Blog Application

Blog entry for May 21, “A Helping Hand”, and on May 24,” Not Satisfied”, generated greater than normal reader response. There was one particular email I received that gave a good business illustration to the point I was making. I requested his permission to use his email. With minor editing, he wrote as follows:

I have found myself following your blog on a daily basis (if for no other reason than to keep in touch with your travels), and found your comments today, May 24th, especially telling. I find myself struggling with the very topic of your blog entry on an almost daily basis.

One of the manufacturing lines I put in Mexico was state of the art. I spent $500,000 on top of the line assembly equipment and plastic injection molding machines. I travelled the world for about 8 weeks doing the final run-offs, and then shipped all the equipment to Mexico for installation. Over the next 10 months, I spent about 6 months in Mexico (away from family) training them on how to run the equipment. It ran great for the next 3 years.

The next manufacturing line was an almost duplicate of the first one; same molding machine, similar assembly stations. The next 4 lines were built in the US and sent to Mexico and then I went down for a week for training. Similar assembly sequences, so it should have been a no issue as far as upkeep.

One year ago, I was informed that they had no capacity for making parts, 40% of the machinery and assembly stations were broken and not working, so I went to Mexico to investigate. It seems they had been cannibalizing some of the machines to keep others running. They would take parts from machine A to make machine B work and so on. The repair costs were astronomical (not as much as the original purchase but probably 40% of that cost).

The next line I put in Mexico, I only provided funding. I did not specify the sequence of assembly, I did not specify the machines, and I did not go for installation, training, or approval. This line is still running today, does not have operational issues, and cost less than any of the other lines I put there. The only thing I can chalk this up to is empowerment. Because I did not dictate, they felt that this was their line, their call, and their technology. They made it work with technology they were familiar with and with what they were comfortable with.

In the same fashion, I am seeing parallels to what you may be witnessing. I originally thought to myself that it is great and altruistic to bring this new operation to Mexico, uplift these people, and bring them into the next century with technology. I am finding that maybe the best and more successful way would be to provide the objective/the message, maybe provide training to a limited number of people, and then get out of their way and let them tailor it to their culture and their way of operation.

Could this be the same thing you envision for missions trips? Would they be more successful and less damaging, long term, if we were to enable the local populace to bring the message? There will always be the need for missionaries to go and live among the local population, to train the "first's" people to bring the message, but at the same time, does that not encourage reliance and not empowerment?

Just curious; this blog was very close to what I see every day, and wanted to share my personal insights.

Americans are very good at designing projects to effectively produce products and results and at times do it at the expense of people. Results and profit are what they see as important and when it comes to helping those in need the approach is go, accomplish your objective and leave. This is true even with short term mission work. They seldom take the time to evaluate the gifts, abilities, and assets of the people in need to see how they and what they have can be included in their recovery or advancement. They do not consider the importance of working behind the scene to strengthen local establishments, business and government to be more effective. They do not realize that by providing certain help and resources, more harm is being done than if they were to help them develop their own ability and their own resources, so then in their absence the local people are able to continue on their own. I really believe Americans have done more harm than they realize when it comes to helping others. Handouts establish dependency and maybe produce bondage through shame. Empowerment establishes satisfaction and pride in the ability to provide for your own needs.

This is causing me to think about the child Connie and I sponsor in India. How is World Vision using our money to help her? Is there any chance it is causing shame on the part of her dad? I think there is much I can learn about this by getting to know Swathi and her family in the years ahead.