Proposal #50: CISV Exit Strategy.
I propose that CISV is closed down and we administer the money that we spend in one year to a different Social Organization.
Rationale:
CISV and JB are often speaking of empowering people to reflect and act. Up to now i dont see this happening in an appropriate way. This is because CISV likes to achieve its goals on the long run. My idea is to help right now and to make a radical change with immediate consequences.
The CISV machinery eats up a lot of money, if we give this huge amount to a sophisticated humanitarian organization, we might help thousands of families, children, animals, plants (whatever would be decided on) all over the world.
Respectfully submitted, Paul (GER)
26 Comments:
I like it. I think I'm getting too old for this anyway. Besides, it would be the best way to make people know CISV - even though it won't exist anymore.
Young people today have so many offers, and it's hard for CISV to compete, so why bother?
I say, micro-loans to countries around the world that CISV left in the dark because of CISV's western-oriented closed-minded mentality.
Vinh...I'm seriously rolling over the floor laughing reading your micro-loans-to-CISV-deprived-countires proposal. Fantastic. Nick (still giggling)
hm, I don't like the idea.
What am I supposed to do with all the freetime I'll have when I am not working for CISV anymore?!?
Maybe I'll join the army... they "make" peace, too.. ;-)
And you can visit many countries with them as well...
Do they qualify as an "LMO" to CISV?!? ;-)
just kidding.
Hendrik
JB Hamburg, Germany
Let's strike a more serious tone in this discussion: Some years ago (omg, it was in 2000!) I took part in my first EEC (expanded executive, the bosses of CISV plus comittee chairs) meeting, when the discussion came up, that CISV's numbers are dropping. Chris Bodnar from Canada, IJR at the time, suggested, that yes, if other organisations were more successful in working for peace, we should let them do the job instead. (He didn't receive much applause, you might inmagine)
In 2003 during an IPP meeting in Costa Rica we had a great discussion, stating yes, CISv really needs IPP, but does the world need IPPs? We came to the conclusion, that no other organisation offered a similar programme, that IPP was unique.
More than a decade ago a CISV taskforec was formed to write a new constitution for CISV. This was done within two years, but the "COD" (taskfore for constitutional and organisational development) existed for further 5+ years. They kept inventing new stuff for them to do.
Just a few examples to illustrate the complex issue of "right to exist". It's difficult for a CISVer to be honest and objective on the legitimacy of CISV to be around. Is CISV is having an impact? Of course it's difficult to measure, but is it really really really making a difference? What if not? Are we wasting our time?
Personally, I've come to the decision that I like CISV because it was good for me. It made me a better person - I think - and being an educational organisation teaching awareness, it's less easy to do something wrong.
Oh oh, I'm writing too much - your turn to comment...
Reading your posts gets me wondering:
Have we lost of what the meaning and purpose of CISV is?
CISV was created so that it doesn't end up to be an organization that just gives money and helps people. It was created to teach our youth how to become their own organization and want themselves to help people and the world.
So let's keep in mind the original most important goal of CISV and of the founder of CISV (and please don't turn this into old mentality vs new mentality like it always turns into): Start with the children, teenagers and youth in general to help the world.
So no...we're not closing CISV :p
undoubtedly there is large amounts of money that is generated within CISV, much of this comes through grants and funds whilst the vast amounts paid by families must add to no small figure.
What we must remember firstly is that all money that comes through the process of grants is generated and allocated because these funds believe that CISV has a valid contribution that can be made to the world and society today. To re-allocate the money would firstly be ignoring the ambit under which we recieved the money and secondly failing to recognise that education can have an influence far greater than the donation of money.
With regards to the amounts that are spent on the participants in CISV, largely by their families, this money is not something that belongs to CISV, but rather money that parents are willing to spend to enhance their childs education. If the same call was made by CISV not to attend a program somewhere, but just donate $5000, there is no chance that we would see the same amount of capital, or almost any of it generated.
What we do in CISV is something unique, but by no means perfect, and we must realise that we have these financial constructs existing around us becuase people are donating/paying/granting money to support an organisation and a way of thinking that they believe in, not because they have random amounts to allocate. Were we to go down this path this would be a reality that we would realise very quickly.
just some thoughts...
cheers
Chris
JB Australia
well i think that chris has a point there, but my point was pretty much, that all the money we waste just on administration would probably be better used if we administered it... i dont say that all our administration is wasted, but many of the meetings we hold or a lot of time we spend in cisv is just, as nick said, keeping up our right to exist. all that money would have a better use elsewhere
well i find cisv first an amasing ide that have done so much for me as a person and really opend my mind i do bealive that cisv does a big difrents by efekting all of us (the cisv people) so we can and will do our bit for all the worlds problems
i belive that good people makes the world a better place not just for us but for everyone
and i belive that cisv is helping the good that are in every person grove
i know we use alot of money but cisv just does a difrents that can't be compared.
i hope you got my point
cheers ^^
I do think paul's got a pretty clear point when he says "all the money we waste just on administration would probably be better used if we administered it".
So why aren't we administering it? Because believe it or not the organization got too big. Not too big in the sense of too many people (because as Nic noted numbers having been rising and dropping over the years), but too big as in too heavy, too bureaucratic, too inflexible to be able to make change fast enough to make the impact that many people in the organization now want to see.
So shut CISV down? yes. and donate the money somewhere else, of course.
The key thing is that the money should go to a new CISV. With a renewed mission statement, set of programs, and educational methods. It's the CISV we want CISV to be, we just don't have to go through the pain of slowly adjusting this one to look like. We just cut ties and start all over again.
And just as a final note, this new organization should be called YEAH! (Youth Educating for Active Humanity).
Kelly
A note for Kelly's note: I have been wanting a new name for a long time, and I vote for ICY - InterCultural Youth.
No matter how you pronounce it, it symbolises enlightenment: "I See (Why)". That's all from me.
kelly's point is exactly why i came up with the proposal
in cisv as we have it now it just takes too long for a specific decission to take place
most of the decisions take at least three years to take action, first year, thinking of how to propose a motion and getting all the points clear
then we decide on it, once it's passed, the second year mostly is wasted on convincing every na that it's a good idea
and then in the third year, once everyone is convinced, you have to tell people how to make it happen
or at least that's how i see our decissionmaking...
all that time could be cut down to a minimum, and with that we'd be more efficient and wouldn't waste as much money
why do we have all this bureaucracy, wherever we see bureaucracy in normal life, we hate it for being so damn slow and energyconsuming, still we made cisv the exact same bureaucratic-machine we all cant stand...
greetz paul
ps: i have been copy-pasting bureaucracy all the way
I think this proposal ought to be renamed "CISV relaunch strategy". I like both ICY and YEAH alot. In fact I believe, that after dropping the "Children's International Summer Villages" out of our name, the time may be ready in a few years to get rid of the acronym as well.
Getting back to the content part: I think we are now dealing with three issues:
1) Are the resources best spent on CISV programmes or should it go somewhere else? Or beter: Is CISV good for a better world, or are others doing a better job?
2) Inside CISV are we wasting too much energy and resources on administration, and should we try to cut down on IO/AIM spendings so more is left for the educational spendings themselves?
3) Is CISV stuck in a dead-end street with a huge trolly, unable to move, so we should just hit the "restart button" and ride a bicycle instead?
Some of these issues are also dealt with in Teo's "From Elephant to Butterfly" proposal a while ago.
I find it interesting to read that we waste a lot of money on meetings, etc. Honestly, I don't think we do. If we look at how many people get paid by CISV to meet and discuss it's a laughable number. We spent money merely on travel expenses and accommodation, which I think is just fair enough, considering how many people put their time (and money) into volunteering for CISV. Probably any other organisation that implements half the number of activities in half the number of countries spends double of what we spent on administration (no guarantee for those numbers though).
About how quickly we get things done. Well, that's democracy, I guess. If you want quick decisions, get a dictatorship and be even more unhappy with it. Communicating decisions that are taken quickly through a network that never meets and works entirely on a volunteer basis will not get a lot quicker by that.
I agree with Nick that a lot of the comments here are about different issues. As for the names - nice ideas! I'm looking forward to the discussions on if to change, when to change, what will happen with the rebranded design, the tagline, etc.
I might sound like the super-conservative of this discussion now, but I'm comfortable in this position and welcome any bashing you guys might have for me!
well my point wasnt to get rid of all the funding (unless ofcourse we get rid of the organization) because otherwise we'd make cisv even more upper-class, but im saying there must be better ways than now, even if we are better than others...
for instance we could have a much better communication before meetings, get a clear point of view, then go to the meeting and just clarify the last points,
i guess it's already happening but it could be working much better
other than that im pretty sure that there is a faster way of democracy with a less timeconsuming decissionmaking without drifting into the extreme of a dictatorship
it's not all just black and white bastian, see the greyish notes ;)
or how about a dictatorship after all? haha
Kelly: Agree on the fact that the money should be administrated in a better way. One small exemple is IJBC and AIM. who said that we have to stay in this big luxurious site. Can't it be in a normal CISV-spirited place and the money put on the luxury be put on something more peace oriented?
Paul/Bastian: No one said that there is one type of Democracy. Just because we call it democracy doesn't mean it has to take that much time. It could be democratic and efficient too, not slow democracy but no dictatorship at the same time.
Paul: wasn't it agreed on generally in CISV that it is for middle/upper class people? I mean every time I ask why don't we have other people included in CISV and traveling and I get: it's been agreed on that it is middle/upper class.
I would really enjoy a name change for CISV but...
One of the things that truly upset me during these years of CISV memebership (almost 5) was the rebranding.
THAT was a ridicoulous waste of money, time and energy! It was like pretending to restructure a building simply by re-painting the walls.
Going back to the proposal, i wouldn't close down CISV and give money to other organizations, simply because our "offer" as association has no equal on this planet. as far as I know we are pretty unique.
And closing down would mean waste all our knowledge. think about it: we trained too many people that are doing an amazing job, to simply tell them "ok, sorry we close! go and find yourself another association"
What we have to do is to restructure ourself (not rebrand), rethink ourself, set new goals while we keep on with the good job we are already doing! We have the people, the will and also enough money to do that...
wow
this is a really good discussion
1. yes to a name change
2. rebranding was indeed, silly
3. CISV has always been meant to give people an experience they can't get elsewhere. With the introduction of IPP, we are now focusing a lot more on getting into the community, rather than making it simply a travel program.
4. I'm currently the co-chair of a jb, and i can safely say that we do not spend a lot of money. Any money that we do spend, is fundraised BY THE JB. We are entirely self-sufficient, with the exception of a little help from the board to have one person attend the National Board Meeting every year. While I know that this topic is more about the international scene, stay with me as I walk through this. At the local level, we have a lot of fundraising to keep our costs low. At the national level, everyone/chapter pays their own way... for the most part. Internationally, the National Associations (NAs) pay for whatever happens internationally, as I understand it. So maybe we need to look at where we can cut costs, so that the NAs, and thus the chapters, do not have to pay for it all.
We all know that we spend a lot of money ... so we need to figure out what can be done with the situation.
5. There is SO much more to CISV than simply traveling and administration!!!!!!!!! We have fundraisers, we get out into the community. CISV doesn't change the world. It gives people a safe environment to grow, so that they can change the world. Shutting down CISV all together would be silly. We just need a little revamping. So let's git'er done!!!
Much love
Julia
first am loving everything about this discussiong, how its evolving the new names, about rebranding and all the different ideas...
i disagree on stopping cisv activites, since these activities is what brought us here today as a group thinking how together we could help our world, but i see it the natural evolution of the organization. to realize that we are putting too much effort changing it, while we can start a new one, to start a whole new entity with a different mission, but why stop there, why just start one organization?
since what we are here for is "to prepare individuals to become active and contributing members of a peaceful society" then lets empower these people when they have a new idea, something like IPP which is still until now is not an official program while it has been taking place for 10 years! so why make it harder for CISVers to implement their ideas, and go through the bureaucracy of our organization, while our role could be empowering these ideas to see light through helping in the administrative or accounting parts, publicity or mobilization... whatever. although this will definetly wont cut from our expensesbut will raise it, but would help us recieve more grants.
so no dont stop CISV activities, since it healthily creates a community like the one are in right now, and sharing our ideas, but change it role maybe, from just educating/preparing people on how to become active, but to 'empower' them through creating more organizations and more opportunities for people to be active.
Are you crazy?!
You can't close CISV, a lot of childrens all over the world like it. In Cisv childrens learn how to be a better person and some wait all the year to make a program with CISV.
I promess for a staff in my camp that I'll be a JC and if you close Cisv i won't do it, everybody like Cisv for a reason and maybe if you close it you'll destroi dreams.
Just think about the consequences for a thousand people if you do it.
Please don't close CISV.
okay, so...
1st: to answer the jc: we're not realy in the position here to make that kind of decission
2nd: i have to agree that cisv without anything that it stands for is just a random name but i disagree on rebranding being silly... i think it is one of the few things that was worth spending money on :D after all it makes us seem more sophisticated and not like the organization of mummys and daddys that send their kids to summercamp...
3rd: to get back to the proposal, the core of the idea is that cisv is not as effective, great and unique as we think it is, i heard many people now that say that we are one of a kind...maybe, i didnt research
and if we're not, then let's rethink or let's give our money to an organization that has better use for it
another background of the proposal was, that im not sure if "peace is possible through friendship" or better just by friendship, we have to go out in the world and change it, also as an organization (which we do now with ipp and mosaic) but not enough for my taste,
so is what we do useless unless we act on what we preach?
Already there has been a lot of discussion (so of course I have to say some things too)
I agree that we need to look carefully at our administration and streamline
I disagree that our meetings are a waste of time - in fact I would propose that for many they are as educational as a CISV camp and certainly prepare us to take active roles in other organizations, jobs, etc. with a certain mindset we gain from CISV (which I do think is unique)
But of course the meetings should be cheaper and don't need the luxury they often have (but this, as many point out, is very much a North American/European view of "hospitality"
I think much of this comes down to what we are trying do to. If we are trying to improve the world through micro-loans, that's new to me (although check out the IPP in Indonesia for that angle!) There is some interesting stuff coming out of the IO about clarifying our purpose - have a look.
Sarah - USA
I love how the connectivity of our tools (JBcommunity and CISV Devils) has helped put some sort of a spot light on this discussion, other than the fact that it is controversial and interesting ofcourse ;)
I love this proposal. Not because I want to see CISV closed down, because I do believe that it empowers and educates individuals like it says in our statement of educational purpose. I just think everyone in the organization needs to be aware of that, and not be under the impression that CISV is a travel agency or an organization that believs it can acheive world peace through friendship (as it sadly says on our websites, business cards and even suggested in our new tagline)
About the rebranding process, I agree with the principles behind it, that was brilliant. I just really dislike the results... not in terms of logo or colours or any of that, but just the image we are putting for ourselves. Our image should be what is there in our statement of educational purpose not what it ended up being.
4. As for the administration costs, I agree AIM is insanely expensive something seriously needs to be done about that...
5. My last point is that I don't think closing CISV is the answer, but rather giving channels for its members to get out of it and go work for other organizations and make a change in the world with all the knowledge and skills they learned in CISV. I mean CISV is there to "empower and encourage" so why aren't we?
to comment on point 5, why dont we act ourselves as an organization? why do we just empower?
Well, for now this is what it says in our documents and mission statments, that we are there to empower and encourage... if we want to change that then great, but my point was more linked to what CISV is now.
Hi everyone,
Nick has invoked my name in discussions and I thought this would be a good opportunity to add my own comments.
While I was IJR I made regular comments in a rhetorical fashion to try and get a point across. Indeed, I wish CISV Devils had existed when I was a JB member. In the particular instance Nick notes, we were having discussions about what it is that CISV does. My point was that CISV gives young people the social and cultural tools to act peacefully in their daily lives. This is what we do best -- peace education. I fully support CISV's work in this realm of activity. But if we're going to try to be everything to everyone, then our focus diminishes and we don't have a clear purpose. If we don't have a clear prupose then we need to ask what we're doing and why we're here.
What I find problematic is when CISV becomes confused as a humanitarian organization. CISV cannot save the world -- at least not on its own. This can be frustrating.
The fact of the matter is this: CISV is a peace education organization and it is a very efficiently-run charitable organization. Very few organizations have as many volunteers doing such a vast quantity of work at such a high quality. This is an outsatanding achievement. The fact that so few paid people in Newcastle accomplish the core functions of the organization is truly outstanding.
Although I am no longer involved in CISV, when I look back to where CISV was in 1998 when I stared as IJR (wow, 10 years ago) many things have changed for the better (because of the volunteers and staff who have continued the organization's work). The organization appears to be more efficient, new and innovative projects have been started and there is a clearer message of what the organization is.
At the same time, I also carry a critical eye toward CISV's functions. CISV doesn't do a good job of bridging participants' experiences with their daily lives. One of the results is that a lot of people want to make big changes, and the only avenue they see for making this change is CISV. But CISV is a peace education organization . . .
Ultimately, one of the main problems with CISV is that we don't share the stories and successes of individuals who have been through the organization's programs and who are now doing amazing things. Instead, when someone leaves CISV they are often excommunicated in a way. They are viewed as odd for not wanting to continue working exclusively in CISV. There is a failure to see that these people are using the skills they developed in CISV to do new and exciting things in the world.
CISV now exists in a very different world than it did in 1951. Some aspects of the organization need to change -- particularly in regard to the culture of the organization. But there are core elements -- the villages, summer camps, seminar camps and now IPP -- that are the heart of the organization. This needs to be remembered in CISV decision-making: the organization doesn't exist for AIMs or IJBCs or whatever other meetings take place. These are simply the places where a lot of work takes place that allows the organization's core mission to operate. Remembering this might help to make those meetings more efficient. The real places of action are in the actual programs that take place every year around the world. That is what CISV does well and where it should focus its attention.
I'll stop before this gets any longer. Good discussion, but don't be discouraged. CISV is doing good work.
Chris
IJR from 1998-2000
Hello, I have come to the discussion late, so sorry If I am repeating, or missing people’s points (and that what I am writing is so long)
I think that Chris has a very valuable point here:
‘not trying to be everything to everyone’. A problem that has occurred over the years, as CISV has developed, and expanded. This has resulted in ‘CISV’ being even more different to each person. (Hence problems with the rebrand- we suddenly had an identity crisis on our hands)
I truly believe that this situation will improve over the next few years as we are assessing the goals that each programme has, and then whether each programme achieves it’s goals (and altering the programmes appropriately). Maybe I’m being an optimist, be I have a feeling that this will streamline many questions about the purpose and structure of our programmes, then of the organization.
Then there’s the case of ‘what’s so special about CISV’. I think that is the problem with the voluntary sector (I’m talking entirely about GB here). There are too many overlaps, too many volunteer organizations doing the same thing. For me, it’s all about the sharing of resources and opportunities. And I don’t think that that means giving a bunch of money to another organization (eg good luck with CISV agreeing on which organization that is + if it’s inline with our ‘purpose’) – even though your idea Paul, is a nice one
And I think that we need to think on a greater scale then Mosaic or IPP (which are still great, by the way). It’s about understanding what elements/ goals of CISV are similar or identical to other organizations and publicly working together with them on a large scale. An example could be how Oxfam works on some of it’s campaigns eg Control Arms (a specific cooperation with Amnesty + Iansa), or Make Trade Fair, a cooperation between Oxfam + National Fair trade organizations.
About empower to act etc:
Yes, we need to address this more, or perhaps just identify it more. We need to celebrate success and personal achievements/ changes more
As for other expenses. A lot of money goes to administration. Yes.
However, we need this, we need an element of consistency, and professionalism that is encouraged by having paid staff. It is also an opportunity to bring in new minds from outside of CISV to contribute to the way we work. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t look at how we are working now, and improve it, we can and should. If anything, I believe we should have more employees (extending the actions of IO hiring a educational officer and a development officer recently).
The way that decisions are made and implemented:
I don't know about anyone else, but my experience with 'boards' on any kind of level whether it is junior, national board, CISV international..... is that they have certain complexities that cannot be simplified easily. This may be the fact that only 20% actually know what’s going on, or care about what’s going on, or have read the relevant papers etc etc.
As many of you know, CISV International is even more complex. Never mind the number of opinions, but also think of the number of cultures that have to be ‘considered’ in the board situation. I know it’s not the same, but do the UN, the EU or other larger international bodies make quick and simple decisions? Of course not. I think that this is something that we have to realize will always take a lot of time (and consequently money) from the organization. And, in terms of where we are now + inclusion/exclusion I would even invest more time (and consequently money) in supporting this at AIM and throughout the year.
Ah. Enough of my babble.
Post a Comment
<< Home