Effective Networking for Social Learning
The Experience of Grupo Chorlaví
Julio A. Berdegué
Presented at the Annual Meeting 2004 of Euforic, June 8-9, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
Grupo Chorlaví
What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Achieving the intended outcomes
Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection
Contents
1. Grupo Chorlaví
2. What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
3. Achieving the intended outcomes
4. Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection
Grupo Chorlavi
10,000 individuals
442 NGOs and CBO
Grupo Chorlavi
► The objective of Grupo Chorlaví is to promote social learning to
support the initiatives carried out by individuals, groups and
organizations working for the transformation of Latin America rural
societies
► An experiential learning approach, i.e., social learning based on
critical reflection about initiatives being carried out by a wide
variety of catalysts of change in Latin American rural societies
Grupo Chorlavi
► Tools and platforms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Fondo Mink’a de Chorlaví - Competitive Grant Fund
Electronic conferences
InterCambios electronic newsletter
www.GrupoChorlavi.org
Internet-based distance training
Chorlaví electronic list
Special Cooperation Agreements
Eldis en Español
Contents
1. Grupo Chorlaví
2. What we mean by effective networking for
social learning?
3. Achieving the intended outcomes
4. Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection
Effective networking for social learning
► Why social learning?
–
–
–
–
–
Disappointing results of old approaches
New economic, political, social and cultural contexts
New societal demands on rural societies
New objectives of rural social actors
Few of the old ways of thinking and of doing are still relevant
and effective
Effective networking for social learning
Can be defined based on three outcomes:
1. A functional, vibrant, group or community of individuals and
organizations
– Diversity and representativeness of participants
– Intensity and frequency of the interactions
– Trust and reciprocity
Effective networking for social learning
Can be defined based on three outcomes:
2. The quality of the social learning process and its results and
products
– Who learns?
– Are the questions (learning objectives) pertinent and to whom?
–
–
–
–
–
(“Boundary partners”)
Is existing knowledge considered?
How rigorous and systematic is the experience-based critical
refection process?
Are conclusions and lessons up-scalable?
Is the process well documented and communicated?
Are new capacities built or strengthened?
Effective networking for social learning
Can be defined based on three outcomes:
3. Influence
– It cannot happen if the two above have not been achieved
– Is dependent on how much the ‘boundary partners’ trust the
knowledge generated and the group of people who generated it
Contents
1. Grupo Chorlaví
2. What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
3. Achieving the intended outcomes
4. Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection
Achieving the outcomes
Effective networking for social learning is:
► 10% inspiration and 90% transpiration
► 90% of the transpiration is experimentation
► A constant frame of mind: learning about social learning
1. The people and the quality of the interactions
► The approach to the issue of the participants and their
interaction will depend on which of two types of networking
is taking place:
netWORK
or
NETwork
1. The people and the quality of the interactions
► netWORK:
Which people and which types of interactions do you need?
– Is about the coordination of distributed work and coproduction of knowledge, goods and services
– Is about bringing together specialized skills ... and
coordinate them to obtain an integrated result
1. The people and the quality of the interactions
► NETwork
Which people and which types of interactions do you need?
– Is about mutual contributions of information to
independent (not coordinated) goals, objectives,
initiatives ....
– Is about linking people who complement in each other
in the type of knowledge they have access to, but that
are related enough to be relevant to each other
1. The people and the quality of the interactions
► Regardless of the type of networking, ICTs cannot deliver
the goods if there is not a pre-existing social nucleus
► Networks which work for everyone and no one on particular,
tend to be the victims of the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’
2. The quality of the social learning process
► Grupo Chorlaví’s experience is more of the netWORK kind,
with elements of NETwork
► A seven step process:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Identify and engage the ‘boundary partners’
Establish a social learning agenda
Identify critical questions and issues  learning objectives
Design ‘learning projects’ to achieve ‘learning projects’
Document the process and the results
Communicate
Build capacities
2. The quality of the social learning process
1. Identify and engage the ‘boundary partners’
– netWORKING for social learning cannot be very effective if it
–
is a ‘common property’ process, that engages everyone and no
one in particular
Who
• asks the questions?
• is engaged in the learning process?
• who establishes the meaning of the results?
• who qualifies the findings?
• who establishes the meaning of the results?
• who is the end user and ‘beneficiary’ of the process and of
its results?
2. The quality of the social learning process
2. Establish a social learning agenda
– What are the important questions that the network will answer
–
–
in the medium term?
Criteria need to be defined, of two types:
• What we would like to do
• What we can actually do
Experts need to be engaged and consulted, to compare with the
‘state of the art’
2. The quality of the social learning process
3. Identify critical questions and issues  learning objectives
– To netWORK effectively you need to define clear objectives
– Learning objectives are specific questions that, in total, allow
the network to deal with the medium term social learning
agenda
2. The quality of the social learning process
4. Design ‘learning projects’ to achieve ‘learning projects’
– Once learning objectives are clear, social learning processes
can be treated as a project:
• A theory
• A learning method
• Milestones
• Partners with tasks and obligations
• Time framework
• Budget
• Partnership
• Governance mechanism for the partnership and the project
2. The quality of the social learning process
5. Document the process and the results
– Self-evident...
– But almost never done!!!
2. The quality of the social learning process
6. Communicate
– Diffuse communication – to the broad public of individuals and
–
groups presumably interested in the agenda, the learning
objectives and the results and outputs of the learning project
Focused communication – an attempt to reach specific
individuals and organizations who have it in their power to ‘do
something important’
2. The quality of the social learning process
7. Build capacities
– A response to the demand for demonstrating impact of the
–
–
learning process
Limited in reach, but significant ICT-based opportunities
Engage boundary partners who can have large ‘multiplier
effects’, for example:
• Higher education (leading MSc courses)
• Managers of large development projects
• Leadership of significant social movements & organizations
• Coordinators and key members of important networks
• Publishers of regional or national journals
3. Influence
► By definition, social learning organizations and processes do
not have ‘impacts’ in the sense of direct and lineal cause
effect relationships
► For all practical purposes, it is impossible to attribute
effects to a social learning process
► But social learning can have great influence
► A direct function of:
– The quality of the people engaged in the learning process and
–
of their interactions
The quality of the learning process and its results and products
Contents
1. Grupo Chorlaví
2. What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
3. Achieving the intended outcomes
4. Issues for further experimentation and critical
reflection
Issues for further experimentation
1. Should we seek to have sustainable networks or should we be
more concerned with effective networking resulting in
outcomes which are sustainable in themselves? When one or
the other or both?
2. How do we evaluate effective networking for social learning?
What do we do with ‘accountability’ and ‘impact’? Are there
technically and politically feasible alternatives?
3. How do we deal with issues of power in networks? For
example, donors as participants in networks, N-S networks,
researcher-practitioner networks, computer skilled and
equipped vs unskilled and less equipped...
4. Capacity-building in networking
Thank you!
www.GrupoChorlavi.org
and
www.FondoMinkaChorlavi.org