Sherbrooke Record (Quebec)
September 4, 2009 Friday
Final Edition
A Gift from Gugark
BYLINE: Tom Cavanagh, The Record
On my recent visit to Armenia I stayed at a summer camp in an isolated
area about 30 plus kilometres from the nearest town. It was called
Gugark camp and traces its history back to the l950’s and the Russian
controlled period when Armenia was one of many Soviet republics. After
the Soviet collapse in 1991, Armenia voted overwhelmingly in favour of
independence. They got it, but unfortunately freedom from external
control also meant dramatic withdrawals of Russian industry with
inevitable economic setbacks and problems.
Gugark was affected by the economic downturn and seeks to restore its
fortunes by expanding the time frame of the summer camp’s
operations. My sending organization (CESO) was contacted for
assistance and that is where I come in. I was somewhat surprised that
Gugark selected me from amongst possible candidates. On the other hand
I do look good on paper, and I do possess considerable international
experience. I suppose it impresses people to see the work experience
in England, Sri Lanka, Colombia, Bolivia, Russia, the Ukraine,
Jamaica, Guyana, and six years in two African countries of Ghana and
Malawi.
I do not wish to, nor do I label myself as a consultant but in effect
that is what I have been doing in many different countries. I sense
the reputations of consultants have declined in recent
times. Certainly that was the case in my CEGEP years where we
periodically brought in ‘experts’ or consultants over the years. Not
many faculty were impressed with those visitors. After 40 years
working in education at all levels I have to say that teachers were
seldom enamoured with advice from outsiders. Of course the teachers
attended the sessions and speeches, and sometimes even made
sympathetic noises; but once the expert leaves, and the door of the
classroom (the inner sanctum) is once again closed, there is no way of
knowing what effect if any the outside visitor has had. Usually it was
not much.
What I learned, and I learned the hard way, is that the consultant
must work in a collaborative relationship. Without such a relationship
his/her effect will be minimal – or non-existent. I once walked away
from an African multi-year high paying project when I learned that the
local staff were not to be directly involved. The plan was to have the
outsiders (the experts) decide and lay on the changes from above. No
thanks. You can make a good living at that sort of thing, but once the
‘reforms’ or ‘changes’ are in place and the experts are back in
Canada, the effect is transitory. Like putting your hand in that
proverbial pail of water and pulling it out again. Not much changes.
The best consultant I ever worked with came to our campus to evaluate
our situation, investigate our weaknesses and strengths, brainstorm
our best possible responses, and had us set up a schedule with about
what would and should be done, when, where, by whom, how – and why. It
was a kind of revolutionary approach. He didn’t tell us much at
all. In fact he started from the premise that the best people to
address college problems were the people who for years had lived with
and understood the problems first hand. The consultant’s name was Fred
Jervis.
Fred established a collaborative relationship. He did not offer much
in the way of answers. He was better at listening than
questioning. The insightful reader may now be thinking – "But aren’t
all your staff, who have worked there so long, too close to the
problems? Are they able to see the big picture? Are they capable of
seeing anything but trees – and never the woods?" That could be the
case, but Fred’s methodology addressed those problems. Indirectly he
taught us a lot. Listen more than you talk. There are always
politics. Hidden agendas are common.
Gugark was seeking ideas for expansion. I told them from day one that
our relationship had to be a collaborative one – that my role was more
of a guide. I hammered away during my short time there that it is a
long term project and must be thought of in terms of years, not
months. Theirs was a family-run operation that had been in place for
more than a generation. It would be ridiculous to bring a stranger
from a foreign land, language, and culture to set her/himself up as
the expert. I warned them that I was no miracle worker and no
messiah. They know and have lived the problems and understand the
culture and the issues at play. They are the ones best suited to find
solutions. Suggestions were brought up from all staff, and in the
workshops and planning sessions everyone was involved: the kitchen
staff, the doctor, the manager, the support staff, the owners, the
counselors, the campers. Everyone. I had suggestions too and in all we
ended with more than
thirty. The real work begins after I leave. The management group
(five of six are female) must now narrow that long list to four or
five manageable and agreed upon projects. I think they will succeed in
doing so. Then comes those so-important and unavoidable issues: the
schedule and the decisions about who what when where why and how. I
mentioned to them the story about belling the cat. They told me that
the tale originated in Armenia. It is a simple little legend. The mice
studied how to outwit the cat. Someone suggest they put a bell around
his neck. Great idea but . . . ‘who bells the cat?’
Armenians are great people. It is a beautiful country to visit. As one
commentator said the danger is not robbery or getting mugged, but
avoiding the potholes and all those generous people who want to invite
you home for a meal. The meals are as huge as the towering mountains,
and as a matter of courtesy you must at least sample all the many
courses. And the vodka. Be warned. But you will have a good time, —
and you can always take the weight off when you get back. I hope.
(I wish to add special thanks for the very helpful assistance and
encouragement I received from Jim Brodie and David Monty in preparing
for this particular assignment.)