6.4 Working with Discourses
85
What is required to make a good one [social investment] is real involvement from all sides,
community participation, you know some volunteerism, … in addition to the money and
the people that are paid to do it, but you know, it requires, like a community spirit to really
undergird any project, to make it last, to make it acceptable, to make it sustainable. So more
of that is needed here and in most places I’ve worked, … it is still something that everyone
doesn’t intrinsically just grasp you know. (P10, social investment expert)
P10 suggested that good social investment required genuine engagement from the
company, the community, and the people being paid. Nonetheless, obtaining such
engagement was not an easy process. For instance, P4 recounted some of the difficulties s/he felt when trying to shift the focus from a top-down company-oriented
approach, to a participatory community-oriented approach:
We move to the point where we get [the community] to participate in [the social investment
process]… Um, so getting this simple process done is always very, very, challenging. Because
the moment you say that there is an opportunity of a contract in your community, who is
going to do this work for you, we will fund it, then one single team before becomes divided.
Everyone wants to do the job and to have the contract done and score it. And in many times
you create a lot of tensions in the communities. And we now have to start managing these
tensions as well. (P4, social investment expert)
Although, participants drew on working with discourses to articulate their ‘ideal’ type
of social investment, P4’s quote indicated that developing community-centred social
investment is not simple. Although P4 attempted to develop a participatory approach
to social investment, s/he still adopted working on discourses when discussing about
how s/he approached the community. It is clear from their interview excerpt that
social investment had already been designed prior to engaging with the community;
the community would only implement it. P4 highlighted how developing working
with discourses do not necessarily operate in isolation from other discourses of social
investment and developing participatory social investment programmes is a complex
undertaking.
Another participant, P3, also described how complicated participatory approaches
can be in practice:
If O&G companies have [a] most beautiful social investment strategy, an effective execution
of that strategy depends on number of different factors. There are still issues where companies
just face up to a number of challenges, which are beyond their control and just would be
beyond their responsibilities. So that is one issue: just clarity around role responsibilities.
Who does what and what is the time frame. Secondly, I think it is to do with capability of
partner organisations. And third is the sustainability of these projects so, many companies
just come in and they set up very high level strategies, social investment strategies, and most
of the time they miss the opportunity. We are all excited, we implement it and we do it with
good will but we don’t realise government is not involved. When the government is not
involved upfront, it creates a sense of instability… because it becomes a major challenge [to
make social investment last]. (P3, social investment expert)
P3’s account indicated how complex it could be to work with companies in developing
social investment. In addition, P3’s excerpt inferred how challenging it is to achieve
meaningful social investment partnerships where multiple stakeholders are involved.
P3 highlighted how vital it was to have companies allocating the right expertise to
85
What is required to make a good one [social investment] is real involvement from all sides,
community participation, you know some volunteerism, … in addition to the money and
the people that are paid to do it, but you know, it requires, like a community spirit to really
undergird any project, to make it last, to make it acceptable, to make it sustainable. So more
of that is needed here and in most places I’ve worked, … it is still something that everyone
doesn’t intrinsically just grasp you know. (P10, social investment expert)
P10 suggested that good social investment required genuine engagement from the
company, the community, and the people being paid. Nonetheless, obtaining such
engagement was not an easy process. For instance, P4 recounted some of the difficulties s/he felt when trying to shift the focus from a top-down company-oriented
approach, to a participatory community-oriented approach:
We move to the point where we get [the community] to participate in [the social investment
process]… Um, so getting this simple process done is always very, very, challenging. Because
the moment you say that there is an opportunity of a contract in your community, who is
going to do this work for you, we will fund it, then one single team before becomes divided.
Everyone wants to do the job and to have the contract done and score it. And in many times
you create a lot of tensions in the communities. And we now have to start managing these
tensions as well. (P4, social investment expert)
Although, participants drew on working with discourses to articulate their ‘ideal’ type
of social investment, P4’s quote indicated that developing community-centred social
investment is not simple. Although P4 attempted to develop a participatory approach
to social investment, s/he still adopted working on discourses when discussing about
how s/he approached the community. It is clear from their interview excerpt that
social investment had already been designed prior to engaging with the community;
the community would only implement it. P4 highlighted how developing working
with discourses do not necessarily operate in isolation from other discourses of social
investment and developing participatory social investment programmes is a complex
undertaking.
Another participant, P3, also described how complicated participatory approaches
can be in practice:
If O&G companies have [a] most beautiful social investment strategy, an effective execution
of that strategy depends on number of different factors. There are still issues where companies
just face up to a number of challenges, which are beyond their control and just would be
beyond their responsibilities. So that is one issue: just clarity around role responsibilities.
Who does what and what is the time frame. Secondly, I think it is to do with capability of
partner organisations. And third is the sustainability of these projects so, many companies
just come in and they set up very high level strategies, social investment strategies, and most
of the time they miss the opportunity. We are all excited, we implement it and we do it with
good will but we don’t realise government is not involved. When the government is not
involved upfront, it creates a sense of instability… because it becomes a major challenge [to
make social investment last]. (P3, social investment expert)
P3’s account indicated how complex it could be to work with companies in developing
social investment. In addition, P3’s excerpt inferred how challenging it is to achieve
meaningful social investment partnerships where multiple stakeholders are involved.
P3 highlighted how vital it was to have companies allocating the right expertise to