TED Community » Daniela Papi

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Education, harnessing each individual's potential to better themselves and simultaneously better the world

An idea worth spreading

Giving something to a non-profit organization is NOT always better than giving nothing. Sometimes our donations can do more harm than good! Educating donors how best to positively impact the issues they believe in changing will do far more good than trying to continue to raise money from donors who are disconnected from the places they are giving to.

My TED Story

I was a speaker at TEDx in Bangkok in February 2010 and feel in love with the "Ideas Worth Spreading" concept. The next week I applied to be the TEDx licencee for Phnom Penh and we will have our first TEDx in Cambodia in November 2010.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +50.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A comment on Conversation: People buy the WHY.... and this is a problem when it comes to investing in development work. Are we just fueling "good intentions"?

  Mar 19 2012: Hi Richard - I think we are going in circles here... but that is the point I guess... this stuff is confusing! You keep starting off by saying that my video is telling NGOs to "sell the HOW".... but actually, that is not the point of the video (which I guess isn't that clear).
  
  I DO NOT think NGOs will sell the HOW. Why should they? Their goal is to raise the most money so that they can do the work they need to do. You are suggesting that they should show what they managed to do with the money the received. I too wish NGOs would do that, but from having worked with NGOs for the last six years, I can tell you that that is not what raises money. What raises money is pulling at people's heart strings - hence selling the WHY (like Simon Sinek pointed out).
  
  You and I want the same thing: NGOs to be showing what their impact is so that there can be competition and higher success rates of NGO work. BUT, my point is that just telling NGOs to "show their results" is not going to work? Why? Because donors currently DON'T CARE ENOUGH. I think that is in part because they don't realize yet just HOW MUCH money is being wasted. Like you said, donors don't want to think. They just want to check a box.
  
  BUT - if they keep doing that - we will continue to fuel FAILING programs. Even if NGOs were indeed selling their HOWS or being open and honest about their impact, if donors don't care about that, aren't asking about that, and can't bother to look at that information, then this system will not change.
  
  Donors need to realize just how waste and sometimes harm their money is causing. Maybe then they wont just click the box without thinking. Yes, having to think before we donate will indeed probably mean less money goes into the system, but from my perspective so much of it is being wasted or used poorly, that is ok! Let there be less money going in, but let that money be going to BETTER places, and we'll still have an overall better impact.

• A reply on Conversation: People buy the WHY.... and this is a problem when it comes to investing in development work. Are we just fueling "good intentions"?

  Mar 19 2012: Hi Richard - I replied to your thread, but somehow it ended up at the top, so just check "view full conversation" or something like that and you should be able to see it! Thanks!

• A comment on Conversation: People buy the WHY.... and this is a problem when it comes to investing in development work. Are we just fueling "good intentions"?

  Mar 19 2012: I guess it wasn't clear enough in the video, but I am not suggesting that the first move is that NGOs sell the HOW. Like you pointed out, this goes against free market economics. NGOs are just selling what the world is demanding.
  
  I am suggesting, like you are saying, that NGOs should be rated for and competing about the impact they are having. In many ways, they already are. The problem is, what are they competing for? Just like apple, they are competing for money. And who holds the money? In Apples case, the consumer holds the money. In an NGOs case, a DONOR holds the money and the consumer is the beneficiary of whatever projects they are doing, and those are often different people.
  
  So, rather than suggesting NGOs should change their marketing to reflect HOW, I am suggesting that donors, like you and I, need to start only donating to projects where we think there is an impact. If we can't tell if there is an impact, we should ask more questions or withhold our donations. THEN, NGOs will really be competing on impact, like you are suggesting.
  
  We are both suggesting the same end result, I am just trying to point out that, unless you and I and other donors start donating based on impact and STOP donating to NGOs where we know nothing about their impact, then we will continue to fuel wasteful and sometimes harmful projects. Does that resonate with what you were thinking as well?

• A reply on Conversation: People buy the WHY.... and this is a problem when it comes to investing in development work. Are we just fueling "good intentions"?

  Mar 18 2012: I don't think we are saying very different things, Richard. I feel like you are saying "NGOs need to properly track and tell us what their impact is so we can invest in positive work" and I am saying "We as donors need to only invest in organizations who are able to tell us what their impact is and how they are achieving these good intentions they sell to us." This is a cycle which can only be achieved from both sides: if donors continue to give to organizations without asking ANYTHING about their impact or the HOW, NGOs will continue a race to sell the emotions and WHYs. Both NGOs and donors need to change how they give, and like in free market economics, the idea that you go bankrupt if the world does not want your product because they are not buying it, should indeed still apply. But the people buying the "products" in the NGO world, the donors, are not the consumers of this, so they have to be asking questions if they want to fuel the best work.
  
  The TEDx talk you are referring to is one by my friend (and current classmate) David Damberger: http://www.ted.com/talks/david_damberger_what_happens_when_an_ngo_admits_failure.html and I too think it is a great talk. I gave a related TEDx talk here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvOSiM6UKGk&list=UUCJ1VQQQiDF07XuXAqgqB6g&index=19&feature=plcp which relates to our discussion as well.
  
  I think we both agree - NGO work is often failing to do what it claims to do. My point is that if donors continue to fuel this same work, we are then committing to continue to fail. The cycle needs to break and people need to start demanding higher results for their money - and until donors know how to do that, what questions to ask, and what sorts of things to focus on, they'll continue to buy into the WHYs.

• A comment on Conversation: People buy the WHY.... and this is a problem when it comes to investing in development work. Are we just fueling "good intentions"?

  Mar 16 2012: The ideas of a free market economy work when the feedback loop is closed. You buy a car because the advertisement says you will look cool if you do, you feel relatively cool and the car works well, so you buy another from them and tell your friends. Or, the car breaks down, you feel un-cool standing at the side of the road, and you tweet about it. Great!
  
  I agree with you, Richard, that part of this failing is that NGOs are not explaining or monitoring their impact well. BUT, some of them are indeed, and if donors are giving to anyone who says "We are supporting education in Africa" but they don't ask HOW, or don't ask about the impact, then the competition becomes around who can pull at more heart strings. The best marketing does not mean the best impact, and unless donors look under the covers a bit, they might be wasting their money.
  
  Additionally, there are indeed the NGOs who are just failing to do things well, let's call them the "I tried hard, but just didn't make it" group. Then there are the groups who are corrupt, using their NGOs status as a guise to profiteer, and are often causing harm. If both of these orgs, plus one with great impacts, are selling the same WHY and donors aren't asking HOW or what impact, then we are fueling harm. I spent 6 years living in Cambodia and watching a LOT of people fuel negative impacts, and I'd love to see that money going to good places. So, it's the NGOs AND us donors who need to make changes. If we vote with our money on HOW, then NGOs will be forced to advertise their HOW. If they can't show us an impact and how they are working towards it that we can believe in, then we don't vote for them with our money. I agree, there will still always continue to be waste in this system, but there is so much room for improvement, I'd love to figure out ways to fuel some upward motion!

• A comment on Conversation: People buy the WHY.... and this is a problem when it comes to investing in development work. Are we just fueling "good intentions"?

  Mar 16 2012: Indeed. The feedback loop is not closed, so they often never know if they are fueling just good intentions or real impact. If they voted with their money because of the HOW the organization was selling rather than the WHY though, this might at least slightly increase our chances of voting for the right initiatives..... eh?

• A comment on Talk: Simon Sinek: How great leaders inspire action

  Mar 16 2012: People don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it.... and this is a BIG PROBLEM in development work! Here is a response video about why this is a problem asking us to FOCUS ON HOW: http://lessonsilearned.org/2012/03/focus-on-how/