content added value in structural funds pcm / lfa output based subsidies outcome mapping conclusions...

Content

• Added value in Structural Funds• PCM / LFA• Output based subsidies• Outcome mapping• Conclusions

1

Complexity is back again

• PCM and OBF are „static“ approaches.• They assume the environment is pretty

stable (at least within the lifespan of a project).

• But, as we know, the world is complex. • Outcome mapping is one option how to

deal with this.

3

Logical framework for COP RBM + network

• Equal Opportunities case study in hand-out

5

Further reading

Name of your presentation

Outcome mapping “intentional design” as one approach to dealing with complexity in a better way

8

improved human, social, & environmental wellbeing

Step 1:

9

A vision statement..

• guides

• motivates and inspires

• is an ‘accountability-free zone’

10

Vision facilitation question

“Imagine that in 3-5 years the world has changed. The well-being of your intended beneficiaries has improved beyond your most ambitious dreams. What changes have occurred? Who is doing what differently? How have the actors changed? What conditions are influencing people’s well-being?”

Describe the world you seek to help bring about.

11

Vision facilitation question

“Imagine that in 3-5 years the world has changed. The well-being of your intended beneficiaries has improved beyond your most ambitious dreams. What changes have occurred? Who is doing what differently? How have the actors changed? What conditions are influencing people’s well-being?”

Describe the world you seek to help bring about.

Requires good knowledge of the

situation which can be gained eg from a …problem analysis

12

COP RBM problem tree, based on situation analysis (see doc.)

COP RBM longer term vision• The network partners have ignited an energetic movement of reform throughout the

European Structural Funds. Fund leadership and their staff are focused on key organizational and societal outcomes. They are also highly attuned to their external environment, aware of emerging threats and opportunities and ready to act upon these swiftly.

• There is a common understanding that change primarily takes root when it involves broad sets of actors engaged together in designing and implementing locally relevant solutions to locally perceived problems, in the public service and in society in general. Collaboration, inviting feed-back, using information purposefully, deliberation, respecting diversity and taking responsibility constitute the core of Fund management. This is reinforced actively at all levels by a highly committed leadership.

• Leading by example, the Funds are actively engaged in stimulating more widespread reform of the public service throughout Europe, at all levels, including the European one. They are acknowledged as centres of excellence in this field.

• Due to this effort, the public sector matches the capacity of the private and non-governmental sectors to perform, innovate and change. It is seen by citizens as being responsive, pro-active and supportive. It is government “with” citizens rather than “for” citizens, therefore strengthening their resilience.

13

14

The mission is that “bite” of the vision statement on which the

project is going to focus.

MissionStep 2:

15

A mission statement:

• Describes what you do, produce

• Identifies your principle collaborators

• Tells how you work with them

COP RBM mission• To contribute towards the vision, the members of the COP “RBM-plus” steering group,

supported by their Mr/Mrs results, take meaningful steps (relevant to them in their particular context) forward in terms of increasing the results orientation of their respective organisations. To this end, they make use of the training and consultancy opportunities as well as the web-based platform that the network, as a partnership, offers to its members.

• In taking steps forward, they generate new insights as to how to approach the kind of reform depicted in the vision of the network. They share the knowledge they gain within the network, through direct contacts, the website and learning seminars, helping their partners to progress even further.

• They also share this knowledge beyond the network, particularly towards initiatives in support of wider public reform, some of which may be financed by their own Structural Fund programmes. To gain further support for these internal efforts to reform as well as any wider public reform initiatives, they each set up a regional / national network of relevant stakeholders (for example academics, officials, politicians, professional associations, social partners, NGOs, etc. ).

• At the EU level, the network will likewise interact with the European Commission (particularly DG EMPL and REGIO), the relevant European Parliament committees, the European Court of Auditors, social partners etc. gaining further support for its mission and vision.

16

17

Summary

✓ feasible, accountable

✓ current

✓ identifies activities, products, services

Vision Mission

✓ idealistic

✓ future ‘world’ conditions

✓ observable wellbeing & interrelationships

18

Boundary Partners

Those individuals, groups, & organizations with whom a project interacts directly to effect change & with whom the project can anticipate some opportunities for influence.

Step 3:

19

BeneficiariesProject Partners

There are limits to our influence

sphere of influence

sphere of concern

20

Who are our Boundary Partners?

Boundary Partners

Beneficiaries

other stakeholders

Project

21

1. Identify actors and stakeholders

2. Categorize actors & stakeholders

Categorizing stakeholders

your allies or strategic partners

(already act in a beneficial way)

your boundary partners

Your boundary partners’ boundary partners

22

• Think of a specific project and write down –during the next break- an answer to the following questions:

• With whom do you work directly in this project?

• In which individuals, groups, or organizations is your project trying to encourage change as a contribution to the vision?

• On whose actions does your success depend?

Boundary partner facilitation questions

STAFF(OF THE RBM+ NETWORK

PARTNERS

CoordinationCOP RBM+

Central Coordinators + Zonal coordinators

VISION

Network Partner Senior Management+

Mr/Mrs Results

PROGRESS MARKERS- - - - -

OUTCOME CHALLENGE

STRATEGY MAPS

STEERING GROUP

Facilitation & Coordination COPFacilitation COP websiteFacilitate consultancy requestsAdmin & FinancesReporting to EC…

COP RBM+ Network

Expected changes

Type of support activities

24

• Describes how one boundary partner is contributing maximally to the vision.

• Defines one boundary partner’s ideal actions, relationships & activities.

Step 4: Outcome Challenge

STAFF(OF THE RBM+ NETWORK

PARTNERS

VISION

PROGRESS MARKERS- - - - -

OUTCOME CHALLENGE

COP RBM+ Network

Expected changes

The steering group members and the Mr/Mrs result work with staff to bring about the following changes in staff behavior:

Staff take a variety of initiatives out of their own accord to change and improve the way they work, based on constant critical thinking. This leads to taking actions that benefit the

“clients” (project promotors), such as reducing administrative burden and conducting the required verification and other

processes faster. However, staff do more than work on files. They take ownership of the issues their programme is trying to

address, which becomes visible by their engagement in dialogue with relevant stakeholders, including constituents, whose needs

are always at the top of their mind. They seek feed-back from their colleagues and the outside world about what they are

doing, learn from it and use it. They regularly give an account of what they have done and why they have done it to those that

they touch with their work and allow these to contest what they are doing.

Outcome ChallengeIdeal desired changes in practice/behavior of the staff from the participating network partners.

26

Progress Markers

(Deep transformation)

(Active engagement)

(Early positive responses)

Love to see

Like to see

Expect to see

Step 5:

Love to see

Like to see

Like to see

Expect to see

Like to see

Like to see

Expect to see

Like to see

Like to see

Expect to see

28

inputs activitiesoutputs

Changes in behaviour as ‘outcomes’

sphere of influence

sphere of concern

o u t c o m e s

changes in conditions, well-being

changed patterns of behavior

technical training

unemployed acquires social and personal skills

Unemployed applies more often and more focused for a new job on own initiative

Unemployed gets job that fits profile

coaching on the work floor

training in job application

personal skills training

unemployed acquires technical skills

acquires skills to apply for a job

Getting unemployed towards durable jobs

?

?

Increased social

inclusionUnemployed applies new

skills?

?

Screening better idea of labour market and own potential

Stays in the job and works longer

?

In this case only one boundary partner identified: what about others (e.g. employers)

30

Progress Marker Checklist

• Each Progress Marker:Describes a change in the boundary partner’s

behaviorCan be monitored & observed

• As a set, Progress Markers:Are graduated from preliminary to more profound

changesDescribe the change process of a single boundary

partner

31

Generic Stages in a Journey of Change

1. Learning about the journey

2. Taking the first tentative steps

3. Strengthening skills & knowledge

4. Committing to the journey

5. Investing own resources

6. Overcoming obstacles

7. Owning, identifying with the changes

8. Leading, influencing, leaving a legacy

COP RBM progress markers1 Staff ask for information in order to be engaged in the journey of change towards an RBM

organisation2 Staff ask to participate in RBM-related trainings and similar opportunities that cover personal

needs for skills development to improve professional competences (e.g. management and leadership)

3 Management (Heads of Unit) communicate about results from projects4 Staff give more feedback and coach each other on how to improve their work in terms of RBM5 Units meet with each other on a regular basis to coordinate and discuss improvement in terms

of RBM6 Staff present concrete ideas to be more result oriented7 Staff apply practices and experiences gathered from each other in daily work8 Staff coach promoters on results orientation 9 Staff use relevant sources of information to learn about the needs of constituents/citizens10 Staff seek feedback from their colleagues and the outside world about what they are doing,

learn from it and use it11 Staff set up working groups with other external actors to remove barriers to results12 Staff discuss and assess results with promoters and the citizens they serve alongside controls 13 Staff facilitate active ownership with relevant partners 14 Management encourages staff to critically assess the ways of working 15 Staff anticipate the consequences of decisions

32

33

causal persuasive supportive

Iaimed at

individual boundary partner

stronginfluence

arouse new thinking;

build skills, capacity

on-going support

Eaimed at boundary partner’s

environment

alter the physical,

regulatory or

information environment

broad information dissemination; access to

new info

create / strengthen

peer networks

Step 6: Strategy Map

34

causal persuasive supportive

Iaimed at

individual boundary partner

what will be done to produce

immediate outputs?

what will be done to build

capacity?

how will sustained support,

guidance or mentoring be

provided?

Eaimed at boundary partner’s

environment

what will be done to alter

the physical or policy

environment?

how will the media or

publications be used?

what networks or relationships

will be established or

utilized?

Facilitation questions ?I-2 I-3I-1

E-1 E-2 E-3

35

Step 7: Organizational Practices

How does your team or organization stay relevant, viable and effective?

36

Organizational Practices

1. Prospecting for new ideas, opportunities, and resources

2. Consulting knowledgeable informants

3. Maintaining the support of your next highest power

4. Assessing and redesigning products, services, systems, and procedures

37

…organizational practices

5. Getting feedback from those already served

6. Sharing your learning with the world

7. Experimenting to remain innovative

8. Engaging in organizational reflection

Step 8-12

• Monitoring Priorities: identify whether the project wants to monitor:Changes in the Boundary Partners (Outcome

Journal, Step 9)The effectiveness of its own strategies

(Strategy Journal, Step 10)Its functioning as an organization

(Performance Journal, Step 11)

• Evaluation strategy (Step 12)


40

Journal for Monitoring OutcomesOutcome Monitoring Journal

Period of monitoring and data collection: Contributors to Monitoring Update: Name of the person(s) who compiled the journal: Outcome Challenge:

Based on your analysis of each progress marker, please indicate the number on the scale that best represents the boundary partner's progress in achieving the progress marker (1 indicates no activity towards the progress marker while 7 represents full achievement of the progress marker) Not started yet/no activity towards progress marker 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Progress marker reached/strong activity towards progress marker noted Progress markers What happened (who, how,

what, where) Date (when)

Strategy Used and its Efectiveness

Follow up/corrective measures Evidence (documents etc.)

1)

Not started yet/no activity towards progress marker 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Progress marker reached/strong activity towards progress marker noted

2)


3)


4)


5)


Thanks to Kevin Kelpin

41

PROGRESS MARKERS

UK

Swed

en

Bel

gium

Fla

nde

rs

Bel

gium

Fr

Bul

gari

a

Slov

enia

Gre

ece

heal

th

Pol

and

Lit

hua

nia

Chec

h R

ep.

Gre

ece

Edu

cati

on

1 Staff ask for information in order to be engaged in the journey of change towards an RBM organisation

2 Staff ask to participate in RBM-related trainings and similar opportunities that cover personal needs for skills development to improve professional competences (e.g. management and leadership)

3 Management (Heads of Unit) communicate about results from projects

4 Staff give more feedback and coach each other on how to improve their work in terms of RBM

5 Units meet with each other on a regular basis to coordinate and discuss improvement in terms of RBM

6 Staff present concrete ideas to be more result oriented

7 Staff apply practices and experiences gathered from each other in daily work

8 Staff coach promoters on results orientation 9 Staff use relevant sources of information to

learn about the needs of constituents/citizens

X

10 Staff seek feedback from their colleagues and the outside world about what they are doing, learn from it and use it

X

11 Staff set up working groups with other

Color code for changes progress markers No progress in 2013 Initial changes in 2013 Bigger changes in 2103

Example OUTCOME journal COP RBM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ….

42

What were key hindering factors affecting the achievement of progress markers?

- Volatile political situation which affects also PMO’s senior and middle management;

- Strong focus on absorption of Structural Funds rather than on the results;

- Very poor evaluation culture, (not just in terms of ministerial capacity building, also the outsourced reports are mainly descriptive-based, too),

evaluation is not perceived as a management tool;

- PMO is still predominantly audit-driven in terms of performance management;

- Unclear procedures regarding the field of lobbying (roadmap to prevent illegal lobbying is being elaborated in collaboration with Commision for Prevention of Corruption right now)

PROGRESS MARKERS Synthesis of progress in 2013

Describe briefly the progress for each PM with the main changes observed in the respective countries

1 Staff ask for information in order to be engaged in the journey of change towards an RBM organisation

We had a few requests from our co-workers to share experience from seminars in journey to COP RBM. Several of co-workers asked us to send the COP handbook although there was never a feedback or any questions from them regarding the content of the handbook or RBM agenda to enhance the debate. That’s why it’s only an initial progress.

What were key stimulating factors that assisted in achieving progress?

- Informal observations from the EC regarding the draft version of Partnership Agreement 2014-2020 promote the importance of results,

- The completion of projects from the 2007-2013 programming period – gradual emergence of result-based questions by journalists and EC (f.e., what has been achieved by certain project? What was the benefit for the citizen/constituents?)

Example OUTCOME journal COP RBM

Strategy journal


Name of your presentationPerformance Journal

WORK DATING FROM/TO: CONTRIBUTORS TO MONITORING UPDATE: PRACTICE 1. PROSPECTING FOR NEW IDEAS, OPPORTUNITIES, & RESOURCES EXAMPLE OR INDICATORS SOURCE OF EVIDENCE: LESSONS: PRACTICE 2. CONSULTING KNOWLEDGEABLE INFORMANTS EXAMPLE OR INDICATORS SOURCE OF EVIDENCE: LESSONS: PRACTICE 3. MAINTAINING THE SUPPORT OF YOUR NEXT HIGHEST POWER EXAMPLE OR INDICATORS SOURCE OF EVIDENCE: LESSONS:

Simplification and outcome mapping

• Outcome mapping presupposes financial simplification • Staff interact much more frequently with project:

Must be clear how project starts in the short term… then make agreement when to report back relating to which with what kind of

answer (e.g. in 3 months) depending on the nature of the project… …in person at the PMO Bring also financial/administrative pieces for verification (if deep financial

simplification this entails mainly registration and sub-contracting which can be verified quickly)

• As one person “interviews”, the other checks: probably done in 2 hours• Or could be done in advance, resolving any issues during the meeting

What is checked here is not rechecked afterwards! Short minutes are made and agreed (audit trail) on the spot

• discussion can even be taped (if consent given)

on the spot checks only when fraud may be an issue: easier to detect via interviews than via “paper perfect” project reporting

New agreement made for next meeting!

45

EXERCISE

• Take the OM exercise


Discussion on outcome mapping as a way to run a call

Outcome mapping and solutions management

• Solutions management is dealing with multiple actors who interact with each other and with constituents (target groups, users) across sectors and services

• Sustainable progress in this system will require establishing a self-sustaining dynamic of mutual adaptation

• Solutions manager does NOT impose solutions but support actors to continuously explore and find solutions together…

• …until the solutions manager is not required anymore for this

48

Nobel prize winning economist A. Sen’s capability approach

Outcome mapping is on

PLPA’s and calls for proposal

• at the call level, the specified outcome performs the function of a boundary

• at the project level, a PLP approach empowers constituents to create new possibilities to address their changing and diverse needs, which will itself unlock awareness of new needs

• hence, it is not a static but dynamic approach

50

Solutionsproject

to support e.g. PES

Solutions manager

PMO

PESConst.

Const.

Const.Demand

Demand

Demand

INVOLVE

CALL

Other actor

Other actor

FACILITATE

PLPA delivery mechanism(solutions project gets EURO

envelope)

52

Solutionsproject

to support e.g. PES

Solutions manager

PMO

PESConst.

Const.

Const.Demand

Demand

Demand

INVOLVE

CALL

Other actor

Other actor

FACILITATE

PLPA delivery mechanism(solutions project gets EURO

envelope)

Enhancer PMO

DP

DP

DP

DPDP

DP

Const.

Const.

Const.

Demand

Demand

Demand

Demand

PCM (grants) or Results Based Financing delivery

mechanism (tender)

CALL

Or internalise

• Let us look at other applications of this kind of logic….

53

MICHAEL WOOLCOCK is Lead Social Development Specialist with the Development Research Group at the World bank, and a Lecturer in Public Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.

From 2007-2009 he was on external service leave as Professor of Social Science and Development Policy at the University of Manchester, where he was the founding Research Director of the Brooks World Poverty Institute.

Prior to joining the Bank in 1998 he taught at Brown University and the University of Queensland (Australia).

Watch also : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05AaiOZfRXM

Problem-Driven Iterative Adaptation

• developed to counter the tendency in the public sector to engage in “best practice” reforms


Rather PDIA will:

interventions are successful if they empower a constant process through which agents make organizations better performers

Performance drivenCompliance driven

“Issues” have to be politically and socially constructed to gain attention as “problems”. This involvesraising the visibility of issues through spectacular “focusing events” (such as crises), the use ofstatistical indicators, or manipulation of feedback from previous experiences.

Only possible when novelty is encouraged and rewardedwithin the authorizing environment within which key decisions are made

Small steps help flush out contextual challenges, includingthose that emerge in response to the interventions themselves.

Convening = decision-makers working closely with front-line staff… and connecting = interacting with other frontline workers to get the changes going

57

Innovation pipelines

OPENINNOVATION

NEEDS!

Robert G. Cooper is one of the most one of the most influential innovation thought-leaders in the business world today. He pioneered many groundbreaking discoveries in product innovation, including the Stage-Gate® Idea-to-Launch Process, now implemented by almost 80% of North American companies. He is the recipient of numerous prestigious awards including the Crawford Fellow from the Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) and the Maurice Holland Award from the Industrial Research Institute (IRI). He is also Professor Emeritus of Marketing and Technology Management at the DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University, and Distinguished Fellow at the Institute for the Study of Business Markets (ISBM) at Penn State University.

NOT LINEAR!

“CONCEPT”

59

Domain project

to supportinnovation

InnovatorPMO

DP

DP

DP

DPDP

DP

Const.

Const.

Const.Demand

Demand

Demand

INVOLVE

CALL

SUPPORT

InnovatorPMO

DP

DP

DP

DPDP

DP

Const

Const

Cons.Demand

Demand

INVOLVE

CALL

SUPPORT

PLPA delivery mechanism(domain gets EURO envelope)

PLPA delivery mechanism(DPs get EURO envelope)

• Annex

60

Worker teams

Workers more satisfaction

Sphere of influence

Sphere of interest

Human Res. Dept.

Management

Company XProject team Sphere of

Control

WorkersWorkers more healthy

VISION Specific objective

Intermediate Result (e.g.

Policy development)


staff development)


early childhood development)

Boundary Partner (e.g.

Student support

structures)


College administra-

tions)


Student bodies)

Sph

ere

of in

tere

stSph

ere

of in

fluen

ce

Programme implementing

team

Outcome Challenge

Progress Markers

Outcome Challenge

Outcome Challenge

Progress Markers

Progress Markers

Program activities &

outputs

Program activities & outputs

Program activities &

outputs

Spher

e of control

Organisational practices

Monitoring of results

through result indicators and

specific objective indicators

Monitoring of achievement of progress markers by boundary partners through outcome journal

Monitoring of

programme activities

and organisational practices

through strategy journals

Autonomyin teams

Management

Human Res. Dept

Worker teams

Teams have challenging but realistic tasks

Supportiveleadership Results

Workers have more job

satisfaction

Workers are healthier

Overall Objective

VISION

Project implementing

team

Project mission

Project purpose

Project activities and outputs

Project activities and outputs

Project activities and outputs project

actions

content added value in structural funds pcm / lfa output based subsidies outcome mapping conclusions...

Documents