I never really wanted a cell phone, but at 17, Christmas came with a cell phone from my Dad. My friends rejoiced, welcoming my long-overdue entrance to the 21st century. I was only grateful because I knew that no one could snoop on my phone calls anymore, as they did when I used the landline in the kitchen. The truth was, as a teen in the throes of adolescent angst, I wasn’t particularly excited about the idea of further enabling people to reach me whenever I crossed their mind.
My lack of enthusiasm for cell phones never really evolved over the years. My friends all know that I’m not the type to call or text “just to chat.” I’ve also lost more cell phones than I care to count, because I don’t value them. The only job from which I’ve ever been fired was the one where my boss bought me a Blackberry so that she could reach out to me 24/7 – and I just couldn’t adjust to the lack of quiet time, leisure time and time to just “be.” I actually resisted getting a Smartphone until just last year, not because I could continuously access my email, but rather so I could read the news on the Subway (ok, and also play Angry Birds).
I’ve often had the thought that, ironically, cell phones support more antisocial behavior than what is more natural to humanity – a genuine desire to connect to others on a meaningful level. It’s rare that I’m in a meeting, or out to dinner, or in a theater, when time spent with friends isn’t interrupted by an incoming call or message that ensures we will never be completely present to each other. The quality of our relationship is compromised, as is the quality of communication that lacks eye contact, giving way to high-tech, low level dialogue that seems to thwart maturity and interpersonal growth.
Its easy, then, to find humor in the fact that I’m working for a company that develops mobile technology. Even more ironic: one of my primary roles in the company is marketing. Essentially, my job is to convince businesses, governments and nonprofits alike that they should reach out to their customers in the bottom of the pyramid in a way I would never like to be contacted – through the mobile phone.
My work is part of a movement known as Mobile for Development (M4D), embodied in an annual conference that I attended this year, both as a participant and presenter. Practitioners from over 30 countries gathered to share their insights on the role of mobile phones in health, education, agriculture, financial services, governance and livelihoods. There were over 50 presentations about the various ways that mobile phones are changing the face of development. Text to Change, for example, demonstrated how text campaigns can improve the delivery of male circumcision for HIV Prevention Services. Eko, an Indian financial service company, discussed how they enable financial inclusion through mobile-based transactions. My presentation was especially exciting because I showed how voice technology enables mobile applications to reach the last-mile, promoting the most inclusive development.
The human voice is a universal asset that allows those without literacy to be included in the possibility of economic advancement through mobile applications. They simply have interactive dialogues through speech recognition (the same technology used by Siri on the iPhone). Multilingual speech recognition permits everyone to use these tools in their local languages. Using voice technology is also important in areas that lack connectivity, as people can still interact without a wifi connection. Voice biometric technology enables organizations to offer even more valuable services through the mobile phone, allowing them to not only access information, but also conduct transactions, whether it be a loan payment, ordering an agricultural input, or purchasing medicine. My company is the only provider of multilingual speech recognition and voice biometrics in India, so it’s important to participate in these conferences to get the word out and partner with all kinds of players trying to include the poor in their business models.
The businesswoman in me recognizes that using mobile phones is the most efficient way to leapfrog poor infrastructure, as well as literacy, language and connectivity issues. Since mobile penetration has reached such high levels in the developing world, it makes sense to tap into this pre-existing supply chain and deliver products and services to people directly through their phones. Many of us are familiar with the challenges faced by many pregnant women in the developing world, who in so many cases, have to walk miles and miles, sometimes while they are in labor, for assistance in a delivery that could end in the death of both mother and child. Mobile phones can aid a life-threatening situation through telemedicine, allowing the expectant mother to communicate in her native language with a medical information portal that can deliver relevant information specific to her health profile. Opportunities such as these are vast.
But the social worker in me is much more hesitant to embrace mobile phones for development. In my training at Columbia University School of Social Work, I learned so much more about the status of my clients through their expressions and body language than I did their words. In fact, a UCLA study showed that 93% of communication effectiveness is determined by nonverbal cues. When I started studying different facial expressions, eye contact, posture, hand and feet movements, body placement, and walking styles, I became much more effective in my work. My clients would often tell me things that were incongruous with their body language. The more I attended to nonverbal cues, the more effectively I was able to assist my client.
And so I worry that the use of cell phones enables people to mask their feelings and reactions through more calculated verbal or written communications. In spaces like mobile health and mobile education, I fear that without the human connection to a doctor or a teacher who can holistically communicate through verbal and nonverbal modes, genuine care and learning won’t take place. The nuances of emotion and relationships can be lost in mobile communication. From a wider perspective, I also have trepidations that a one-dimensional push for greater use of mobile development programs may increase the dependency on these methods in poorer countries, further de-motivating governments from building roads and developing remote areas with proper public services. This would translate to poor people continuously receiving services through mobile technology, while others receive services in centers where compassionate professionals can offer help. In the long run, could this augment the divide between urban and rural areas, and between the rich and the poor?
My goal in coming to India was to participate directly in social enterprise and learn, from a practitioner’s perspective, what works and what doesn’t on the ground. I was hoping to gain some clarity from insights on the front-line that I could eventually use to inform better policy-making. And while I’ve learned a lot, my work has perhaps brought more ambiguity than certainty. Should we be using mobile for development? To what extent? In what industries? And what will the long term consequences be?
On a personal level, at least, I’ve come to embrace cell phones a little more. In a city like Chennai that uses what I’ve termed the ‘anything-but-a-grid’ method of city planning, I’d love to have a phone with a map. And because the infrastructure is not in place to get anything done quickly – like going grocery shopping, visiting the doctor, etc. – it would be nice if I could accelerate those processes with my mobile phone. Yet, even here in India, I still find people who are reliant on text messaging for relationship building and suffer chronic distraction from true intimacy because they can’t turn off the technology for even ten minutes.
Professionally, I’ve had a front row seat to the progress made possible through mobile phones: a man opening his first bank account, a woman getting previously inaccessible medical advice, and a farmer having access to information about weather conditions for the first time. I also know that a 1% increase in telecommunications penetration in India leads to a 0.03% increase in its GDP. Mobiles do contribute to growth, but growth is not always indicative of development, which is a much more difficult end to achieve. We cannot simply throw these high-tech solutions at villages and expect development. The success of mobile phones will be determined by the human skills implementing them. We must work intimately with the end user to train them on using these new tools and provide relevant content in accessible and useful forms, that is responsive to their needs and communications styles. I’m proud to be here using my social work skills to work towards this end, helping to create technologies with which the poor can be most comfortable, and that genuinely enhance their standard of living. But I tread carefully, wary of the fact that the mobile phone is a tool, but not a panacea, for genuine poverty alleviation in India.








































