A Complimentary Approach to Developing Progress Markers in Outcome Mapping

1. A Complimentary Approach to Developing Progress Markers in Outcome Mapping Julius Nyangaga and Heidi Schaeffer

2. Objectives of the webinar 1. To share results of the Progress Marker Research.2. To discuss how the results can be used to think about change in Boundary Partners and to develop Progress Markers.

3. Introduction: boundary partners and outcome challenges Boundary Partners are Individuals, Groups or Organizations that you do not control but in whom you wish to support transformation. The Outcome Challenge is the ideal transformation (in the form of behavior, actions, interactions, relationships, cultures, policies and practices) sought in the boundary partner.

4. Progress Markersare graduated indicators of transformation towards the outcome challenge • They are the OM indicators of change. • Starting from what is expected to be immediate reactionsto the project/intervention … • They demonstrate progression in transformation … over timeorgreater commitment to desired change

5. Progress Markers = change ladder Love to see PMs Like to see PMs Expect to see PMs

6. Key rule for progress markers … PMs are changes associated WITH a Boundary Partner: For a Farmer Field Schools (FFS) project, the PMs for extension agents as boundary partners included: • The extension agents are working directly with the farming communities to establish the FFS • They (the extension agents) run FFS sessions with a high level of participation by both men and women farmers • They form networks of FFS facilitators for knowledge and information exchange, peer-support PMs here are about transformation in the extension agents, .. and not the farmers or other actors

7. Examples of Bad Progress Markers They must be about observable changes in the actions, interactions, relationships, procedures or policies of a boundary partner. e.g. The effects of climate change on poverty are reduced. They must be measurable. e.g. Awareness about the effects of climate change is increased.

8. Progress Markers in the OM manual The Outcome Mapping manual proposes a way to categorize changes in boundary partners (the Progress markers) as a progression in phased steps from ‘expect to see →like to see →love to see’. Hypothesis:Behavioural change in BPs follows an observable patterns that can make them easier to develop

9. Progress Marker Research – method 32 sets of Progress Markers (indicators in OM) from 13 Projects (using Outcome Mapping for PPM&E) were analyzed in 2009/2010 to determine if there were comparable patterns in the stages of change in Boundary Partners Analysis entailed reviewing the project, the BP and targeted Outcome Challenge and placing the progress marker into categories of practice

10. Progress Marker Research – method Some of the projects and their boundary partners: …

11. Boundary partner sets – an example Project: Project: ILRI implementing Farmer Field Schools for livestock keepers

13. Progress Marker Research – findings P1 transformation: Progress Markers Showing practices around knowledge acquisition about project’s intentions, and building required capacity The BP is ... “... ‘interacting with’ the project team to learn about the technology” “...raising questions and issues that (the Project) will address (the BP’s) uptake of the technology” “...seeking information on issues related to the technology” “...clarifying their purpose, methods of organisation and internal functioning in line with project vision, mission”

15. Progress Marker Research – findings P2 transformation: Progress Markers showing greater involvement (in the project mission and activities) and promotionof targeted vision to others The BP is ... “...establishing and expanding their membership base ...” “...initiating activities/meetings during which members and other stakeholders can share, learn and cooperate to undertake project activities” “...identifying & collaborating with key actors of the supported value chain”

17. Progress Marker Research – findings P3 transformation: Progress Markers showing ownership of transformation through own investment, policy influence and institutionalization The BP is ... “...modifying/creating their (policies) and institutional structures to mainstream the change” “... generating their own funds and re-investing in (related) community projects” “... establishing mechanisms to share and review work programmes across departments”

19. Progress Markers, BPs and Context influence A BP’s set of markers developed for and with a partner will strongly be related to the project’s context ... will depend on the stage of project implementation and the alignment status of the BP to the project goals and the shared vision of change

20. What phases of change tell us about BPs P1 transformation: Progress Markers Showing knowledge acquisition about project intention, and building required capacity ... crucial when introducing a project to new boundary partners ... vital in getting support from those disinclined to the mission or vision Aim: to increase their knowledge regarding the Program’s background and justification so as to develop acceptance

21. What phases of change tell us about BPs P2 transformation: Progress Markers showing greater involvement (in the project mission and activities) and promotion of targeted vision to others ... working with BPs who are relatively more aligned and ready to support the project’s mission BP helps translate project intentions into what they would like/prefer and promoting the project’s vision and mission to other stakeholders)

22. What phases of change tell us about BPs P3 transformation: Progress Markers showing ownership of transformation through own investment, policy influence and institutionalization ... working with BPs demonstrating support, the program would be to entrench targeted changes Use P3 types of PMs (‘culturalization', institutionalization and regularization of the change through long term policies) to develop ownership and sustainability

23. P1, P2, P3 Circle of Change

24. Comparing with “Expect to, Like to, Love to” Expect to see P1: Building interest, capacity The whole set is developed Like to see P2: Involved, promoting Set will depend on BP alignment and project stage Love to see P3: Owning & sustaining Both approaches can complement each other

25. Progress Markers are NOT linear Revised P2 P1 Revised P1 P3 P2 Revised P3

26. The Markers are NOT linear – an example • Example: BP Outcome Challenge • BP establishing participation throughout the organization in Change Management • ... maintaining close working relationships with Head of Governments and other officials. • ... demonstrates strong leadership, frequent face-to-face communication with staff. • .. recognises the achievements of teams and staff and adheres to the agreed-upon model

27. The Markers are NOT linear – an example Example: BP Progress Markers

28. Conclusions and Recommendations Expect to see P1: Building interest, capacity The whole set is developed Like to see P2: Involved, promoting Set will depend on BP alignment and project stage Love to see P3: Owning & sustaining Both approaches can complement each other

29. End Thank You