Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #981
    Keymaster

    Forum members both comment on the participatory techniques mentioned, and also share their experiences of their use of similar tools in the field.  Please note that they are encouraged to practice using the Ten seed Technique (TST) ranking tool, as it is extremely valuable for use in the field .

    #1035
    Inactive

    I haven’t used the ten seed technique as such however have used similar counting type strategies using post it notes and show of hands, stickers etc against root cause analysis type situations in Melbourne. it does generate a visual representation very quickly and can highlight areas that people don’t necessarily intuitively identify.

    Regarding the PMC my comments are that :
    * it is very detailed in the Preparation and Design Phase but not so much in the other 2 phases. I am a strong believer in a good plan will increase the chances of a successful implementation, however implementation and post implementation are far longer periods of time and have their own sets of tools to utilise.
    * I applaud the emphasis on stakeholder engagement
    * differently to the PM4NGO model, the iterations of the design through the implementation don’t seem to be here as overtly, which I wonder about. Typically, you are there to deliver outcomes with quality so ongoing goal readjustment can be disruptive and diminish the quality of the final result, however I do think it is something to keep in mind as scope change is still very much a possibility, especially as conditions change, and more information becomes available.
    * is the assumption that a project or program manager carries through the whole of the process from Preparation and Design through to Post Implementation? I have only been involved in the 3 phases in a commercial employment setting. In the limited development world I have experienced, I have been involved in implementation only. The future, I hope will hold design and monitoring and evaluation. I imagine that these three phases are far more separated in a development context, so that a donor like NZ Aid hires a company or individual to review the needs and develop a plan for spending known funding, then that funding is utilised to deliver a separate implementation phase with quite separate project management. Monitoring and evaluation or Post Implementation is deliberately an independent third party in order to objectively assess progress on behalf of the donor. I believe that this is a typical approach.
    * I haven’t been involved much in the sourcing of funds as part of a development project except to the extent of being a stakeholder in Solomon Islands Education.

    #1068
    Keymaster

    Hi Mardi,
    Thanks for these comments. To briefly answer some of your points:
    1. The TST is probably the best single tool I’ve come across…and of course it can be used in different variations. As used in the West Bengal and Vanuatu examples, it can be utilised to draw out 9relatively quickly) quite complex factors…
    2. Yes, the strength of the PMC is in the planning stage, rather than the implementation or post implementation stage.
    3. Depending on the project, different stakeholders can be involved at the Planning, Implementation, & Post-Implementation Stage. It’s probably relatively rare than an agency such as World Vision might be involved in all three. That’s no real problem that stakeholders may just be involved in one area (eg a consultant for the planning stage), as long as he/she can see his/her role in perspective. With regards evaluations, it’s obviously better objectively if the team leader can be from outside of the organisation

    #1069
    Keymaster

    Hi Mardi,
    Thanks for these comments. To briefly answer some of your points:
    1. The TST is probably the best single tool I’ve come across…and of course it can be used in different variations. As used in the West Bengal and Vanuatu examples, it can be utilised to draw out 9relatively quickly) quite complex factors…
    2. Yes, the strength of the PMC is in the planning stage, rather than the implementation or post implementation stage.
    3. Depending on the project, different stakeholders can be involved at the Planning, Implementation, & Post-Implementation Stage. It’s probably relatively rare than an agency such as World Vision might be involved in all three. That’s no real problem that stakeholders may just be involved in one area (eg a consultant for the planning stage), as long as he/she can see his/her role in perspective. With regards evaluations, it’s obviously better objectively if the team leader can be from outside of the organisation

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.