Sunday, June 11, 2006

The true value of volunteers

Interesting article from The Straits Times, June 5 2006

By Willie Cheng

'FREE Labour Wanted; Conditions Apply'. Occasionally, when working in the voluntary sector, the sign above pops up in my mind. Like the time I attended a volunteer briefing for an overseas mission several months ago: A volunteer manager started off by asking: 'Who would you say are our customers?'

His point was that the volunteers were not his customers, the beneficiaries were. Hence, his main job was to worry about those faraway beneficiaries of the mission ahead. Volunteers should just fall in line.

Apparently, he was peeved at feedback some volunteers had offered his board of directors to the effect that his organisation needed CRM (customer relationship management) - a term from the commercial world for how companies should value and treat people who contribute to the organisation's revenues.

The tone of the meeting was so bad ('Sorry, don't expect too much information or help from us for you in this strange land - after all, you had volunteered to go knowing the risks and uncertainties') that, at one point, a volunteer raised his hand to ask meekly to be treated as a 'secondary customer'. I was tempted but decided not to launch into a lesson on volunteer management at that very briefing.

In all fairness, the volunteer manager felt overwhelmed and could not answer all the questions thrown at him by this batch of spoilt-by-the-good-life Singaporean volunteers who were anxious about the unknown terrain ahead.

So what do you do with high-maintenance volunteers?

When this question was posed some years ago at an annual conference of the National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC), Mr Robert Chew, one of the panellists, responded spontaneously: 'Why, just fire them, of course!' It was a typical response that Robert, a good friend and former partner of mine at Accenture, gave. After all, in the corporate world, when the cost of maintaining an employee outweighs the value he delivers, there is no business case for his continued employment. These two stories illustrate a common perception within and without the non-profit sector: that volunteers are nothing more than free labour. Non-profits simply use volunteers because they cannot afford to have paid labour do the same thing. Such a view underestimates the true value of volunteerism.

Two years ago the NVPC conducted a study to quantify the value of volunteerism in Singapore. We thought it was important to do so in a country driven largely by economic imperatives. The result was a bit disappointing. Volunteers in Singapore contributed the equivalent of S$746 million per annum of 'unpaid labour' at fair market value, which is less than 0.5 per cent of our national GDP. In contrast, the US' volunteer contribution equivalent was 2 per cent of its GDP and Australia's was 7 per cent.

However, the study also looked at costs, as opposed to economic value, that volunteers contributed in 24 volunteer host organisations (VHOs). Now, even though a VHO does not pay a volunteer any wages, there is a cost to recruiting and managing them. We measured the VIVA (value investment & value audit) ratio which is the dollar value of the voluntary work compared to the cost of investing in the volunteers. A ratio of 1:1 means the organisation breaks even.

The majority of VHOs had VIVA ratios that showed returns ranging from 6 per cent to over 480 per cent more than their cost of recruiting and managing volunteers. But two outliers, in particular, sparked strong debate within the study team. These VHOs had negative returns: That is, the cost of recruiting and managing volunteers exceeded the equivalent labour costs they contributed.

So, had the VHO known their true cost, would paid labour not have been better? Yes, from a purely economic standpoint, but not if you consider the broader aspects of what volunteerism means to non-profits and the community. Our debate led us to conclude that it was good to devote a section in the report to the non-economic value of volunteerism as well.

When you cut to the chase, it all boils down to engagement - engagement of the individual volunteer with the VHO and the community, and engagement of the VHO with the community.

Volunteers are rewarded beyond any monetary return for their services - otherwise they would not have volunteered. Often, they broaden their horizons and receive immense personal satisfaction from giving back to society.

For the VHOs, volunteers give them access to talent they can't afford or which is not otherwise available. However, beyond that, an engaged volunteer represents an extension of the VHO's personality itself into the very community it aspires to serve.

Several charities today are involved in the building of houses for tsunami victims. Many do so by sending funds raised while a few such as Habitat for Humanity, Mercy Relief and Singapore International Foundation engage volunteers from Singapore and other countries to go onsite to help build these new homes.

Volunteers who usually pay for their own cost of travel and accommodation are also asked to contribute to the costs of construction material, typically about S$1,000 per volunteer per week, depending on the location. It's a common contention by critics that the same money would go a lot further if it was spent on local labour, for not only could more houses be built, but the displaced could also be employed.

But ask any volunteer who has been on such a mission and you will be convinced about the value of such trips to build houses. The impact on volunteer attitude is never adequately captured in slide shows and fanciful brochures. Many volunteers I know leave a lot more than their work or money at the site: In a sense, they empty themselves of the earthly things that weigh us all down and they come back with a renewed sense of mission so they get involved in future projects more readily.

Moreover, the money a volunteer spends may not have been forthcoming in the first place without prior volunteering experience. But having gone before and been deeply engaged, they now give more of their time and money. This is borne out by the NVPC's recent philanthropic survey which found that volunteers tend to donate 63 per cent more than the average individual donor.

Volunteerism also develops the community spirit and encourages people from diverse backgrounds to bond with one another. Picture flag days without volunteers. Imagine the National Day Parade if the contingents and helpers were all paid. Think about a Standard Chartered Marathon if the 'runspirators' (people who cheer you along the way) were paid to do it.

In 2000, I went to my first Olympics in Sydney. To my surprise, I was met at the airport and driven to my lodging by a volunteer. I learnt that she was one of some 47,000 volunteers, mostly Australians, who had raised their hands for the simple joy of being part of a historic moment in her country's hosting of the Games.

She and the other volunteers we came into contact with during the trip were genuine and excellent ambassadors for Australia and the Olympic movement.

Such is the power of volunteerism for any community. Properly harnessed, volunteers are not solely free labour but the very soul of a free society.

The writer is chairman of the National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre. This article appears in the May/June issue of SALT, an NVPC publication. The opinions expressed here are the author's alone

No comments: