Ecb Project Case Study

ECB PROJECT CASE STUDY Examining an Inter-Agency Community of Practice: the ECB Accountability & Impact Measurement Advisory Group Loretta Ishida and Katy Love August 2011 1 Examining an Inter‐Agency Community of Practice: the ECB Accountability and Impact Measurement Advisory Group 1. Background The Emergency Capacity Building (ECB) Project aims to improve the speed, quality, and effectiveness of the humanitarian community in saving lives, improving welfare, and protecting the rights of people in emergency situations. To this end, CARE International, Catholic Relief Services, Mercy Corps, Oxfam, Save the Children, and World Vision International have come together in a unique collaboration to build field, agency, and sector level emergency capacity. The Emergency Capacity Building (ECB) Project focuses on improving capacity in three cross‐cutting themes: Staff Capacity, Disaster Risk Reduction, and Accountability & Impact Measurement (AIM). In the first phase of the ECB Project (2005‐2007), over 20 tools, research products, and inter‐agency program approaches were developed in each of these areas. Now in its second phase, the six participating agencies and five inter‐agency country consortia have developed collaborative work plans to improve their capacity across these three themes. Agencies and country consortia both are supported in this work by three inter‐agency Advisory groups brought together at the global level. The three inter‐agency Advisory groups share their technical expertise to develop small multi‐agency projects, and provide support to the consortia for their country‐level activities. Each agency has designated one primary Advisor and one alternate to each Advisory group. The Advisors are, for the most part, headquarters staff (though some Advisory groups benefit from country office staff participation) with full‐time jobs. These Advisors support the ECB project for up to 25% of their time. The individual work plan time allocated is considered an agency “match” or collaboration cost, and is not paid by ECB Project funding. Without each agency committed to assigning specific ECB time to the salaries of Advisors, it was initially not clear how active each Advisory group might be sustained over five years. 2. Community of Practice by Design Etienne Wenger, a leader in the theory and practice of communities of practice defines them as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly.”1 Wenger describes three characteristics of a community of practice: 1) members are committed to a particular area of common interest; 2) members build relationships so as to learn from each other by sharing information, helping each other, and working on joint projects; and 3) members engage in practice together through shared experiences, tools, and ways of solving problems. According to 1 Wenger, Etienne. 2006. “Communities of Practice: A Brief Introduction” www.ewenger.com/theory/index.htm 2 Wenger, these three elements are the critical components of a community of practice (COP), and it is “by developing these three elements in parallel that one cultivates such a community.”2 The ECB Project clearly defines the Advisory groups’ function as a community of practice. ECB’s Advisory groups serve three main roles in the Project: 1) Provide technical oversight and support to ensure the Project’s work is technically robust and of high quality in planning and implementation. 2) Disseminate outputs and learning from the implementation of the Project’s work. 3) Function as a community of practice by sharing information and experience and developing common positions. As COPs, each Advisory group carries out the following activities: meeting through monthly teleconferences and periodic face‐to‐face meetings, discussing in between meetings through email exchanges, sharing resources, and implementing joint activities with a shared goal. Advisors are equals, and no Advisory group has a designated leader. Decisions are made by consensus within each group. All groups receive the support of the global project coordination team. This support facilitates communication and collaboration, and includes the following activities: orienting new Advisors, maintaining email databases, developing communications materials (website, newsletters and regular updates), setting up conference calls, building and orienting Advisors to the knowledge base intranet platform, preparing the monthly meeting chairperson, taking minutes, and facilitating meetings occasionally as necessary. All Advisory groups began meeting by telephone conference at the end of 2008. Several months later, Project stakeholders came together to define common gaps and priorities, and to develop joint activity work plans. Advisors oversee and support work on those joint work plans, in addition to meeting regularly by phone and in person to share learning and experience from their agency. 3. Results Using Wenger’s characteristics of a community of practice, we examined the ECB Accountability and Impact Measurement Advisory group. Based on those criteria, we found that the AIM Advisory group fit the profile outlined in Wenger’s research. Common interest The Advisory groups worked quickly to identify specific areas of common interest. AIM Advisors focus their work in the areas of learning, accountability, impact measurement, and monitoring and evaluation. The group is particularly interested in developing and supporting a joint needs assessment approach, joint evaluations, accountability frameworks and systems, training, and more. In fact, several Advisors’ individual job descriptions or work plans are very closely aligned with the work plan of the AIM Advisory group, and their engagement with the group is seen to add value to their organization’s broader strategy and work. 2 Ibid. 3 Since they work on similar issues, the AIM Advisory group has helped individual Advisors with their responsibilities within their respective agencies. One of the CARE Advisors said, “I’m just as likely to ask an AIM Advisor for materials or support as I am to ask an [agency] colleague. I get access to resources I would have never seen otherwise.” Indeed, many have shared resources and experience to avoid duplication of effort and to capture learning from different perspectives. CRS, for instance, benefitted from a guidance document about real time evaluations from Oxfam. CRS adapted the guidance to fit its needs and then shared that guidance and experience in real time evaluations with Save the Children. Save the Children also provided CRS with job descriptions for accountability positions. During the Haitian earthquake response, World Vision shared tools in Haitian Creole with others, saving agencies valuable time and resources. In addition, most AIM Advisors regularly deploy in emergencies, sometimes to the same emergency. In these settings, they often meet and collaborate in person as they are often deployed with similar program functions. In other instances, one deployed Advisor may meet with other agencies’ in‐country staff. For example, one AIM Adviser held a joint accountability training based on ECB tools in Pakistan and again in Ethiopia, open to all ECB agency staff. Relationship building The ECB Project was designed to bring the AIM Advisors together. A joint commitment to the areas of impact measurement and accountability is the critical foundation to the group’s purpose, but would not have been sufficient if professional and personal relationships did not develop. The relationships among the individuals developed over time due to several critical factors. First, AIM Advisors regularly meet in person and have built trust in their group. Face‐to‐face meetings are critical to build trust, and are reinforced by regular monthly phone meetings. Occasional miscommunications or misunderstandings receive prompt attention and are often quickly resolved. Cooperation, though difficult at time, has proved to be the best way forward and allows each agency to better meet the needs of disaster‐affected communities. An Oxfam Advisor noted that “the levels of trust are high, really very high considering most of us really haven't worked together very much before the ECB Project.” AIM Advisors have a commitment to the principles of accountability, where Advisors “practice what they preach.” Each Advisor, in his/her given job, encourages transparency, cooperation, meaningful participation, and accountability in his/her agencies. These values are modeled within the Advisory group; people share experiences and resource materials, follow through on commitments, and are accountable to each other. Advisors have common priorities and overlapping work plans, and use the ECB Project to achieve their individual and agency goals. One CARE AIM Advisor noted that he used the ECB Project’s work to help develop CARE’s Humanitarian Accountability Framework, and Mercy Corps has done the same. Both have solicited advice and input from their colleagues. When the priorities of some are not the priorities of all, however, Advisors have the option to ‘opt out’ of certain projects. An Oxfam Advisor noted that this is important and allows her to focus on the more relevant projects. 4 Finally, Advisors have a stronger voice in arenas when they develop common advocacy agendas. In working with sector partners like ALNAP, HAP, or the UN, ECB agencies have a ready‐made peer group to discuss issues and positions of each agency at the field, regional, and headquarters

Load more