Report Workshop 4: Expertise, Experience and Exchange

Transcription

1 Report Workshop 4: Expertise, Experience and Exchange The main question in this workshop was how we can improve the impact of training on the capacity building of local authorities. The discussion was guided by the following questions: 1. What are the strengths and weaknesses of local government training as it takes place today? 2. How can we improve monitoring, evaluation an learning looking at the personal, organisational and societal level? 3. How can training outcomes be maximised - looking both at how training should linked to the wider context, including broader capacity building programmes. Corina Dhaene Director/evaluator ACE Europe I evaluated a.o. the fellowship and capacity building programmes of Nuffic (the Dutch organisation for internationalisation of Education) and the Local Government Capacity Building-programme of VNG international. There are strengths & weaknesses. If relevant and responsive to clear needs, good quality trainings can have great impact on the individual level: increased skills, higher performance, increased self-confidence, influence on community. To increase impact, it is important to link increased individual capacity to organisational capacity. Challenges: All programmes aiming at capacity building face the challenge of ensuring effects on organisational and sector level. Most results at individual level. Organisations are always in development, and trainings cross-cut that. This can be a risk but also offers opportunities, if aligned with the actual needs and organisational goals. The impact on organisational development depends very much on the organisation itself: leadership, readiness to change current practices, sense of urgency, available funds. In the case of local governments the institutional framework is often limited: they lack the authority to hire staff, develop their own HR-policies, set expenditure priorities. Funds to follow up on training or invest in capacity building of the organization are scarce. Sectoral change is even more difficult. Recommendations: If training is part of a longer term capacity building programme, using various types of interventions, then impact is usually higher. Invest in analysis of capacity needs (to get organised to deliver results) Be realistic in objectives (ToC), pay attention to outcomes and sense making. To influence organisations, participants should be carefully selected. If a critical mass of people can be reached, the chance for change is bigger. 1

2 Follow up is important: o Coaching, e.g. with the implementation of action plans. o Peer exchange, either between participant and trainer, or between participants after completing training (to remain in one group, and exchange difficulties and successes). Support the development of competences for change management. Make sure sufficient time and space (design and funds) is available at organisational level. Invest more in systems for service delivery and sound HRM-approaches. Focus monitoring on the broader picture and continue to invest (donor) money in tracer studies. Learning about public participation gave me new hope, and triggered me to create innovation in Indonesia. My perception changed: I was always working against the government, but after the training programme I realised the need to collaborate with government. The fact that the training was organised both for the Corruption Eradication Committee and different community organisations, it strengthened our cooperation and motivation to work together. After the programme, I created the Sekola Kota Sekola Desa -programme, a public participation programme for youth. By networking and capacity building, we lobbied for a better position of youth. We created a platform to involve youth in village budgeting: monitor and give recommendations on village fund usage based on the youth s needs. Greg Sindana Community leader Yogjakarta, Indonesia I participated in in training programme on anti-corruption and public participation, with an artistic background. I had to learn about laws and regulations, government issues and since I had no background knowledge on these issues. The study visits related to public participation were an important learning experience, especially the meetings with the youth branch of the labour association and the Ombudsman. Then, I realised that the government needs public participation to reach its outcomes. I also learned about stakeholder mapping and involving stakeholders for lobbying purpose. Edith Kroese Director Avance for Impact From my experience with working in capacity building programmes, training can be very valuable, especially in identifiying and enabling change makers. These are difficult to identify, but might be very beneficial for outcomes to work on this. On the other hand, many times people end up frustrated due to lack of results. More is needed than individual capacity and intentions only: support from management, 2

3 space, award for difference individuals. Too often this type of follow up is lacking. We need to make longer trajectories, work with organisations and see training as one of many elements. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E): capacities and organisational change are said to be difficult to measure. However, often the problem is that there is no clear idea of what you want to measure. If you have the experience, tools and data, everything can be measured. M&E starts with: what is the role, behavior or goal that needs to be changed? Opportunity: blended learning. Use a combination of technology and classroom sessions to improve training. Classroom settings are used more and more for interaction and problem solving, video for knowledge transfer. Hans Buis Senior project manager VNG International When designing a project or implementing it, it s all about change, and hope is that those who are in training are also in favour of this change. However, the demand for training/capacity building often comes from (international) donors and those who are involved may not know any of this. Topdown imposed trainings can easily fail because there is not enough knowledge about the audience. Challenges: We need to think about our audiences: why are they here, and why am I here? Putting people from different contexts together has advantages (increase understanding and cooperation between different groups), but there is also a risk that it limits the impact of the training. Discussion Invest in impact Willem van Nieuwkerk (CILC): Most capacity building programmes are donor-driven, very dependent on the hand that feeds us. We often have to respond to something, and we try to make it fit, but are constrained by knowledge, lack of baselines. Within the possibilities, NGOs try to make the best of it. But with lack of funding it is impossible to have a long term perspective. Corina: Donors should allow us to increase the impact of programmes, o.a. by using M&E tools used as a sensing/probing tool. Ask questions about what s going on, what the urgency is, this leads to new knowledge and insights on the topic. Role of alumni When talking about opportunities for followup, one can also think of alumni-meetings. Here, participants from the same country or from different countries in a region, who have followed training with similar topics can meet. This was done in the MATRA Rule of Law Training Programme for Eastern European countries. Nuffic wants to hold thematic alumni-meetings and develop alumni-communities so alumni can contribute strategically. Alumni could also be engaged in think-tanks for example, where they can share their knowledge and take responsibility for the community. The Dutch embassies can support and promote this. 3

4 Out of the box thinking Focus less on knowledge, more on getting together, exchanging experiences, out of the box thinking. Nuffic gives a lot of room to invest in soft skills. Two weeks ago in Indonesia there were discussions between the Corruption Eradication Committee and the constitutional courts about improving interventions and programme design. These discussions moved beyond project thinking. Training needs Lars Burema (THA): Even when trainings are incorporated in larger programme, the training might be disconnected from the rest of the content. Often when The Hague Academy is approached to provide training, the content and length of training has already been decided on. Corina: A critical issue is to understand what is happening on the ground before organising training. Needs analysis is often done based on mental checklist of what needs to be done, and filling those gaps. However, needs analysis also requires understanding of local government life cycle, their goals and objectives, and their specific needs. Projects/programmes should be flexible so if a needs analysis shows the true need of training participants is different than expected, the content can be adapted. Schools for public administration Public administration schools often compete with each other for donor funds. Often, they are not well integrated in the national system but serving the EU or other countries interests. Impact strongly depends on the capacity of the leadership to properly incorporate donor actions in the curriculum. Artan Rojji (FLAG): The Albanian school of public administration is by law required to provide training to central and local government. The legal framework is good, but there s a lack of capacity and no relations with local governments or local government associations. In developing training and capacity building programmes, schools of public administration and the associations of local governments should be part of the programme design process. Often, public administration schools don t set an agenda, or just weakly. At the same time, donors demand specific types of training and do not listen to the ideas of the local partners. Positive example is a project with support of the Council of Europe. Staff members of municipalities had access to a database and annually filled out a needs assessment. This made it possible to develop a training needs analysis based on the actual needs at the municipal level. 4

5 RECOMMENDATIONS: HOW TO IMPROVE TRAINING IMPACT? 1. Connect individual training needs with the organisational needs. Ask the managers of participants what behaviour should change, and what should be changed in the organisation after one year. 2. For a good Training Needs Analysis diversity is needed: the person who fills out the needs assessment form does not always represent the actual needs. Do not only look at M/F, but also at age and position. 3. Include decision makers (mayors, council members) to create support for training results and follow up within the organisation. 4. Be strict with the selection of participants: set out a maximum, but do not always necessarily fill to the brim. The training provider should have the possibility to select strictly. 5. By targeting multiple actors, the chance of creating impact is higher. Try to increase interaction between different groups (e.g. local government employees and NGOs together etc.). 6. If you want to reach more people, it could be more efficient to go into the region, which is less costly in terms of time and money than following a training in The Hague. However, training in the region may be less effective because people are still occupied with work related business. 7. Try to find change makers in organisations and pay attention to developing competences for change management. 8. Feedback: ask participants to give feedback not only to the training provider, but also to the donor organisation. Often donors do not receive the feedback they need to properly outline demands and follow up actions. 9. Take measures to institutionalise knowledge in the organisation, in order to mitigate a high turnover of employees. 10. Donors should invest more in Monitoring & Evaluation to increase impact. For training providers this is time consuming but these efforts are mostly not included in training budgets. 5