Eric Martin thank you for joining us today at the Across Border podcast.
Eric Martin is a professor of management at Buckner University in the United States with a lot of research and experience in doing research in crisis contexts and international development areas with a special interest in Eastern Europe and the Balkans and we did together some work into the cross-sectoral partnership looking at the Ukrainians in Romania.
This is how we met years ago and maybe this is how we can start the discussion today after you tell us a few words about you.
Why are you here and why are you interested as a US scholar based scholar? Why are you here in Romania? Well thanks for having me here it’s a pleasure to see you again and chat with you about this.
So I’ve been coming to this region for a long time and it’s been interesting to track changes and developments over time but of course most recently the answer is because of the full-scale invasion in Ukraine which forced a lot of refugees and so into Romania and also Poland which I’m probably more familiar with and so that’s been the main focus of work and of course it’s been a pleasure to work with you as well.
We’re in the final stages of a paper that I’m sure we’ll get into talking about.
But yeah it’s been fascinating to see the response here and also see the different responses across countries throughout Europe.
Each have sort of unique contexts, maybe different subgroups that might be going in various levels of support or not support from institutions but also from the public and so and of course that’s changed over time now and very unfortunately we’re into the third year, well into the third year.
And so I think that was unexpected and I didn’t necessarily think I’d be continuing to come back here and certainly it’s very unfortunate. Yeah.
Was there an interest in the 90s when you came for the first time here? Was there an interest for this area specifically in the United States? Right. Well yes there was.
So I was part of a group, it’s called the Peace Corps and so I was right out of college in 1992 and so I joined the Peace Corps. Maybe I could talk about that.
So the Peace Corps you have volunteers and they volunteer for two years to go abroad and you really… Does it replace military service? It does.
We don’t have that but yeah some people can think of it as that. But no, we don’t have any sort of compulsory military service. And so yeah, it’s something that I always knew I’d do.
They used to have commercials and I remember seeing these commercials on television when I was quite young and they just looked like the coolest guys, you know, working in Africa, working in South America.
And you know, it was always called the toughest job you’ll ever love, you know. And so it was maybe in the back of my mind over time.
And then I learned that it was fairly well respected, you know, in the United States. And it would be very helpful for graduate school.
And so graduate programs often look favorably upon Peace Corps service, especially in my area of international development.
It would kind of, you know, demonstrate that you were at that front line, grassroots, very grassroots kind of development work. So I was here in 92 to 94 and I was in Poland.
And it was a, you know, I just finished college. I had not, I had traveled to France and Spain, you know, I had never really traveled. And so it was eye opening to see Eastern Europe.
But then also to see the tremendous growth, right? 1989 is the fall of the wall. And there are a few years after this, you know, I wasn’t here for in Poland, let’s say for, for the first McDonald’s.
But I saw number three to 33, right? You know, so this explosion of development.
And in a lot of ways, certainly retrospectively thinking about this, you know, I kind of, you know, I saw Poland, which was like the archetype of, of change and development, right?
Going from the Soviet Union to the European Union, you know, under influence, right?
In such a rapid time, Poland received an inordinate amount of US support, primarily in an effort to, to help crush the Soviet Union. And it was a fascinating time of of growth and change.
I believe when I was there, the stock market went up, you know, 900%, you know, massive growth, massive change. And, you know, Chicago at that time was the second biggest Polish city, right?
A Polish national. So there’s a unbelievable diaspora and connection with the United States for Poland. You know, it was 99% white and Catholic, this homogenous.
So, so it had maybe the easiest path, right? It had a ton of money, a ton of political support, a homogenous society that was very supportive of each other in many different ways.
Also long tradition of connections to the United States. Yeah, that’s right. The famous Polish peasant book explaining the 19th century. Absolutely. Right.
So, so there was a great affinity towards the country. Um, and so in that sense, you know, I saw this, uh, you know, crazy successful model of change.
Um, and then after that, it was almost as if I could compare, uh, or start to compare lots of different other settings to that, right?
So soon after that, uh, when I was getting my doctorate, I worked in Bosnia. Um, and so there you start seeing, oh, it’s not quite the economic powerhouse and there’s ethnic division.
So it was almost, I saw all these, the differences in other settings. Um, and I did not spend a lot of time in Romania, uh, back then, but I came, you know, and I visited.
And so it’s been interesting to see change over time. But yeah. Was this the initial experience of living in the area, informing your decision to go to the crisis management field of research? Yeah.
Were there specific things that, you know, maybe informed your decision? Right. You know, I think, um, so when I, well, let’s see.
So when I got back from the Peace Corps, I, uh, was at Indiana university, I got my masters and that was in, um, comparative international affairs, right?
So this, I, and a very big focus on Eastern Europe, uh, and the Baltics at that time. Um, when I did my, uh, uh, doctorate, um, the Bosnian war was happening, the breakup of Yugoslavia.
So now we’re into 95 to, you know, 90, 97, uh, maybe so 95 is Dayton peace accords, 97. I was doing this work. And at that time I was in a public administration program.
Um, and my area was sort of interorganizational relationships.
And, uh, I remember reading something about, um, um, you know, if you really want to understand something, you know, go to a point of great crisis and see what people are like then, right?
It’s like putting, you know, if you want to examine something, you put it under pressure, right?
And so, or, or before you, uh, before you get married, you know, travel with your spouse, let’s see what they’re like at three in the morning, right?
If you still love each other and then you miss a train, it’s three in the morning. If you still love each other, then you’re good to go. Um, so finding those pressure points.
And so, um, I had a friend from the Peace Corps who was then working Brian Fahy, who was working in, um, Bosnia at the time.
And he thought, uh, you know, if you want to see a complex setting, here’s a complex setting. We have, you know, the U S the EU. Yeah.
Well, at that time it would have been like, um, DFID, GTZ, um, you know, all of the different individual country agencies, but there’s the EU Fahy program, you know, and those and all on the ground, World Bank, IMF, but also NATO, uh, you know, the, and so all these groups are on the ground, uh, and they’re trying to do things like privatize state-owned enterprises, you know?
Well, that was much more complex than Poland. You know, Poland, they were able to do a voucher system, um, that seemed fair.
It worked, you know, let’s give everyone, you know, take the working population, you know, what’s the right age.
So if it’s, you know, 30 million people, everyone has one 30 millionth, you know, roughly. Right. Um, and then a stock market will emerge. And so that was a wonderful way to do things in Bosnia.
You know, not so much. We had three way ethnic warfare. Um, maybe some of the folks with money maybe shouldn’t have had the money.
Uh, so they had to think about more like, you know, and you wouldn’t want to do an auction either. Right. So you can do vouchers, you can do auction, or maybe it’s more like a tender.
And so the auction might’ve been unfair too. So the, this international group of people would try to, um, vet, uh, programs. So someone might say, well, I’ll buy this firm, you know, for a dollar.
But I’ll keep everybody employed and I’ll repair the roads in the school. And the next person will say, I’ll buy it for a million dollars, but I’m laying everyone off and I’m not fixing your road.
You’re fixing the road. Right. And so you had to weigh those benefits. Right. And that’s a very crude description, but roughly you get what I’m talking about.
Um, and so it just made for a greater complexity for interorganizational relationships. And so that made for a good dissertation. It gave me a lot to talk about. I, I wrote about privatization.
I wrote about media reform and I wrote about refugees. And so those were different agencies that were involved.
Some agencies were involved in all three USAID, um, you know, GTZ, DFID, they do all of those. Um, those were just in space and others would just do some. So right.
Uh, world vision or Catholic relief services just in the refugees. And then there’d be maybe OSCE in media and then privatization would have the treasury department, the world bank, the IMF.
Um, and so, you know, that made for a ready-made dissertation, right? You could compare across those. You could also write about each one of those.
Um, and I guess I found that those turned out to be some pretty pillar core areas of change everywhere. Uh, refugees, obviously that’s why we’re here today.
Um, media is incredibly important and we’re facing those issues in my own country.
Um, you know, about, uh, fairness, about, um, you know, reporting unbiased reporting, those kinds of issues, um, and, uh, privatization, you know, maybe that’s not everywhere, but economic development certainly is.
And so those three things sort of set me on a path, I’d say of then looking at, well, after it was Bosnia, then it was Kosovo and Croatia and Serbia.
Um, and then, um, refugee, uh, actually in like 2014, 15, I spent time in the Greek islands and then into Macedonia and Serbia, sort of following the path of, of the Syrian refugees at that time.
Um, you know, with some other little, you know, crises here and there. So I could continue to come back to some of those themes, um, which has been over. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Um, this crisis, when you talk about international development crisis is not one of the topics that pops up immediately to your mind, right? Yeah.
How is, how are they related and why, why should we focus on, and, you know, be, uh, be interested in, in this topic of, of crisis management? Yeah.
I mean, I, I’d say, you know, it’s a time in an optimistic way, it’s a time for change, right? Um, you know, all bets are off. If you could take that phrase.
Um, it’s, uh, a situation in crisis where, um, you can usually do things the way you imagine doing them, not constrained by bureaucracy or red tape. Um, people tend to be more forgiving.
Um, they tend to be more open. Um, and so, you know, if you just think about even crisis in your own situation, we had a flood in my town many years ago.
Um, and I had no problem, you know, going to the neighbor, let’s say an old woman and either asking for help or helping or just letting myself in.
You’d never do that normally, but in a crisis situation, you say, I better check on this person or I need someone to check on me. Um, and so, you know, that happens organizationally as well.
Um, when we all know from COVID, every one of our institutions probably did something that in normal times would have been considered inappropriate, maybe illegal, um, uh, unfair, um, or, or it was maybe something we always wanted to do, but we couldn’t because there were barriers.
And so to me, when there is a big crisis, it’s an opportunity to change perhaps multiple things at once. Um, and that’s a fascinating thing to explore.
And that’s something that again, didn’t necessarily happen in Poland. In Poland, I saw this traditional development model in Bosnia.
You saw, wait a minute, this unbelievable, devastating crisis and they needed this development. Um, you know, how could you leverage those two things at once?
Uh, and that just kind of became a niche and, and not always in a positive way. Um, right.
In some places they leveraged that well, some places, um, you know, maybe my work in Haiti, uh, you tend to see the same patterns reemerge and it’s not because the crisis wasn’t enough of a jolt, they had some devastating years and they still do.
Um, but maybe the assistance wasn’t provided properly. And, you know, I, I certainly wouldn’t put the blame on the Haitians. Um, you know, it’s how we provide assistance too.
And, you know, that sort of power imbalance becomes important. As a, as an expert in this field, I’m, I’m curious, what’s your opinion?
I’m coming from this conference where one of the subtitles was the poly crisis, meaning that there are several interrelated crisis.
One after another one, is this a real understanding of sure there a bit more where is it something different with our time compared to. Yeah. Yeah.
That’s always a question whether, you know, are we any different than any other time?
Um, but that idea of cascading crises, um, you know, are more sequential or multiple, um, you know, that does happen.
And so I think that, that, uh, idea of maybe they’re two completely unrelated things, you know, then they just, you’re dealing with two, but often it’s one has made you perhaps more vulnerable to something else.
You know, it’s like sort of chronic versus acute, you know, are there chronic underlying issues, uh, institutional, political, economic, social, that perhaps make a country or an organization more vulnerable to the acute, right?
Then there’s others where that acute, that, um, that sudden jolt is just so big. Let’s think COVID, right? That it affects everything.
Or I could think of the current, the floods in Texas, you know, these horrible floods, they devastated everything, right? It’s going to have effects all across the spectrum, uh, for a long time.
So, um, you know, whether these poly crisis are causal, sequential, parallel, you know, correlated, uncorrelated, you know, um, either way, it’s something that you need to address.
And that, uh, again, that becomes fascinating to see how organizations deal under such a complexity and uncertainty, right?
And, and at the core, you know, now my work is in organizations and management. And so, uh, I don’t pretend to be an expert in these issues.
To me, these are contextual, uh, and I’m looking for responses, you know, are there different structures that make more sense?
Um, during COVID, you saw a lot more decentralization of different things because there was uncertainty. And so, you know, that hierarchy, maybe it’s to deal with uncertainty.
Um, but when no one knows, um, maybe you want to experiment. And so we don’t need one top decision maker.
Maybe it’s better to have eight lower level decision makers and the top decision maker can judge, uh, well, is the score five, three, or is it four, or is it seven, one?
Um, and that’s maybe how we could think about management in a slightly different way. Yeah. Um, I see there is a real readjustment of the worlds in the relation with the United States.
I’m, I’m curious, how, how was it to, to be a US scholar, uh, in, in the area in the nineties and then later in the, during the refugee crisis.
And now do you see any, any change, any difference in the way people talk to you, they relate to you, you know, welcoming you maybe more or less, is there a change in this regard?
I have the impression there, there are some things there probably is. I’m not sure I’ve, I’ve felt it to be honest, you know, conceptually, uh, sure.
Um, and I could just think of the United States role during these different times, um, you know, if anything, I mean, just, you know, sort of off the cuff of, uh, you know, in Poland in the nineties, when someone learned you were American, like they, I might get a beer put in front of me, you know, and like a thank you, you know, and a cheers and a hug.
Um, that was not the case in Serbia, um, many years later. And right now it tends to be this questioning of what’s going on.
Um, and I think Americans, wherever we stand in the political spectrum, um, I think we can all recognize we’re projecting in uncertainty and a, and a, and an, yeah, uncertainty or an ambivalence, um, that, uh, the rest of the world is not quite used to.
Um, so the United States had a position for a long time and now it’s changing.
Um, you know, and I, I don’t need to make a political statement that alone is this question over, um, you know, something that you thought was fundamental and, and fixed or locked is no longer.
And so that creates uncertainty. Um, and that, that’s a different, uh, interpretation of context. Yeah. Yeah. Um, how do you see the area?
I wouldn’t use the word evolving because it’s not necessarily an evolution, but you know, developing or changing in, in this three decades.
I mean, I’m not old enough to, to have a, an understanding of it, but still, I mean, I can see improvements, but also, you know, areas where we don’t do that good, uh, in a way or another. Yeah.
Yeah. You know, I mean, economically, uh, you know, Poland’s been on a, you know, uh, upward and Northern, uh, trajectory nonstop since that time.
Um, you know, socially, politically, um, there’s been some changes at different times, right to left, um, left to right.
Um, so it’s probably a few phases there at different times, uh, you know, uh, often probably in response to economic issues and social issues.
Um, you know, and I think those kinds of things are cyclical, you know, right would push too far and it jumps back left, left pushes too far, it jumps back, right.
Excuse me, but by and large, you know, uh, uh, a positive trajectory in terms of development nonstop, um, you look at other places where, you know, maybe the growth, uh, you know, was sort of very positive early on and then it either stagnated or you start to see some, some, um, you know, issues there.
Um, you know, I, I, again, I’m not an economist, uh, but just from observing, you know, different situations, you see some places that are not quite as beautiful, not quite as polished as they might’ve been 10 years ago.
Um, which just suggests maybe a little less investment, a little less focus on things. And again, I’m sure that’s cyclical.
You spend a lot of money, um, you know, to beautify something, uh, Budapest, for example, um, you know, it was a tourist destination. There was a great incentive to really spruce it up.
They did that. I’m sure it cost a great deal of money.
Um, and then, then you don’t for a while and now it’s starting to maybe show a little bit, um, you know, crack oof in comparison looks more and more beautiful, um, you know, all the time.
On the other hand, I’m a little disappointed to see, you know, hard rock cafe is now on the, you know, on the square, um, you know, and, and, you know, but okay, that that’s business and development, you know?
Um, but you, you see those trends over time. Um, you know, Ukraine of course was just always, uh, I don’t know how to describe years, but always behind Poland.
Um, but moving maybe in the same similar direction, um, with, you know, some obvious, uh, times during different sort of revolutions, orange revolution and, you know, um, but, uh, uh, Maidan, you know, was cementing in that decision, uh, uh, you know, of again, a split in the country of looking east or looking west.
Right. And the answer behind that was look, uh, look west. Um, and that was the answer. Um, and that wasn’t well appreciated. Right.
And so now, um, you know, I just feel devastated for the country and for my colleagues and friends there.
Um, you know, because I think they’re going to be set back many, many decades and, um, and, and this war is lasting so long that so many funds are being used for that.
There’s just going to be so much less for development afterwards. So, you know, we can only hope that this ends immediately. I know that you, you’re about to go there for a few weeks.
You’ve been there last year, the year before and so on. How is it to, to do field work, uh, in the middle of the storm?
And this is not the only case also when, when it was the Syrian refugee crisis, you’ve been in the middle of it. So in the Balkans, also in the Haiti. Yeah. Is it dangerous?
Uh, can you share some, you know, stories about how is, how people are connecting with you? Yeah. Which are the institutions responding to, to, to you or not and so on. Right.
Um, you know, so I guess one thing I’d say is, um, I, I feel like it’s possible that I, um, for research, I, I publish, uh, maybe a little above my, my belt above my weight, um, because of these settings.
Right.
And so, um, you know, there’s some forgiveness on maybe some methodological, um, you know, imperfections, um, you know, sampling sizes and, you know, perfect representation, that I cannot justify.
Um, and the answer is because I have to rely on snowball sampling from moving from one person to the next.
I’m hoping for a contact often, uh, who lead me to another contact, which is of course how we met, um, you know, and so, you know, that, um, there’s the, the, the downside of this.
It’s hard to do really proper research sometimes.
Um, the upside is, you know, you’re going to be submitting stuff as we have and are, um, you know, on a topic that very few others are writing about at that time or having access to, um, I’ve gotten extraordinary access at different times because there’s so few other people maybe on the ground in some certain situations.
You know, I remember back in Bosnia, um, you know, I was, I was much younger than, um, you know, but sort of expatriate families who might’ve worked at the embassy or mostly with USAID, um, you know, might sort of take me under their wing, you know, sort of surprised to see a young PhD student in this setting.
Um, or there’s been times when, when I was very naive and in a wrong spot and somebody, you know, uh, spots me and says, let’s come with me, you know, let’s go somewhere else. Um, yeah.
And so those are often eyeopening of course. Um, but they spark great connections, right? And then somebody is asking what I’m doing there and then they say, well, I’ve got people you can talk to.
Um, and so, you know, uh, sometimes you need to revisit those. Uh, can I tell our story about how we work together?
Um, you know, I was doing my sort of classic snowball sampling, uh, starting with one contact, you know, a colleague, Sean Flanagan, who does a lot of great research in, Romania and has for a long time.
She was in the peace corps as well in Romania many years ago, probably about the same time that I was. And so, um, she put me in touch with Paula, you know, who then put me in touch with you.
Um, you know, and at first, uh, you know, I guess I would have considered you an interviewee, right? Um, I was just asking you my questions.
Um, and then it was clearly some, you were, you are clearly somebody who knew more than me about this situation, so much more than me.
Um, and you started guiding, uh, who I should speak with next and what I should ask them about. Right. And that’s where now I’m starting to say, you know, as I’m recording this, right.
And, and transcribing it the way I do my work. What is this now? This is no longer me questioning you, right? This is you advising me. So now maybe I have to not include this as an interview.
And now I’m including you as like my, my key informant, right?
In this sort of ethnography, almost ethnography, ethnographical, um, not, I, I, those who really do that would say this is not the case. And I understand that, but you know, along those lines.
Um, and so now you’re an advisor to my research, right? So now I’m saying, okay, you know, get rid of you, you no longer count in my sample size. Um, so now I’m just going to use your advice.
Uh, and then, uh, we start recognizing that, uh, we know, actually even forget that, um, we should just write together and we should work on this.
And so those words that maybe originally could have been in the paper in quotations now are in the introduction, uh, you know, as you are describing things.
Um, and that’s a, that’s an evolution that, um, perhaps could have happened with a number of people that I’ve talked with. Um, but certainly not all of the people, right?
And, and so paying attention to that is intriguing, um, and, uh, developing longer term relationships, um, you know, wherever you can, so that you keep returning to people and hear changes over time.
Um, that’s helpful. And maybe for the young academics out there, um, you might not realize that maybe someday you could put together a compilation or best of, right?
And I’m starting to do that as, um, you, it maybe is two things. One, um, it, it becomes a little harder to do very long-term field research.
You know, I used to go to Bosnia, let’s say for the entire summer, right. I’d leave as soon as classes were over and I get back in August.
Um, that now I’m trying to jam it into two weeks, you know, five weeks. Um, and second is you start to see things happen over and over again.
And you start to maybe recognize that the nature of your research is changing.
Um, and the nature of you as a scholar is changing from, you know, not a hypothesis testing, but, you know, demonstrating a theory or trying to find something new and novel or trying to, you know, expose a framework, you know, and say, could I find that framework?
Um, that’s what I did when I guess I wasn’t exactly sure what I was looking for.
Uh, and it’s fine research, you know, now when I start seeing trends over time, you start saying, is that really something right?
Um, you know, and I, I think the really great scholars did that immediately, right? Or very soon. And the very productive people did. It’s taken me far too long.
Um, but you start to see that, you know, so, so actually like I have a paper, um, in disasters, right? Um, that’s under a review right now that is trying to explore, um, reactions temporarily.
And so this idea, a lot of people talk about coordination, usually at a fixed point in time, like there’s a task force. And in fact, that’s what we worked on, right? It’s a task force.
And then that task force may be over time changes, right?
But I start realizing, you know, from seeing refugee response in multiple places that a situation happens, whether it’s an earthquake, whether it’s war, whether it’s the final day of full scale, February 24th or 22nd or 24th, um, you know, this day happens.
Um, well, when it goes over the border, in fact, you, you told me that like you responded, you know, what were you doing again, going up to the border, providing just translating and trying to provide some, uh, accommodation and transportation because that were the things missing at the moment.
Right. So that’s a classic example. Day one, you see informal responses. You see volunteers here. A professor is saying, what else can I do? I can help.
I could give a little money, but I, I speak multiple languages. I’ll lend my services. I can provide help. And that lasts for some time, but people are not trained for that.
Um, they have to get back to their jobs, their family. Um, so money might be an issue.
Um, you know, and so they respond, uh, people opened up their homes here, uh, drove cars, you know, how long can you do that? Um, so you see this informal response right away.
Then you tend to see maybe some NGOs, right? And maybe they’re local NGOs at first. Um, and now we get some more organized response. Um, then you might see the international NGOs.
They take a few days, maybe a week to arrive, but now all of a sudden, you know, save the children arrives and then it becomes highly professionalized, right? They are experts at this.
Um, and so for example, in these situations, save the children would be horrified that all these well-meaning Romanian folks were driving people all over and saying, you, you, we, you can’t just drive offer these rides.
We should have some documentation. We should make sure that we’re tracking people for safety, right?
Um, providing food, you know, like, Oh, God bless all the Romanian, you know, grandmas who were bringing food and pot.
Um, but what if somebody got sick, you know, what, you know, so these, you know, um, these are all great concerns.
Uh, so the international community, the international NGOs tend to, you know, make up for things, uh, you know, put in some bureaucracy, some rules.
And that’s about the time when the informal volunteers are exhausted and ready to transfer over that, that duty. Um, and then the international community sort of wanes, right?
Um, that, you know, emergencies are emergencies. Now it’s maybe not an emergency anymore. Ukrainian refugees in Romania, it’s not an emergency. It’s a problem. Yeah.
Um, and so now that becomes municipal or state, right. And so in that sense, they’re cooperating, but it’s like, I call it like passing a baton in a relay race.
It’s a different form of cooperation that happens over time where I do my work and then I hand it to you and you do your work and you hand it to someone else.
And then maybe the informals are going to come back again, the volunteers to be like watchdogs for the government who’s now maybe doing this work or not doing this work.
Um, and so, you know, that to me was not a theory. That wasn’t something I was trying to prove, but that’s something that I kind of saw in Bosnia, uh, forcing myself maybe to remember it.
I definitely saw in Greece and Serbia in the refugee response. Um, in fact, people talked overtly about these periods at that time. And now you a hundred percent see it here.
Um, and you know, the tasks change too, right?
So in that beginning, when you were there, it was, uh, providing, uh, providing, um, transportation, it was probably giving food, some shelter, maybe some clothes.
Um, then it becomes settling people in, maybe doing paperwork, maybe some housing, right? Then it gets to be jobs, education, schooling, health, right?
These are, you know, you know, some, you know, we just had breakfast with, um, uh, with our colleague and, and Sarah, Sarah, Sarah Phillips. Um, and, uh, right.
She was working with folks with disabilities. They need those things right away, but by and large, those things happen after a little while and that becomes a state job.
So that makes it difficult for all the actors to learn from each other over time because the actors are changing and the tasks are changing and the time is changing.
Um, so there’s almost a disincentive to learn from each other. It’s almost like a, thank God, my job’s done and move on or, or, um, you know, my funding just disappeared.
So it might not be, thank God, it might be, oh my God, uh, my job is done. Um, and so, you know, that’s, that’s the kind of stuff we look at.
Considering, considering, no worries, considering your, um, wide experience and publications in very good journals and, you know, academically speaking, there, there’s a lot of expertise you’re having.
Do you have the impression that governments or, well, bodies of organisms of any sort, listen to what you have to say? Are you invited to conferences?
Are there workshops maybe where you, because I very often have this impression that, um, academics do not necessarily play an important role. I actually, I tried this several times with my students.
So we, we simulate one of, let’s say, even we did simulate actually the, the task force we studied.
So various students had various roles and I was always interested in observing where the students will stay according to their roles.
And, you know, academics are always left somehow, somewhere in the, in the, in the back of the room, uh, the, the amount of time they speak, it’s not really that much.
So what’s your impression in, in real life? It’s no, I’d agree. You know, I mean, again, top notch academics. I, I’m, I’m not there.
Um, you know, the folks that really, uh, are at the top of their game, uh, yes, they are advisors, they are working with folks, um, you know, but, um, you know, there’s sort of, there, there’s not all those incentives.
Um, you know, it’s still a job and, you know, the job is to publish papers and present at conferences. Now, some conferences you’ll go to, there’ll be many more practitioners.
Um, and I guess I’d see where the overlap is, um, are organizations that, um, would be interested in an academics, either perspective or ability to do this work on like after action reviews, right?
Or evaluation work. Um, I don’t think they’re actively sought after, uh, but if you can make that connection, um, that could be valuable to both sides, right?
Um, so for example, I did work with some NGOs at times, uh, who gave me plenty of access.
Um, you know, I, I, I have confidentiality, but I’d like to be able to tell everyone because you should be thrilled at this.
Um, essentially their, their approach was, we will give you access, ask whatever you’d like, tell us what you find and give us a report. And then publish whatever you’d like.
Um, you know, that is wonderful, right? And so, uh, they allowed me to see multiple different offices, interview everyone there.
Um, at times there were some, I think, interesting insights, you know, that, that, uh, in fact, one of them was, I remember, um, sharing things with a director in, you know, managing director in one country that I’d learned from his same organization in the other country, um, that he did not know about.
And he was like, wow, how do we not like this? I would like to do this. And so, um, I think those are the kinds of things that an academic can do. We have time. Um, we just want the data.
Um, you know, and I think most of, uh, you know, I’m also in management and very applied field. So it is a little more relevant.
Um, the things that I’m looking for, perhaps more relevant to organizations, looking for evaluation work. Um, so that’s, I think that’s important.
I think if you’re working in an area that there’s not a lot of, you know, relevance to marketing management, finance operations, HR, if it, you know, none of those things, then why would I perhaps?
Um, cause it costs a lot of time to speak with us, you know, um, you know, again, you know, people are working in a very difficult situation.
Uh, they’re often either not paid enough or paid a lot of money.
Um, and so to take an hour to talk with you, and then if you really think I want to talk with 10, 12 people in the office, uh, it’s not nothing, you know, it costs money.
And so, um, many times to give back, um, you know, some feedback that they don’t have mechanisms for, you know, of what’s working and what’s not working.
Um, you know, minor things sometimes about, uh, relationships between headquarters and field offices, um, you know, budgeting things, you know, where people need to be so specific back at home.
They’re so worried sometimes about every penny and the people on the ground in a complex situation are trying to make do the best they can and to wear them down with more bureaucracy.
Um, you know, as somebody I interviewed in our project, you know, was saying, okay, we have a vehicle. We use that vehicle, um, two different projects legitimately, right?
Now the vehicle needs work. Yeah. How do we build that repair? Right. Something like that. We should just free up and say it needs a new tire, right? Flip a coin. It goes to one or the other.
Uh, but that’s us talking as, you know, away from the situation. Somebody else has to account for every penny. Um, and they’re saying, well, why are we paying for that tire?
You know, can you split that? And, um, you know, those are the kinds of things that, um, sometimes you give feedback to a home office.
Um, oh, I remember one time we talked about it and they just made a change about a dollar figure upon which you needed receipts. Right.
And it’s like, wait a minute, can we just move this to $25 at the time? It was a long time ago, $50.
Um, and that just frees up all sorts of headaches, you know, um, in places where receipts are difficult, you know, that doesn’t always happen.
Uh, credit cards have changed a lot, you know, recently, but in the old days, uh, that was something complex.
And so for someone to, um, you know, increase the threshold of scrutiny to a slightly higher level could meet a world of difference to people on the ground, uh, to the frontline folks, uh, and really wouldn’t change all that much back at the home office.
So those are maybe some of those kinds of insights that, um, I think somebody like me going around talking to people in the field, learning some of those things, putting it back in a report. Yeah.
Sometimes that gets listened to, um, you know, and you can see change happening, but, you know, to your point to get to, you know, high level political stuff, you know, um, I think those are the top folks and, and it’s the outlets they publish in, right.
As long as my incentive is primarily in academic journals, all right, not that much.
It’s the folks that get into Stanford social innovation review or Harvard business review, or, or, you know, uh, foreign policy, foreign affairs, those kinds of pieces. Yeah.
Those are, those are well-respected stuff. And, and, you know, I, I, I read that stuff regularly.
Is there maybe a difference you see in, in trying to translate, uh, research findings in, in the countries in the middle of, of the, of the crisis where, uh, for the countries providing the support, right.
Uh, maybe, you know, uh, talking with, uh, Bosnian association or government where we’re being in Poland and having a discussion is, is there a difference in this regard? You mean during the crisis?
Yes. Yeah. You know, I mean, where there is no time, there’s no time, right. That’s the interesting thing.
Like again, another one was, um, you know, folks, this was in, uh, Greece, actually Greece and Macedonia, uh, Northern Macedonia. Now.
Um, and so, um, they were working on something of an app, um, for refugees. And, and the point being, they didn’t really want to track folks.
Uh, you know, uh, the refugees, we want to keep this anonymous and their confidentiality. So they weren’t necessarily trying, these are NGOs.
They weren’t necessarily trying to track, but you would like to know sometimes the trauma and the background of different folks, um, and, and, uh, and how they might be better cared for, um, without them having to repeat that at every stop, you know, these folks were, you know, leaving from Turkey, they’re getting to an island to Lesvos, let’s say, then they got to get to Athens.
Then they’re going to make their way up to, you know, Thessaloniki or up to the border. Then they got to get into Skopje.
Then they’re going up to Belgrade and at each border, um, you know, they get through the border and maybe even smuggled through a border.
Um, they’re going to face an NGO who’s going to relive this trauma again. Um, and they may or may not, whoever they confront may or may not be well-trained or well-suited to handle that.
So there was kind of this idea of, you know, is there a way we can start tracking this? Right. Um, anyway, people were starting to work on it.
They had sort of a working model and then the flows changed. Um, this is back at the time, right?
When, um, when finally Germany shut its borders, uh, to certain flows of people and, and that sort of then that causes the next country, Austria, that causes the next country, Croatia or Hungary or Serbia, which causes the next.
So everyone, you know, everyone responds two days later and now you have groups, pockets of people stuck.
So you might have a bunch of folks, um, you know, let’s say from somewhere in, say in Africa, Ethiopia or Somalia just serve, who went along with the flows.
And now there’s a pocket of those folks in Belgrade. Oh, geez. Like what do they need? And what is Belgrade? You know, you know, what are the municipal authorities there suited to deal with?
Um, so anyway, that idea of tracking, you know, was good except then everything changes. And now they say, now we’re not tracking anymore. Yeah.
Well, we don’t keep investing sometimes into that because the donors are often very short term, short sighted, uh, and need immediate results and, and the situation changed.
And so now we’re saying I’m not tracking flows anymore. Now I got to figure out how to get these kids into schools.
Now I got to figure out longer term healthcare, as we talked about, or jobs or visas, you know.
Um, and so as the nature of the crisis changes and the players change back to that temporal sequential type thing, um, the learning and the reflection and like the after action review, um, sometimes falls by the wayside, uh, almost by requirement.
Like I don’t have time now to think about what I should have done in the last phase.
So instead we see that those first responders or those folks in NGOs, international NGOs who might travel from place to place might learn for the next crisis, right?
So it’s a diffused long-term learning process. Those individuals are learning over time.
They hope to bring that to the new organization, but then they land and the crisis is going to be different, right? It’s the next place they go was wiped out by flooding and it’s not a war.
And so now we have very different sets of needs. And so, so, you know, the population on the wall is different. You know, it’s hard to learn.
And I think that’s where, um, people can get frustrated with the international community and, and, you know, our, our administration was, if you look at it in one way, there is a lot of waste.
We pay for people to be in countries for a long time when perhaps they don’t need to be there at that time. And I understand that.
And that’s what, uh, Trump just, uh, got rid of USAID, you know, largely cut those budgets. Um, again, short-term savings, fine. It’s smart in that sense.
Uh, the long-term problem is there that we were paying those people to stay in that country because the countries still pose some risks.
Um, and when something does unfold, you sure would like to have those people who’ve been there building relationships, building relationships with people on the ground, with politicians, with organizations.
Um, and that’s hard to justify a big salary. You know, when you look at them all right now and saying, really, we’re paying people just to live in Belgrade. I’d love to live in Belgrade.
It’s fantastic. Um, why are we paying, you know, American, uh, embassy staff and folks to be there?
Well, the answer is because it’s good to have a long-term presence in places and Ukraine couldn’t be a better example, right?
That, um, you know, I think probably in, uh, 2000, somewhere around there, people thought, okay, we’re good to go. We could pull out, we could stay.
Which was happening actually for many organizations. You know, um, then 2014, you know, and then you finally say, oh, made on. Okay. It finally happened. Good. Now they’re set. Right.
Um, and yet another crisis happened. So, um, having people there for the long term is very costly. I understand, but that’s how learning happens, you know, over time. I think. Mm-hmm.
Is there a toll, a price you are paying at the personal level by working in this, in this field?
Because this is a topic we don’t, we don’t often discuss about, but because my impression is that there is always emotion involved.
There is a, uh, yeah, I think it’s fair to call it a price that we’re paying for, for researching topics like this. Yeah.
You know, I mean, certainly, uh, yeah, you, you can see things that are uncomfortable. Um, you know, it’s a constant reflection on how privileged you are, um, and lucky. Um, but yeah, sure.
You can, it can be tough. Um, you know, uh, very functionally sure. You, you know, time, you know, it takes a lot of time.
And so, um, you know, I, I, I enjoy being in places for long periods of time, but you’re away from your family, you know, and certainly that was much more of an issue with my wife at home with my kids.
Um, you know, but yeah, I think that emotional toll, you know, is not always there. Um, but you know, you get into a refugee camp, you see what’s going on, you see people desperate at a border.
Um, and that is, you know, very difficult and very difficult to see, uh, kids, you know, uh, for sure.
Um, you know, because I’m a dad, uh, so you can’t help but be thinking about those things, but yeah, by and large, it’s, uh, um, you know, it is, it is difficult.
Um, you know, it’s not made for everyone. Um, but you know, I, I’m in Cluj right now. I mean, there’s absolutely, it’s, it’s wonderful to be here.
Um, you know, I suspect things will change when we travel, uh, again. So yeah. Yeah. What about teaching?
I know you are teaching in one of this, can I call it elitist or highly highly ranked college?
Uh, I mean, this is somehow in my understanding totally the opposite of what this type of institutions represent. So you’re talking about, uh, societies in the middle of camp, right?
You’re talking about people very in very vulnerable position. How is it to, to, to explain, to, to, to, to touch upon? I know that you are have some powerful tools like images.
There are some interesting, uh, pieces of documentary you can use and so on, but how do they respond to this topic? Yeah. I mean, I’m at, um, Bucknell university.
It’s a very, you know, well-financed, well-resourced, um, you know, institution.
Um, and, uh, yeah, largely there’s a rather wealthy population that, that attends who, uh, may not have been exposed to some of these things.
What I will say is my university, you know, I’m in a college of management.
Um, and it’s a college of management that takes seriously, um, these kinds of situations that management is not business and business alone. Yes.
We need to understand marketing, management, finance operations, and HR. And we do.
Um, but that idea of social responsibility, um, of, uh, people, planet, and profit, uh, is ingrained into what we do.
And I don’t think it, you know, maybe it was, but I don’t think it’s like this liberal elitist approach, uh, to things. It’s good strategy, right?
It’s good strategy to be thinking about all these principles and that idea of stakeholders.
Um, and it’s not that the business needs to do good for everybody, you know, and that we’re doing that, you know, as Freeman would argue against profit, we’re using the stockholders profit.
Um, you know, more of that, uh, um, you know, or the, uh, freedmen versus freemen, uh, you know, this idea of stakeholders, which just says you do have responsibilities to lots of people, uh, lots of organizations, suppliers, customers, partners, and lots of different ways.
And so let’s start paying attention to those, um, to do good business. That’s good strategy. Um, and so, uh, my university is very open and welcoming to that.
Um, in addition, they fund this kind of research.
And so this kind of research, I think, you know, again, exposes those relationships in a very overt and, you know, maybe sort of in your face kind of way.
Um, but I think it, it gives you some, uh, perspective on what people should do.
So, so in this part of the world, when you see businesses doing things, um, you know, I, I don’t remember now exactly who bolt or Uber, you know, somebody giving free rides, right?
Airbnb or bookings, giving free housing. Uh, and I wish I knew exactly which one. Um, right. But, uh, those are, um, yeah, that’s responsibility. Yes. It’s social responsibility.
It’s giving back when you need to, but it’s also really good marketing, right? It’s really good strategy. Uh, it may be very long term, but people are going to respect that, um, you know, over time.
Um, and so, uh, you know, my university, uh, Bucknell is very supportive of that kind of approach. Um, I think we’ve made it a, you know, a sort of a, um, a prominent feature of what we do.
And that I think reflects this idea of us, you know, being a college of management within a liberal arts setting, um, and recognizing that management is psychology and sociology and anthropology and political science and economics.
Yeah. And it’s all of those things combined. It’s just the applied version of that. Um, the same way engineering is physics and, you know, right. And so, um, it’s applied. Um, and, um, yeah.
And I, and, and everybody at Bucknell probably left a traditional business school, uh, at some point in their life to, to be in this different kind of environment.
Um, we also do a lot of very experiential learning. And so students are, are doing things. We, um, hands-on.
So actually our core, uh, introduction to management course, students create a company of 27, 29 students. Um, and they decide a project to do in the town.
Maybe they might build a fence around the community garden or they’ll paint the community gym or they’ll do something.
Uh, they get a budget, uh, together, how much it would take and how many hands those, or those 27, how many hours they might need to work. And then they sell a product, um, to finance that venture.
And they usually sell like a Bucknell hat or a Bucknell shirt. Um, and you can imagine the Bucknell university becomes like the parent corporation.
So they actually go through legal procurement, you know, they create a budget. So they’re going through as if they’re an organization. So what a fantastic way to learn.
Um, the organs, you know, that’s, this class alone has given almost a million dollars away over time in goods and services. It’s been going on like this since 1979.
Um, and so it was kind of a leader in, in experiential work. Um, and now lots of places do that. And so what a great way for students to learn. They learn about working together.
They learn about some responsibilities that go beyond just the bottom line. And that is not a, I don’t even think it’s an ethical or moral statement anymore. It’s like, it’s just good business.
It’s smart. Um, and then, um, they do good as they’re learning, right? They actually help provide something for the community and the surrounding area.
Um, and I think that’s important for universities to constantly be giving back. Yeah, because we’re getting, um, close to the end of the episode.
Um, share with us a story that, uh, connects you to, to, to, to Romania or to the area.
Uh, I had another, uh, interview a few weeks ago and, uh, the, the person mentioned the smell of the, of the cities, uh, he visited in the nineties, was, you know, totally different than, than the smell of the cities.
I mean, and that goes to so many fields, the type of food people are, I think the, the, how clean the streets are, the type of activities in the cities, because you have so many cars and so on.
So, and that’s a, you know, that’s an interesting way to, to, uh, put together all these changes we see in this. So what do you have? Yeah. Yeah. In your memory.
And I’ve often thought about, um, you know, trying to put together sort of a, you know, that sort of on the ground measurement of change, right?
For, for a time it was, to me, it was bank machines, right? For a long time. And it was like, you could never find those.
It was a huge process to go through getting money to getting money instantly. And of course now it’s at every counter. Um, you know, but that’s, that’s global almost. Um, right.
But seeing some of those, you know, changes over time.
Um, yeah, I think all the things you talked about, you know, safety on the roads, bike paths, um, yes, the smell of gasoline, you know, not diesel and cheap gasoline.
Um, you know, um, it’s, it’s amazing. Uh, but, but when you said that the feel responded and it was, um, you know, these old buildings with their basements, it’s been so hot lately, right.
And that cold air coming out from a basement. And that reminds me of this part of the world in the summer, for sure. Super wonderful. Thank you, Eric, for, for joining us. Well, thank you.
It was great. To chat. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks.