And the accolades keep pouring in! By which we mean that last year we were runners up for an ABBA from A View From The Cave.

But that has not been our only nomination for a random blogging award. Oh yes, there’s more.

Last month we were nominated in the Best Australian Blogs 2013 Competition. We’ve been nominated for an award in the Commentary category, and we’re also up for a People’s Choice Award.

To win the People’s Choice Award, we need people to vote for us. People just like you.

Take thirty seconds of your time to go to page five of this site and vote for us.

A vote for us is a vote of acknowledgement that our contributors are awesome. It’s a vote for sunshine and puppies. It’s a vote for Madonna to get back to the music she was making in the ’80s and away from development.

Not convinced we’re worth your vote? Let us convince you by highlighting some of our favourite posts since the last time we boasted about the quality of our posts.

Brendan:

“How services, not “innovation,” can change lives” by Weh Yeoh

This is a challenging post that has broad implications in an environment that is increasingly searching for The Answer to End Poverty. Where does this leave service provision and the needs of people, particularly people with disabilities? Who is deciding what those needs are? Are we listening? Weh challenges us to not get distracted by shiny things and bring it back to the people.

“Where are the children? Orphanage voluntourism in Ghana” by Hanna Voekl

Finally, some evidence-based research about the efficacy and effects of orphanage voluntourism! There is a lot of chatter and general misgivings about: a) orphanages in general; b) how voluntourism is a negative practice particularly in orphanages. But, these misgivings are anecdotal. Hanna’s research is not.

Weh:

“Making the world better does not make you better” by J.

I’m generally not a fan of opinion pieces that border on rants, but there is something about the way that J. writes and thinks that is so compelling. This piece is a great example and taps into something really important about the distinction between what aid/development workers do, and how we are more broadly as human beings.

“9 development phrases we hate (and suggestions for a new lexicon)“ by WhyDev Team

“MT @Vanalli: In Laos “gender mainstreaming” translated as “man & woman together in the middle of the river”. Shows how silly NGO-speak is.” WhyDev Twitter account, 10th April, 2013. As tongue in cheek as this post is (creating an entire litany of useless buzzwords simply because you don’t like the previous lot), it does highlight the importance of saying what you mean. All the time.

Allison:

“Stop branding aid” by Josie Stewart

I come from a communications background where a central assumption is that branding is good. Josie strongly challenges this assumption, and argues that branding aid undermines aid effectiveness.

“Teaching children journalism to strengthen democracy” by Jessica Carter

Children are so much brighter and more critical than we often realise. This piece powerfully demonstrates how kids in Bangladesh involved in a youth-centred development project are reporting on and critically assessing news in their country.

Did we convince you? Then vote for us. Voting closes Tuesday, April 30.

It has been a tumultuous and unprecedented year. According to the UK’s Spectator, 2012 was ‘the best year ever‘ as there never has been less hunger, less disease and more prosperity. Ghana recorded yet another peaceful, free and fair democratic election; malaria deaths have fallen by one-fifth over the past decade; and a Korean singer brought back dancing on an invisible horse after Adam Sandler’s celebrated Happy Gilmore.

Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) began to admit failure; more and more donors, international aid agencies and NGOs committed to greater transparency and accountability; and the sequel to KONY 2012′s first, viral video proved again that sequels usually flop (except in the case of Aliens, Godfather II and Home Alone 2).

It has also been a great year here at WhyDev. We were joined by two new team members, Allison Smith and Daniel Drake, whose contribution to our growth have job-seekers emailing us under the impression that we are a bona fide organisation and can hire (read: pay) staff. We redesigned our logo (HT Stuart Meney) and website (HT Daniel Drake). We also launched our Peer Coaching Pilot Program in partnership with Shana Montesol Johnson, which currently has over 300 participants from around the world connecting with and supporting one another. Next year will the see the improvement and scaling-up of this program.

The contributions and quality of our blog continues to grow sustainably, having published over 230 posts since 2010. We have also quantifiably increased participation from our readers, with an unprecedented number of surveys asking your opinions about everything from aid/development jargon to dating in the aid world.

We gave you at least 52 reasons to date an aidworker and Dave Algoso’s always popular post continues to dispense career advice (from people smarter than him).

Besides these popular posts from the popular kids, we had a number of fantastic posts from new and returning contributors:

• Alison Rabe, ‘Why tourists should be buying from children on the streets‘.
• Josie Stewart, ‘Stop branding aid‘ (and Jennifer Foth’s response).
• Jessica Carter, ‘For girls, there is more to empowerment than education‘.
• Makarand Sahasrabuddhe, ‘The Capacity Building Game‘.

In 2013, we look forward to building on everything we accomplished this year, by continuing to promote open and critical discussion on issues related to development on our blog, and by launching an improved Peer Coaching program to help aid and development workers be better supported in their work.

We want you to be involved with these things. Leave a comment with a topic you’d like WhyDev to cover in 2013, or send your pitch for a blog post to submissions@whydev.org. Also sign up to register for Peer Coaching 2013 here.

Thanks for all your support in 2012 – best wishes for a wonderful holiday season and a very happy new year! We will see you in 2013.

It’s been a great year for WhyDev. We redesigned our website, have a new logo and added some invaluable team members – Allison and Daniel. We also wrote a post on why aid workers make great lovers and over 25,000 aid workers with self esteem issues clicked through and read it.

And then, there’s peer coaching. To get more background information, we suggest you start by reading these previous posts.

Back in February, with the help of our partner, Shana Montesol Johnson, a certified executive coach who blogs at Development Crossroads, we introduced the concept of peer coaching for aid workers. We put out a survey to see whether or not there would be interest in being part of a peer coaching program. Within a matter of weeks, we had over 350 people respond to tell us that they wanted to be part of our program.

In June, with the support of over 76 generous people, we raised funds to develop a professional and comprehensive peer coaching program. We’ve been hard at work getting the pilot program going, and we think you’re going to be impressed with how it has turned out.

To understand how the peer coaching system works, you can view the video we used to gather support :

To give you an idea of what we’ve been hard at work doing, we worked remotely with a professional from South Africa in creating an algorithm to match aid workers from different parts of the world. In partnership with Shana, we formulated guidelines, terms and conditions, coaching agreements, risk management strategies and other resources to give participants the best possible experience.

And now, after many months of hard work, we are pleased to announce that we are ready to accept registration for our pilot program.

We have already contacted those who signed up on our original expression of interest survey back in February and if they contact us in time, they will get priority. But in total, for our pilot program, there are only 400 spots available. That’s right, only 400.

How will the Pilot Program work?

We will gather information about you and what your expectations of peer coaching are. Once registration is complete, we will start to match peer coaches together. We will have a bunch of resources to give you including a Peer Coaching Agreement that you and your peer will complete. This will be used as a contract between peer coaches to negotiate and make clear expectations.

Throughout the program, we will be monitoring your peer coaching relationship and checking in on you to see what is and isn’t working.

After a period of four months, we will end the pilot and re-evaluate how it all went down. This will help us to develop the program in full for next year.

If you are one of the first 400 people who manage to sign up to enter our program, you will receive a full pack of resources detailing further how peer coaching will work.

The cost of the pilot program is 100% free. All that we ask is that you work with us to help us to improve what we are trying to achieve. This means participating in evaluation activities, such as a post-program survey so we know what went well and what didn’t.

So what are you waiting for? Sign up here!

The results of the participatory survey can be found below. The impact of this project is as follows: 2,000 aid workers impacted; seven phrases changed; 530+ responses to the survey and a few feathers ruffled. We estimate that 2% of participants took this too seriously and at least three participants corrected our grammar and syntax errors. We also managed to offend at least one person, the ‘Director of Strategy and Capacity Building’ of unnamed organisation (who contacted us during the week on LinkedIn) twice in one fell swoop.

‘In the field’ NOW ‘Visiting projects/On a work trip’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• Drinking lots of Tusker
• In denial that 3G is better in the project community than it is at NGO HQ
• Actually explain what you’re doing – are you meeting with partners, dancing around to Katy Perry – what?
• In {specific location}
• Making sure you are connected to the realities on the ground
• Doing actual work

‘Beneficiaries’ NOW ‘People’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• ???
• Partners
• Users
• I think beneficiaries is fine. If the don’t need it, then they shouldn’t be targeted, and if they’re not benefiting, then why are they receiving it?
• Citizens
• Recievers of aid?
• Clients

‘Developing countries’ NOW ‘Referring to specific countries’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• Less-developed regions? post-colonial countries? There is nothing so wrong with ‘developing countries’ even though the term is not so accurate.
• Resource-limited settings?
• Poor countries; some of them are NOT developing.
• Developing countries

‘Capacity Building’ NOW ‘Other/Trainings’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• Pumping up the volume
• Capacity building is beyond training; it should entail regular supervision, mentoring, coaching – like apprentenceship (sp)
• You can use it. But only when you are are actually giving teaching new skills
• Figuring out why implementation isn’t working
• Use real definition or qualifier, like institutional capacity building or organizational capacity development
• Consulting
• None, it’s actually a good term
• Nothing wrong with capacity building if it’s being done correctly
• Dnt knw, just not cap building!
• Just use it right!
• Kicking asses
• Nothing
• Capacity building is good – your critique is of CB done badly
• You say here to use trainings, however, then later you say the word “training” is a stupid buzz word. make up your mind!

‘Livelihoods’ NOW ‘Creating/building jobs or Employment’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• The problem is that so much income earning in…the majority world, is informal. So you can say to create employment, but is selling plastic buckets in the market + farming + fixing cell phones employment? or maybe it IS a livelihood.
• All of the above. Be specific. Is it subsistence agriculture. Is it market development. Or is it a cover-up of a grab-bag project with no clear goal.
• Not really replaceable
• Livelihoods (food, water..then jobs!)
• Whatever it is, as long as we’re not qualifying it with a moral framework ala ILO: ‘decent’ employment (what makes it decent? what’s ‘indecent’ work?)
• Samsara
• Having enough money
• All of above!

‘Local’ NOW ‘Using the proper identity of people’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• Dudes over there
• Citizens
• This is so linked into issues of identity – it’s best that you use whatever term people refer to themselves as.
• Natives

‘Trainings’ NOW ‘Workshop’

A snapshot of the “Other” responses:

• “Lecture” if that’s really all it is; “workshop” if applicable
• Uh, say the actual goal of the training, on the assumption that there is some clear goal for getting everyone together.
• Training sessions (how can you list capacity building here as an alternative and also have this on your list of words to change? Also, trainings is not a word, you should use training sessions or equivalent)
• Training is fine surely if a topic is used, ie Goat Management Training, Agribusiness Training, otherwise workshop infers active participation. Name it for what it involves.
• Trainings is NOT a word. It’s a verbal noun so should never be plural – but this is used everywhere. It should be either “training” as a general notion, or “training sessions”/”workshop”. Workshop/discussion are good because they suggest it’s a 2-way process…

The findings of this research demonstrate that we should start using Visiting Projects, People, Referring to specific countries, Creating/building jobs, Using the proper identity of people, and Workshop. And, there is also some evidence that we should stop using “capacity building” altogether. Although there is no clear alternative offered, “pumping up the volume” must be considered on creativity alone.

What do you think? Are you happy with the new buzzwords we have created (using a participatory approach)?

Every sector, discipline and tribe develops its own language, its own secret code that only those in the know can understand. Law, medicine, air traffic controllers, the lyrics of Katy Perry, ‘The Wire’. The aid and development sector is not immune, and a cursory glance at the acronym page of any report can feel overwhelming. If Scrabble allowed acronyms, aid workers would probably win every time. IMF, FAO, ILO, WTO, IAEA, UPU, UNWTO, WMO, WIPO. You couldn’t be blamed if you thought LMFAO was actually an international development agency whose tagline is ‘I’m sexy and I know it‘. Indeed, Land Management and Financial Agricultural Organization (trademark) sounds quite legitimate.

But, the lexicon of aid and development goes well beyond acronyms. Bill Easterly, whose own name is probably part of this lexicon, did a sampling through Twitter of decoding aid and development jargon. The ‘AidSpeak Dictionary‘, while very funny and tongue-in-cheek, is also quite poignant and close to the heart. For example, Ed Carr (otherwise known as EC in development circles), defined ‘participation’ as “the right to agree with preconceived projects or programs”. We are all very familiar with these terms, often saying them using the hand quotations gesture, a roll of the eyes and a knowing smile when speaking to friends, but at the same time, using them quite seriously when writing proposals, concept notes and reports. Are there alternatives?

Here, we list the 9 development phrases that we particularly hate, and open suggestions for a new lexicon. Voting for new suggestions can be done in a Google Docs Drive form at the very bottom of this post. We want your suggestions to help destroy these old, meaningless buzzwords and help to create a shiny set of new, meaningless buzzwords. Without further ado – let’s get proactive!

1. In the field

How it is used.

“Sorry, I can’t Skype that day. I’ll be in the field and internet connectivity is notoriously bad.”

Why we hate it.

“In the field” seems to suggest that there is some important dichotomy to what you do in country versus out of country. Or even what you do in the headquarters in the city, versus what you do out in the project sites. The reality is that the dichotomy is at best, fuzzy.

It also romanticises the nature of visits to projects. It makes aid and development workers sound like explorers, or more accurately, Indiana Jones. There’s nothing romantic or adventurous about staying in hotels, using their wifi, and being driven around in a 4WD.

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• Visiting projects
• Suffering from per diemitis
• Out of the office
• On a work trip

Indy was understandably perturbed that the hotel was charging $5 an hour to use their wifi.

2. Beneficiaries

How it is used.

“Aid and development, as it stands, involves a triangular relationship between the donor, the NGO and, for lack of a better word, beneficiaries.” WhyDev, 2012.

Why we hate it.

It’s passive. It’s reductive. It’s patronising.

Sure, working in aid and development is about improving the lives of those in need. And sure, they receive a benefit. But labeling them as beneficiaries seems to suggest that that is all that they do. Put a hand out and have their lives improved.

Thinking of people this way completely ignores the agency that they have in creating positive change for themselves. It also sounds like ‘fisheries’, which is ironic, considering the similar relationship between donors and beneficiaries and that of fishermen and fisheries. ”Give a donor one project, and feed him benefisheries for one day. Teach a donor to scale-up, and you will feed him benefisheries for a life time”.

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• People
• Contributors
• People aid/development is targeting

3. Developing countries

How it is used.

Wikipedia.

Why we hate it.

Thinking of countries as developing is far too simplistic. It puts them on a scale from “less developed” to “more developed”, where the ultimate goal is to be closer to our end of the scale, and further from theirs. And trust us, being closer to this end means being more like the Kardashians. No one wants that.

By the way we also hate Global South, poor countries, and Third World.

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• Majority world
• Referring to specific countries
• Using terms that have clear parameters and meanings, such as ‘Least Developed Countries’
• Just don’t generalise, ever

4. Capacity building

How it is used.

“Build staff capacity on community based development approaches!” – Community Mobilisation Advisor job vacancy.

Why we hate it.

It’s extremely misleading. As Makarand Sahasrabuddhe said: “Many a time capacity building is just a euphemism for cramming 30 people in a room for a few days and trying to kill them with power-points and flipcharts and group work (that also takes care of the ‘participation’).”

Generally, we think people who use the term “capacity building” with a straight face should be crammed into a room for a few days and killed with really on-the-money Makarand Sahasrabuddhe quotes. That will sort them out.

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• Asking important questions
• Listening sessions
• Trainings

5. Livelihoods

How it is used.

The Livelihoods Development (LD) programme carries out field projects and related support activities that develop sustainable livelihoods and reduce poverty using bamboo and rattan in order to help support the achievement of national and regional development objectives. (That must be some crazy-ass bamboo and rattan!)

Why we hate it.

According to Samuel Johnson’s greatest invention, Google, the definition of livelihoods is: “A means of securing the necessities of life”. In the general development context though, livelihoods is (possibly incorrectly) used to describe a way of helping people to generate income. The problem with the word livelihoods is that it has overtones of subsistence. It hints that poor people should only have enough just to live – not to thrive. As Kate Magro says: “Why is it that Westerners have careers, jobs, employment opportunities and everyone else has a livelihood?”

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• Creating/building jobs
• Thrivelihoods
• Work
• Jobs
• Employment

6. On Mission

How it is used.

“Can you take some time out for a coffee that afternoon or are you on mission?”

Why we hate it.

Like “in the field”, “on mission” has some nasty undertones associated it with it that make you think that the phrase belongs in some leathery old hardcover book, not in the 21st Century. Apart from having that delightful Morricone song in our heads whenever someone says they are “on mission”, we also picture a bearded Robert De Niro leaping out of a misty forest, unsheathing his foil from his scabbard.

Mr De Niro had a long and illustrious career with Engineers Without Borders, before turning to Hollywood.

Taking our cues from Mr. De Niro above, we’d like to take a wild stab in the dark and guess that the phrase “on mission” originally derives from the word: missionaries. So, not exactly a great look for the modern-day development worker then.

New suggestions.

• See: “in the field”.

7. Local

How it is used.

We refer to ‘local’ when describing someone or something as different from ourselves. ‘Local people’ are the Other. The exotic. They live in ‘developing countries’, need aid and development through livelihood, education and health programs and generally make poor life choices. And, they usually live in poverty.

“During the occupation, western governments and development agencies have failed to invest enough in local people to enable them to earn lasting livelihoods” (Financial Times, 30 July 2012)

Why we hate it.

It is indicative of the discourse generally when we talk about development issues and people in other countries. In countries like Australia, U.S. and Canada (see, it’s easy – we referred to three individual countries and didn’t say ‘Western’) ‘local’ has come to be associated with terms like organic, healthy, sustainable. We have new words like ‘locavore‘. If we use this term ‘locavore’ in a development context, does it refer to foreign aid workers who only eat locally produced food or locally produced people? Better yet, most ‘local people’ can be considered locavores, because they only eat food that is locally produced. In the development context, ‘local’ is not associated with these same terms. It infers ‘colour’, distance and lack of capability. But, again, like many of these terms, it is reductive and generalised and gives no respect to diversity, identity or power relationships. Who are ‘local people’ in Ghana? Who are ‘local people’ in Cambodia? Bugger if we know.

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• National/s
• Use the proper identity of the people you are referring to

8. Strategic

How it is used.

“We have developed a strategy to strategically engage key stakeholders in a participatory process for our strategic plan. I used ‘strategically’ enough in that sentence to show how seriously we’re taking this, right?”

Why we hate it.

It’s overused to the point of having lost any meaning it once had.

New suggestions.

None. It doesn’t require a replacement. Let’s just assume that whenever we’re creating a plan, working on a project, or engaging stakeholders, we’re doing so in a thoughtful, intelligent way, and we don’t need to explicitly say so by tacking a “strategic” onto the activity.

9. Trainings

How it is used.

“I’m on mission this week in the field to delivery some strategic trainings to some local people.”

Why we hate it.

Trainings seems to suggest a one way flow of ideas and information. Party A trains Party B. If they’re lucky, Party A might learn something new, such as how to say: “Where is the bathroom?” in another language.

But in reality, trainings don’t occur this way (or at least they shouldn’t). One of the most satisfying things about continually doing these activities is that you learn something new every time you do them.

Point in case: One of us (Weh) conducted two similar “trainings” on barriers that people with disabilities commonly face – one in China, another in Cambodia. Whereas the Chinese participants tended to identify physical barriers such as lack of ramps and rails as most disabling, people in Cambodia identified discrimination as the major barrier that people with disabilities faced there. A wonderful opportunity for the “trainer” to learn from the “trainee”.

New suggestions (vote at the end of this post).

• Workshop (we know this is used sometimes, but could be used more)
• Discussion
• Information exchange (or infochange)
• Capacity building

Tell us below – how would you shape the language of development so that it didn’t drive you crazy? What other development buzzwords get up your nose? Let us know in the comments!

(after filling in the survey below you will have a chance to view previous responses so far)

Update 19th September, 2012

Be sure to check out the latest results to the survey in our next post here. The findings may shock you.

In the romance stakes, aid workers often get a bad rap. In fact, recently over at On Motherhood and Sanity, we heard about 52 reasons why you shouldn’t date an aid worker. We love that site, but respectfully, we disagree (yep, clearly not breaking any of the stereotypes outlined). Here’s why:

1. You will never have to suffer through a song by Bono or Madonna in their presence. After all, irrespective of their successful hits, “what do they know about development?”

2. They’re good at bargaining, and always pay close to local price.

3. They know how to fix a bicycle, using only a toothpick, some dental floss and a few small twigs.

4. They’ll be able to tell you the exchange rate in any country, down to the nearest cent.

5. In a crisis, they are seemingly unflappable, even if they’re melting down inside.

6. Impressive gut bacterial flora.

7. They’ll have an plentiful supply of cassava, chia seeds or any other obscure super-foods that you can tap into.

8. They’ll never complain about a hard mattress, a non-fluffy pillow or a cold shower (though you might have to suffer through a story about a harder mattress, less fluffy pillow or a positively arctic shower from years ago).

9. They know how much it should cost to take a taxi from the airport, even if they haven’t been to that country before.

10. They can quote lines from Hotel Rwanda.

11. They’re okay with using squat toilets – in fact, they may even tell you how it’s better for you because it elongates your bowel.

12. They make good +1′s to weddings, birthdays and open house parties. Impress your friends.

13. You will not have to indulge your own sense of guilt at social injustice and global inequalities, as they will take the whole burden on their own shoulders.

14. Smugness doesn’t come easier than when dating an aid worker.

15. Use ‘Moral Credits’ gained from dating an aid worker to offset the morally hazardous aspects of your life.

16. No, you do not have to give a beggar change. Although, there is evidence demonstrating the positive effects of non-conditional cash transfers, it may not have any robust effect on long-term earnings or savings.

17. Never feel like you need to donate clothing to charity again!

18. You’ll have reason to visit all kinds of exotic destinations around the world, places you would have never visited (and perhaps never wanted to…).

19. Get perspective on your cold/sprained ankle/other injury or ailment – hey, it’s not malaria!

20. Your mother will love the fact that you’re dating someone so caring.

21. They will be able to pack a suitcase or backpack as effectively as Mary Poppins.

22. They will be perfectly content if you skimp out on their birthday and take them to the local hole-in-the-wall place, because it serves “real Pho”.

23. They’ll know how to stream obscure interstate cricket matches/American football games/curling bonspiels via your PC.

24. If they are male (and sometimes even if it isn’t), they’ll have an uncanny knack for growing impressive beards. As the band “The Beards” suggests, You Should Consider Having Sex With a Bearded Man

25. They won’t know who Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry or any others on the Billboard charts are, being so out of touch with pop culture “back home”.

26. They know how to use Seatguru to find the safest and best seat on any plane, in case of an emergency.

27. They actually enjoy candle-lit homes, although this is double-edged, as it may take away the romance aspect of candles.

28. Your belief in democracy will be restored, as you will come to appreciate the significance of being able to vote for one of two parties.

29. They’ll know the one spot in any airport where you can find unlocked wifi.

30. Spending too much time on social media and blogs is better than spending nights at some club with that work colleague (“She’s just a friend!”).

31. They’ll have done yoga at some stage – flexibility is good, right?

32. They’ll have a camera on them at all times.

33. They’ll be the first to know about breaking news around the world. “Hmmm, I hope those folk in Galle, Sri Lanka, will be okay after that tsunami..”.

34. They won’t be easily sold by Fair Trade, Carbon Neutral businesses, or any other seemingly quick-fix solutions.

35. They know how to troubleshoot your SMTP settings on Outlook, so you can actually send emails from outside your home network.

36. She’ll know how to wax her legs using candlewax and foolscap paper (although more likely is that she doesn’t wax at all).

37. They’ll be able to track down Vegemite, Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups, or any other geo-centric snacks, no matter where you are in the world.

38. As they view material possessions as unnecessary and nothing more than a nuisance when moving, you will never have to give them any kind of gifts.

39. You’ll feel better about what you earn in your job.

40. Your son/daughter will become their school’s Model UN President (and work to bring about democratic changes to the Model UN from a bottom-up approach).

41. Have you ever wanted to see bureaucracy at a household level? Yes? Date an aid worker and see that everything is accounted for.

42. Your children will be empowered through a Family Micro-loans and Savings scheme, rather than the orthodox Weekly Allowance scheme, which creates dependency and has shown to only promote sugar highs.

43. Your friends will think you’re going out with someone with the flair and mystery of Indiana Jones, when in actual fact you’re going out with someone closer to Michael Cera.

Michael Cera and Indiana Jones

44. They will never, under any circumstances, inflict Kony 2012 on you.

45. They will be able to seduce you with that most romantic of languages, Bahasa Indonesia. “Saya cinta kamu”. Ah. It warms the heart.

46. You’ll never have to worry about what they look like when they’re not “dolled up”, because chances are, they looked their roughest when you first met them.

47. They are able to use the phrase “I’m going to a networking event” with a straight face.

48. You will get to participate in your first “tweetup” w/ #globaldev wonks in NYC. #smartaid #1milliontshirts #whatonearthisatweetup?

49. You will beat out celebrities to the next batch of exotic and trending baby names.

50. They wouldn’t be caught dead in Crocs.

51. They’ll know how to speak English to anyone, regardless of where they’re from. For example, they’ll say “seeya this arvo” to an Aussie, “Oh! Master, I beg you. I want to doze small small” to a Ghanaian and “why the hell do you call that hat a toque, eh?” to a Canadian.

52. If you end up getting married and your wedding is being paid for by either of your parents….well, let’s just say that aid workers know how to schmooze donors.

And, if you ever need to break up with an aid worker, just remember, there are 50 ways to leave your lover.

Over to you now – can you think of any more reasons why aid workers are date-worthy? Please let us know in the comments.

You can also follow Allison Smith, Brendan Rigby and Weh Yeoh on Twitter for more dating advice.