Collaborative Learning Approach to NGO Security Management

1. Collaborative Learning Approach to NGO Security Management International Consultation Washington, DC 27 September 2010

2. Objectives • To generate discussion about acceptance as a security management approach. • To provide an opportunity for participants to learn about other organizations’ experiences implementing acceptance as a security management approach. • To inform and design field research through a better understanding of headquarters’ level perceptions about acceptance.

4. Session 1: Key Concepts Objective: To reach consensus on key concepts of acceptance as an approach to security management. Task: Discuss your organizational definition and identify the main concepts that underlie it.

5. Session 1: Key Concepts Respect for mission/purpose Stakeholder analysis – contextual analysis of all power players (with potential to impact you) Should be used in negotiations for access, understanding motivations of actors, chains of command, etc Power balances; Negotiation mechanisms of community Consultative process with stakeholders (very wide range of actors – observers, beneficiaries) Transparency – genuine process Pro-active and continual engagement with consultations and analysis

6. Session 1: Key Concepts Perceptions – understanding how you are perceived and how other organizations in the area are viewed (how that might impact your work) Tolerance v. embrace (degrees of acceptance) Negotiations – to arrive at culturally appropriate understandings to gain access to see if they are doing the right programs for their presence there Component of a security strategy – not comprehensive in and of itself

7. Session 1: Key Concepts Many of key concepts for acceptance mirror good practices for programming Humanitarian principles – independence, impartiality, neutrality (should inform this balance) Acceptance for aid and development may look different for a humanitarian organization Delivery – following through on promises, commitments or acceptance may be in jeopardy Relationships – that enable you to be informed by actors of potential security risks Security as enabling effective programming

8. Session 1: Key Concepts Application of Do no harm to security principles (ex. use of armed guards contributes to small arms in community) Understand impacts of work Not putting people at unnecessary risk Balanced – take into account ethnic divisions, impacts of supporting one community and not another Passive acceptance is not acceptance

9. Session 2: Activities at Field Level Objective: Identify specific activities/indicators used by your organization at field level. Task: Identify specific field level activities that your organization has in place to implement an acceptance approach.

10. Session 2: Activities at Field Level

11. Session 2: Activities at Field Level

12. Session 2: Activities at Field Level

13. Session 2: Activities at Field Level

14. Session 2: Activities at Field Level

15. Session 2: Activities at Field Level • Back to the ideal vision –what’s missing? Managing to respond to the sphere of things outside your control? Develop a more critical view of your own analysis so that you question to make sure it still holds Know the context and culture extremely well so that you can detect shifts/changes Subtext and nuance – be able to hear the tone of conversation Staff selection and turnover (ensuring ideas are transmitted to new staff) Coordination/Information Sharing within community

16. Session 2: Activities at Field Level Objective: Identify specific activities/indicators used by your organization at field level Task: Identify verifiable indicators for each activity.

17. Session 3: Promoting Acceptance at Headquarters Objective: Identify strategies for promoting acceptance at headquarters.

18. Session 3: Promoting Acceptance at Headquarters

19. Session 3: Promoting Acceptance at Headquarters Objective: Identify strategies for promoting acceptance at headquarters. Task: Give specific examples of how these units think about acceptance and how they incorporate it into what they do.

20. HQ discussions RE acceptance • Disconnect b/t program and security staff in terminology • Requirement of proposals to go through review by security (different mechanisms for review) • Opportunities with auditors and program evaluators for information from the ground about perceptions • Donor branding and acceptance • Ways to talk with HR – recruitment, training, induction; in some cases its country-level HR • Often reactionary discussions after specific security events (can be more or less oriented towards acceptance)

21. HQ discussions RE acceptance • Orientation for new staff • Discussions at HQ level is opportunity to demystify and “de-demonize” security • Discussions about security/acceptance are happening but not systemmatically • Many discussions involve acceptance conceptually but acceptance terminology is not used (e.g. community engagement) • Discussions about acceptance as a means and an end (process/outcome)

22. Session 4: Successes & Challenges Objective: To identify successes and challenges in promoting acceptance at headquarters and in the field. Task: Take 5 minutes to complete the matrix and share within your group.

23. Session 4: Successes & Challenges Success Challenge Field HQ

24. Session 5: Next Steps Objective: To generate input and support from participants for the next stages of the research project.

25. Session 5: Next Steps Your Support….. • National staff from Uganda, South Sudan, and Kenya to attend training in Nairobi and to serve as field researchers • Hosting and logistical support for learning teams in Kenya, South Sudan, Uganda • Field contacts – program managers and local partners