Grassroots volunteers in context: rewarding and adverse experiences of local women working on HIV and AIDS in Kilimanjaro, Tanzania

Abstract

Many nongovernmental organizations in Africa rely on grassroots volunteers to provide critical health services. Considering context and the interplay of individual, organizational, and societal influences on the experience of volunteers, this paper addresses three questions: What do grassroots volunteers contribute? What organizational processes promote volunteer engagement? What are the positive and negative consequences of volunteering? Eighteen members and staff of the Tanzanian HIV and AIDS NGO, KIWAKKUKI, were selected from 6000+ women volunteers to be interviewed. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for themes. Within KIWAKKUKI, volunteers contributed time and local knowledge, leading to an indigenous educational approach building on local norms and customs. Volunteers' engagement was motivated by the desire to support family members, reverse stigma, and work/socialize with other women. Benefits to volunteers included skills acquisition and community recognition; yet some volunteers also reported negative experiences including burnout, conferred stigma, and domestic violence. Positive organizational processes built on cultural practices such as collective decision-making and singing. The findings point to important considerations about context, including the synergistic effect training can have on local traditions of caring, complications of gender inequity, and how community health planning processes may need to be modified in extremely poor settings. This research also suggests good utility of the research framework (the Bergen Model of Collaborative Functioning) that was used to analyze volunteer engagement for service delivery in sub-Saharan contexts.

What makes intersectoral partnerships for health promotion work? A review of the international literature

“…This model provides an analytical frame for examining collaborative working arrangements ( Endresen, 2007 ; Dosbayeva, 2010 ; Corbin et al , 2012 , 2013 ; Corwin et al , 2012 ). Researchers have chosen to use the BMCF as a guide for practice ( Haugstad, 2011 ; Corbin et al , 2012 ) and as an evaluation tool ( Amaral-Sabadini et al , 2012 ; Corbin et al , 2015 ) for health promotion partnerships because of its focus on the processes of partnership and its acknowledgement of both negative and positive interactions.…”

“…The study also found that having substantial partner resources (>6000 grassroots members) balanced the financial contributions of Northern partners and empowered the Southern organization. Multiple funding streams also strengthen the Southern organization’s position as a partner, as did a clear focus on the locally developed organizational mission Input interaction (distrust), input interaction (power), antagony feedback Latinos in a Network for Cancer Control (LINCC), USA ( Corbin et al , 2015 ) A qualitative evaluation of a community-academic partnership working to reduce cancer-related health disparities. The analysis employed the Bergen Model of Collaborative Functioning as the analytic frame to analyze 19 interviews with diverse community and academic partners.…”

“…Studies found that actual partner presence at meetings was crucial for success ( Barile et al , 2012 ). The length of service to the partnership and partners’ previous history with one another was also found to affect functioning in a positive way, as relationships strengthen over time ( Nelson et al , 2013 ; Corbin et al , 2015 ). Conversely, high partner turnover is associated with negative functioning ( Breslau et al , 2014 ).…”

“… Jones and Barry (Jones and Barry, 2011b ) and Weiss et al ( Weiss et al , 2002 ) found an association between leadership and synergy. Research suggests that successful leaders are also able to identify, combine, and distribute financial resources in creative ways ( Cheadle et al , 2008 ; Corbin et al , 2015 ). While these individual characteristics and skills are clearly important for collaborative leadership, Barile et al ( Barile et al , 2012 ) also found that the length of time a leader had been in place predicted overall functioning.…”

“…They describe work that partners accomplish individually without the benefit of collaboration ( Corbin and Mittelmark, 2008 ). These results are rarely discussed in the literature on partnership functioning but they represent a real risk to collaborations—a loss of the multiplicative value of collaborations if inputs are not adequately engaged ( Corbin et al , 2015 ).…”