values
shaping the form and behavior of
What is missing from neo-institutional analysis are accounts of how meanings

attributed to values by different epistemic communities are reconciled. Indian
stakeholders include international donors, government agents,
NGOs, whose
"beneficiaries/clients," and the general public are excellent subjects to examine
these processes. As seen through the preceding discussion, international donor
meanings were influential in shaping the material environment in which NGOs

worked. Meaning is thereforenot isolated from power (Foucault 1974), and needs to
be incorporated into analysis of the construction of legitimacy (Lister 2003).
Contrary toTvedt's (1998) analysis, donors are not, however, the only players in the
production of meaning, nor can it be said that "Western" conceptualizations of
voluntarism supersede all others. In addition, it is the understanding of seva amongst
the Indian general public, including NGO "clients," that is also influential.These
intersect and converge to produce a meaning of voluntarism thathelp shape NGOs.
NGOs become a terrain in which different conceptualizations meet (such as seva
and "voluntarism"), contributing to their refashioning in the Indian context.
At the same time, NGOs engage in strategies to overcome a meaning of
voluntarism that is against their interests.Neo-institutionalism, with its focus on

"cognitive frames" and similarities, has tended to overlook how legitimacy is
contested, resulting in different institutional forms. Struggles over themeaning of
values are productive in themselves, resulting in contrasting organizational types.
This was evident in the different stress thatNGO

voluntarism,
vis-?-vis
other
characteristics
such
actors placed on the importance of

as
"professionalism"
or
"sacri
fice." Struggles over meaning help to shape organizational distinctiveness within

the sector. This article has foreground struggles over the meaning of value as
domains inwhich organizational forms are produced and reproduced.
In recognizing these contests and the emergence of differentNGO forms, this

article has contributed to understandings of how trans-national institutional fields
are experienced at local levels. As demonstrated, values that are salient in the
international development sector have not had uniform effects on theNGO sector in
India. Rather different organizations strategically use different interpretations of
voluntarism thatare local, national or global, to present an identityand make claims

to their legitimacy. NGOs do not adopt one in rejection of the others, but rather
different organizations emphasize different interpretationsover time. The result is
not, as Tvedt (1998) suggests, greater institutional isomorphism, but rather greater
institutional diversity.
Most importantly, this article has highlighted how values are a useful, albeit
overlooked analytical tool in the study of NGOs. Research needs to go beyond calls
for particular normative values, or critiques of NGOs who fail to live up to them.
Rather an approach is required that examines the (multiple) meanings of values, as
Springer

566
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
the negotiations and contestations over those meanings. Values, and

subsequent debates, can reveal changes in sectoral identity, and highlight the
disjuncture between societal expectations and organizational imperatives.
The above analysis of the value of voluntarism sheds light on particular aspects
of the Indian NGO sector with practical implications. First, it reaffirms the observed
shiftfromNGOs based on ideals of seva, to organizations thatbase their legitimacy
and identityon "professional" skills. Rather than the latter replacing the former, the
ongoing pertinency of values of seva and "voluntarism" reflects that both
well
as
organizational forms co-exist. What is evident in the above analysis is the way
that these two types of NGOs are engaged with struggles over legitimacy, and how
these struggles are strengthening particular forms of identity. I do not wish to
suggest that there is a dichotomy between "seva" oriented, and "professional"
oriented NGOs, but to outline that these two characteristics will become more
important as defining features of NGOs due to contestations over themeaning and
value
of
"voluntarism."
narratives and counter-narratives related to voluntarism reflect the

between
societal expectations of NGOs, and the needs and wants of the
disjuncture
who
work
for
them. As seen above, NGOs who are tied to conforming to
people
voluntary ideals, struggle to achieve adequate livelihoods. I argue that this is
partially due to the unrealistic expectations of donors and the general public that are
Finally,
constructed without reference to the conditions in which development work takes

place. There remains a lack of understanding about the nature of development work,
and a continued romanticization about what NGOs should and can do. Values in this
sense, provide the public legitimacy and comparative advantage that is importantfor
NGO survival, at the same time as perpetuating unrealistic expectations.
Conclusion
This article has highlighted the different conceptualizations of voluntarism that
shape NGOs working environment and identity. Empirical accounts demonstrate
some
thatNGOs adopt different strategies in relation to "voluntarism." While
use
seva
as
a
means
own
to
enhance their
NGOs
legitimacy and discredit others,
otherNGOs attempt to transformmeanings of legitimacy through counter-narratives
of sacrifice and professionalism. I argue that values are a terrain for competing
images of NGOs, and that subsequent struggles over meaning are productive.
I have also
research, and
"voluntarism"
shown the utility of values as an analytical tool in third sector

the necessity of greater attention to the conceptualization of
sector in India. Values, as productive mechanisms
in the NGO
environment,
require deeper analysis that can contribute to
working
shaping NGOs'
better understandings and development practice. This also requires a questioning of
both
practitioners'
and
researchers'
conceptualizations
of
values
such
as
"volun
tarism," being more attentive to the perspectives ofNGO actors in the "South," and
realistic about which values can be sustained in the contemporary context.
Springer

Voluntas
(2010)
567
21:546-568
in Development
like to thank Salim Lakha, Honorary Senior Fellow
I would
Acknowledgments
for his useful comments on an earlier draft. This paper was
Studies, PASI, University of Melbourne,
new researchers
further developed from the feedback received from participants at the VSSN/NCVO
session, September 7-8 2009, and the very helpful suggestions of two anonymous reviews.
References
(AHC) India. (2009). Direct aid program guidelines. Retrieved May 28,
High Commission
2009, from http://www.india.embassy.gov.au/ndli/DAP.html.
Australian Red Cross (ARC). (2009). Landmine survivor assistance fund funding guidelines. Retrieved
28, 2009, from www.nsw.redcross.org.au/media/2_Landmine_Survivor_Assistance_Fund_
May
Australian
Guidelines_2009(l).pdf.
and rethinking alternatives in the Andes. Annals of the
Bebbington, A. (1997). Reinventing NGOs
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 554, 117-135.
of development
intervention.
and uneven development: Geographies
Bebbington, A. (2004). NGOs
Progress inHuman Geography, 28(6), 725-745.
Charity needs caution: Govt blacklists 769 NGOs'.

14, 2007. Retrieved February 26, 2009,
Das,
(2007). Economic Times, Internet Edition, November

from http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Personal_
Finance/Savings_Centre/Savings_News/Charity_needs_caution_Govt_blacklists_769_NGOs/rss
articleshow/2540492.cms.
A. (2003). Oh what a racket! Outlook, September 22, 2003. Retrieved April 15, 2009,
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0903/174.html.
de Sardan, O. (1999). A moral economy of corruption. The Journal ofModern
22-52.
Dhavse,
R.
(2002).
Servants
of
India.
Retrieved
June 4,
from
African Studies, 37(\),
from http://www.indiatogether.
2009
org/stories/2002/rd 1002.htm.
P. J., & Powell, W. W.
(1983). The iron cage revisited:
DiMaggio,
collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological
isomorphism and
147-160.
Review, 48(2),
P. W., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. InW. Powell & P. DiMaggio
(Eds.), The new
DiMaggio,
institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1-38). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Djelic, M. L., & Quack, S. (2003). Theoretical building blocks for a research agenda linking globalization
Institutional
and institutions: Redefining the

and institutions. In M. Djelic & S. Quack
(Eds.), Globalizations
rules of the economic game (pp. 15-34). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
legitimacy: Social values and organizational behaviour.
Dowling, J.,& Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational
The Pacific Sociological
Review, 18(\), 122-136.
and voluntary organizations:
Some sceptical
and values in NGOs
Edwards, M.
(1999). Legitimacy
the third
thoughts. In D. Lewis (Ed.), International perspectives on voluntary action: Reshaping
sector (pp. 258-267). London: Earthscan.
states and donors:
Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1997). NGOs,
Martin's Press.
Too
close for comfort? New York:
St
Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (2002). Beyond themagic bullet? Lessons and conclusions. InM. Edwards &
A. Fowler (Eds.), The Earthscan reader on NGO management (pp. 204-213). London: Earthscan.
Fernandes, L., & Heller, P. (2008). Hegemonic
aspirations: New middle class politics and India's
(Eds.), Whatever happened
democracy in comparative perspective. In R. J.Herring & R. Agarwala
to class? Reflections from South Asia (pp. 146-165). London: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1974). Archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge.
Fowler, A. (1997). Striking a balance: A guide to enhancing the effectiveness of non-governmental
in international development. London: Earthscan.
organisations
Fowler,
A.
(2000).
NGO
futures: Beyond
Quarterly, 21(A), 589-603.

Gangrade, K. D. (2005). Gandhian
approach
aid: NGO
values
to development
and
the fourth position.
and social work. New
Third World
Delhi:
Concept
Publishing Company.
and themiddle classes in India: The social and
Ganguly-Scrase, R., & Scrase, T. J. (2009). Globalization
cultural impact of neoliberal reforms. Oxon: Routledge.
Government of India. (2007). National policy on the voluntary sector, voluntary action cell. New Delhi:
Planning Commission.
?l Springer

568
Voluntas
(2010)
21:546-568
A. (1995). Blurred boundaries: The discourse of corruption, the culture of politics and the
imagined state. American Ethnologist, 22(2), 375-402.
Gupta, A. (2005). Narrating the state of corruption. In D. Haller & C. Shore (Eds.), Corruption:
Anthropological perspectives
(pp. 173-193). London: Pluto.
Gupta,
J. (2000). Indicators of identity: NGOs

and the strategic imperative of assessing core values.
and Practice,
10(3&4), 402-407.
Development
Jenkins, K. (2009). "We have a lot of goodwill, but we still need to eat...": Valuing women's
long term
voluntarism in community development in Lima. Voluntas, 20, 15-34.
Hailey,
S. (2003). NGOs and the new democracy. Harvard International Review, 25(1), 65-69.
for empowerment: Dilemmas
Kilby, P. (2006). Accountability
facing non-governmental organizations.
World Development,
34(6), 951-963.
Lewis, D. (2007). The management of non-governmental development organizations
(2nd ed.). London:
Kamat,
Routledge.
Lister, S. (2003). NGO
175-192.
legitimacy: Technical
issue or social construct. Critique
of Anthropology,
23(2),
Meyer, J.,& Rowan, B. (1983). Institutionalised organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony.
In J.W. Meyer & W. Richard Scott (Eds.), Organizational
environments: Ritual and rationality
(pp. 21^44). London: Sage.
National Audit Office. (2006). Department for international development: Working with non-govern
mental
and other civil society organisations
to promote development.
Retrieved May
28, 2009, from
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0506/dfid_working_with_non-governm.aspx.
Ninan, S. (2007). Headlines from the heartland: Reinventing theHindi public sphere. New Delhi:
Padaki,
V.
(2007).
The
human
organization:
77(1), 65-77.
Challenges
in NGOs
and development
Sage.
programmes.
in Practice,
Development
S. (1999). Some aspects of state-NGO
era.
relationships in India in the post-independence
and Change, 30, 327-355.
Development
Shore, C, & Haller, D. (2005). Introduction?sharp
practice: Anthropology and the study of corruption.
In D. Haller & C. Shore (Eds.), Corruption: Anthropological
perspectives
(pp. 1-26). London:
Pluto.
Sen,
Tvedt, T. (1998). Angels of mercy or development diplomats: NGOs and foreign aid. Trenton: Africa
World Press.
(1999). Voluntary development organisations: The guiding
Voluntary Action Network of India (VANI).
principles. New Delhi: VANI.
Williams,
R.
(1999). New
concepts
for old? Third World Quarterly,
20(3),
503-513.
Springer


27928239

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

27928239

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Negotiating the Boundaries of Voluntarism: Values in the Indian NGO Sector

Author(s): Tanya Jakimow

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

in the Indian NGO Sector

online: 26 August 2010

and The John's Hopkins

Values are an essential part of the identity of non-government organi

narratives. These struggles over the meaning of voluntarism are in themselves

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

Ces luttes sur le sens du b?n?volat sont en elles-m?mes constructives, en fa?onnant

anal?tica ?til para comprender las ONG.

are an essential part of non-government organizations' (NGOs') identity,

of which they are a part; pressures to conform to expectations results in institutional

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

singular understanding. I examine the ways the meaning of voluntarism is

It is important to note that although I am discussing the value of voluntarism, my

party political formations, people's associations, and regionalist, ethnonationalist,

Non-government organizations are arguably, values-based organizations: dependent

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

advantage in relation to other development actors (Hailey 2000, p. 402).

(1999), values underscore all other

...legitimacy is claimed and maintained through demonstrated conformity

are the articulations that show adherence to acceptable modes of behavior

Considering their importance NGO values have surprisingly remained under

in their construction and rearticulation. The implications go beyond the values

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

(1998) makes such an observation in the NGO sector. He argues that

to be legitimate (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975, p. 127).

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

institutions, resulting in increasing standardization and homogenization across

appropriate development activities and institutional forms. Research that examines

In 2008,1 spent 10months researching theNGO sector in a state inNorth India.

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

with previous experiences working for three other NGOs

opportunity for funding, turning interviews into discussions designed to impress,

fieldworkers, and 25 donor agency staff,experts, and government officials. Again,

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

in the Indian Context

organization; often, this involvement, even when undertaken in a professional

remunerative (material resources and rewards); and normative: "based on the

ideals of dharma (personal obligations) and jeev day a (humanitarian concern). In

since ancient times. In ancient India up to the colonial period, the

remains an important concept to the NGO

the continuation of NGOs embodying its ideals helps maintains seva's

efforts,providing basic needs to support these "servants" of the community. This

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

and Scrase (2009, p. 11) argue, "conspicuous consumption has

It is important to note that although similar, the English concepts of

dealing with international donors may conceptualize voluntarism differently, but

identify themselves as voluntary agencies or voluntary organizations (VOs). The

after consultation with

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

Beyond labeling, government regulations require the adoption of voluntary

longer a guiding principle in practice. In this instance, the regulatory

The Problem with Labels

is tomake money from some way

Personal conversation with government official in the National

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM

rather than a positive

expertise,who are people who work for thewelfare of thecommunity, on no profit

to be seen in the context of fast economic change in India.

provide themwith an adequate livelihood.

package of characteristics in someway distinguishable fromNGOs.

This content downloaded from 14.139.156.82 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:11:08 AM