Deutsche Gesellschaft fürTechnische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH

402/96 22e NARMS Department 402 Environmental Protection,Conservation of Natural Resources,Dissemination of Appropriate Technologies(GATE)

Process Monitoring(ProM)

Work Document for project staff

402/96 22e NARMS Department 402 Environmental Protection,Conservation of Natural Resources,Dissemination of Appropriate Technologies(GATE)

Pilot ProjectNatural Resource Management bySelf-help Promotion (RMSH)

Process Monitoring(ProM)

Work Document forproject staff

Published by:Deutsche Gesellschaft fürTechnische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbHPostfach 51 80D-65726 EschbornFederal Republic of GermanyTel.: (+49) 6196 79-0 Fax: (+49) 6196 79-11 15

Department 402, Environmental Protection, Conservation of Natural Resources,Dissemination of Appropriate Technologies (GATE)

Pilot Project: Natural Resource Management by Self-help Promotion (NARMS)Wachsbleiche 1D-53111 BonnFederal Republic of GermanyTel.: (+49) 228-98 57 00 Fax: (+49) 228-98 57 018

Compiled by: Arthur Zimmermann and Markus Engler – KEK/CDC ConsultantsEdited by: Thomas Schwedersky, Oliver KarkoschkaTranslated by: J. Tazir

Contents

Foreword 1

1 How to read and use the Document 3

2 Introduction: process steering 5

21 What is process monitoring (ProM)? 5

22 Which processes do we mean? 7

23 What are the benefits of participation? 8

24 The four basic activ ities of ProM 9

25 The levels of action of ProM 10

3 Key messages and questions 13

31 The project stage 13

32 Changing perspectives 14

33 Tools 15

34 Information 16

35 Project logic and ProM 18

4 Where to start and how to approach the problem 19

41 Landmarks 19

42 On selecting processes 21

43 The right point in time 22

44 Results-oriented monitoring and ProM 23

5 Six fields of observation and tools 24

51 Tasks and roles 25

52 Learning 27

53 Performance of organisations and groups 29

54 Cooperation between groups and organisations 31

55 Conflicts over scarce resources 33

56 Strategies for action 35

6 List of tools 37

1

Foreword

The Process Monitoring/ProM Work Document is a product ofthe supraregional NARMS pilot project of the GTZ. The projectis designed to strengthen and enhance participatory andself-help approaches in natural resource managementprojects, thus helping promote their sustainability.

The Document is aimed primarily at the staff of organisationsdirectly involved in projects of international cooperation.Secondly, it is designed to assist those who facilitate, adviseon and help steer these projects from a distance. In thesetwo roles we are both actors in and observers of theprocesses of technical and social change initiated andsupported by projects.

The involved actors perceive and judge these processesdifferently. Process Monitoring therefore rests on afundamental attitude based on mutual respect and goodwill,across all divides of authority and power. Moreover, we haveto accept that we often miss a great deal, that intentions andinterests are often negotiated backstage of the arena, to whichwe have no access. Bearing that in mind, if we still wish tounderstand actors’ motives when they appear surprising, andcreate fresh scope, then we will need to adopt a circumspectand sensitive approach.

The ProM Document makes two assumptions of the reader:we assume that you will search in six fields of observation forpossible ways to systematically observe processes in whichyou are involved. And we assume that you will set-up aprocess monitoring system in the context of your own workwhich is in tune with the situation in which you find yourself.

With regard to the first assumption: we have defined the sixfields of observation on the basis of an evaluation of ourexperiences. We know there are others.

With regard to the second assumption: in view of the differentcircumstances under which you work, and the aims of naturalresource management projects, it seemed to us moreappropriate to offer you a number of different routes - asopposed to a prescribed formula. What we mean by that is:you ultimately have to decide with whom and on what youwish to reflect on a selective and regular basis. ProM is aboutthis selection of iterative loops.

The elaboration of this work document was and is designed asa learning process. Benchmarks of this learning process were:

What is ProM?Process Monitoring is a termused in professional jargonto denote the careful andsystematic observation ofthe activities of a deliberateselection of processes,enabling us to consult withothers on those processes,and learn how to steer them.

Action and reflection form aniterative loop:We know that what we wantto achieve is brought about inthe first place by our actions.Reflection alone is notenough. But we also knowthat reflection on our actionsand achievements is anecessary precondition forcircumspect action in a highlycomplex and dynamic con-text.

2

• Need assessment with GTZ-desk officers and project staffand evaluation of experiences (2-5/95)

• Elaboration of a discussion paper (6+7/95)• Expert consultation with GTZ-desk officers, -project staff, a

German Development Service-desk officer and externalresource persons (7/95)

• Elaboration of a concept for the work document (8/95)• Discussion on the concept in the NARMS project advisory

council and in the informal working group (9/95)• Elaboration of the draft of the work document (10+11/95)• Discussion of this draft in the informal working group

(12/95)

For precious contributions to the work document we thank theparticipants of the expert consultation and the members of theinformal working group: Dietrich Burger, Reiner Forster, AnneHahn, Ulrich Hösle, Alois Kohler, Harald Lang, Rudolf Rogg,Christina Scherlre, Ann Waters-Bayer and MarionWinkelmann.

This learning process will continue. The focus will now shift tothe level of those projects who are interest to gain practicalexperiences with the work document "in process". Therespective experiences should be jointly evaluated andconceptualized. According to the needs of the project staff, animproved version of this work document might be elaborated.

Thomas Schwedersky Oliver Karkoschka

Bonn, Mai 1996

3

1 How to read and use the Document

The term steering can mean different things, especially wheredevelopment processes are involved. It implies that we havesomething "under control“. This is certainly not the case withTC. Which includes projects pursuing the NARMS approach.

In our work we deal with changing problems and interests. Asa rule, we find it difficult to admit that we understand only little,that we are mistaken, that we are taking decisions based oninadequate data, and that we barely understand the complex,dynamic processes in which we are involved. The ProMDocument is designed to encourage us to make theseadmissions. We ourselves have to develop the confidenceneeded for that.

The basic understanding of development and steering onwhich the ProM Document is based invites you to do threethings: We invite you to get into the habit of stepping back andtaking a detached view of your own role; we invite you to thinkin terms of processes; and we invite you to inquire as to thefundamental values of development. Let us cast light on thatwith a few questions:

(1) We need to ask questions of ourselves.What am I doing here in the first place? What is the point orpurpose of my actions? Who understands that? Who isinterested? What is going on around me? What processes ama part of? Which processes am I promoting or slowing down?How interested am I in other interpretations of the situation?How do others see me? What is expected of me, and bywhom? Which roles do I find difficult/easy? How do I makemyself superfluous?

(2) We question the relationship between the head, theheart and the hand.What significance is attached to my actions and the actions ofothers? On what desires and visions are those actions based?How do others interpret the causal relationships I believe Isee? What impacts do the explanations we construct have onour willingness to act, and on interests and intentions? How doexplain complex processes of social and technical change?What can I learn from my partners?

(3) We need to ask what development means.What have we taken on? Are our plans in harmony with theambitions, aims and visions of our partners? What are wecontributing to? Which decisions brought us to where we arenow? How far have we got? What do we conclude from that?What else needs to be done? What are we going to do?

The first time we interact witha new environment, knowingbarely anything of our part-ners’ intentions and wishes,we make the mistake of ap-plying our own "standards"to interpret and explain situ-ations. This is a trap.

ρ The Document will be ofno use if we

• try to copy solutions in-stead of working themout,

• apply tools mechanically,i.e. without understandinghow they work,

• look for tricks,• are unwilling to take risks

and learn.

4

Projects and programmes of TC are planned and implementedby numerous organisations within a decentral system ofcooperation. Consequently, they cannot be steered by oneorganisations from one point in time and space. Steeringtherefore means negotiating which route we want to take. Wecan involve our partners in this steering process, and we canparticipate in their steering processes. This will involvechanging locations and perspectives, a point we touch onrepeatedly in this Document.

The ProM Work Document is not a set of technical directionsfor use; it can only supplement existing experiences. It is thereader who fleshes it out with content and direction. Forinstance when you ask yourself which processes in your lifeyou have experienced, helped shape or suffered. Or bydrawing your own learning tree. Where am I coming from?When did I learn something crucial? Which way did I go at thevarious cross-roads? Which landmarks did I leave behind?

The ProM Work Document contains tools, which can also leadto blind activism. This is not our intention; we wish to invite youto act cautiously and with circumspection: you yourself have todecide what is appropriate, beneficial and reasonable inyour particular situation. - We hope that you will apply one orother of the tools. Please don't expect things to work at thefirst attempt. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. Adapt thetool to your needs, and give it a number of tries! - Start withwhat you know:

• Which tools have you seen before?• Which have you already used?• What other instruments are you familiar with?• Which tools do your partners in cooperation know and use?• What do you feel capable of?

The ProM Work Document is not a "golden path" from the firstto the last page. If you browse through it forwards andbackwards, picking out what appears useful to you, thenyou will be using it as we intended. It all depends on thesituation in hand: When the time seems right, you can pick upon a selected process field.

ρ Projects emerge from aprocess of reform. Weparticipate in our partners'processes of change. Andwe involve our partners insteering support of thoseprocesses.

ρ The Work Document isnot a substitute for

• putting thought into find-ing your own solutions,

• other literature.

5

2 Introduction: process steering

21 What is Process Monitoring / ProM?

As you read this first introductory sentence, you can decidewhether you want to carry on reading or not. If you were tostop reading here, and flick through the Document until youfound something you wanted to continue reading, this wouldbe one way of steering the reading process.

Whether you continue reading or not, what you have done canbe called "process monitoring". Reading is a fairly complexprocess of information intake and information processing. Onthe basis of your own criteria and assumptions, you haveobserved, assessed, discontinued or continued the process.Later, you might perhaps find that you made a mistake.

By this we mean that you yourself define "process monitoring".You decide which way to go as you move around in thelabyrinth. You walk into an unknown world, are confused, andmake discoveries. Labyrinths are images representingcomplexes processes of searching, which we rephrase as"learning". We learn when our curiosity is aroused by freshstimuli as we move on through our experiential world, but oftenthe shortest route takes us no closer to the target. Aseveryone knows, to get to know a place really well it isnecessary to have taken a good number of wrong turnings.

What questions did we ask ourselves when drawing up thisWork Document? This is best explained by way of anexample:

In a village forest management project, user groups formwhich negotiate with the government forestry service thearrangements for management of a large area of forest ownedby the local government. On paper, everything appearsstraightforward at the first glance: competences for loggingand afforestation, extensive management of the forest marginzones, consensus-based monitoring of sustainable manage-ment. Shortly thereafter, two systems of forest managementemerge which operate in parallel: on the one hand, a smallpowerful group of families continue to use the forest as before.Their family connections are far-reaching: they extend as faras the government forestry service, political parties, and evenreach as far as haulage and construction companies. Theirpreferred forms of forest use also include slash-and-burn, andcommercial logging.

Thousands of years ago,labyrinths were beingscribbled on rocks inSumatra, India, Scandinavia,by the Hopi Indians in NorthAmerica, and in Crete. Theidea of a building in whichone loses one's way, or apath ending in the darkestdepths of madness or thesaving grace of enlighten-ment, is a metaphor of lifeitself.

"We go wrong and are wiserafter the event!"This truism sums up processmonitoring in a nutshell: wegain experiences, and reflecton them.

ρ Which processes areinvolved here?

• division of tasks• learning of new tech-

niques• adoption of new forms of

cooperation• coordination between

institutions• power conflicts• action strategies

6

On the other hand, the organised members of the communityare using the forest for firewood and construction timber,operating a large tree nursery, and are taking on afforestationand forest tending work. They accept periodic monitoring bythe government forestry service, and maintain a delicatebalance in their activities towards the more powerful usergroup which, on the basis of a old unwritten law, allocatesthem marginal zones for grazing purposes. Major loggingactivities do not come to their attention until the wood hasalready left the valley.

The processes mentioned in the example are spasmodic, andopen-ended: the project plans make no mention of two formsof management operating in parallel, and we do not know howthe forestry service, the local authorities and the villagepopulation will behave in future. In other words: we often haveto deal with unexpected events, and find a path to take usthrough the confusion of experiences and norms, which wealso at the same time have somehow to comply with.

We can observe, reflect on and influence the processesoutlined above, but they cannot be reversed: we will never beable to jump into the river of time twice at the same place.

The example outlined above show two basic characteristicfeatures of processes which - in contrast to the controlledkind of production processes encountered in a factory - aredealt with here:

• We cannot observe and talk about the totality of interwovenevents taking place at the same time.

• The particular geographical perspective and interests ofeach observer make his or her perceptions partial,representing only one section of reality.

In a natural resource management project it is thereforeappropriate for us to select specific processes (e.g. thedialogue between the forest administration, beneficiary groupsand local authorities), to observe their development andimpacts, and to learn from those observations.

The term process monitoring is used in professional jargon todenote the activities of consciously selecting processes,selectively and systematically observing them so as tocompare them with others, and communicating on that inorder to learn how to steer and shape the processes.

In everyday practise, processmonitoring activities are amatter of course. We ob-serve ourselves and others,we continuously steer ourbehaviour on the basis ofthese observations, wereflect on our lives and areconstantly reconstructingour own life histories.

ρ Processes are sequencesof states in time. Theyare initiated, influenced,suffered, observed,measured and describedby people. People con-struct explanations ofthose processes, whichguide their actions.

ρ Process monitoring is amanagement instrumentsuch as planning or re-sults-oriented controlling.It is there to help steerthose processes in whichwe participate to achievecommon goals.

7

22 Which processes do we mean?

Natural resources (water, soil, forest, biodiversity etc.) form thebase on which all life forms depend. When people use theseresources, they simultaneously change the ecosystem, theirsocial relationships and themselves. Such processes ofchange are initiated, speeded up, slowed down or preventedby projects pursuing the NARMS approach.

Moving away from the actors and towards the tasks of ProM,we see that we are dealing with processes which take placeinitially irrespective of whether a project exists or not:

ρ The actors construct within their own life space concepts ofhuman ecology to describe or explain the relationshipbetween humans and their natural environment, and thedegree to which the natural resource base on which theirlife depends is finite or renewable.

ρ The actors decide to pursue certain forms of managementbased on their traditions, their knowledge, their experienceand the anticipated benefit.

ρ The actors use techniques of natural resource manage-ment, and learn to apply new techniques.

ρ The actors declare (irreconcilable) claims and interests vis-à-vis the forms of use, elaborate rules and pass laws togovern rights of use.

ρ The actors define roles and delimit the freedom of action.ρ The actors keep or break the rules, and negotiate sanc-

tions.ρ The actors learn to deal with the conflicts associated with

the access to or use of scarce resources, either by solvingthem through agreement, or discontinuing the cooperation.

ρ The actors adapt their organisations in line with the calcu-lated benefits, the environmental trends, the availabletechnologies, and the forms of cooperation.

Projects pursuing the NARMS approach intervene in theseendogenous processes. Ideally, they do so - in line with theguiding principle of minimum intervention - by focusing on theelimination of limiting factors, and by enabling their partnerorganisations to solve their own problems self-reliantly.

The processes involved in natural resource management haveone characteristic feature in common: they are socio-tech-nical processes. In other words, real economic output andthe application of technologies are linked to individual, socialand organisational relationships and learning processes.

These processes are initi-ated, influenced, suffered,observed, described andmeasured by people. Thosepeople construct explana-tions of these processes,which in turn steer their ac-tions. People's capacity toact is determined both bythese constructs, and by therespective social and insti-tutional environment.

8

23 What are the benefits of participation?

Experiences gained in projects pursuing the NARMS approachindicate that the systematic observation of processes ofchange, reflection on those observations and the corres-ponding steering of those processes are key tasks to identifysustainable, ecologically-sound and locally-appropriate naturalresource management forms.

Through projects we initiate processes of technological, socialand organisational change, and we ourselves are actors inthose processes which we influence and steer more or lessconsciously. Whatever we move, we at the same timeintervene in technical, human and organisational structures.We therefore use the term socio-technical systems when thefocus is on technical innovations. This always involves people.They decide what is to be changed, when, and how.

It is therefore essential that we approach process monitoringtogether with the actors, that we seek their participation. Thismight not be easy, but it does have many advantages:

• We gain access to the perceptual world and experiences ofthe actors.

• We identify the various interests and action strategies ofgroups and organisations.

• We become familiar with the passive and active resistanceto processes of change.

• We promote the willingness of the various actors to respectdifferent viewpoints.

• We elaborate practical solutions based on the experiencesand action strategies of the actors.

• We promote the assumption of responsibility.• We simplify complex and dynamic processes, which

facilitates communication with the actors.

Process monitoring is participation-oriented. Participation inthe systematic monitoring of processes is designed to promotethe autonomy and self-responsibility of the actors.

The very mention of the word participation raises the issue ofpower: Who decides who may or should participate? Whichdecisions will the actors be involved in? What influence will wehave over their selection? Is it appropriate, and are we willing,to declare openly our interests in exercising that influence?

ProM gets people on board.There is no other way to ac-cess the experiences andaction strategies of theactors. And there is no otherway of achieving more self-reliant steering and greaterassumption of responsibility.By definition, participation isan integral component ofProM.

ρNon-specific participation byeverybody in everythingprevents clarity andtransparency. Differencesin interpretations, inter-ests and positions ofpower do not becomeapparent unless we ad-dress them and do notgloss over them. Thisoften means we areforced to work first of allwith groups which havethe same interests.

ρ ProM promotes thequality of cooperationwhen it succeeds indefining the division oftasks and roles amongthe actors with the leastpossible input. In extremecases, such clear defi-nition leads to the co-operation being discon-tinued; as a rule, it pro-motes and consolidatesboth the cooperation andthe performance capa-bility of the participatinggroups and organisations.

9

24 The four basic activities of ProM

Process selection, observation, reflection and process steeringare the four basic activities of process monitoring. In relation tothis sequence, the following questions might for instancearise:

We need to question oureyes, so that we can start tosee more clearly.

ρ ProM comprises fourbasic activities:

• process selection

• observation

• reflection

• action

Actionρ What do we want to

do differently thanbefore?

ρ What do we hope toachieve by that?

ρ Who can support us?

Reflectionρ What turned out

differently than wethought?

ρ Which aspects of ourapproach proved theirworth?

ρ With whom do we wishto exchange ourobservations?

Process selectionρ Where do we direct our

attention?ρ With whom do we wish to

select importantprocesses?

ρ How does that relate toour objectives?

Observationρ What are we able and

inclined to observe?ρ Who should do the

observing?ρ How can we measure and

represent what we wish toobserve?

ρ How can we present theinformation accessibly?

10

The sequence process selection - observation - reflection -action requires coordination: we need to know when we haveto get together with whom and why. A core task of processmonitoring is therefore to organise and - again on the basisof observations - steer this meta-process. The quality of ProMis dependent on this being done regularly and syste-matically.

To ensure that the Work Document retains its practicalorientation towards introducing ProM, a line needs to bedrawn at this point: the fourth step, i.e. action, will not be amajor topic of the Document. The window on issues ofprocess steering will be opened if at all by way of examples,and in the presentation of the tools.

The observation of selected processes requires at least aminimum systematic approach:• The processes must be observed at different points in

time, so that changes become evident.• The observations made by different actors at different

locations must be comparable.• The observations must be based on the assumption that

they will be beneficial for decision-making.

25 The levels of action of ProM

Process monitoring can be set-up at various levels, and canaddress the interplay between these levels:

• an individual activity within a project, e.g. tree nursery• relations of cooperation within an organisation, e.g. be-

tween extension team and management of the forestryservice

• cooperation between various actors, e.g. local government,forestry service, user groups, project team

• institutional and socio-economic environment, e.g. effectsof import restrictions or trends of national programmes

In practice, ProM operates on all levels: usually we observeboth processes closely related to projects, and processesrelated to the wider context. ProM which is narrowly focusedon project objectives turns into a trap: we dig a tunnel and losesight of the mountain, we ignore the tremendous tectonicforces in play all around us.

ρ ProM is driven by syste-matic observation andreflection:

• What (which processes)do we wish to observe?

• Who is observing whom?• What can we conclude

from that?• What will we change on

the basis of our obser-vations?

ρ Projects aim to achievecertain goals, and in-evitably narrow down thefield of vision. To over-come this "tunnel vision",ProM also needs to takeinto account the widercontext.

11

The levels move at different speeds, and are interconnectedlike spiral staircases. The basic features of ProM are the sameat all levels. In practice, however, different terms are used:project ProM; strategic ProM (for context monitoring).

We can observe processes taking place within the widercontext. The difficult thing is to define what we mean by theterm wider context: each project defines its own context.

The levels are linked by two interlocking processes:

• bottom-up: the evaluation of experience, and translationthereof into policies, norms and rules.

• top-down: formulation of policies, elaboration of norms andrules, and the monitoring thereof.

As a rule, we observe processes within an operational projectcycle, from planning via implementation through to evaluation(including results-oriented M&E). To take into account theperspectives and interests of the various actors, we need tolook beyond this cycle. What this means is: various groups ofactors observe, reflect on and steer what we can term theirprojects. The standard construct project then breaks downinto a number of projects or sub-projects of individual actors.Seen from this angle, the project then resembles a platformon which we need to negotiate joint projects with the actors.

ρ ProM links the micro- andmacro-levels.

ρ As a rule, context moni-toring is designed to pickup the signals for earlyrecognition of trends, soas to steer entire pro-grammes. Using a smallnumber of key indicatorsderived from the assump-tions of a project, for in-stance, we are able toobserve such trends andask ourselves which pro-cesses these develop-ments are promoting,building up, speeding upor slowing down again.

Relations of cooperationbetween the project actors

and other institutions

Cooperation among the actorswithin the project

Individual activity

Context:socio-economic, political

and institutional changes andtrends

12

ProM can embrace one or two of these sub-projects; there isno such thing as all-embracing ProM. That would be neitherappropriate nor economical, and is quite simply impossible. Asthis observation is per se of little help, we have dealt with theissues of where to start and possible ways to approach theproblem in Section 4.

When selecting the processes, it is a good idea to first askwhere we are at present:• at which level do we wish to focus ProM?• with which actors are we going to begin ProM?To achieve sustainable change, we must also devote somethought to the interplay of levels.

Actor B

Actor C

Actor DActor A

13

3 Key messages and questions

31 The project stage: where are we?

Projects create a framework for communication - as on astage: we negotiate objectives, take decisions, defineresponsibilities and scope for action, try out new forms ofcooperation, make pledges and enter into agreements.

We often deceive ourselves about the viability and bindingcharacter of agreements concluded in spite of large powergaps. Agreements are useful, but trust is essential. Thebarriers to communication which exist everywhere can onlybe overcome in face-to-face situations, however. These alsoexpress various aspects of a relationship: predictability, liking,common interests and a sense of humour.

A TC project places only a thin, brittle veneer of rules andagreements over the live scene of cooperation. Thecharacteristic feature of the production is that the actors createan artificial reality: they invent an outside word which isfavourably disposed or hostile, they invent their ownorganisational theory on which they base their behaviour, andthey admire or disparage events within the organisation.Organisations are a dance floor for social intercourse, for theassertion of claims, for power games and conflicts. Thedancers do battle for status and symbolic power, and grapplefor power to define.

Whilst we shine the limelight on the actors at the front of thestage, the most crucial goings-on remain in the shadowsbackstage. Often we simply don't have a clue. This is difficultto bear when we have grown accustomed to always having ananswer straight away.

Key questions What is the issue at stake here? (... the selection of

villages, award of concessions, roles in cooperation, oldconflicts, etc.?)

Who is asking which questions? To whom are the questions addressed? How will this agenda of questions change in the course of

time?

As everyone knows, everystage has a backstage area.There, alliances are forgedand roles negotiated. Friend-ships, rivalries and intriguesemerge.

ρ Power gaps createstigmas. They pervadeall social relationships.Not even participatorymethods can obscurethis fact.

ρ When we are denied ac-cess to the backstagearea, we use our imagi-nations and projections tosupply the information welack: we invent someonepulling the strings, andcome up with conspiracytheories, or put thingsdown to "cultural traits".We overestimate ourability to influence things,and forget that we areguests, and often onlyspectators.

14

32 Changing perspectives:the view from inside and outside the system

If we were to walk along the Möbius strip, we would movealong the inside for a while, and then along the outside again.The two perspectives are complementary: we come tounderstand the shape of the strip by moving, by going insidethe system, by "becoming part of that unfamiliar system". Theprocess of understanding unfamiliar action strategies is basedessentially on this principle of changing perspectives.

Entering the system: Projects are co-productions oftemporary institutional arrangements The participating groupsand organisations agree to change a situation perceived to beunsatisfactory, over a limited transitional period. The actors,together with their various interests, are involved in theseprocesses. We have to enter and become part of theseprocesses, and do so at a point where something is alreadyunder way. We therefore have to select the processes wewish to observe together with the actors.

The view from inside: Organisations and groups functionaccording to their members' understanding of what thoseorganisations are. We can only identify and understand theintentions, interests and motives of the involved groups andorganisations if we help enable the actors to express them

The view from inside and outside: The tasks associated withProM (process selection, observation, reflection) need to beperformed from the seemingly opposed standpoints ofdetachment from and involvement in the process. We mustmake a calm and sober attempt to understand what isobjectively going on, whilst at the same time being a part ofthe process. Both attitudes are necessary. And we need to beable to reflect on both. This gives us the detachmentnecessary to reflect on our own conceptual framework

The view from outside: It may be appropriate to provideexternal facilitation and consultancy inputs to help set-up andpromote ProM, for instance where the actors are unable tobegin ProM, or where the application of ProM methods provesdifficult.

Key questions What do our partners consider important? Which processes do they wish to observe? What must I do to ensure that different interests and power

positions can be accessed? Where are our blind spots which need to be looked at from

outside? What external support would be appropriate?

ProM is a piece of musicwe compose and play. Theactors play in the sameband - but their styles aredifferent. Local interpreta-tions are as diverse as themusic that would be playedat a dance in Chulumani:samba, salsa, cueca,merengue, mazurca.

ρ Are we also willing toaccept processes whichconflict with our inter-ests?

ρ What do we have to offerto enable the actors toput forward their ideasand interests?

ρ All too often we do onlythe things we know howto do, the things we aregood at, that we under-stand straight away andbelieve we have "got agrip on".

ρ If consultancy inputs areto be effective it is essen-tial that the TORs, modusoperandi and consultantprofile can be jointlyagreed on with theactors, and if necessaryrenegotiated. Processconsultancy without aperiodic review of theinputs is blind.

15

33 Tools: What have we got to work with?

Tools are like spectacles: we put them on so that we can seebetter. Under water we put on goggles, and on sunny days weput on sunglasses. We use optical instruments to enhance ourlimited powers of visual perception. By doing so, we alsorestrict our field of vision. Consequently, we need to bear inmind not only the capabilities of tools, but also theirlimitations. This calls for a keen eye, or in other words: astrategy:

• Why are we using this tool?• What form of cooperation does it imply?• What would I like to try out?

We cannot simplify a complex situation, but we can simplifythe way we deal with it. Methods and tools are designed tofacilitate communication on dynamic, complex processes.

With respect to the four basic activities of ProM, theinstruments are designed to

• facilitate the selection of processes,• support the observation and comprehension of the

emergence, development and impacts of processes,• stimulate self-reflection: in which processes am I, are others

involved? What has proved successful? What do we wishto approach differently than before?

Repertoire: There is no single instrument on which we canplay every tune. We therefore need a range of methods tocreate a clear framework of communication, invitinginterpretation and stimulating creativity. The tools presentedhere are simple, user-friendly, adaptable and largelyindependent of expert support. In other words, theirmalleability is self-evident.

Adapting to the situation and ongoing development: Wefirst need to find out what people are already doingthemselves. On the basis of these observations, we can adapta tool. Where proven instruments are not available or will notwork, we need to develop new methods together with theactors.

Courage to try things out: Anything we are not familiar withand are trying for the first time involves the risk of failure orcollapse. It is therefore worthwhile to make several attempts,as this will give us greater confidence.

A pair of binoculars, even ifwe turned them round, wouldnot do the job of a micro-scope.

ρ The increasing process-orientation of TC projectshas led to a number ofmethods taking the samedirection as ProM:methods of self-evaluationfor instance, or the PRAtools. ProM utilises theseand similar methods.Where methods overlap,this is a good thing. Weexpect very little of moreorthodox methods. But wedo have high expectationsof locally-appropriate in-struments, ideally emerg-ing from the situation inwhich they are to beapplied.

16

Communicative equipment: The tools have been designedon the assumption that we possess the relevant consultancyexpertise: we need to be able to submit proposals, we mustbe able to set-up and facilitate a working group, we need to beable to organise a workshop and steer it using visualisationtechniques. If we do not feel up to these tasks, either becauseof our experience or the role allocated to us, then we needexternal support. It is far better to focus our energy on theorientation of this support, rather than tinker around in adilettantish fashion.

Key questions Which tool is simple and can easily be adapted to my

situation? Which tool can be linked up to the data available? Which tool will counterbalance the power of interpretation

held by certain actors, by providing comparisons? Which tool will facilitate the qualitative analysis of selected

processes using the simplest possible quantifiableindicators?

Which tool will promote cooperation by pointing to idealsand common goals?

34 Information: What information interests us?

What may be important information to some people may begibberish to others. In everyday terms, what we don'tunderstand we call "Double Dutch". Or some say "It's all Greekto me". In ProM, the only information that interests us is whatwe can use in an exchange of experiences. This appliesboth to factual information, and to interpretations thereof.

Cold and warm information: Human behaviour is determinedless by statistics, and more by interests, moods andassociative interpretations. The acquired and deep-rootedpatterns of perception, and the social framework of behaviour,are the foundation on which constructions of reality rest. Wetherefore need a skilfully-mixed blend of "cold" information and"warm" interpretations: we need clearly-presented figures,studies and analyses, as they stimulate communication onprocesses of change; but we also need interest-driveninterpretations and passionate debate on those data with theactors. The consequences of ignoring data are just as seriousas having total faith in them. People telling their own lifehistories, or explaining pictures, can be just as informative asthe presentation of figures, graphs and reports.

ρ ProM is the business ofthe actors themselves.The purpose of externalsupport is therefore todemonstrate to the actorsways and means for themto set-up ProM.

It is less a question of howmany individuals know, andmore a question of howmany know a certain thing,so that we can communicateabout it.

ρ Heaps of dead data andconcentrations of in-formation are a dead end.

17

Engineer the information and communication process:Each item of information which is relevant to people's actionshas an addressee. For ProM, this means selecting andpackaging the information such that it can be used.

Make use of open-ended information transfer processes:We have a highly-developed need to systematically organiseinformation transfer processes. Within socio-technicalsystems, however, interlocking processes of informationtransfer unfold in an unstructured and disordered fashion.Information is selected, amplified, ignored, distorted andcirculated. In organisations the term "communicative noise" istherefore used, which is just as important for performance asthe well-ordered flow of information. The formal structures andprocesses are as it were the parasitic beneficiaries of informalrelationships, which cut across the barriers set up by the rulesof authority and power. Irregular and casual exchangestherefore often convey more authentic information onexperiences, intentions and shifts in power than do the writtenreport, the specifications or the organisation chart.

Key questions What am I unable to see from the "cold" data? How should data and reports be presented so that ideas on

them can be exchanged? Whom do I need to approach to get hold of "warm"

information? How much time do I invest in face-to-face encounters with

the actors? How much time do I invest in encounters outside of or

peripheral to my contract?

ρ "Critical events" and"interference", which wereact to by improvising,can yield profound in-sights into group pro-cesses. Conversationswith individuals of inter-cultural background orexperiences reveal to ushow removed ourthoughts and actions arefrom the reality of theother actors. It is there-fore both appropriate andefficient for us to take thetime to exchange life his-tories, go on a field tripwith decision-makers,visit farmers, taketransect walks throughinstitutions or attendsocial functions.

18

35 Project logic and ProM

Projects begin with a process of communication andagreement between people who want to change somethingtogether. The joint, limited-term undertaking aims to build-upthe participating actors' capability to act, and support them insolving the tasks and problems self-reliantly. Conceived of inthese terms, the notion of a project as a mechanistic operationdesigned to reach a preconceived end is transformed into aconcept of cooperation as a process. Together we cover acertain amount of ground, and at the next cross-roads wethink about which way we might go next. Discussing what ourvisions are is just as important here as realistically assessingwhat resources are available.

We see the planning and implementation of projects asprocesses which are initiated, observed, steered andassessed by the various actors. This involves three interlinkedinput processes:

• The input processes of the target groups, designed toachieve a concrete development goal, e.g. theecologically-sound and sustainable management ofcommunity forests by the community itself.

• The input processes designed to achieve a project goalperformed by the supporting partner organisations, e.g.the private consultancy organisations, local authorities,government forestry service, a commercial bank, privatesawmill, local building contractors.

• The input processes designed to achieve a promotion goalprovided through consultancy and training services of TC,e.g. consultancy and training inputs to decision-makers ofthe supporting partner organisations.

Actors interpret a project differently, depending on theirperspective and interests. ProM aims to help the actorsdescribe and communicate on their various projects within aprocess of dialogue. In our view, we need to ask ourselves thefollowing questions on this:

Key questions What do the various actors expect of the project? To which of the partners' projects do we subscribe? How can we promote dialogue among the partners? How can we support individual and organisational learning

processes?

If you want to build a ship,then don't gather peopleround to distribute tools andchop wood. Inspire themwith a vision of sailing theopen seas.

ρ The complexity of theproject process weakensthe prognostic force ofplanning activities, re-vealing the need for aniterative, flexible andcyclical approach: weneed to periodically re-negotiate the objectivesand roles of the involvedorganisations.

19

4 Where to start and how to approach the problem

41 Landmarks

There is no prescribed way to begin ProM: the actorsthemselves must decide when to start and which processesthey wish to select. Consequently, ProM is different in eachindividual TC project.

We basically have to accept that - as long-term advisors orexternal consultants - we will always be working in a project asoutsiders. We therefore need to become members of theother system (self-help organisation, local government,agencies of central government, enterprises, consultancyorganisations etc.).

People usually respond to suggestions that might affect theirbehaviour or identity with reserve or scepticism. This alsoapplies to organisations: they have an immune system toprotect themselves against the outside world. Consequently,the suggestion to adopt ProM as a rule does not only meetwith approval; disinterest, scepticism or open resistance canbe expected just as often.

The first thing ProM needs is a conducive environment,which we need to help create. What can we do? How shouldwe deal with resistance to ProM?

When helping shape the context for consultancy, we needto bear in mind primarily the following: In the first place, eachconsultant is on his/her own with his/her own views and ideas.This entails risks: others might treat us as a foreign body andisolate us, or brand us a fool. Moreover, ProM then remainsthe domain and "property" of the consultant. A number ofconclusions can be drawn from this regarding the definition ofour role and the launch of ProM:

• We need to invest a great deal of time and energy inestablishing working relationships based on trust, so thatany resistance to the unfamiliar or unwanted ProM can bediscussed. We work towards being personally andprofessionally accepted, and inspiring confidence.How often are we addressed, and by whom, at meetings?What about my personal communication chart? Whom do Ideal with regularly? Whom do I avoid?How will this agenda change in the course of time?

ρ ProM is custom-made.

ρ Shaping the context: thefirst task of any ProMconsultancy involves ushelping create a contextconducive to our work.

ρ Viable working relation-ships based on trust.

20

• We arrange face-to-face encounters with other actors tofocus minds on practical ProM. The aim of theseencounters is to arouse the interest of involved groups andorganisations in ProM, and that our partners themselvescome up with suggestions as to what would be appropriateand useful for them.What kind of encounters would serve this purpose?

• We begin where a process is already under way. We utilisethe existing structures and sites of communication to raiseProM issues. We utilise face-to-face cooperation with theactors to practise self-reflective thinking: What have wejust done? Did that meet our original expectations? Are wesatisfied with the result?Where and when do our partners normally reflect on theirwork?At what point and in which working context is it appropriateto raise issues of ProM?

• We choose to begin simply, so that we can more easilybecome familiar with the resistance we expect. In otherwords: the number of fields of observation and questionsshould at first be kept small, and practical proceduressimple. Emphasis should be placed on a process ofdialogue on experiences and views. Step by step, thesimple structures which emerge can then be elaborated intosomething more complex.Which simple and immediately appealing instruments dowe wish to use?

• We define the boundaries and time frame for ProM. In sodoing, we create for our partners a clear picture of whatinitially to them seems new and strange. They begin to seethemselves as actors in ProM, and acquire a grasp of first,simple tools.What do we want to try out first for a limited period?How much time do we need for people to get used to thingsand try them out?Who should evaluate the experiences?

• We attach importance to efficiency and transparency ofthe results. Otherwise, ProM will always be vulnerable tothe suspicion of having done nothing except expel hot air.How much time and resources will ProM cost?What do we expect ProM to achieve?How will that help us achieve our objectives?

ρ Learn from other people'sexperience.

ρ Practise self-reflection.

ρ Have the courage to besimple.

ρ Create a clear picture.

ρ ProM must help promoteefficiency.

21

• We support a flexible approach to planningspecifications, and look for ways to apply results-orientedmonitoring (cf. Section 44 below).

42 On selecting processes

As a rule, fields of observation and processes are selectedwhen problems arise. We observe that something is not goingas we expected it to, and therefore we want to find out why.

Process selection puts to the test the actors' willingness toquestion themselves and their forms of cooperation. Thesediscussions are conducted along three polar axes:

Perception of the environment

Social stability

Individual attitudes

ρ Any plan is a simplifi-cation, and needs to beadjusted.

ρ Starting with processselection: together withthe actors, we establishwhat we wish to observe.

Self-confidence: we'llmake it - we can do it.

Insecurity: I don't feel upto that - I feel unsure of

myself.

Opportunities: that willopen up new horizons -

just what we need.

Risks: nobody will acceptthat - it's against the rules.

Flexibility: we can dothings differently and set

new goals.

Rigidity: that will rock theboat and upset the normal

run of things.

22

43 The right point in time: When should ProM begin?

ProM can begin at any time. The actors themselves decidewhy and when they want to step outside of a process of whichthey are a part in order to reflect on it.

ProM begins where actors start to reflect on processes whichare already under way. Things start when we ask questionsabout our own work. Here is an example:

In a land-use project, agreements are being drawn-upbetween various user groups. It is clear that the targetedecologically-sound but profitable land-use arrangements aredependent on the success of these agreements. There is noprescribed formula for launching and stabilising this cooper-ation. A number of practical questions arise:

• Who should negotiate the agreements?• How much energy should we invest in producing the formal

written agreements?• How are the agreements being negotiated?• Under what circumstances are the agreements kept or

broken?• For how long are they kept?• What fresh conflicts arise in the course of the cooperation?• How do the expectations of the parties to the agreements

change?• How does a functional cooperation differ from a conflictive

one?

On the basis of these questions we develop a simpleprocedural guide for observation, on the basis of which theexperiences of cooperation can be compared.We confine ourselves initially to four simple reference values:fluctuation of members among the user groups, frequency ofjoint meetings, definition and review of roles, number ofexplicitly addressed problems and conflicts.We present the observations systematically and discuss themwith the user groups at a meeting held every two months. Atthese mirroring meetings, we initiate a process of reflectionamong the groups. The problems explicitly addressed areentered in a simple matrix, together with the possible causes.Within the user groups, different conclusions are drawn fromthe observations. So we add another component to ProM:meetings are held at each of which three user groups arebrought together to exchange their experiences horizontally.This ProM step promotes learning in the user groups, andleads to marked improvements in practical solutions.

ρ There is no prescribedformula for ProM. It startsat the point where actorsbegin to ask questions.

23

44 Results-oriented monitoring and ProM

Results-oriented monitoring may be the simplest place to start,but it is not the only one.

Results-oriented monitoring tells us for instance to what %value an objective has been reached, but does not tell us howthat came about, nor what we need to be aware of next time.

If we observe only what we produce through TC projects, thenwe are placing excessively tight constraints on ProM. ProMcomplements results-oriented monitoring, and broadens itbeyond the more narrow scope of project activity. The widercontext comes into view, and the groups and organisationsinvolved in a project are able to contribute experiences theyhave gained outside the project.

Results-oriented monitoring and ProM can be linked to goodeffect. At the monitoring sessions held periodically we can, forinstance, ask ourselves the following questions:

• Why does the same activity take a different course indifferent cases?

• Why does the cooperation work wonderfully in one casebut not another?

• Why do we never reach the agreed goals, contrary to allexpectations? Are we too ambitious?

• Why do we/they do everything our-/themselves?• Why do we always keep making the same mistake?• Why do we never have any new ideas on that?• Why do people never invite us/them to their functions?• Why are the economic incentives not having any effect?• What do the others really expect of us?• Why have our expectations changed?

ProM begins where the actors select on the basis of suchquestions a number of the cooperation processes, in order tosystematically observe and evaluate them.

ρ ProM complementsresults-oriented moni-toring by broadening thefield of vision. We leavethe project tunnel.

ρ Results-oriented moni-toring sessions are anideal platform for decidingwhere to start ProM.

24

5 Six fields of observation and tools

As explained in the introduction in Section 2, the processesinvolved here have two basic characteristic features:

• We cannot observe and talk about the totality of interwovenevents taking place at the same time.

• The particular perspective and interests of each observermake his or her perceptions partial, representing only onesection of reality.

We therefore propose confining ourselves to six fields ofobservation which project actors mention with noticeablefrequency.

The key messages and questions presented in Section 3form the circular backgrounds of the six fields of observation.

By this we mean that in all six fields, primary processes areunder way which are crucial for the success of projectspursuing the NARMS approach.

The central question is that of the distribution and allocation oftasks and roles among the involved groups and orga-nisations. The process can begin in any of the six fields. Therelative significance of these arenas varies, depending on thenatural resource management project in question. It is theactors themselves who decide which of the arenas they wishto illuminate.

ρ ProM focuses on thefollowing fields of ob-servation:

• The actors allocate tasksand take on roles amongthemselves.

• The members of groupsand organisations acquirenew expertise and capa-bilities which they apply intheir daily work.

• Groups and organisationsdeliver inputs on anagreed scale.

• Groups and organisationscooperate and coordi-nate.

• Conflicts of interest andpower arise between theactors vis-à-vis access toscarce resources and in-fluence.

• Actors' action strategiesare adapted both to worldpictures and visions, andto risk assessments andanticipated economicbenefits.

On the following pages wehave illustrated each of thesix fields of observation byway of example with a pic-ture, text and an introductionfor the tools.

Wedeliverinputs

We learnin groups

andorganisation

sWe

developaction

strategies Wetake on

tasks androles

We argueout

conflicts

Wecooperate

25

51 Tasks and roles: Who does what? What do weexpect of each other?

Can we afford to repay this month's credit instalment on the tree nursery?We are liable with our land titles for timely repayment. The representative ofthe bank takes the floor, flanked by his assistant and the village chief. Wedebtors are sitting on the floor, men at the front, women at the back

Projects are laboratories for reallocations of tasks. Theconcentration of public services on core tasks, complementarycooperation between public- and private-sector partners andthe involvement of people's organisations are on the agendain many natural resource management projects. However,tasks cannot be reallocated by force from the top down, norcan a prescribed formula be transferred from one context toanother. We need to ascertain who can best do what in eachparticular instance.Goal: determine the ideal mix of institutions and groups todeliver inputs (public sector, private sector and civil society) onthe basis of concrete experiences. $ T-01

During the cooperation, the roles of groups and involvedinstitutions change. Who can and wishes to cooperate withwhom, and who is willing to assume responsibility, often donot become apparent until cooperation is under way. Thepartners get to know each other during cooperation. Interests,claims and dependencies change. Periodic role reviews arean appropriate tool to steer the process of cooperation. Aninterface analysis can be an appropriate way of taking thereview of roles a step further, and steering it in the direction ofpossible practical improvements: the availability of contactpersons, their contactability, the frequency of encounters, the

Example

In a project to promote sus-tainable management ofpastureland, the importantactor groups are visitedindividually in their ownworking environments, andinvited to hold discussions(separation of perspectives).Some of those involved knoweach other from the planningworkshop held two years pre-viously. On that occasion, allactors agreed to the project.Since then however, their dif-ferent intentions and interestshave brought the cooperationto a standstill. The groups andorganisations visited includethe responsible agency forland titles at the Ministry ofAgriculture; representativesof the powerful national cattlebreeders' association in thecapital; selected small farmingfamilies who jointly farm andmanage community land intheir villages; representativesof the expanding export-oriented agro-industry.

The discussions are steeredby a moderator, whilst a smallgroup of three individualsminuting the proceedings raisequestions when they simplyrequire further explanation.

26

regularity of information exchange, the use of technical meansto facilitate information exchange.Goal: negotiate mutual expectations at a "round table".$ T-02

Organisations and groups involved in projects provide servicesand goods to others, who in turn are often also providers ofservices or producers of goods. The afforestation of a piece ofland, for instance, is dependent on a chain of supportingorganisations performing different tasks. Problems that doarise are often due less to individual organisations'unwillingness to perform their tasks, and more tocoordination: in other words, those activities which aim toestablish and maintain communication between theorganisations. To address these issues, we need to focus ourattention on the process of exchange between organisations.Goal: improve the coordination of inputs. $ T-03

ToolsT-01 Analysing the TasksT-02 Negotiating RolesT-03 Analysing Interactions

The discussions are based onthe Analysis of Tasks: Whatconstitutes the common task?Which sub-tasks do weperform? Which tasks need tobe performed by otherorganisations?

A group minuting the meetingcompiles the results, anddraws up working hypotheseson role and land-use conflicts.The results are presented fordiscussion at an internal work-shop, to ascertain whichquestions need to be fed backto the actors. Looking back atthe ground already covered,the project officers ascertainthat all activities initiated bythe project need to be accom-panied by discussion of rolesamong the actors. They de-cide to hold role reviews atregular intervals.

27

52 Learning: We make mistakes and are wiserafter the event.

Should we participate in the tree nursery? Do we want to take that step intothe unknown and tread new ground? How would we acquire the knowledgethat we would need?

Natural resource management projects have one overridinglearning goal. This can be summed up as a single keyqualification: growing competence to act in sustainablenatural resource management. We aim to develop thiscompetence to act on three levels:• as an individual learning process,• as a process of learning in groups,• as an organisational learning process.

The three learning processes promote or retard each other ona reciprocal basis. This becomes clear where individuals haveacquired expertise or capabilities, but are unable to applythem within their organisations. The task is to close thistransfer gap between the individual and organisationallearning processes.

Learning processes are too often designed to achieve a fixedstate: "the municipality is able to draw up a budget". To designan effective learning process for adults, we need to basethings on key qualifications that promote learning in the worksituation. This generates a culture of learning with thenecessary scope for action: people must be allowed to makemistakes, people must feel sure that others are also able toadmit their mistakes and willing to make corrections.Goal: achieve optimum development of key capabilities withscarce resources. $ T-04

Example

In a project to conserve andmanage natural forests in theAmazon basin, relations be-tween the villages and thegovernment district forestryservice are strikingly one-sided: the long distancesmake it impossible for thevillages, or their chiefs, toraise matters of concern tothem; the forestry serviceintervenes from above withno regard for the precariousnatural resource base onwhich the life of the localpopulation depends.

To date, the experiences ofthe village chiefs when dealingwith governmental agencieshave all been negative: shiftingcultivation was banned, thepopulation was displaced, orthey were exploited as cheaplabour.

Close personal ties exist be-tween the district forestry ser-vice and commercial timbermerchants. Logging licensesare granted regardless of theinterests of the localpopulation.

The national forestry policyprovides for organisation ofthe population into trans-community forestry cooper-atives. This would put them ina stronger position when deal-ing with the district forestryservice.

28

Learning in groups has objective advantages over individuallearning: there is greater potential for discovery, experiencesare broader, the incentives to learn are more numerous anddiverse. The limiting factor in this situation is the quality ofinteraction within the group, i.e. whether or not the membersare willing to communicate openly with one another and learnfrom experience.Goal: open up routes to open communication and self-evaluation. $ T-05

In organisational learning, individual, social and structuralprocesses are closely interwoven. An organisation's capabilityto learn is crucially dependent on how it deals with voicedcriticism. This friction results from the members of theorganisation deviating from or having problems with standardprocedures. Friction between the outside world (e.g.demands of the market, legal system, offers of cooperation)and the world within the organisation can only triggerlearning processes if people are permitted to voice it.Consequently, organisational learning is crucially dependenton whether the organisational culture prevailing within theorganisation will allow discussion of such phenomena. Anorganisation which neither admits to nor deals with voicedcriticism, or even an organisation which responds to it on acasuistic basis, but does not make any structuraladjustments, is suffering from a learning block. $ T-06Goal: create frameworks and opportunities for criticism to beexpressed.

In purely quantitative terms, experiential learning outweighsall other forms of learning. It is therefore appropriate tosystematically observe and reflect on learning processes ofthis type too. This promotes consolidation of what has beenlearned within the group, and focuses attention on the jointprogress achieved. The act of reflecting on past processesalso has the advantage in the present of focusing our mindsmore sharply on those situations that are really important fordecision-making. $ T-07Goal: strengthen participants' confidence in their ownexperience by reconstructing process histories.

ToolsT-04 Management of LearningT-05 Learning in GroupsT-06 Organisational LearningT-07 Process History

Three elected representativesfrom each village are briefedon their tasks within the co-operative.

The district forestry service isobliged to conduct this train-ing. The measures providedare designed primarily topromote the development ofstructures and procedureswithin the cooperatives: con-stitution, selection of manage-ment, performance of simpleadministrative tasks, organisa-tion of work with the members.

The district forestry service,with its staff of 60, also hassomething to learn: as anorganisation, it has to learnhow to cooperate with thecooperatives. The key to this is a willingness to creategreater transparency.

The organisation must learn toreflect on its own behaviour.Monthly M&E sessions areintroduced in which repre-sentatives of the cooperativesalso participate. As a result theorganisation gradually movesaway from a normative, ver-tical concept of managementand becomes more stronglyoriented toward the user co-operatives and their needs.

29

53 Performance by organisations and groups: What areour strengths and weaknesses?

How many more hands should we employ? Can we pay back the credit? Willthe merchant buy the saplings from us at the agreed price? With whommight it be a good idea to cooperate?

Development takes place inside organisations: in thehousehold, in self-help groups, in small enterprises, in non-profit organisations, inside local government, in pressuregroups and trade associations, in governmental agencies andin corporations. It is the people working inside thoseorganisations who deliver the inputs and seek to bring aboutchange.

We often think in terms of group performance. In otherwords, we ask ourselves why a certain group or single agencyhas not delivered the desired inputs, or not all of them. Wemight ask ourselves how the group differs from others, andwhat conditions might be conducive to enhancing itsperformance. $ T-08Goal: observe the characteristic features of group formationand group performance.

Organisations set themselves apart from their environmentthrough their internal rules and conventions, which establish agiven order. These structures represent clots, or coagulatedexperience: they simplify the performance process within theorganisation by firmly ascribing responsibility, routine andstandardisation. Structures promote or hamper the per-formance process. Where there is free scope for action,structures are continuously interpreted and modified. It is acharacteristic feature of organisations and their sub-

Example

A project is helping rehabilitatesmallholder irrigation schemesby providing extension inputsand credits. The cohesion andcapabilities of the beneficiarygroups vary widely. It becomesapparent that two very differenttypes of group have a strongcommitment to the project: onthe one hand, groups with arigidly hierarchical structure,led by landowners, and on theother hand strikingly homo-geneous groups of landlesssmall tenants.

The organisations providingextension support (one govern-mental agency and two NGOs)have to learn to take into ac-count these differences whennetworking the two beneficiarygroups. They also have to re-design the extension inputsand the credit terms in line withthe needs of the groups, whoare their clients.

One of the NGOs is small, andsees an opportunity to growlarger through the project. Atthis point, it begins an intensiveprocess of self-diagnosis.

30

organisations to divide themselves up into structural andprocess components. Having said that: there are a very widevariety of structure and process mixes, which cannevertheless be entirely appropriate. Observation of the task-related division into structure and process provides pointers todevelopment trends within the organisation. $ T-09Goal: select and observe indicators of division into structureand process.

Self-help groups and bottom-up social movements differsignificantly from other organisations in terms of their originsand dynamics. $ T-10Goal: observe characteristic features and development trendsof grass-roots organisations.

When assessing organisations, we are guided by our ownstandards, which we apply to them. However, organisationalchange is based on the principle of minimum externalintervention, leaving as much as possible to the initiative ofthe organisation’s members, or in other words to self-organisation. The organisation must change itself, hence thatis where the insight needs to grow. $ T-11Goal: initiate self-diagnosis within organisations.

Organisations cut themselves off from the outside world. Theyhave an immune system to ward off extraneous influences,and attempt to prevent any unsolicited glances backstage. Atthe same time, an organisation clearly cannot function only inthe way it is portrayed to outsiders. Organisational reality canonly be captured from a variety of perspectives, angles andinterpretations. $ T-12Goal: gain an understanding of the dynamics of anorganisation from different perspectives.

If we take the principle of minimum intervention seriously, weneed to feel our way into organisations from the outside in. Inother words, we must help enable organisations to perceivetheir environment and their clients there with greater depthand clarity of focus. Organisational adjustment is then the taskof the organisation’s members. $ T-13Goal: sharpen focus on orientation towards client needs.

ToolsT-08 Group PerformanceT-09 Structure and ProcessT-10 Characteristics of Grass-roots OrganisationsT-11 Systemic DiagnosisT-12 Subjective Organisation ChartsT-13 Client-orientation

The dynamic generation offounders begin to realise in-creasingly that• administrative controls were

constraining initiative inextension work, and that

• flexible adjustment to theneeds of beneficiary groupscould not be achievedthrough the usual workingmethods.

Self-diagnosis is facilitated andsupported through externalinputs. Although the power ofinterpretation of the foundinggeneration is curtailed by theseparation of perspectives,that generation does at thesame time gain an opportunityto identify its new managementtasks.

At the brief, externally-supported diagnostic work-shops, to which individualmembers of beneficiary groupsare also invited on a case-by-case basis, a model emergeswhich might work: small, rela-tively autonomous and self-responsible extension teamsare formed. They are givenquantitative targets to meet,and receive inductive trainingand coaching support.

31

54 Cooperation between groups and organisations:Who gets on with whom?

Whose is that truck? Who’s in charge here? What benefit will we get fromthis cooperation?

As a rule a variety of private and public, local, national andinternational organisations are involved in natural resourcemanagement projects - depending on their comparativeadvantages in the case in hand. Focusing on one organisationwhich plans, implements and completes a project is anoudated approach. Tasks of natural resource managementare complex: they include both economic, technical, social andorganisational components, as well as training tasks, whichare performed by different organisations.

As a result - in organisational terms - projects becomedynamic co-productions, which function as contractually-bound arrangements, or are coordinated via the marketmechanism. They are dynamic because the relationshipsbetween the partners also change in the course of thecooperation. This presents the participating organisations witha fresh challenge: the capability to cooperate becomes akey competence.

Co-productions and associations are - in contrast to individualorganisations - constructions of horizontal cooperation acrossa plane. As a rule, pronounced hierarchies lead to one orother partner withdrawing from the cooperation. The key factorin a group or organisation remaining is the advantages itderives from the cooperation. $ T-14Goal: observe how the partners rate the benefits they derive.

Example

In a regional irrigation schemebuilt decades ago, yields arevery low due to heavy waterlosses, salinisation and the risein the groundwater level. Theresponsible ministry, supportedby projects, is carrying outcomprehensive technicalmeasures to rehabilitate themain and feeder channels, andis building a network of drilledwells to lower the water table.The construction works arebeing planned by engineeringfirms, and executed by majorbuilding contractors

These projects need to becomplemented by maintenanceof the irrigation and drainagechannels in the fields. Thiswould be inconceivable withoutcoordination between thefarmers and landowners: largelandowners, who have goodconnections inside the publicauthorities, small tenants andlandless families, who to datehave gone largely unnoticed bythe authorities, and part-timefarmers, for whom the channelis not a major concern, need tobe brought to the table and tiedinto an organisation.

The actors rate differently thebenefit they derive from coop-erating in the construction andmaintenance of the channels.

32

The more diverse the participating organisations are, themore important it is to observe changes in the individualrelationships of cooperation. Weak points only come to lighton in-depth analysis, carried out repeatedly. $ T-15 / $T -16Goal: periodic qualitative and quantitative self-evaluation ofcooperative relationships.

The dynamics of cooperation entail shifts in power in twodirections: a concentration of power, and a redistribution ofpower (empowerment). The two processes need notnecessarily run in opposite directions. The case might arisewhere a concentration of power occurring at the expense of amiddle level would be desirable, in order to create space foraction at a lower level, for instance for self-help organisations.Natural resource management projects often involve delicatesocial processes in the struggle for distribution of scarceresources, which take time to unfold and allow shifts in powerto come into play. Consequently, it is often clumsy toapproach these issues with a view to addressing them directlyand formally. If we rely on self-interpretation by the actors,then we achieve the aim of the actors’ determining their ownway forward. $ T-17Goal: promote self-reflection among the actors on thedistribution of power.

Efforts to decentralise overtaxed central governmentstructures, currently a common phenomenon, create newpotentials for cooperation at the local level: local municipaladministrations need to bring local organisations together, inorder to harmonise the development of urban core zones andthe development of the periurban rural population. There isoften a lack of simple tools with which to observe thepotentials for cooperation. $ T-18Goal: compare self-assessment and outside assessment oflocal organisations.

ToolsT-14 Benefits of CooperationT-15 Qualitative Analysis of CooperationT-16 Quantitative Analysis of CooperationT-17 Power and Shifts in PowerT-18 Cooperation at Local Level

The tasks of water distributionand management dictate that acommittee be formed for eachsection of channel, on the onehand to handle arrangementsfor water management, and onthe other hand to interface withthe agency operating the majorfeeder channels.

As a result of traditionalbarriers, tenants and landlessare barred from membership oflocal organisations on thegrounds of their low socialstatus. The vitally-importantissue of water managementarrangements therefore re-quires all participants to re-think.

Tangible economic incentivesultimately lead to first success-ful cooperations:

Prompted by the agriculturalextension service, the com-mittee decides to rehabilitatethe watercourse at channel32500-LJ with prefabricatedconcrete elements. The com-mittee purchases the elementsfrom a local manufacturer, andcommissions a mason tosupervise the work.

Improved yields and marketingprospects generate a demandfor extension inputs: farmerswant to familiarise themselveswith new crops and farmingmethods. To obtain seed moreeasily and boost marketing, thefarmers begin to organise in apurchasing and credit cooper-ative.

33

55 Conflicts over scarce resources

What advantage is he gaining from this? Who is entitled to that share? Whois in the right? Who will gain the upper hand? What is really going on?

Natural resource management projects hinge on theconflicting interests behind economic, ecological and politicalideas and actions. In many cases, relations of control,disadvantages and privileges, direct coercion and phenomenaof social disintegration are directly linked to the struggle foraccess to scarce resources.

Project actors often overestimate their legitimacy, anderroneously believe they have the scope for action needed todeal with conflicts. At the same time, they tend tounderestimate the social forces underlying those conflicts.Hence their assessment of both their role, and the capabilitiesrequired to manage conflicts, is inappropriate to their situation.It is therefore advisable to put up a number of warning signsin this area. $ T-19Goal: areas of conflict need to be discretely illuminated andobserved over a long period. Legitimation for the conflictmanagement role must be worked out with the parties to theconflict.

Conflicts are based on issues of the distribution of goods,resources and power. Yet they only become conflicts becauseof the different interpretations of these issues. Conse-quently, we can best gain an understanding of them bylooking at their history, which is made up of a number ofhistories constructed from different perspectives Types ofconflict can then be identified from this (What does the actorwant?). $ T-20

Example

In line with the new forest man-agement law - codesigned by agovernment advisory servicesproject - a village community isallocated rights of use overforest plots. The terms of en-forcement are unclear andcontradictory

The state supervisory bodyinsists that the local adminis-tration take care of land-userights. The local forestryagency and the central en-vironmental agency, alreadyat odds due to the shortageof funds, agree to act in aschematic vertical fashion.

The local administration isclosely intermeshed with theagencies through political partymembership. It does not haveany professional technical ser-vices.

In various municipalities withina region, local user coopera-tives have been formed whichare firmly rooted within thepopulation. The cooperativesmeasure themselves by theeconomic success of theirmembers. They maintain areserved stance towards themunicipal administrations.

34

Goal: deconstruct the history of the conflict from theperspectives of the participating and non-participating actors.

Parties to a conflict load it with affects, which are attached toparticipating individuals. As a result, the conflict itselfbecomes displaced, submerged and nebulous. Interpersonaljudgements and disputes become the affect-laden centres ofconflict. The closer the parties know each other, the more thisis the case. This makes it both easier and more difficult tomanage the conflict: it becomes easier and more logical toalso deal with the conflict on the personal level; and itbecomes more difficult to remain detached and define theactual point or points at issue. If the credibility of the opposingparty is undermined, and the conflict is accompanied bywounding, moralistic disparagements, the parties find itincreasingly difficult to gain a clear picture of the points atissue. This creates unrealistic expectations of the conflictmanagement process. Consequently, we often have to besatisfied with a modus vivendi, since many conflicts cannot besolved, and recur time and time again. $ T-21Goal: observe conflict strategies and create a clear picture.

As a rule, projects to initiate change trigger conflicts. Initially,they are perceived as a threat to individuals’ psychologicalstatus quo. Should I decide to accept the changes or not?Feelings of insecurity, doubt and unease are normal reactionsto impending change. Within groups and organisations, thesereactions split the community into progressive andreactionary forces. Within this field of forces, new coalitionsand alliances are formed. To find our bearings within theseconflicts, we have to try and understand the different forms inwhich resistance is expressed: resistance can be silent ormanifest, objectively well-founded or evidently irrational. Oncewe learn to work with the resistance, it becomes an importantsource of learning and of steering change.$ T-22Goal: observe and understand the forms in which resistance isexpressed.

ToolsT-19 Warning SignsT-20 Phases and HistoryT-21 Conflicts between GroupsT-22 Resistance to Changes

The new law puts the old usercooperatives in the wrong.They would now have to comeunder the supervision of themunicipal administration, whichthey see as the long arm ofcentral government. None ofthe active cooperative mem-bers want this.

For several reasons, thevarious interests at stake arenot easy to expose:The arguments put forward byrepresentatives of the centralgovernment agency are basedentirely on legal interpretationof the new regulations; theyturn a deaf ear to technical andsocial arguments.The representatives of themunicipal administrations avoidmaking any unequivocal state-ments; they look the other wayand adopt a wait-and-see ap-proach. The cooperativesmake no headway with theirsocial and technical argu-ments; as the conflictsmoulders, their representa-tives are turned into defend-ants in the dock: they are ac-cused of self-interest, pervert-ing the course of justice, arbi-trary appropriation of publicproperty and subversivegangsterism.

Personal relationships are amajor factor in the conflict:several of the user coopera-tives have their origin in thefailed government land reformproject of the 60s. Descend-ants of the former big land-owners, who control partypolitics, see in the new land-use law an opportunity toregain through politicalchannels the land-based ad-vantages formerly enjoyed bytheir families.

35

56 Strategies for action - Where do we want to go?

What’s in store for us? What will give us security and strength? What do wefeel capable of? Whom can I rely on?

Thoughts and actions are not only determined by rewards andincentives. The motivation to act with ecologicalsustainability in mind is crucially dependent on deeply-rootedstrategies for action, for instance whether or not the action inquestion is consistent with the cosmic world picture, orwhether it might alter social bonds that provide security.Superimposed on this underlying current of motivation areeconomic considerations, for instance whether or not there isa prospect of achieving tangible results, and what risks thatinvolves.

Whilst it has to be conceded that economic incentives do playa major role in motivating people to act, their impact is oftenoverestimated. The well-established equilibrium between thesexes, between the generations, towards those in positions ofpower, or between cattle farmers and crop farmers, play justas much a part in determining people’s action strategies.People with charisma, and the sense of security conferred bythe social institutions governing people’s lives, are equallyimportant. We can only gain an understanding of the complexlogic of action strategies of the actors through a process ofobservation and self-reflection thereon: Why do people act inone way and not another? Do they see themselves as activesubjects? How do they themselves explain their behaviour?What motivates them to act in that way? What do they expectto achieve by that? $ T-23

Example

Within the scope of a researchproject, soil-conservingcropping methods are beingdeveloped. The research groupinvites small farmers, who areconsidered in the region topossess a particularly highdegree of initiative, to a one-day workshop. The aim is togain their consent to carry outself-responsible field trials. Thesimple cooperation agreementshave already been prepared.

The researchers explain theirresults and proposals usingclear examples. The farmerslisten closely to what is beingsaid, without comment. At firstthey do not ask any questions,and at lunch they tuck in.

Shortly before the end of theworkshop the researcherspose the question directly:Who is willing to carry out thetrials on his/her own land?

After some initial hesitation, thefarmers begin to ask questionswhich the researches thoughthad long since been answered.Who will pay for the seed, thefertiliser, the draught animals?What is the expected yield?Who will help us to fill in theprotocols? Why should it beonly us who carry out thetrials? etc.

36

Goal: gain an understanding of how motivation and a sense ofactive locus of control emerge, and disseminate as groupaction strategies.

Where human behaviour is driven by some economicconsideration, a pragmatic calculation of the benefits ismade: We ask ourselves the question of what future benefitsa defined input, the taking of a risk or the making of a sacrificewill have. These calculations are also made on the basis ofexperiences, and projected risk assessments. The positivebalance of a calculation of benefit then becomes the drivingforce of action, provided that it can be harmonised with a lifeplan. Life plans are socially-acquired concepts of whatconstitutes a good life worth living. $ T-24Goal: gain an understanding of economic expectations andtheir integration into life plans.

Strategies for action have a biographical origin and ahistory, which runs in parallel to the history of the individual,who gradually leaves the more narrow confines of the family.These histories can be seen in the life world systems of thefamily households. Such systems embody the socialorganisational forms and behaviour patterns found in the widerinstitutions of society: status, roles, obligations of solidarity,power gaps, and interpretations of the spatiotemporal horizonare nurtured there. The boundaries between households areblurred. Whilst certain tasks are performed only within thenuclear family, other functions are distributed along the axesof family ties, which extend far beyond the householdresidence per se: welfare obligations, production andaccumulation, consumption, insurance against risks. A basicsocio-economic pattern is formed by three structuralcharacteristics:• access to and control of resources.• division of labour between men and women, adults and

children.• obligations to contribute to the household.$ T-25Goal: gain an understanding of behaviour patterns byobserving everyday activities.

ToolsT-23 Motivation and VisionsT-24 Calculations of Benefit and Life PlansT-25 Household Forms

The research station personnelare growing impatient. Thefarmers are keeping themwaiting.

Their questions refer to boththe economic and the socialrisks. If the trials go wrong, thefarmer will be laughed at, oreven made responsible forother problems.

To date, agricultural innova-tions have consisted of ready-made "packages“ prescribedand implemented first bymissionaries, then by thegovernment extension service.The farmers have no faith intheir own powers of innovation;they place their expectations inexternal agents, but do notwant to take any risks at allthemselves. They have alreadyseen too many things go wrongfor that.

Nevertheless, a first phase offield trials is commenced onindividual farms. On visitingthose farms, the researchpersonnel discover thatwork in the fields is performedmainly by women and children.They realise that they hadinvited the farmers, whilstleaving out other householdmembers actively engaged inproductive activity.

37

6 List of tools

51 Tasks and roles

T-01 Analysing the TasksT-02 Negotiating RolesT-03 Analysing Interactions

52 Learning

T-04 Management of LearningT-05 Learning in GroupsT-06 Organisational LearningT-07 Process History

53 Performance of organisations and groups

T-08 Group PerformanceT-09 Structure and ProcessT-10 Characteristics of Grass-roots OrganisationsT-11 Systemic DiagnosisT-12 Subjective Organisation ChartsT-13 Client-orientation

54 Cooperation between groups and organisations

T-14 Benefits of CooperationT-15 Qualitative Analysis of CooperationT-16 Quantitative Analysis of CooperationT-17 Power and Shifts in PowerT-18 Cooperation at Local Level

55 Conflicts over scarce resources

T-19 Warning SignsT-20 Phases and HistoryT-21 Conflicts between GroupsT-22 Resistance to Changes

56 Strategies for action

T-23 Motivation and VisionsT-24 Calculations of Benefit and Life PlansT-25 Household Forms

T-01/1

T-01: Analysing the Tasks

A Method

In many projects, new forms of cooperationrepresent the crucial pivot around whichtangible results emerge: village beneficiarygroups cooperate with the governmentsupervisory body, and private constructioncompanies cooperate with both.

Projects are co-productions staged by anumber of partners; they form acooperation system based on a bottom-linecommon denominator: the partners mustbe able to say to themselves and eachother that they are helping achieve a jointgoal.

There is no universally-valid answer to thequestion: Who should do what? Private-sector, non-profit and governmentalorganisations can share in performing anoverall task in a wide variety of ways.

The tasks taken on by an organisation byvirtue of its function and role within acooperation system need to be analysed inrelation to the overall task. This isparticularly advisable in case of division oftasks between very different organisations.It then becomes evident which new public-private partnerships the project is inclinedand able to bring about.

We know from experience that similarorganisations "understand each otherwell", or in other words: they tend totransfer their own practises to otherorganisations. The vertical managementlogic of a governmental agency, the profitinterest of a private enterprise, theideological orientation of a non-profitorganisation, or the measures taken by anassociation to gain political leverage, are

clearly essential features, which even atthe task analysis stage may already pointto future difficulties in the cooperation.

Task analysis will obviously form part ofany planning process. However, since thecooperation changes in practise, it will needto be repeated periodically. It thusbecomes an instrument of processsteering.

The tasks in hand can be analysed eitherjointly with the participating partners, or ona contrastive basis. In the latter case, thepartners first need to be interviewedseparately.

The results should be presented and dis-cussed at a workshop.

Clearly, a contrastive approach alsorequires that a further condition be met: thevarious partners must be capable ofnegotiating and reaching a consensus. Inmany cases, this cannot be expected at theoutset of the cooperation.

B Application

Step 1: Describing and representing theoverall task

• What is the overall task or objectivewhich the participating partners areworking towards?

• Which sub-tasks can the overall task be

broken down into?

T-01/2

civil society

Step 2: Critique of the tasks

• How have the sub-tasks been performedto date?

• What was the result in terms of qualityand internal efficiency? (management oftime and scarce resources)

• What were the critical, limiting factors?• Which minimum requirements need to

be met for each of the sub-tasks?(human, economic, technical)

Step 3: Distributing the tasks

• Which organisations are capable oftaking on sub-tasks, given the human,economic and technical requirements?

• What expertise do they possess?(strengths and development potentials)

• Do these organisations want to take onsub-tasks?

• What experience do these organisationshave with cooperation?

When applying this tool, we usually comeup against the cardinal question of what, inthe given context, are the core tasks ofgovernment. Here too, there is nouniversally-valid answer. Yet we will haveno difficulty in identifying a trend towards adifferentiation between the roles ofgovernment and society as a whole:undisputed core tasks of governmentinclude for instance guaranteeing legalsecurity, and social and regionaladjustment (integration). For all other tasks,we need to ask the question of how far thepublic services advance along thecontinuum of tasks of standardisation,monitoring of those standards, provision ofguarantees, and performance, or where theinterfaces are located with those privateorganisations which could assume

responsibility for tasks to benefit the publicinterest.

C Result

Analysing the tasks serves a dual purposefor the cooperative co-production: itorientates the partners towards a jointoverall task and goal, and heightensawareness for solutions which are feasiblein the given situation.

This approach has the advantage over ananalysis of problems and deficits in thatattention is focused on potentials andvisions.

Furthermore, the analysis of tasks formsthe starting point for the issue of theperformance capabilities of the individualpartners:

• Are the partners selected for the sub-tasks actually willing and able to performthe assigned sub-tasks?

• What are they willing to do to ensurethat the cooperation runs smoothly andsuccessfully?

private sector

constitutionlegislationstandardisation

guaranteesperformance

ê êgovernment

monitoringguarantees

performance

T-02/1

T-02: Negotiating Roles

A Method

Wherever possible, we normally define theroles of the organisations participating in aproject at the beginning of the cooperation.We consult, identify the intentions andexpectations of the various actors, andenter into contractual agreements stipu-lating rights and obligations.

Having said that, we observe that theseroles undergo constant change duringcooperation. This dynamic process is theresult of new expectations, modifieddemands, asymmetrical relationships, dis-tortions of communication and shifts in thebalance of power.

In most cases, we cannot simply define theroles once and for all and then forget aboutthem. As cooperation progresses, it isnecessary to constantly renegotiate thoseroles, as the partners themselves undergochange during cooperation.

Since roles are negotiable, the definitionand redefinition of roles form one basicelement of process monitoring. The threekey questions here are:

• What do the others expect of us?• What do we expect of the others?• What do we expect of ourselves?

B Application

Step 1: Describing expectations

The following matrix is designed to enablethe actors to describe both their expec-tations of the other actors, and their ownconception of themselves

organisation èexpects oforganisationê

A B C D

A

B

C

DThe matrix is based on the assumption that roles arebeing defined between the four organisations A to D.

Step 2: What others expect of us(horizontal) and self-images (diagonal)

• Do we understand the expectations ofthe other partners in cooperation?

• Which expectations do we agree with?What do we disagree with?

• Is the sub-task allocated to us consistentwith our own self-image (= boxes in thediagonal)?

• What is absolutely essential andnecessary in order for us to perform ourrole?

Step 3: Our expectations of others(vertical)

• Do we expect too much/too little ofothers?

• Does the self-image of otherscorrespond to the expectations we haveof them?

• Do the partners have the means andmethods at their disposal to meet ourexpectations?

T-02/2

• What are our minimum requirements forthe task to be performed?

Step 4: Interfaces

Addressing and attempting to answer theabove questions usually brings to lightconflicts, the underlying motives of whichremain concealed. The latter include thefear of losing power or image, rivalries andmistrust, the removal of professionalresponsibilities, and the working methodsused by others.

(Re-)negotiating roles can help alleviate orresolve these conflicts, if we succeed infocusing attention on practical issues.Where are the key interfaces? What canwe do to make these interfaces "work" likeplugs and sockets? Here are a few keyissues to be considered in this more in-depth process of negotiating roles:

We confine ourselves here to onerelationship which we consider it importantto analyse more closely. The twoorganisations A and B first askthemselves, separately, the following fourinterface-related questions:

• index of the relative relevance of therelationship: number and frequency ofthe exchange of goods and services inrelation to overall production of A/B.

• index of staff commitment: number ofstaff in direct/indirect contact with otherorganisations.

• index of the qualitatively bindingcharacter of the relationship: verbaland written agreements, contracts, com-pensations, terms of withdrawal, sanc-tions.

• sockets: communicative design of theinterfaces between A and B; availabilityof contact persons and their obtain-ability, regularity of information ex-change, use of technology for exchangeof information.

When different experiences and per-ceptions are compared, a process ofnegotiation develops which leads to prac-tical improvements

C Result

Role negotiations are an appropriate wayto facilitate dealing with the slightlynebulous issue of coordination: wediscuss mutual expectations, and thepractical demands we place on a co-ordinated approach.

If we negotiate roles with the key partnersregularly during cooperation, we focustheir attention on the observation anddesign of those processes which shapeany cooperation: changing mutual expec-tations.

After a certain period, the partners willbecome so experienced in and accustomedto this approach that they will continue topursue it without external support.

• relevance of relationship• staff commitment• binding character• sockets

interface A/B

T-03/1

T-03: Analysing Interactions

A Method

Many projects aim to create an operationalproduction and exchange system be-tween various actors: services and goodsare produced and exchanged, for instancebetween municipalities, user groups, acooperative, the district administration andan NGO.

The more actors are involved, the soonerthe following questions for the observerarise:

• What kind of relationships exist amongthe actors?

• Who is providing which services and/orgoods to whom?

• How satisfied are the clients with theservices/goods provided?

• At which level (local, regional, national)are which services/goods to beprovided?

• Where do we observe overlaps?• Where are unnecessary services/goods

being provided which we could dowithout?

An analysis of interactions attempts toanswer these questions. It makes thecomplex interactions within a network oforganisations, working for instance in thefield of natural resource management,more easy to grasp. And it identifiesconcrete steps which can help boost theefficiency of these processes.

In the case of services, this thereforebecomes very important, as their charac-teristic feature is that the recipient of theservice is involved in its production (= clientinvolvement). Services are produced

through close interaction between theprovider and the recipient.

B Application

Step 1: Matrix of relationships

At a workshop attended by the majoractors, we enter the participatingorganisations in a matrix. (Instead of amatrix, another means of visualrepresentation can of course also beselected, for instance a Venn diagram oran organisational landscape).

organisation èinteractswithorganisationê

A B C D

A §h* ó

B ó *+ *

C §*h * *

D + * ó

Various types of relationship are thenentered in the boxes using simple symbols:

Service relationship: organisation Aprovides a service to organisation B.

§ Legal relationship: between organisa-tions A and C there exist contractually-stipulated rules and standards governingthe exchange of goods and services.

T-03/2

ó Market relationship: the relations ofexchange between organisations A and Bare determined by supply and demand.

* Information exchange relationship:information is regularly exchanged betweenorganisations A and C.

h Interpersonal relationship: closepersonal relationships exist betweenorganisations A and C.

+ Power relationship: between orga-nisations A and D there exists a power gapwhich consists in the fact that organisationD cannot of its own accord escape theinfluence of organisation A.

The matrix of relationships is a firstapproximation, and creates a clearerpicture. Consequently, it is not necessaryto shed full light on all relationships. As arule, it is sufficient to use the tool toaddress discrepancies in assessmentsmade by the actors themselves.

Step 2: Production/exchange andmarket interactions

In the second step we focus onproduction/exchange and marketrelationships. We list the variousproviders and recipients of goods/services.With membership organisations - e.g.cooperatives and associations - we haveto take into account the fact that theirmembers are both producers and recipi-ents of the goods/services in question.Here too, the relationships can berepresented in the form of a matrix.

organisation èprovidesgoods/servicestoorganisationê

A B C D

A

B

C

D

In practise, it has proved beneficial todistinguish three types of good/service:

• material inputs: goods, money, trans-port

• know-how: information, consultancy,training, planning, R&D

• regulation and coordination: legislation,standardisation, monitoring, coordina-tion of the division of labour

C Result

Cooperation networks are often based onplans which are too complex; after a shorttime they collapse as the excessive numberof interfaces overstretches them.

Regular observation of interactionssupports the gradual simplification of thedivision of labour in networks and within co-productions. It promotes client-orientation,and an exclusive focus on core tasks.

T-04/1

T-04: Management of Learning

A Method

Learning takes place automatically alwaysand everywhere as a communicativeprocess. We are familiar with it in the formof everyday problem-solving behaviour.

Learning is more than just the intake andstorage of information. Learning is a pro-cess driven by incentives, new ambientconditions, and models or ideals: we seenew differences (differentiation), and newcommonalities (integration) - and act onthem, in order to learn from that experi-ence.

In all projects designed to promote change,the actors learn: during the work, orthrough coaching or training. The effective-ness of these learning processes isdetermined to a large extent by threemanagement functions with which weshape learning processes:

• we define learning goals according tothe necessary competences,

• we facilitate and support the learningprocess through moderation, methodsand didactic aids,

• we prepare the ground for and supporttransfer into practise.

With adults, these management tasksneed to take into account the following:

• Learning is an individual act, deter-mined by the personal learningbiography of the learner, and thephysical and social environment (e.g.the working group and the availability ofconference rooms). Both support andpromote, or hamper and block, learning.We can help make learning processes

more effective by taking learning experi-ences seriously and creating conduciveenvironments.

• Adults find learning easier when it islinked to their experiences, interestsand desires. Subjective plausibility isoften more important than scientific ob-jectivity and a systematic approach.

• Adults expect a balance to be createdbetween instrumental/rational, and ex-periential/creative activities. Their well-being and sympathies (affective states)determine their willingness to learn.

• Adults have already developed learningstyles which differ from individual toindividual. Activities to promote learningtherefore need to combine differentsocial forms of learning, and involveseveral channels of communication:

− didactic social forms: individualwork, group work, project work, prob-lem conferences, coaching, learningand project groups.

− communication through severalchannels: listening, reading, watch-ing, discussing, observing, feeling,experiencing.

• When learning, adults feel a need fororganisation and co-determination.Learning should therefore take place inrecognisable blocks (sequences), andbe evaluated periodically together withthe learners.

• Adults expect the learning process to beboth goal-directed and flexible. To

T-04/2

meet these conflicting needs, learningactivities must• be planned less in terms of their

content and more in terms of thelearning goals,

• be designed less with a view to theacquisition of factual knowledge, andmore with a view to the capability tosolve problems self-reliantly.

B Application

B-1: Key qualifications

Learning goals must be derived from theanticipated work to be performed at theworkplace.

We can assume that learning always takesplace at the workplace itself, and thatadults always already possess skills whichwe can build on. Learning (whether intraining or coaching courses, or in workinggroups at the workplace) should extendthese skills and support the process oflearning by doing.

It is therefore appropriate that we focus onthose key qualifications which affect thelearning process in the working environ-ment. In other words: the learning goalsare geared to the capability to learn.

Step 1: The workplace environment

We cannot define any learning goalsunless and until we are familiar with theworkplace of the target groups and theirenvironment. We have to ask ourselvesthe following questions:

• With which other individuals do thelearner group perform their tasks (e.g.staff, clients)?

• To whom do those individuals report?• What support do the learner group

receive from their superiors and thoseon the same level?

• How many individuals report to thelearner group?

• What kind of leadership/managementdo the subordinate staff expect?

• What experiences of learning andchange have the learner group gainedto date?

Step 2: Core tasks

• Which tasks will the learner group beperforming in future?

• Which activities do they comprise?• Which activities are recurrent, which are

of a one-off problem-solving nature?• Which of the recurrent activities cannot

be learned through practise at the work-place?

• Which of the problem-solving tasks areespecially important for performanceand quality?

• Which quantitative and qualitative ex-pectations vis-à-vis performance areattached to these tasks?

Step 3: Promoting learning at theworkplace

• How do the learner group learn at theworkplace?

• Which forms of work promote learning,and which impede it?

• Which social skills promote the learningprocess?

Step 4: Prerequisites for learning

• Which professional and socialcompetences are particularly highlydeveloped within the learner group?

• Which experiences and interests of thelearner group will motivate them todevelop these competences further?

• Which learning experiences and stylesdo the learner group have at theirdisposal?

Step 5: Four-dimensional goals

The questions for steps 1 to 4 shouldprovide the basic information required todefine learning goals. Having said that, we

T-04/3

cannot be certain we are marching in theright direction until we have tested thingsout under practical conditions andevaluated the results.

By learning, the individual developsvarious competences simultaneously:both social and communicative, andmanual and theoretical. Learning goalscan be correspondingly distinguished ac-cording to the contained proportions ofknowledge for orientation, knowledgefor action, skills and supportive be-haviour.

We can break down the learning goalsfocused on key qualifications into fourdimensions:

− Orientation: What do I need to knowabout my environment in order for myactions to be successful?

− Action: How much do I need to know tobe able to perform the task efficientlyand as specified?

− Skills: What skills do I need to be ableto perform the task?

− Behaviour: Which behaviour willsupport my performance of the task?

For these key qualifications to becomeactivated in the subsequent learningprocess within the working environment,we need to equip the target group with anadditional tool: They must learn to monitortheir own learning progress and learningblocks. Achieving this will mean involvingthe learner group in the evaluation oflearning processes. In other words: Wegive them an opportunity to assess their

own performance capability, and measureit in relation to the key qualifications.

B-2: Coaching

Coaching in the sense of facilitation oflearning is consultancy for learning, andaims to enable learners to learn and solveproblems self-reliantly. It is based on theassumption that potentials can be tappedwithin the learner group if and when weadhere to the principle of minimumintervention. In other words, coaching - asopposed to instruction - is the approach ofchoice wherever the aim is to increase theautonomy of and empower learner groups.

Coaching is problem-oriented: Facilitationstarts with the problems encountered bythe learner group, and the methodsemployed are adjusted to the problems athand: within the scope of problemconferences, case studies or expertmeetings.

Coaching is a process of assumingresponsibility. Responsibility for learningand for the outcome rests with the learnergroup. Coaching promotes the assumptionof responsibility through non-directive,circular enquiry; it unfolds in four phases:G-R-O-W

• Goal setting: What are our aims? Whatdo we consider important? What is ourtask? Which problems do we finddifficult to deal with?

• Reality checking: What is happening tous? Where are we? Which factors areinfluencing our actions?

• Options: What options do we have?Which are the best? What risks will wethen be taking?

• Will: What needs to be done when andby whom? Which decisions do we needto take? Whom shall we involve? Inwhat form?

Coaching presupposes a basic supportiveattitude, based on faith in the developmentpotential of the learner group. This isexpressed most clearly through withdrawalfrom decision-making situations:

Behaviour

Orientation

Action

SkillsLearninggoals

T-04/4

B-3: Bridges across the transfer gap

The third core task of learning manage-ment involves bridging the gap between thelearning process and practical applicationof what has been learned.

The following suggestions make no claim tocompleteness:

• We promote all forms of practise-oriented learning: coaching, mentor-ships, work experience, horizontal ex-change of experience.

• We rely on the observation of problemsand critical events, in order toharmonise the learning process with thepractical problems and task-relatedcompetences involved.

• We work on genuine issues andproblems: through problem analyses,search conferences, mirroring sessionsand research groups.

• We develop training courses andcoaching for operational teams workingtogether. Or we offer courses forfunction-based groups which overlap, sothat the various groups experiencewithin the learning process how crucialthe interfaces between the learnergroups are.

• We ensure that training is held at alocation far from the workplace, in short,intensive blocks, and that it includes thedevelopment of social skills.

• We develop learning activities to matchthe given situation, in response to theproblems experienced by the learnergroup: Training and coaching involve ahigh proportion of practical skillsdevelopment through exercises,problem-solving activities and casestudies.

• We consolidate individual learningthrough regular group work.

• We avoid blanket training and coaching,and focus on selected organisationalunits which serve as a model.

C Result

Management of learning is at the core ofany consultancy. Learning processesbecome effective when we take the time toidentify the key qualifications, when wecombine training away from the workplacewith coaching, and when we do thegroundwork for transfer of the skills andcapabilities learned into practise.

the learner groupdecides

... and coachingasks

nothing

that somethingshould be done

what should be done

when, how, whereand by whom some-thing should be done

nothing

whether somethingought to be done

what might be done

on which assump-tions and motivesthat is based

whether the actorscan perform thetasks

what the anticipatedconsequences are

☯

☯

☯

☯

☯

T-05/1

T-05: Learning in Groups

A Method

Learning in groups has advantages overindividual learning: the potential for dis-covery is larger, experiences are broader,and the incentives to learn are morenumerous and diverse.

The quality of interaction within thegroup can stimulate or block the process oflearning in groups. If the members are notwilling to speak openly with one anotherand exchange experiences, then learning isconfined to interaction within the group. Inother words: Under these circumstances,the group becomes occupied primarily withitself. The performance capability of agroup is adversely affected as the groupbecomes cut off from the outside world, aswell as by the opposite, i.e. dissolution.

The Johari window model demonstratesthe two ways in which we can improve theinteraction within groups: through self-presentation, and by stimulating feedback.

As a rule, the concealed and blind windowsare filled with assumptions, imagined ideasand projections.

The model initiates a sequence of commu-nication acts, involving two pro-active be-haviours:

• letting others know more about oneselfthrough targeted self-presentation: The"hidden window" becomes smaller, the"conscious window" becomes larger.

• seeking feedback from others throughactive enquiry: The "unconsciouswindow" becomes smaller, the "con-scious window" becomes larger.

Deadlocked personal relationships blocklearning within groups. To turn groups intoactive learner groups, we need to counter-act two tendencies which inhibit manygroup processes:

• Horizontal relationships: People tendto seek reassurance and conform to thenorms of a group. People must beenabled to express divergent opinions orattitudes, and criticise and contradict.

• Vertical relationships: People tend tobehave in a reciprocal fashion to avoidpower conflicts. They react to dominantbehaviour by being submissive. - Powergaps and pronounced dependenciesstructure communication such that it isoften necessary to first of all formgroups with similar interests.

consciouswindow

unconsciouswindow

hidden window unknownwindow

known to me unknown tome

known toothers

unknownto others

seek feedbackself-presen-tation

T-05/2

B Application

Groups can modify their learning behaviourwithin a short period, and increase it to anastonishing degree, if and when a commonorientation is found, and scope created forself-appraisal and feedback. To this end, itis beneficial to regularly apply mirroringtools.

Example 1: Appraisal of self and others

Example 2: Learning climate

The following 15 statements are rated bothby the individuals and within the group on ascale of 1 (completely false) to 5 (com-pletely true). By repeating and comparingthe ratings through time, a picture of thegroup process is obtained.

Information01 We possess the necessary information to

complete our task.02 All group members are aware of the purpose and

objective of our task.03 We know how and where to obtain further

information.

Leadership04 We consider the management competent.05 The management is engaged chiefly in organising

the work.06 We are supported by the management in the

performance of our tasks.

Disagreement07 The individual contributions are barely criticised.08 New ideas and proposals meet with keen interest.09 Critical contributions modify our approach.

Decision-making10 The management decide everything by them-

selves.11 We are given a hearing prior to each important

decision.12 We know which decisions we can influence.

Atmosphere13 The cooperation is slow and sluggish.14 The discussion is marked by personal conflicts.15 Problems can be addressed immediately, directly

and personally.

Example 3: Criticism of roles

If a group wishes to establish how itsmembers deal with one another and howtheir roles change in the course ofcooperation, it can insert a pause forthought at regular intervals. The followingquestions are based on the assumptionthat the group has already developed aninterest in the transparency of roles. Thisis designed to make the role descriptionstangible, i.e. modifiable.

01 Which two members of the group do I acknowl-edge most on the basis of their professionalcompetence?

02 Which two members of the group can the othersleast influence to change their opinion?

03 Which two members of the group can the othersmost easily influence to change their opinion?

04 Which two members of the group have, in thecourse of our work, been most at odds with eachother?

05 Which two members of the group are most willingto protect and defend members who are beingattacked?

06 Which two members of the group keep remindingthe group of its objectives?

07 Which two members of the group tend to with-draw from discussion when differences of opinionarise?

08 Which two members of the group tend to succeedin pushing through their personal objectives andinterests?

09 Which two members of the group often discussissues which have nothing to do with our task?

10 Which two members of the group show thegreatest need to accomplish something?

11 Which two members of the group make a specialeffort to settle disputes?

12 Which two members of the group make thegreatest effort to keep the cooperation underway?

13 With which two members of the group do Inormally talk the least?

14 With which two members of the group do Inormally talk the most?

dominant

criticising consulting

disliking liking

submissiveordering compliant

How do I react to X?

T-05/3

Example 4: Self-evaluation

Learning processes in groups are steeredand promoted primarily by the groupobserving its own work. The S-W-O-Pmodel (Strengths, Weaknesses, Obstacles,Potentials) is a simple method of periodicself-evaluation. The basic element com-prises a window with four boxes:

The two boxes on the left relate to thepast, whilst those on the right contain anassessment of the potentials and risks forthe future.

This tool has proven valuable for an ap-proach involving the separation of per-spectives: groups with homogeneousinterests present their different experi-ences, perspectives, group interests andpositions of power, in order to be able tocompare them at a later date. The toolunfolds its full potential when appliedregularly, such that comparisons can bemade through time.

Step 1: PreparationThe group agrees on a task which it wishes toobserve using the SWOP tool described above,for instance the marketing of saplings, coordi-nation meetings with the forestry serv ice, nego-tiations with the land-use authority, mainte-nance works on the irrigation channels. A large

SWOP window is drawn. The intervals for theprojected and retrospective observations aredefined.

Step 2: Collecting experiences and assess-mentsThe group members write their responses oncards, and stick them in the appropriate boxes.

Step 3: EvaluationThe members comment on each others' cards.In each of the four boxes, a summary of ob-servations is produced.The summary of experiences (= left-handside) in compared with the future prospects (=right-hand side) of the last SWOP windowproduced: Have we utilised the potentials? Didwe underestimate the obstacles? The membersadjust their work schedules in line with theevaluation.

Possible further stepsThe tool can be adapted to the particularsituation, for instance by making the followingfurther distinctions when filling in the cards:

• consensus/dissent: What do we agree on?Where do out opinions differ?

• internal/external influences: What can weinfluences using our own resources? What arethe external influences over which we have nocontrol?

• empirical/non-empirical influences: What canwe measure precisely and address directly?Which statements constitute assessments andobservations which cannot be addresseddirectly?

C Result

Learning processes within groups can beobserved and reinforced by simple means.

The impacts of self-reflective loops, assuggested for instance using the SWOPmethod, include not only an enhancementof group performance, but also greatergroup inclusivity (we-feeling), and astronger will on the part of the group toperform tasks under difficult conditions.

strengths potentials

weaknesses obstacles

looking forwardinto the future

looking backinto the past

S P

S OS P

S OS P

S OS P

W O

S P

S OS P

S OS P

S OS P

W O

actor A actor B

time

T-06/1

T-06: Organisational Learning

A Method

We are all familiar with the concept oflearning as applied to individuals. We haveall had the experience of overcoming andextending the limits of our knowledge andexpertise.

With organisations too, we can observethat they become able to achieve thingswhich they previously did not achieve. Thisis not only due to an increase in individualcapabilities. Organisational learning in-volves a network of interlinked individual,social and structural processes. Organi-sational learning is based on the assump-tion that individual learning is incorporatedinto the organisational memory, or inother words that it leads to a change inprocedures and structures.

It is widely acknowledged that organisa-tions are vital and open systems whichconstantly adapt to their environment, forinstance the market or new tasks, in orderto maintain themselves. There must be ademand for the product or service whichthey generate from their own resourcesand feed back into the environment. Theneed for organisational learning istherefore a consequence of continuouschange in the environment. Organisationsmust learn to realistically assess the legal,political, economic, social and marketenvironment in which they exist, and toidentify the potentials generated when theyhelp shape that environment.

Organisations can wait passively untilchange is thrust upon them, or they canattempt actively to harmonise their owndevelopment in line with new potentials andchallenges. This forward learning occurs

when an organisation draws up a strategyin response to trends and scenarios for thedevelopment of its environment.

We have thus identified three features of alearning organisation: An organisationlearns when its members actively draw upmedium-term plans (a model or strategy),designed to guarantee the continuedexistence of the organisation by making itbest fit with the environment.

This can be summarised in the followingdiagram:

Organisational learning is a process oftransforming the internal structures andprocesses of an organisation, with the aimof adapting to the changed environment.This requires both knowledge and expertiseon the part of individual persons andgroups, and changes in routine proceduresand fixed rules within the organisation.

Two key questions can be asked in thecontext of organisational learning pro-cesses, which can serve as the startingpoint for all observations:

technology

goals

tasks

incentives

information

ldshp.

environ. dynamics

T-06/2

• How does the organisation deal withinformation from the environment?

• How does the organisation deal withvoiced differences of opinion?

The first question is based on theassumption that each organisation needsto absorb information important to it fromthe complex environment in the simplestway possible.The second question presupposes thatindividual and structural learning processesin organisations are interlinked, and that itis therefore important for the organisationto respond to differences of opinion and"local theories".

B Application

B-1: Information management

What can organisations do when having todeal with a high level of environmentalcomplexity undergoing constant change?

The following checklist contains positivelyworded qualitative indicators of a dynamicorganisation which is willing to learn.

01 Information sources: Does the organisationmake use of a wide range of mutually inde-pendent information sources? How does theorganisation define its environment? Whichtrends does it monitor?

02 Information flow: What incentives to pass oninformation does the organisation create? Whattechnical aids and methods does it make avail-able? How does it promote informal exchange ofinformation?

03 Information processing: Does the organisationmake use of both encoded (figures, statistics)and narrative forms (stories, group discussions)?Does it have a medium-term strategy?

04 Interest in interpretations: What opportunitiesdoes the organisation offer for different inter-pretations to be expressed and compared?

05 Evaluation of experience: How does the orga-nisation evaluate its experiences? Does it adaptthe evaluation to the environmental dynamics?

In order to identify and put forward for discussion thetrends in the development of an organisation over aprolonged period, it is appropriate to quantify specificindicators.

B-2: Voice and exit

The quality of organisational learning canbe measured by the dynamics of voicebehaviour. The way an organisation dealswith criticism has a crucial effect onlearning processes, and thus on organisa-tional change. Let us first define the basicconcepts:

Voice denotes those behaviours which callinto question the status and prevailingroutines of an organisation. Voice meansthat standard procedures are not being fullycomplied with, or are creating problems.

Voice becomes manifest when people ex-press direct and open criticism and valuejudgements; in other words, they drawattention to shortcomings, mistakes andfaults, as well as good experiences andunharnessed potentials. In so doing, theycall into question the prevailing under-standing of how the organisation functions:The "local theory" is born.

The term exit denotes the phenomenon ofan individual withdrawing from a relation-ship (to individuals or organisations), andterminating it in order to seek an alternativerelationship. Frequent exit is a signal:Something is wrong when staff hand intheir notice and clients disappear.

Exit is the most determined form of voice,and presupposes that the individual makingthe exit has other alternatives to choosefrom. Although exit is entirely consistentwith market principles (...we will select thebest product, the best organisation), it in-hibits organisational learning: Organisa-tions may lose their best and most creativepeople as a result. Organisations whoseonly scope for dissent is exit (... those whodon't like it here can go elsewhere!) have amassive learning block.

Willingness to assume responsibility andthe possibility of voicing differences ofopinion are closely related. Those who areable to express different opinions withoutrisk will identify with a problem, and bewilling to assume responsibility for it.

T-06/3

It goes without saying that any voice be-haviour is strongly influenced by socio-cul-tural factors, and the status of the in-volved persons and groups. In other words,in each organisation the strength of loyaltyto "local theories" is differentially distributedamong persons and groups.

The repertoire of responses to voice andexit is wide:

• Express criticism which is voiced andcalls into question existing notions caneither be accepted and taken intoaccount, or rejected and ignored, ormerely ostensibly accepted.

• Latent criticism (dissatisfaction, pass-ivity, exit in spirit or in fact) can alsoeither be ignored, or actively addressed,for instance through a process of ques-tioning and discussion.

Step 1: ObservationSelf-observation:• To whom can I express criticism and meet with

their interest?• What makes it easier for me to express criticism?• Who will support me if I express criticism?• Who is interested in what is changing outside our

organisation?• What advantages would I be hoping to gain if I

were to move to another organisation?• What reasons or advantages here prevent me

from moving to another organisation?Observation of others:• By whom have major changes been initiated

recently?• Who has tried to bring about an open exchange

and discussion regarding those changes? Howsuccessful were they?

• Who has exited recently?• What reasons did they give?• Who showed interest in those reasons?

Step 2: Culture of horizontal exchange• What opportunities do we have within our organi-

sation of work to exchange experiences?• How are we rewarded for exchanging experi-

ences?• Who is interested in our insights, assessments

and suggestions?

Step 3: Voice cultureThe behaviour of organisations vis-à-visvoice varies from case to case, as it is in-fluenced by a number of situational charac-teristics, e.g.

• by the degree to which the arguments voiced areconvincing and objectifiable

• by the status and influence of the individualvoicing the opinion ("messenger profile")

• by the degree to which the status quo isthreatened

Nevertheless, we can distinguish fourpatterns of how organisations deal withcases of voiced criticism:

1 DenialThe organisation closes its eyes and ears to anyneed for change which might have been identified, orpossibly seeks to perfect existing structures andconsolidate the official perception of the environ-ment.

2 Pseudo-acceptanceCosmetic measures are taken to create the falseimpression that the suggestion for change has beenaccepted, whilst the structures to resist the voicing ofcriticism may possibly have been strengthened, e.g.through marginalisation or defamation.

3 Reactive adjustmentVoiced criticism is taken seriously and leads to con-crete, albeit sporadic changes in internal proceduresand structures, and possibly the perception of theenvironment is also adapted.

4 Active adjustmentThe organisation actively seeks to identify problemsand criticism, with the aim of adjusting its own struc-tures and processes, and redefining the environment.

C Result

The degree of an organisation's willingnessto learn can be observed through itsbehaviour with respect to information andvoiced criticism. Discussion of these issuesas a rule initiates both strategic planning,and strong team-formation processes.

T-07/1

T-07: Process History

A Method

Whilst we are constantly involved inprocesses of change, we neverthelesshave surprisingly little process experienceat our disposal. This also applies to pro-jects of cooperation which, as a rule,expend a great deal of energy on planning,but spend little time on periodic adjustmentof the plans in the light of experiences.

The parameters of a project are in constantflux: New emphases emerge, others fade,and roles, interests and power structureschange in the course of cooperation.

As a rule, we find it difficult to concede thatwe fully grasp only little, that we makemistakes, that we take decisions on thebasis of inadequate data, and that webarely understand the complex, dynamicprocesses in which we are involved.Nevertheless, planning does make sense:We want to agree on goals, and we canobserve the discrepancies between ourplanned targets and what we have actuallyachieved.

We know where we started from, and whowe were with along the way, but we barelyknow how we reached the goal.

Methods of self-evaluation are an appro-priate means of reshaping planning into aniterative process responsive to experi-ences. Having said that, the majority ofmethods focus on the results, and in doingso neglect the detours, the errors and theuncertainty which have been with us alongthe way.

To learn from the history of the process,we must take the trouble to look back over

the individual decision-making pro-cesses. At first glance we often observe achaos of facts and an agglomeration ofinterests, of which we understand only little,even though we did take decisions at thetime.

Reconstructing process histories has thebenefit of making us focus more closely onfactors influencing decision-making in thepresent. Instead of seeing uncertainty,errors and contingency as obstacles, wecan harness them as creative potentials:We look back at selected processes wehave undergone and ask ourselves:

• What decisions did we take at the time?• What information did we base those

decisions on?• What did we expect to happen as a

result?• What was the actual outcome?

B Application

Step 1: Determining the scene

Any situation in the present can be seen asthe result of decisions we have taken inthe past. In other words: The scene inwhich we find ourselves now was con-structed, and has a history. Which majordecisions brought us to where we aretoday?

First of all, the question contains a problemof delineation: We must confine ourselvesto a section of the present which can bedescribed, and whose history we wish toshed light on.

T-07/2

When first attempting to work with processhistory, it is recommended to select a con-crete result: The village tree nurseries arebeing run self-reliantly and on a break-evenbasis, loans are being repaid, the usergroups are not keeping unwritten agree-ments, etc.

In the following steps, the method gainsmomentum if - in order to separate per-spectives - we work with different groupsin parallel, so that we can later comparethe decisions taken and their importance.

Step 2: Fishbone

If we focus on a particular scene, e.g. thetree nurseries, we can hold a workshop tocollect the decisions which brought us towhere we are today. We plot the decisionsalong the time axis, and draw a fishboneof the decisions D-xx:

Decisions with even numbers were strongly deter-mined by us.Decisions with odd numbers were strongly in-fluenced by external factors.

We can distinguish several hierarchical levels ofdecisions, for instance the relationship betweenD-05 and D51 is that the latter influenced decisionD-05.

The straight line along the time axis shouldnot give the impression that the path takenwas itself a straight line! This becomes allthe more clear when we take into accountdecisions which at the time appearedminor, or which at the time we did noteven see as being formal decisions.

Step 3: D-matrix

We can now enter the decisions in a matrixwhich will make it easier to begin dis-cussion of the process history:

Step 4: Styles of decision-making

We assume that decisions were taken ona more or less participatory basis, andthat alternative options were compared inthe decision-making process. We will nowattempt to characterise the decisions inS-3 (= with a large degree of freedom andof major importance for the outcome) onthe basis of these two criteria

• Which three decision-making styles dothe decisions in S-3 display?A: Autocratic - one individual or group ofindividuals took the decision on thebasis of their position and function.B: Consultative - one individual or groupof individuals took the decision afterconsulting other individuals and askingfor their opinion.C: Group-centred - one group of indivi-duals reached agreement on the deci-sion through an opinion-forming pro-cess.

• What alternative options were con-sidered before taking the decision?What and who played a crucial role inour deciding this way and not differ-ently?

D stronglyinfluenced byexternal factors

D-01

D-06 D-08

D-05D-03

D-04D-02

D11

D21 D41

D81D62

D61

D31

D51D32

D stronglyinfluenced by us

time

today

S-2illusions

S-3self-steering

S-1formalisms

S-4constraints

minor major

large

small

relevance to the outcome

degree ofdecision-

makingfreedom

T-07/3

Step 5: Evaluation

Once we have worked with various groups,we begin evaluation by comparing theresults. To learn from the process history,it is now necessary to focus on thefollowing questions:

• Which decisions proved to be of majorimportance in retrospect?

• Why did they prove important?• What information did we base the

decisions on?• What was the level of acceptance of the

decisions at that point in time?• Where did we make mistakes and end

up in dead-end situations?• What detours were necessary? What

did we learn from that?• What did we forget? What did we not

want to acknowledge, and what did weput out of our minds?

• When were we blocked, with none of usknowing what to do next?

• What and who helped break downthese blocks?

• How much weight did we attach toformal decisions? Where did real self-steering actually take place?(Comparison of squares S-1 to S-4)

• Why did something take longer thanexpected?

• Why did certain actors remain com-mitted and others drop out?

• What alliances were formed betweenthe actors, and how did they affect thedecisions?

• What do we see differently now thanthen?

• In which decisions now under con-sideration do we wish to take that intoaccount?

• What can we do to ensure that thelessons from the process history are notforgotten?

C Result

The reconstruction of process historiespromotes the incorporation of what hasbeen learned into the existing body ofknowledge of a group or organisation: Weretrace our steps, and recall what welearned.

Process history focuses attention on jointlyachieved development, on our develop-ment. Through a process of experientiallearning, it promotes the adjustment ofplans to those processes which we havehelped shape.

T-08/1

T-08: Group Performance

A Method

Organisations consist of groups: workinggroups, user groups, departments, func-tional groups, operative groups, manage-ment ranks, directors etc., which in turnform sub-groups.

When observing group processes,several basic questions arise both for out-siders, and for the group members them-selves:

• What is a group?• How does it develop?• What holds it together?• What performance advantages does it

have?

Once the group members begin to con-sciously ask themselves these questions,the ability of the group to steer itselfincreases.

B Application

B-1: What is a group?

Not every collection of people constitutes agroup. When using the term group, werefer to an entity with the following dynamiccharacteristics:

• Direct contact: The members of agroup are in direct personal contact.They meet regularly, and exchangeinformation on their work. The membersknow each other, and enter intorelationships with each other which aremore or less related to the work.

• Timespan: In contrast to functional

groups formed coincidentally (e.g. in alift or in a queue), the group survivesover a relatively long period.

• We-feeling: The members perceive

themselves to be part of the group.Unlike groups upon which we impose adefinition based on socio-economic orsocio-cultural characteristics (landlessfemale farmers of Indian origin, estab-lished civil servants of salary bracket X),the members themselves are aware ofbelonging to the group. This may be re-inforced by formal or symbolic con-ditions for admission. The individualmember develops a more or less pro-nounced "we-feeling".

• Community of values: The members

have a minimum, in some cases tacitconsensus on how the outside world,and behaviour within the group, are tobe judged, and which norms are to becomplied with. This forms the basis forthe admission or exclusion of members,and for the joint goals of work.

• Differentiation of roles: On the basis of

their ascribed status or their social andprofessional skills, the group membersdevelop mutual expectations. Positionsand roles emerge, for instance leaders,moderators, co-workers etc. Attached to

differentiationof roles

directcontact

communityof values

wefeeling

time-span

group

T-08/2

these roles are prestige, respect, feel-ings of liking, disliking, competition andrivalry etc..

Where direct contacts are a condition, agroup cannot be enlarged indiscriminately.With working groups, it has proved to bethe case that - depending on the task - theupper limit is six to twelve members.

B-2: How does a group develop?

The most common group formation pro-cesses emerge from one of two sources:

• The group is formed around a core offounders who join forces in the light ofcommon interests and projected bene-fits: Common economic interests lead tothe founding of a company, commonawareness of discrimination leads to thefounding of a social movement.

• The group is formed on the basis of afunctional division of labour: To guar-antee coordination, a working group isformed; to divide up maintenance workand assert water rights, a user group isformed.

Admission to a group can be based on anumber of different criteria:

• compulsory membership: social groups,occupational groups, age groups whichat the same time function as workinggroups.

• appointment or nomination: decisionrests with a higher authority.

• selection by the group itself: groupdecides on the basis of prescribed rulesor its own criteria.

• voluntary membership: new membersseek contact and make an active effortto be admitted.

Each change in the composition of thegroup changes its internal dynamics, moreso in the earlier phases of developmentthan in the latter, when the group hasalready developed a pronounced task-orientation.

Phases of group development:

Phase andgroup structure

Task-orientation andgroup dynamics

1 Forminguncertainty regardingexpectations; heavydependency on foundersor leadership; situationaltrial of behaviours;negotiation of rules.

understanding of taskscharacterised by viewsof members; much timeand energy expended onrelationships, rules andmethodological issues.

2 Stormingformation of sub-groupsand alliances; resistanceto division of labour; re-volt against leadership;mistrust towards andrejection of strong groupmembers.

task-orientation dis-appears behind issuesof relationships; polar-isation of opinions;rivalries and conflicts;affectively laden rejec-tion of roles and tasks.

3 Normingdevelopment of we-feeling, group cohesiongrows; norms and rulesperceived as supports;members provide mutualsupport; conflicts aresettled.

common goals come tothe fore, pragmatic task-orientation becomesstronger; open ex-change of opinionsfacilitates cooperation,overcoming barrierscaused by relationships.

4 Performingproblem-solving strat-egies developed, divisionof labour is functional;mutual expectations areaddressed periodically;role changes are poss-ible.

relationship problemsare considered resolved;constructive handling oftasks becomes thenorm; communicationproblems and relation-ship-related issues areaddressed, where thework demands.

This diagram does not imply that everygroup will undergo all phases in a linearfashion: There are groups which nevermove beyond phases 1 and 2, and thereare groups which move backwards again,for instance because new members havejoined.

The diagram will prove useful when thegroup asks itself at what stage it is at andwhere it is going.

B-3: Group cohesion

The internal cohesion of a group is ameasure of its stability. Group cohesionhas an ambivalent effect on those outside

T-08/3

the group: On the one hand, it can seemattractive to new members, as they see a"social home" inside the group; on theother hand, cohesion can cut the group offfrom the outside world, even turning it intosomething like a sect or secret society.

promoting cohesion inhibiting cohesion

frequent and regulardirect contacts

size of group inappro-priate to the task

agreement on goals andvalues

inconsistent goals, andconflicting basic attitudes

competition betweengroups and group re-wards

performance assessedindividually

cooperation and syn-ergistic effects amongmembers

loner culture and rivalriesbetween sub-groups

success, acknowledge-ment and visible benefitto members

failures

As well as cohesion, there are otheradvantages which make a group distinctlyattractive:

• pragmatic benefit: the anticipated economicbenefits of membership.

• protection: collective protection against violenceand coercion guaranteed by membership.

• safeguarding of interests: strengthening andprotection of members' interests by the group.

• aura: gain in social prestige associated withmembership.

• self-actualisation: opportunity for members touse their own expertise and capabilities.

• learning: possibilities for acquiring new exper-tise and capabilities in the group.

Strong group cohesion can also have drawbacks:• Highly cohesive groups are resistant to organisa-

tional change.• Group pressure can lead to isolation, and thus to

a clouded perception of reality.

Sociograms can be an appropriate meansof observing the development of cohesionwithin a group. These respond to the ques-tions: Who gets on best with whom? Whoenjoys the highest level of acceptance?Which sub-groups are forming?

The members of the group are invited toselect two or three other group members.The question of selection is alwaysposed in relation to a concrete goal, forinstance:

• With whom would you like to cooperatein connection with afforestation?

• Whom could you not cooperate withunder any circumstances?

For each of the questions, each result isthen shown in a diagram as below:

D G means: D chooses G.G H means: G and H choose each other.Numerical values can be added to the diagram,indicating the number of times each individual hasbeen selected.

Sociograms need to tread a fine line between dis-cretion and transparency. Not all groups can with-stand the level of self-analysis necessary. Inappro-priate application of this instrument might causeirreparable damage, for instance if rivalries were tobecome visible or loners to become branded.

Cohesion and performance only go handin hand if and when the group identifiedwith the superordinate objectives of thelarger organisation. If this is not the case,the group constitutes a threat within theorganisation. The ideal situation is one inwhich highly cohesive groups are well led.

B-4: Performance advantages ofgroups

The performance of a group is greaterthan the sum of its members' individualperformances if and when the group sizeis optimal, and the members complementeach other qualitatively. This will not bethe case where the group is homo-geneous, yet performs different tasks, or if

A

B C

DE

F

G H

JK

M

L

T-08/4

it contains freeloaders or passive mem-bers.Experiences from the working world indi-cate that partially autonomous groupswhich plan, implement and evaluate entiretasks, perform better than highly-special-ised groups, provided that their memberspossess the necessary social skills forinternal coordination.

Designing the task lays the foundation forthe performance capability of a group.What requirements must a learning-oriented task design fulfil?

• The task allows the self-reliant definitionof goals, within the framework of theknown superordinate goals.

• The task comprises the planning andsteering of the work.

• The task makes it possible to maintaincontacts with internal and externalclients.

• The task allows corrections and otheradjustments to be made during execu-tion.

• The task allows for review of goalattainment.

• The task allows for a horizontal ex-change of experiences with othergroups.

• The task allows for the rewarding ofgroup performances.

The social skills of the members aretherefore a further limiting factor, sinceperformance-orientation and members'needs often conflict. Competent groupleadership must be able to harmonisegroup needs with task-orientation. Searchtasks, problem-solving tasks and routinetasks require different communicationpatterns. Consequently, group perform-ances are promoted primarily throughtargeted training of leaders, in order thusto stimulate the self-reflectivity of groups.

This is best illustrated on the basis ofseveral internal communication patternsof groups:

Circular (1) and linear communication (2)are least conducive to task performance:communication takes longer thannecessary, the paths of decision-makingare long and complicated. Having saidthat, where errors of information do occur,these are most quickly corrected in thecommunication circle (1), as this patternprovides the best guarantee of creativeand rapid exchange.

Group members prefer the circulararrangement (1), as they see this asproviding an opportunity to enter into dis-cussion with others more quickly and moreeasily, and see the least danger of beingexcluded.

The fact that these patterns are stronglyinfluenced by the respective superordinateorganisational culture need not prevent usfrom discussing them.

C Result

Observation of group formation processes,and the dynamics between task-orientationand internal cohesion, enables us toassess the performance capability ofgroups. Once groups automatically seeprocess observation as being their owntask, they begin to steer themselves.

1 32 4

T-09/1

T-09: Structure and Process

A Method

Organisations are subject to the twin polarinfluences of order and chaos.

Rules and norms simplify internal coordin-ation and control of the performanceprocess; these include for instance: safetyregulations, rules governing working hours,service regulations, definition of respon-sibilities and relative positions of personnelwithin the hierarchy, rules governing theuse of infrastructure. Taken in their entirety,these rules, together with the material re-sources (buildings, machinery etc.), formthe structure of an organisation.

Structures are expressed in organisationcharts, specifications, in the number oflevels of the hierarchy, or in the division ofduties. They provide actors with a binding,secure framework within which the produc-tion process takes place. Ideally, the rulesare only so dense as to promote initiativeand innovation, whilst at the same timesecuring the "regulated“ production pro-cess.

The alteration of rules, output-orientedresource management, all interpersonaldealings and all communication thereonform the processes of an organisation.These also include personal relation-ships, which cut across and may circum-vent or threaten formal structures. This isthe case for instance with friendships orfamily ties, as they exist independently ofthe asymmetrical power gap and relation-ships of authority.

A symbiotic relationship exists betweenstructure and process: structures promoteor hinder processes, whilst the largelyinvisible processes have a dynamic effect

on the structures of the organisation - theyare the engine driving the structures. With-out processes there are no structures, andstructures are pointless unless they formthe riverbed for processes

The aim of the organisation-specific bal-ance between structure and process is toachieve a maximum of clarity, bindingforce and adaptability, with a minimum ofrules.

Rules and norms are clots of coagulatedexperience. They lead to a certain degreeof routine, security and standardisation,and serve a dual purpose:

• increased efficiency: We know e.g.who we have to approach (proper officialchannel!) and which form to fill in.

STRUCTUREScontinuity

security routine

rules and norms

organisation chartand levels ofhierarchy

division of labour,description of tasksand functions

instruments andmethods of work

planning, monitor-ing and sanctions

PROCESSES flexibility initiative innovation

production pro-cesses

formal and in-formal com-munication

interpersonalrelationships

learning pro-cesses

T-09/2

• quality: We achieve a consistent qualityof products and services.

There are declared and undeclared,regularly observed and tacitly ignored rules.Interest in the density of rules and theirobservance varies. In most organisations,the density of rules decreases at the upperlevels of the hierarchy, whilst interest intheir being followed increases.

Organisations are made up of sub-organi-sations and niches, which are structuredand regulated to differing degrees. Theratio of the mix is reflected for instance inthe scope for decision-making on adiscretionary basis as opposed to by thebook. It may also be expressed in thematerial structures, for instance a work-place design conducive to communication,or in values, for instance the attachment ofpositive value to informal contacts.

Wherever order is defined by rules, thereare also sanctions to punish infringementsof the rules, and there are disputes overwhich rules should be kept and whichthrown overboard. People adopt anattitude toward the structural and processcomponents of the system: for instance,they seek security in routine, and accept alarge gap in power between themselvesand their superiors. Or they are comfortablein processes which feel chaotic, and seekout their own reference groups.

Processes are determined by task-relatedcooperation between people, their affectiverelationships, their expectations anddesires.

The division of the (sub-)organisation intostructural and process components isdependent on the nature of the task, andthe resources available. It is also influencedby culturally-determined thought and be-haviour patterns, and organisational tradi-tions: the same tasks are performed differ-ently in different places!

B Application

B-1: Indicators of structure andprocess

It is a characteristic feature of organisa-tions and their sub-organisations to dividethemselves up into structural and processcomponents. This generates key informa-tion on existing scope for action and theprevailing organisational culture.

A working group wishing to conduct anorganisational diagnosis can select thoseindicators from the following list which itconsiders especially significant:

• number of levels of the hierarchy involvedin the performance of a task or in adecision-making process

• number of formally distinct tasks• design of tasks: breakdown of objectives,

planning, regulation, quality control, evalu-ation v is-à-v is execution

• number of meetings at the horizontal level• number of meetings within the vertical

structure• time taken for decision-making• number of indiv iduals involved in decision-

making• interval between planning and execution• time needed by new staff to feel integrated• frequency of formal alterations to regulations

and organisation charts• staff turnover• ratio of number of indiv iduals with and those

without direct external contacts• number of standardised work instruments:

manuals, forms etc. and their distribution• frequency of sanctions• frequency and target groups of promotions• methods of monitoring presence• methods of staff evaluation

B-2: Shifts in the balance betweenstructure and process

Where specific tasks need to be re-designed, either for individuals or forteams, the redefinition of structural andprocess components can be discussed.

T-09/3

First of all, the tasks (in this case A and B)are entered along the continuum of struc-ture and process, with selected indicators.

In a second step, the direction in which thetask needs to be developed in order toachieve the objectives is discussed. Therationale of why a shift in one or otherdirection is appropriate consists of threearguments:

• the targeted increase in quality,• the anticipated increase in efficiency (in

the sense of improved resource man-agement),

• the new skills possibly required by thepersonnel performing the task, necess-itated by the shift.

C Result

The insight that there is a need for bothstructures and processes leads us topursue a question-and-answer approach:we attempt to find out what would be theideal mix in our particular case. As aresult, we begin to develop our ownconcepts of the organisation in question.

By analysing the balance between struc-ture and process, we discover somethingabout the dynamics of an organisation,laying the foundation for appropriateinterventions. We address the issue ofwhether and where we have too fewstructures, and whether and where we arecreating too little scope for processes.

high levelof infor-mality

highdensityof rules

processorientation

structureorientation

Task B

indicators:---

indicators:---

Task Adirection

rationale:---

rationale:---

Task BTask B

T-10/1

T-10: Characteristics of Grass-roots Organisations

A Method

The term grass-roots organisation is notclearly defined. It is applied to a broad fieldof highly diverse organisations, whosecommon feature is that they all maintainmore or less direct relations with thepeople.

• as a territorial community: extendedfamily, village, parish, local administra-tion, urban district group, school parents'group, etc.

• as a productive membership organisa-tion: user group, self-help group, co-operative, small business association,credit association, etc.

• as a social movement: self-helpgroups, human rights association, tradeunion, cooperative, etc.

The terms themselves point to the fact thatthere are a large number of hybrid organi-sations, which makes them more difficult totypify. For example: Self-help groups whichhave been formed in response to acollectively felt deprivation in villages, joinforces in a federation, form a credit co-operative, and develop into a powerfulpressure group which controls a politicalparty.

The grass-roots orientation of theseorganisations, in the sense of their beingobliged to the people, is compromised bythe need for internal professionalisationwithin the organisation.

Ethnic affiliation and clientelistic familyallegiances of these organisations in manycases prove to be both strengths andweaknesses at the same time: theystrengthen the grass-roots orientation,

whilst possibly accentuating social differ-ences.

These organisations' close links withpolitical parties and pressure groups ofcivil society create scope for action forthem, whilst at the same time binding themto their governmental and non-govern-mental partners in alliance.

We also need to see the distance betweenthese organisations and public administra-tion structures as a dynamic process.Extensive decentralisation of governmentalstructures and the strengthening of localadministrations can lead to territorial grass-roots organisations becoming involved inclose cooperation with the local administra-tion in local areas.

Many grass-roots organisations perform abridge function: They link rural sections ofthe population, largely neglected bygovernments, to the modern urban-orientedworld. These agents of this link are in manycases young university graduates whoassume leading positions in these orga-nisations.

Normally, when dealing with grass-rootsorganisations, greater emphasis is placedon intercultural issues than when co-operating with governmental agencies orlarge NGOs, for instance. With rural grass-roots organisations, we also look forauthentic, genuine and exotic "otherness",and when we do not find it (...They'realready hooked up to the Internet), wesuspect them of operating on the basis ofinstrumental and rational (i.e. western!)logic.

T-10/2

The development of grass-roots organisa-tions is characterised inter alia by thefollowing conflicts:

• Local versus modern forms of commu-nication: written contracts, planning,technical rationality.

• Breadth of values of members (seniority,social obligations within the community,local knowledge) versus professionalorientation and upgrading of the leader-ship group: growth in power throughprofessional competence.

B Application

B-1: Points to observe

• People are already organised

People unsuspectingly referred to in planners'jargon as target groups always have orga-nisational experience no matter where they are.Organisational cores exist everywhere. Projectplanners occasionally overlook this fact. Theywant to organise the target groups from scratch.People react to this with a reasonable socialtechnique: they allow themselves to be organised.Cooperation must build on the existingorganisational cores and local organisationalexperiences. In many cases, the establishmentand development of new organisations will besuperfluous.

• Paradoxical cooperation

In many cases, raising the issue of organisationconsists in placing the naked demand on usergroups to provide material inputs: manual workas day labourers, provision of materials, money.Grass-roots organisations see this as the collec-tion of a tribute, a practise which in many placesawakens memories of compulsory measuresimposed by colonial administrations.Organisations based neither on benefit nor onvoluntary understanding of their value tend tocrumble and fall apart once the inputs have beenmade.

• Dormant rump organisations

Everywhere there are organisations which havebecome dormant, because they are not needed atpresent. These can be self-help organisations, orassociations. We do not see these organisationsat first glance.Rump organisations contain development poten-tial. They can be reactivated with only little input.

• Demoralised grass-roots organisations

Expectations which have not been met areamong those obstacles which are most difficult toovercome: Following a painful disappointment, aBolivian campesino or an African cooperativefarmer, with his perforce pragmatic strategy forsurvival, will take care not to join an organisationa second time, thus risking his economic andsocial survival.It is absolutely essential to evaluate local orga-nisational experiences, in order to be able toanswer the question as to who we want to workwith.

• Culture of negotiation

Nothing is so time-consuming as two differentpartners moving onto common ground andnegotiating their interests. Organisations areplaces for the slow to sojourn. We cannot de-velop and change non-stop. Hectic activity blockssustainable learning processes.We need to gear communication to the slowlearning processes. The harmonisation of differ-ent interests requires time.

B-2: Diagnosis

Step 1: Self-profile in facts

Facts are objective, their selection andevaluation are not. Where the opportunityarises, it is also recommended to establisha separation of perspectives here: Wework with two or three groups whosecomposition is relatively homogeneous.Two questions interest us: What is fac-tually the case? Who knows what? We areinterested in both the facts and theirinterpretation, in other words the "localtheory" of the organisation about itself.

We can gain an overview with thefollowing twelve thematic fields:

1 Establishment: When was the grass-roots orga-nisation founded? Who founded it? With whatintentions?

2 Members: How many persons belong to thegrass-roots organisation as

- members> in total> honorary staff

- permanent staff> in managerial positions> in operative positions> auxiliary staff

- temporary staff

T-10/3

3 Legal form: What legal form does the grass-roots organisation have? (informal group, legallyincorporated society, cooperative, association,private company, etc.)

4 Products and clients: Which goods andservices does the organisation produce? (also:empowerment, protection of interests, etc.) Forwhom?Which products are in greatest demand amongwhich client groups?

5 Cooperation: With which other organisationsdoes the grass-roots organisation cooperate ona regular basis? What is the purpose of thatcooperation?

6 Reach: How far does the grass-roots orga-nisation extend (local, regional, national) interms of- its own infrastructure? (e.g. with branch offices, means of communication)- its members- its partners in cooperation

7 Tasks: Which main tasks does the organisationperform?

- core tasks- supporting internal tasks

8 Structure: How many hierarchical levels doesthe organisation have? What are they called?How are staff distributed across the levels? Whatprofessional qualifications do these groups ofindividuals possess?

9 Funds: Where do the funds come from?- members' contributions- revenues earned- credits- grants

10 Infrastructure: What infrastructure and assetsdoes the grass-roots organisation have at itsdisposal?

- buildings- production plant and vehicles- means of communication- other

11 Planning: When and where does the grass-rootsorganisation plan its activities? Does it have amedium-term strategy or ideal?

12 Evaluation of experiences: What positiveexperiences can the organisation look back on?How are experiences evaluated within the grass-roots organisation?

Step 2: Visions

Even a grass-roots organisation withlimited performance capability constitutesa development potential. If the socialenergies can be successfully focusedtowards a joint vision, this potential can beharnessed. Consequently, the seconddiagnostic step focuses attention on thefuture.

• Images of the future: What do we wantto achieve in the next two (three) years?We collect the concepts and ideas, andturn the suggestions into pictures, forinstance a hill with a forest on top, or awell-attended meeting of members.

• Growth: How are we going to achievethat? We use a simple, everyday imageto illustrate growth and change, forinstance the growth of a tree, the pathof a drop of water on its way to the sea,the transformation of a silkworm into acocoon, or the lunar phases leading tofull moon:

Phases Path marks: How do we knowthat we've got that far?..........................................................................................................

.....................................................

.......... ..........................................

.....................................................

.....................................................

This illustration is designed to focusattention on a stepwise procedure outlinedmore precisely in the next step.

T-10/4

Step 3: Limiting factors

To refine the diagnosis, we can ask our-selves which capabilities the organisationlacks in order to develop in the prescribeddirection. Here too is it appropriate to avoidapplying a preconceived list. It is a knownfact that there are grass-roots organisa-tions capable of performing well withoutduplicate bookkeeping, organisation chartand computers.

We ask two key questions:• What must we know and be capable of

doing in order to attain our goals?• Where are we strong already?

The results can be illustrated in the formbelow, for example. First of all, fields ofcompetence are delineated, for instance:

A deposits in the credit cooperative,B number of active members,C coordination with the local adminis-

tration,D regular meetings with the women's

groups to evaluate experiences.

The segmented circle distinguishes threedifferent degrees of competence. (1) low,(2) medium and (3) high. To provide aclear representation of the developmentprocess, this can be applied repeatedlythrough time.

Step 4: The outside world

Every organisation has relations with theoutside world, and its members developideas concerning that environment.

Key questions:• Which developments encourage us?• What do we observe with concern?• Which relationships with other

organisations (private and public) willbecome more important in the future?

C Result

Cooperation with grass-roots organisationsplaces high demands on our flexibility: Wemust become detached from our ownorganisational concepts.

Diagnosis of these organisations'performance capability is based on theexperiences and assessments of theirmembers. This helps the grass-rootsorganisations realistically assess theirpotentials and limits, and open up to theoutside world.

1

3

2A

B

C D

T-11/1

T-11: Systematic Diagnosis

A Method

Organisations are living organisms, shapedby their own members. Each member hashis or her own understanding of how theorganisation works or should work. These"local theories" contain notions on leader-ship and cooperation, and on the purposeand quality of the work. Some have veryclear and explicit ideas, whilst others havea more intuitive grasp of what is going rightand what is going wrong in an organisation.

The members differ in their ability to putacross their local theory, and in their in-fluence, or power of definition, in terms ofbeing able to transfer their ideas to othersand have them accepted.

Systemic diagnosis is based on the con-structivist assumption that behaviour andwillingness to learn are moulded by themembers' local theories.'The aim of this procedure is for a workingteam or organisational unit to elaborate itsown diagnostic model, and on that basisto think about and discuss possiblemodifications.

The method complements and extendsother types of diagnosis based on facts,figures and surveys. Organisational changeis based on the principle of the minimumpossible external intervention. The orga-nisation must change itself; consequently,that is where the corresponding insightmust also start to grow.

B Application

Step 1: Bird's-eye view and logo

Organisations are complex. We see some-thing different depending on where we arestanding: from above or below, from theinside or the outside. What is striking tosome, is insignificant to others.

The first step consists in preparing acoarse-grained snapshot of the organisa-tion.

We work with a working group. Eachmember first selects eight specific featuresto describe the organisation.

Task: Select eight typical positive andnegative features of the organisation, fourof which are qualitative characteristics andfour of which are quantifiable magnitudes(or relationships). Draw a logo of theorganisation which characterises thepresent status quo. Represent the resultas follows:

logo oforganisation

T-11/2

Step 2: Zoom

The representation of the eight features,based on personal organisational experi-ence, is compared with a list of systemicfunctions which an organisation com-prises. The list of systemic functions isopen-ended, and may be supplemented.Examples are:

• satisfaction of client needs• economic profitability• social integration of members• internal coordination• stability and continuity• ability to cooperate with other organisa-

tions• adaptability• self-reflexivity and learning capability

Task: Mark with a cross those systemicfunctions which correspond to the eightmain features you selected, and representthe result as follows:

Step 3: Limiting factors and strengths

In the third working step, the individually-elaborated diagnostic models are com-pared and discussed in the working team.The aim is not to build a model applicableto all, but to identify limiting factors. Thereasons for these problems are complex,and can be identified on the basis of theindividual models. Equally important for thediagnosis are the strengths and poten-tials which we can rely on.

Task: Draw up a list of the systemic func-tions which you crossed. Bearing in mindthe main features you selected, ask your-self which limiting factors, bottlenecks,

deficits, weaknesses and which strengthsand potentials you observe.

Step 4: Objectives for change

The three columns are now used to drawup objectives for change. In this context,the following sequence of prioritiesshould be observed:

(1) Environment and products: quality andquantity of goods and services, demand andmarket position, portfolio.

(2) Ability to cooperate: cooperation with otherorganisations.

(3) Staff development: expertise and capabilitiesof staff, team development and social skills.

(4) Internal structures and processes: allocationof tasks, rules, information flow and decision-making.

The objectives for change must be soughtat the highest possible level of objectives,so that the forces for self-organisation canbe mobilised and strengthened: What mustwe change at the level of objectives (1),such that (2), (3) and (4) are adjustedautomatically? What must we change atlevels (1) and (2), such that (3) and (4) areadjusted automatically? etc..

C Result

Systemic diagnosis takes the organisa-tional experiences of the members as itsstarting point, and leads to a consensusregarding the key limiting factors andpotentials. It promotes the willingness tochange, and allows objectives for changeto be drawn up which build on the orga-nisation's own strengths.

O

systemic functions

systemic functions limitingfactors

strengths/potentials

T-12/1

T-12: Subjective Organisation Charts

A Method

There is no ideal organisation chart X fororganisation Y, and an organisation charttells us nothing about the performancecapability of an organisation. Organisationcharts are simply cognitive maps repre-senting an organisation from a functionalperspective as a hierarchical system ofdivision of tasks.

Organisation charts represent an idealsituation, are aids to orientation and serveas planning tools. They cannot show thereal socio-technical dynamics of the orga-nisation: open positions, the performancecapability of an organisation, circumventionof official channels or the real relations ofcommunication remain invisible.

Organisation charts reveal and conceal atthe same time. Since more coordinationtasks are generated as the division of tasksincreases, organisation charts attempt toprevent this by methodological means, forinstance by creating staff units or orga-nisational matrices. When this occurs, com-munication, relationships and work pro-cedures are deliberately neglected.

Organisation charts express the perspec-tive of the management of an organisation,and to a certain extent represent the officialversion of things. We can also elaborateorganisational charts from different per-spectives, for instance from the perspectiveof the staff, or the perspective of outsiders.This makes sense if we are interested insubjective organisational experiences, orclient-orientation.

B Application

B-1: The view from inside

We ask the staff of an organisation thefollowing question: With which supra-ordinate, coordinate and subordinate col-leagues do you cooperate?

To represent this we use a circular model.At the centre of the circle is the name ofthe staff member (X). Superordinate, peerand subordinate colleagues are entered onthe concentric circlers. The size of theentry represents the number of workingcontacts per unit of time.

B-2: The view from outside

We ask outsiders, for instance the keypartners in cooperation or suppliers, thefollowing question: How do you see theorganisation on the basis of your relationswith it?

To represent the responses we use amodel based on perspective: Those indi-viduals and units with whom relations aremost intensive are placed at the front.

superordinate

peer

subordinate

X

T-12/2

client

B-3: Client contacts

We represent the organisation from theperspective of a client. Whom does theclient deal with most frequently? Whosupports the staff with whom the clientdeals?

To illustrate this we use a semicircle. Theconnecting lines represent support. Thesize of the entry (node) represents thenumber of interactions with the client perunit of time.

C Result

We access the organisational realitythrough these numerous perspectives,angles and interpretations. It is revealing tocompare different organisational charts ascognitive maps. This provides informationon the organisational structure, the in-formal flow of information, on intersections,on the degree of centralism and powercentres, and on client-orientation.

T-13/1

T-13: Client-orientation

A Method

Organisations produce goods and provideservices to satisfy a client's need. Thebenefit derived by the client is a keycriterion for the success and continuedexistence of the organisation.

There are a range of possible ways inwhich an organisation can make itselfclient-oriented. Here is a selection ofseven fields of observation:

1. Client needs: The organisation identifies clientneeds on a regular basis, takes seriously prob-lems emerging during interaction with the client,responds to changes in client needs and monitorsdevelopment trends within the wider environment.

2. Communication: The organisation links goods

and services to messages which are appropriateto emphasise and firmly establish in the client'smind the benefits of the product(s).

3. Centring of competence: The organisation con-

centrates on goods and services which it canproduce especially well and economically.

4. Cooperation: The organisation seeks cooper-

ation with other organisations, to profit fromcomparative advantages.

5. Task structuring: The organisation gears its

internal structuring of tasks to client relations. 6. Quality management: The organisation moni-

tors quality and adjusts it in line with clientneeds.

7. Personnel management: The organisation de-

velops the key qualifications, primarily of thosestaff dealing directly with clients.

B Application

To find out where the organisation canimprove its client-orientation, it is appro-priate to examine closely the interactionswith clients.

Step 1: Client-bonding

A working group selects clients on thebasis of two aspects:

• clients with strong client-bonding whohave availed themselves of goods andservices repeatedly.

• clients with weak client-bonding, i.e.whom the organisation has only dealtwith once.

Step 2: Chain of interactions

For selected clients of both groups, theworking group draws up the chain of inter-actions: from the first point of contact,through to the point at which the client wassatisfied, and finally returned as a client.

responsibleinteractions with client X

time

T-13/2

The working group rates the interaction onthe basis of a first assessment:

1 = excellent2 = satisfactory3 = unsatisfactory

Step 3: Evaluation

The working group presents its evaluationfor discussion at a workshop. The respon-sible staff are requested to add furthercomment, and are asked whether or notthey agree with the assessment.

A selection is made from the numerouschains of interaction of those which includea high number of excellent and a highnumber of unsatisfactory ratings of theinteractions with the client. These are thentaken as a basis for making proposals fororganisational improvement. The figureon the right relates to the above-mentioned seven fields of observation ofthe organisation:

C Result

Organisations have a tendency to becomeso introspective that they begin to operateas if they were an end in themselves.Focusing attention on the clients promotesa more outward-looking approach, andthus the organisations' adaptability. Re-peated regularly, the method presentedhere can become an instrument of qualitymanagement, and can be used to carryout on a self-reliant basis, small but im-portant organisational changes.

21 3

no.proposed improvements

T-14/1

T-14: Benefits of Cooperation

A Method

Voluntary cooperation between differentpartners is only possible when an advan-tage, a benefit to the actors, is generatedby that cooperation.

We can regulate horizontal cooperationthrough contracts, but the crucial factor forperformance of the contract and for re-maining in the cooperative relationshipboils down to one question: What's in it forme?

This question can only be answered fromthe perspective of the actors themselves,and the answer given will change duringthe course of the cooperation. In otherwords, we will need to ask ourselves thiskey question on repeated occasions.

Considerations of benefit are relative. If inthe eyes of others certain partners arederiving a disproportionately large benefit,this imbalance - irrespective of how objec-tive the judgement is - can lead to a termi-nation of the relationship.

The benefits of cooperation consist notonly in economic advantages. We alsohave to include independence, or thepossibility of learning within an alliance.Consequently, cooperation of a voluntarynature will withstand only a low level ofhierarchical relationships. Accentuatedhierarchies lead to individual actors with-drawing from the cooperation.

B Application

Step 1: Analysis of actors

The term "actor" is not sharply defined. Inone case it might denote governmental orprivate organisations, in another it mightmean specific sub-organisations or groupsof individuals. Decentral sub-organisations,for instance the local branch of the ministryfor forestry or the operational extension unitof an NGO, differ so profoundly from theirhead offices (in terms of mandate, re-sources, client-orientation) that it is appro-priate to view them as different actors.

It is quite possible for individuals to belongto different groups of actors: they lead awomen's group and hold a seat on the localcouncil, they are cattle farmers and at thesame time are on the board of the cattlebreeders' association.

group ofactors 3

subordinate relationshiprelationship of intensive exchange

group ofactors 1

group of actors 2

T-14/2

The circular diagram emphasises cooper-ation within the plane. The three key ques-tions are:

• Who is involved?• To which group - differentiated by level -

does the actor belong? (local - regional -national)

• What major relationships do the actorsmaintain with each other?

Step 2: Analysis of benefits

We need to ask each one of the actors thequestion as to the benefits of cooperation.

To present the results for discussion, wecan use the same circle diagram:

Should actors have difficulty in seeing anybenefit in the cooperation, this indicatesthat there are already pre-existing or latentproblems for cooperation.

Commonalities with regard to the benefitsof cooperation are ambivalent in terms ofwhat they signify: The actors may have aninterest in close cooperation, or they maybe in competition.

Where the targeted benefit of an actor is inharmony with the objective of cooper-ation, we can assume that the actor willhave a growing interest in the cooperation.However, we should not be surprised bythe fact that, in most cases, the benefitturns out to be more or less far removedfrom the declared objective of cooper-ation (e.g. afforestation). In each case, theobjective of cooperation is the lowest com-mon denominator upon which the actorshave agreed.

C Result

Actors draw different benefits from a coop-eration. Their motives for cooperation arediverse.

Observation of the benefits of cooperationprovides important information on the be-haviour of the partners in cooperation.

group ofactors 1

group ofactors 3

group of actors 2

What benefitsdo we gainfrom the

cooperation?

T-15/1

T-15: Qualitative Analysis of Cooperation

A Method

Organisations exchange information, goodsand services. However, it is almost imposs-ible to predict the developmental dy-namics of relationships between different,independent private and governmentalorganisations. It is therefore all the moreimportant to observe them continuously.Yet we cannot see everything! The imagewhich springs to mind is one of jumpingfleas: Imagine we lived in a two-dimensional world. A flea jumps - throughthe third dimension - from one place toanother. Whilst in mid-jump it disappearsfrom our sight, to reappear unexpectedlysomewhere else. The spatial dimension towhich we have no access leaves us inwonder and amazement ...

And yet: There do exist a small number ofnormal economic phenomena. The divisionof labour leads to increasing transactioncosts, caused by coordination and steer-ing. At the point where these costs exceedthe benefits of cooperation, one would ex-pect organisations acting rationally to with-draw from that cooperation. Yet cooper-ation is just as little based exclusively onrational calculation of benefits as anyhuman relationship.

Relationships of cooperation range frommere exchange of information, via stra-tegic alliances and through to limited-termcooperation agreements which establisha cooperation based on the division oflabour. These warm up, turn dormant, andcool down again.

A network of cooperation is seen differentlyby each of the participating organisations:there is no objective centre. We need to

change our location and perspective, sothat we can draw conclusions from com-parison of our observations.

Within the cooperation system, all partici-pating partners are involved in steering,albeit to differing extents and with differ-ent interests. Ideally, the network is com-parable to points on the surface of asphere: All points are potential centres, butthe network looks different when seen fromeach of the points.

When one of the partners in cooperationtakes on a task of coordination, an auto-matic shift in power and influence takesplace. The following questions might beraised:

• Does the coordinating organisation enjoy thenecessary acceptance among the other orga-nisations?

• Does the coordinating organisation have at itsdisposal the capability and the necessary re-sources to perform the communicative tasks?

• What shifts in power are to be anticipated?• Which decisions must the coordinating organisa-

tion discuss and agree on with all participatingorganisations?

B Application

B-1: Observation of steering

Who performs the following core tasks?

1 Communication• emphasis on overriding, common goals.• processing of information on important develop-

ment trends.• promotion of exchange of information and active

participation in planning and evaluation.• drawing-up of plausible, transparent and accept-

able criteria and methods for evaluation.

T-15/2

• definition of binding rules and conflict manage-ment procedures.

2 Clarity• stimulation of cooperation through greater clarity:

− periodic review of roles.− support in the simplification of planning,

contractual agreements, definition of qualitycriteria and methods of evaluation.

3 Complementarity• emphasis on strengths, potentials and comple-

mentarity of the participating organisations.• periodic analysis of tasks with the participating

organisations.

4 Focus• confinement to key areas and strengths: core

business.• gradual, cautious expansion in agreement with

the existing partners.

5 Competence• promotion of mutual recognition of professional

capabilities.• arrangement and support of personal exchange

of experience.

6 Coherence• identification and clear presentation of the advan-

tages of cooperation and the lowest commondenominator.

• evaluation of experiences with the participatingorganisations, also in connection with the im-pacts of the cooperation on the participatingorganisations.

7 Continuity• emphasis on the long-term, common interests.• support of sustainability through strategic plan-

ning.

B-2: Critical events

Once a cooperation system has beenformed on the basis of an analysis of tasks,and the coordination tasks have beendefined, the structure begins to move aspractical cooperation progresses. In otherwords, the tasks already defined and theobligations entered into change. Organisa-tions which respond not flexibly but for-malistically to this will soon break off coop-eration, or attempt to impose their view ontheir partners. There are a number ofcritical factors or symptoms which point to alooming crisis in the cooperation system:

MIf the processing and exchange of information arenot based on accepted agreements, imbalances andmistrust arise. The information gaps are filled by thepartners' imaginations, mutual predictability andtrust subside.

MDuring the cooperation, shifts in influence and powertake place. This does not exclude the possibility thatrivalries and competition may arise. If tensions growinto a dysfunctional conflict, which threatens to turninto a game of winners and losers, then potentiallosers withdraw, regardless of how important theyare for other partners in cooperation.

MWhen specific organisations feel controlled by morepowerful partners and a vertical pattern of behaviourbecomes the norm, weaker partners withdraw fromthe cooperation.

MOne organisation is of the view that another is inter-fering in its internal affairs and as a result with-draws from the cooperation.

MIn the course of the cooperation, fresh alliances areformed among the partners which others perceive asa threat, as they then become de facto excluded fromthe inner circle. This can lead to the entirecooperation network collapsing and having to reform.

B-3: Analysis of a relationship

The following method has proved useful forin-depth analysis of a single relationship ofcooperation:

Step 1: Separation of perspectives

The two partners in cooperation are invited toanalyse the relationship on the basis of their ex-periences and assessments. Steps 2 and 3 beloware carried out separately, i.e. with two workinggroups from the two organisations working sep-arately.

Step 2: Criteria

The seven criteria are explained with a positivelyworded indicator. They can be adapted to thesituation, and weighted with a factor F of between 1and 3: Which of the seven criteria conveys little or nosignificant information? Which criterion is missing?Which criteria are in our view more important thanothers?

T-15/3

Step 3: Rating

The two working groups continue working with theirrevised and weighted list of criteria. They rate theirrelationship to other organisations, and supplementthe relationship profile with examples andcomments.

Step 4: Discussion and evaluation

The two working groups present to each other theirseven criteria, their respective weightings and theirrelationship profiles. They explain their ratings bygiving examples. The overall rating can also beexpressed as a numerical value, representing thetotal of ratings of the individual criteria on a scale of1 to 4.

During the evaluation, the atmosphere of thediscussion will be crucially determined by the extentto which commonalities are emphasised. As a rule,the answering of questions requesting further expla-nation of points not understood will lead to a com-parison of the different interpretations of the relation-ship derived from the different perspectives.

Marked discrepancies are symptoms of smoulder-ing conflict. Having said that, an imbalance need notalways be redressed, as asymmetrical-comple-mentary relationships are quite capable of beingfunctional. The partners in cooperation lay down in aplan of action which measures they wish to take toimprove the cooperation.

C Result

The observation of dynamic processes ofcooperation can focus on important tasksand critical factors. Nevertheless, surprisesare not ruled out. Specific important con-flict-laden relationships must be analysedregularly, together with the partners in co-operation.

Criteria

1 Agreed goalsWe periodically define goals on ajoint basis.

2 ContractWe enter into unequivocal, clearwritten or verbal agreements con-cerning rights and obligations.

3 Contractual fidelityWe comply with agreementsentered into, or give early noticeof any deviations.

4 AdvantagesWe derive benefit from the coop-eration.

5 TrustWe actively inform our partners ofour intentions.

6 CommunicationWe nominate contact persons, re-spond as quickly as possible andmake appropriate means of com-munication available.

7 ConflictsWe address conflicts early on anddirectly, and offer to help find waysof dealing with them.

F Criteria & examples

1 Agreed goalse.g.2 Contracte.g.3 Contractual fidelitye.g.4 Advantagese.g.5 Truste.g.6 Communicatione.g.7 Conflictse.g.

F ++ + - - -

T-16/1

T-16: Quantitative Analysis of Cooperation

A Method

Relationships of cooperation have sub-stantial content: information, goods andservices are exchanged. This relationshipof exchange is steered by rules, which areinitially only of an informal nature, and arestrongly influenced by personal relation-ships. When products are exchanged, theneed to secure the relationship within acontractual framework increases, as thelevel of interest and associated risks grows.

In view of their dynamic and turbulentnature, we should also attempt to describerelationships of cooperation using simplequantitative magnitudes. This makes iteasier for the partners to understandimbalances and to review roles.

If we confine ourselves to a relationshipbetween organisations A and B, we canask ourselves the following two key ques-tions:

• What is the relative significance of thecooperation to the two organisations Aand B?

• What other relationships bind the twoorganisations together?

B Application

• Financial volume: We compare thetotal annual turnover (or annualbudgets) of organisations A and B. Therelative sizes of the two circles corre-spond to this ratio. We then enter seg-ments in the circles which represent thepercentage of total turnover accountedfor by the cooperation for each of theorganisations A and B. This can be re-presented as follows:

The sizes of the segments in relation to the totalvolume mean that, for organisation A, the coop-eration accounts for approximately 10% of eco-nomic and human resource deployment, whilst fororganisation B the figure is over 40%. The depen-dency of organisations A and B on the cooperationis also correspondingly disequitable.

• Staff commitment: Similarly, we com-pare for the two organisations A and Bthe relationship between total workingtime per year, and working time gener-ated by or invested in the cooperation.

• Memberships: A further relationship

which may be significant is that of com-mon memberships of third organisationsheld by individuals belonging to orga-nisations A and B, or by the organisa-tions themselves.

C Result

Quantitative relations make an importantcontribution to our understanding of the be-haviour of partners in cooperation. In par-ticular, they reveal the relative dependenceon the cooperation.

A B

T-17/1

T-17: Power and Shifts in Power

A Method

In social and organisational relationships,power is the ability of a person or an insti-tution to impose their will on another personor institution, even if the latter does notwish that to occur.

Relations of power and coercion permeateall areas of life, since we are both depend-ent and vulnerable: physically, emotionally,socially and economically.

In groups and organisations, power is distri-buted, exercised, declared and transfiguredin different ways. Yet it is most certainly ahuman invention: created and changed bypeople.

For a relationship of power to come intoplay, there must exist a dependency be-tween the two parties, usually involvingseveral dimensions: economic, social andemotional. The enforcement of power isbased on the threat or exercise of co-ercion.

The exercise of power is governed bydifferent rules in each society, and withineach smaller social unit. To understandpower relations within relationships of co-operation, we need to ask ourselves threekey questions:

• On what foundation is power built?• How does power affect a relationship?• When and why do relations of power

change?

Power has a material base in the inequit-able access to scarce resources, for in-stance to land, water or capital. This in-equity is cemented through educationalinequity, and a lack of equal opportunity toassert legal rights.

Power always takes on symbolictrappings: spatial demarcations mark outdistance, ceremonial actions and signsenhance, consolidate and legitimate it.

Power relations have a history: they existwithin the context of a social, cultural andsymbolic world view. This means thatcharacteristics such as gender, age, educa-tional status and ethnicity are inextricablylinked to relationships of power.

The most naked form of the exercise ofpower is sheer violence: the power to inflictharm on others, to turn them into helplessvictims. Consequently, we can never quiteconceive of a life free from anxiety and fearof others. Coexistence also means con-stantly having to live in fear and protectourselves.

Power can be exercised more easilythrough direct violence where

• socially-conditioned indifference to thesuffering of victims causes people tolook the other way, and erodes scruplesand

• the face behind the violence is madeanonymous through mechanisation andautomation.

We can distinguish three categories ofacts of power:

• acts which guarantee or damagematerial security,

• acts which strengthen or reduce socialstatus,

• acts which physically injure or protect.

The three acts of power mutually reinforceeach other: a curtailment of resources

T-17/2

leading to a loss of the means to subsistcan, for instance, entail exclusion from agroup. Punishment and loss of freedom areoften associated with a loss of socialrecognition, and economic disadvantage.

The very possibility of power being exer-cised is enough to make power relation-ships work. Many acts of power arepreceded by censure and admonition, topromote this gentle form of coercion.

Power relations are dialectic: The anticipa-tion of rewards or sanctions lend thepowerful an aura, which facilitates theexercise of power and promotes theidentification of the less powerful with themore powerful (power fantasies). The exer-cise of power leads to compulsive be-haviour when people can only act underthe pressure of the threat of sanctions, orpromise of rewards, in the future. Or if theyaspire only to maintain or extend theirpower.

The structures of an organisation are co-agulated clots of power: They regulate andorganise access to power and powercompetences. Norms, habits, routines andsymbols secure those structures.

When structures change or dissolve, theestablished balances of power also changeto the benefit of individual persons andinterest groups. We perceive these shiftsas moments or periods of crisis and in-security.

The dynamics of power distribution inrelationships are complex. We will confineourselves here to two fields of obser-vation:

• Sources of power: How does the powerwhich individuals and groups have, ariseand develop?

• Power relations in organisations:Which characteristics of an organisationreflect the relations of power within it?

Issues of power are considered delicate, aswe are unable to address power relations ifthe actors are unwilling to do so.

B Application

B-1: Positional power and sources ofpower

Members of groups and organisations havean ascribed or acquired positional power,expressed through their position and func-tion within the hierarchy. The organisationassigns it, consolidates it, secures it andattaches status symbols to it.

Positional power involves the right to wieldauthority. The range of this power is finite;is confined for instance to the authority toissue instructions to the staff of adepartment, but not fix salaries or takedecisions on promotion. Only the power ofmoney knows no physical boundaries.

Step 1: Positional power

The participants of a workshop, or indi-vidual members of an organisation areinvited to discuss their positional power.

Practically speaking, we exercise positionalpower through:

• TQ: targets and quality control,• IP: access to information and partici-

pation in decision-making,• M: allocation or refusal to allocate ma-

terials,• SI: standardisation and issue of direc-

tives,• RS: rewards, acknowledgement and

sanctions.

The relative proportions of the positional powercomponents can be expressed by the sizes of theovals.

number ofsubordinate staff

TQ

RS SI

MIP

number of superiorstaff

:

T-17/3

It can be illuminating in the discussion if theparticipants also describe their earlier posi-tion in the organisation.

Additional step 1: For purposes of comparison, thesame picture can also be drawn up by outsiders, forinstance by superiors and subordinates. However,this is not possible in organisations where powerissues are taboo. How openly power issues can beaddressed is dependent on the power culture in therespective groups and organisations. This is shapedby both sides of a relationship of power: on the onehand by the extent to which the individual exercisingthe power feels subjectively entitled to do so, and onthe other hand by the acceptance s/he enjoysamong his or her subordinates.

Additional step 2: The opinion that, in western-oriented organisations, professional competencealone is the key to positional power, is a widespreadmisconception. In all organisations, this power islegitimated through organisation-specific and socialmeans. Subjective reports (constructs) on the issueof the legitimacy of power can be illuminating: back-ground, gender, age, property, influence, merit,industry, professional experience, expertise, socialand professional competence.

Step 2: Sources

In groups and organisations, positionalpower is docked into power sources whichreinforce or weaken it. It is easier to tap intoand exhaust these sources from a strongposition of power than it is from a weakone.

Processes of extending power (self-empowerment) are, as a rule, less gearedto achieving positional power than togradually tapping into new power sources.

Which sources are these?

• IN - information: power derived fromcontrol over the flow of information andinfluence over the information contained.

• CN - communicative and negotiatingpower: power to grasp, describe andconvey ideas comprehensibly, to con-vince, and in so doing to assert one'sown interests.

• EK - expert knowledge: power basedon specialised knowledge which othersdo nor possess and which, as a rule, isprotected by formal titles.

• PO - practical orientation: power grow-ing from learned capabilities, and ex-

pressed in the ability to bring somethingabout.

• CR - creativity: power arising from thecapability to develop new ideas andthings, and to look at existing ideas andthings from a fresh angle.

• SR - social relationships: power de-rived from belonging to a social group,stratum or class, and secured throughrelationships with other power holders.

The participants draw their own hexagon of powersources, and offer it for discussion in a small group,giving examples.

Use of the various power sources is steered by threesalient factors:

• organisational cultures: these create better orworse preconditions for specific power sources.

• established communication patterns: thesemake it possible to utilise or inhibit the utilisationof specific power sources.

• gender-specific behaviour: women and menattach different values to and anticipate differentbenefits from specific power sources.

B-2: Power relations in organisa-tions

Organisations assign roles, and determinewho may influence decision-making pro-cesses. In other words: They define thecircle of people involved and framework forparticipation. Why is participation appro-priate?

IN

SR

CR

CN

PO

EK

T-17/4

• Participation makes people moreshrewd: It creates access to knowledgeand experience, and brings solutions toproblems more closely into line withpractical conditions.

• Participation promotes self-confidenceand responsibility: The participatingactors grow into their active role, andinfluence decisions.

• Participation creates acceptance forchanges: The participating actors adjustto new things.

Organisations attempt to keep complexitylow by imposing hierarchical structures:The prescribed order acts as a substitutefor negotiation of working relations, and isdesigned to make the work easier tomonitor and control. However, this stan-dardisation weakens flexibility and adapt-ability. Consequently, the performancecapability of strongly hierarchical organisa-tions is disputed - even as regards repeti-tive tasks.

Depending on the tasks involved, organisations havea shallow or a steep hierarchy.

Steep hierarchies have the advantage of beingclearly structured, thus inspiring confidence in theirmembers that they are doing the right thing. They arepredictable, since roles are clearly allocated. As thedivision of labour increases, they are conducive tothe formation of broad intermediate hierarchicalstrata involving complex decision-making paths.However, even the most rigid hierarchical structuresare constantly being evaded, as peoples' capacity toanticipate the consequences of their own actions arelimited. Therefore, once structures have been definedthey are then evaded, and periodically revised. Thoseat the top of steep hierarchies run a constant risk ofbeing cut off from reality. This is the case, forinstance, where the management surrounds itselfonly with faithful paladins.

Shallow hierarchies have the advantage of beingadaptable, conducive to cooperation and learning-oriented. The shallow hierarchy, as encountered forinstance in project groups, does however require thatmembers talk to each other, and are capable ofconstant self-coordination. The malleability of thesestructures makes them prone to the emergence ofinformal power structures which lack transparency.

Looking at a hierarchical structure we can identify theroutes up the career ladder, which not all will beable to follow. Since not everyone can reach the top,this creates competition. However, selection pro-cedures often consume a great deal of socialenergy: Members watch each other, and self-serving

cliques and rivalries emerge. In the cut-and-thrust ofcompetition, it is precisely those qualities which arecrucial for tasks of leadership and coordination whichare not rewarded: ability to cooperate, transparency,trustworthiness, and an ability to support others.

Step 1: Structural characteristics

The power culture within groups and orga-nisations can be observed via three struc-tural characteristics: the power gap, thedegree of bureaucratisation and the stylesof management practised. Simple indi-cators include for instance:

• Power gap: number of hierarchicallevels. number of persons in staff unitsin relation to personnel with line man-agement functions. number of personnelwith supervisory responsibilities. wagegap. centralisation of decision-makingon issues of policy, strategy, personnel,technical matters.

• Degree of bureaucratisation: numberof separate tasks with prescribed pro-cedures, responsibilities and officialchannels. density of regulations andstandards. importance attached towritten communications in keeping ofrecords. formal conditions for entranceand requirements for promotion. grad-uated remuneration and status symbols.depersonalisation of responsibility fordecision-making.

• Styles of management: Management ispractical steering work in relationships ofpower. It is dependent on communica-tion and allegiance. The style of man-agement practised is always a compro-mise reached under the influence of fourpolar factors:

biography of the superior, e.g. author-itarian role models.

the nature of the tasks themselves,e.g. problem-solving tasks involvingnon-standard procedures

expectations of the individuals beingmanaged, e.g. clear definition ofgoals with maximum individual scope

power culture of the organisation, e.g.bureaucratic procedures.

T-17/5

There are no ideal management per-sonalities. There is merely empiricalevidence that complex problems arebetter and more quickly solved through aconsultative and goal-oriented style ofmanagement. Consequently, the levelof conscious awareness of the man-agement style needs to be questioned:

Are different styles of managementpossible?Are their impacts observed and thoughtabout?What expectations do the superiors/sub-ordinates have regarding management?Are the superiors aware of the style ofmanagement which they are practising?Do the superiors negotiate the socialrelationship of "leadership" with thoseinvolved?

Step 2: Distance of power

The power culture in groups and organisa-tions is reflected in the bonds of authoritywithin power-based relationships. There isalways a greater or lesser degree ofdistance between those holding power andtheir subordinates, which the subordinateseither more or less accept and tolerate.

Observation of this distance providespointers as to

• the stability of the distribution of poweras it stands

• the identification of the subordinateswith those holding power

• tendencies and efforts to bring about aredistribution of power

Rationales of distance can be addressed instructured group discussions, or in one-on-one meetings; they can be related to fouraspects:

• Personal qualities of those wieldingpower: charisma, background, prestige,influential connections.

• Professional capabilities of thosewielding power: expert knowledge, ex-perience, brilliance, speed, clarity.

• Social capabilities: reliability, pre-dictability, openness, cooperativeness,transparency, trustworthiness, fairness,willingness to support.

• Organisational culture: models, groupculture of superiors, management direc-tives.

C Result

All human beings observe relationships ofpower involuntarily. They fascinate us, andgive rise to wild speculation. If and whenwe are able and willing to address issues ofpower, it is all the more important that wedo so with caution and on the basis of athought-out strategy.

Raising issues of power is equivalent toasserting a claim to power. Consequently,we first need to ask ourselves the ques-tions raised here.

T-18/1

T-18: Cooperation at Local Level

A Method

As is generally known, a diversity of organisationsoperate in local areas: the local administration,municipal enterprises, the justice of the peace, thepolice force, the parish, religious and ceremonialassociations, neighbourhood self-help groups,special-purpose associations for the maintenance ofcommunity facilities, savings associations and creditcooperatives, purchasing and marketing cooper-atives, parents' associations, mothers' clubs, youthgroups, artisans' associations, user associations forforest, water, pasture or electricity users, manu-facturing enterprises, small engineering offices,building contractors, local groupings of regional ornational parties, trade unions, professional bodies,etc.

Cooperation between organisations in aspecific locality is also shaped by personaland in some cases family relationshipsamong its members. People know eachother, they meet on a regular basis, andare at the same time members of severalorganisations.

It is therefore a logical first step to famil-iarise ourselves with and observe thesememberships.

The size, purpose, goals, resources andperformance capability of these organisa-tions vary widely. However, it is often lesswhat an individual organisation can achievethat is important, and more what theorganisations can achieve in cooperation.This question arises for instance in caseswhere central government devolves newtasks upon local authorities, and allocatesto them the necessary resources andcompetences. Within these processes ofdecentralisation, the local administration isassigned the core task of bringing togetherand coordinating local organisations.

The question raised in this context is: Whocan do what best: What are the compara-tive advantages of the various organisa-tions?

B Application

B-1: Memberships

Step 1: The network

It is basically of no significance where webegin within a network of organisations toexamine the issue of memberships. Thesimplest approach is to start where weknow relationships already exist. (Enquir-ing about memberships of third partiesshould if at all possible be avoided, as thiscreates mistrust).

Our mapping of the network of personalinterconnections will be more reliable if weproceed from several individuals at thesame time. The network might for instancebe represented like this:

M = 3 6 2 3 2 1

The arrows indicate that the membership of therespective organisation involves a senior position.The arrow is counted double in determining thevalue M (= number of memberships).

Org. 1 Org. 2 Org. 3

C DA EB F

Org. 4

T-18/2

Step 2: The membership matrix

To obtain a clearer overview, we represent therelationships in matrix form. We enter the positivenumerical value M (= number of memberships) inthe respective box where a membership exists; weenter the negative value where no relationshipexists.

Organisations èIndiv idualsê

1 2 3 4

A 3 3 - 3 3

B 6 6 - 6 6

C 2 - 2 2 - 2

D 3 3 - 3 - 3

E 2 - 2 2 - 2

F - 1 - 1 1 - 1

Value V 15 7 - 7 1

Value V is a simple numerical indicator of therelative significance of organisations 1 to 4. What issurprising in this example is the fact thatorganisation 4 has a higher value than 3, becausealthough it does not have many members, it hasmore influential ones such as B, who also holdpositions in other organisations.

B-2: Comparative advantages

Step 1: Representation

Local organisations can significantlyincrease their performance capabilitythrough cooperation. This also createsmotivation for community development.

By holding workshops with local organisa-tions, or by visiting them, self-assess-ments can be generated, leading to thequestion of comparative advantages: Withwhom do we wish, with whom are we able,to cooperate in order to raise our per-formance?

The self-assessment focuses on fourcharacteristics:

• Willingness to achieve (W) Have we set ourselves goals? What are we doing to attain our goals? How great is our interest in cooperating with other

organisations?

• Performance capability (P)Which human resources and capabilities do wehave at our disposal in order to attain our goals?What material resources can we count on?Do we know how to deploy these scarce re-sources most effectively?

• Cohesion (C) Since when have we been cooperating? How many members are actively involved? How many members have we gained or lost over

the last twelve months? What keeps us together?• Legitimacy (L)

What secures us recognition among other localorganisations?What influence do we have on other organisa-tions?

Step 2: Radial profile

To begin the discussion, the self-assess-ment can be represented as a radial pro-file:

C Result

The boundaries of local organisations arefluid, and the performance capability ofthose organisations fluctuates. By observ-ing memberships, we can better under-stand the fluid boundaries and the relativeimportance of specific organisations. Be-fore focusing on the promotion of specificorganisations, it is appropriate to sound outthe potentials for cooperation. In manycases, when an organisation becomesopen to cooperation, this triggers off sus-tainable learning processes.

W

L

P B

C

T-19/1

T-19: Warning Signs

A Method

Conflicts are an everyday concomitant ofany cooperation. There is no such thing aspermanently conflict-free relationships.Wherever people work together, there willbe clashes between different opinions,needs and interests, both between indi-viduals, and between groups and organisa-tions.

In everyday life, we resolve most conflictsin an unspectacular fashion. We negotiatecompromises, make concessions, and thenext day nobody remembers that there wasany conflict at all.

There are latent (cold, smouldering, con-cealed) and manifest (hot, openly argued-out) conflicts, which mutually reinforce eachother. Conflicts are processes of nego-tiation which usually lead unexpectedlyfrom dialogue via debate and disputethrough to emotionally-charged argument.Anger, feelings of helplessness, contemptand hatred fuel the conflict. The parties tothe conflict turn into merciless enemies andlock antlers. Annihilation of the adversarybecomes the main objective. The damageremains: destroyed interpersonal rela-tionships, physically and emotionallyinjured human beings, ruined settlements,scorched earth.

Projects also trigger conflicts, and fuelthem unintentionally. They draw new linesof conflict in the organisational landscape,make them visible and accentuate themthrough the targeted changes: For in-stance, a new land-use strategy ascribes towomen a new, active role, shifts therelationship of dependency between smalltenants and landowners in favour of

organised user groups, or requires achange in the prevailing land-use system.

Where users compete for scarce re-sources, the question arises of the extentto which we ourselves are part of theconflict, and to what extent we should be-come actively involved in solving theconflict.

The ability to act appropriately in conflictsituations and in a manner acceptable tothe actors presupposes powers ofempathy and self-detachment. We per-haps need to ask ourselves the followingquestions:

• What is going on here? What is at stake? Howcan I obtain information in order to gain an initialoverview of the situation?

• What is my role? What is my part in the conflict?• What do I lack and need in order to be able to

make a contribution to management of theconflict?

Conflicts are a source of interference,because they frustrate our plans. We arecapable only to a limited extent of under-standing and predicting the consequencesof our actions and the actions of others. Torectify the problem, we tend to seek rashsolutions. For many conflicts, however,there is no final solution in the given timespan and social framework. We have tocome to terms with them and live withthem. We perhaps have to smooth themover or postpone them, even at the risk thatthey might erupt again. To detach our-selves from the negative understanding ofconflict, it is beneficial if we call to mind thepositive aspects inherent in such sourcesof tension:

T-19/2

• Signal effect: Conflicts point to symptoms andopen questions.

• Interests: Conflicts reveal where interests lie.• Stimulus: Conflicts make self-observation more

acute.• Cohesion: Conflicts consolidate social relation-

ships.• Change: Conflicts push forward changes.

B Application

There are a broad selection of possibleways to act in conflict situations. Theyrange from observation, via inquiry throughto active conflict moderation. Actions maybe directed with differing degrees of inten-sity at the causes of the conflict, theprogress of the conflict and the possibleimpacts of the conflict.

causes ofconflict

progress ofconflict

impacts ofconflict

becomeaware andobserve

M M

ask ques-tions M Msuggest dia-logue Mestablishdialogue M Mdefineroles Mascertain ex-pectations M Mshare emo-tions M Msound outscope Melaboratesolutions M Mevaluatesolutions M Mnegotiatesolutions Mreach agree-ments Mmonitor im-pacts M

The ability to recognise conflicts in goodtime and influence them such that thedamage is limited, and the parties to theconflicts reach agreement on solutions, re-quires a great amount of social skill and lifeexperience. Also essential is the accept-ance an individual needs when activelyentering conflict situations. The following

warning signs point to a number of furtherpitfalls:

• Naivety: "It's a cut and dried case; Iknow the causes." - Conflicts have ahistory, which consists of histories tolddifferently by the different parties to theconflict.

• Violent potential: "It'll be possible tosort it out." - We often operate in anenvironment of smouldering violencewhich defies rational control.

• Social romanticism: "I must help thedisadvantaged groups." - Taking sidesprematurely makes it impossible to takeon the role of moderator, and weakensthe disadvantaged: Only those whohave liberated themselves know how toutilise and defend what they haveachieved.

• Megaphone: "I've got to get this out intothe open." - Many tensions and conflictsare everyday concomitants of cooper-ation. They constantly build up and sub-side. Discretion is often more advisablethan transparency. Outsiders are notentitled to step backstage and broad-cast everything.

• Umpire pose: "I am neutral." - This self-assessment is not sufficient for anactive, neutral mediator role. The keycriteria are acceptance by and expecta-tions of the parties to the conflict.

C Result

It goes without saying that our behaviour inconflict situations is not only rational. Bothour assessment of the risks and potentialdamage, and our understanding of our ownrole, are coloured by our biographicalexperiences. It is therefore all the moreimportant that we proceed cautiously,shedding light on fields of conflict, andobserving them over a long period beforebecoming actively involved.

Conflict management requires professionalexpertise and a level-headed assessmentby the moderator of his/her own role. Thetask confers prestige and power, but alsoentails risks.

T-20/1

T-20: Phases and History

A Method

Anyone wanting to repair something firsthas to understand how it works. Conflictsdevelop in several phases, can escalatethrough several stages, and as a rule in-volve different sub-conflicts.

Conflicts bring the actors under theirinfluence, as in conflict situations theactors suddenly become conscious of whatthe were previously only unconsciouslyaware of: standards and rules, relations ofownership and power, dependencies andinterests. This triggers off anxieties: Whatsome are relieved to see finally reach thelight of day, poses a threat to others.

Conflicts narrow perception. The actors re-construct their view of the situation such asto support their own standpoint:

• Defensive attitude: The parties to aconflict see themselves as being sur-rounded on all sides by a hostile en-vironment. A friend-or-foe schema issuperimposed on and distorts their per-ceptual world. The protagonists expectunquestioning and unconditional alle-giance. Dissent is not tolerated. Thisparanoid narrowing of the mind meansthat members expressing criticism arequickly branded as traitors.

Efforts to restore harmony: The partiesto a conflict gloss over mistakes andfailures. Only good news is welcomenews. The protagonists surround them-selves with unquestioning yes-men. Thestatus quo must be maintained at allcosts. Things which might damage har-monious relations are made to lookunimportant and shut out in an attemptto pacify. The experience that seeing

conflicts through leads to nothing can alsohelp keep a conflict latent; It smouldersaway, damages the workingatmosphere, and promotes an attitude ofironic and cynical detachment.

Avoidance of conflict can be put down to factorsdirectly related to the nature of the conflict itself:

• The nearer protagonists are to reaching theirgoal, the less willing they are to engage in con-flicts.

• If the goal is acceptably similar to the originalgoal, the protagonists will come to some arrange-ment.

• The more the conflict is seen as unpredictable,the greater the reluctance to become involved.

• Conflict is also avoided where there is a high riskto the loser, or

• a threat of losing face, or status.

It goes without saying that the parties to aconflict deal with it now on the level of theissue at stake, now on the level of therelationships involved. They defend theirmaterial interests, and voice opinions ontheir adversaries. The primary task of amoderator is therefore to obtain clearanswers to the following questions:

• phases: Where are we?• types of conflict: What kinds of conflict

are involved?• stories: How do the actors explain the

causes of the conflict?

Conflict management aims to establish aprocess of self-observation among theparties to the conflict, and halt or reversethe narrowing of perception. The role of themoderator shifts along the continuum be-tween the two opposite poles of an inter-vention by force, which might be necess-ary under certain circumstances, and anobservational role of process facilitation.

T-20/2

Between the two lies the role of providingintermediary services and consultancy onrequest.

B Application

B-1: Phases

Conflicts undergo a cycle of differentphases of development.

PresentimentThe parties to the virtual conflict are notconsciously aware of the differences. Theyallude to them. Outsiders are already ableto identify growing conflict potentials.

Conscious differencesThe parties to the conflict are consciouslyaware of the differences. For economic orsocial reasons, they refrain from address-ing conflict-related issues. The parties tothe conflict cut themselves off and avoiddirect encounters. They form cliques andactively seek allegiance, especially amongindividuals with power and influence. If theaction of the conflict being fought out ismoved backstage - where spite, rivalry anddisparagement become concealed - thenthe path to open conflict management be-comes littered with obstacles.

Demarcation of the arena of conflictThe parties to the conflict mark out the con-flict with a selection of opinions and inter-ests. In some cases they repudiate thepoints made by the opposite side in theconflict. The parties compare advantages

of location, arguments and coalitions.Depending on how they estimate theirchances of success, they attempt todemonise or play down the importance oftheir adversary, or blot out the conflict.

DiscussionThe parties to the conflict attempt to defendtheir own standpoint and interests. The un-compromising game of win-or-lose elicitsresistance from the opposing side, leads toinjuries and cripples the forces for compro-mise on the side waging the battle. Unlessexternal mediators are called in (appeal tocivil or criminal law, decisive verdict bysomeone in power), the conflict escalates.

EscalationThe further the conflict escalates, the moredifficult and complicated it is to manage:

Stage I - The fronts harden: Opinions turn intocreeds, to which the parties firmly adhere. Directencounters are accompanied by verbal offence with ahigh symbolic content, which is then reduced tolabels. The parties conceal their own weaknesses,and close ranks. The cooperative forms of conflictmanagement still prevail: The parties may be atodds, but they take note of each other and thearguments put forward. The grim debate remainsconfined to a small circle. Outside witnesses andinterested parties fuel the conflict.

Stage II - Actions speak louder than words: Thedebate fails to reach a solution. Arguments anderrors of the opposing side are polemicised, broughtto a head, embroidered and made to seemridiculous. Meetings take longer and longer, but donot lead to any tangible result. The conviction growsthat there will no longer be any agreement. Withinthe parties, a strong pressure to conform emerges.Anyone willing to compromise or accept the otherside's view is suspected of treachery. The socialarena suddenly becomes much wider, whilst thearguments become unsophisticated. Both partiesbecome more preoccupied with the nature of theopposite side than with the problem itself. They seethemselves as victims, and make the opposing partyresponsible for their own behaviour. When one of theparties sees an opportunity to assert its interests, itdoes so. The conflict then becomes a question ofpower.

Stage III - Threatening attitudes and loss of face:The parties to the conflict are unwilling to make con-cessions, and adopt an "all-or-nothing" attitude. Mildforms of threat turn into radical ultimatums with firmdeadlines. Mistrust and fear develop. The parties be-come completely cut off from one another, and theirbehaviour follows a pattern of threats and sanctionson one side, and a feverish quest for countervailingpower on the other. The conflict has become com-

presentiment

differences

arena

discussion

negotiation

Mescalation

T-20/3

pletely divorced from the real issue, and has turnedinto a matter of principle. Attacks are focused on theadversary's moral integrity and basic attitudes. Theaim is to publicly expose the opposite side, causethem to lose face and thus justify the sanctions.

Stage IV - Final blows - If I go down, the enemygoes down with me: The loss of grip on realityleads to a situation in which both parties now thinkonly of their own survival. Thinking about the sourceof the conflict is now taboo for the actors. Theopposing sides avoid direct contact, and keep aneven larger psychological distance from each otherby denying each other's basic human values, also byspreading deceit and lies. By doing so, they lowertheir own threshold as regards the use of violence.The opponent's intention to inflict damage becomesa paramount concern. The solution is now: Forwardat all costs! The only satisfaction is that, when oneside goes down, it can also drag the enemy downwith it.

NegotiationThe parties succeed in breaking the spiralof escalation. They return to the discussionphase. With external assistance, directcommunication leads to a controlled dia-logue. The two sides agree on rules ofcommunication. Different opinions andinterests can be expressed. The history ofthe conflict is jointly analysed. The scopefor negotiated solutions widens again. Forboth sides, provisionally viable and accept-able solutions emerge.

Scope for negotiation between parties Aand B:

B-2: Types of conflict

Conflicts become suppressed, deferred orpoorly resolved when the parties remainunclear as to the sub-conflicts of which itis comprised. Within a field of conflict, wecan observe different types of conflict:

• Conflict of values: The parties judgecauses and effects of situations differ-ently, which in many cases is attribut-able to their holding incompatible values.

• Conflict of cultures: The actors holdincompatible values as a result of theirdifferent cultural backgrounds. Thesevalues include ways of encounteringpeople and ideas from other cultures,and the constructions placed on thoseother people and handed down throughone's own cultural tradition.

• Conflict of distribution: The parties donot agree on access to and the (fair) dis-tribution of scarce goods and services.

• Conflict of goals: The parties are pur-suing conflicting goals, which under cer-tain circumstances may be detrimentalto the other party.

• Conflict of schools: The parties are indispute over methods and routes of goalattainment, and over scientific hypo-theses.

• Conflict of roles: The mutual expecta-tions of the parties are incompatible oronly partially compatible with the respec-tive conception each side has of its ownrole.

• Conflict of information: The parties tryto prevent each other from obtaininginformation, withhold information, anddefame the information sources and thereliability of the information which theysupply.

• Conflict of power: The parties competefor power, influence and material advan-tages. They ignore decisions made bythe other side, question the other side'sprofessional competence, and evade orobstruct decisions.

A wants to gothis way

B rejectsthis

A rejectsthis

B wants to gothis way

M

room forcompromise

÷

T-20/4

B-3: History

The management of a conflict always leadsback to the history of its origins. This his-tory is constantly being written and re-written by the actors. The key questionsare:

• Boundaries: Who are the parties to theconflict? Who is in dispute with whom?Who is intervening?

• Issues: Over which issues are theparties to the conflict in dispute? Whatdo they see as being the issue at stake?

• Support: What support from groups ororganisations are the parties countingon?

• Relations: Since when have relationsexisted between the parties? Of whatnature are they?

• Objectives: What are the parties to theconflict aiming towards? What do theyseek to achieve? What have they calcu-lated as being their chances of success?

• Means: What inputs are they willing tomake in order to attain their goals?

• Conflict experience: Which major con-flicts do the parties remember? Whatexperience do they have of conflict man-agement? How are conflicts dealt with inthe groups and organisations within theirimmediate environment?

The conflict history can be visualisedthrough simple means; the starting point isa concrete event which one of the partiesto the conflict considers important:

To enable the conflict history to emergesuch that it incorporates the different inter-pretations of the involved actors, we needto apply this method separately with eachof the parties to the conflict. A comparisonof the results can be a useful starting pointfor the conflict management process, asthe actors are then invited to consider the"objective situation" from various angles.

C Result

A knowledge of the phases, types ofconflict and conflict history forms the basisfor all active roles in the conflict manage-ment process. This knowledge is obtainedthrough observation, and patient listening.

In many natural resource management pro-jects, conflict management can ultimatelyonly be understood as a dilemma: On theone hand, projects aim implicitly to redis-tribute power - for instance with respect toaccess to and the management of scarceresources. On the other hand, many pro-jects lack the process consultancy compo-nent which would be necessary in thiscontext.

The earlier consultancy inputs are fed intothe conflict management process, thegreater will be its chances of success.Observation of specific fields of conflicttherefore needs to be commenced as earlyas possible, and continued over a pro-longed period.

irrigationchannel closedon 14/09/1988

future

past

effectseffects

effectseffects

effects effects

rationalerationale

rationale rationale

T-21/1

T-21: Conflicts between Groups

A Method

Tensions and conflicts between groups arean everyday occurrence in any cooper-ation. Within an organisation, they arisenaturally as a result of differences in func-tion, for instance between

• staff departments and line management• development and production• planning and execution• controlling and line management• project groups and line management

Claims on scarce resources place groupsin a competitive situation, which can end ina life-and-death struggle. If the conflictremains unrecognised and untackled, itsoaks up a considerable amount of energy,and becomes correspondingly costly. Com-petition is narrowed down to rivalry, andcomes to a head in direct hostility. Infor-mation gaps, misunderstandings and errorsgradually become firmly established in theshape of enemy stereotypes. Ultimately theparties to the conflict are no longer able tocommunicate with each other.

The following method of Intergroup Con-flict Management (ICM) has proved suc-cessful in a variety of practical situations. Itreduces competition and selfish parochialgroup politics, creating greater scope forcommunication. The method steers theparties towards the following questions:

• What do we really want?• How are we different from each other?• What are we able and willing to commu-

nicate about?• Which modus vivendi do we wish to

achieve?

ICR forces each side to see things fromthe other's point of view, thus diluting es-tablished attitudes held by group members.

Conflicts are diffuse and complex, sincethey are viewed and affectively chargeddifferentially by the different parties. ICMforces the parties to take part in a struc-tured communication process. This con-trolled communication is designed as andwhere necessary to bring out into the openand negotiate experiences, images, inter-ests and emotions. ICM is based on thefollowing working hypotheses:

• equality: Parties A and B are equal partners interms of their right to express their own view-points.

• constructs: Parties A and B have constructedconceptions of themselves and the other partywhich can be put forward and exchanged.

• openness: The ability to listen, an effort tounderstand other viewpoints and the willingnessto see things from the other's point of view can belearned and acquired more easily when the com-munication is structured by certain rules.

ICM is a planned sequence of ConflictResolution Conferences (CRCs). Depend-ing on the conflict situation, these confer-ences last one-half to two days. They es-tablish direct dialogue between theparties.

Between the CRCs, the parties need timeto digest the confrontation. In other words,they must unlearn things already learned,and learn new things; they must also takenote of unpleasant information, and dealwith that within their own group. This in-volves a risk of conflicts within the groupemerging for one or other of the parties in

T-21/2

the course of the ICM process. It is there-fore appropriate that not only the CSCs, butalso the group meetings of the parties, besupported by external moderators.

The external moderation - ideally compris-ing at least two individuals - must plan,steer, observe, continuously evaluate andadjust the process. The tool is based onthe assumptions that:

• the moderators are accepted by theinvolved parties,

• the parties wish to resolve the conflict,• the groups are not larger than eight to

ten persons,• primarily those directly involved and

those with a major interest in the conflictwork in the groups,

• the parties to the conflict are willing toinvest the time necessary for an ICMprocess,

• the moderators introduce and steer theprocess carefully, and insist on theschedule and rules being adhered to.

ICM can even be useful in the event of conflicts ofobjectives and socioculturally-induced tensions,although in such cases it will often need to beexpanded:(1) Conflicts of objectives require greater openness:Where the visions are fundamentally at odds, furthercooperation is no longer conceivable.(2) Culturally-induced tensions are based ondisturbances rooted in one's own culturally-inducedperceptions of culturally alien phenomena. To bringto the surface (misleading) constructions of alienphenomena transmitted through one's own culture,the (unconscious) constructions of self held by theactors need to be addressed. Intercultural conflictmanagement makes the constructions of self avail-able, and dilutes and modifies them. As a rule, thistakes more time than is available for the ICMprocess.

B Application

As with all the tools, the following steps of ICM needto be adapted to the respective situation. Some stepsmay have to be omitted, or expanded. Depending onprogress, breaks, pauses for thought and interim re-views should be incorporated into the process.

Planning and preparation:

The moderators hold a preliminary dis-cussion with two representatives of theparties to the conflict.

• They provide them with thorough information ofthe purpose and steps of ICM.

• They answer all questions on points not under-stood.

• They explain their own role, and gain animpression of their level of acceptance.

• They work towards establishing on the part of theconflict party representatives a pledge to seekways and means improve relations between theparties to the agreement.

• They ascertain where resistance to the process isto be anticipated.

• They influence the size and composition of thegroups.

• Together with the representatives, they draw upthe time schedule for the CSCs.

• They discuss the logistic issues affecting theworkshops: premises, teaching aids etc.

The representatives of the two parties tothe conflict are requested to inform theirgroups of the purpose and structure of theICM process.

If necessary, the moderators hold addi-tional one-on-one discussions, and thenprepare the first workshop.

Step 1: Opening the dialogue

The initiation of the process of dialogue is deliber-ately highly structured. This promotes confidence inthe method on the part of the parties to the conflict,and consolidates the role of the moderators. Theparticipants should find the working rhythm pleasant,and be given clear tasks.

01. Plenum: Welcome and introduction bythe moderators: general timetable ofthe ICM process, aim and structure ofthe workshop, rules.

02. Group work: The two parties A and Bdraw up in separate rooms a presenta-tion of themselves on a flip-chart.

03. Plenum: half-hour presentation byparty A. Party B allowed to requestexplanation of points not understood(no discussion!).

04. Plenum: half-hour presentation byparty B. Party A allowed to requestexplanation of points not understood(no discussion!).

05. Group work: group work in separaterooms. Presentation on a flip-chart.Parties A and B answer the followingfour questions separately:

T-21/3

• What did we understand as being the keymessages?

• What do we find new, and possibly sur-prising?

• What is directly related to our conflict with theother group?

• What did the other group conceal?

06. Plenum: brief presentation of flip-charts. Questions requesting explana-tion of the first two points. The partiesexchange flip-charts and retire again.

07. Group work: The groups comment onthe answers supplied by the otherparty. Per question, precisely thesame amount of space is provided inwhich to write these comments.

08. Plenum: exhibition of the four flip-charts (answers to the four questionsof the two groups + feedback of theother group).

Step 2: Deepening the dialogue

This step can be commenced either immediately, oron the following day. Interruptions which are too longshould be avoided, however.

In this phase the sequence plenum-group is inter-rupted. One aim of the committees is to ensure thatthe parties are no longer able to maintain taboos oncertain ways of thinking within their own group.

09. Plenum: welcome and introduction bythe moderators: calm, sober review ofthe results of step 1, repeat explana-tion of the general timetable for theICM, aim and structure of the processto deepen dialogue, rules.

10. Group work: The two parties A and Bseparately draw up three flip-charts(possibly have them illustrated withdrawings).

• Our image of the other group: How do wesee and experience the other group? How dothey behave towards us? What harm havethey inflicted on us or do they wish to inflict onus? What are they more interested in, andless interested in? What are their weak-nesses? Which mistakes and false assump-tions do they make? What are theirstrengths?

• Their image of us: How do the others seeus? What do they think of us? What do theyexpect of us?

• Zoom: Based on the presentation of ourimage of the other group and their image ofus, what are the questions which we havewanted to have answered for a long time?

11. Plenum: One after another, the twogroups first present their projection ofthe other group's image of them. Nodiscussion! Between the two flip-charts, the moderators place an emptychart containing a question:

12. Plenum: One after another, the twoparties present their own image of theother group, and their zoom ques-tions. The groups first discussamongst themselves what they havejust discovered about themselves andthe other group. In the next plenarysession, the groups will have to answerquestions requesting further explana-tion of points not understood regardingtheir own image of the other group -possibly giving examples. Once thereare no further questions remainingregarding the zoom questions, theparties retire to the next group worksession with the list of questionsposed by the other party.

13. Group work: The groups answer thezoom questions of the other party.

14. Plenum: Presentation of the answersand discussion, with the aim of col-lecting questions and problems. Thepoints are arranged by thematicfields, and by their importance anddegree of urgency. Under certain cir-cumstances, it may be useful to breakthings down by type of conflict.

15. Plenum and groups: Per thematic field,the two parties form mixed com-mittees made up of the same numberof representatives from each group.

Projection ofgroup A: Howdoes group Bsee us?

What do wefind new or sur-prising?A B

Projection ofgroup B: Howdoes group Asee us?

T-21/4

The committees discuss the thematicfield, and draw up proposals foraction.

Beware! - This intermediate phase canbe short or long. It may be the casethat the committees require a day or aweek as time in which to elaboratetheir proposals.

Step 3: Solutions

Solutions only make sense if they can be put intopractise at a later date. The plan of action worked outhere should therefore be aiming to achieve a modusvivendi rather than any grand visions.

By this point at the latest, the moderators must pointto and address those conflicts rooted in personalrelationships which jeopardise realisation of themeasures.

16. Plenum: The committees present theirproposals for action. Questions onpoints not understood are raised andanswered.

17. Group work: Feedback of the propo-sals of the committees on a flip-chart.How satisfied/dissatisfied are we withthe proposals? Which proposal standsthe best chance of being successful?

18. Plenum: discussion of the feedbackfrom the groups. A decision is taken onthe three to five most importantmeasures.

N.B.: - If during this discussion nominimum consensus emerges on con-crete measures, the moderators mustinterrupt the ICM process. The partiesare invited to suggest dates for re-commencing. On the second occasion,the moderators themselves shouldpresent a proposal containing thesimplest possible measures.

19. Plenum: A new mixed committee isformed and mandated to draw up thefinal plan of action (What? Who? Withwhom? By when?).

N.B.: - A break will need to be insertedhere, depending on the amount ofwork involved.

20. Plenum: The new committee presentsthe plan of action. The two parties ac-cept the plan, and decide how to

facilitate and possibly monitor imple-mentation. At this point the parties canalso decide on sanctions, to lend themeasures a sense of urgency.

C Results

Many conflicts over scarce resources reacha fatal conclusion. They are resolved notthrough communication, but by power andviolence.

When farmers north of Mardan in Pakistanwish to settle a dispute over land or water,they do so within the framework of several"Jirga", or assemblies in which the issuescan be argued out and solutions sought.The assemblies are structured according tostrict rules and rituals. The highly esteemedarbitrators who are called in pay scrupulousattention to compliance with these pre-scribed practises. In other words, thefarmers have their own ICM mechanism.

ICM is appropriate in cases where apotentially explosive conflict has existedbetween two groups over a prolongedperiod of time. In contrast to the energyconsumed by smouldering conflicts, thismethod is efficient. It forces the parties tocommunicate, and leads to acceptablesolutions within a relatively short period.

It is necessary to regulate the commu-nication in a structured fashion, as theissues at stake in the conflicts cannot beclearly separated from the relationshipsand feelings involved. Only experiencedmoderators will be capable of steering ICMin a manner adapted to the situation andappropriately structured.

The moderators must also be aware interalia of how deeply they wish to probe intothe tensions which arise. This places highdemands on the moderators, for instancewhere the parties' aggression is directedagainst them, or when delicate, personalconflicts arise.

T-22/1

T-22: Resistance to Changes

A Method

Resistance is a natural concomitant ofchanges. There is no learning and nochange without resistance.

We first notice resistance in ourselves:Changes are disconcerting and make usanxious, as the future is uncertain. This isalso the case when we plan the change, inother words when we attempt to gain anoverview of the uncertainty. Althoughchanges are a natural part of the humanlife cycle, from birth, via adulthood andthrough to death, we are basically con-servative beings: A bird in the hand is stillworth two in the bush.

Resistance to change is an expression ofinsecurity and worry that it will not bepossible to deal with the new by applyingthe old experiences and action strategies.Caution and reserve towards any changeat all is a natural defence mechanismagainst losing control: We know fromexperience that an abrupt burst of changethrows us off balance. Here too, Para-celsus' rule applies: What makes a man illalso cures him, it is simply a question of thedose.

When changes are pending, as a rule threegroups form: the pros, the indifferent andthe contras. Changes - whether technical,methodological, organisational, economic,social, political or cultural - are thereforealways potential sources of conflict. Ifredistributions of power are not addressedopenly, but tacitly ignored, this will evenstimulate resistance.

The greater the pressure of time toimplement a change, the more of a prob-lem, the more of a burden the resistanceseems to be. We tend to disregard it, andtry to push through the change. However,as a rule this cardinal error reinforces theresistance. Ignoring resistance leads toblocks and costly errors. Dealing construc-tively with resistance, indeed learning fromit, is therefore a central prerequisite for thesuccess of changes.

The sequence of events leading to thedevelopment of resistance to impendingchanges is, in simplified form, as follows:

1 Announcement of a change: If theinformation on the change is fragmen-tary, and the consequences unforesee-able, this generates anxieties and fears.

2 Disturbance of the psychologicalequilibrium: The necessity and rationaleof the change are called into question:Why should anything be changed here?What were we doing wrong before?Who is hoping to gain something fromthis? What do I have to fear?• the new is unknown:è suspicion• the benefits are unclear:è scepsis, wait-and-

see• the way there is unknown: è fear of losing

control• I haven't got the strength:è flight

3 Rationalisation: In a state of disequi-librium, we look for more or lessplausible explanations as to why thechange should not take place. Argu-ments and objections are signals wemust take seriously, for instance:

T-22/2

• Considered, objective arguments indicate aneed for information and interest.

• Negative talk, jokes, rumours and intrigueusually have their origin in a diffuse informa-tion situation.

• Attacks on individuals who embody thechange point to the tabooing of power issues.

• The casting of doubt on information sourcesindicates fundamental rejection of theobjectives of change.

4 Symptoms and actions: Sickness, highstaff fluctuation, absenteeism, with-drawal (emigration within), frictionlosses, confusion, paper warfare,sabotage, staff departure.

Dealing constructively with resistancemeans reducing loss of control in favourof participation.

Loss of control in this context means people losingtheir grip on the situation ("What is actually going onhere?"), because the familiar rules no longer applyand people can no longer assess the consequencesof their own actions. As a rule this leads to anxiety,and it is widely acknowledged that anxiety gives badcounsel: It reduces self-confidence, narrows the fieldof vision and blocks willingness to learn.

In this unpleasant situation we tend to fendoff the threat to the status quo with pseudo-logical arguments: We rationalise ourpreconscious, affective disinclination, andmobilise from the rich fund of stock re-sponses that we can summon up withoutthinking, those which speak against thechange:

• That will have the opposite effect.• That will have no effect.• That will destroy what we've already got.• In our organisation, department etc. everything is

quite different.• Not bad really, but not really for us (not invented

here syndrome).• Nobody does it like that.• We've always done it that way.• That's too theoretical.• There's too little empirical/theoretical evidence of

that.• That's not our problem.• That's too complicated.• That doesn't interest me.• It's too late for that.• It's too early for that, we're not ready for it yet.• That would cost too much! We haven't got the

money for it.• That would be all right, but we haven't got the

time.

• Actually we've got much more urgent problems.• Nobody here wants that.• That comes from outside, it's alien to us.• We'll never manage with that for one minute.• I personally would be in favour, but I don't believe

it's got any chance of getting through with us.

An objective and logical argument caneasily be unhinged by these stockresponses. Despite appearances they allboil down to a single statement: We don'twant to change anything!

These stock responses are encodedmessages. We need not take them literally,but we must take them seriously. Thereare very many more emotionally chargedresistances than rationally founded ones. Ifthey are not interpreted as signals, theylead to never-ending communication loopsalong the rhetorical lines of: "We knowwhat's going on, but we don't want tochange anything, so we don't understandanything."

Resistance indicates where energy isblocked. Conversely, this means: Wherethere is resistance, energy can bereleased. In other words, resistance isbasically not a source of interference, but asource of energy, which we need to tap forchanges.

B Application

Step 1: Understanding resistance

Resistance is often diffuse: We notice thatsomething or other is "not quite right".Suddenly things clog up, everything turnsstop-and-go, there is endless debate overinsignificant issues, the "thread" is lost, asense of helplessness and disgruntlementprevails, an awkward silence develops.

The forms of expression of resistanceare many and varied. The matrix below isuseful for providing a clear illustration ofobservations, and possibly comparingthem over a longer period of time. Thesimplest approach is to enter the verbaland non-verbal behaviours of individualsand groups in the matrix, with examples.

T-22/3

verbal(speech)

non-verbal(actions)

active(attack)

resistancecounterarguments- accusations -protests - threats -suspicion of othersgaining advantage- polemics – stub-born formalism -

agitationunrest - disputes -intrigues - rumoursof negative conse-quences – forma-tion of cliques -sabotage – boy-cotts - withholdingof information

passive(flight)

evasionsilence - trivialdebate – debase-ment of individuals- ridiculing anddebasement ofnew ideas – be-littlement - foolingaround - jibes -sarcasm

apathybad moods – sulki-ness –inattentive-ness - anger -fatigue – absenee-ism - withdrawal -sleepless nights -fear for one's eco-nomic position -sickness

All resistance contains encoded messageswhich we need to decipher. We cannot dothat without entering into direct contactwith the persons and groups concerned. Inthis context, understanding means trying tosee behaviours from their point of view.In the face of impending changes, theactors ask themselves three interrelatedquestions:

The various forms of expression ofresistance mutually reinforce each other.When individuals do not see the point of achange or understand their future role,

they do not believe the well-meantassurances of the protagonists, and fearonly negative consequences. This pro-duces a climate of mistrust, which we cancarefully attempt to break down byadopting an inquiring attitude:

• What objections and questions do the actorshave?

• What is especially precious and important to theactors?

• What are their interests, needs and concerns?• What might happen if we proceed as planned?• What ought to be prevented in the view of the

actors?• What alternatives do the actors themselves see?• How should things proceed in their view?• What is acceptable and appropriate?

To prevent different groups from rein-forcing each other's resistance and form-ing mutual alliances, it is important to workwith groups separated according to theirrespective interests (= principle of separ-ation of perspectives). In attempting tounderstand the resistance, actions areguided by two rules:

• We must encourage and supportpeople in expressing and explainingtheir resistance.

• We must transform non-verbal andpassive forms of resistance into verbal,active forms.

Step 2: Learning from resistance

The art of dealing with resistance is relatedto the Japanese martial art of "aikido":Instead of launching a frontal assault on it,we have to absorb the energies enclosedin it.

If we wish to reduce actors' loss of control,help resistance be expressed and get thepeople on board, then we need to treadseveral paths at the same time. All pathslead to the common goal of learning fromthe experiences and arguments of theactors.

Will I manage? What am I

capable of? Am Iup to the task?What are mychances ofsuccess?

Why? What is the point

of this exercise?What is being

concealed whereverpossible?

Do I want to? What's in it for

me? What kind ofpeople will I be

dealing with? Whatwill I lose?

T-22/4

Step 3: Turning resistance into dialogue

The field of energies between advocatesand opponents of a change, betweennegative and positive forces for change,can be captured and illustrated by simplemeans:

positive arguments,actions and be-

haviours

actorswho

influencethe

negativearguments, actions

and behaviours

+ + + change - - -

...

As a rule, this observation of the field ofenergies brings to light numerous insightsinto the driving forces behind, resistance toand dynamics of processes of change:

• The same individual or group can mobilise bothpositive and negative energies simultaneouslyor, in other words, have two souls in one breast.

• The field of energies draws to our attentionwhere we are making assumptions and wherewe know too little.

• We recognise which actors embody the resis-tance and need to be involved to an especiallyhigh degree.

• The field of energies provides information onalliances and self-serving cliques.

The tool is especially revealing when ap-plied several times during the course of aprocess of change, if possible with groupsseparated according to their respectivedifferent interests.

C Result

Projects for change trigger conflicts, whichtake the form of resistance to the change.Anyone understanding and observing theopen and discrete forms of resistance canadjust the change process to the givencircumstances and the actors' standards ofacceptance, and help steer it accordingly.

InformThe purpose of the changeis made known clearly andsustainably - route andmethods are known -target situation is madeclearly evident.

learn fromresistance

SupportThe actors are takenseriously - their concernsare listened to - they aregiven a forum to presenttheir experiences, interests,fears.

InvolveAffected persons andgroups are involved earlyon according to theircapabilities - their experi-ences are taken into ac-count in implementation.

Change theenvironment

The actors are given anopportunity to look beyondtheir garden fence: theybecome familiar with otherways of working and otherenvironments.

Try out newsocial forms

The actors work in workinggroups which cut acrossexisting boundaries withinthe organisation - they es-tablish new relationships.

Observe critical-fields of conflict

E.g. loss of wages or othermaterial benefits - loss ofpersonal relationships -fear of being overstretched- loss of decision-makingauthority - constriction ofscope for action - poorprospects for developmentand learning.

T-23/1

T-23: Motivation and Visions

A Method

The complex logic of motivation can beillustrated by the example of two usergroups: One works with high motivationand strong internal cohesion, whilst theother - under the same external conditions -cooperates only hesitantly, and falls apartagain after a short time.

The different motives for the behaviour ofthe two groups is to be found in thebehaviour of the individual members, in theinternal structure of the group or in environ-mental influences. Motives are alwayspseudo-rational, as they are characterisedby obscurity:

• It is not possible to draw a sharp distinctionbetween the behaviour of a group as a whole andthe behaviour of individual members.

• Environmental influences are interpreted differ-ently by groups and organisations, and permeategroups to quite different depths.

Motives are the causes of behaviour: weeat because we are hungry. In other words,hunger is the motive for the behaviour"food intake". However, this mechanisticview, as postulated for instance by theMaslow pyramid (ascending from physio-logical needs via social recognition up toself-actualisation), falls short of the mark. Itis widely acknowledged that there aremany more reasons why we eat: for in-stance pleasure or worry, boredom, humancontact, festive occasions, politeness, theend of Lent or religious feast days.

Motivation explains why we do something,and why we do it one way as opposed toanother. Biological, personal, social andcultural motives merge in one explanation.Motives are deeply rooted both in culture

and in the experienced present. Theyshould be understood as the product of adynamic relationship between humansand their environment.

Against this background, the rain dance ofthe Hopi Indians appears in a new light: Itis effective not because the Indians knowhow to successfully outwit the meteoro-logical turbulence, but because by doingthis, even if they are still thirsty, theymaintain group cohesion in difficult times.

Three observations can be drawn from this:

• Behaviour cannot be reduced to a one-dimen-sional motive. Consequently, behaviours can onlybe predicted with great difficulty.

• Human beings are at once both free agents anddetermined beings. Their behaviour takes placewithin a socially and symbolically charted space,through which they move as more or less activesubjects.

• Motives are linked to cultural orientations, in thatthey are either faithful to them or reject them.Dissent from dominant cultural values is part ofany culture, and is a driving force of culturaldevelopment.

Long-term cultural orientations provide acommunity with a relatively stable ready-made stock of motives.

Cultural orientations determine in language, symbolsand images how experiences are to be evaluated,and what aims are worth striving towards. Theyconstruct meaning for people's actions, and providerationales for the causes and effects of naturalevents. They contain life plans and norms for theindividual and the community, and describe what isconsidered appropriate and acceptable, or what is tobe rejected. They determine moral distinctionsbetween virtues and vices, and contain models of agood life from birth until death. They regulatecoexistence, and the management of natural re-sources.

T-23/2

Comparative studies indicate that there area number of fundamental differenceswhich affect motivation, for instance:

• Conceptions of space

sedentary (rooted): The life space is given; theperceptible horizon describes the life space;travel creates feelings of insecurity; the familiarand known are important.

mobile (movable): The space is opened-up, con-quered, measured; various horizons intersect; lifehas a vector; travel is considered enriching; thenew is considered worth striving towards.

• Perception of time

polychronic: A human lifetime is part of aneternity or a natural cycle; individual aspirationsare unrewarding; life is determined by waiting forfavourable opportunities.

monochronic: A human lifetime serves endsworth achieving ;it is divided into small units andactivities; planning, order and punctuality serve tocontrol time.

• Demarcation of the boundaries be-tween private and public life

clear boundaries: Private walks of life areshielded and protected. Public life is governed bymarket laws and publicly verifiable rules. Mutualsupport based on family and group ties isconsidered a distortion of the market. Connivanceand corruption result in criminal prosecution.Protection and nepotism are suppressed.

obscure boundaries: Family, community orethnic obligations are at least as important asmarket demands. Connivance and solidarity con-fer prestige. Economic success is worth strivingtowards if it can be transformed into social recog-nition and liking.

These comments are intended to illustratethat we need to use the following tools withcare. They simplify the situation in order tobring us closer to the old question of whywe do one thing and not another. Weshould certainly take a look at the firstquestion - the question as to the actors'visions.

B Application

B1 Visions

Visions of the future are sources of moti-vation. They focus and mobilise energiestowards an imaginary state, and they showwhat we want to guard against and whatwe are afraid of.

How do the actors (e.g. user groups) seetheir future? Supported by creative tech-niques such as group discussion, drawing,photography, model construction, theatreor video, we try to find answers to thefollowing questions:

The translation of diffuse motives andinclinations into a clear vision releasesenergies. Visions unfold their power ofmotivation through obvious images, whichalso include stories and fairy tales. More iscontained in these ambiguous andambivalent forms of expression than instraightforward descriptions.

B2 History of motives

Motives are concealed, behaviour can beobserved. Picking up on the earlierexample of the two user groups who be-have differently, it would be helpful to ask

visionpast

What has changed inour community in therecent past?Why did the changeoccur?What was our part init?What did we achieve?What has improved/deteriorated?

What can we do?Whom can we count

on?

How are our childrensupposed to live?What are they supposedto live from?What will help enablethem to live like that?

What do we intend todo to realise this?

What is standing in theway of that?

T-23/3

the groups what their motives were, so asto be able to compare them.

The reconstruction of motives (reverseengineering) is based on the assumptionthat when we archaeologists find an arte-fact, we inquire as to the purpose behindthe "mysterious behaviour".

• What did we expect? What did we hope to gain?• Who acted?• What moved us to act that way as opposed to

another?

This comparative observation of the historyof motives (benchmarking) promotes self-reflection within groups and organisations,and focuses their attention on their ownstrengths.

B3 Social fields of motivation

People acting as members of a groupanticipate tangible benefits which theycould not achieve as individuals. The inputmade by the individual member must beeconomically proportionate to the benefitwhich the member derives from the group.

However, the cohesion and performanceof groups are also dependent on whetherthe group is able to bind and integrate itsmembers. This occurs primarily throughthe satisfaction of needs which the mem-bers can only realise within a group, withina social environment. Observation of thesesocial fields of motivation thereforeprovides valuable information on group

cohesion, stability and willingness toachieve.

There are "freeloaders" in all groups. Members whotry to keep their own input as low as possible, andonly climb on board once the risks are foreseeable.It is to be assumed that social motivators play amore minor role with these individuals.

With regard to the performance capabilityand stability of a group, the satisfaction ofsocial needs becomes all the moreimportant, the more heterogeneous theinterests of the members are. It goeswithout saying that this cannot meanwhitewashing over diametrically opposedinterests of ownership and status, as occuramong user groups. These interrelation-ships are represented in the followingmatrix:

B4 Assuming responsibility

The central question is whether people seethemselves as active and free agents(subjects), or as victims of circumstanceor the power of fate (objects). The fact thatpeople can be willing or motivated to ac-cept or reject responsibility, to stand up

behaviour ofuser group A

behaviour ofuser group B

motives

motives

motives

motives

motives

motives

motives

Whatdistinguishesus from group

A?

Whatdistinguishesus from group

B?

support

achievement

helping

learning

recognition

socialmotivators

Group promotes will to achieveand stimulates comparisons.

Group helps spread risks andprovides a sense of security.

Group makes it possible to learnfrom others.

Group promotes sense of re-sponsibility and selfless action.

Group strengthens self-esteemthrough rewards

unstable group, butof high performance

in the short term

unstable, poorcohesion

stable, high-performance group

with strong co-hesion

recreation club withlimited performance

high

perfor-mance

low

low social needs high

T-23/4

for or put aside their own interests, leadsback to the following observation: Peoplebelieve that their lives and actions areeither more or less determined by them-selves or by others. They implicitly answerquestions regarding the relationship be-tween human beings and their environ-ment, e.g.:

• Do I determine my life and actions myself?• To what extent are my life and actions deter-

mined by other people, the organisation of workor environmental constraints?

• Is my life characterised by chance, strokes offate or other unforeseeable influences?

• Am I subject to laws which, although I am fam-iliar with them, I am nevertheless at their mercy?

• Can I overcome restrictions and constraints ornot?

The responses to these questions provideinformation on the subjective locus ofcontrol, or in other words: the conceptionan individual has of the scope of his or herinfluence. These notions represents in-sights and world pictures gained fromeveryday experience. If we listen carefully,we can glean these from casual statementsmade to justify behaviour:

"Never let things get you down.""The way my parents and forebears did it is best.""That is futile.""One has to adapt.""That's the way it's always been, it's in the regu-lations.""I can wait.""I'll struggle through.""I'm expecting something from that!"

Subjective notions of locus of control aresocio-culturally and biographically learntideas on the effects of an individual's ownactions, and are relatively stable throughtime. All an individual's experiences of hisor her own effectivity or powerlessnessshape their subjective locus of control. Keyformative experiences of this kind arealready acquired during childhood:

"Our place in life is preordained." - "We still managedit." - "You'll never get past her up there!" - "Do notcontradict figures of authority (father, teacher,superiors, government officials)."

Subjective loci of control are cognitivemaps with which we continuously evaluatewhat we think ourselves capable of, whichoptions are promising and what we wouldbe better advise to avoid or take flight from.

• Subjective loci of control: To what ex-tent are my/our life/lives and actionsdetermined by myself/ourselves or byothers?

• Perceived constraints in the environ-ment: What do I/we believe is in my/ourway?

• Actual constraints: What is actually inthe way? What obstacles do the otherssee?

There is no right or wrong subjective locus of control!If we compare these subjective notions with the ac-tual constraints, we might be able to draw con-clusions regarding the appropriateness of the con-straints. But this says nothing about the success ofthe subjective locus of control. "Unrealistic" ideas ofcontrol are also quite capable of being successful. Itis widely acknowledged that someone who believesstrongly in him-/herself is also more likely to over-come obstacles.

When groups and organisations develop ajointly accepted picture of the con-straints, the actors become clear in theirown minds as to what they wish and areable to assume responsibility for. Onlythose things can be changed which thepeople involved feel able to change.

Methods of self-observation and self-evaluationpromote the exchange and comparison of subjectiveloci of control, and thus the self-reliance of groupsand organisations.

C Result

Motives and motivation have their origin invisions. Knowledge of the social needs andsubjective loci of control which theseincorporate provides a good basis on whichto understand strategies for action.

T-24/1

T-24: Calculations of Benefit and Life Plans

A Method

As we can never grasp the full complexityof circumstances and influences, action in-volves risks. We compare the initial situa-tion with the anticipated economic, socialand symbolic benefits, we consider ourown inputs and the risks. In short, weperform a calculation of the benefits.This economy of action is based onlearned assumptions of the effects andinterplay of actions and circumstances, oncausal schemata.

These calculations of benefit include considerationson both the current and the anticipated situation.As a rule, an unsatisfactory initial situation triggersactions to change it; in such cases we speak of pushfactors. Visions of alternative life potentials exert aforce of attraction and give actions a target; inthese cases we speak of pull factors.

Individual calculations of benefit are oftennot expressed through actions until theyare discovered within a group to be a jointexperience. Within a group the experienceof deprivation is reinforced, individual inter-ests coalesce into a collective will, and riskscan be spread.

Although life plans are largely prede-termined by values and rules, they alsocontain an individual core: the totality ofdesires and expectations, dreams andvisions. The prospect of economic or otherbenefit alone is not sufficient to make usact accordingly. Actions must be con-sistent with culturally-determined life plans,or at least not diametrically opposed tothem.

When we ask ourselves how people canmanage scarce natural resources soundlyand sustainably, we need to understandtheir calculations of benefit and lifeplans; the following questions need to beasked for example:

• What expectations and desires do thepeople have?

• Which economic or other disadvan-tages do they suffer?

• Who are the agents?• What benefits do they expect to gain

from that?• Which subjective successes gradually

raise the expectations?• To which incentives to act do the people

respond?

People with the same or similar calculationsof benefit and life plans form communitiesof values responding to the same incen-tives. These groups are bound together bycultural orientations.

Even highly individualistic societies contain commu-nities of values bound together through commoncultural orientations, for instance through theconsumer experience or motor vehicle mobility.

In order to become familiar with culturalorientations, it is appropriate to inquire asto the inputs which a community of valuesderives from a culture. We can thus assesswhich energies are mobilised when valueschange, when people are influenced byextraneous cultural values, or when theyare cut off from their own culture.

T-24/2

The western industrialised societies for instance offertheir members a culture with marked individualistictraits. The support is limited, and its aim is todevelop a competitive individual fit for life. The lifeplans contain an evolutionary view of history, andplace a positive value judgement on individualsuccess achieved in competition with others.Incentives to selfless, altruistic behaviour are indirect competition with these life plans.

Support, order and strategies for actionmerge into one cultural orientation. Themembers of a community of values, forinstance pasture or forest user groups,draw their life plans from this source. Newforms of resource use which are promotedthrough economic incentives, but areinconsistent with cultural orientations, willbecome established either only slowly ornot at all. They will meet with the resistanceof attitudes, with opinions and valuejudgements which are affectively laden andrelatively stable through time.

Attitudes are coagulated experience. Themore important those attitudes seem topeople for their life plans, the strongerthey become. They facilitate selective per-ception and moral judgement of behaviour;they serve as mutual supports, and providepeople with a basis on which to justify theirown behaviour. Attitudes are learnedthrough:

• Assimilation: New attitudes adjust tobecome as consistent as possible withexisting life plans (= avoidance of dis-sonance).

• Reification: Abstract concepts (naturalresource management, sustainability,autonomy etc.) are translated intoimages or stereotypical aphorisms, orpersonified.

Incentives are designed to influencepeople's calculations of benefit and lifeplans. The aim is to reinforce a certainbehaviour, for instance ecologically soundand sustainable land-use forms, or diminishor prevent another behaviour, for instanceexhaustive exploitation.

Anyone consciously employing incentivesin their work must therefore becomeintimately acquainted with the calculationsof benefit and life plans of the peopleconcerned.

B Application

B-1: Life histories

Historians' interest in biographies isfounded on the insight that they containsomething which cannot be obtainedthrough structural history: moods, men-talities, personal world pictures, lifeplans, attitudes governing behaviour. Itis barely possible to capture all thisthrough surveys. Conversely, even amodest qualitative cross-section through asocial group involves complex methodo-logical problems and a large amount ofwork.

The only way out of this dilemma is tokeep ambitions modest, a healthy eye onthings and remain cautious. The followingobservational design offers a correspond-ing framework .

Life stories are narrated, and in the courseof a life are retold repeatedly. They belongto the people who tell them. They decide- inter alia on the basis of the relationshipthey enter into with their interlocutors -

members ofa community

of values

cultural inputs

Support:care, devotion,upbringing, socialties: sense ofbelonging to familyand thecommunity.

Provides:sense of securityand link tocommunication aswell as symbolicactions and theirinterpretation.

Order:differences withregard tobackground,property, age,profession,gender, education,power andauthority.

Provides:norms, conceptsof law andincorporation intostructures ofpower anddependency.

Strategies foraction:visions, goalsworth attaining,technical andorganisationalcapabilities, formsof cooperation.

Provide:concepts ofachievement andbenefit, scope foraction.

T-24/3

what they want to tell. This situation pre-supposes trust, openness and mutualityon both sides. But it also presupposes onthe part of the listener powers of empathy,discretion and a questioning awareness ofhis or her own life experiences.

• Definition: By which structural charac-teristics (property, land-use forms, in-come, age, gender, number of personsper household, etc.) can the groupwhose calculations of benefit and lifeplans interest us be defined?

• Selection of interviewees: To whichindividuals (at least five) do we seekaccess in order to interview them?

• Contact persons: Who can establishcontact with these individuals, and holdfour or five long biographical interviewsin an atmosphere of mutual openness?

• Establishing contact: How and whereare the contact persons going to estab-lish the relationship with the inter-viewees leading up to the first inter-view?

• Interview guide: With which questionsare we going to establish the relation-ship of trust? Which experiences andchanges do we wish to address in thecourse of the interviews?

• Interview notes: In what form and onwhat scale should the contact personput the interview down on paper on thefollowing day?

• Evaluation group: Who should formthe evaluation group? What should bethe group's task? What behaviouralchange do we anticipate on our ownpart?

Practical tips:− If biographical literature is available, it should be

consulted beforehand. It may provide valuabletips for the interview guide.

− It has proved useful to complement the inter-views with photographs, following the first inter-action. The small selection of subjects should bemade by the interviewees themselves. The pic-tures and discussion thereof will facilitate theinterview process.

− Individuals with intercultural backgrounds orexperiences will be able to provide valuable tipson establishing contact and on conducting theinterviews.

B-2: Changing attitudes

Attitudes (value judgements and opinionsexpressed as behavioural habits) are sub-ject to social change. They are changedthrough:

• coercion and the threat of sanctions• rewards and incentives• models and ideals (personification)• reduction of dissonance between attitudes and

behaviour.

The permanence of a change in attitude isdependent inter alia on the following fac-tors:

• prospect of advantages and benefits• tangible proof of the benefits• credibility and social status of role models and

individuals with different attitudes• certain knowledge that an individual would not

isolate him- or herself by virtue of the newattitude

Individuals tend to revise an insight if theyare the only ones to have it. New attitudesare more likely to be accepted when theyare confirmed by others, and put to the testand demonstrated with others. The learningof attitudes therefore needs to be sociallysupported. Learning in groups throughdialogue and experience is the most appro-priate means of achieving this, applying thesteps of PLA (participatory learning andacting):

• Address and make visible attitudes in the group,without placing value judgements on them: rela-tive situation in the field of attitudes.

• Get to know the attitudes and thoughts of otherpeople, reinforce surprise and curiosity: dilution.

• Note and record differences, get to know advan-tages and disadvantages of one's own attitude,see the familiar in a new light, through new eyes:differentiation.

• Try out new attitudes under practical conditions,evaluate experiences in group discussion, linknew attitudes to existing ones: integration.

Changes in attitude occur within a field offorces. A tension known as "cognitive dis-sonance" arises between new demandsand old habits which is perceived as beingunpleasant. There are various ways ofrelieving this tension, for instance:

T-24/4

• Ignore the call for a change in attitude.• Avoid further contacts.• Call into question the rationale for the new atti-

tude.• Seek confirmation of the existing attitude.

The more pronounced habits and opinionsare, the less effect a direct assault is likelyto have. As a rule, assaults of this kindeven reinforce the existing attitudes. Thefollowing model therefore focuses attentionon those "soft" attitudes which are of amore provisional nature.

The model raises the following question fordiscussion: How do people react to infor-mation which contains value judgements?

The model distinguishes three fields ofresponse to value-laden information:

• Field of acceptance: Contains those attitudeswhich an individual adopts on the grounds ofpersonal conviction - the information confirmsand reinforces existing attitudes.

• Field of indifference: Contains attitudes whichapply from case to case, are adapted toindividuals and situations, and point to indecision- the information elicits hesitation and surprise, isexamined and depending on the benefits offeredintegrated into the field of acceptance.

• Field of rejection: Contains attitudes which anindividual firmly rejects on the grounds of per-sonal conviction - the information is questionedand rejected, previous attitudes are reinforced(boomerang effect).

A number of conclusions can be drawnfrom this contrastive model of assimilationfor the observation of changes in atti-tude:

• It is not worth fighting windmills. Changes inattitude are best achieved through the field ofindifference.

• Information which neither confirms nor directlyconflicts with existing attitudes opens up accessto the field of indifference.

• New attitudes need to be linked to existing,positively experienced values and ideals.

• The consequences of changes in attitude must beclear and predictable.

B-3: Indicators for observation

If user groups observe the consequencesof their actions themselves, they are morelikely to become willing to change theirbehaviour. On the basis of an observa-tional model to examine natural resourcemanagement and its impacts, we can sur-vey user groups as to which indicatorsthey consider important. The model dis-tinguishes three groups of indicators:

• Pressure: natural resources utilised bypeople, e.g. water consumption, log-ging, land use.

How high do we estimate consump-tion of the resources we use? Is itincreasing or decreasing?

• State: impacts of resource use onenvironmental quality, e.g. lowering ofthe ground-water level, reduction inforested area, erosion.

What are the impacts of resourceuse?

• Response: preventive, controlling andregulative measures of resource man-agement, e.g. water rates, afforestation,land-use rights.

What can/must we do to ensure thatour children will still be able to usethese resources? What are the im-pacts of the measures we/othershave taken?

These P-S-R indicators sharpen theawareness of user groups vis-à-vis theirown resource management activities, andform the starting point for periodic moni-toring to provide information on whichincentives are effective.

acceptance

Information

indifference

rejection

1

23

T-24/5

B-4: Economic incentives

It is widely acknowledged that subsidies oncapital goods and loans, price supports andsubsidiary direct payments on the intro-duction of new technology distort marketconditions. They raise profitability at thelevel of the individual farm or enterprise inorder to create an incentive. The extent towhich limited-term incentives are justified ismeasured by the long-term benefits to theeconomy as a whole. The crucial questionis therefore whether or not the user groupswill continue the new forms of managementonce the incentives have elapsed. If eco-nomic incentives are to be effective, wemust ask the following questions whendesigning and applying them:

• Were the nature and scope of theincentives negotiated with the usergroups? What means of articulatingthemselves do the user groups have inthe determination of economic incen-tives?

• With which expectations, life plans andcalculations of benefit will the economicincentives be competing?

• How will the economic incentiveschange the status of the recipients with-in the family and within the user groups?

• What impacts will the incentives have onother sector policy measures?

• When and how is the transition fromthe system of incentives to marketintegration planned to take place?

• Does the scope of the subsidies corre-spond to the recipients' own inputs andsolvency?

• Is the new management forms' profit-ability at the level of the individualfarm or enterprise guaranteed?

• Will subsidies and compensation beawarded selectively to the legitimate re-cipients on a timely and efficient basis?

• Will the recipients use the subsidies inthe intended manner?

• Will additional income be earned on acontinuous basis?

• Will the recipients' own inputs and otherconditions attached to the subsidies beadhered to?

• How will the capabilities of the recipi-ents develop with regard to the newforms of management?

• Will the overall economic benefitscome up to expectations?

• Will the subsidies lead to ecologicallydamaging behaviour? Will other usergroups crowd into ecologically sensitivezones in order to be able to participatein the incentive systems?

• Will a dependency develop among therecipients of subsidies, stifling initiativeand self-responsibility?

• Will individual user groups receivepreferential treatment and come offconsiderably better? Will subsidieshave undesirable social impacts, for in-stance in the form of a more pronouncedsocial differentiation among the ruralpopulation, or a diminution of the statusof individual family members?

C Result

The transition to sustainable forms ofnatural resource management is inter-woven with social learning processes whichare foreseeable only to a limited extent.New forms of resource management- especially when coupled with economicincentives - also always modify people's lifestrategies. It therefore makes little sense toorganise user groups and use incentivesunless we are familiar with the experiencesof change and calculations of benefit inwhich their life plans and attitudes arerooted.

T-25/1

T-25: Household Forms

A Method

Within the horizon of natural resource man-agement, family households are perhapsthe most important strategic group pur-suing their own interests and with their ownproject. Like other groups -administrationofficials, entrepreneurs, foreign consultantsetc. - they act according to their own logic,and are in a continuous process of ex-change and negotiation with their environ-ment.

The microcosm of the family household is asmall enterprise in which production isbased on the division of labour, and inwhich investments are made of both amaterial and an immaterial nature (welfare,social relationships). The family householdis closely interlinked with other householdsand larger enterprises via markets.

The family household is at the same time asocial community within which variousroles are allocated by age and gender, andin which decisions are taken and powerand dependency are negotiated. In theoutside world, the family household plays acentral role as a solidary community and asa participant in the political process.

The family household is held together by adense network of sociocultural normsand interpretations which govern relation-ships between its members and the outsideworld.

The boundary between a household andlarger organisational units is blurred. Whilstspecific individual tasks are performedwithin the nuclear family, other functionsare spread along the axes of family ties,which extend far beyond the household perse: for instance, obligations to care for

children and

the aged, production and accumulation,consumption, insurance against risk. Thebasic socioeconomic pattern of familyhouseholds consists of five characteristics:

• central or decentral community of residence• access to resources• division of labour between men and women,

and between adults and children• obligations to contribute to the household• distribution of usufruct of the household

This focuses attention on two key prop-erties of the household:

• Family households feed, care for and in-struct growing children, and exert a for-mative influence on the behaviourpatterns of their young members; toensure survival, their exists a mutualitybetween the generations which isredeemed at a later date.

• Households maintain intensive relationsof exchange with the outside world;they exchange what they themselvesproduce for those goods and serviceswhich they do not; relations of exchangebetween nomads, agricultural societiesand urban zones, between lowlands,mountain areas and coastal regions aretypical examples of this.

The members of user groups are oftenreduced to one function: they are waterusers, cattle farmers, consumers of fuel-wood. Their rationality of action, however,is derived from the life world context ofthe family household. Efforts to guaranteesurvival are mingled with business calcu-lations. Investments in line with market con-ditions compete with obligations to con-tribute to the household. Economic be-

T-25/2

haviour is linked to symbolic and ritualactions. The utilisation of natural resourcesis weighed up against commercial industrialactivity, and wage labour against cliente-listic protection.

In the relationship to family households, themost important interface is to be foundbetween two widely divergent knowledgesystems: between local knowledge and theinstrumental-technical rationality of actionof the economy. Observation of the diversehybrid forms of the family household istherefore key to understanding an unfam-iliar and complex rationality of action. In thedwellings and houses people build, thisdiversity is manifestly materialised: in thefinca in the Bolivian highlands, in the iglooof the Inuit, in the Indian tepee, in theKyrgyz yurt, in the mud house of theDogon, in the pile house of the Toradjas ofSulawesi.

B Application

Step 1: Pictures of houses

Definition: We define the group whosehouseholds interest us on the basis ofsimple structural characteristics: location,property, land-use forms, income, numberof persons per household etc.

Photography: We establish contact with asmall number of families and declare tothem our intentions, i.e. that we would liketo take pictures of their houses, so as tobe able to talk to the families about themafterwards. Pictures of our own housesand other dwellings can be useful whenexplaining this.

It may be necessary to pay several visits inthis connection. Which members of thehousehold make themselves available totalk to us is in many places culturallydetermined.As a rule, only outdoor shots are taken;entry into the interior of the house andentering individual rooms infringes theintimacy of the family organisation, and inmany places is subject to ritual activities.

The approximately ten pictures shouldshow both the house within its immediateenvironment, and striking or puzzlingdetails (the various construction materials,the ornamental door, the projectingcanopy, etc.). The inhabitants of the houseshould only be photographed at theirexpress request.

Step 2: Explanations

Presentation: We prepare enlargementsof the pictures in DIN A4 and A5 format,selecting only pictures that do not showany people. We visit the families in orderto show them the pictures and talk aboutthem. After that, we give the pictures to thefamilies.

Discussion: The first discussion focusesinitially on the following aspects:

This will provide us with insights into• the ecological, economic and institu-

tional environment• the resources, capabilities and knowl-

edge of the family members• the economic and other purposes and

objectives

Photography: If the interlocutors permit,we now take additional pictures with themembers of the family on them, for in-stance a group photograph of the childrenand the adults, a group picture of thewomen, a picture showing people doinghousework etc., and shots of the interiormight also be permitted.

Step 3: One step further

Presentation: Again we prepare enlarge-ments in DIN A4 and A5 format, selectingshots showing both the house and the

climate andtopography

objectives, purposeand products

materials andtechnology

house

T-25/3

people. The shots of the house now alsoshow ornaments or other non-directly-func-tional features, and possibly also theinterior. We visit the families to show themthe pictures and talk to the families aboutthem. After the discussion, we give thepictures to the families.

Discussion: The discussion should first ad-dress the issue of the history of the house:When and by whom was it built? Why didthey build it just here? etc.. The discussionshould focus on the following aspects:

This will provide us with insights into• social relationships, spatial planning,

division of labour and forms of cooper-ation

• values and common experiences• history, symbols and their significance

Step 4: Evaluation

The pictures of the visited families are nowput together in the form of an exhibition.Where possible, the captions should in-clude verbatim quotes from the inter-locutors. The six-point star formed by thetwo superimposed triangles helps illustratethe areas discussed.

Comparative viewing of the pictures leadsspontaneously to striking correspon-dences and to new questions. If we ident-ify important information gaps in thesequestions which we need to fill for ourwork, this will require further rounds ofdiscussion, possibly also with other house-holds.

Among the most important insights andfindings we seek the link to our project. Keyquestions: What does this mean for ourproject? What influence will that insighthave on what we do or what we areplanning to do?

C Result

Observation of the diverse functions offamily households enables us to under-stand the behaviour patterns of the actorsin their everyday context. By doing this wecreate favourable preconditions for us toharmonise what we do or are going to dowith the thoughts and actions of our part-ners, in other words to become a part ofwhat they do.

values andnorms

cooperation andconflicts

symbols and history

house

values andnorms

cooperation andconflicts

symbols and history

climate andtopography

objectives, purposeand products

materials andtechnology

house

Literature 1

Literature

A English

• Bolliger, Ernst et al.: Agricultural Extension,handbook, St. Gallen 1991 (SKAT, LBL).

• Davis-Case, d'Arcy: The Community's Tool-box, The Idea, Methods and Tools for Par-ticipatory Assessment, Monitoring andEvaluation in Community Forestry, Rome1990 (FAO) Paper 311, October 1992.

• De Leener, Philippe, Ndione, Emmanuel,Ndiaye, Mamadou (a.o.): The future ofcommunity lands. Human Resources, Lon-don 1995 (ENDA. GRAF).

• Engler, Markus: Participation in Rural Infra-structure Programmes. A process-orientedapproach to Bridge Building at the LocalLevel in Nepal, Lindau, February 1994.

• Gohl, Eberhard, Germann, Dorsi, Prey,Joachim, Schmidt, Uwe: Participative ImpactMonitoring, A Short Guide To ParticipativeImpact Monitoring, Eschborn 1993 (prelimi-nary draft).

• Harder, Martin (GTZ, Abt. 403): Sri Lanka,Launching a Self-Evaluation Process inFarmer Organizations, Report on a consul-tancy, Colombo, Nov./Dez. 1991.

• Pretty, Jules N., Guijt, Irene, Thompson,John, Scoones, lan: Participatory Learning &Action, A Trainers Guide, London 1995(IIED).

• Scheuermeier, Ueli: Approach Development,A contribution to participatory developmentof techniques based on a practical experi-ence in Tinau Watershed Project, Lindau1988 (LBL).

• Schönhuth, Michael, Kievelitz. Uwe: Partici-patory Learning Approaches, Rapid RuralAppraisal, Participatory Appraisal, An intro-ductory guide. Rossdorf 1994, (TZ-Verlags-gesellschaft).

• Schwedersky, Thomas (GTZ): Report of theconsultancy to Siran Forest DevelopmentProject (SFDP), Pakistan, 07.-26.04.1995,Bonn, May 1995.

• SDC (Swiss Development Cooperation):Impact hypotheses, development and itsenvironmental impact, Bern 1994.

• Wells, Michael, Brandon, Katrina: Peopleand Parks, Linking Protected Area Manage-ment with Local Communities, WashingtonD.C.1992.

B Spanish

• Balzer, Geert, Engel, Adalbert: Die Rolle vonAnreizen bei der Anwendung von RMSH alsVorgehensweise, Eine Handreichung fürProjektbearbeiter/-innen, Consultants undProjektmitarbeiter/-innen, Eschborn, Januar1995 (GTZ).

• Antons, Klaus: Práctica de la dinámica degrupos, ejercicios y técnica, Barcelona 1986.

• Bojanic, Alan, Cañedo, María Elena: De-mandas campesinas, Manual para un análi-sis participativo, La Paz 1994.

• Bolliger, Ernst et al.: Extensión agrícola, unmanual, St. Gallen 1991 (SKAT, LBL).

• De Bono, Edward: El pensamiento lateral,Manual de creativ idad, Barcelona, BuenosAires, México 1993 (Ediciones Paidós)

• Hopson, Barry, Scally, Mike: 12 pasos parael éxito brindando serv icio, Buenos Aires,Bogotá 1993 (Ediciones Macchi).

• Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS): Gobiernolocal, desarrollo institucional y participacióncomunitaria, Serie de publicaciones sobrePolítica, Economía, Derecho, 1995, N° 1,Quito, Ecuador.

• Quintanilla, Ismael, Bonavía, Tomás: Direc-ción participativa, Madrid 1993 (EditorialEudema).

• Schein, Edgar H.: Consultoría de procesos,México 1988.

• Tillmann, Hermann J., Salas, María Angé-lica: Nuestro Congreso, Manual de Diagnós-tico Rural Participativo. Santiago de Puriscal(Costa Rica) 1994.

• Tillmann, Hermann, Salas, Maruja: (para elproyecto manejo de los Recursos Naturalesa través de la Auto-ayuda de la GTZ), Diag-nóstico rural participativo (DRP), Proyectorío Guatiquía - Colombia, informe narrativode un Curso-Taller que se llevó a cabo entreel 31 de agosto al 17 de septiembre de 1993,Stockach-Tübingen 1993.

2 Literature

C French

• Balzer, Geert, Engel, Adalbert: Le rôle desmesures d'incitation dans l'application de lastratégie GERNAP, Outil de travail à l'inten-tion des chargés de projets, des consultantset des collaborateurs de projet), Eschborn.1995 (GTZ).

• Bolliger, Ernst et al.: Vulgarisation agricole,un manuel. St. Galle 1991 (SKAT, LBL).

• Bourdieu, Pierre: Le sens pratique, Paris1980 (Editions de minuit).

• DDA (Direction de la Coopération au Déve-loppement et de l'Aide Humanitaire): Hypo-thèses d'impact, développement et impactssur l'env ironnement Berne, 1994.

• DDA (Direction de la Coopération au Déve-loppement et de l'Aide Humanitaire): Miroirmon beau miroir dis-moi..., L'auto-évaluationdans la coopération au développement,Berne mars 1991.

• De Leener, Philippe, Ndione, Emmanuel,Ndiaye, Mamadou (u.a.): Avenir des terroirs:La ressource humaine, Dakar 1992 (ENDA,GRAF).

• De Leener. Philippe: Réinventer le présent,Dakar 1994 (ENDA GRAF Sahel).

• Doucet, Lavai, Favreau, Louis: Théorie etpratiques en organisation communautaires,Québec 1992.

• GTZ: L'idée a fait tache d'huile. Etude de casd'un projet d'amélioration de la gestion desterroirs v illageois (PATECORE) au BurkinaFaso, Synthèse, Eschborn 1992.

• Gueye, Bara. Schoonmaker, Karen: Intro-duction à la méthode accélérée de rechercheparticipative (MARP), London 1991 (IIED).

• Imfeld, Josef, Kalt, Peter Manuel de l'auto-évaluation, Serv ice Evaluation de la DDA,Mai 1994.

• Lecomte, B., Kwan-Kai-Hong: Renforcementinstitutionnel des organisations d'autopromo-tion. Cadre conceptuel et méthodologique,GTZ Division 403. No. 12f. 1/1993.

D German

• Balzer, Geert, Engel, Adalbert: Die Rolle vonAnreizen bei der Anwendung von RMSH alsVorgehensweise, Eine Handreichung fürProjektbearbeiter/-innen, Consultants undProjektmitarbeiter/-innen, Eschborn. Januar1995 (GTZ).

• Bolliger, Ernst et al.: LandwirtschaftlicheBeratung, Leitfaden, St. Gallen 1991 (SKAT,LBL).

• Bourdieu, Pierre: Sozialer Sinn, Kritik dertheoretischen Vernunft, Frankfurt a./M. 1987(Suhrkamp).

• DEH (Direktion für Entwicklungszusammen-arbeit und Humanitäre Hilfe): SpiegleinSpieglein an der Wand..., Zum Thema"Selbstevaluation" (SE) in der Entwicklungs-zusammenarbeit, Reihe Arbeitshilfen zu Pla-nung, Evaluation. Monitoring und Umsetzung(PEMU), Bern Dezember 1990.

• DEH (Direktion für Entwicklungszusammen-arbeit und Humanitäre Hilfe): Wirkungshypo-thesen, Entwicklung und Umwelt-lmpactBern, Juli 1994.

• Doppler, Klaus, Lauterburg, Christoph:Change Management. Den Unternehmens-wandel gestalten, Frankfurt 1994 (CampusVerlag).

• Glast, Friedrich: Konfliktmanagement. EinHandbuch für Führungskräfte und Berater,Bern 1994 (Haupt Verlag).

• Gohl, Eberhard: Participative Impact Moni-toring, Ein Positionspapier. Stuttgart April1993 (GTZ).

• Högger, Rudolf: Wasserschlange und Son-nenvogel, Die andere Seite der Entwick-lungshilfe, Frauenfeld 1993 (Verlag imWaldgut).

• Lecomte, B., Kwan-Kai-Hong: InstitutionelleStärkung von Basisorganisationen. Begriffs-rahmen und methodisches Vorgehen, GTZAbt. 403. Nr. 12d. 12/1992.

• Müller-Glodde, Ulrike: ProzessbegleitendeBeratung im Ressourcenmanagement, EineArbeitshilfe für GTZ-Mitarbeiter-/innen undMitarbeiter/-innen in der Projektplanung und-durchführung, Bonn April 1994.

• Stachle, Wolfgang: Management, München1991 (Verlag Franz Vahlen).

• Sülzer, Rolf, Zimmermann. Arthur Organi-sationen verstehen, Westdeutscher Verlag(erscheint im September 1996).

• Whitmore, John: Coaching für die Praxis,Frankfurt a./M. 1994 (Campus).

Deutsche Gesellschaft fürTechnische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)GmbH

402/96 22e NARMS Department 402 Environmental Protection,Conservation of Natural Resources,Dissemination of Appropriate Technologies(GATE)