Shared “identity construction” enables North-South dialogue

A number of EASUN e-news dating back to late 2009 have highlighted events initiated jointly by EASUN and PSO, to discuss capacity development of Southern CSOs as a meaningful intervention. The Moshi dialogue held in November 2009 brought together some 50 Northern (Netherlands & Denmark) and Southern (East Africa) NGOs to review critical issues in capacity building activities today.

The dialogue was a big event and, was probably rather ambitious in terms of the diversity of experiences of participants in relation to the kind of preparation that was possible at that time. However, it was a bold and important step. EASUN and PSO have sought to take the initiative forward through various reflection meetings and associated joint initiatives. A joint Moshi dialogue review meeting between EASUN and PSO staff held in Tanga, Tanzania from 10-13th August, was a particularly important aspect of such shared learning and development process.

Biographical notes shared

In a particularly important part of the review process EASUN and PSO shared stories of how they had emerged and developed as civil society institutions. This enabled a more effective reflection on how partnership between EASUN and PSO might fit and support the strategies of both organizations.

What stood out on the part of PSO is its relationship to a government that embraces civil society organizations as part of its strategy for international development support. Based on a social contract that has evolved well in the Netherlands, it was anticipated that development aid from the Dutch community might build a similar model of relationships between the government, civil society and business sectors in the South.

EASUN, on the other hand, has shaped its identity on a capacity building platform to address leadership and institutional development challenges of civil society organizations in East Africa.Both the support by local organizations and donors has enabled EASUN to put up a practice based profile to strengthen identity formation and transformational leadership of the civil society organizations. On the other hand, a political environment where governments tend to perceive civil society organizations as competitors or whistle blowers often throws up the kind of challenges that undermine stable identity construction processes for CSOs. An increasingly difficult funding environment is also forcing CSOs to move from one activity profile to another, leading to erosion of identity and values upon which they pin their sense of purpose.

EASUN’s identity construction has culminated in its new profile as Centre for Organizational Learning, which is increasingly characterized by a new phase of movement building to enhance conscious practices that support sustainable capacity development of civil society organizations in the South.

The Moshi dialogue in retrospect

A Northern view of Moshi
From the Northern perspective, the Moshi dialogue was meant to take the EASUN-PSO learning trajectory to the next level. However, because of the specific relational and communication difficulties experienced in the event itself, there was a feeling that the process had been taken two steps back.

Communication difficulties included the silence that heavily characterized Northern participants in the meeting. It was shared in Tanga that this had been a conscious choice, so as not to dominate the dialogue process, since the North was coming from a position of power that, in the past, had been used to dominate. Another source of disappointment for the North was that they had thought the process would be conceptual, and not about sharing of experiences. That, it was hoped, would create a ‘safe environment’ where the dialogue would be between organisations that were not actual partners in terms of funding relationships. Northern partners expressed the feeling of coming away from the Moshi dialogue feeling very exhausted, as if all the negative feelings about the oppressive nature of N-S relations were being heaped on those who had come to the meeting in Moshi; the very people who were trying to do something about it.

Southern perspective
Southern NGOs perceived a lack of shared understanding about process and content. Northern representatives wanted to see the pre-planned outline of the meeting content as a contract for “dialogue”. The perceived rigidity of the North in wanting to control what would be discussed, and to predict the eventual outcome was creating tension even at the final planning stages between EASUN and PSO. It was as if having held planning meetings to think about what the meeting should address and achieve meant that it would not be an encounter of real human experiences. Southern participants had indeed hoped that this meeting was a dialogue towards transforming practices in both capacity development work and managing partnerships that support such activities. The South had expected a transformational shared learning process. What they experienced instead was a desire by the North to limit the meeting to a workshop for harvesting insights under sanitized circumstances where there is no encounter with real-life burning questions and feelings.

That seemed evident in the methodology that the North had thoroughly prepared itself for. During the meetings, the Southern representatives had the feeling of simply being recorded. The “dialogue” looked like it was mainly planned for evidence gathering. Many felt that the North was not listening, but busy taking photos and recording in order to take away a ‘product’ from the event.

So what happens now?

At the end of the meeting in Moshi, individual organizations or groups of organizations from both North and South did plan some specific follow-up steps that they would work on at their own initiative and share with others through various communication platforms.

The Tanga review itself was an outcome of a commitment by EASUN and PSO to engage in further clarification of our assumptions and practices as we continue to seek to build a working partnership for sustainable capacity development of CSOs in the South. The review, therefore, included surfacing our different passions and needs, but also the interests we share, based on what we had learnt from the Moshi experience. This final reflection led to the identification of action steps that will support our learning together through shared identity construction and movement building for sustainable capacity development of CSOs.

Other organizations working in partnership with EASUN and PSO in the effort to contribute to civil society regaining the public space are CDRA (South Africa) and PRIA (India)

For more information and full report of the Tanga Review contact, in East Africa: atieno.olwal@easun-tz.org; mosi.kisare@easun-tz.org; in the Netherlands: Temmink@pso.nl; poelje@pso.nl
________________________________

Training civil society leaders to manage institutional Development

With good facilitation, organizations can be particularly effective in identifying important questions and committing to appropriate action to stimulate and sustain their development. The FOD course supports leaders to transform their values and behaviour in ways that enhance their ability to effectively facilitate the learning and development of others in organizational situations.

Lessons of day four

Fourteen civil society leaders from Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania completed module 1 of cycle “N” of the FOD course on 29th August 2010. A particular exercise used on day three had surfaced participant’s attitudes and behaviours in a simulated situation of conversation without words. Insights shared by participants from the exercise demonstrate how they had recognized “listening” and “conversation” to be capacity areas that organizations need to bring into greater awareness to support conscious management of their various levels such as relationships, leadership, and identity construction.

Another area in which participants expressed increased awareness is the whole concept of organizational complexity. Mbayo, a participant from Gulu, Uganda shared his organization’s story where the inability to see and address development question emerging at the levels of leadership and relationships led to the resignation of some board and staff members, causing severe strains at the levels of available professional skills in the organization. It was noted how the board was not able to formally acknowledge that there was a serious stuck situation or development questions for the organization, until related crises started manifesting themselves at the visible levels of physical resources.

The solution is wrong

“Hold onto your question” was a hard lesson in cycle “N” as it has been in all other past cycles of FOD. In an OD process, clarifying and understanding the real question is a critical avenue for aligning process, activities and systems with organizational values and identity. The way an organization’s question is formulated is particularly important toward making appropriate interventions that address the real issue.

Participants of cycle “N” brought lots of questions, with the hope that the course would help them solve long standing issues in their organizations. They expected immediate answers. In the end they learnt that a question needs to be clarified in order to identify the issue it is carrying. For instance, “How does the organisation secure multi-year non-restricted grants to meet other institutional objectives?” sounds like a question that merely seeks to confirm what one wishes to see—a point of view, an outlook or a need in the current situation.

Clarifying a question may cause it to shift and possibly reflect issues at other levels, such as leadership or the organization’s ability to network. If the exploration indeed confirms an issue in the question posed, then the process will have enabled the organization to generate a broad-based response more likely to develop its capacities at various other levels. An immediate pursuit of a solution to a question loaded with the desire for a particular result is likely to block the organization from seeing its other institutional development needs related to the question.

The “solution”, particularly from an expert, is associated with “ego sense of superiority”. Unconscious processes of an organization become active in creating conflict in human or social development processes where the ego alone presupposes the responsibility for knowing or decision-making. In such dynamics, the ego may be symbolized by an expert or leader. Human and social development processes need to be managed more holistically. This particular insight carries critical implications for the personal development of change agents, to know that a facilitator, leader or team member needs to develop skills that support “discovery” or “revelation” within the situation of learning.

Processes that create or intensify conflicts tend to hinder, rather than facilitate, the capacity of an organization to see its real questions. Solutions need to emerge out of reflective learning processes that transfer ownership and responsibility to the client situation itself.

For information on how and when you can attend the next cycle of FOD course contact alando.anyona@easun-tz.org
________________________________

This newsshot is also available at: www.easun-tz.org/enews/newsshot_31august2010.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
________________________________