Elements of a workshop on prevention of corruption in an NGO or CSO
Who is this intended for?
This collection of workshop elements can be used by any Civil Society Organisation (CSO) or Non Governmental Organisation (NGO) with the interest of exploring its own organisational integrity and robustness to avoid corruption.
How can it be used?
The idea is that you build your own workshop from the elements presented according to the time available, the specific needs and characteristics of the organisation.
Who should participate?
The answer is easy; as many as possible! It is recommendable to have representatives from all levels and sections of the organisation:
· Staff – including support staff, volunteers, board or executive committee members, common members, head office, local branches, and maybe even stakeholders close to the organisation.
Whenever there is group work, no more than five persons should be in each group. Consider advantages and disadvantages of making groups with persons from either same or different sections of the organisation.
Do we need someone to facilitate the workshop?
It is definitely a good idea to have someone to plan and facilitate the actual workshop. It can be one or more persons from within the organisation, or if possible someone from outside. If someone from outside takes you through the workshop it is important that it has been planned in close cooperation with management (or an appointed ad hoc committee).
Can more organisations make a workshop together?
It is absolutely an option. You can learn a lot from seeing how other organisations are structured and what kind of procedures they use to avoid corruption and mismanagement. It is probably best if the organisations are likeminded in some way, and if some kind of trust from previous cooperation exists.
We are very keen to hear about your experiences with using this tool. Please send feedback to
EXERCISE 1
Purpose / To set the scene and open the discussion about corruption as a phenomenon – but also to link it to CSOs.
Proposed time span / ½ to 1½ hour
Methods / Discussions let and steered by the facilitator - when convenient - discussions in pairs or triples can be useful
Sub-topic / Action / Additional information to the facilitator
What do we understand by corruption / Ask the participants about what they understand about the word corruption, where do we find it? And who takes part in actions of corruption? / Eventually participants could be given 5 to 10 minutes to discuss with the person seated next to them before the plenary discussion.
Let participants give their ideas in brief, thus giving the opportunity to hear the voice of as many as possible
Eventually key words answering the question could be written on flip charts. / Quite often we will hear people talking about the corruption we meet in society – both the big corruption found within government structures and the small corruption found in everyday life whenever ordinary people need any service. These are good observations – look out for how misuse of power could be central in the statements.
Definition of corruption / It is time to give a clear definition of corruption. Transparency International, and many with them, uses the following:
“Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain”.
Give participants time to discuss the definition either in pairs or in common. / This is a very broad definition of the word and it entails much more than e.g. bribery which is often the most commonly associated word with corruption.
Fraud, misuse of funds and assets, embezzlement and extortion are other words that explain what corruption entails by this definition. And corruption has many faces. It may be in the form of money or of providing services in order to gain advantages such as favourable treatment, special protection, extra services, or reduced delays. It is important to realise that corruption is not exclusively a matter of money. To provide a person with a job, services or other favours, can in certain circumstances also be construed as corruption.
What if we allow corruption within ourselves? / Ask the participants to discuss the consequences of allowing behaviour and actions of corruption within a CSO. What are the risks we take if we can’t keep “our house clean”? And could eventual benefits set off such risks (this is meant to be provocative)? / A CSO open to corruption will experience people telling stories about mismanagement and abuse of power. It will loose credibility in the eyes of donors, stakeholders, and hopefully members and staff.
Worst of all, it will prevent the organisation from enjoying respect and full legitimacy when it takes on advocacy activities or rights campaigns.
Is a person either corrupt or non-corrupt? / Pose this polemic question to the participants:
“Is a person either corrupt or non-corrupt? – are we either good or bad?”
Let them answer and bring examples.
If a person is not corrupt per se, what can then make a person become corrupt?
A list of suggestions could be written on a flip chart. / It is a well known fact that a person can become fraudulent or corrupt when there is:
· an opportunity
· he or she has a motive
· and normally rationalization by the fraudster is also needed (his or her internal justification)
We cannot do much about the motive and rationalization, but we can do our best to minimize the opportunities. Here we can link the discussion to internal control mechanisms and of course to the general accountability structures of the organisation – topics that are covered in other proposed exercises.
END OF EXERCISE 1
______
Other resources to bring in or to investigate before taking on this exercise:
· On Transparency Internationals webpage the FAQ section gives answer to many good questions about corruption: http://www.transparency.org/news_room/faq/corruption_faq
· Transparency International’s (TI) 2009 Global Corruption Barometer (the Barometer) presents the main findings of a public opinion survey that explores the general public’s views of corruption, as well as experiences of bribery around the world.
Find it here: http://www.transparency.org/publications/publications/gcb2009
· Or you can find your own country on their interactive map here: http://media.transparency.org/imaps/cpi2009/
· The international auditor company KMPG has made a study based on hundreds of real corruption cases itgives valuable insights into the nature of the average fraudster.
· Find it here: http://www.kpmg.co.uk/pubs/ProfileofaFraudsterSurvey(web).pdf
EXERCISE 1
Purpose / To set the scene and open the discussion about corruption as a phenomenon – but also to link it to CSOs.
Proposed time span / ½ to 1½ hour
Methods / Discussions let and steered by the facilitator - when convenient - discussions in pairs or triples can be useful
Sub-topic / Action / Additional information to the facilitator
What do we understand by corruption / Ask the participants about what they understand about the word corruption, where do we find it? And who takes part in actions of corruption? / Eventually participants could be given 5 to 10 minutes to discuss with the person seated next to them before the plenary discussion.
Let participants give their ideas in brief, thus giving the opportunity to hear the voice of as many as possible
Eventually key words answering the question could be written on flip charts. / Quite often we will hear people talking about the corruption we meet in society – both the big corruption found within government structures and the small corruption found in everyday life whenever ordinary people need any service. These are good observations – look out for how misuse of power could be central in the statements.
Definition of corruption / It is time to give a clear definition of corruption. Transparency International, and many with them, uses the following:
“Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain”.
Give participants time to discuss the definition either in pairs or in common. / This is a very broad definition of the word and it entails much more than e.g. bribery which is often the most commonly associated word with corruption.
Fraud, misuse of funds and assets, embezzlement and extortion are other words that explain what corruption entails by this definition. And corruption has many faces. It may be in the form of money or of providing services in order to gain advantages such as favourable treatment, special protection, extra services, or reduced delays. It is important to realise that corruption is not exclusively a matter of money. To provide a person with a job, services or other favours, can in certain circumstances also be construed as corruption.
What if we allow corruption within ourselves? / Ask the participants to discuss the consequences of allowing behaviour and actions of corruption within a CSO. What are the risks we take if we can’t keep “our house clean”? And could eventual benefits set off such risks (this is meant to be provocative)? / A CSO open to corruption will experience people telling stories about mismanagement and abuse of power. It will loose credibility in the eyes of donors, stakeholders, and hopefully members and staff.
Worst of all, it will prevent the organisation from enjoying respect and full legitimacy when it takes on advocacy activities or rights campaigns.
Is a person either corrupt or non-corrupt? / Pose this polemic question to the participants:
“Is a person either corrupt or non-corrupt? – are we either good or bad?”
Let them answer and bring examples.
If a person is not corrupt per se, what can then make a person become corrupt?
A list of suggestions could be written on a flip chart. / It is a well known fact that a person can become fraudulent or corrupt when there is:
· an opportunity
· he or she has a motive
· and normally rationalization by the fraudster is also needed (his or her internal justification)
We cannot do much about the motive and rationalization, but we can do our best to minimize the opportunities. Here we can link the discussion to internal control mechanisms and of course to the general accountability structures of the organisation – topics that are covered in other proposed exercises.
END OF EXERCISE 1
______
Other resources to bring in or to investigate before taking on this exercise:
· On Transparency Internationals webpage the FAQ section gives answer to many good questions about corruption: http://www.transparency.org/news_room/faq/corruption_faq
· Transparency International’s (TI) 2009 Global Corruption Barometer (the Barometer) presents the main findings of a public opinion survey that explores the general public’s views of corruption, as well as experiences of bribery around the world.
Find it here: http://www.transparency.org/publications/publications/gcb2009
· Or you can find your own country on their interactive map here: http://media.transparency.org/imaps/cpi2009/
· The international auditor company KMPG has made a study based on hundreds of real corruption cases itgives valuable insights into the nature of the average fraudster.
· Find it here: http://www.kpmg.co.uk/pubs/ProfileofaFraudsterSurvey(web).pdf