All-Rounder: Angel Theodora
Interview with Christy Davis and Ysel Fresnido
What is an all-rounder? It is a person who exhibits versatility and adaptability, able to adjust and move, not just across types of jobs, but in different countries, cultures and contexts as well. Within World Vision in Asia Pacific, one person that quickly comes to mind when we think about all-rounders is Angel Theodora, Programmes and Operations Director of World Vision Nepal.
She shared three lessons as advice to those interested in becoming an all-rounder — know what motivates you, be open to opportunities, and do not be afraid to make a jump! Check out our conversation with her for some nuggets of wisdom, and find out more about what being an all-rounder is all about.
Tell us a little bit more about you, your current role and how you got to where you are.
I kind of stumbled into the development and humanitarian sector. I did not have any educational qualifications in this area, like international development or humanitarian studies. I graduated with a bachelor’s degree in business studies from University of Technology Sydney in Australia. When I graduated in 1998, it was in the middle of the Asian Financial Crisis. Not long after I returned home to Jakarta, Indonesia went through the May 1998 riots at the time when the Suharto regime fell out of power. I think I was only home for less than a month when that happened, so it was soon clear to me that getting a job as a fresh graduate would be challenging, to say the least. I decided to expand my job search with the goal just to get some work experience. I started applying for jobs in different sectors and industries without doing much thinking and allowed myself to have a year of adventure and experience. I ended up pursuing a role in the non-profit sector so I could travel around Indonesia. I landed a job with World Vision Indonesia for a grant-funded emergency project, staying in the organisation for less than three years — nine months in Indonesia and then some time in their Australia, Timor-Leste and India offices. I left World Vision in 2001 thinking that working in the NGO sector was not for me. I pursued my Master’s degree in Australia in Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations, then went back to Indonesia to work with a national school that was trying to establish a franchise mechanism (a national school with international curriculum), which was on trend at that time. I also set up my own cafe as it was my lifelong dream to have my own business. Five years after I left World Vision, I didn’t think I would come back until the Indian Ocean tsunami hit in 2004 and World Vision started reaching out to ex-employees, to ask if they wanted to work in any of the four emergency responses that they launched in different countries. I joined the response in India, since I had experience with World Vision previously in emergency projects in that country. The rest is history. After the tsunami, I was part of the Global Rapid Response Team of World Vision International for more than four years before I moved to the regional HEA (Humanitarian Emergency Affairs) role. In late 2016, I wanted to go back to working closer to the field, so I moved to World Vision Nepal as the Programme & Operations Director, which is my current role.
Was it a hard decision to step back into the development sector? The Indian Ocean tsunami was a major event and you were leaving Indonesia to go back to India.
You know, I think my biggest worry at that time was what was going to happen to my business because I had to leave it behind for the manager and other staff to take care of. I think at that time it was only running for two years. My other worry is that I had stepped out of the humanitarian and development sector for 4.5 years and I wasn’t sure of the changes. I wasn’t sure if I would be able to keep up with the sector from a personal confidence perspective. What was interesting was that it felt almost like I never left when I came back. There were probably some new standards, but in the emergency response business, I thought things were pretty much the same. And maybe because I was older and I had other experiences in between which made me somewhat wiser, I actually enjoyed my work much better the second time around, compared to when I first got into the sector when I was more concerned about getting the projects done, and getting the target beneficiary numbers. I wasn’t so much focused on the process, on the people who I worked with, and the people we served. When I came back to working with World Vision, I already had my nephew, so when I talked about or looked at programmes serving children, I saw him in the mix. So, I think I came back like a different person and I appreciated the process more and appreciated working with people more, which was much better for me in terms of getting the job done right, and most importantly getting the right things done.
Before I get to the second part on talking about versatility and adaptability, I’m curious. When we look at people who are adaptable and can move, not just across types of jobs, but in different countries, cultures and contexts as well. What would you say was one of the most difficult jobs that you had that challenged you and pushed your boundaries?
To be honest, I think my current role is the most challenging one, interestingly. With the emergency work before, I would get involved with a response for maybe maximum three months, and it was intense and harder in terms of physical challenges and the time pressure. However, it was more focused, had clearer objectives, and you do get more satisfaction from the job because you know exactly how your work is impacting others. The chain is kind of shorter between you and the impact.
In my current role, the challenge is maintaining momentum because often the pace isn’t always as intense or urgent. This is actually my first long-term development role. Working more closely with the national and local governments, sometimes you are not sure how the policies are implemented and some political challenges can be interesting. I am a strong believer of working with the government because at the end of the day, they are the ones with the mandate. I think the other challenge for me is adjusting my personality. I feel I’m better at setting up and not so good at maintaining, and I think this is a personal development opportunity for me in keeping up momentum and continuing to maintain focus and sharpness even when there is no urgency and no adrenaline pumping.
I consider you an all-rounder. These are people that are really quite resilient and adaptable. What are the most important factors that are helping you to be successful in your role now?
This is an interesting question because when I think about how I ended up being an all-rounder, I think about my first role in this sector as a Programme Officer. I thought that was the best training ground for me because it was a role that had high expectations in terms of outputs that the role has to generate, but it did not have authority. I had to work with different departments and facilitate processes with people over whom I had no authority. So I had to hone a lot of my soft skills — facilitation, influence, negotiations. I think the other interesting aspect is not having a formal training or educational qualification in international development or humanitarian studies. When I first came into the sector, I had a business degree, so everything was new to me. I had to keep an open mind and I had to learn everything on the job. I had no preconceived ideas about the development sector, which in the end served me well. I started really positive, I was not cynical or jaded about some of the challenges of the development sector.
So, the two key things that most likely helped me to be an all-rounder:
- Keeping an open mind.
- Having strong soft skills around communication, facilitation, influence, and getting things done through and with people, even when you have no formal authority over them.
Earlier you mentioned working with the government, and the importance of collaboration and partnering. The boundaries, responsibilities and roles between the different sectors are continually blurred. How does partnering play a role in your work?
In the past prior to coming to Nepal, for me partnering was a strategic choice that we may or may not take in our work. Our context in Nepal is interesting because, as an International Non-Governmental Organization (INGO), we cannot implement projects directly as we are required by law to work through local or national NGOs as our implementing partners. That brings a different dynamic into the relationships, in a way that we have no choice but to partner for implementation. When partnering is a strategic choice, you go into it wanting the partnership, but the law made it a little bit interesting that in Nepal, it is actually the other way round. How do you still maintain the principles of partnering when you have no choice over it? It is almost like there is a power dynamic that is not always equal as we function as an INGO and often also function as a donor to national NGOs. In a way, we have more power in terms of financial and material resources that we bring into the partnership. So, how do we maintain our partnering principles in terms of working with our implementing partners?
That point about power is a significant one. How do you ensure equity in that relationship given the financial dynamic? And how do you cultivate and sustain trust?
It is actually taking a multi-pronged approach because I think in some ways we still need to maintain the accountability from a perspective of financial management and project management. But I think we hone trust more from the other aspect of things, in terms of building personal relationships and taking a more supportive approach when working with the staff of partner NGOs. The tone of our one-to-one conversations, for example, is not about managing performance but about understanding what kind of support and capacity building they need to be successful in their implementation. As an organisation, we are required to build those types of competencies among our staff as well. In the context of Nepal, we need people who are capacity builders, advisors, mentors and can do quality control, which are all different skill sets than the ones required as direct implementers.
The other context that I find also interesting about Nepal are the changes that the country is going through with federalism. In 2017, for the first time ever, Nepalese people got to choose their local representatives through elections which brought in more than 750 local government bodies. This creates a lot of opportunities for us to build better relationships with the government, and for NGOs and INGOs to support and strengthen government roles and responsibilities.
With your background and looking back to the different experiences you have had, even if they seem a little abstract, do you find that these experiences relate to what you are doing now? Can you see how you use skills or experiences from those times in what you are doing now?
I did not start with preconceived ideas with how a development programme should be done. I remember when I was starting, maybe because of my business background, I would build up strong relationships, with finance departments for example, as I could not fathom how to manage projects without knowing exactly where your numbers are at. That was an interesting approach because I am fully aware that sometimes there would be tension between departments, offices or even countries. That was never a challenge or competition for me as I always see complementary skill sets that are brought to the table. The other things that I find interesting are being able to apply learning from the for-profit sector, like when reading articles from the Harvard Business Journal. It is not easy to translate profit into what we do but there are always cross-industry gems that we can apply. That is an interesting thought process that I bring in to the work that people with a different background might not apply as easily.
What would be your advice or wisdom from your own experience that you would share with somebody who is just getting started and is interested in becoming an all-rounder?
I have three lessons:
- Know what motivates you. Ask yourself: Does the job excite me? Can I leverage my strengths and still have an opportunity to grow and to challenge myself? For me, as the people with whom I work are important, I ask the question, “Am I comfortable with the people that I will be working with?” before I take on a new role.
- Be open to opportunities. We all have different situations and different opportunities come to us. Just be open and choose one that works best for you.
- Do not be afraid to make a jump! Take some risks, explore, and find your dream. When you make a decision to pursue something, just take the jump and give it your all!
You had an international education in university, how important is that?
Educational qualifications are important, but I think what is more important is mindset and personality. What I appreciate about studying overseas is learning about myself faster and being independent, and it developed my skills in research and communication. Those were the practical things that serve me well, but I have seen other colleagues who do not have international qualifications but are also independent and able to express themselves.
We hope you learned a lot from this interview. If you want to read more from our All-Rounder series, click HERE.
