"Your Report is Completely Wrong!" (aapkii report ek dum galat hai!): Locating Spaces Inside NGOs for Feedback and Dissemination

Abstract

This paper explores separate, but similar, confrontations that occurred at the end of two research studies conducted with two different Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) in Rajasthan, India. Although our goals included explaining our questions and methods during the research period, when we returned to the field for feedback and dissemination, in both cases, the research participants were upset by our findings. The similarity of the experiences caused us to reflect on: (1) power and its spaces inside NGOs and (2) the possibilities for social change through the process of feedback and dissemination. The tensions between NGOs' interests in controlling project narratives of success and counter-narratives was revealed through researcher-led feedback and dissemination. Drawing on feminist ethnography and organizational theory, we find that dissemination becomes a counter-narrative among the many narratives of an organization. Dissemination highlights already existing narratives and the tensions they produce, besides enabling dialogue that enables new narratives to emerge. We conclude by suggesting that tensions need not be resolved for dissemination to be considered successful-enabling spaces for dialogue leads to insights for both researcher and researched.

“We Are Not Contractors”: Professionalizing the Interactive Service Work of NGOs in Rajasthan, India

“…For Sunil and other Rural Power fieldworkers, being called contractors struck a nerve; their arguments against the idea that Rural Power acted like a governmental contractor were relentless (see O'Reilly and Dhanju, 2010). Even if they worked with low‐caste people and the poor, there was still respectability in their work and, by extension, in the work of an NGO.…”

“…Even in a remote place like rural northern Rajasthan, Sunil was familiar with international criticisms of NGOs and was aware that being called a contractor was pejorative. So when my research assistants and I told him that the employees and clients 1 of Rural Power had suggested that the NGO had become a contractor, he vehemently denied it (O'Reilly and Dhanju 2010). In Sunil's denial is the expression of a dearly held belief by many development practitioners: NGOs are independent social service organizations, not business operations.…”

“…These professionalization processes also seeped into other projects that the NGO worked on. I began participant observation in December 2005 and completed it in December 2007, with two follow‐up visits to the NGO in the summers of 2008 and 2009 (see O'Reilly and Dhanju 2010 on dissemination). Staff interviews (32) were conducted in Hindi and Marwari; I also attended monthly reporting meetings of staff whenever possible.…”

Negotiating Organizational Access as a Multifaceted Process: Comparative Research Experiences With Three Advocacy NGOs in Kenya

“…In the case of Greenpeace in Norway, for example, public criticism of its anti-whaling campaign caused some of the (former) employees to react with suspicion to the researcher, denying her interview requests and checking her background with colleagues before participating (Riese, 2018). Similarly, in the case of Rural Power, an NGO in India, the organization’s response to research dissemination constituted criticism and denial by the NGO staff, highlighting their interest in controlling narratives of project success (O’Reilly & Dhanju, 2010). Particular attention therefore needs to be paid to processes of gatekeeping and impression management employed by organizational representatives (Grant, 2017).…”

“…The majority of methodological literature on access in NGO research has highlighted either the role of gatekeepers or researcher positionality (see for example, Noh, 2019; Riese, 2018). Additionally, most of the existing studies draw on a single case study (e.g., Markowitz, 2001; Noh, 2019; O’Reilly & Dhanju, 2010; Riese, 2018). While these studies are appropriate for studying individual NGO cases, they are typically ill-equipped for capturing and comparing context-specific experiences of negotiating access, particularly in non-Western settings which have been underrepresented in the methodological literature on organizations.…”