Written by: Eng. Mohammed bin Khalid Al-Saif

When we talk about the non-profit sector, we find many influential voices in its course: leaders of supervisory and regulatory bodies, donors, and members of high councils in organizations, as well as community leaders in general. These individuals carry weight, and their opinions reach far and are the basis for many decisions, legislations, and directions.

There is no doubt that many of them have sincere intentions to develop the sector and possess the experience that deserves to be listened to. However, what sometimes strikes me is the distance that forms between those who evaluate and those who work, when the judgment on the sector becomes easier than understanding its reality.

The non-profit sector has its errors and challenges, this is true and no one denies it. But it also has real successes, outstanding practices, and effective leaders who work silently and make an impact. Criticism, at its core, is healthy and necessary, and is indeed part of any real development process.

The problem begins when leaders base their judgment and opinion on experiences that are then generalized, or when criteria are borrowed from other sectors and applied directly without regard to the nature of charitable work, or when everything is reduced to numbers and reports while the field is much more complex.

This is evident during discussions in meetings or at the fringes of conferences, seminars, and workshops.

The challenge grows when understanding and correctness are confined to a specific group, and those who work in the field daily—with their varying capabilities and accumulated challenges—are not heard as they should be.

I do not deny that there is weakness in the sector; the capabilities of the sector are a reflection of the capabilities of the community itself. The sector does not operate in isolation from its environment, but attracts its staff, volunteers, and resources from this community, with all its potentials and constraints.

I believe that this perspective of leaders is not usually driven by bad intentions. However, those in positions of decision or finance see the scene from a different angle, and this angle may not reveal to them the details known to those who live it daily. Additionally, the pressure of responsibility and accountability drives caution and strictness, which is understandable, but sometimes turns into a pre assumption of shortcomings. Furthermore, the voice of the field does not always reach as it is; it is often filtered through official reports and channels that smooth and beautify the discourse until the true picture disappears.

Here, I recall the words of Al-Hutheiya when he said:

“Lessen the blame on them; it does not matter for your father’s sake, or fill the space they filled.”

“Those are a people; if they build, they build well, and if they make a promise, they fulfill it, and if they engage, they are firm.”

This verse encapsulates what I want to say: alongside criticism, the challenges of reality and the capabilities of people must be considered, otherwise, let the critic stand in the place where they stand and face what they face. Those working in the field do their best with what they have, confront issues that do not appear in meetings, and sometimes innovate solutions from nothing.

What is required is not to silence criticism nor to justify mistakes. What is needed is for criticism to be accompanied by fairness, and for the evaluator to recognize that field experience is no less than management and planning experience. What is needed are channels that deliver the true voice from the field, not embellished reports. It is required that those who criticize are also ready to support and assist, not just categorize and judge. What is necessary are genuine visits where more is listened to than spoken.

The sector needs those who correct its course, but it also needs those who appreciate the efforts of its workers. When leadership combines both, it does not merely correct; it inspires.