Wednesday, 16 April 2008

Communication & Development: The State of the Art

Mini Seminar ‘Communication & Development: The State of the Art'

On April 16th five international experts from the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC), gave a presentation about their work on Communication for Development, and was followed by a short discussion facilitated by Dr. Albert van den Heuvel.

It was an inspiring meeting, to hear from very dedicated an professional people about their work, experiences and views on communication. Specially for this meeting some handouts were prepared on the work of WACC on the specific ICCO-Alliance themes. As only a handful of colleagues assisted the meeting I would like to use this way to share these handouts with you:


After the presentation we had a short discussion which in my words led to the following conclusion:
Promoting the right to - value based - communication is essential to development and analysing well the intended audiences can make this communication effective.

In Oktober 2008 WACC is organising a world wide seminar on communication in South Africa with the title: Communication IS Peace.

































Maarten

Tuesday, 8 April 2008

"The truth is not democratic, if it would be, we would all know it!"

These are the words from Bob McHenry, former chief editor of Encyclopaedia Britannica. He sais these words in a very interesting TV broadcast of the Dutch VPRO on April 7th, 2008 about the Truth in times of Wikipedia, and for that matter also in the times of ComPart. Although I do not know how long the link will be usable, you can view this ±45 minute broadcast via this link. Besides a short introduction and some words in between in Dutch the whole broadcast is in English.

Maarten Boers

Monday, 7 April 2008

RPC's the "spiders in the webs"?

>On Friday 4th April, three new regional process coordinators (Central America, South Asia, West Africa) and colleagues from PIT spent the afternoon exploring the ComPart toolkit.

Maarten Boers set the scene, then Peter Ballantyne introduced how the various tools can be grouped into those that are more 'personal' - to track and share information, and those that are more for a 'group' to share and communicate with each other and with the rest of the alliance. He explained that, ultimately, the idea is that these tools will also provide ways for Alliance partners in a region to share among themselves and with the Alliance. [see his short presentation]

Pier Andrea Pirani then led the group through the toolkit - ComPart toolbar, iGoogle, search, wiki, dgroups, blogging and interwise. Despite jetlag and the end of week timing, the group enthusiastically explored several of the tools, particularly iGoogle, Dgroups and the wikis. The future looks bright!

After the session we asked Frederika and Peter to explain a little about the new RPC roles.

For Frederika Meijer, the RPC has an important role in bringing ICCO closer to the field:



According to Peter Oomen: An "RPC will work as 'spiders in a web', connected to people in Utrecht, to the Regional Councils members and to the Programme coalitions":

Friday, 4 April 2008

Latin America regional councillors interviewed on You Tube

Today in a workshop about the ComPart Flowers with the three RPC 'pilots' - Mariecke van der Glas, Frederika Meijer, and Peter Oomen - and colleagues from the PIT, we came across an ICCO channel on You Tube.

Recent video's by Jack van Ham include interviews with members of the new 'regional' council in Latin America:




Monday, 3 March 2008

Inspiring meetings about Learning, Capacity Development and the Programmatic Approach

The past week I have been in Lima, Peru having several meetings with partner organisations. The main issue was learning, capacity development and the programmatic approach. These meetings led to some thoughts, perhaps not all new, but nevertheless I would like to share and discuss them. That’s why I am posting them on our learning blog.
  • Implementing the programmatic approach implies talking about “programme development” (in the same way as we prefer to talk about “capacity development” in stead of building). Hereby I mean that it will probably not be feasible to “define” a programme because it never will be finished or ready. The ever and rapidly changing (world wide) context means that all involved in a programme will have to adapt their ideas and practices constantly to be able to respond to these changes and getting the programme further. In that sense perhaps it is good to speak and think about “programme development”. In that way we also avoid talking about building something new. In many cases - at least elements of - a programmatic approach is already being applied and the “only” thing which has to be done is develop these elements further.
  • While within ICCO we all are very busy thinking on how to concretise programmes with our allies in the South we might tend to forget to follow our own thinking and doing in this process. At the same time this first phase is essential and we should put an effort in it, to learn about what and how we are doing. So we should add a “monitoring” system to this aspect of the process as soon as possible. I am not referring to something like a formal or usual monitoring system, but a system which helps us to remember why we did what, with whom and based on which assumptions. Only in that way we can learn from it and become able to improve our actions in the future.
  • The question however is how to implement such a monitoring system as it has to be very flexible and truly reflecting what is happening. I mean that it should not only show the “reality” as it is interpreted by us as staff of ICCO-HQ, but also from the perspective of the ones with whom we are developing these programmes. So we will need more and different “eyes” and “ears”.
  • But these eyes and ears should have a same (or at least very similar) vision on what and how we as ICCO-Alliance want to achieve with the the programmatic approach. So where and how do we find them?
  • We also need to develop a common language with all involved in this process of explicitly implementing the programmatic approach, so we are sure that we have a same or very similar interpretation about all these (new or old) concepts we are talking about. Even if we do not all agree, we need to know on what we do, or do not agree. I am quite sure this is not the case yet.
  • The reason for implementing an explicit programmatic approach should have little or nothing to do with doing new things, or doing different things or things different. It has all to do with adapting our doing and our (institutional) being to new circumstances and – not to forget - making maximum use of the experience of all involved, be they existing or new partners or otherwise experienced parties.
Of course there is much more to say after a week long of inspiring meetings. But I just want to leave it at this point for the moment. If you have any remarks, questions or whatever reaction, please leave a comment.

Friday, 18 January 2008

Introducing Interwise: 'Hello, can you hear me now?'

I am part of the steering group of the Capacity Development Initiative of ACT (a worldwide alliance of emergency aid agencies, which is composed of 10 people in 10 countries - ranging from India to Congo to Haiti. Last December the coordinating office of ACT in Geneva organised a teleconference. It was great - as was the Swisscom bill, which was 2000 euro for 2 hours of interaction. We need to have such a conference at least 4 times a year, so you will imagine that with our limited budget there won't be other traditional teleconferences.

Last Monday the steering group finally met for the first time in Geneva. ACT, becoming a bit nervous about future phone bills, approached ICCO to find out about our experience with alternatives for teleconferencing. Maarten Boers offered to help out with Interwise, of which ICCO has purchased a licence last year. We ended up doing a live conference of the steering group with Maarten sitting in Utrecht.

Interwise is based on a small piece of free software that every user needs to download. Only the conference organiser needs to buy a licence in order to book a virtual conference room, where up to 50 users anywhere in the world can log in for the conference. Of course it carries speech (as any telephone), but you can also use webcams, share powerpoints, send chat messages to all or some of the participants, and so on.

So, how was it received? A mixture of disbelief, and of eager acceptance. The first attempt to connect with Maarten failed which lead to statements like: 'just what I expected'. But when we discovered the right button for the volume control, everybody got excited: 'Hey! is that guy on the screen Maarten?' 'Are you sure this is at no cost?' 'Why doesn't everybody to this?'. Carlos from El Salvador and Arshinta from Indonesia had wireless access on their laptops in the room, and it took them less than 4 minutes to download the software, register their name, type in the unique conference URL, and enter the conference.

The challenge now is to ensure the others prepare their computers for our next Interwise try, mid-February. Any suggestions how we can do that are welcome!

Herman Brouwer

Friday, 7 December 2007

Some questions and answers about the ComPart Flowers

>Some time ago I posted an introduction about the ComPart flowers on the I-collaborate blog (which by the way is a very interesting blog). Two people gave some interesting comments and asked some questions. I am posting my reactions on this blog, because I assume they are of interest for you as reader of this blog.

Joitske Hulsebosch experienced some problems with bandwidth in Southern countries, especially with Delicious and wiki. The way we try to tackle the bandwidth problem is to keep the wiki’s as “light” as possible avoiding (large) pictures for example. For delicious of course it remains a problem when the set of tags gets (too) large. Therefore we try to be efficient with the tags and seek specificity using “cleaver” combinations of tags. But of course even then for some partners in the South the bandwidth problem remains. That is why we will be transferring the most important information which can be found on the wiki’s and blog’s by way of memory sticks. The idea is that when a colleague visits a partner organisation the information on the sticks will be downloaded on the computer of this partner, who in that way also can stay updated, unfortunately a little later though.

An anonymous person asked a couple of questions, a first one about the handling of the scattered information among the “numerous” online services. Indeed this is a challenge. For all services which will be used by normal users as wiki, blog, delicious and google we use one shared password and where necessary one shared username. So if you know the username and the password you can access and contribute to these services. Of course this password, at a certain moment, will get “too known” outside the circle of intended users. As soon as we get such indications we will change the password and inform all who have to know, and if we forget someone they will have to ask ;-)

For the administration of these services we use other passwords only known to the admins. The same applies for services which will not be used by normal users as Conduit and feedburner.

A second question was about how we handle sensitive information. That is indeed a “sensitive” issue which leads to many discussions. What information is sensitive and why? The starting point however is that all information is public unless there are clear reasons to keep it private. A sound principle I guess for our type of organisation, working with public funding. But of course we also use private versions of the tools with passwords only known to those who should have access. Anyhow we try to avoid working with more than two or three different passwords as to have everything as accessible as possible. And in certain cases we just do not let the information get beyond our firewall.

A third question was how participants would decide on the way they would like to get the information and avoid double information. In fact that is all up to every individual user. Anyone can choose whether or not to subscribe to email alerts or feeds, using an I-Google page or not, to have a daily look at the wiki’s or not. And of course the idea is that anyone who gets to information on the web which is of their own – or for that matter their colleagues – interest, is stimulated to tag that information in Delicious, because this tagging is the “motor” which makes the information flowing (in a selective way).

And of course it would be a good idea to follow anonymous’ suggestion to write up some usage-scenarios. However we do not have them yet. Our idea is to construct the whole system by doing and sharing our experiences and in that way learning how to improve or way of using these services.

To end I want to thank Joitske and Anonymous for their interesting contributions. I hope it will stimulate others to react on the postings in this Blog as well.