SOC/101
ORGANIZATION ANALYSIS
National Civilian Community Corp
October 17, 2001
Week 4
Jeremy Vigil
INSTRUCTOR
Bob Weltzer
Overview
Several years ago, I was thumbing through the Rocky Mountain News when I found an article about a volunteer program called the National Civilian Community Corp. This was an 11-month volunteer program that gave you money for school. I needed the school money and I needed a life change. This paper is the organizational analysis of the National Civilian Community Corp. Although this isn’t a business for profit, it is still a business. The National Civilian Community Corp is a business of community needs that has a wide variety of social issues.
First, I will give you some background on the National Civilian Community Corp. Like I said before it is an 11-month volunteer program. The National Civilian Community Corp provided $4,700 for school and $8,000 living allowance. This was below minimum wage but I didn’t do it for the money. We lived in dorms, which was paid for by the program. They also provided breakfast, lunch and dinner. There were a total of 250 volunteers who lived in the dorms so this was an active social environment. We divided into teams of 10-15 people. We worked together in the same team all year and we focused on four key issues listed below.
· Education
· Public Safety
· Environment
· Human Needs
All of our projects were related to the above issues. Each project we worked on lasted for about 4-6 weeks. For example, I tutored students in an elementary school, built trails for
Roxborough State Park
Roxborough State Park and refinished housing for habitat for humanity. I learned the year I participated was the first year the program was in operation so we made the mold for the following volunteers. Today, six years later, the National Civilian Community Corp is still running with increased funding. Right now 75 National Civilian Community Corp members are staffing the Red Cross National phone bank by provided information, guidance and support for victims of the September 11th tragedy. The experience was definitely a life changer for me. I hope it will be for anyone else who will participate in the future.
Stakeholders
There were many organizations involved in this program but I will only discuss the three major stakeholders. The government, the volunteers and non-profit organizations that we helped. The government was the strongest and most prominent stakeholder. They determined the budget and the projects we worked. We received praise and opposition from the government. We received praise from President Bill Clinton because he was the one who created the National Civilian Community Corp. We received opposition from the republicans because they opposed anything that Bill Clinton initiated. The republicans also opposed the program because they thought it cost too much money. Why put money towards the community when they can fill their own pockets. (Not that I’m biased.) We had to deal with more politics during the first year than normal because it was the first year. Many people were split on this program because it was new. We, the volunteers, took the stance that we had to prove its merit. That leads me to the volunteers. I have never met such friendly and energetic people. Everyone was willing to work hard to prove the need for the National Civilian Community Corp. They didn’t complain when they received a dirty job. I remember working on the Roxborough State Park trail. We had to hike two hours up a mountain just to get to the job site with rock bars, saws and axes in hand. The rock bars were 30-40 pounds alone. No one complained that we had to put in more work and hours for this project. It was two-hour hike to the site, eight hours of working on the trail and another 1 ½ to get back down. It was easier to get back down. That’s 12 hours on site. That doesn’t count the hour drive to the site and the hour back. Everyone was willing to do his or her part. The non-profit organizations were glad we were there. We did projects in six weeks that would have taken a year for the organizations themselves. They submitted the projects to the government. Then the Government determined if it was a viable project or not. The non-profit organizations were always glad to have us helping them. They provided training and the tools for completing the project. I don’t recall any of them being dissatisfied with our work. The schools were the most appreciative because they needed the help. We were able to help the children that were falling behind.
Performance-expectation gap
This program was designed to reduce the performance-expectation gap. Americans citizens expected the government to be socially active in their community. No longer do citizens only expect police, fire and roads. Citizens now ask the government to maintain “social order.” The government had to show they are doing something for the community. This has created a win-win situation. The community gets the volunteers to combat social issues and the volunteers learn a trade and get money for school.
The government is socially contracted to provide social programs but
citizens don’t want to pay the taxes for them. The government is asked to do
more and more with less and less. I find that the National Civilian Community
Corp is doing more than it was designed to do.
All Corp members are asked to continue their volunteerism past their
11-month commitment and many do just that.
I am convinced that the National Civilian Community Corp has narrowed
the performance-expectation gap the community has for the government.
Diversity
One thing that really stood out in the National Civilian Community Corp was the diversity. The administration made a conscience effort to pair roommates with different ethnical backgrounds. So basically, every white volunteer was paired with a minority. I was impressed that the program was about 50% white and 50% minorities. I think that volunteerism wasn’t the only goal for this program. Organizers wanted diversity to be apparent. There was more conflict because of the diversity but in the long run everyone was better because of it. Short-term conflicts were met with long term friendships. Some of the volunteers were never exposed in such a diverse environment. These people were the ones that received the most benefit. They learned how to communicate with people from a different culture. This is a valuable skill in today’s global economy.
The diversity wasn’t just ethnic. There was gender diversity also. There were more than 50% women in the program. This is the opposite of corporate America. In my team alone, there were 10 women and 2 men. This was a learning lesson for me. I always thought I got along well with women but with a ratio of 5:1 it is a whole different story. This was quite a role reversal.
Gender Pay Gap
This program was truly gender neutral in regards to pay. Every person male or female received the same scholarship and living allowance. This led to no tension about money, which was a first for many including myself. No one was worried someone was getting paid more than him or her for the same job. This had been the only job I wasn’t concerned about money. I was satisfied having beer money for the weekend. Occupational segregation was not an issue. Everyone pitched in with little or no complaints. The women were always willing to do the manual labor or “dirty work”. They had to on my team because the women were the majority.
Social Challenges
There were many social environments that challenged everyone. We needed to adapt to roommates, teams, and dorm life. The most challenging social environment was the team. There was always someone who wanted to dominate the team. This person wanted everyone to follow his or her rules. This “my way or the highway” attitude was the less productive trait among a team of volunteers. Most of the people consisted of the laid back type. These types of people do not welcome control so there was countless head butting but there were only a small number of grudges. You worked together everyday so peace was imperative.
Living with a roommate provided another challenge. It was compounded by not having your own room. The rooms consisted of one room with two beds and a bathroom. Privacy wasn’t an option but you were never lonely. Space was as valuable commodity but everyone did what he or she could on their side of the room to make it feel homier. Some people put up pictures and some lit incense. Most people though tried to stay out of the dorm rooms as much as possible. So, when you wanted to go out on the town to get away from your bad mannered roommate a friend was only across the hall. More social challenges were resolved at the bar across the street then in the dorms.
Conclusion
The question for this paper is what social views have changed because of this class. I pondered this for several hours and determined that my social views haven’t changed. A five-week class and a book was not enough to change my stubborn views but my participation in the National Civilian Community Corp has positively changed me. I am now able to communicate with more variety of people. I made lifelong friends and I met my wife. My view of the world was widened. I now can see beyond Denver. I did things I would never had done on my own. I would never of thought to tutor elementary school students. The lessons I learned will stay with me for a lifetime. The republicans have since changed their mind about the National Civilian Community Corp.
References
http://www.nationalservice.org