Process Documentation

Process Documentation and its future use within the Community-Based Fisheries Management Project CBFM-2 Roger Lewins Dhaka 2003

Explaining PD… PD in the context of CBFM-2… Presentation Outline…. 1. the concept - “what is process?” 2. its development - early experiences & examples 3. lessons learned 4. “where are the processes?” 5. stakeholders, indicators, methods 6. analysing and interpreting feedback 7. drawing from discussion... guidelines for PD in CBFM-2

Part 1. What is “Process” ?

What is “Process” ? Definition 1. Policies, Institutions and Processes and Sustainable Livelihoods The famous PIPs provide the environment that shapes livelihoods • In reality PIPs merge.. • policy is shaped by institutions such as culture • local access rights are both institutions and processes

What is “Process” ? Definition 1. Policies, Institutions and Processes and Sustainable Livelihoods “If structures (organisations etc.) can be thought of as hardware, then processes can be thought of as software” SL Guidance Sheets The way things get done …everyday procedure

What is “Process” ? Definition 2. Processes within Development Projects “Processes” are actions that go to produce “outcomes” in projects. …activities (formal) and the way things get done (informal)

What is “Process” ? Definition 2. Processes within Development Projects Intended Processes Intended Outcomes In an ideal world... • regular community/staff dialogue • awareness building • inclusion of women • new management institutions • environmental sustainability • social development

Intended Processes (activities) ActualOutcomes Extrainterventions Changing interpretations Skill differences Revised expectations Processes within Development Projects However…..project processes become more than agreed activities...

Processes within Development Projects Unforeseen access issues Extrainterventions Conflict resolution (new+old) Distractions - unrelated demands Skill differences Revised expectations Changing interpretations

Processes within Development Projects Extrainterventions Between sites Skill differences Between activities & staff Across implementation phases Revised expectations Changing interpretations

Processes within Development Projects Extrainterventions Skill differences Greater local knowledge Revised expectations Unforeseen obstacles Unforeseen opportunities Changing interpretations

Processes within Development Projects Extrainterventions Skill differences Revised expectations Site-specific project “institutions” Changing interpretations Prioritisation of activities The “reading” of project objectives

FORMAL Project-ascribed activities & procedure INFORMAL Evolved project activities & procedure design of participation & CBOs staff/community interaction set of technical options learning & habit-forming design of staff reporting prioritisation of reporting Processes within Development Projects Two types of process...

Processes within Development Projects Donors DoF MoL Project Staff HQ Project Field Staff Project Targets Union Officials Upazilla Officials Non-targets Processes at different scales National Interface Local

Donors DoF MoL Project Staff HQ Processes within Development Projects Processes at different scales Relevance at the national policy level... • can donors create a better environment for integrated management? • what co-management relationships work well? • can (should) government change its emphasis?

Project Field Staff Union Officials Upazilla Officials Processes within Development Projects Processes at different scales New interest in relevance of existing formal institutions... • does the project work with or against wishes of local government? • can local government take forward some project tasks, or.. • are new institutions required?

Project Field Staff Project Targets Non-targets Processes within Development Projects Processes at different scales A focus of previous research projects... • impacts on non-targets • function and character of staff/community relations • potential sustainability for co-management

Other reasons to study this level... Project Field Staff Project Targets interface between project & community Non-targets Processes within Development Projects Processes at different scales • project CBOs are here…..voice & input? • need to monitor formal structures and processes • need to monitor actual interaction • where dialogue and action cross over

Processes within Development Projects National Policies Donors DoF MoL Project Staff HQ Project Field Staff Institutions Interface Project Targets Union Officials Upazilla Officials Non-targets Processes Local

Processes within Development Projects Outcomes are usually monitored…. why monitor process? It helps... • explain differences between sites • identify good and poor practice • reveal externalities (unrecorded impacts) • uncover strengths and weaknesses of project approach • detect problems before they worsen • detect new opportunities • highlight the effectiveness of project institutions • capture learning process for knowledge sharing

Processes within Development Projects Outcomes are usually monitored…. why monitor process? Projects are complicated on paper and become more so... • human & unpredictable systems • stakeholders & agenda widen • evolve differently in each setting • may diverge from envisioned design

Processes within Development Projects Discrepancies between plans and practice “The cow is in the book - but not in the shed!” Bangladeshi proverb

Part 2. Development of PD - early experiences & examples

To document the PAPD methodology at 3 sites Methods for Consensus Building for Management of CPRs To evaluate processes in 3 distinct projects work in progress… To review processes across a range of projects Institutions project Case Study 1 Case Study 2 PD used within 2 LWI projects

Case Study 1 Process Documenatation of the PAPD method for Consensus Building • to independently assess the PAPD workshops • to help identify strengths, limits & prospects • to test a process documentationmethodology

Using indicators to break up the evaluation... Good Consensus Building approaches should demonstrate: • Shared and common purpose • Full participation • Perceived as fair • Create a mutual understanding of goals • Informs, engages and interests participants • Provide inclusive solutions • Encourage challenges to the status quo • Be self-organising

understanding, participation & fairness Increased awareness & changing relations Using indicators to break up the evaluation... Shared and common purpose Full participation Perceived as fair Create a mutual understanding of goals Informs, engages and interests participants Provide inclusive solutions Encourage challenges to the status quo Be self-organising

Consensus mid-course end-of-workshop Using indicators to break up the evaluation... Process Outcomes understanding, participation & fairness increased awareness & changing relations

understanding, participation & fairness increased awareness & changing relations Indicators 1 - 4 for mid-course evaluation Using indicators to break up the evaluation... 1. Shared and common purpose 2. Full participation 3. Perceived as fair 4. Create a mutual understanding of goals 5. Informs, engages and interests participants 6. Provide inclusive solutions 7. Encourage challenges to the status quo 8. Be self-organising

understanding, participation & fairness Indicators 1-8 for end-of-workshop evaluation increased awareness & changing relations Using indicators to break up the evaluation... 1. Shared and common purpose 2. Full participation 3. Perceived as fair 4. Create a mutual understanding of goals 5. Informs, engages and interests participants 6. Provide inclusive solutions 7. Encourage challenges to the status quo 8. Be self-organising

Consulting the relevant stakeholders 3 Survey Target Groups at the each site: • Facilitators (midcourse and end-of-workshop) feedback on workshop (problems, unusual directions, unexpected discoveries etc.) • Participants from each stakeholder group (end-of-workshop) feedback on perceived relevance, problems & level of understanding • Neighbours of participants (end-of-workshop) feedback on level of understanding throughout the community - the “spread effect”

1.) Areas for discussion for semi-structured interviews • for smaller numbers of key informants • generally for qualitative information Using indicators to form lines of enquiry Indicators help develop... Good discussion is based on open questions….. How….? Why….? What….? Provide us with contextual information and overview of important background issues

2.) Types of question for questionnaires • for larger numbers of similar respondents • for more quantifiable information Using indicators to form lines of enquiry Indicators help develop... Ensure responses can be tallied Can reveal differing perspectives between stakeholder groups and trends

Using indicators to form lines of enquiry Questions to Facilitators

Using indicators to form lines of enquiry mid-course evaluation Questions to Facilitators Checklist for semi-structured interviews 1. Shared and common purpose • “ How do participants understand the purpose of workshop?” • “Are any participants confused by any activities?” • “How do participants understand relevance of activities?”

Using indicators to form lines of enquiry mid-course evaluation Questions to Facilitators to guide semi-structured interviews 2. Full participation • “Do all participants contribute to the workshop?” • “Do some contribute too much?” • “Any differences in participation between stakeholder groups?”

Using indicators to form lines of enquiry mid-course evaluation Questions to Facilitators to guide semi-structured interviews 3. Perceived as fair • “Any participants annoyed by behaviour of others or format?” • “How well has workshop represented opinions within groups?” • “Any complaints about direction or activities of workshop?”

Using indicators to form lines of enquiry mid-course evaluation Questions to Facilitators to guide semi-structured interviews 4. Create a mutual understanding of goals • “How has level of understanding increased within groups?” • “How could level of understanding been further increased?”

to guide semi-structured interviews Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Facilitators 5. Informs, engages and interests participants • “Did activities keep participants’ interest?” • “What did participants learn?”

to guide semi-structured interviews Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Facilitators 6. Provide inclusive solutions • “Did 2nd plenary focus on issues for all or few stakeholders?” • “Did some groups feature more strongly than others?”

to guide semi-structured interviews Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Facilitators 7. Encourage challenges to the status quo • “How will the workshop lead to new ways of doing things?” • “Will this lead to new relations & support between groups?”

to guide semi-structured interviews Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Facilitators 8. Be self-organising • “Did the workshop develop as expected, or were you surprised?” • “How active were participants in guiding direction of discussion?”

Using indicators to form lines of enquiry Questions to Participants

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 1. Shared and common purpose • “What do you think was the purpose of workshop?” • “Were the activities relevant?” • “Was anything confusing?” • “Do you think the workshop was a success?”

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 2. Full participation • “Could you communicate your opinion sufficiently?” • “Did some groups add more than others?”

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 3. Perceived as fair • “Did the workshop represent the diversity of interests?” • “How fair was the workshop?”

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 4. Create a mutual understanding of goals • “Have you learned about other groups & their needs?” • “Have you learned about other people like you?”

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 5. Informs, engages and interests participants • “Was the workshop interesting?” • “Were any of the activities irrelevant to you?” • “What did you learn new & interesting?”

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 6. Provide inclusive solutions • “Did discussions & plans address your issues?” • “Did discussions & plans address just some stakeholders?”

For questionnaire Indicators 1-8 Using indicators to form lines of enquiry end-of-workshop evaluation Questions to Participants 7. Encourage challenges to the status quo • “How will the workshop lead to new ways of doing things?” • “Will there be new relations and support between some?”

Process Documentation