And still people say that English is an easy language.

To add to the discussion I think the lines you drew between being a professional and behaving professionally were a little fuzzy in your post. In my mind they have two concretely separate meanings – being a professional implies that that person has expert or advanced knowledge in a subject (or at least they should) and is being paid for their work. This definition doesn’t just apply to volunteers. For example, a photographer will always be considered amateur no matter his technical ability if he is not paid for his work. Same is true in sports. Being a professional means they are getting paid, but it does not always mean they should be (which is what I think you were getting at).

In this post I think you addressed the concept of behaving professionally and that is should apply to professionals and volunteers alike. I completely agree. The points you brought up are all highly desirable and should not relate to whether the person is getting paid or not. Behaving professionally is a character trait that every one of us should strive for.

I blame the English language for confusing two very different terms. =)

Anyway, I enjoyed reading this post and included it in our weekly blog roundup. You can see that post here. Feel free to share this within your social community.
http://www.gooverseas.com/go-abroad-blog/week-overseas-july-2nd/3364

Cheers,
Andrew

2) I would agree that, as a whole, the field is complex and needs people with a high degree of knowledge and specific skills. However, I also think that some specific aspects are really not that specific. To give one example from my recent direct experience: a large NGO needed a group of their car mechanics trained in some of the intricacies of a new model vehicle. A Japanese volunteer car mechanic organised and ran the training with input from a local senior mechanic about specific local issues. The training was a huge success, mainly because of the drive, dedication, and professionalism (in my sense of the word) of the volunteer.

Two short points:

1) Part of the problem is in the language. “Volunteer”, to many, connotes an unqualified amateur, someone who’s primary contribution is that they cost nothing in terms of salary. We need a new term.

2) Where one falls on the issue of volunteers (or whatever term one uses) ultimately boils down to how one views the field of humanitarian aid in general. I happen to see it as a field that requires a high degree of specialized knowlege and skill; a field that requires individuals and organizations alike to deal with very complex and difficult ethical, moral and technical issues. To put it bluntly, we are dealing with people’s lives. If you accept this, then in my view the conversation about “volunteers” and “salaried amateurs” alike, become irrelevant very quickly. On the other hand, for those to whom humanitarian is not as deep or complex as what I describe, the volunteers conversation remains viable.

• Let me say upfront that I agree with much of what you say, especially that what counts in the end are results. I do think, though, that it needs stressing that we are talking about results as seen by the recipients, not necessarily the boss. I know you said that, but I’m afraid it gets a bit lost in a very long response.
• Having said that, I think that professionalism as described above is a way, and possibly the most effective and efficient way, to get those results. In other words: professionalism is not and end by itself, but a means to an end. (This, by the way, is implied in the very first point on the list: being competent, which basically means: get the things done that you are supposed to. As you say yourself: “Competence is a measure of results”.)
• I would go one step further, and say that without professionalism as described here, you are a lot less likely to get results. If you don’t know your limitations; if you are a unimaginative drone who just copies what has always been done in the way it has always been done; if you can’t be depended upon; you are less likely to get things done than if you do. It’s not impossible to be successful (again, as measured by results for the recipients) while being totally unprofessional — but I would say that the professionals I know are, on the whole, much better in getting those results.
• “None of the soft stuff adds to the employees ability to be in control of their destiny. It’s an illusion.” It’s only an illusion if you believe that it will help you to be in control. It doesn’t, you need other, addtional skills for that. So I agree that this does not add to any control, but I disagree with your implied suggestion that it is supposed to.
• “You screw up a multimillion dollar development program, you can redefine success, claim “externalities”, and ask for more money. That worries me. It makes me feel insecure. I need to do my job better and if I don’t I should be fired. That’s a professional outcome.” And there, we agree absolutely 100%. The culture of nice that exists in too many aid organisations has done untold damage, and is, in my view, highly unprofessional.