Las causas y el atolladero

Participants from the Ministry of Labour and Social Development emphasised the wide range of projects being carried out in coordination between the SDCs and the local social development committees, which are formed by community members on a voluntary basis to help identify and implement social programmes. It was stated that these programmes “were not used to be considered as part of a government strategic plan but this is changing” (MIN02), and they are often now linked to government strategy on social development and that the Ministry has “an administration responsible for developing its strategies and plans, and SDCs projects are part of these strategies” (MIN01). It was further stated that there has been an increasing emphasis on social development in Saudi Arabia and that “the government intends to encourage more social development projects rather than direct aid ones” (MIN02). Elaborating on this point, participant MIN01 stated:

“The Ministry has more than 145 social development and welfare projects being conducted in coordination between the SDCs, the social development committees and NGOs. The Ministry is increasingly focusing on social development programmes and our intention is to give most of the social care projects to specialised NGOs leaving the Ministry employees [including SDCs staff] to focus on social development work and making social development a core task of the Ministry work.”

However, non-government participants had a clearly different perception and view of the SDCs. When asked about their awareness and evaluation of the SDCs and their current role, the participants from the Chamber of Commerce stated that they

had never heard of the SDCs or of any of their work. Therefore, they have not offered any views related to the SDCs or to their potential role in future CSR implementation in Saudi Arabia. However, the private sector participants appeared to have different levels of knowledge of SDCs. On the one hand, around half of the participants were aware of the SDCs and of their basic role in helping families in need of social support and their links to charities. A couple of the participants were aware of the SDCs but felt they did not know enough about their role or purpose. For example, it was stated that “their work is mostly related to families in need of social support” (PR03), “I am aware of their work on social development and links to charities” (PR07) and “I am aware of some their work but do not know them well” (PR09). The remaining participants, on the other hand, were not aware of the SDCs at all. In this regard, participant PR04 stated “I have never heard of them!”, while participants (PR06 and PR08) stated that the SDCs were “unknown” to them. It was suggested by a couple of participants that the current role of the SDCs was not clear and needed to be clearly defined (PR02 and PR10). The views of the NGO participants on this matter were largely consistent with those of the private sector. For example, participant NGO01 mentioned:

“I was not aware of the SDCs or of their role in the community until we were asked by the Ministry to conduct a study about this role!”

It is clear from these responses that the level of awareness of the SDCs among non- government participants is mixed with a substantial number of participants not clear about the SDCs or their current role. This reflects the limited current role of SDCs in the wider Saudi society and that, as a resource, they could potentially be utilised in a more effective way. This chapter focuses on evaluating and understanding the current state of SDCs in order to understand the potential role in CSR implementation. A more

detailed discussion of what would be needed for SDCs to play a role in CSR implementation will be presented in the next chapter.

There was a generally negative assessment of the current role and performance of the SDCs by the private sector describing them as “Timid and ineffective” (PR01),

“Unclear role and ineffective” (PR08) and “Have no clear impact in the society” (PR- 10). Importantly one participant stated that:

“There is a clear gap between government strategies and work of SDCs. These centres have a negative public image and are viewed as places for pensioners and old people to socialise.” (PR05)

This participant went on to suggest that:

“There is a clear gap between government strategies and work of SDCs” In their response to the follow up question about possible reasons for the current state of SDCs, participants highlighted the lack of expertise and of appropriately qualified and trained staff as one of the main challenges followed by bureaucracy in governmental organisation being a constant obstacle hindering collaboration between the public and private sectors. In addition, the types of programmes being offered by SDCs and a lack of planning were seen as a contributing factor to the current state of SDCs. For example, the issue of staff qualifications and expertise was highlighted by participant PR07 as follows:

“The SDCs lack expertise. Most of their staff are not qualified as social workers and therefore, do not have the appropriate experience to fulfil their role. The centres have some excellent projects. However, the staff are often unable to carry them out properly due to their lack of understanding of the details.” On the types of current programmes offered by the SDCs, participant (PR08) stated:

“In my opinion, they do not offer sustainable programmes, which can make tangible social impact. The private sector is looking for programmes with clear

understanding of society’s needs and deliver programmes accordingly. We think the SDCs lack the appropriate expertise in this regard. It is not that their staff are not working hard, it is more that they need better training, planning and funding”

The views of the NGO participants on the SDCs were very similar to those of the private sector. For example, a very clear view was expressed by participant (NGO02) as follows:

“SDCs are not clear about their own role or purpose. They suffer from a lack of recognition and from being deemed unimportant. They lack the authority to take decision and only implement programmes set by the Ministry. Most of these programmes are run on a short-term basis and lack a clear strategy. SDCs do not have highly skilled and qualified staff.”

Another participant (NGO01) emphasised and expanded upon these views by stating that:

“SDCs do not have long term social programmes. I suspect that their programmes are not good enough and therefore they have no social impact. I think the decision makers in these organisations do not have the right vision..” Similarly, participant (NGO03) stated that “The SDCs’ role is weak and they are in need of development”. This was consistent with the view expressed by participant (NGO04) that “SDCs are generally weak and have no authority in planning or implementing social programmes”.

Participants compared SDCs to Saudi charities and the wider Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) sector and thought that NGOs had a much better defined role and programmes. It was also suggested by private sector participants that NGOs had a higher overall quality compared to SDCs when it came to their resources, programmes and overall delivery. For example it was stated that “Unlike SDCs, charities have a clear and well defined role” (PR03), “Programmes run by SDCs lack credibility and need to be more transparent” (PR06), “NGOs appear to have many more initiatives compared to the SDCs” (PR07) and “NGOs have much more quality

than SDCs in terms of their resources and programmes” (PR05). The positive views of the current state of the Saudi NGOs were attributed to factors such as planning, better trained staff, organisation and access to good quality databases containing information on people with social needs. In the context of this discussion, it is perhaps not surprising that two participants have explicitly stated that NGOs have much more visibility and connections in the Saudi society and among the Saudi private sector, while SDCs remain largely unknown. In this context, it was stated that “Unlike SDCs, NGOs are well known in society and to the private sector” (PR05). One of the reasons for this contrasting view of the NGOs and SDCs is perhaps the negative influence of government bureaucracy on the general perception of SDCs as suggested by two participants from the private sector. Other suggested reasons include the lower resources of SDCs compared to those available to NGOs. Governmental bureaucracies in the Arab World in general have long been thought to have serious administrative problems and are generally perceived to have a negative influence on government operations. Common problems associated with government bureaucracies include a lack of worker motivation or commitment, overconcentration of authority at the top of administrative hierarchies, excessive political interference, mismatches between position requirements and training, a lack of trust between administrators and the public and extreme over or understaffing (Chackerian & Shadukhi, 1983; Weber, 1997; Lipsky, 2010). It must be emphasised, however, that the Saudi government has been working hard to shake up its bureaucracy and simplify regulation in order to modernise its operations and achieve efficiency gains (Vision 2030).

On the relationship between SDCs and NGOs, a view was expressed that NGOs perceived the new regulatory role of SDCs to hinder their work, which suggests that further development is needed if they are to partner with companies to play an effective role in CSR. However, the views of the NGOs are not all positive, as a number of participants emphasised that the quality of NGOs and their work was highly variable with a small number of excellent organisations. Other highlighted issues include the preference of some NGOs for direct financial support instead of specific projects or programmes, as well as complaints about alleged cases of corruption and extravagant behaviour. In this regard, it was recommended that the Ministry of Labour and Social Development needed to play a stronger role in regulating the work of NGOs through the setting of standards to further regulate their work.