#learning organisation

[milfitinstitute]

Exploit vs Reinforce… “Exploit success, don’t reinforce failure!” Unknown "In general, when shifting the main effort, we seek to exploit success rather than reinforce failure." The US Marine Corps on the Conduct of War

[milfitinstitute]

Experience, Teacher & Schoolmaster “Experience may be the best teacher, but it is a ruthless schoolmaster!” Unknown

[milfitinstitute]

Apology & Mistakes… "To inquire if and where we made mistakes is not to apologize." Vice Admiral Hyman G. Rickover in testimony before the U.S. Congress in April 1964

[milfitinstitute]

Training Management in the US Army in 1977

Training Management in the US Army in 1977

Research Paper Title

Battalion/Brigade Commander’s Training Management Package (Self-Paced) – 01 July 1977.

Outline

This training management package was developed for you, the commander, as a means by which you can prepare or improve your proficiency to perform your training management function.

This training package has been prepared in a self-paced format in order that you may Spend as much or…

View On WordPress

[milfitinstitute]

Connecting Organisational Theory & Design and Irregular Warfare

Connecting Organisational Theory & Design and Irregular Warfare

Research Paper Title

Reorganising for Irregular Warfare.

Abstract

A thorough understanding of Irregular Warfare (IW) and the principles of organisational theory and design will enable the Department of Defense (DoD) to organise efficiently and effectively for operations within the Irregular Warfare Environment, while maintaining its conventional capabilities.

The researchers develop their…

View On WordPress

[ecologyalike]

Research centre (ICRAF) putting trees on farms to raise farmers' income and reduce poverty, working between agriculture and forestry

This is an old publication, but interesting reading to compare with what is going on in communities interviewed now. One of them is the Bathin III Ulu, Bungo, which I got to know closely just recently. Others are Paninggahan, Singkarak and Sumberjaya in Indonesia. The interviews were conducted also in Baku and Kalahari Ancestral Domain in the Philippines and Kulekhani in Nepal.

In 2009 the community representatives in Bungo state  “lengthy and cumbersome negotiations” with buyers as one of the key constraints for generating rewards from environmental services. How about six years later from writing this paper. Are Payments from Ecosystem Services (PES) up and running in 2015 in Bungo, are they now providing a viable alternative for fast gains from forest clearance? 

A lot of hard work is behind supported by the NGOs involved. The five villages have got to the point, where all of them have tenure rights (demonstrated with heaps of paper as legal agreements, institutional arrangements and plans), monitoring system is underway, initial payment schemes ready. Yes sure rubber certification did not quite work out, but learnings are there...

But tangible financial benefits managed by the community are not there - yes, not quite yet, but almost -maybe. This is not a storyline that is new or extraordinary and probably with many other communities the time would have been running out to have the PES success....with Bunjang Raba things still look quite bright.

But when reading all this, when trying to put pieces together, documents from past, research paper here and there and looking at where are now, I can not but ask the question if there is an alternative for this intensive preparation of getting ready and fulfilling all the tick boxes? The cost to get to here from there (from the time when the paper above was written) has been probably exorbitant. 

How about just starting, through the local change agents who are there, I have met them, supporting them (directly on what ever they feel they need-without too much top down planning, external accountability or scrutiny). 

Could these movers be simply supported in solving the locally nominated problem, growing organically, through trial and error, working together, building success, solutions, that ultimately lead to strong and capable institutions, would we have a PES up and running in Bunjang Raba already?

[ecologyalike]

Learning Organisation III

Another Outcome Mapping example to facilitate dialogue in organisational learning in the context of development intervention.

Example of an outcome challenge: “Coordinated planning between agency A and agency B on all programs targeting the same beneficiaries.”

Three levels of progress markers to measure progress (all levels are indicators of progress, the love to see level being the most desired but expect to see already demonstrating progress).

Plans between agency A and agency B regularly shared (expect to see)

Joint planning between agency A and agency B of all activities that are agreed under ‘tasks that need coordination’ (like to see)

Planning shaped by the regular monitoring data and feedback sought and received from the target group and partners involved  (love to see)

This was also very helpful for me to distinguish why were are using progress markers and not just “indicators”. The difference between an indicator and a progress marker: Progress markers are different from indicators in the following ways:

They do not describe a change in state (e.g. income levels increased), but rather changes in behaviour or relationships of those individuals or groups that a program supports directly.

They describe a gradual change process.

As a set, progress markers help illustrate the complexity of the change process.

They can be adjusted during the implementation of the project (mid-course corrections).

They are not a checklist of accomplishments or targets to be reached.

They provide a basis for dialogue about progress.

Reference: Barefoot Guide Two CHAPTER 5: Weaving learning into change: planning, monitoring and evaluation

[ecologyalike]

Learning Organisations II

Some steps of outcome mapping can be used to agree, together with the direct partners, what organisational practices or institutional changes are needed to improve policy implementation and service delivery, and also carry on the results beyond the life of the project [1].

The outcome challenge statement for village forest conservation could be: All community members see conservation as a viable option for short term gains derived from deforestation and forest destruction

Progress markers to monitor and reflect whether this outcome challenge is being met[2]:

Objectives of the village forest are discussed/reviewed/clarified regularfly within the village forest committee (VFC) and among all villagers

VFC involves villagers and other agents/partners to provide evidence on progress of activities, management practises and results

Decision making process of the VFC is supported by evidence, learnings from the past implementation and all members can contribute to discussion when VFC is preparing new plans and strategies

VFC ensures that financial reports are readily available, based on actual expenditure and all villagers can see and discuss how funds are allocated and used 

All grievances are handled in timely manner with the mechanism agreed upon and regularly reviewed by VFC and all members 

It is important to note that progress markers are not indicators in the sense that they are monitored externally by the project to see if it is reaching certain targets, but instead create a frame to discuss organisational practices and policy implementation together with the project partners.

[1] Outcome mapping is a project progress measurement system that was designed by the grant-making organisation International Development Research Centre (IDRC).

[2] Progress markers
are developed by the partners as a framework for dialogue
and learning. They are a little like resting places on a long journey, places to reflect and review progress. Reference: Barefoot Guide Two Page 73.