1 outcome mapping training workshop april 2011 dtalk dublin, ireland
TRANSCRIPT
1
Outcome Mapping Training Workshop
April 2011
DTALK
Dublin, Ireland
2
workshop objectives
✓ Clarify what OM is - and is not
✓ Help you decide if & when to apply OM
✓ Enable you to apply some tools immediately
by means of a lively learning experience
3
the outcome mapping story
4
✓ New vocabulary
✓ OM is not a panacea
✓ OM is shaped by context
before we start, be aware...
5
✓mid-1990s: need to demonstrate results
✓1998: Barry Kibel and Outcome Engineering
✓methodological collaboration with FRAO & NEPED (IDRC funded projects)
✓2000: publication of manual in English
✓presenting, training & using OM globally
✓2006: www.outcomemapping.ca
a brief history
6
©TOM Jochen Enterprises, Möckernstr.78 10965 Berlin
7
focus of outcome mapping
Behavioural Changes
community capacity & ownership increases
program influence decreases
8
the problem with « impact »
Impact implies Development Implies
Cause & effect Open system
Positive, intended results Unexpected positive & negative results occur
Focus on ultimate effects Upstream effects are important
Credit goes to a single contributor
Multiple actors create results & need credit
Story ends when program obtains success
Change process never ends
9
What are we trying to accomplish and how?
What do we want to learn?
What do we want to know?
10
key ideas in
11
look at the bigger picture
See yourself as a part of an
interconnected web of relationships and
systems
12
“You cannot step into the same river twice..”Heraclitus, 6th c.
Greek philosopher
13
increase our knowledge of the processes we are engaged in
know if and how we made a difference
recognize and share credit with other contributors
given this complexity, we need to :
14
15
nested spheres
Project
Partners
Beneficiaries
Adapted from: Steff Deprez VVOB-CEGO, Nov 2006
sphere of ‘control’
sphere of influence
sphere of interest
16
focus on direct partners
Identify the individuals, groups, and organizations you work with directly to support their contribution to the vision
17
Why focus on behaviour changes?
✓ Development is done by and for people
✓ While a program may be able to influence peoples actions, it cannot control them.
✓ Ultimate responsibility rests with the people affected
18
checking in
How would people react to these ideas in your work environment?
Could thinking about ‘behavior change’ or ‘sphere of influence’ be useful in your work?
19
uses
20
PLANNING clarify intentions
MONITORINGtrack program performance & partners’ progress
EVALUATIONdesign & conduct a use-oriented evaluation
primary uses
21
principles of use
Flexible: modular to be adapted to use & context
Complementary: combine with other methods
22
principles of use
Participatory: seeks dialogue and collaboration with partners
Evaluative: promotes culture of reflection, results oriented thinking, and social & organizational learning
23
where is the map?
✓ OM is a guide to the journey we take with our partners. We co-create the map.
✓ It focuses on the intention and what happens along the way
✓ The map is not the territory, it shows the route taken
24
step 1: vision
Intentional Design
25
I have a dream!
Martin Luther King, Jr.August 28, 1963
26
vision guides…
…and energizes the team
27
improved human, social, & environmental wellbeing
28
vision in graphic form, Nagaland (India)
29
??vision facilitation questions
Imagine that, 5-10 years from now, the program has been extremely successful. Things have improved beyond your most ambitious dreams.
• What changes have occurred?
• What (& how) are your intended beneficiaries doing?
• What are your partners doing?
• Describe the better world you are seeking.
30
step 2: mission
Intentional Design
31
The mission is that “bite” of the vision statement on which the
program is going to focus.
32
mission statement
Describes how the program intends to
• Apply its resources in support of the vision
• Specifies the areas in which it will work
• Support the achievement of outcomes by its direct partners
33
out of the entire forest of possibilities,
it is the tree you have chosen to water.
34
your mission is your “business”
•What do you do?
•Who are your principle collaborators?
•How do you work with them?
35
Summary
✓ about the future✓ observable✓ idealistic ✓ not about the program
✓ feasible
✓ identifies activities and relationships
✓ about the program
Vision Mission
36
checking in
What is the important difference between vision and mission?
In your work, is this a useful way to define these two concepts?
37
step 3: boundary partners
Intentional Design
38
sphere of influence
Program
= boundary partners
The rest of the world
39
boundary partners
those individuals, groups, and organizations with whom the program:
• interacts directly to effect change
• anticipates opportunities for influence
• engages in mutual learning
40
boundary partners have boundary partners
program program’s bp bp’s bp
41
INGO
IDRC
BAIF
StateNGO
StateNGO
StateNGO
StateNGO
StateNGO
StateNGO
SHG Police CommunityLeaders
Families Banks PHCs
42
• Identify possible actors or stakeholders
• Conduct stakeholder analysis
• Categorize stakeholders (including the subset “boundary partners”)
• Identify boundary partners
• Identify boundary partners of boundary partners
Identifying boundary partners
43
HIGH
LOW
Tool for stakeholder analysis
HIGH
44
moving from stakeholders...
45
...to boundary partners
project
46
strategic partners
selected for their potential to contribute to the mission
a person or group with whom the program works directly to achieve the mission, without necessarily wanting to change the partner’s behaviour as part of the mission
Examples: Donor agency
Contracted service
Other NGOs doing similar work
Media
47
✓In which individuals, groups, or organizations is your program trying to encourage change as a contribution to the vision?
✓ With whom will you work directly?
✓ Are you choosing boundary partners because you want to influence the ways they help or influence others?
??boundary partners facilitation questions
48
checking In
What are the benefits of classifying some stakeholders as “boundary partners”?