Civil Society Organisations

and Policy Entrepreneurship

Enrique Mendizabal Overseas Development Institute, London

Workshop Objectives

a) Share experiences about CSO-policy context in

African CEF partners;

b) Learn about the latest worldwide research and

practice in this area;

c) Share experiences about approaches to

influence policy and what works;

d) Start to develop strategies to improve policy

impact.

Outline of the Workshop

Day 1

• General Introductions

Day 2

• Tools

Day 3

• Tools and field trip

Day4

• Develop a strategy

Day 5

• Knowledge management

Any questions about the plan?

Self Introductions

2 minutes!

• Name

• Organization / Area of Work

• What do you want to get out of this workshop?

Plenary discussion:

1. What are the main opportunities and

challenges

a) Regarding CSO-policy links? (in general)

b) Affecting the policy impact of your work?

1. Individually, think about 3 opportunities

and 3 challenges (5 minutes)

2. Then in groups identify the 5 most

important opportunities and the 5 most

important challenges (30 minutes)

3. Feed-back to plenary (25 minutes)

CSOs, Evidence and Policy

Processes

Next steps:

• Definitions

• Theory

• Reality

• (Then we‟ll discuss what issues matter)

A word of warning…

• The world is complex

• We do not aim to make it simple

• Only to find recognisable patterns or beacons

• Which might guide your actions

• There is NO blueprint. NO linear, logical, rational, proper, method.

• Most of the time it is up to you.

… A word of warning

• You will probably never find out what goes

on within the policy process

• And not have all the evidence you need

• You need to be confident to act even in a

context of uncertainty

• And be systematic and scientific (context,

strategy, action, record, learn) but flexible

and original

Overseas Development Institute• Britain‟s leading development Think

Tank

• £8m, 60 researchers

• Research / Advice / Public Debate

• Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty &

Aid / Economics (HIV, Human

rights, Water)

• DFID, Parliament, WB, EC

• Civil Society

For more information see: www.odi.org.uk

RAPID Programme

• Research

• Advisory work

• Policy change projects

• Workshops and seminars

• Civil Society Programme

www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Civil Society Partnerships Programme

Outcomes:

• CSOs better understanding evidence-policy

process

• Capacity to support CSOs established

• Improved information for CSOs

• Global collaboration

Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs

in development policy processes

http://www.odi.org.uk/cspp/

CSOs and Pro-poor Policy Influence

• Complementing state in providing services

• Innovators in service delivery

• Advocates with and for the poor

• Identifying problems & solutions

• Extending our understanding

• Providing information

• Training and capacity building

The Opportunity

• The results of household disease surveys informed processes of health service reform which contributed to a 43 and 46 per cent reduction in infant mortality between 2000 and 2003 in two districts in rural Tanzania.

– TEHIP Project

HIV Prevalence in Thailand, Uganda &

KwaZulu-Natal: 1990-2000

0%

6%

12%

18%

24%

30%

36%

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

HIV

Pre

vale

nce

Thailand Kampala, Uganda KwaZulu Natal, South AfricaSource: UNAIDS

When it Works: Attitudes to HIV

“on the education sector it is evident that the project has institutionalised a new attitude towards HIV/AIDS education in primary schools ….

Teachers' and pupils' knowledge, attitudes and behaviours have also changed.

Primary School Action for Better Health Project in Kenya (PSABH)

www.odi.org.uk/rapid/Lessons/Case_studies/PSABH.html

When it works best: Aid and Debt

“all the contributors emphasise the importance of researchers forming alliances with civil society.”

- Court and Maxwell, JID Special Issue

Context• Democratization and liberalization.

• In some countries, move from challenging state to policy engagement.

• CSOs increasingly involved in policy processes (from focus on service delivery).

• CSO accountability and legitimacy of CSO involvement is questioned.

• Challenge of engaging in a way that does justice to the evidence.

• Southern research capacity has been denuded.

• CSOs, researchers and policymakers seem to live in parallel universes.

CSOs: Definitions and Functions• Definition: “organizations that work in an arena

between the household, the private sector and the

state to negotiate matters of public concern”.

• Functions:

– representation

– technical inputs and advocacy

– capacity-building

– service-delivery

– social functions

Types of CSOs• think tanks and research institutes

• professional associations

• human rights advocacy bodies and other promotional groups

• foundations and other philanthropic bodies

• trade unions and workers co-operatives

• media/journalist societies

• community based organizations

• faith based organizations

• cross-national policy dialogue groups

Definitions• Research: “any systematic effort to increase the

stock of knowledge”

• Evidence: the result/output of the research process

• Policy: a “purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors”

– Agendas / policy horizons

– Official statements documents

– Patterns of spending

– Implementation processes

– Activities on the ground

Evaluate the results

The linear logical policy model…

Identify the problem

Commission research

Analyse the results

Choose the best option

Establish the policy

Implement the policy

Generic Policy Processes

1. Problem Definition/

Agenda Setting

2. Constructing the Policy

Alternatives/ Policy Formulation

3.Choice of Solution/

Selection of Preferred Policy Option

4. Policy Design

5. Policy Implementation

and Monitoring

6. Evaluation

The Policy Cycle

in reality…• “The whole life of policy is a chaos of purposes and

accidents. It is not at all a matter of the rational implementation of the so-called decisions through selected strategies.” 1

• “Most policy research on African agriculture is irrelevant to agricultural and overall economic policy in Africa.” 2

• “CSOs often have very little to bring to the policy table.” 3

• “CSOs, researchers and policymakers seem to live in parallel universes.” 4

1 – Clay & Schaffer (1984)2 – Omamo (2003)3 – CSPP Consultations4 – ODI-AFREPREN Workshop

Agenda

setting

Problem

definition

& analysis

Policy

tools

Selection

Implementation Enforcement Policy

evaluation

Public

Scientists

Industry

CSOs

MediaGovernment

Source: Yael Parag

Policy

Tools

selectionMinistry

of Finance

NGOs

Scientists

Industry

Stage outcomes may be:

Direct regulation (strict or moderate)

Economic incentives

Information to the public

Voluntary agreement

Ministry

of

Environment

Ministry

of Industry

& Trade

Source: Yael Parag

CSOs and Policy: Existing theory1. Linear model

2. Too close for comfort, Edwards

3. Impact & Effectiveness, Fowler

4. „Context, evidence, links‟, RAPID

5. Policy narratives, Roe

6. CSO legitimacy, L. David Brown

7. Links and Learning, Gaventa

8. „Room for manoeuvre‟, Clay & Schaffer

9. „Street level bureaucrats‟, Lipsky

10. Policy as experiments, Rondinelli

11. Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon

12. Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist

13. Tipping point model, Gladwell

14. Mercenaries, missionaries and revolutionaries , Malena

15. „Non-Western?‟, Lewis

16. Global Civil Society, Salamon, Kaldor

17. Types of Engagement, Coston

18. Linear model of communication, Shannon

19. „Space‟ for thought & action, Howell

20. Simple and surprising stories, Communication Theory

21. Provide solutions, Marketing Theory I

22. Find the right packaging, Marketing II

23. Global Civil Society?, Keane

24. Global Legitimacy, van Rooy

25. Epistemic communities, Haas

26. Policy entrepreneurs, Najam

27. Advocacy coalitions, Keck & Sikkink

28. Negotiation through networks, Sabattier

29. Social capital, Coleman

30. Accountability, OneWorld Trust

31. Communication for social change, Rockefeller Foundation

32. Wheels and webs, Chapman & Fisher

www.odi.org.uk/rapid/lessons/theory

X

Existing theory – a short list• Civil Society, Edwards

• Types of Engagment, Coston

• Legitimacy, L. David Brown / van Rooy

• „Street level bureaucrats‟, Lipsky

• Global Civil Society, Keane / Kaldor / Salamon

• Policy streams and policy windows, Kingdon

• Disjointed Incrementalism, Lindblom

• Social Epidemics, Gladwell

• CSOs & Policy Processes

Key factors for CSO influence (Malawi)

Opposing

• Lack of capacity

• Lack of local ownership

• Translating data into evidence

• Lack of data

• Donor influence

• Crises

• Political factors

Supporting

• Evidence of the value of CSO involvement

• Governments becoming more interested in CSOs

• CSOs are gaining confidence

• Strength of networks

• The media

• Political factors

Any questions?

Policy life is complex. What

issues matter? The RAPID

Framework

A word of warning…

• The world is complex

• We do not aim to make it simple

• Only to find recognisable patterns or beacons

• Which might guide your actions

• There is NO blueprint. NO linear, logical, rational, proper, method.

• Most of the time it is up to you.

… A word of warning

• You will probably never find out what goes

on within the policy process

• And not have all the evidence you need

• You need to be confident to act even in a

context of uncertainty

• And be systematic and scientific (context,

strategy, action, record, learn) but flexible

and original

The Analytical Framework

The political context –political and economic structures

and processes, culture, institutional

pressures, incremental vs radical

change etc.

The evidence – credibility, the

degree it challenges received

wisdom, research approaches

and methodology, simplicity of

the message, how it is packaged

etc

External Influences Socio-economic and

cultural influences,

donor policies etc

The links between policy

and research communities –

networks, relationships, power,

competing discourses, trust,

knowledge etc.

And allows useful comparisons1. Ideal model

e.g. ??

KnowledgeLinks

Contexts

2. Islands model

e.g. multilaterals

KnowledgeLinks

Contexts

3. Technocratic model

e.g. donors

KnowledgeLinks

Contexts

4. Ivory Tower model

e.g. Research institutes

Knowledge

Links

Contexts

Political Context: Key Areas

• The macro political context (democracy, governance, media freedom; academic freedom)

• The sector / issue process (Policy uptake = demand –contestation) [NB Demand: political and societal. Power.]

• How policymakers think (narratives & policy streams)

• Policy implementation and practice (bureaucracies, incentives, street level, room for manoeuvre, participatory approaches)

• Decisive moments in the policy process (policy processes, votes, policy windows and crises)

• Context is crucial, but you can maximize your chances

Evidence: Relevance and credibility

• Key factor – did it provide a solution to a

problem?

• Relevance:

– Topical relevance – What to do?

– Operational usefulness – How to do it? :

• Credibility:

– Research approach

– Of researcher > of evidence itself

• Strenuous advocacy efforts are often needed

• Communication

Links: Coalitions and Networks

• Feedback processes often prominent in

successful cases.

• Trust & legitimacy

• Networks:

– Epistemic communities

– Policy networks

– Advocacy coalitions

• The role of individuals: connectors, mavens and

salesmen

External Influence

• Big “incentives” can spur evidence-based policy – e.g. PRSP processes.

• And some interesting examples of donors trying new things re. supporting research

• But, we really don‟t know whether and how donors can best promote use of evidence in policymaking (credibility vs backlash)

• Any questions?

LUNCH

Key-note Speakers

• Zeferino Martins, Former Deputy Minister of

Education: On the needs and pressures of

policymaking

• HAI: On producing relevant and credible

research

• Questions?

Plenary discussion:

1. How can we change what we do to be more

useful for policymakers?

1. Individually, think about 3 things you (as

an individual) and 3 things your

organisation can do different (5 minutes)

2. Then in groups identify the 5 most

important things you and an organisation

can do different (30 minutes)

3. Feed-back to plenary (25 minutes)

Skills of (pro-poor) policy entrepreneurs

Storytellers

Engineers

Networkers

Fixers

Policy Entrepreneurship

Questionnaire • Rank responses

• Add scores

• Don’t worry about

specifics

End DAY 1

DAY 2

• Results of the Policy entrepreneurship

questionnaire

• Tools

– Identifying the problem and assessing the

context

>44 = Low

CEF Policy Entrepreneurs

<23 = V. High

<30 = High

Eduardo, Tome 38 36 35 41

Muzoora, Tom 42 23 38 47

Dyer, Kate 40 40 29 41

Vernyny, Francis 37 34 36 43

Karim-Sesay, Beatrice 40 36 31 43

Mokoto, John 30 39 40 41

Kamara, Sally 32 30 44 45

Baloma, Josue 36 38 35 41

Ogwai, Henry 37 36 36 41

Birungi, Teopista 44 26 36 40

Dunor, Abdou 34 35 33 48

Jarju, Nyakassi 41 30 31 43

Average 35 32 39 44

Comments

• Tendency to prefer “networking” and,

maybe, “story-telling”.

• Tendency to dislike “fixing”.

• One of you has a strong preference:

“networking” and a strong dislike: “fixing”

Compared with others…

Any questions?

Tools for Policy Influence

To Maximize ChancesYou need to:

• better understand how policy is made and options for policy entrepreneurship;

• use evidence more effectively in influencing policy-making processes;

• build stronger connections with other stakeholders;

• actively participate in policy networks

• communicate better.

Practical ToolsOverarching Tools

- The RAPID Framework

- Using the Framework

- The Entrepreneurship

Questionnaire

Context Assessment Tools- Stakeholder Analysis

- Forcefield Analysis

- Writeshops

- Policy Mapping

- Political Context MappingCommunication Tools- Communications Strategy

- SWOT analysis

- Message Design

- Making use of the media Research Tools- Case Studies

- Episode Studies

- Surveys

- Bibliometric Analysis

- Focus Group Discussion

Policy Influence Tools- Influence Mapping & Power Mapping

- Lobbying and Advocacy

- Campaigning: A Simple Guide

- Competency self-assessment

Policy Analysis: Methods and tools

– RAPID Framework

– Problem Situation Analysis (Tree Analysis)

– Stakeholder Analysis

– Policy Process Mapping

– Force field analysis

– Influence mapping

– SWOT analysis

Problem Tree Analysis• The first step is to discuss and

agree the problem or issue to be analysed.

• Next the group identify the causes of the focal problem –these become the roots – and then identify the consequences – which become the branches

• The heart of the exercise is the discussion, debate and dialogue that is generated as factors are arranged and re-arranged, often forming sub-dividing roots and branches

Stakeholder Analysis

• Clarify the policy change

objective

• Identify all the stakeholders

associated with this objective

• Organise the stakeholders in

the matrice according to

interest and power

• Develop strategy to engage

with different stakeholders

Keep

Satisfied

Engage

Closely and

Influence

Actively

Monitor

(minimum effort)Keep

Informed

High

Power

Low

Low HighInterest

Mapping Policy Processes

Agendas Formulation Implementation

Central

Government

Parliament

Bureaucrats

Civil Society

State

Government

Implementation

Civil Society

Political Context Assessment Tool

(e.g. from Middle East)

Interests

Extent of Interests of Policymakers

High Medium Low

Public Interests 1 3 6

Personal Interests 5 4 1

Special Interests 6 1 3

• The macro political context

• The sector / issue process

• Policy implementation and practice

• Decisive moments in the policy process

• How policymakers think

Force field Analysis

• Specific Change

• Identify Forces

• (Identify Priorities)

• (Develop Strategies)

SWOT Analysis

• What type of policy

influencing skills and

capacities do we have?

• In what areas have our staff

used them more effectively?

• Who are our strongest

allies?

• When have they worked

with us?

• Are there any windows of

opportunity?

• What can affect our ability to

influence policy?

Strengths Weaknesses

Opportunities Threats

•Skills and abilities

•Funding lines

•Commitment to positions

•Contacts and Partners

•Existing activities

•Other orgs relevant to the

issue

•Resources: financial,

technical, human

•Political and policy space

•Other groups or forces

Policy Process Workshops

• Looking at internal policy processes –

what works in DFID.

• Small, informal workshop with 7 staff.

• Participatory pair-wise ranking of

factors influencing the success of 8

policy processes.

• Worked quite well.

• In DFID - agendas and processes

rather than documents are key

How we‟re doing it in RAPID

• Clear Aim & Outputs

• Building credibility with research/action

• Employing the right staff & staff development

• Good internal systems (Mgt, Comms & KM)

• Programme approach:– Strategic opportunism

– Research / practical advice / stimulating debate

– Engagement with policy makers & practitioners

– Community of practice cf network

• Financial opportunism

How we advise: SMEPOL Egypt

• Policy Process Mapping

• RAPID Framework

• Stakeholder Analysis

• Force-Field Analysis

• SWOT

• Action Planning

• Evaluation & Adapting

The overall framework

• Identify the problem

• Understand the context

• Identify the audience(s)

• Develop a SMART Strategy

• Identify the message(s)

• Resources – staff, time, partners & $$

• Promotion – tools & activities

• Monitor, learn, adapt

How?

Who?

What?

Identifying the problem

• First win the fight over the problem

• Then fight for the solution

• Therefore the first thing we are going to do

is think about the problem:

– What is the problem?

– Why is it important that we address this

problem?

Problem Tree Analysis• The first step is to discuss and

agree the problem or issue to be analysed.

• Next the group identify the causes of the focal problem –these become the roots – and then identify the consequences – which become the branches

• The heart of the exercise is the discussion, debate and dialogue that is generated as factors are arranged and re-arranged, often forming sub-dividing roots and branches

Pick a policy issue to work on

for the rest of the workshop• Individually – that you / your organization

are working on or planning to work on. (OK to

join someone else.)

• Is there a theme a group is interested in?

• Discuss it with your neighbours?

• Keep your notes!!

Use Problem Tree analysis• Identify the problem you are working on

• Identify the roots (causes) of the problem

• Identify the branches (effects) of the

problem

•Answer:

•What is the problem?

•Why must we address this problem?

Plenary Discussion:

Tell each other about your Problem Tree

Analysis: think about:

•Mental image -reminder

•Actors, dates, numbers

Present each other‟s problem and reasons for

addressing it.

LUNCH

Understanding the context

• The RAPID Framework

• 28 Questions which explains how to use the

framework

An Analytical Framework

The political context –political and economic structures

and processes, culture, institutional

pressures, incremental vs radical

change etc.

The evidence – credibility, the

degree it challenges received

wisdom, research approaches

and methodology, simplicity of

the message, how it is packaged

etc

External Influences Socio-economic and

cultural influences,

donor policies etc

The links between policy

and research communities –

networks, relationships, power,

competing discourses, trust,

knowledge etc.

A Practical Framework

External Influences political context

evidencelinks

Campaigning,

Lobbying

Politics and

Policymaking

Media,

Advocacy,

Networking Research,

learning &

thinking

Scientific

information

exchange &

validation

Policy analysis, &

research

Using the framework

• The external environment: Who are the key actors? What is their agenda? How do they influence the political context?

• The political context: Is there political interest in change? Is there room for manoeuvre? How do they perceive the problem?

• The evidence: Is it there? Is it relevant? Is it practically useful? Are the concepts familiar or new? Does it need re-packaging?

• Links: Who are the key individuals? Are there existing networks to use? How best to transfer the information? The media? Campaigns?

Using the Framework

What CSOs need to do

What CSOs need to

know

What CSOs need to

do

How to do it

Political Context:

Evidence

Links

• Who are the policymakers?

• Is there demand for ideas?

• What is the policy process?

• What is the current theory?

• What are the narratives?

• How divergent is it?

• Who are the stakeholders?

• What networks exist?

• Who are the connectors,

mavens and salesmen?

• Get to know the policymakers.

• Identify friends and foes.

• Prepare for policy

opportunities.

• Look out for policy windows.

• Work with them – seek

commissions

• Strategic opportunism –

prepare for known events

+ resources for others

• Establish credibility

• Provide practical solutions

• Establish legitimacy.

• Present clear options

• Use familiar narratives.

• Build a reputation

• Action-research

• Pilot projects to generate

legitimacy

• Good communication

• Get to know the others

• Work through existing

networks.

• Build coalitions.

• Build new policy networks.

• Build partnerships.

• Identify key networkers,

mavens and salesmen.

• Use informal contacts

Example of application

• Animal Healthcare in Kenya :You could use

a time line of events…

• How PRSP came about:You could analyse

events that lead to a significant

development/change

Animal Health Care in Kenya

Why did a new approach spread rapidly in Northern Kenya?

Why despite 20 years of convincing evidence of the value of community-based animal health services provided by farmers themselves is it still illegal?

Animal Health Care in Kenya1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment → collapse.

­ Paravet projects emerge.

­ ITDG projects.

­ Privatisation.

­ ITDG Paravet network.

­ Rapid spread in North.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

­ Still not approved / passed!

Animal Health Kenya - Context1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.

­ Paravet projects emerge.

­ ITDG projects.

­ Privatisation.

­ ITDG Paravet network.

­ Rapid spread in North.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

­ Still not approved / passed!

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment

­ Privatisation

­ ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

Animal Health Kenya - Research1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.

­ Paravet projects emerge.

­ ITDG projects.

­ Privatisation.

­ ITDG Paravet network.

­ Rapid spread in North.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

­ Still not approved / passed!

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment

­ Privatisation

­ ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

ITDG projects – collaborative action research.

The Hubl Study

International Research

1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.

­ Paravet projects emerge.

­ ITDG projects.

­ Privatisation.

­ ITDG Paravet network.

­ Rapid spread in North.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

­ Still not approved / passed!

­ Professionalisation of Public Services.

­ Structural Adjustment

­ Privatisation

­ ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.

­ KVB letter (January 1998).

­ Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

ITDG projects – collaborative action research.

International Research

The Hubl StudyDr Kajume

Animal Health Kenya - Links

• Political stagnation, professional protectionism

• Practical evidence invisible to policy makers

• Powerful individuals, “professional” interests

• Timing

• A “Tipping Point”

• New champions

• Collaborative policy-research

Animal Health Kenya - Lessons

The PRSP Story…

• The WB & IMF “adopted” PRSPs at

the AGM in Sept. 1999 as the 1o

instrument for HIPIC II (and

subsequently for all loans)

• Why?

• What were the key factors?

• What role did “evidence” play in the

process?

PRSPs – Evidence• Long-term academic research informing new

focus on poverty, participation, ownership, aid

effectiveness etc

• Applied policy research:

– ESAF reviews

– HIPC review

– SPA Working Groups

– NGO research on debt

• Uganda‟s PEAP

PRSPs – Political Context• Widespread awareness of a “problem” with

international development policy in late 90s

• Failure of SAPs (and Asian financial crisis)

• Mounting public pressure for debt relief

• Stagnation of Comprehensive Development

Framework idea

• Diverging agendas (UK – Poverty, US –

Governance)

• WB/IMF Annual General Meeting, Sept 1999

PRSPs – Links• WB, IMF, SPA, Bilaterals, NGOs all involved

• Formal and informal networks

• “None of the players was more than two

handshakes away from any of the others”

• …or you could use Social Network Analysis

Any questions?

About the framework?

About the cases?

Group WorkUse the RAPID Framework to analyse

the key factors likely to affect the

policy influence of your work

(remember you will present each

other‟s work)

1. Go over all factors (pick the most relevant questions) –but do not worry if you do not finish

2. Answer:

1. How friendly is the policy context?

2. Do you have access to the right evidence?

3. Are there clear and strong links between evidence and policy?

4. How influential are the external forces?

Feedback and DiscussionGroups (a few key points):

What is the issue?

What factors matter?

Is the evidence credible?

Others:

Are the same issues important?

Do you find the evidence credible?

What is the present policy agenda?

Tomorrow

• We will begin with a field trip.

• You will use some of the questions and tools to collect information about the problems faced by the school/project and its context

• Use your „What to watch for‟ hand out as a guide, only.

• Ask questions, observe, take pictures if possible, make sketches, get quotes.

End of DAY 2

DAY 3

• Tools

– Identifying the forces for and against change

and developing the strategy

LUNCH

Developing a strategy

• This is when we decide what we are going

to do to try to bring about change.

Force field Analysis

• Specific Change

• Identify Forces

• Identify Priorities

• Develop Strategies

Force Field Analysis

• Think about:

– Who needs to change

– Who can support and who can resist change

• Do not confuse strength of force with importance

of force

• Look out for:

– VERY strong forces

– Priorities

– Nested FFA (you might have to re-think your problem)

Group work:• Use Force field analysis to identify key

issues and strategic objectives

• Feedback –highlighting examples

(remember you are telling each other‟s

strategies):

– Main forces for and against

– Overall strategic options

– Implications for problem analysis?

End of DAY 3

Optional session

• The lessons from the Civil Society

Partnerships Programme

– What have we learned in the last 18 months?

– What are the next steps?

– What do you think?

Civil Society Partnerships Programme

Outcomes:

• CSOs better understanding evidence-policy

process

• Capacity to support CSOs established

• Improved information for CSOs

• Global collaboration

Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs

in development policy processes

http://www.odi.org.uk/cspp/

Activities

• Principles of partnerships etc

• Mapping of CSO‟s and support organisations

• Regional Workshops

• Research, synthesis and toolkits

• Small-scale collaborations (internal)

• Small-scale collaborations (external)

• Identification of long-term partners

• Support (and capacity-building)

• Collaboration on global projects

Linking Evidence to Policy: Lessons Learnt

• Understanding Policy process means

understanding the politics

• Demand led vs Supply driven

• Credibility of CSOs is questioned

• Capacity to use and package research for

policy influence is limited

• Donor influence is huge

• Gradual erosion of research capacity in the

South

Establishing capacity

• Engagement with policymakers varies

• Varied level of capacity in the south• Retention and recruitment of qualified staff

• Role of research in development organization

• Lack of training opportunities

• More emphasis on policy advocacy

• Limited fund for research

• Strong Demand for support ( regional bias)

• Capacity of government institutions also in

question

Partnership for Capacity Development

• Equitable

• Long-term commitment

• Intellectual honesty

• Mutual Trust

• Ethical Principle of Partnership

• Contextual ( strong regional variation)

• Capacity is demanded not given!!

Key issues for Partnership

• ODI needs to change ( Org and Staff)

• Invest time and resource

• Partnership to accommodate diversity of

capacity

• Different modes of Partnerships ( research,

networking, advocacy)

Capacity Development in CSPP

• Building a knowledge base of orgs

• Responding directly to CD demand of

partners

• CSPP network

– Training ( Research methodology, policy

analysis, etc).

– Facilitating exchange of information and

knowledge ( Best Practice)

– Support institutional development

– Collaborative action research projects

DAY 4

• Communications and Developing a strategy

The overall framework

• Identify the problem

• Understand the context

• Identify the audience(s)

• Develop a SMART Strategy

• Identify the message(s)

• Resources – staff, time, partners & $$

• Promotion – tools & activities

• Monitor, learn, adapt

How?

Who?

What?

Communication Toolkit for

Researchers and CSOs• Why Communicate? (To inspire, inform and learn).

• African agriculture Researchers have failed identify the

problems facing policymakers ( Omamao 2003).

• Each stakeholder has different communication needs,

information is accessed by them differently, need research

results in different times and different formats (Mortimer et

al 2003).

• Communication capacity – is a long term process

• How to improve communication of research to

policymakers, to other researchers and the end users ( i.e

NGOs, CBOs, etc).

• Communication tools

Remember: What are the changes you

are trying to bring about?

• Use the problem tree or some other tool

to identify problems, impact of the

problem and root causes

• Specific, Measurable, Achievable,

Realistic, Time-Bound (SMART)

objectives

Remember: Why do you want to

make the changes?

• Why should things change (or what is the

evidence to support your case?)

• How to make sure that the evidence is

credible and „legitimate‟?

• The evidence : accurate, credible, well

researched, authoritative…

• What the target audience wants to hear....

Audience

• Who needs to make these changes?

• Who has the power?

• What is their stance on the issue?

• Who influences them?

• Identify targets and influence

(use stakeholder & context mapping tools)

Remember: Who are you working

together with?

1. Who do you need to work with?

2. Identify your „niche‟ (SWOT)

3. Stakeholder Mapping

4. Structures for collaborative working

5. Skills needed in teams

6. Benefits and pitfalls of collaborations

Message

• Why should things change (or what is the

evidence to support your case?)

• How to make sure that the evidence is

credible and „legitimate‟?

• What the target audience can hear....

frameworks of thought

• Language, content, packaging, and timing

Messenger (Promotion)

• How to access information and target?

• Who is a trusted and credible messenger?

• What is the most appropriate medium?

(campaigns, public mobilisation, formal and

informal lobbying) Piggybacking?

• How will you package your information?

• Role of the media?

Different Approaches

Issues: Persuasion

• Separate people from problem

• Focus on interests, not positions

• Invent options for mutual gain

• Insist on using objective criteria.

• Manage human emotion separately from

the practical problem

• Highlight the human need to feel heard,

understood, respected and valued.

Targeting: Writing Effective Policy Papers

Providing a solution to a policy problem

• Structural elements of a paper

– Problem description

– Policy options

– Conclusion

• Key issues: Problem oriented, targeted, multidisciplinary, applied, clear, jargon-free.

[Source: Young and Quinn, 2002]

Issues: Lobbying

• Be an authority on the subject

• Include all group in the work

• Be positive in your approach

• Be aware of the agenda and language on the government in power

• Identify and target politicians

• Time your input

• Use the Media to lobby

Networks

• Roles of Policy Networks

– Filtering

– Amplifying

– Investor / Provider

– Facilitator

– Convening

– Communities

• Policy Code Sharing

• Some networks net; some networks work.

Group work

1. In your country groups:

1. Write up a strategy brief detailing: problem,

context, audience, strategy, message and

messenger

2. Develop a presentation of your message

2. To the plenary:

1. Present your message

End of DAY 4

Optional session

• The ODI: Think tank of Research Centre

– What does the ODI do and how does it work?

– Is it a think tank or a research centre?

– What do you think?

Think Tanks or Policy

Research Institutions

Enrique Mendizabal Overseas Development Institute, London

• Think tanks

• The ODI

• Researcher profiles

Think tanks

– Or Policy Research Institutions play at least

one of these roles:

1. Advocacy – specific types of reform by

sector or political orientation

2. Independent Research – agnostic in

orientation and presentation

3. Consultancy – on a commissioned basis

Think Tanks

• Everyone says they are 2, when they are more likely 1 or 3.

• They influence policy at different stages of the policy process

– Advocacy: agenda setting, M&E

– Independent: agenda, analysis, options, evaluation

– Consultancy: options and implementation and Monitoring

Overseas Development Institute• Britain‟s leading development

Think Tank

• £8m, 60 researchers

• Research / Advice / Public Debate

• Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty & Aid / International Economics

• DFID, Parliament, WB, EC

• Civil SocietyFor more information see: www.odi.org.uk

RAPID Programme

• More or less what makes it a

TT/PRI

• Research

• Advisory work

• Workshops, seminars and

communicationswww.odi.org.uk/rapid

Researcher Profiles

• Two categories: Research Officer and Fellow

• Depends on the type of think tank you work in:

– Consultants

– Policy entrepreneurs

– Social entrepreneurs

– Academic researchers

– Capacity developers / trainers

Researcher Profiles

• Young generation –many new faces

• Many returning from short/mid term

placements in developing countries (e.g. via

the ODI Fellowship Scheme)

• Multicultural and Multinational (In RAPID,

for example, 6 nationalities among 9)

• Placements and secondments are not rare

Type of research work

• Some desk work (lots of emailing, debating and writing)

• But significant amount of field work. Work is done in the field and for country offices

• In the last 6 months I have not spent more than 3 weeks in London in between travels

• Networking is important (most jobs come from follow-ups)

• Increasing need for Programmatic work

Further Information / Resources

• ODI Working Papers

• Bridging Research

and Policy Book

• JID Special Issue

• Meeting Reports

• Tools for Impact

• www.odi.org.uk/

• www.odi.org.uk/rapid

DAY 5

• Monitoring and learning

Plenary Discussion

• Think about 1 way in which you:

– monitor impact?

– learn from what you do?

– learn from what others do?

• Discuss in Plenary

Why is this important?

• Because we need to be able to be strategic

• And strategies need to be evidence based

• But most relevant evidence is held by the process of policy influence –we will learn it as we do it

• And we must have the capacity to respond to new evidence and adapt our strategy

– Do not think about evaluation!

– Think monitoring LEARNING and adapting

External networks; Colleagues;

Information assets

“…The idea is not to

create an

encyclopaedia of

everything that

everybody knows,

but to keep track of

people who „know

the recipe‟, and

nurture the

technology and

culture that will get

them talking…”

Goals ResultsUsing

Knowledge

UsingKnowledge

Learnduring

Learnafter

Learnbefore

StartHas it been

articulated?

Can it been

articulated?

Explicit Tacit

Implicit

Y N

Y

N

Getting the environment right

• Shared beliefs and common values

• A willingness to ask for help

• Common technology which connects

people

• Effective Peer Processes

• Rewarding and recognising learning

• Identifying and reinforcing the right

leadership behaviours

Some quotes

"Practice provides the rails

on which knowledge flows." John Seely-Brown

"When knowledge gained somewhere

doesn't move elsewhere, that's not a

learning organization; that's just a

bunch of projects." Saratoga Institute

“It is not the strongest of the

species that survives, nor the

most intelligent, but the one

most responsive to change.”

Charles Darwin

“Most activities or tasks are not one

time events… our philosophy is fairly

simple: every time we do something

again we should do it better than the

last time.” Lord Browne

ODI experience• Knowledge and learning are at the heart of the ODI

approach to bridge research, policy and practice

• ODI research groups and networks provide a

substantial knowledge base

– e.g. ALNAP and RAPID

• The CSPP has systematic learning as a core principle

The Knowledge Strategies Framework

organisational contextsleadership approaches,

governance structures,

management processes,

institutional pressures, funding

cycles, historical evolution etc.

knowledge – forms and

locations; processes – e.g.:

creation, sharing, storage, use;

key activities and tools; staff

capacities; relevance, M&E

external factors knowledge of partners,

donors, other external

agencies; networks;

national and global

factors

links within and

across the organisation

boundaries – via communities

and ICTs; to communications

plans; to core functions and

support functions, etc

The framework can be used to devise

and revise strategies

• The external factors How does the knowledge and learning strategy address issues emerging from external relationships and factors?

• The context How do issues of institutional governance, politics and economics support or hinder the knowledge

and learning strategy?

• Links How does knowledge and learning link to structures, functions, core activities, supporting activities and processes of a given organisation?

• The knowledge How is knowledge and learning

understood and applied within each organisation? What tools are used, why and how?

Knowledge: processes and tools• There are a range of processes to consider

– Mapping and creation of knowledge

– Managing and storing knowledge

– Learning and sharing knowledge

– Use of knowledge

• The different processes and different forms of knowledge can be brought together…

What kind of learner are you?• People show preferences for particular learning styles, and different

learning activities are suited to different styles of learning. You are most likely to learn when your learning style and the nature of the activity match.

• So if you can choose among activities to learn the same subject, you may be able to choose an activity to match your preferred style. But often you aren‟t given the luxury of a choice, so you will need to use a style that may not come naturally.

• If you are prepared to use different styles on occasion, so that you strengthen styles that you currently don‟t often use, you can become an all-round learner, able to benefit from any learning opportunity.

What kind of learner are you?

Activists

• Activists are people who learn by doing. They like to involve themselves in new experiences, and will „try anything once‟. They tend to act first and consider the consequences afterwards

Reflectors• Reflectors learn by

observing and thinking about what happened. They like to consider all the possible angles and implications before coming to a considered opinion. They spend time listening and observing, and tend to be cautious and thoughtful

Theorists

• Theorists like to understand the theory behind the actions. They need models, concepts and facts in order to learn. They like to analyse and synthesise, and feel uncomfortable with subjective judgements

Pragmatists• Pragmatists are keen

on trying things out. They look for new ideas that can be applied to the problem in hand. They like to get on with things and tend to be impatient with open-ended discussions; they are practical, down-to-earth people

The knowledge and learning self assessment is based

on five organisational competencies

• It can be used to work out needs and priorities for knowledge and learning, hopefully pointing to specific actions

• It also provides a common framework and common language to support knowledge and learning activities

• The self assessment has 5 practices each with 5 levels of competence from BASIC to HIGH. For knowledge and learning, these are as follows:

– Strategic alignment

– Management behaviours

– Collaboration mechanisms

– Learning and knowledge sharing processes

– Capturing and storing knowledge

• It is likely that you will be good at some practices – but may not have considered all 5 practices

– may not be highly competent in all of them

TaskKnowledge and learning self assessment explained

Four Simple Questions:

• What was supposed to happen?

• What actually happened?

• Why was there a difference?

• What can we learn from it?

15 minute team debrief, conducted in a “rank-free” environment.

After action reviews: learning during

projects

• What was the objective of the project?

• What did we achieve?

• What were the successes? Why? How can we repeat the success?

• What were the disappointments? Why? How can we avoid them in future?

• „Marks out of 100‟, what would move it closer to 100?

Facilitated, forward looking team meeting, soon after the

project has ended

The Retrospect – Learning after projects

Monitoring ex-ante

• … ex-post is sometimes too late

• A short introduction to OUTCOME

MAPPING

What are the problems we face?

• The problem with attribution

– Multiple actors and factors contribute

– Unintended results are often ignored

– Influence shifts overtime (indirect relation)

– Impact of our interventions occurs further down

the development chain

• The problem with Accountability vs.

Learning

The problem with attribution

CEF

National Gov

Family

Local Gov

GRO

USAID

Church

CSO

DFID

What is the problem we face?

• The problem with attribution

– Multiple actors and factors contribute

– Unintended results are often ignored

– Influence shifts overtime (indirect relation)

– Impact of our interventions occurs further down

the development chain

• The problem with Accountability vs.

Learning

Why do we face these problems?

• Because the responsibility for achieving

results ultimately depends on the actions of

our partners as influenced by the contexts

in which they work

• Focusing on downstream impact increases

programming bureaucratisation and is

inconsistent with our understanding of

develpment as a complex process.

Some terminology

• Outcomes: changes in behaviours, relationships, activities and/or actions of the people, groups and organisations with whom we work

• Vision: the broad human, social and environmental betterment we desire

• Mission: how we intend to contribute towards the achievement of the vision

• Boundary partners: individuals, groups and organisations with whom we interact directly to effect change

• Outcome challenges: changed behaviours of the boundary partner as identified by the vision

What is OM?

• OM is a dynamic methodology useful in the development of planning, monitoring and evaluation mechanism. OM:– Provides the tools to think holistically and strategically

about how it intends to achieve results

– Focuses on Outcomes instead of impacts

– It deals with Contribution instead of attribution

– Forces us to limit our planning and evaluation to our sphere of influence

– Deals with changes in the behaviours of our direct partners

The 3 Stages of OM• The intentional design stage: helps answer 4 questions: 1)

Why? (developing a vision statement); 2) Who? (identifying the primary partners); 3) What? (specifying desired outcomes and relevant progress markers); and, 4) How? (articulating the mission and a portfolio of strategies).

• The outcome and performance monitoring stage: provides a framework for a continuous monitoring of the initiative as a tool to achieving its outcomes. The program uses progress markers, a set of graduated indicators of behavioural change, identified in the intentional design stage to clarify directions with its primary partners and to monitor outcomes.

• The evaluation planning stage: helps identify the evaluation priorities assessing the strategy at greater depth than the performance monitoring stage.

Intentional design

• Boundary Partners

– Individuals, groups and organisations with whom the programme interacts directly to effect changes.

– Those that you are trying to encourage to change so that they can contribute to the vision? With whom will you work directly?

– We must try to group similar partners according to the type of behavioural changes sought. Boundary partners are different from strategic partners.

Boundary partners

= Program`s Partners

Program

Intentional design

• Outcome Challenges

– The changed behaviours (relationships, activities

and/or actions) of the boundary partner and how they

would be behaving if they were contributing ideally to

the vision.

– Imagine that in 3-5 years PartCom has been extremely

successful. What would our boundary partners be

doing to contribute maximally to the vision?

– Outcome challenges are about the boundary partner,

not the programme.

Intentional design

• Progress markers

– Step by step progressive changes that one expects to

see (short run), would like to see (medium to long run)

and love to see (very long run) –keep it simple, 15 max!

– Are about CHANGES IN BEHAVIOURS OF

BOUNDARY PARTNERS

– Are linear but NOT static

– Must be revised

– Help monitor the effectiveness of the strategy

Intentional design

• Strategy Map– Outlines the programmes approach in working with the

boundary partners

– How will the programme contribute to the achievement of the outcome challenged over the next X months/years?

– Use force field analysis

OM main elements

The three stages of OM

Further Information / Resources

• ODI Working Papers

• Bridging Research

and Policy Book

• JID Special Issue

• Meeting Reports

• Tools for Impact

• www.odi.org.uk/cspp

• www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Contact Details:

Naved Chowdhury – n.chowdhury@odi.org.uk

Enrique Mendizabal: e.mendizabal@odi.org.uk

RAPID Programme, ODI www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Other sources of information:

Visit http://www.odi.org.uk/rapid

or e-mail rapid@odi.org.uk for a copy of the RAPID/CSPP CD-ROM

Closing comments

1. Was this useful?

2. What will you do different from now on?

3. How can we help you?

Obrigado

Gracias

Thank you