1

Module 7: Designing the Change Process

Effective Capacity Development

From Theory to Practice

This Module

• Discusses design considerations for supporting a capacity development and change programme

• Considers what strategies can be used

• Considers what inputs can be applied

• Considers the respective roles of partners

Contextual factors beyond influence

Contextual factors and actors within influence

Wider impact

Outcomes

Outputs

Capacity

Recurrent inputs

CD processe

s

CD

support

Internal resources

CD/ Change Process

Theories of Change • About How to arrive at Capacity Results?

– From the WHAT to the HOW….

– A strategy to get from where we are to where we want to be?

• Highlights our understanding of how change happens – what it will take to deliver results.

• Builds on insights from earlier diagnostic work and dialogue.

– Political economy, incentives and opportunities for change

– Change readiness, ownership and demand for support

– The nature of the capacity challenge; simple or transformational, supply side or demand side

– Single organisation or multiple entities and stakeholders

– What has worked before and possible role for external assistance

Some questions to ask

• How to engage: How directive, how facilitative?

• What opportunities for Quick Wins: versus longer processes?

• Where and with whom best to engage and what mix: selecting “action fields”?

• What inputs required: What combination is appropriate?

• Roles and responsibilities of Partners: Who does what?

• What kind of programme implementation arrangements: Leadership, oversight and accountability?

6

How we see Organisations: “Functional” and “political” dimension of capacity

Functional dimension “Political” dimension

Main unit of analysis?

Drivingforces?

Image of man?

Change?

Change efforts?

Focus on functionaltask-and-work system

A sense of norms, intrinsicmotivation

Employees caring for theorganisation

Participative reasoning,finding best technicalsolution, orderly

Internal systems, structures, skills, technology etc

Focus on power-and-loyalty systems

Sanctions and rewards,incentives

Individuals caring for themselves and their in-groups

Internal conflict, coalitionwith powerful externalagents, unpredictable

Incentives, change of keystaff, outsmarting opposition

Complexity and Capacity

Far From Far From AgreementAgreement

ComplexComplex AnarchyAnarchy

▲▲

▲▲

▲▲ComplicatedComplicated ComplexComplex

Close to Close to AgreementAgreement

SimpleSimple ComplicatedComplicated ComplexComplex

Close to Close to Certainty Certainty ►►►►►►

Far From Far From Certainty Certainty

9

Analysing four “action fields” for promoting change

Focus on the ‘functional-rational’ dimension

Focus on the ‘political’ dimension

Focus on factors within the organisation(s)

1. Getting the job done 2. Getting the power right and accommodating interests

Focus on factors in the external environment

3. Creating an ‘enabling environment’ for doing the job

4. Forcing change in the internal power relations

10

  Hard capacity needs Soft capacity needs

Institu-tional

• Formulation of enabling legislation

• Establishing necessary institutions to oversee legislation enactment and implementation

 

• Public awareness campaigns

• Lobbying and advocacy with political decision makers

• Creating sector consensus

Organisat-ional

• Development of policies and procedures

• Development of strategic and operational plans

• ICT infrastructure

• Facilitation of conflict resolution

• Leadership development programme

• Introduction of reflective learning practices

Individual • Training to upgrade technical skills

• Facilitation of reflective learning practices

Selecting a balanced set of interventions

11

Lesson learned:Technical skills, laws, policies and such like are rarely, if ever, enough on their own. Behaviour, attitudes and informal structures are usually much more importantNo single tool can provide the answer to a complex need

Lesson learned:Technical skills, laws, policies and such like are rarely, if ever, enough on their own. Behaviour, attitudes and informal structures are usually much more importantNo single tool can provide the answer to a complex need

Learningprogramme

Skillsdevelopment Ministry

capacitySector

coordination Traderegulations

Educationsystem

Etc., etc.

NGOsupport

Questionnaire results:

Colours of change

Colour images

YellowSame wavelength = change

Difficult to predict

BlueRational design

Management forces change

RedManagement attention

Soft aspects

GreenTrial and error

Ownership and support

WhiteChange is autonomous

Outside influence no effect

Main orientation

YellowBring key players together and come to a consensus of best feasible solution.

BlueAnalyse situation and rationally plan for the pre-determined result. Implement accordingly.

RedProvide incentives and motivate for a ‘best fit’ between people and organisation.

GreenCreate awareness and systematically develop joint learning opportunities. Coach for results.

WhiteCreate space for self-organised change. Remove blockages, promote energy.

Criteria for effect/success

YellowMutual interests, consensus, a ‘good deal’, no (more) resistance.

BlueResults achieved, plan has been implemented, clear responsibilities.

RedPeople feel connected/at home/taken serious, good atmosphere and cooperation, proud.

GreenStaff experiment and ask for feedback, want to learn, good experiences are shared.

WhitePeople adapt to new situations, organise themselves outside formal structure, energy.

Ideals and pitfalls

YellowI = mutual interest is primary

P = no real action (only on paper)

BlueI = everything can be controlled and managed

P = relationships and emotions are neglected

RedI = the right man in the right place

P = resisting staff and powerful structures

GreenI = anything can be learned

P = rules and assignments also work

WhiteI = progress will emerge by itself

P = laissez-faire, chaos

Will not work when ...

YellowWeak leaders, too much dissent, no urgency or ambition

BlueVery dynamic environment, difficult to acquire expertise, unclear conditions and means

RedStaff do not wish to take responsibility, leaders cannot provide trust, little in common

GreenLittle understanding towards change, hidden conflicts, no safety, leaders not accepted

WhiteLittle dynamism and confrontation, no confidence/guts, too dependent

Country Partner Input

CD suppo

rt

CD processes

Recurrent inputs

CapacityOutputs Outcome

sWider impact

Internal resour-ces

Who Does What – the country partner?

• Focus first on what the country partner will bring to the process.

– the change management responsibility; leadership– the practical actions the partner will do (time, money,

logistics, staff, activities)

• • Only then consider need for external support

including that of the Commission

External Partner Input

CD suppo

rt

CD processes

Recurrent inputs

Capacity

Outputs Outcomes

Wider impact

Internal resour-ces

What External Partners can bring

• Many possibilities: advice, knowledge-ideas, funding, hands on deck, linkages, mentorship, sounding board

• Think beyond TC: consider if other instruments (eg NGO support, Budget support, dialogue) can help

• Think beyond TA – twinning, knowledge, peer support, funding, pilots-experimentation

• Inputs without an influencing or engagement strategy is likely to be ineffective

And be aware of your and your partner’s colour

Yellow

Blue

Red

Green

White

Summing Up• Clarify the results needed: Ask about what results the sector or

the organisation(s) are supposed and want to deliver that they are not delivering today (according to the organisation, its staff, its customers and other stakeholders)

• Then ask what/ how the sector/ organisation wants to strengthen their capacity to deliver services

• Help the partner clarify the broad set of critical activities needed to produce change and develop capacity, and help him to assess whether it is feasible

• Ask what resources the partner has to lead the process

• If these resources are not sufficient, then ask if and how donors (not just the EU) might be able to help

• Then, finally, determine how the EU might be able to contribute to supporting the desired change.

24

Quality of Interventions matters

• END