Report writing in a development context

EASUN examines opportunities for report writing as a developmental relationship

That was the subject of EASUN’s report writing workshop for its OD Associates, held from 30th May – 3rd June 2010, in Moshi, Tanzania. The associates came from Kenya Uganda and Tanzania, and included all EASUN programme staff who undertake OD interventions with client organizations, organize CSO institutional development workshops or train facilitators of change and development in organizations or communities.

EASUN has for quite some time now experienced the need to strengthen the capacities of its staff and Associates in the basic skills for writing reports that meet the basic standards of good delivery of information. Its work plan for 2010 is particularly focused on such an outcome for the report writing workshop.

Quite often in capacity building work, different versions of reporting templates are given by donors or organizations requesting a particular intervention. A good report, therefore, is perceived as one that complies with the detailed nuances of templates provided, which usually go to satisfy administrative, technocratic needs related to construction, organization, analysis of data and explanation of logical outcomes of the intervention.

As we prepared the workshop itself, participants were asked to share their current experiences and questions related to report writing. Either inadvertently, or perhaps because of EASUN’s particular OD focus on the client’s own development question, we completed the instructions with the phrase: “...questions related to report writing as an intervention” This emphasis generated expressions of experiences and questions suggesting that there is often tension, frustration and even conflict between consultants, clients and donors involved in any particular intervention and its reporting requirements.

What are capacity building reports written for?

Such tensions, which were mostly related to compliance, had to do with how the facilitator had intervened, what kind of emerging issues were included in the report and how, therefore, was the mandate of the intervention adhered to? It was particularly interesting to note that this level of experience with reporting capacity building interventions was highlighted mainly by the more seasoned OD practitioners, compared to expectations of participants who were rather new to the practice, who had particularly hoped that the workshop might address purely technical skills related to report writing.

On the other hand, even those whose primary perception of the workshop was skills transfer had raised questions such as:

1. When are my analysis and comments helpful in the report, and ultimately, therefore, an intervention?
2. To what extent is it right to include my thinking in the report?
3. How can I write a report that adds value to participants rather than just a documentation of the training?

Such questions led to the choice to shift the question and theme of the workshop from writing technique, to examining “what are reports of capacity building interventions written for?” This seemed to better reflect what was clearly the urgent question, given that EASUN’s mission focuses on transforming practices related to organizational development.

The workshop thus sought to establish clarity about the nature and effects of relationships, among the client situation with a particular question, the consultant, and other stakeholders in the context of the capacity building establishment within the development sector. What do the current report writing dynamics say about such relationships and how they impact the development of the client organization itself?

The new questions for the workshop brought participants face-to-face with the fact that relationships in capacity building work today are mostly active in the shadow area of development(al) practice, i.e., there is no agreed common purpose and many operating assumptions and values that represent specific interests remain unacknowledged.

From a “shadow” (unconscious processes) perspective, when the unwritten or unsurfaced purposes dominate, then an organization (or relationship) begins to destroy itself. This is also true where report writing and the capacity building interventions they serve are riding on unexamined assumptions and values. Ultimately, all the templates that a consultant has to respond to in planning an intervention or writing a report will shape his or her attitudes and behaviour. This can have a particularly negative impact on the development needs of organizations in which we intervene, as well as the values of development practitioners.

Regardless of the practicalities of the need to sustain funding relationships or livelihoods of consultants, the extent to which the report itself is an intervention remains the most critical question for a practitioner whose process is about improving human interactions as the most important aspect of an organization or community’s capacity to take its own development processes further.

Key outcomes of the workshop

The workshop identified specific points likely to enable a consultant transform his/her report writing posture to be more facilitative rather than extractive. This includes a simple framework that can be used in the future to develop a more comprehensive guide for report writing, as shown below:

Practice issues to keep in mind

1. Effective reporting is made possible by focused considerations at the points of clarification, process design and ways in which we intervene in the client situation.
2. Self-awareness of the practitioner has everything to do with the role the report will play in the development process of the client;
3. Analysis of real questions or issues happens during the intervention process. Report captures and presents analysis done by organizational members themselves;
4. Consultants need to be conscious of their posture and how s/he takes space, i.e., enables trust, confidence and responsibility taking (positive engagement) in the client situation.
5. The report is part and parcel of the intervention.

Improved actions planned

1. Discuss reporting relationships at the point of clarification with the client.
2. Put away any assumptions about the client as you plan the intervention and the report structure;
3. Identify, during the intervention, shifts and emerging issues that you may need to include in the report for the sake of the client’s learning;
4. Contract for methodology in the whole intervention, ensuring that the client is aware of connection between what transpires in the whole process, the report, and its development;
5. Develop the necessary report writing skills, including structuring and presentation of issues and outcomes in ways that communicate well to the client and other stakeholders.

For more information, comments or requests for the workshop report contact
mosi.kisare@easun-tz.org
________________________________

Why UKITA is seeking a comprehensive OD process

It is a challenging time juggling moment. Where do we fit in UKITA? The timetable for July and August seems full. But, who else can undertake this intervention in a meaningful way for this strategic organization in Northern Tanzania?

That was a difficult decision-making time for EASUN. UKITA had shown rare insight in its request for an OD intervention. Structure? Yes! “But”, says UKITA, “we want to assess how our current structure is shaping our governance and leadership practices. Regardless of how we juggle it, the current hierarchical model leaves us with only one option, i.e., bureaucratic relationships of control”. UKITA Board now wants to provide leadership in ways that increase the organization’s capacity for ongoing accountability to its stated purpose and values. UKITA feels that its supervision of resource use and policy management must fall in the context of conscious management of organizational purpose, rather than simply maintaining a technocratic organization.

UKITA is clearly expressing a shift of mindset. It is looking at an OD intervention from the perspective of transformation and development. In a clarification meeting held in June 2010, the Managing Director expressed UKITA’s desire for a structure that supports team and organizational learning.

Training to transform the governance ethos of UKITA

The intervention, to take place in August 2010, is a follow up action step planned by UKITA during an earlier Board training exercise facilitated by EASUN in 2008. According to the Managing Director, this plan is about transforming governance practices of UKITA and not an isolated structure review or leadership workshop. The ongoing interventions will build the capacity of the Board to base its leadership on the stated values of UKITA and to seek accountability on the consistency with which UKITA’s activities and management are sustaining strategic focus and moving the organization toward achieving its stated goals of increased human rights for women and children in Kilimanjaro region, Tanzania.

To embark on this transformational venture with an eye to success, UKITA will send 2 people, including the Managing Director, to EASUN’s transformational leadership course (FOD), which starts in August 2010. This is based on the awareness that transforming governance practices does not happen in a momentary flash. Instead, it requires careful consideration of factors related to the management of innovations. Transforming the ethos inherent in UKITA’s organizational structure, from a deep set of control relationships to a learning and team based structure, will require the cultivation of a critical mass of people who understand and believe in new ways of working, relating and practicing leadership.

EASUN’s experiences from its own personnel transitions confirm the importance of a critical mass (of 10-25% as suggested by Everett Rogers way back in the 1970s). Other civil society leaders in East Africa have also shared their experiences of OD interventions before FOD, and how attending the course later on gave them the knowledge, insights and skills that they wished they had during or immediately after the OD interventions. Given such experiences, EASUN is interested in supporting UKITA’s institutional development in the most meaningful and sustainable ways that also bring excitement to the whole organization.

For more information on OD interventions (including Board training) contact
atieno.olwal@easun-tz.org
________________________________

FOD cycle "N": Secure your place now!

Facilitating Organisation Development (FOD) course is offered by EASUN for leaders of civil society Organisations in East Africa. Over 180 leaders have attended the course since its inception in 1997 and are sharing great stories of transformation in their leadership practices and facilitation skills in capacity building work. Apply now and join a growing community of development practitioners experiencing paradigm shifts in facilitating transformational change in Organisations and individuals.

Module 1 of Cycle "N" will be held from 15th – 21st August 2010. Modules 2 and 3 will take place in November 2010 and March 2011, respectively. Ask for application materials from: alando.anyona@easun-tz.org. The deadline for new applications or confirmation of intent to participate has been extended to 15th July 2010 due to late distribution of E-News of May.

________________________________

This newsshot is also available at: www.easun-tz.org/enews/newsshot_23june2010.html

If you wish to unsubscribe from the EASUN eNews mailing list, e-mail: webmanager@easun-tz.org

If you have any comments, questions or concerns about this list, your subscription, and/or any of the news shots that you receive, e-mail webmanager@easun-tz.org directly.
________________________________

EASUN Centre for Organisational Learning
P.O. Box 6120 Arusha, Tanzania
Tel: +255-(0)27-2548803
Fax +255-(0)27-2548289
info@easun-tz.org
www.easun-tz.org
________________________________