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.

Like you, I have seen these “lists” before and have made a few myself. So I’ll go on about that a little, if you’ll indulge me for a moment.

Professionalism is a subjective measure of behavior. Competence and creativity need to come off the above “Elements of Professionalism” list to make it one of many possible variations on a theme. Competence is a measure of results and creativity is a type of competence. With that out of the way; these lists circulate around inside companies along with other lists like “Codes of Conduct” (Don’t steal stuff) and “Dress Codes” (Don’t ware shorts to a customer meeting). Companies like to make lists. Consulting companies really like to make lists and often have lists of “Soft Skills” (how to tell your customer they are dumb as a rock without being shown the door and losing the $5M contract) and send new hires to “Boot Camp” (how to be drunk around the boss and not get fired) to learn all about them.

As an aside, there was a time when it was very trendy to try to measure behaviors during the hiring process through a series of psychological tests. Evaluating the results as indicators of future success. As it turns out, it’s crap. Credit scores are a better measure of future success (and honesty), not that I am advocating such an intrusive thing. Thankfully, past success is “the best” measure of likely future success and it costs a lot less to evaluate. Furthermore, the context in which past successes were accomplished is almost irrelevant as a predictor of future success. Past success in any area (or degree program) plus a set of core skills equals a good hire. Surprising and maybe a bit unsettling, but true.

Companies also care about “culture”. Some care so much about it it starts to look like dogma. The gospel according to Apple/Toyota/Accenture. So the lists from above find themselves on someones desk during the annual employee performance review process. At the bottom (or top) of some list you will likely see:

- Knows the scope of responsibilities and the limits of authority.
- Understands how professional conduct contributes to the ability to advance within the organization.
- Understands what the process is for improving “underperformance” and the circumstances that lead to termination.

Everyone feels fully vested in the process and after you successfully (or not) talk your way through the soft, squishy, feels good stuff and that gets blended in with, um…, HOW WELL YOU DID YOUR JOB, you find out if you get to come to work on Monday and how much you now make. None of the soft stuff adds to the employees ability to be in control of their destiny. It’s an illusion.

So, it’s more crap. So much so there are words used to get around this crap. Management Challenge. The consistent over performer who is kind of a pain in the butt. They don’t care to much about their co-workers or mentoring. If a co-worker messes up they just come in over the weekend and fix it all. They don’t measure themselves based on some list, and have a hard time understanding why anyone would even try. Results count, the rest is just frosting. These people are successful. You want them on your team, even if you whine about them constantly. Of course lots of folks are successful without being a management challenge, the primary difference being you would never give a management challenge a bunch of direct reports or sit them down with the CEO of your biggest customer, that would be dumb.

It’s simple: If someone does their job well, give them a raise. Otherwise, fire them. In the same vain: if they are smart, hire them. If they are smart and experienced, hire them fast before someone else does. Volunteer or paid employee hardly matters, volunteers (some call them interns, some call them grad students) should be engaged in the same way as paid employees.

Ok, list rant over on account of time and the comment is longer than the post, my bad.

So what’s the problem? I don’t care about a youth group with a box of sneakers heading to Haiti to “broaden their horizons” and “open their eyes”, it just doesn’t matter. Qualitatively, yea, it’s really dumb. Quantitatively, they aren’t really much of a danger, certainly not the walking disaster zone some would make them out to be. Same for Jason/T-Shirt guy. He’s a jerk and his ideas are horrible. But beyond the entertainment value in giving him a hard time, he is ignorable.

I do, unfortunately, care about the Churchies and their Adoption/Human Trafficking racket. I wish I could ignore them, but because the “International Community” has FAILED to protect the weak, vulnerable and desperate in Haiti, these morons are able to do real harm. That should make lots of “professionals” uncomfortable or insecure, right? I’m not sure it does and that worries me.

I cared about success when I was a SVP in a very large professional consulting practice and I care even more about it in the humanitarian aid business. What is more important? Getting the inventory control system for a Korean ship builder out on time and on budget or not botching up a multimillion dollar aid program that intends to improve (Improved being defined by the recipients. I hope that doest need to be restated) the lives of millions. Process, methods and the latest theories are great if they give measurable results. Otherwise, they just add pounds to the annual report. You screw up the inventory control project you get fired. End of story. 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.