RE its being “impossible to understand a situation unless you’re there” - I am skeptical of claims like this, but it depends what you mean. If you mean that it’s impossible to prove something about a culture to a donor who hasn’t see it, I agree - sometimes the people I talk to have seen things I haven’t seen, and I have to take their word that they’ve seen them. Trust comes in here. But to tell me that the culture is a certain way is still to give an explanation/description (even if an unprovable one) - by contrast, to refuse any explanation, and say “We can’t do things in such-and-such a way because … well, you just have to be there,” just reeks of refusing to question one’s intuitions.

How great it would be if all donors truly wanted to be treated like adults and were willing to wade through the often complicated facts of trying to help people. The ‘reassuring platitudes’ and thank-you notes exist for multiple reasons, but one very real reason is that many donors “want” the platitudes and thank-you notes. They don’t actually want the truth: the complicated facts of what it takes to help people. Especially in cross-culture projects, the “best” way to help isn’t always the most efficient way or even the most fiscally responsible way. Sometimes helping involves perceived waste, that’s the truth.

A small example: In many cultures what you wear when you visit someone demonstrates how much respect you have for them. It is also true that often the first step in helping people is restoring their respect and dignity. The director of our organization often took flak for wearing nice suits - ‘Why is he spending money on suits when he is supposed to by helping people? That money should go for other things.’ Well, that money was going toward communicating the fact that he had tremendous respect for each of the people he visited and the bond of mutual respect would open doors to help in very practical ways that probably would not have opened had he shown up in shorts and t-shirt.

I wish all donors truly wanted to understand all the facets involved in helping people, but often they actually just want to feel good about being the kind of person who helps people. . .or they simply want the tax write-off. Above all, what they often “don’t” want is their assumptions contradicted. They “don’t” want an education. They just want an easy way to feel good about ‘doing their part.’ It’s difficult to figure out which ones truly care about the goal of an organization and which ones just want to write a check and move on. Unfortunately, there often aren’t enough “adult” donors to allow an organization to do away with platitudes and thank-you notes (actually, it is always good to say thank-you).

And one hard lesson I learned was that it is often impossible to fully understand a cross-cultural situation without being there. So, no matter how much I wanted to explain or how much a donor wanted to understand, there was often still a gap that was impossible to cross without the common ground of living in the other culture. Sometimes you just get tired of not being understood even when you explain and explain. Settling for a platitude and a thank-you isn’t always a cop-out, but sometimes is simply the meeting ground of trust: the donor trusting the organization to wade through the complications and do good, and the organization trusting the donor to truly be on their side even though all they’re able to do at the moment is write a check.

The truth is usually simple, but it is a simplicity that exists on the far side of complexity.

So, should organizations have honest, down to earth answers for questions on how they are spending the money and how they are actually helping others? Yes, of course. Should donors actually care deeply about what they donate to and be willing to stuggle to understand situations that may be completely outside their experience and perhaps threaten their assumptions? Yes, of course. Will this happen in the majority of nonprofit/donor relationships? No, of course not. But should we all keep trying? Absolutely.