MfDR Software: Culture Change - A Tough Nut to Crack
Dear Colleagues,
Our last ediscussion centered around the "hardware" of managing for development results. We are now going to focus on the "software".
Are you the only Results Based Manager in your organization? Are you constantly trying to engage senior management and get them to change the way they do business? Then this ediscussion is for you!
We want you to share your stories on how you got your organization to change. How did you manage to move your team from thinking about getting money out the door by the end of the fiscal year to aligning resources to results?
In this ediscussion we are going to explore the following questions:
A. External and internal developments leading to change:
1. What were the external drivers for change and how did leaders communicate these change messages?
2. How was the need for change towards MfDR created in your organisation and who were the internal drivers?
B. Information and awareness:
3. To what extent was the concept and were the consequences of MfDR explained to everyone within the organisation?
4. How were staff informed about and motivated for the change towards MfDR?
C. Organisation and implementation:
5. How was the change towards MfDR organised?
6. What support did staff members get to work differently and according to MfDR?
D. Results:
7. What is different in your organisation now, compared to the situation before the introduction of MfDR?
8. Which are the most important steps still to take in order to integrate MfDR as management approach in your organisation?
E. Lessons learned
9. What are the positive and critical lessons learned?
10. What could we advise others to improve in this process?
By going through these questions we can build a body of knowledge in terms of successes (and failures) to often esoteric issue: How to bring about change? Through sharing our experiences we will draw together a list of tips and guidance that others can use in similar situations.
I now turn the floor over to you: Please share your answers to the following questions:
What were the external drivers for change and how did leaders communicate these change messages?
How was the need for change towards MfDR created in your organisation and who were the internal drivers?
I can't wait to hear from you!
Kind regards,
Hannah
Our last ediscussion centered around the "hardware" of managing for development results. We are now going to focus on the "software".
Are you the only Results Based Manager in your organization? Are you constantly trying to engage senior management and get them to change the way they do business? Then this ediscussion is for you!
We want you to share your stories on how you got your organization to change. How did you manage to move your team from thinking about getting money out the door by the end of the fiscal year to aligning resources to results?
In this ediscussion we are going to explore the following questions:
A. External and internal developments leading to change:
1. What were the external drivers for change and how did leaders communicate these change messages?
2. How was the need for change towards MfDR created in your organisation and who were the internal drivers?
B. Information and awareness:
3. To what extent was the concept and were the consequences of MfDR explained to everyone within the organisation?
4. How were staff informed about and motivated for the change towards MfDR?
C. Organisation and implementation:
5. How was the change towards MfDR organised?
6. What support did staff members get to work differently and according to MfDR?
D. Results:
7. What is different in your organisation now, compared to the situation before the introduction of MfDR?
8. Which are the most important steps still to take in order to integrate MfDR as management approach in your organisation?
E. Lessons learned
9. What are the positive and critical lessons learned?
10. What could we advise others to improve in this process?
By going through these questions we can build a body of knowledge in terms of successes (and failures) to often esoteric issue: How to bring about change? Through sharing our experiences we will draw together a list of tips and guidance that others can use in similar situations.
I now turn the floor over to you: Please share your answers to the following questions:
What were the external drivers for change and how did leaders communicate these change messages?
How was the need for change towards MfDR created in your organisation and who were the internal drivers?
I can't wait to hear from you!
Kind regards,
Hannah
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Bimerew Alemu on -
Dear colleagues
This cultural change topic initiated by Hannah is very important. This is the key problem that needs an in depth discussion and understanding. This is I think one of the key variables to sustainable growth. On that basis I suggest that cultural change has to be initiated at all levels with special emphasis to leadership and pointed out the following ideas.
In most of the institutions we have been undergoing change process during the last 6 years. There are certain changes with respect to service delivery. But in most of the cases I see we are not that much successful. Why such shortcomings?
Let me focus for instance on some of the causes
ineffective communication;
failure to identify and eliminate obstacles to change;
Solution is clear
The change effort must be guided by committed and resilient role models. Leaders actually play a critical role as change agents in the transformation process. Successful change efforts necessitate the leader to articulate a forceful vision that appeals to both internal and external stakeholders; show strong personal commitment, and enable stakeholders to contribute to their full potential. Successful change management, therefore, requires the organization to overcome several leadership challenges, and to develop a focused and proactive strategy to address change.
From these general ideas I totally believe that we need a cultural change in all our societies especially with respect to work that the society as a whole needs to implement. To have seen results on the ground we need to be efficient and effective. Transparency and interpersonal communication of the workforce is important.
Very important point is that change has to begin in schools so that the new generation is well aware of what the current situation demands. In the context of developing countries formal and non-formal education institutions are overburdened with the task of providing basic education, thus failing to engage students in other social and leadership issues. I think focus group discussions with regards to what the new generation or the future leaders of that specific society require needs to be identified and properly addressed.
Generally to empower the youth it is not enough to make them a member of a certain club. The main thing is to realistically show them proactively participate in matters that need immediate change in the society. That is when we can be sure sustainable development is to exist.
Best regards
Bimerew Alemu
-
Permalink Reply by Hannah J Cooper on -
Dear James and Bimerew,
Thank you both for your comments.
James, I agree with you. We really need to ensure that civil society, community based organizations, and the private sector need to be included in the debate on performance. They help hold governments to account and are another way to convey results achieved to citizens.
Do you have any suggestions on how to ensure that these groups are brought to the table? I know that this is not always an easy feat, and so some small, realistic small suggestions would be really helpful!
Bimerew, you raise some interesting and tough points, especially regarding youth and empowering them to become change agents.
I’d like to move to the last part of our ediscussion and ask you all the following questions:
E. Lessons learned
9. What are the positive and critical lessons learned?
10. What could we advise others to improve in this process?
Please share your thoughts. I look forward to hearing from you all on this and any other points that we have raised throughout our ediscussion that you would like to answer.
Many thanks and kind regards,
Hannah
-
Permalink Reply by James O. Wagala on -
Hello Hannah and other CoP members for very insightful contributions. It has been through provoking reading from you.
Over my short stint in the reform outfit in my country, I have come to appreciate that the software of managing for development results are more stable on a platform of:
1. The ability of the organization to know with certainty its stage of development (in results-focus) before it embraces MfDR or RBM. My country adopted RBM in 2004 but it had also been implementing programme-based budgeting, medium-term expenditure framework, stakeholder consultation in budget and programme implementation and many other hallmarks of MfDR. The dilemma now is that many RBM tools have been adopted in an uncoordinated manner. MfDR cannot deliver any results if its tools are not speaking to each other. In this case, conducting a comprehensive RBM readiness assessment is vital to informing the organization (or country) of what tools it needs to review and which new ones it needs to implement for its MfDR venture to be a success.
2. Power play is one of the most important factors which squarely determine the success of any MfDR venture. When I teach my students about politics in an organization, I stress that it is not just top-down interplay of authority and decision-making prowess. Rather, it is a complex state of chaos where the seemingly harmless nitty-gritties can totally undermine the organization's quest for results. The most subtle power games are between employees of middle or lower level cadres and this is the most dangerous. Where the work gets done, the results become manifest, the money gets spent etc is the point which determines the success of an MfDR venture. In government for example, the strategic orientation from the executive leadership can be clear. But for many reasons, the implementers can derail the strategic vision for other pursuits. Therefore, it is important for the leadership to delicately balance power plays in a manner which ensures that everyone (especially the operational staff) works towards achieving the results of the organization.
3. Momentum keeps the results coming and the organization going! It is important to build the momentum for change from processes to focus on results. This excitement will attract a critical mass of followership while at the same time unfreezing the barriers to change. Sustaining the momentum is also key. The leadership will steer the change process, there is need to keep the people focussed and highly motivated. In this case constant coaching is a must. And when I talk about coaching, our Rapid Results Approach comes to my mind. Institutions which were supported to scale up their RRIs are now bragging of the impressive results they have delivered to their constituencies. Those which did one wave and let go are constantly wondering whether RRI really transforms!
4. Any RBM or MfDR initiative will thrive on mutually beneficial coalitions. Partnerships with employees, customers, suppliers, fans, citizens and other stakeholders is crucial for the success of the transformation towards MfDR. Coalitions should be on communicating the good work that the organizations does to its citizenry, fostering and sustaining interdependencies which will ensure that the organization continues to deliver meaningful results and putting in place sustainability structures, not only for collaboration but also for delivery of results. A government institution for example needs to work closely with other government agencies to deliver its results, it needs to acquire a robust system for M&E, it needs to implement an effective IEC strategy for communicating its results to its citizens, its needs to talk to civil society and private sector to get a third party's opinion on how well it is delivering its results etc.
5. Lastly, freezing the change. Adopting MfDR as a way of doing business is one thing. Embedding MfDR within the organization is quite another. An organization and its workers are amenable to changing during the early stages when the hype for change is still high. Then when the steam dies down, they lapse back to business as usual. This has undermined the success of many MfDR ventures world over. It is therefore important that the change is embedded into the whole organization into a framework that even a regime change will find difficult to undo.
In MfDR, it is important to let CHANGE BE THE ONLY CONSTANT!
Regards,
James
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Latest Activity
Dear friends
Greetings
Strategic direction you mentioned is a good thinking. Apart from human capacity institutional capacity building is essential. What I am not clear is how to relate the activities with the public sector work being implemented i…
Parliamentarians in democratic societies play a crucial role in ensuring budgetary oversight, budgets that in developing countries often consist of a high proportion of international development aid. By ensuring aid funds are accounted for and trans…
In January 2010, the AfCoP’s Core Management Team members acknowledged that the objectives of the first three-year plan have been achieved and have agreed on a new strategic direction for the community (concept note available here. The Community is…
© 2010 Created by copafrica
