HR and Capacity Issues Within NGOs - Report of Study (PHF) June 2008

Report of a study on
Human Resources and Capacity Issues within NGOs in India
for
Paul Hamlyn Foundation, UK
R V Jayapadma
rvjayapadma@gmail.com
+91 94475 94765
June 2008
Human resources and capacity issues within NGOs
Table of contents
1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................4
1.1 Methodology....................................................................................................................4
1.2 A note on the survey of NGOs.........................................................................................4
2 Changes in the NGO context and implications on HR............................................................6
2.1 Growth in the NGO sector...............................................................................................6
2.2 Changing environment of NGO work..............................................................................8
3 Changes in the HR profile of NGOs.....................................................................................11
3.1 Change in staff composition...........................................................................................11
3.2 Organisational preferences for recruitment ...................................................................13
3.3 Retention of staff............................................................................................................13
3.4 Career growth in organisations......................................................................................15
3.5 Human Resource challenges before the NGO sector – opinions and perceptions.........16
3.6 Systemic challenges of NGOs affecting HR..................................................................17
4 Capacity building of NGO staff............................................................................................19
4.1 Data from the study........................................................................................................19
4.2 Capacity building Needs of NGOs.................................................................................20
4.3 Perceptions of challenges in capacity building..............................................................21
5 The ways forward..................................................................................................................21
6 What needs to be done?.........................................................................................................23
6.1 What individual organisations could do.........................................................................23
6.2 What organisations could do jointly...............................................................................23
6.3 What donors could do....................................................................................................24
6.4 What training institutions could do................................................................................24
June 2008 2
List of tables
Table 1 Profile of sample organisations...................................................................................5

Table 2 Financial size of organisations....................................................................................6
Table 3 Sectoral spread of organisations..................................................................................7
Table 4 Staff size of organisations...........................................................................................7
Table 5 Growth in staff size.....................................................................................................8
Table 6 Distribution of staff by educational qualification.....................................................11
Table 7 Distribution of staff by educational qualification - Rural.........................................11
Table 8 Distribution of staff by educational qualification - Urban........................................11
Table 9 Change in staff strength by educational category.....................................................12
Table 10 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Rural focused organisations.....12
Table 11 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Urban focused organisations....12
Table 12 Preference for sources to recruit people....................................................................13
Table 13 Proportion of staff by educational qualification continuing from 1995 to 2007.......13
Table 14 Retention of Staff between 1995 and 2007 by educational category........................14
Table 15 Proportion of those continuing since 1995 in total staff in 2007 .............................14
Table 16 Reasons for people leaving as % of positive responses recorded.............................14
Table 17 Proportion of senior staff to total staff......................................................................15
Table 18 Proportion of senior staff started career in the organisation itself............................15
Table 19 Reasons for promotion to senior positions................................................................16
Table 20 Work Experience profile of senior positions.............................................................16
Table 21 Benefits to organisations from capacity building of staff.........................................20
Table 22 Who pays for staff capacity building?.......................................................................20
Table 23 Capacity Building Needs...........................................................................................20
Table 24 Limitations of the existing service provision by institutions....................................21
June 2008 3
1 Introduction
This report documents a study of human resources and capacity issues within NGOs. The
study was initiated by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, UK (PHF) in January 2008 in response
to the concerns raised by its partner organisations in attracting and retaining ‘good’ people.
Based on this PHF identified five key questions related to the human resource situation
within NGOs in India:
• To what extent, and in what way, have human resources needs changed for NGOs over the
past few years?
• Who are the people that NGOs would like to attract? Why? Which institutions do they
come from? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in joining
the development sector? What can be done to address these?
• Who are the people that NGOs would like to retain in the medium/long term for senior
management roles? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in
achieving their ambitions and potential from within the NGO sector? What can be done to
address these?
• What are the institutional resources available for educating and training entry and middle
level people in the NGO sector to meet future requirements? Are there gaps? What can be
done to address these?
• Is there a role for PHF, given its mandate and resources, to work towards addressing the
problem of human resources (if there is one) within its partners in particular and within the
NGO sector in general in a meaningful way?
1.1 Methodology
The study incorporated a broad spectrum of inputs from across grassroots NGOs, donor
representatives, and people associated with NGOs with its focus on understanding both the
objective and subjective facets affecting human resource and capacity issues of NGOs, and
combined the enquiry with both quantitative and qualitative methods. A questionnaire
schedule was administered to selected NGOs to collect data. This was complemented by
recording the perceptions on the concerned issues from NGOs through open ended
interviews. Personal conversations through visits, telephone and email discussions were
carried out with select key informants with a check-list of questions. Relevant literature was
also surveyed.
1.2 A note on the survey of NGOs

The survey was carried out through a questionnaire schedule sent to a select sample of
organisations. Most of those selected were partner organisations of PHF. A few organisations
who were not PHF partners were also contacted in order to draw a broader as well as
comparative picture. A total of 27 organisations responded to the schedule, 24 of which were
PHF partners.
For parameters where temporal comparison (then and now) was required, 1995 and 2007
were selected as the reference points. The reference point for ‘then’ was fixed at 1995
considering the fact that it was sufficiently old to facilitate meaningful comparison, at the
same time not so long in the past that meaningful data would not be available. With some
significant changes in the NGO sector having come about in the 1990’s, it was felt that 1995
June 2008 4
as the reference point would lead to inputs facilitating meaningful comparison. 2007 was the
reference year for ‘now’.
Table 1 Profile of sample organisations

Number of participating organisations 27
Single-State focussed organisations 17
Organisations working in more than one State 10
Organisations with Rural focus 20
Organisations with Urban Focus 7
Organisations with focus on one work sector 8
Organisations with multi-sectoral focus 19
Organisations operating commercial activities 11
Comparing the organisations in terms of the geographical spread of work, 17 organisations

focused their work in one State. Three worked in two States, two in five states, and one each
in three, four, six, nine and twelve States.
Twenty of the sample organisations focused their work on rural areas. A majority of the
organisations worked in multiple sectors. Less than half of the sample organisations carried
out any commercial (income generating) activity.
Chart 1 Distribution of organisations according to their age
More than 30
years old Less than 12
19% years old
26%
21 to 30 years
old
15%
13 to 20
years old
40%
A quarter of the sample organisations were established after 1995, while a third dated back to
before 1987. Thus the sample provides a fair representation of the sector in terms of age of
organisations. The youngest of the lot was 6 years old and the oldest 56.
June 2008 5
2 Changes in the NGO context and implications on HR

Available literature and people consulted suggest that there have been several changes in the
context in which NGOs operate. These are elaborated at a later stage. In the changing context,
the general trend is that NGOs, particularly the ones at the implementing end have grown
substantially in size and complexity.
2.1 Growth in the NGO sector

The survey of NGOs tried to understand how NGOs have grown in size. Three parameters
were used to identify growth trends:
• Financial size, indicated by annual expenditure figures
• Work spread, indicated by sectors which the organisations work in
• Staff strength
2.1.1 Growth in expenditure

Table 2 Financial size of organisations
1995 (N=24) 2007 (N=27)
Number Percentage Number Percentage
Less than Rs.1 million 18 69 2 7
Between 1 and 5 millions 3 12 5 19
Between 5 and 10 million 1 4 3 11
Between 10 and 100 million 3 12 14 52
More than 100 million 1 4 3 11
(N=Number of organisations reporting)
• The large proportion of organisations (69 percent of the sample) with annual expenditure
less than Rs.1 million in 1995 has to be seen in conjunction with age of these
organisations.
• There were 6 organisations that reported expenditure below Rs.100,000 in 1995. Five of
them were established between 1992 and 1995.
• Four organisations that reported expenditure above Rs.10 million in 1995 had already
completed more than 20 years of existence.
• In 2007 63 percent of the sample reported expenditure in excess of Rs.10 million, tilting
the scale in the opposite direction, as compared to 1995. Only two organisations reported
expenditure below Rs.1 million in 2007.
• However, the minimum reported by any organisation was 44 times the minimum reported
in 1995. After accounting for a halving in the real value of the Rupee (Consumer Price
Index for 1995-96 was 295 while in 2006-7 it was 593, RBI sources), this represents an
increase by twenty times.
• Maximum expenditure reported was Rs.240 million in 1995 and Rs.1.65 billion in 2007.
Examining the rate of growth in expenditure of organisations between 1995 and 2007, it
emerges that more than half of the sample organisations (14 out of 24) experienced growth of
more than ten times. Between rural and urban focused organisations, urban organisations
have grown more than their rural counterparts. 83 percent of urban organisations reported
growth more than five times, while the corresponding proportion for rural organisations is
only 62%.
June 2008 6
2.1.2 Growth in work diversity

The questionnaire schedule had a list of 9 work sectors that respondents were asked to choose
from, as relevant to their organisations. They could also add up to three areas that were not
listed. The nine listed sectors covered almost all key areas of development work. Two areas
that the list did not have and came to be indicated as important were advocacy and capacity
building.
Table 3 Sectoral spread of organisations
1995 (N=27) 2007 (N=27)
One sector 1 4 0 0
Two sectors 4 15 1 4
Three to five sectors 14 52 7 26
Six to ten sectors 8 30 18 67
Twelve sectors 0 0 1 4
• About a fifth of the organisations reported working in one or two sectors in 1995
• In 2007 the proportion of organisations working in two sectors or less was down to one
out of 27.
• More than two-thirds of the organisations reported working in more than 6 sectors,
indicating the very wide spread in terms of activity areas.
• Micro Finance is one sector where the largest number of organisation diversified into. In
1995 eight organisations reported to have work in micro-finance; in 2007 the
corresponding number was 16.
• Similar growth was also reported in Health - 12 in 1995 to 20 in 2007, and in Livelihoods
- 14 in 1995 and 22 in 2007.
Analysis of the changes in work spread, present the following results.

• Two organisations reduced their work spread
• Five organisations reported no change
• About two-thirds of the organisations (of the sample of 27) increased their work spread by
more than two sectors.
2.1.3 Growth in staff strength

Table 4 Staff size of organisations
1995 (N=25) 2007 (N=27)
Less than 10 15 58 1 4
Between 11 and 50 5 19 8 30
Between 51 and 100 1 4 8 30
Between 101 and 500 4 15 8 30
More than 500 1 4 2 7
• In 1995 more than three-fourth of the organisations reported staff strength below 50.
• By 2007 the proportion of such organisations had come down to 34%.
• The proportion of organisations with more than 100 staff members almost doubled during
the same period.
June 2008 7
Table 5 Growth in staff size

(N=25) Percentage
Reduced 2 8
Less than two times increase 5 20
Up to five times increase 5 20
Five to ten times increase 8 32
More than ten times increase 5 20
• 20 out of 27 organisations reported doubling or more of staff between 1995 and 2007.
• In absolute numbers, the 27 sample organisations employed 1903 persons in 1995, this
number increased to 4593 in 2007.
• Effectively, the number of persons employed by the sample organisations as a whole grew
two-and-half times in twelve years.
The survey also attempted to compare changes in gender composition of NGO staff.
Chart 2 Change in Proportion of Female Staff to Total: 1995 and 2007
12
10 10
10
Number of organisations
8
8 7
6 1995
6 5
2007
4 3
2
0
0
Less than 25% Between 26% and Between 51% and All staff are
50% 99% women
Proportion of women in total staff
While in 1995 some organisations were staffed entirely by women, none were in 2007.
The proportion of organisations that had less than one-fourth of its staff as women was not
different during the two reference years, roughly a quarter of the organisations.
Overall, the proportion of women in staff reduced from 40 percent in 1995 to 35 percent in
2007, among the total staff of the sample organisations.
• 12 of the 22 organisation with relevant data reported drop in proportion, with five of them
reporting more than 25 percent drop, while 10 reported increase in the proportion of
women staff.
2.2 Changing environment of NGO work

Literature abounds with analysis of the rapid changes that have taken place in the context of
NGO work. Fowler (2004) lists four sets of areas affecting the working of NGOs.
June 2008 8
• The first set is to be found in a general predominance of goal-based poverty reduction as

the objective for international aid, thereby focusing and ‘harmonizing’ NGO work with
that of official aid.
• Another cluster of external forces stem from concerns about legitimacy and accountability
that place stricter demands on the way that NGOs are governed and retain public trust.
Responding to these demands will require a much better ability to demonstrate
performance.
• Relationships are a third source of pressure for change. Here, two trends are particularly
noticeable. One is the drive to form complex ‘partnerships’ that combine NGOs (of the
North and South), government and businesses. Another is the displacement of NGOs as
agents of structural change by member-based activist and other civic entities.
• Fourth, NGOs face major changes in terms of raising money for their work. Common
sense suggests a strategy of financial diversification, but strategic choices to ensure
resource continuity may not be straightforward.
The study also sensed similar perceptions among NGO stakeholders. Questions about the role
and relevance of NGOs have been asked in the public domain for several years, but
increasingly within and by NGOs themselves.
Diversity - Complicating matters is the heterogeneous spectrum of organisations occupying

the space of NGOs and their myriad functions, ranging from grassroots based activist groups,
community based organisations, service delivery organisations (providing economic, health,
education services, etc.), donor agencies, micro credit institutions, agencies promoting
livelihood strategies, organisations engaged in capacity building, advocacy, etc.
Competition - The environment in which NGOs operate has seen large scale changes, and
NGOs can no more claim to occupy a niche in what they do. Occupying the development
space today are bigger players including the Government and Corporate organisations, which
have their own interpretation of the context and what needs to be done. The conjecture is that
large scale changes will require new ways of working. This places significant demands on the
development orientation of NGOs and in the processes and systems they work by.
Historically, NGOs in India have kept themselves away from the influences of the larger
socio-political-economic frameworks. They were meant to influence these frameworks in
what was considered to be 'one-way traffic'. The reality has changed substantially and NGOs
find that the nature of their work is increasingly determined by the external environment.
There is also a tendency within the sector and outside to label and define action as service
delivery, welfare orientated, rights based, public-private partnership, etc. Amid all the
ambiguity and conjecture, it is important for NGOs to make sense of the changing
environment and state the choices for action and the principles that guide them.
Scale/impact - While there is the grudging recognition of contributions made by NGOs in

localized contexts, the concern is that there has been no significant dent in absolute poverty.
The claim of NGOs to be agents of social change is widely questioned, as not all are
positioned to do so. NGOs play out a range of roles as collaborator, contractor, watch-dog
and at times antagonistic to the state and/ or market. It is harder for NGOs today to sustain
June 2008 9
claims that “they know better” or that “processes are more important than results”. The onus
is on showing demonstrable impact in an effective and efficient manner.
Resources - New age donors appear to value market oriented, business perspectives to
development, contrasted with the development perspective that NGOs claim to champion.
The reality also is that while there is evidently a lot of money to be spent, there are limited
ideas to what can be done. At the same time there is very little that is untested, new or
innovative that is being proposed to tackle fundamental problems of poverty and under
development.
2.2.1 Implications of changing environment on human resources of NGOs

In the changing environment, a vital ingredient of NGOs, human resource, is significantly
affected. The job market has changed dramatically in recent decades. Options and
opportunities have exploded making choice complex and difficult. Aggressively consumerist
lifestyles continuously fuel aspirations and needs of people. With the arena expanding thus,
working in development is also often equated with another option for employment rather than
being based on any ideological or value driven commitment. Very often it is the last resort, or
at best a stop gap arrangement before a better opportunity works out.
Opportunities for working in development have increased manifold in the past decades.
Corporate and para-statal organisations engaged in development have a high demand for
people with a wide range of education qualification and skills. For NGOs this has meant that
they are often not able to attract and retain the best of talent as they are priced out by the
competition. While earlier it was largely people with higher qualifications seeking better
options, there is greater movement today across ranks. NGOs have tried to nurture local
catchments, but even this is becoming difficult as aspirations even among local sources have
changed towards further objective advancement. Grappling with issues of recruitment and
retention, there is a widespread feeling that NGOs are saddled with mediocre talent.
The changing demands on and expectations from NGOs have meant that new skills are
needed, especially in how information is collected, analysed and used. There is a greater
expectation on NGOs to professionalize, to demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness,
sustainability, scalability, and the ability to generate and manage large, complex investments.
A more subtle and fundamental change is being witnessed in the leadership of NGOs.
Displacing and at times complementing the champions of non government development
action who emerged in the 80s and 90s, many of whom came from urban middle class
backgrounds, is the growing local leadership, often representing constituencies that were the
focus of benefits of development processes. While being locally rooted and with an acute
awareness of the changes in the development context they face significant challenges in
articulation, and are inhibited by the limited exposure they have had to other contexts. The
changing leadership also faces a challenge in its ability to inspire, motivate and champion
causes in the way an earlier generation of leaders were able to.
June 2008 10
3 Changes in the HR profile of NGOs

The increasing diversity in work of NGOs and complexities of the context have led to
substantial changes in type of people working in NGOs. It is worthwhile to understand how
these changes manifest and what their implications are. The issues examined include:
• Changes in the composition of staff over time across different categories of staff
• Preferences of NGOs in recruitment of personnel
• Retention of staff
• Factors related to promotion of staff to senior positions
Attempt has been made to understand both the objective, data-supported aspects and more
subjective matters related to perception of various stakeholders. Educational background is
probably one of the better parameters to reflect staff profile from an objective viewpoint. The
interactions with other stakeholders have focussed on inputs related to other characteristics,
albeit from a subjective point of view.
3.1 Change in staff composition

The survey used six categories of staff based on their educational qualification - not schooled,
those with some schooling, those who completed schooling (10th/12th), graduates, post
graduates and staff with professional education. Data was collected on composition of staff in
1995 and 2007 and compared between these two years.
Table 6 Distribution of staff by educational qualification

1995 2007
(N=1903) (N=4593)
Not schooled 5% 2%
Some schooling 33% 12%
Schooling completed 20% 32%
Graduate 25% 31%
Post Graduate 10% 16%
Professional 7% 7%
(N=Total number of staff with respondent NGOs)
• Proportion of those who completed schooling, graduates and post graduates increased
among NGO staff, while proportion of those with some schooling went down two-thirds.
• Notably, the proportion of total staff with professional education has not changed.
• Analysis was also done separately for organisations focusing on rural and urban sectors
with the following results:
Table 7 Distribution of staff by educational Table 8 Distribution of staff by educational

qualification - Rural qualification - Urban
1995 2007 1995 2007
(N=1579) (N=3811) (N=324) (N=782)
Not schooled 1% 2% Not schooled 18% 7%
Some schooling 26% 8% Some schooling 54% 32%
Schooling completed 23% 34% Schooling completed 11% 19%
Graduate 31% 31% Graduate 8% 29%
Post Graduate 12% 18% Post Graduate 4% 7%
Professional 7% 7% Professional 5% 6%
(N=Total number of staff with respondent NGOs) (N=Total number of staff with respondent NGOs)
June 2008 11
This analysis is important as the location of work has implications on who NGOs can recruit
or retain. In both groups of organisations, the proportion of staff with graduation or more
increased, and that of staff with only school education came down. Among rural
organisations the ratio between staff with only schooling and staff with higher education
changed from 50:50 in 1995 to 44:56 in 2007. Similar ratio for urban organisations was 83:17
in 1995 and 68:32 in 2007. This reflects the difficulty NGOs face in getting people with
higher education, especially in urban areas where options and opportunities are wider.
3.1.1 Change patterns across different educational categories

The changes in staff strength by educational categories across organisations were analysed.
Table 9 Change in staff strength by educational category

Some School Graduate Post Professi
Schooling completed Graduate onals
(N=15) (N=20) (N=26) (N=24) (N=23)
Reduced share 33% 29% 23% 32% 52%
Increased share by up to 20% 47% 52% 50% 56% 39%
Increased share between 21% and 50% 13% 10% 23% 12% 4%
Increased share by more than 51% 7% 10% 4% 0% 4%
• Graduates are the most common category of staff across organisations, with all 26
organisations which reported relevant data having graduates as staff members.
• It is also this group that showed the least amount of reduction, with only 23% of the
organisations reporting reduction in proportion of graduates in their rolls.
• The proportion of reduction was the highest for those with professional education, 12 of
the 23 organisations reporting reduction. This has to be seen along with the fact that
proportion of NGO staff with professional degrees, in total staff strength did not change
between 1995 and 2007 (7% in both years). Thus, while some organisations have been
able to attract more professionals, a majority have actually not been able to increase or
even maintain the proportion of such staff.
• Same data related to rural and urban organisations analysed separately is as follows:
Table 10 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Rural focused organisations

Some School Graduate Post Professio
Schooling completed Graduate nals
(N=9) (N=14) (N=19) (N=17) (N=16)
Reduced share 44% 43% 26% 35% 63%
Table 11Growth in staff strength by educational category – Urban focused organisations
Some School Graduate Post Professio
Schooling completed Graduate nals
(N=6) (N=6) (N=7) (N=7) (N=7)
Reduced share 33% 0% 14% 43% 29%
June 2008 12
• Rural organisations experienced higher reduction in proportion of staff in all categories

except post graduates.
• The drop in proportion of professionals indicate that rural organisations have greater
difficulties in getting such people.
Considering the fact that only two of the 27 organisations reduced total staff strength over the
decade, the disaggregated figures in the above tables, provide interesting insights.
• Higher number of rural and urban organisations found it easier to attract graduates than
post graduates or those with professional degrees.
• Urban organisations had greater increase in the proportion of staff with professional
degrees, as compared to rural organisations. The reverse is true in case of post graduates.
• People with only school education continue to be important human resource for NGOs.
3.2 Organisational preferences for recruitment

The schedule asked respondents to rank five possible sources of people on a scale of 1 to 5,
with 1 showing very high preference for that source and 5 showing very low preference. The
ranking was done with a ‘then’ and ‘now’ comparison.
Table 12 Preference for sources to recruit people

(N=27) High Low Medium
1995 2007 1995 2007 1995 2007
Local 85% 74% 7% 11% 7% 15%
Regional 81% 81% 0% 7% 19% 11%
State 41% 48% 52% 44% 7% 7%
National 37% 33% 63% 56% 0% 11%
Walk ins 81% 74% 7% 4% 11% 22%
• There is no significant variation in preference of organisations between 1995 and 2007.

• Sources closest to the organisations, within the region/ operational area, were ranked
higher by more than four-fifths of the organisations.
• A large number of organisations ranked walk-ins (people who came to work on their own)
high in their preferences.
• Recruiting staff from campuses, within the State or nationally has low preference.
3.3 Retention of staff

The survey looked at staff retention in the organisations between 1995 and 2007 across
categories based on education qualification.
Table 13 Proportion of staff by educational qualification continuing from 1995 to 2007

As % of total staff in the category in 1995
Not schooled (N = 104) 6%
Some schooling (N = 624) 14%
Schooling completed (N = 381) 33%
Graduate (N = 477) 27%
Post Graduate (N = 188) 29%
Professional (N = 129) 36%
Total (N = 1903) 24%
(N=Total staff in the category in 1995)
June 2008 13
• 24% of all staff who worked in the organisations in 1995 continue to work in 2007.
• The retention proportion of staff with higher levels of education is higher.
Retention trends were also analysed in terms of occurrence across organisations.
Table 14 Retention of Staff between 1995 and 2007 by educational category

Total Some Schooling Graduate Post Professi
schooling completed Graduate onal
(N=24) (N=9) (N=15) (N=20) (N=10) (N=15)
Less than 25% retained 13% 33% 0% 10% 10% 0%
Up to half retained 25% 22% 20% 25% 10% 13%
More than half retained 25% 22% 27% 10% 30% 27%
100% retention 38% 22% 53% 55% 50% 60%
• More than a third of the organisations reported retaining all staff from 1995 in 2007.
• 63% of organisations have retained more than half the people working with them in 1995.
Table 15 Proportion of those continuing since 1995 in total staff in 2007

(N=26) Percentage
Less than 5% 7 27
Between 5% and 15% 10 38
More than 25% 3 12
• Staff members continuing to work in the organisations for more than a decade constitute
only 10% of the total staff strength of the organisations in 2007.
• Splitting this figure into bands, it emerges that in more than one-third of the organisations,
the old-horses constitute more than 15% of the current staff.
• The implications on institutional learning and memory hence probably are important
issues for all the organisations, more so for the two-thirds of the sample where older
people constitute less than one-sixth of the organisation.
3.3.1 Reasons for people leaving organisations

Examining the retention trends leads naturally to enquiring about reasons for people leaving
the organisations. The study schedule had a list of statements which the respondents were to
rank in terms of their significance. This section does not make use of any objective data
provided by the organisations, but is based entirely on what the organisations perceived as
reasons for their staff leaving.
Table 16 Reasons for people leaving as % of positive responses recorded
Proportion of Is a significant Is one of the
(N = 116) total responses reason reasons
Better prospects 53% 25% 75%
Unhappy with work 10% 0% 100%
Personal reasons 18% 10% 90%
Unable to cope with conditions 3% 0% 100%
Terminated 16% 21% 79%
(N=Total number of responses)
June 2008 14
• Better prospects, is the strongest reason for people leaving. This includes better jobs in
another NGO, development project, government or donor agency.
• Some organisations also cited better prospects in the corporate sector, as a reason for some
of its staff leaving. Among the responses that cited this as reason, a quarter ranked this as a
very significant reason for people leaving.
• Personal reasons, like family pressure, health related issues, marriage etc. were cited as the
second most important cause for people leaving.
• One-sixth of the responses cited the organisation terminating employment of persons as a
reason. This includes both termination on account of poor performance or other such
reasons and the project in which the people were employed coming to an end.
• Dissatisfaction with work or inability to cope with conditions, were cited as other reasons
for people leaving NGOs.
The reasons for staff turnover have been analysed only from the organisational point of view.
To what extent organisational systems, leadership issues and other factors that affect people’s
motivation to work were not examined in the survey.
3.4 Career growth in organisations

Career growth within NGOs is a critical factor contributing to retention of staff. The study
tried to look at the different issues in this regard.
3.4.1 Senior staff in organisations

Organisations were asked to define senior position as relevant to each of them. They stated
the proportion of staff occupying senior positions.
Table 17 Proportion of senior staff to total staff

(N=27) Percentage
Less than 2% 3 11
More than 26% 6 22
• In about half of the organisations that responded, one-tenth to a quarter of people occupied
senior positions.
• In 22% of organisations senior positions accommodated more than quarter of total staff.
The study tried to asses the reasons accorded for people reaching senior positions and their
career within the organisation.
Table 18 Proportion of senior staff started career in the organisation itself

(N=27) Percentage
None 4 15
Less than 25% 2 7
All 4 15
June 2008 15
• In about 75% of the organisations, more than one-fourth of those occupying senior
positions started their working career with the organisation itself.
• In 4 out of 27 organisations everyone who occupied senior positions had worked all their
working life with the organisations.
• In a similar number of organisations, all those in senior positions had started their working
life elsewhere.
Table 19 Reasons for promotion to senior positions

As % of total Most likely Likely Is one of the
(N = 108 ) responses reason reason reasons
Experience with organisation 25% 15% 59% 26%
Total experience 20% 32% 41% 27%
Need of the position 19% 40% 30% 30%
Educational qualification 23% 20% 48% 32%
Recommendation from reliable sources 8% 0% 11% 89%
There is no alternative 5% 0% 20% 80%
• Work experience and educational qualification are the most important factors that
organisations consider in promoting staff to senior positions.
• In case of work experience, total work experience was cited in fewer cases than experience
with the organisation, but in terms of ranking the factors, total work experience was cited
as more important than experience with the organisation.
• Similarly, though comparatively lower overall response was accorded to the need of the
position factor, it had the highest ranking in terms of importance.
Analysis was done contrasting total work experience of personnel against work experience
with the organisation itself. This was based on the data provided by organisations on the work
experience profile of some of their senior staff members.
Table 20 Work Experience profile of senior positions

Total Work Experience with
(N = 26) Experience organisation
Less than 5 years experience 0 0 3 12
5 to 10 years experience 4 15 11 42
11 to 20 years experience 18 69 9 35
More than 20 years experience 4 15 3 12
• All organisations have people with a minimum total working experience of at least five
years occupying senior positions.
• The total work experience of people in senior positions is above 11 years in more than
80% of the cases
3.5 Human Resource challenges before the NGO sector – opinions and perceptions
Over time, it has become increasingly difficult to attract and retain people from outside and
those with specialised education, making NGOs focus largely on local catchments for
recruitment. These catchments are also becoming increasingly sparse with increased
opportunities and changing aspirations, as discussed earlier. Approaching the human resource
June 2008 16
issue in a reactive rather than a strategic manner, NGOs have often settled for sub-optimal
human resources solutions. There is evidently a need for fresh strategies to attract and retain
people in NGOs. There is a need for more people in across different categories.
A desirable cultural fit - In recruiting staff, there are people with specific cultural traits who
are considered in sync with the type of expectations and demands NGOs have. These include
a willingness to locate and work in remote areas, adherence to institutional norms and
systems and are affordable by NGOs. While specific skill sets and education are valued, these
are seen in conjunction with ability to work in complex teams with people from diverse
backgrounds, age and experience.
Maintaining diversity - Most NGOs value staff diversity in terms of background and skills.
The diversity is dictated by specific needs (mobilisation of local communities, idea
generation, analysis of complex data, communication, liaison with diverse stakeholders, etc.).
This plurality in staffing is fraught with complexities and has been a one of the key
organisational struggles for most NGOs. Plurality and diversity among staff is valued
especially as this is seen as vital in generating new ideas and in strengthening debates and
discussions, as well as exchange of knowledge and skills.
Organisational development - NGOs have seen significant scale up in their operations in the
past decade, evidenced in expanding staff, budget and diversity of activities. This by itself
calls for internal reorganisation, task delegation and a transition from an informal work
culture and development of appropriate systems and procedures. Organisation growth ideally
is conjunct with organisation development, particularly in investing in training and capacity
building of the employees for future development and growth, and setting up systems and
procedures to manage growth. Translation to practice is often hindered due to a lack of
financial resources and willingness of the leadership to invest adequately towards these.
3.6 Systemic challenges of NGOs affecting HR

Human resource challenges before NGOs are by no means a result of the changes in the
environment alone. Several difficulties of systemic nature contribute to the challenges in
recruiting, nurturing and retaining adequate human resources. Several systemic challenges
were identified in course of discussions with various stakeholders. These are listed below:
A great deal of staff dissonance is related to low pay and low appreciation. There is a skill-
gap crisis in all sectors of work and this is acutely felt in NGOs which are unable to make the
pitch both in terms of wok content and price. Most NGOs guided primarily by fund
availability, work with a project orientation leading to low priority for investing in nurturing
human resource capacities and staff security measures.
For young people joining NGOs there is not enough mentoring while simultaneously there is
a pressure to learn and deliver. The senior leadership, saddled with aspirations to expand, and
often caught up in day to day running of the organisation, does not have enough time for
mentoring and guiding. This responsibility falls on the middle-layer which is not always
prepared to do this.
June 2008 17
Working in traditional and established NGOs poses a common yet significant challenge of
integrating people with age and experience with youth armed with new knowledge and ideas.
This gets further complicated as NGOs are often not able to clearly define who does what and
expect everyone to do everything, creating 'jacks of all trades' and 'masters of none'. It
becomes harder for younger people with higher aspirations to imbibe social skills and the
patience necessary to create their own space and nurture these relations. A strategic
perspective towards human resource will include defining who does/ can do what based on
what capacities they have and how they can be nurtured.
There is also a tenuous relation between field teams and support teams (usually located at the
head-office). There is need for sensitive collaboration and supportive supervision which does
not in anyway undermine the operational autonomy of field teams.
Staff are bothered by a general lack of transparency and weak systems in most NGOs. There
is a lack of readiness and ideological willingness among NGOs to professionalize as a whole,
and looking at professionals primarily to write proposals and reports.
There are usually no clear career directions within organisations. Decisions in this regard are
often not transparent. Inhibiting factors in career growth include lack of understanding and a
mismatch of organisation and individual aspirations. For people at middle and senior levels,
the inhibiting factors are often an unwillingness to relocate or learn new skills, added to
family commitments.
There is need to arrive at an optimal match of organisational expectations and personal

aspirations vis-à-vis operational autonomy, professional challenge and opportunity for
growth. There is also a need to understand salary expectations and match it with resources
available on a sustainable basis.
There are limited spaces to share ideas and concerns, and the absence of peer groups is
acutely felt. Though most organisations appear flat, there are clear hierarchies and limited
room for criticism. Critical questioning by staff is often taken as interference and the
leadership is often unable to handle it, leading to dissatisfaction and dissonance.
Giving voice to the aspirations of marginalised people is considered one of the core strengths
of NGOs. They however falter when it comes to practising this as an organisation. Staff
members feel the need to be heard and allowed to invest in personal growth. That said, even
if open spaces are designed, the ability to articulate in front of seniors/ elders is not common.
This needs facilitation and could be established as a culture over time.
In addition to institutional responses, the onus is again on senior and middle levels to create
informal responses especially in nurturing the emotional quotient. This needs to be renewed
on a continuing basis. There is also a need to invest in people who have been around for long
periods in the organisation to counter the increasing sense of dissatisfaction and distancing
from the vision.
June 2008 18
4 Capacity building of NGO staff

Capacity building of the staff is recognized as a critical need of NGOs. The key informants
were clear that present challenges in this regard have to do both with the attitude of NGOs
towards capacity building and the suitability of current focus of service providers in capacity
building.
4.1 Data from the study

The study tried to understand various issues related to support for staff capacity building
needed by NGOs and what is available at present. It became clear in course of the survey and
the discussions that a significant component of capacity building in NGOs happens through
in-house training programmes with their own staff or external resource persons. This was not
captured in great detail. NGOs also rely significantly on practical learning within the
organisation.
Most NGOs also support practical learning though visits to other organisations. This has
euphemistically been labelled 'exposure visits' in NGO parlance. The practise of
organisations in formalising these learning process varies widely in this regard.
The focus of questions in the survey was on capacity building programmes offered by various
training institutions. All 27 organisations that responded to the schedule reported use of
capacity building services provided by training institutions. The schedule had a question
about the numbers of staff members who took part in such programmes, but the responses to
this were patchy and incomplete in most cases. As a result, the intended quantification of use
of capacity building services could not be achieved.
The data however appears to point to the following:

• Less than 30% of the training is through established training or educational institutions
(the list includes IRMA, IIFM, TISS, XIDAS, BIRD, NIRD, EDI, CSE, PRIA, DHAN
Foundation, Practical Action, Account Aid, etc.).
• Training programmes offered by government organisations account for about 5%
(CAPART, OREDA, NABARD, APMAS, etc. are in this list)
• The rest of the training programmes (65%) are offered by NGOs, NGO networks and
donors. A large bulk of this is perhaps in the nature of practical learning through exposure
visits.
It is reiterated that this area needs to be further explored and the present study has not been
able to capture adequately the availability of capacity building services available and
accessed by NGOs.
The study was able to generate relevant data in trying to understand the challenges that NGOs
face in obtaining relevant capacity building services. The study asked questions pertaining to
the following issues:
• benefits to organisations from staff attending capacity building programmes
• who pays for capacity building services
• organisational needs for capacity building
• limitations of existing capacity building services.
June 2008 19
Table 21 Benefits to organisations from capacity building of staff

As % of responses Benefit in Benefit in Benefit in
(N= 137) all cases most cases some cases
New skills gained 36% 24% 44% 32%
Improved motivation to work 17% 30% 48% 22%
Prepared for taking bigger responsibilities 34% 11% 48% 41%
Led to leaving organisation 7% 0% 11% 89%
No benefit 7% 0% 0% 100%
• Staff gaining new skills and taking bigger responsibilities were reported among the biggest
benefits.
• It also emerged that not always has sending staff for these programmes been in the interest
of the organisation. A few instances of either the staff member leaving the organisation or
gaining little from attending the programme have been reported.
Table 22 Who pays for staff capacity building?

(N= 79) Always Mostly Sometimes
Organisation paid from own general funds 28% 5% 45% 50%
Paid from specific project funds 27% 48% 52% 0%
Sponsored programme 29% 17% 17% 65%
Free programme 16% 15% 8% 77%
• In more than half the cases, organisations have cited paying for the capacity building
programmes from organisational funds, either project specific or organisations’ general
funds.
• More often organisations were paying for training from specific project funds than own
general funds.
4.2 Capacity building Needs of NGOs

The study tried to identify the areas where NGOs need capacity building for their staff.
Table 23 Capacity Building Needs

(N = 101) Very Essential Important
Specific sectoral areas 27% 48% 52%
Leadership and Motivation related 27% 67% 33%
Communication abilities 28% 64% 36%
Needs specific to the organisation 19% 58% 42%
• Leadership and motivation related capacities and communication skills were cited by most
organisations as the most essential area.
• Inputs in specific sectors also ranks high.
• Many organisations listed the need for customized training programmes.
June 2008 20
Table 24 Limitations of the existing service provision by institutions

As % of responses
(N = 62)
Location of the service providers 6%
Cost of the programmes 39%
Language related constraints 31%
Absence of good agencies 5%
Duration of programmes 6%
Inadequate contacts 5%
Uncertainty about benefit/relevance 8%
• Cost of the programmes and language constraints were cited as the most important
limitations with the existing lot of capacity building services provided by various
institutions.
• Several organisations highlighted that there was little common between what they needed
and what was being offered.
• Contextual relevance is among the key issues that respondent organisations raised as
limitations.
4.3 Perceptions of challenges in capacity building

The key informant discussions revealed opinions similar to what the data suggests. A general
sense of dissatisfaction with what is presently available for building staff capacities in
training and education institutions was palpable. This was not seen as weaknesses of training
institutions alone; NGOs’ ability to plan for capacity building of their personnel and demand
relevant services from the training institutions was highlighted as a serious issue.
The typical approach in NGOs towards capacity building is also reactive and opportunistic
rather than strategic. The calendar of training programmes of educational and training
institutions determines the areas in which staff capacities are built. Information on this is also
not complete with most NGOs unaware of the range of capacity building services offered by
the range of education and training institutions. Staff are often sent for these programmes as a
token of appreciation or reward for services rather than any specific need. Budget availability
is also a serious consideration in participation in these training programmes. Another limiting
factor is language. There is need to understand specific capacity building needs of NGOs.
Capacity building needs to be seen as an overall process and not skill building alone. There
cannot be one organisational response to capacity building of the entire organisation.
Individual needs need to be taken care of in an ongoing basis. Capacity building is a
continuous process of enhancing staff capabilities. There has to be a willingness and
readiness among leadership of NGOs to initiate this. This need not necessarily hinge on
recruiting specialised people for managing human resources, which is a challenge for most
organisations.
5 The ways forward

NGOs find themselves at the crossroads on the issue of human resources. Factors in the
external environment as well as those inherent to the sector have combined to create this
situation. While NGOs have to respond to the changing environment within their limitations,
June 2008 21
there is much that can be done in creating a more positive environment for human resources.
A few areas that could be considered emerged in discussions with key informants.
Re-thinking leadership
A majority of NGOs have expanded in size and scope in the past decade. To sustain
effectiveness in work while responding to the complex external environment the
organisational core needs to be strong. It is a recognised reality that the charismatic and
motivational leadership of the founders is increasingly inaccessible due to multiple pressures.
A committed and dynamic senior and middle level leadership has to be nurtured to motivate
the team and to provide good quality development support. Several NGOs have seen attrition
at senior levels due to the lack of space offered by founders/leaders. The onus for this is on
the founders/ leaders, in what and how much they are willing to ‘let go’. The core of
organisations which is able to provide nurturing and support needs to be expanded and
strengthened. While consciously creating this space, there is need for building capabilities of
new leadership to take on these roles.
Sharing resources and looking beyond young people

There are several functions such as accounts, communication, fund raising, etc., for which
resource sharing arrangements can be drawn up between NGOs drawing on resources from
local areas. These decentralised talent pools may be able to service many organisations on a
time-share basis. This is characteristically difficult for NGOs (especially those within the
same region) which are divided on ideological lines.
Another possibility it to tap retired people who have the energy and drive to engage in such
work, or mid-career people in the corporate sector who are looking for newer challenges.
Internet based resources could be developed to connect people with the willingness and
interest to work with NGOs, with the varying needs NGOs have.
In these options there is need for significant investment of time by senior people especially in
the initial stages. There are mixed experiences in this regard, with concerns on the level of
involvement of such resources in organisation strategies and decision making processes.
Often it is the inability of NGOs to define tasks and boundaries that leads to dissatisfaction.
Better capacity building programmes

NGOs have to be supported to identify capacity building and training needs and for carrying
them through. Training programmes on general management modules are needed for all
organisations at different levels. These need to be tailored to local contexts and to the extent
possible available in a mix of English and vernacular.
The multitude of rural development/ rural management/ social work programmes appear to be
focussing largely on the enterprise aspects of development. Decentralised academies of
Social Development with sound principles for recruitment, training and positive placement
can provide a continuous stream of human resource supplies to NGOs within specific
catchments. Processes for continued contacts with persons placed in NGOs as well as with
NGOs may help create a more positive experience.
June 2008 22
6 What needs to be done?

There is need for concerted action from all stakeholders in the NGO-led development process
in responding to the challenges related to human resources. There is probably little that
individual organisations can do on their own to address some of the larger issues. NGOs,
donor agencies and other support institutions will have to come together for joint action in
many cases. There are steps that individual organisations can take to improve their situation.
6.1 What individual organisations could do

Ensuring continued staff motivation is an area that needs to be addressed particularly by
the senior leadership of organisations. It is of little value to blame better prospects for the
attrition that organisations experience. Interactions during the study indicate that the lack of
sensitivity or high levels of complacency in matters of human resources management is an
issue that organisations, especially the leadership need to overcome. Conjunct with this are
the issues of definition of roles, levels of operational autonomy, feedback processes, and
platforms for sharing ideas and concerns (both formal and informal), that play a significant
role in staff motivation. These need sustained attention.
It is also perhaps prudent to estimate the minimum levels of attrition in different categories of
staff, even with adequate human resource support systems in place, and plan for recruitments
accordingly. Organisations need to approach the HR issue more strategically, rather than
adopt reactive positions. This, of course, calls for adequate availability of financial resources
on a sustained basis.
NGOs often tend to communicate one-sided and insular views of development, focussing
more on the rhetoric, making claims, rather than the realities on the ground. The current
generation that is prepared to work with NGOs need facts to base their decisions and
probably have little patience for the rhetoric of ‘poverty’ and ‘good cause’ alone. Re-
configuring communications about their work is an important step in this regard.
On the other hand there is also need for NGOs to perhaps increase the visibility of their work
and communicate in a clear and transparent manner through mainstream media and other
platforms, establishing credibility and creating interest within the larger society.
It may not be possible for many organisations to offer higher levels of remuneration in
general and especially for people with specialised skill sets. The minimum that organisations
need to do is to ensure fair terms of employment. Coverage of staff under social security
provisions like provident fund or pension benefits; having well-documented and properly
implemented service conditions including leave rules; and reducing apparent arbitrariness in
personnel related decision making, are steps that cost the organisations very little, but result
in higher motivation for people to continue working.
6.2 What organisations could do jointly

Sharing resources between organisations has been suggested by many as a feasible idea.
This however needs strong coordination between organisations, including a commonly
accepted mechanism to implement it. Such common platforms may need the initiative from
an external agency like a donor agency supporting several organisations in the same location,
June 2008 23
to take-off. But continued operations will need commitment of time and preparedness from
the part of the organisations themselves. Pooling of funds will also be necessary.
Human resource issues are not on the agenda for discussions in common platforms of
NGOs. It is left to be the problem of individual organisations and not considered worthy of
joint action of any kind. This is an area where organisations could jointly discuss and debate
work and evolve solutions. This is particularly important in dealing with matters related to
capacity building and negotiating with training institutions.
6.3 What donors could do

Financial support agencies have for long considered staffing an issue for the implementing
organisation to worry about. In many cases, issues of how the organisation would recruit-
retain-rejuvenate the human resources needed for the projects are not discussed and
understood. Most donors also do not respond positively to organisations’ demands for higher
outlay in project budgets to meet personnel costs, or the need for associated infrastructure.
Standard ratios of personnel costs to programme costs are applied and often this forces the
organisations to sub-optimal choices. Donor agencies need to become more sensitive and
pro-active to human resource challenges of their partner implementing organisations.
Several established NGOs have good human resource management strategies, spanning
recruitment, induction, management of attrition, capacity and career development. Many field
based NGOs also have well structured staff capacity building programmes blending practical
and theoretical inputs. Donors can initiate the process of documenting and sharing these
good practices within the sector. Specific support for NGOs for carrying out these training
programmes may also be considered by donors.
Donor agencies can play a crucial role in improving the staff capacity building services that
are offered by training institutions. Together with their partner organisations, they can
demand better programmes and also help training institutions by giving more effective
feedback. These can be done without over-stepping the boundaries that donor-doer
relationships entail and without affecting each others’ autonomy. Improved
communications with partners on human resources and capacity building issues, beyond
standard project monitoring questions are required to achieve this.
6.4 What training institutions could do

There is a range of training programmes that NGOs end up with each calendar year, both
through in-house and external trainings. However, the correlation between training
programmes and built capacities is quite weak. Training institutions often fail to read the
market for their services adequately. Standard training programmes are designed and offered,
and more often than not, there is good response in participation. In sum, there is a great
amount of dissatisfaction, both with the suppliers and customers.
It is evident from the staffing patterns of NGOs that there is a diversity of experience and
educational background. Standard training programmes often do not take into account these
differences. In fact in most cases organisations themselves are unable to adequately map the
training needs of their staff. Training institutions need to work more closely with NGOs in
June 2008 24
mapping, designing and conducting training programmes both of a general nature and those
tailor-made for the organisations needs, catering to different categories of staff.
Cost concerns are cited by most organisations in availing training programmes offered by
institutions. It is quite clear that it is not the money cost of the programme per se, that
organisations are concerned about. It is the issue of value from such training programmes that
is of higher importance. The value proposition of the programmes offered need to be
convincing and communicated properly. Institutions need to have a mechanism for
ascertaining this.
Training institutions that cater to small NGOs need to develop skills to offer programmes in
vernacular languages. Organisations need programmes that will help build skills and
knowledge of their regular staff and these inevitably are in areas where vernacular inputs are
not easily available. Reasonable investments need to be made in developing these options.
June 2008 25
Annexes
1. Terms of reference of the study

2. Questionnaire schedule for NGOs
3. Check-list for key informants
4. List of respondent organisations
5. List of key informants
6. References
June 2008 26
Annex 1 – Terms of Reference
A STUDY ON
HUMAN RESOURCES AND CAPACITY ISSUES WITHIN NGOs
Background: The Paul Hamlyn Foundation (PHF) is a UK-based donor agency that supports
local Indian NGOs for implementing development projects within its India programme. It
currently puts in about Rs. 5 crores a year into its India programme, and supports 27 different
NGOs across the country. Relationships typically range from one to seven years, and annual
grant amounts range from Rs. 3 to 40 lakhs.
PHF had hosted a meeting for its partners in February 2007. One of the matters brought up by
the partners was the difficulty in attracting and retaining ‘good’ people – a problem being
faced by their organisations and by the NGO sector as a whole, and a problem particularly
because development projects are increasing in size and complexity and require suitably
qualified and motivated people to manage them.
We at PHF would like to enquire into this – is it really such a problem, who are the people
that NGOs would like to attract and retain, and why are they unable to do so? And can the
PHF do something about this?
Key Questions:
1. To what extent, and in what way, have human resources needs changed for NGOs over
the past few years?
2. Who are the people that NGOs would like to attract? Why? Which institutions do they
come from? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in joining
the development sector? What can be done to address these?
3. Who are the people that NGOs would like to retain in the medium/long term for senior
management roles? What are their critical characteristics? What barriers do they face in
achieving their ambitions and potential from within the NGO sector? What can be done to
address these?
4. What are the institutional resources available for educating and training entry and middle
level people in the NGO sector to meet future requirements? Are there gaps? What can be
done to address these?
5. Is there a role for PHF, given its mandate and resources, to work towards addressing the
problem of human resources (if there is one) within its partners in particular and within
the NGO sector in general in a meaningful way?
The Way Ahead: We at PHF would like to commission a study that addresses these
questions to be undertaken by an independent consultant who is familiar with human resource
and capacity issues within the Indian NGO sector.
The consultant would be initially expected to write a proposal to PHF outlining a

methodology, time frame, budget (with details on consultancy fees and operational expenses),
expected outcomes and a dissemination strategy. Once approved by PHF, work can begin.
The Adviser – India for PHF will be the link person within PHF.
June 2008 27
Annex 2 - Questionnaire schedule for NGOs
1 Organisation Profile
1.1 Name of the organisation – ______________________________________
1.2 Year of founding – _______________
1.3 Number of staff working in the organisation:

In 1995*
In 2007
*if organisation is newer, a year after its founding
1.4 Annual Expenditure (based on audited accounts of the respective year)

In 1995* Rs.
In 2007 Rs.
1.5 Geographic spread of work

No. of States No. of districts No. of Blocks No. of villages
1.6 Primary focus of work: Rural Urban
1.7 Areas of work

Please put a tick mark against areas/ sectors of intervention in the respective years
Area In 1995* In 2007
Education
Health
Natural Resource Management
Livelihoods
Infrastructure
Disaster Response
Micro Finance
Village Organisations
Women’s Organisations
Others (specify)
June 2008 28
1.8 Does the organisation run income generating activities (Production, marketing, trading)
on its own?
Yes No
1.8.1 If yes, please specify what types of activities are being run
____________________________________________________________
2 Human Resources related issues
2.1 Please provide a gender break up of your staff

Please give number of staff members belonging to each category below
Category in 1995* in 2007
Male
Female
2.2 Please give details of educational qualifications of staff members

Category in 1995* in 2007
Not schooled
Some schooling
Matriculate
Graduate
Post Graduate
Professional Degree
2.3 Where are staff members of the organisation recruited from?

Please rank from 1 to 5 where 1=Most preferred and 5=Least preferred
Source in 1995* in 2007
Locally, using local contacts
From within the area (district, region)
From campuses within the State
From campuses nationally
People came to join interested in the work
June 2008 29
2.4 How many persons who worked in the organisation in 1995 (or a year after its
founding, if the organisation was formed after 1995) continue to work in 2007?
Category Number of persons
Not schooled
Some schooling
Matriculate
Graduate
Post Graduate
Professional Degree
2.5 What, according to you, are reasons for people leaving the organisation?
Based on your experience in the past five years, please tick the appropriate boxes against
each reason cited below; please add other reasons, if relevant, in the space provided
Almost More than
Some of the
100% of the 50% of the Not a reason
Reason people who
people who people who at all
left
left left
Better job in another NGO
Move to a Donor
Agency/Consultancy
Move to a Government job
To get Married
Unhappy with the job
Asked to leave
Other (please specify in the space below)
2.6 How many persons occupy senior positions (as defined by the organisation) in your
organisation?
____________
2.7 How many of the persons occupying senior positions started their working career with
the organisation itself?
____________
June 2008 30
2.8 Please give some details about staff members who occupy senior positions
Please give details in the table below for up to five such positions
Total work Experience in the
Sl. No. Position occupied / Designation
experience (years) organisation (years)
1
2
3
4
5
2.9 On what basis does the organisation appoint people to senior positions?
Based on the experience during the past five years, please tick the appropriate boxes
against each category listed below; please add other factors, if relevant, in the space
provided
In all In many In some Not a
Basis of appointment
cases cases cases basis
Experience within organisation
Total work experience
Specific need of the position
Educational qualification
Recommendation from respected
sources
Recommendation from donor or
resource agency
There were no alternatives
Other (please specify in the space below)
June 2008 31
3 Capacity Building of Staff
3.1 Has your organisation used the services of training institutions for capacity building of
your staff members?
Yes No
If Yes, please continue to 3.2 If No, please go to 3.5
3.2 How many people from the organisation have participated in training programmes in
these institutions?
Please give names of the institutions and number of staff persons who have undergone
programmes there
Number of persons Number of
Sl. No. Name of Institution trained in the past persons trained in
five year 2007
1
2
3
4
5
3.3 How do you meet the costs of sending staff members to such training programmes?
Based on experience during past several years, please tick the appropriate box against
each statement
In all In many In some Not
Source
cases cases cases applicable
Organisation paid from its own funds
Organisation paid from specific project funds
Sponsored by another organisation
Free programme
June 2008 32
3.4 What do you think are the outcomes to the organisation from sending staff members to
such training programmes?
Based on experience during past several years, please tick the appropriate box against
each statement; please add other statements, if relevant, in the space below
Outcomes from capacity building In all In many In some Not
programmes at outside institutions cases cases cases applicable
Gained new skills to manage day-to-day
matters
Improved motivation to work
Gained skill to do/manage a new
programme/activity
Groomed persons to take up larger
responsibilities
Improved functioning in their current jobs
Led to person finding another job
No benefit to the organisation at all
Other (please specify in space below)
3.5 What kind of capacity building programmes are most needed in your organisations
context
Please tick the appropriate box against each item listed; please add any other item in the
space provided
Very Not
Type of programme needed Important
Essential important
General Management skill development
Specific programme in Sectoral areas (Livelihoods,
Health, Education, Natural Resource, Micro-
finance, etc)
Capacity in Leadership and mobilisation
Skills in communication
Need programmes specifically designed for our
organisation
Other (please specify in space below)
June 2008 33
3.6 What constraints does the organisation face in obtaining capacity building support for
the staff?
Please tick appropriate options; please add other constraints in the space below
Constraint Please tick if true in your case
Location of the organisation
Cost of the programmes
Language constraints
Other (please specify in space below
Name of the respondent
Designation
Date
Please send your responses by March 15, 2008 either:

By email at rvjayapadma@gmail.com or
By post to R V Jayapadma,
‘Marigold’ Mercy Bungalow, Christ Nagar No.86,
Vazhayila, Karakulam P.O., Trivandrum 695564
For clarifications please contact
By email rvjayapadma@gmail.com or
Phone 094475 94765
June 2008 34
Annex 3 – Check-list for key informants
1 Changing HR needs of NGOs between 1995 and 2007
• What are the changes in the profile of human resources (expertise, experience,
education, orientation, value-system) needed by NGOS?
• What factors have influenced these changes?
2 Changing motivation and challenges?
• Are there differences in the reasons why people join NGOs between 1995 and 2007? If
yes, what are they? What factors account for these differences?
• Are there differences in the types of challenges faced by people who join NGOs,
between 1995 and 2007? If yes, what are they? What factors account for these
changes?
3 Growth within organisations
• Are there specific qualities needed for people to occupy senior positions in NGOs? Are
such qualities generally found?
• What factors in the NGO sector aid/inhibit young people who join NGOs in/from
achieving their aspirations?
4 Capacity building
• Is there a dissonance between supply of capacity building services (for staff) by various
training institutions/support agencies and the actual demand for such services?
• What suggestions do you make to make capacity building services for staff more
meaningful and relevant?
5 Solutions
• If there is a real HR related problem that the NGO sector is facing today, what would you
suggest as the solutions?
June 2008 35
Annex 4 – List of respondent NGOs
1. Anandi, Gujarat
2. Aravali, Rajasthan
3. Action for Social Advancement, Madhya Pradesh
4. BISWA, Orissa
5. Chetna, Delhi
6. Chintan, Delhi
7. Chirag, Uttarakhand
8. Delhi Council for Child Welfare, Delhi
9. Gram Vikas, Orissa
10. Manav Kalyan Trust, Gujarat
11. Margdardarshak Seva Sansthan, Chattisgarh
12. Myrada, Karnataka
13. National Association for the Blind, Kerala
14. Nari Utthan, Madhya Pradesh
15. Nav Bharat Jagriti Kendra, Jharkhand
16. Rural Educational Activities for Development, Orissa
17. Social Action for Association and Development, Maharashtra
18. Saath, Gujarat
19. Sathi, Karnataka
20. Salam Balak Trust, Delhi
21. Setu, Gujarat
22. Seva Mandir, Rajasthan
23. Shaishav Trust, Gujarat
24. Samaj Pragati Sahyog, Madhya Pradesh
25. Srijan Foundation, Jharkhand
26. The Action North East Trust, Assam
27. Vardan Samajik Sanstha, Chattisgarh
June 2008 36
Annex 5 – List of key informants
1. Anjali Agarwal, Sathi, Lucknow

2. Ashish Kumar Sahu, SELCO, Bangalore
3. Kumar Rana, Pratichi India Trust, Kolkata
4. Lata Sachde, Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan, Bhuj
5. Liby T Johnson, Trivandrum
6. Manoharan, ACCORD, Gudalur
7. Priyanka Singh, Seva Mandir, Udaipur
8. Rahim, Sathi, Bangalore
9. Rajeev Kahndelwal, Aajevika Bureau, Udaipur
10. Ram Esteves, ADATS, Bagepally
11. Sajith Sukumaran, Trivandrum
12. Saleela Patkar, Myrada, Bangalore
13. Shubham Singh, Srijan India, Bangalore
14. Siddhi Mankad, Catalyst Management Services, Bangalore
15. Suvojit Chattopadhyay, CMFR, Chennai
16. Swati Bhogle, TIDE, Bangalore
17. Veena Joshi, SDC, Delhi
June 2008 37
Annex 6 – References
1. PVO and NGO futures - A framework for reflection and dialogue, Alan Fowler,
August 2004
2. The Power Shift and the NGO Credibility Crisis, James McGann and Mary Johnstone
The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law Volume 8, Issue 2, January 2006
3. Development, NGOs, and civil society: the debate and its future, Jenny Pearce,
Development in Practice
4. Understanding the Human Resource Challenges in Not-for-profitOrganisations from a

Lifecycle Perspective - Vasanthi Srinivasan, Journal of Health Management 2007; 9;
189
5. Human resource needs of the rural development NGOs in India – S.N.Biswas and
Upasana Aggarwal, Working Paper 187, Institute of Rural Management, Anand
June 2008 38

HR and Capacity Issues Within NGOs - Report of Study (PHF) June 2008

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HR and Capacity Issues Within NGOs - Report of Study (PHF) June 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Report of a study on

Human Resources and Capacity Issues within NGOs in India

Table 1 Profile of sample organisations...................................................................................5

1.2 A note on the survey of NGOs

Table 1 Profile of sample organisations

Comparing the organisations in terms of the geographical spread of work, 17 organisations

Chart 1 Distribution of organisations according to their age

2 Changes in the NGO context and implications on HR

2.1 Growth in the NGO sector

2.1.1 Growth in expenditure

2.1.2 Growth in work diversity

Analysis of the changes in work spread, present the following results.

2.1.3 Growth in staff strength

Table 5 Growth in staff size

Chart 2 Change in Proportion of Female Staff to Total: 1995 and 2007

2.2 Changing environment of NGO work

• The first set is to be found in a general predominance of goal-based poverty reduction as

Diversity - Complicating matters is the heterogeneous spectrum of organisations occupying

Scale/impact - While there is the grudging recognition of contributions made by NGOs in

2.2.1 Implications of changing environment on human resources of NGOs

3 Changes in the HR profile of NGOs

3.1 Change in staff composition

Table 6 Distribution of staff by educational qualification

Table 7 Distribution of staff by educational Table 8 Distribution of staff by educational

3.1.1 Change patterns across different educational categories

Table 9 Change in staff strength by educational category

Table 10 Growth in staff strength by educational category – Rural focused organisations

• Rural organisations experienced higher reduction in proportion of staff in all categories

3.2 Organisational preferences for recruitment

Table 12 Preference for sources to recruit people

• There is no significant variation in preference of organisations between 1995 and 2007.

3.3 Retention of staff

Table 13 Proportion of staff by educational qualification continuing from 1995 to 2007

Retention trends were also analysed in terms of occurrence across organisations.

Table 14 Retention of Staff between 1995 and 2007 by educational category

Table 15 Proportion of those continuing since 1995 in total staff in 2007

3.3.1 Reasons for people leaving organisations

3.4 Career growth in organisations

3.4.1 Senior staff in organisations

Table 17 Proportion of senior staff to total staff

Table 18 Proportion of senior staff started career in the organisation itself

Table 19 Reasons for promotion to senior positions

Table 20 Work Experience profile of senior positions

3.6 Systemic challenges of NGOs affecting HR

There is need to arrive at an optimal match of organisational expectations and personal

4 Capacity building of NGO staff

4.1 Data from the study

The data however appears to point to the following:

Table 21 Benefits to organisations from capacity building of staff

Table 22 Who pays for staff capacity building?

4.2 Capacity building Needs of NGOs

Table 23 Capacity Building Needs

Table 24 Limitations of the existing service provision by institutions

4.3 Perceptions of challenges in capacity building

5 The ways forward

Sharing resources and looking beyond young people

Better capacity building programmes

6 What needs to be done?

6.1 What individual organisations could do

6.2 What organisations could do jointly

6.3 What donors could do

6.4 What training institutions could do

1. Terms of reference of the study