Dialogue in Pursuit of Development - Are you looking for one of ...

100
which can be translated “People are people, through other people”. 2 This
reflects the importance of group solidarity and communal context. In a historically
difficult environment close relations have been a matter of survival
and even today people’s identity is determined by interactions with others.
Another aspect is an unawareness of the impressions you make when
coming from overseas. If you are shy, it can be interpreted as if you are
keeping a distance. If you are used to lecturing and talking in an authoritarian
way, people can easily perceive you as paternalistic, or even as racist. In
addition, difficulties are too often discussed before trust has been built, and
this has a tendency to increase conflicts rather than solve them. A critical
self-analysis can help us to understand what impressions we make. As representatives
of aid agencies, we are used to observing and evaluating others
but we could learn a great deal if it were sometimes the other way round.
We still have a tendency to think that ‘they’ are the ones that will learn
from us, but as a South African community worker once said: “We don’t
only have problems here, we have assets as well. But if you want to find
them, you must look for them and not only ask about our problems”.
Keeping these perspectives in mind, it is no wonder there is much frustration
in development co-operation. However, the whole partnership debate
can be regarded as a kind of ‘meta-dialogue’, a discussion about how we
communicate. If we keep old attitudes and perceptions of each other we
will not be able to harvest the benefits of a partnership. A change of attitudes
and values can improve dialogue and vice versa, but it will take a long
time and consequently the discussion about partnership will continue. In
the short run we can respond to this challenge through effecting a change in
practical arrangements and methodology, such as moving consultative group
meetings from the Western hemisphere to recipient countries and having
regular consultations on issues of concern.
Issues around the quality of dialogue do not only concern the relationship
between donors and recipients, but are also an important process within aid
organisations. Organisational cultures can be rather problematic, no matter if
we are talking about multi- and bilateral aid agencies, non-governmental
organisations or church structures working with aid. Different internal cultures
and weak communication affect relations to partners, who can receive
conflicting messages. A high turnover rate of staff aggravates the problem.
There might be an existing hierarchy that hampers the willingness of
employees to express themselves freely, which may undermine participation
and dialogue in partner countries. The internal agenda becomes more
important than what actually happens in partner countries. One important
question for us as donors is therefore if we live according to the develop-
2 This is how the proverb is presented and translated in Allister Spark’s book The Mind of South
Africa, 1991.