Add a Statement of Values to the Kiva website

[Guest]

.

[RichardF]

After reading some discussions here about the values-neutral position of Kiva on loan postings, I started wondering what Kiva's values actually were.  I browsed through the Kiva website, but I couldn't find anything like a statement of mission, vision, purpose, core values or the like.  It would be nice to be able to find a page in the About section that answers the question, "Why do we do what we do?" in a way that highlights the core values that drive its operations.

[AccountAbility]

With a little extra time this evening I have been looking back through good posts that somehow dropped off the radar with all the new threads that have been added recently.

Richard, I would like to second your suggestion.  It parallels one of my concerns about the current "Terms of Use" which is found at the bottom of each Kiva.org page.  The last iteration, changed back in February removed all aspects of Kiva's goals and mission.  Instead it became an unwieldy conglomeration of topics that sounded legal, but did a poor job of retaining the essence of the Kiva we have come to know. 

Perhaps Kiva needs to break it up into separate documents or stand-alone sections that cover the following:
1.Statement of Values and Mission Statement
2.Standards of Conduct for Kiva, concerning accuracy and safety of data
3.Legal descriptions and positions of the parties involved in the loans posted
4.Risk assessments and default procedures
5.Standards of conduct for Lenders
6.Privacy Policy

I know they can do better.  Perhaps tackling it piece by piece will move this forward faster.

Dan

[RichardF]

That sounds like a plan to me. 

[RichardF]

Kiva's mission is to connect people through lending for the sake of alleviating poverty.

This mission statement reflects a utilitarian ethic that can lead to strategies and business practices justified through reasoning along the lines of "the end justifies the means."

I'm not aware of any substantive progress by Kiva in developing any supporting documents for its mission statement similar to those suggested by Dan.

At the very least, a public statement of the core values Kiva uses to guide the pursuit of its mission will give its constituents a better understanding of why it chooses certain actions over other viable alternatives.

[AccountAbility]

Perhaps tackling it piece by piece will move this forward faster.

Dan

Well, I guess that didn't work so well.  Thanks for bringing this back to the forefront, Richard. 

In a real sense it is foundational to a lot of the discussions going on here.

Dan

[Dagfinn]

The mission statement as such stands well in it own right in my view.  However a set of values that Kiva builds on when striving to fullfil its statement would be needed as well.

When defining those values I think the hardest part for this community is to accept that it is not decided by us I think I showcase that taking it for granted they wil produce the above set of values 

If Kiva develops a set of values, (or have they already?) I wish that they take into account that 50 years ago we ourselves (as in the Western world) practised values that would appal quite a few of us today.  By that I mean that it seems it takes a certain level of welfare before a nation afford itself with some values.  In that view I find envrionmental isues an example as it demonstrates that many a coutry close their eyes for the benefit of cheap petrol (3 times what is paid in US today would be equal to curent level in Scandinavia) to support the current.

So yes, to justify the means solely by the end goal or result achieved do  ot get my vote.  I think this can be a very interetsing debate and teach us a lot.  Thank you brining it up Richard.

Dagfin A

[tomviolence]

I have a question for the next call.

What is Kiva's working definition of "poverty"?

less cows than wives ?

(yes - that cements my reputation as an idiot)

Realisticly, that would be hard to quantify. If one has a uniform $ number, nobody in the US is in poverty. If a nation itself is very poor, below the per capita income does not really do justice to those above it, as the entire number is very low. To not be able to afford ample food and shelter or medical care would make a family earning $100,000 a year in SF poor. Many people have saved and put capital into a business, and already have had one or more loans. Having capital kinda makes all the borrowers here "not poor".

In famously defining a completely different thing, Potter Stewart said " I know it when I see it"

[AccountAbility]

While this topic is not an easy one for lenders to initiate for Kiva, nevertheless it parallels the discussion about the Terms of Use, which Kiva once more has modified to grant themselves more rights in what they COULD do.

A Statement of Values or some other equivalent speaks to the understanding of what Kiva WOULD do.  By remaining silent in this area leaves lenders focusing on what Kiva COULD do--and at this juncture that is not pretty.

Dan

[RichardF]

I'll add that the most likely consequence of Kiva not adequately addressing the issue of clearly identifying, communicating and implementing its core values is to experience what many call "mission drift."  The current version of whether this already has occurred is the debate over whether or not kiva should lend to U.S. MFI customers. 

Here's a background piece on the subject.  While the following piece uses some examples about social vs. financial objectives, mission drift just as easily can be about Social Objective A vs. Social Objective B, such as, What does "poverty" really mean...in practice?

Mission Drift

The inherent challenge of operating a social enterprise is managing to its dual objectives. In practice, the business of generating social and economic value means decisions and actions are in frequent opposition. This translates into calculated trade-offs: decisions to forsake social impact to gain market share or increase profit margins; or conversely, expanding the scope of social good at a financial cost. Problems occur when an organization's enthusiasm to meet its financial goals begins to overwhelm its social mandate. Nonprofits' long history of struggling to secure funding can, in the advent of earned income, threaten to swing the pendulum too far in the other direction. In the early days of microfinance, donors and practitioners toiled to set parameters on "how far is too far" on the mission-money spectrum by quantifying loan sizes, duration of client relationships, and interest rates before arriving at a model that was both viable and scaleable.

The concern many nonprofit practitioners and donors face is that incorporating commercial approaches into a nonprofit will compromise the organization's mission or social services by causing a "drift" too far into the for-profit camp.

The feared results of the "drift" (real or perceived) are:

1. drift may damage the reputation of the organization among stakeholders and the public;
2. the social enterprise may jeopardize funding because donors either misunderstand its dual-intention social enterprise or believe donations are now unnecessary;
3. it may threaten organizational culture by applying market-based approaches and bringing in business professionals and industry experts; and
4. finally, some fear that the organization will lose focus, and stray too far into the commercial realm, neglecting its social mission.

Running a social enterprise is a balancing act, which requires vigilance and a clear understanding of the organization's purpose and priorities: what is the social impact that the organization is trying to achieve, and how much money does it need to make? It means strong market discipline coupled with an equally strong sense of ethics and integrity--and leadership consensus about limits on "how far is too far" in any direction. Generating economic value, or making money, is not an evil act; on the contrary, it's a tool for generating social value in a way that is more sustainable than relying on donor funds. The social enterprise model and design will largely inform how its dual purposes are achieved; it is up to the leadership to manage the tensions. The following exhibit shows this relationship in the product and market mix.
 
Exhibit: Product--Market Matrix

[RichardF]

I really can’t say I’ve seen what I consider to be any appreciable movement on Kiva’s part in terms of it better expressing its core values or guiding principles and how they should be demonstrated.  However, given the recent improvements in communicating with its Kiva Friends (hi, John! ), I have a little renewed confidence some progress can be made here as well. 

In the spirit of open dialogues around what Kiva is all about and what it should do to show that, here are a few examples of possible Kiva core values, how they might influence certain design choices about what it does, and even how having a set of clearly stated core values does not immunize it from confronting tough issues, they just give Kiva a solid basis for addressing them.

A Few Possible Kiva Core Values

Equal Access to Opportunities
Equal access to opportunities is a long-standing social justice doctrine.  It asserts that individuals and groups should be afforded equal access to valued opportunities without regard to irrelevant exclusionary criteria.  Civil rights and social justice movements throughout history have invoked the equal access doctrine as one of its core values and guiding principles. 

In fact, an example of such an organization dedicated to supporting underserved people in the developing world is called Equal Access.

Our Mission
To create positive social change for millions of underserved people in the developing world by delivering critically needed information and education through innovative media, appropriate technology and direct community engagement.

Guiding Principals
We believe that people everywhere are entitled to "Equal Access" to information and education.

We strive to inspire individuals and communities to realize their highest potential.

Information is portable, relatively inexpensive and yet one of the most powerful tools to create social change. But in many parts of the world, information is a scarce and inaccessible resource. By providing critically needed information and education we help people help themselves.

When people join in dialogue, respect divergent views and develop the capacity to act together, the power of positive change is unleashed.

We regard inclusion of local voices and respect for community-expressed needs as key drivers in every program design.

Kiva can demonstrate its support of equal access for Borrowers, Partners and Lenders by ensuring all of its operations do not exclude individuals or groups based on irrelevant exclusionary criteria or practices.

Respect for Life and Opposition to Cruelty
Ultimately, respect for life and opposition to cruelty is one of the most fundamental ethical issues confronting humanity.  Life comes in many forms – human, animal, plant – as well as vast arrays of living systems.  Cruelty can come in many forms through thoughts, words and deeds.  What we do and do not do determines our record on this account.

- Humane Treatment and Slaughter of Animals
The humane treatment and slaughter of animals is one way to demonstrate a respect for life and opposition to cruelty.  Most humans directly or indirectly rely on the labor, service, entertainment, companionship or consumption of animals, at least occasionally.  The forms these actions take determine the extent to which they are conducted humanely or inhumanely.

Clearly, Kiva has the choice on how actively or passively it handles issues of animal cruelty.  The cockfighting controversy is the obvious case in point.  The question also illustrates the ethical dilemma Kiva faces in the context of potentially conflicting core values or guiding principles – in this example, equal access vs. opposition to cruelty. 

This is by no means a simple dilemma to resolve.  However, I do believe Kiva needs to do a better job than it has in the past to clarify its positions on controversial issues in the context of a much fuller expression of its core values and guiding principles.  If these core values are not explicitly expressed, they simply will be inferred.  After all, there’s no such thing as a values-free action.