Philosophy of Volunteerism

For quite some time the notion of “corporate social responsibility” has been discussed and demonstrated in various ways. The concept includes many things, from producing products in environmentally-safe ways to providing family-friendly working conditions, yet our field more narrowly looks for whether a company is philanthropic or charitable, both through financial donations and in offering the talents of its employees to the community.

American companies have led the way in corporate employee volunteer programs, just as they have in setting up corporate foundations and other giving. But the idea has caught on worldwide, spurred by multinational companies, and today there are efforts underway in many countries to increase business community involvement and teach best practices in this type of activity. By and large, the volunteer field has been uncritical of this development, welcoming whatever help we can get from any source without much analysis of the process. Here Susan and Steve take a stab at examining workplace volunteering more closely...and arrive at different conclusions.

Susan’s Point of View

I admit to some concern over corporate employee volunteering practices, though I hasten to note right away that nothing I say is meant to disparage the actual volunteers who come through such programs. Universally, the individual employee is delighted to have the company-sanctioned chance to do community service and we should neither discourage nor refuse such volunteering. My issues are with the employer and the often disproportionate praise we heap on companies for what is, essentially, the effort of their workers.

And Steve Counters

The problem with being a perfectionist is that you have so many opportunities to be dissatisfied.

Sure, there are warts in corporate involvement:

• Not all companies provide adequate support for their volunteer program.
• Some companies probably influence the kind of volunteer projects chosen in ulterior ways.
• Employees are sometimes coerced into “volunteering.”
• Many efforts are confused and muddled.

So, what else is new in the world of volunteering?

Steve and Susan react to recent news stories and observations that perpetuate some frustrating thinking about volunteers. Volunteering is either undervalued or over-valued, elevated to selfless sainthood or seen as a means to the end of teaching the middle class to love others. Some excerpts from this essay:

From Steve:

…Now I suspect that Mr. Roy came to his conclusion following a great deal more thinking that Mr. Sanders brought to his, but I’m not sure that his conclusion is any more rational. Each distorts a realistic look at volunteering, one by undervaluing it and the other by over-valuing it. Each seems struck in the interesting mindset that what a person does can only be valued by what they are paid to do it. People who have this mindset have a hard time thinking reasonably about volunteering, and they generally end up either putting it on a pedestal or else treating it like a momentary aberration of the slightly deranged – one that should be tactfully ignored in a politely capitalistic society.

From Susan:

I realize that I am now in danger of alienating some readers, but I honestly have never understood the goal of selflessness. It makes me wonder:

• • Given the conscious intention to be selfless, isn’t there the danger of selfishly using the person in need for the volunteer to feel spiritually holy? Thereby ending up as the opposite?

  • Why is it necessary to “leave one’s ego at the door” in order to serve? Isn’t it more genuine to bring yourself fully into the relationship with the person to be served? To share your skills and talents generously?

Steve and Susan then start a list of Suggested Universal Principles of Volunteering, to which readers can feel free to add their own Pet Peeves.

The UK think tank Civitas just announced a new publication with the intriguing title of Conspicuous Compassion: Why Sometimes It Really Is Cruel to Be Kind, by Patrick West. According to reviewers, West feels that people who wear colored ribbons to show empathy with worthy causes and mourn in public for celebrities they have never met are part of a growing culture of "ostentatious caring which is about feeling good, not doing good." He notes that none of these public displays help the poor, diseased, dispossessed or bereaved; instead they end up only “projecting one's ego, and informing others what a deeply caring individual you are.”

Susan and Steve ruminate on how public – and private – displays of emotion or politics relate to volunteering as we know it.

Susan examines the history and philosophy of ribbon-wearing, and goes on to muse about plastic forks, Oscar Wilde, SUVs, and individual responsibility.

Steve considers the practice of “keeping score,” the perceived difference between volunteers and activists, and Worthy versus merely Good forms of service.

Just when you think you've seen everything in volunteerism, somebody comes along with something totally new.

And then you discover that other people are thinking about it as well.

Steve was sitting in the Washington Dulles airport over the holidays, engaging in the popular airport occupation of people watching. In front of him was a young couple en route to Vermont, laden with lots of bags of Christmas presents to take to friends and family.

It was the bags that caught his attention.

Two of them were from a familiar store - REI, or Recreational Equipment, Inc., an outdoor equipment supplier. The interesting part was the message blazoned on the side of the bags: "Volunteer with us!"

Steve and Susan highlight what might be a new trend - "customer volunteering" - and what might be the implications of this form of service, both philosophically and managerially.