Three stories.
1. A medium-sized CISV chapter is desperately trying to fill staff positions for a village. They have a few promising candidates, but 4 weeks before the village is supposed to start, suddenly there's nobody. Not one single staff. Brainstorming ideas, and trying to do anything so that the camp won't get canceled they send e-mails about and are suddenly flooded with applications from experienced CISVers around the world, volunteering to be an international staff in that very village. The chapter is even in the comfortable situation to select some of the applicants and the village finally takes place as planned.
2. A CISVer with a ton of experience both being participant and leader applies for the position as international staff in a Seminar Camp. After being asked to take over the more responsible role as the camp director because of the chronic lack of experienced staff, he agrees to this "upgrade" and gets involved in preparations and bringing the rest of the staff together. Suddenly he is informed by an e-mail from the international committee, that two unfavourable reports, some dating back several years, have lead to the decision that he shall not direct this camp but rather be international staff instead.
Understandably upset he decided not to staff the Seminar Camp at all.
3. In order to expand the competence of their team, the staff of a summer camp invites an experienced CISVer from Israel to join in. The delegations are informed about the new staff member through the third precamp. Also Lebanon is invited to this camp and ever since a Lebanese CISV family got into huge trouble a few years ago, CISV international refrains from putting Lebanese and Israeli kids together in one camp - a rule that the particular hosting chapter was unaware of. After the CISV Lebanon is about to cancel their participation, the (reasonable) decision is made to ask the tentative Israeli staff, who is (understandably) upset, to stay at home.
I don't want to dive into the details of these stories, let alone try and figure out who's fault it was, and what exactly should be changed, but they illustrate that the way we are dealing with international staff is far from ideal in two aspects: Apparently there is a huge potential not being used (compare the costs of flying in an international staff with cancelling a camp). And if this potential is actually being used, a lot of collateral damage is generated by our current way of handling things.
Finding volunteers will be an ongoing challenge for CISV in the future, and at least for international staff we should try and create some form of an official, open, transparent, fair and efficient marketplace system to allocate motivated people to the chapters in need.
1. A medium-sized CISV chapter is desperately trying to fill staff positions for a village. They have a few promising candidates, but 4 weeks before the village is supposed to start, suddenly there's nobody. Not one single staff. Brainstorming ideas, and trying to do anything so that the camp won't get canceled they send e-mails about and are suddenly flooded with applications from experienced CISVers around the world, volunteering to be an international staff in that very village. The chapter is even in the comfortable situation to select some of the applicants and the village finally takes place as planned.
2. A CISVer with a ton of experience both being participant and leader applies for the position as international staff in a Seminar Camp. After being asked to take over the more responsible role as the camp director because of the chronic lack of experienced staff, he agrees to this "upgrade" and gets involved in preparations and bringing the rest of the staff together. Suddenly he is informed by an e-mail from the international committee, that two unfavourable reports, some dating back several years, have lead to the decision that he shall not direct this camp but rather be international staff instead.
Understandably upset he decided not to staff the Seminar Camp at all.
3. In order to expand the competence of their team, the staff of a summer camp invites an experienced CISVer from Israel to join in. The delegations are informed about the new staff member through the third precamp. Also Lebanon is invited to this camp and ever since a Lebanese CISV family got into huge trouble a few years ago, CISV international refrains from putting Lebanese and Israeli kids together in one camp - a rule that the particular hosting chapter was unaware of. After the CISV Lebanon is about to cancel their participation, the (reasonable) decision is made to ask the tentative Israeli staff, who is (understandably) upset, to stay at home.
I don't want to dive into the details of these stories, let alone try and figure out who's fault it was, and what exactly should be changed, but they illustrate that the way we are dealing with international staff is far from ideal in two aspects: Apparently there is a huge potential not being used (compare the costs of flying in an international staff with cancelling a camp). And if this potential is actually being used, a lot of collateral damage is generated by our current way of handling things.
Finding volunteers will be an ongoing challenge for CISV in the future, and at least for international staff we should try and create some form of an official, open, transparent, fair and efficient marketplace system to allocate motivated people to the chapters in need.
Agreed.
I think there are many examples in CISV where our volunteers are poorly managed and treated. Examples include heavy workloads, little recognition/reward and as you have highlighted here a lack of fair and transparent systems to volunteer.
We often claim to be a family organisation who cares more about the person and so wants to keep things informal. By doing this though it could be argued that people are more likely to suffer. At least with systems and procedure everyone knows what page they are on.
It seems the 'fuzzy' feel is harder to stomach when it doesn't work in your favour or when you feel unfairly treated.
I am not arguing in favour of anything here, I think both have their merits and of course faults.
I also agree.
we should have an official and transparent way of inviting and applying for international staff and, as usual, every international programme is using its own rules, while chapters go on the informal ways and 90% of the times invite people without following any formal procedure as it is supposed to be.
Short comment: The new website is planned to have a CISV Job Market. Should enable the announcement part of things.
I believe all international programme committees actually "demand" to approve international staff for the reasons mentioned. In the case of the Seminar Camp it is disastrous that nobody did the checks *before* the upgrade...
As for process; CISVs (as a stereotype) hate forms and process, and generally try to do circumvent and avoid adhering to them... :S
The process today for Villages is actually straight-forward:
"If international staff is invited, there must be prior approval from the individual’s home (sending) National Association as well as the hosting National Association before proceeding with the application process and appointment. The IO must be notified of the selection. The majority of the Host Staff must be from the host nation (preferably host Chapter). The International Village Committee maintains a staff data bank for assisting nations in securing International Staff Members." (Village Guide)
Essentially it says "do what you want, but notify IO". Nothing written about strange "I don't want to be with anybody from country XYZ". Being lazy I have not checked the other guides, I assume them to be in line, with exception of Seminar Camp where international staff is something special.