Rapid Results Approach-

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on February 10, 2011 at 7:09pm

Rapid Results Approach has been implemented in various African countries and beyond with very impressive outcomes.  These include countries in South America such as Nicaragua, Yemen in the Middle East, in Africa it has been implemented in Eritrea, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Burundi, Ghana, Madagascar, Kenya, Tanzania and South Sudan just to mention a few to promote institutional reform and capacity building in the public and private sectors.  

Rapid Results Approach essentially shifts focus away from the traditional areas where most people have been looking for answers to vexing development problems: more money, more analytic work, more workshops, more training to government officials- popularly called capacity building, more participatory planning, and more high priced evaluations among other things to determine which donor solution or government policy intervention is the most effective. Whereas all these activities have their place in the development puzzle, Rapid Results Approach recognises that the fundamental engine of change is human motivation and confidence, and the courage to take a first step, to move into collective action boldly and with an intention and a commitment to achieve what could have hitherto been seen as impossible result.

It further recognises the critical role of leadership who once discover how to tap into this engine of change, huge capacities for achievement are unleashed. Consequently in most instances once Rapid Results Approach has been launched, most of the implementation hurdles previously experienced are effectively tackled and the pieces of the implementation puzzle line up and begin to fit together in new and more effective ways, this leads to the efficient and effective attainment of development results.

In this e-discussion series on the Implementation of Rapid Results Approach, the primary objective is to learn from different contexts, situations and environments how Rapid Results has been used in overcoming development obstacles and achieving results. This first discussion in the series will focus on different country and sectorial contexts of Rapid Results Approach implementation. Contributors are therefore invited to share their experiences and insights in the application of this tool in improving implementation of programs to achieve development results.  It is expected to that as the discussion progresses from the broad aspects to specific elements of rapid results approach, lessons learned will be used in improving future implementation.

You are therefore invited to share your experiences on Rapid Results Approach – Portfolios across countries and contexts:  In answering the questions what is Rapid Results Approach? how does it work and what are its benefits, we are requesting participants to share their knowledge and experiences on the Rapid Results Approach focusing on the following aspects:

 (a) The country and the context leading to implementation of RRA;

 (b) Why Rapid Results Approach was chosen;

 (c) The results achieved;

 (d) Challenges and Lessons learned.

 

All contributions will be summarized and compiled, at the end each segment and shared across the community network.  We look forward to a rich and dynamic discussion as you share your knowledge and experiences.

 

Sylvester.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nuha on February 19, 2011 at 4:50am

Thank you very much dear Sylvester for introducing the RRI, I have already read your insertion:

“RAPID RESULTS APPROACH / INITIATIVE Institutionalization of Results Based Management in Kenya Public Service”

For some of the countries including the one of mine, talking about the RRI is a bit premature. We need to be led through primary stages. For a country like mine the question will be is how to get a buy- in to the whole approach before we can embark with the implementation of the whole idea.

I am very convinced that this approach makes it very easy to work for results, and it is easier to manage and amend. The RRI helps breaking down the plans into clear chunks of tasks that feed in a longer term measuring mechanism. For me it is the extension of the hierarchical planning levels:

1. Strategic planning
2. Operational planning
3. Quarter planning (target for the implementation of the RRA)

Honestly, I am not sure about the prevalence of the approach in my country. However I feel the need of being engaged in such a discussion to shed some lights on two main issues that concerns me at the moment:

1. How could we- as civil society and others- get some clues about the current practice in our context?
2. What is the right approach that we can follow to advocate for mainstreaming of the approach in our countries?

I appreciate sharing information about some challenges that faced Kenya in implementing of the RRI, that can be widely applied to other countries in Africa

Regards

 

Nuha Mohamed Abdalla

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on February 19, 2011 at 6:08am

Dear Nuha,

 

1. Thank you for sharing your country experience with the community.  You are very right, RRA is an implementation tool and can help organizations focus on development results. Introducing RRA to an organization needs a systemic approach. Whereas the existence of strategic plans, quarterly plans and operational plans may make introducing RRA relatively easier in an organization, their existence is not necessarily a pre-requisite for successful implementation of RRA. In fact the absence of such plans may provide the reason for introducing RRA and use RRA to develop the plans and move beyond.

 

2. RRA is extremely flexible and can be adapted to suit different circumstances and organization. One of the aims of this on-line discussion is exactly what you have mentioned, give a platform for RRA practitioners/coaches to share their experiences and facilitate introduction of the methodology to other countries/regions likely to benefit from it. In addition RRA curriculum is currently being developed, upon finalization this curriculum will assist in training of more coaches and thereby support implementation of RRA across the continent.

 

3. You've also mentioned about your desire to learn more about RRA in your country, I am aware of several RRA initiative mainly in Southern Sudan. We hope at the end of this series of discussion your questions will have been answered. As a start, I am therefore requesting the coaches who have worked in Southern Sudan:

• John Juma
• George Khasiani

Kindly share with us your experiences.

 

In addition other practitioners/coaches in Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Madagascar, Siera-Leone, Ghana, just to mention a few we are looking forward to read your experiences before we move to the next segment.

 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James F. Kollie, Jr. PhD on February 12, 2011 at 6:36am

 If you are working on a Rapid Results Approach in your country, please share with us:

(a)    The country and the context leading to implementation of RRA;

We have done some work on the RRA in Liberia. Liberia is a post-conflict country with immense capacity deficit and we are implementing our first PRS. During first year review of the PRS, we discovered, not surprisingly, that ministries and agencies were not delivering results as promised in the PRSP. It seems that staff were more focused on processes than on results and that long term results seemed too far removed from their daily work and so no one saw the immediate benefit  of the undertaking they were involved with.

(b)    Why Rapid Results Approach was chosen;

RRA was chosen so that folks working inside ministries and agencies in Liberia could link their daily or weekly activities to specific results and also that long term goals could be broken down into short term results that people could easily link their activities to. It is very easy to get lost in the mountain of activities or forget the purpose or goal of the process you are in involved with. RRA breaks down work processes into results-focused activities allowing staff to complete short results without losing sight of the long term goals.

(c)    The results achieved;

Today, we have been able to expose staff within key ministries and agencies (health, education, agriculture, roads construction, etc) in Liberia to this results-focused approach to service delivery. All across government, folks think in terms of 90-day action plans. Every cabinet minister and their staff know that they have certain results to achieve within 90 days and must ensure those are done because some level of assessment and reporting are conducted at the end of the period.

(d)   Challenges and Lessons learned.

The challenge is that it takes time for these new methodologies to sink into the work culture of Liberians so in order to get the real benefit, the engagements will have to be on longer term basis and not a two weeks workshop as was done in the case of Liberia. Even though we are pushing vigorously to ensure that line ministries and agencies use this approach, the fact is that they have not been trained enough to carry out these functions. Maybe, what needs to be done is to train a select caliber of local trainers to carry out these training in country or imbed them in ministries and agencies for a protracted period of time.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on February 19, 2011 at 5:38am

Dr. Kollie Jr

 

Dr. Kollie thank you for sharing your country experience.  The insights are very useful in understanding RRA within a post conflict environment and how you used RRA to deliver expected results.  We are looking forward for other practitioners/coaches to share their experiences so that we can compile and share among the community. There are definitely other countries who could be in your situation before introducing RRA. 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hannah J Cooper on March 3, 2011 at 3:38pm

Dear Sylvester,

 

Thank you so much for starting this interesting discussion!

 

I'd love it if you could sort of walk us through some of your experiences and basic steps in the RRA process. I remember you gave a great presentation at the 1st AfCoP annual meeting in Uganda and you mentioned that you usually do RRA from the office of a president of the organization. Could you elaborate a bit more on some of the preparatory steps that you use? How do you launch the process? How do you identify demand? And what are some of the results? I'd love a really specific example (I think the one that you used was on passports in Kenya - could you share it with us again? And maybe give us an update? How are things 3 years on after implementing RRA?)

 

Thanks so much!

 

Hannah

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on March 4, 2011 at 1:08am

Dear Hannah,

Thank you very much for your contribution and raising very pertinent issues on rapid results approach. I hope my response will shade a lot more light into the subject and therefore wish to share as follows:

1.       When leading the team implementing rapid results approach in Kenya- we were under the Public Sector Reform and Development Secretariat- (PSRDS) under the Cabinet Office in the Office of the President.  PSRDS was the department charged with the overall mandate of spear-heading public sector reforms in Kenya.  It is important to state that the setting up of the department within the Cabinet Office was a deliberate move to ensure that public sector reforms had- (a) The highest government and necessary political support in the land (b) That initiatives and policies introduced by the department would have the authority necessary for enforcement in the entire public sector.

2.       There are a series of related events that enabled rapid results approach to be readily accepted within the public sector.

a.       The country had just gone through a regime change and the new regime that came to power came with a promise of revitalizing the public sector to enable it provide efficient and effective services to the citizens. The new regime therefore developed a medium term strategy “Economic Recovery for Wealth and Employment Creation” which gave emphasis on the public sector in its dual role of providing services and facilitating growth of the private.   The government from 2003 was therefore pursuing a national development strategy that sought to instill rapid and sustained economic growth and reduce the high incidence of poverty through wealth and employment creation.   This strategy was to be implemented by: (a) creating a competitive market conditions for private sector led growth; (b) directing resources towards wealth and employment creation; (c) supporting both effective and efficient public sector performance and service delivery.

b.      With that background therefore the government introduced Results Based Management as a policy to be applied in the public sector away from the hitherto bureaucratic orientation as an effective tool for managing performance to achieve desired results.

c.       As the government was undergoing these changes, the World Bank had piloted a number of Rapid Results Initiatives in the Ministry of Water, Health Sector and in the security sector.  Although the pilots were highly successful their results were not widely shared and consequently when the World Bank contract with Robert Schaffer ended, the use of the approach/methodology also quietly fizzled out after those first waves. The fact that the first wave depended purely on private sector consultants also contributed to the non- continuity to some extent after the expiry of contract since the government could no longer afford to pay the consultants.

3.       To launch the initiative in any organization, however a number of issues need to be addressed.  Rapid Results Approach can either be introduced in an organization by selling it as a solution thereby convincing the organization that it works or the organization can request for it after hearing or seeing how it works somewhere else or as a policy decision that has been taken by the organization’s management. 

4.       Whichever way the organization has come to know about rapid results approach for successful implementation, there needs to be top level management buy-in. This is achieved through taking the top level management through the concept and outlining how RRA will not only assist them achieve the desired results but also facilitate implementation of desired change within the organization. It is important that such buy-in be obtained directly from those concerned rather than from their representatives.

5.       It is also critical that RRA must be packaged as a tool that will assist the organization achieve the desired results and therefore be seen as part and parcel of implementating the organization’s plans and priorities rather than as a “separate project”.  If that is not harmonised then staff within the organization may begin perceiving RRA initiatives as additional work which may lead to demands of enhanced pay, or additional incentives. That is why in Kenya Rapid Results Approach was reconceptualised as a tool for institutionalization of Results Based Management.  That does not mean that implementation may not be met by pockets of resistance or challenges. These will be experienced but such resistance manifest different in different circumstances and is best dealt with on a case by case basis tactfully. That is why it is critical to use the most experienced and mature coaches for this initial stage. However the good news is that such are normally overcome by a strong leadership/top management support and by the eventual demonstration of results.

6.       The Rapid Results Initiative – impact in Kenya has been very impressive, and I normally would like to look at its impact beyond the ‘hard results’ presented at the end of the 100-days.  The most important of these- is the creation of ‘team-work orientation to implementation of plans’ as opposed to the individual orientation commonly occurring in ‘bureaucratic oriented management’ and change of attitude impacted as a result of working towards results oriented goals rather than process oriented goals.  Organizations which have implemented Rapid Results have always talked about its unique abilities to push teams to achieve way beyond their average through innovative thinking.  Beyond that the hard results have been achieved in various sectors in Kenya. These include:

                                                               i.      More than doubling the ARV intake in HIV patients in Kenya

                                                             ii.      Helping the City Council of Nairobi more than double its revenue collection from car parks within 100-days

                                                            iii.      Reducing the time it takes in processing a passport from over 3 months to 21 days in 100-days. (This initiative has since been scaled up and in Nairobi processing of passports is now done on a 24hrs basis helping reduce the waiting time even further). In addition inquiries on passports and issuance of identity cards now can be done through use of mobile phones by dialling a four digit code and the status of readiness instantly relayed to applicants.

                                                           iv.      The University of Nairobi, reduced the time it takes to process a transcript from about 3 weeks to one day in 100-days. Further through this change the University has also computerized its inquiry system and applicants do not need to visit the University physically to know about the status of their application. The initiative inspired the computerization of other functions which were manual before such as student financial services allowing students to obtain their statements and other services online.

                                                             v.      Through the RRA initiative the University of Nairobi managed to put back their ISO Certification process which had run several years behind schedule on track and were finally awarded the ISO Certificate. These are just but a few of the hard results attained to date. The 'soft results' are equally impressive.

                                                           vi.      The rapid results has been implemented in several sectors with very impressive results and in total since re-launching  RRA as an RBM tool in 2006 over 40 government ministries, 175 local authorities, 3 out 7 state universities and over 50 state corporations have launched and successfully implemented more than one wave of rapid result approach. With every institution having between five (5) to ten (10) teams it means that the country has seen over two thousand seven hundred and eighty (2,780) RRI teams and over 27,000 participating team members, who can provide a firm foundation and a formidable army for change within the public sector.  

7.       Lastly whereas institutionalization across the entire public sector remains a challenge, the good news is that there are a number of organizations within the public sector which have now made RRA their way of doing things.  Such institutions no longer depend on the Reform Unit currently situated in the Office of the Prime Minister to provide RRA Coaches but call on the unit simply for mutual support and collaboration. Leading in this area is the City Council of Nairobi, whom since launching their first wave of RRI in 2006 have now implemented over seven waves of RRIs and have made the end term celebration of every wave the launch of their subsequent wave.  This is a clear demonstration that it can be done and institutionalization is a possibility.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on March 21, 2011 at 12:22am

Rapid Results Approach Implementation Challenges

The first part of the discussion on Rapid Results Approach was geared towards soliciting and sharing information on the various RRA portfolios.  Response from Liberia and the readings show that rapid results approach is not exempt from implementation challenges which might either derail or hinder the achievement of expected results.  The challenges noted can be broadly categorised as environmental or local conditions, capacity – resources both financial and human:

1.       Environmental Challenges: These may cover abroad range of challenges posed by implementation environments or local conditions.  As seen in the case of Liberia- RRA was being implemented in a post-conflict environment.  Post- conflict environment presents unique challenges such as weak institutional frameworks, structures, human capacity, and even financial resources for rebuilding. 

 

On a positive note it also presents high expectations and therefore pressure to rebuild. This may therefore provide an avenue for implementation of rapid of rapid results approach which ‘tackles large-scale change efforts through a series of small-scale results producing and momentum building initiatives implemented in 100-day blocks’.

 

2.        It also emerged that just like other change effort embedding RRA within a system takes time and there is need for continuous and sustained effort to institutionalize the methodology.  This can be achieved through training of local staff who will take over from external experts.  Towards that therefore, whenever RRA is introduced in organization by consultants it is advised that a consultant’s exit plan and training of coaches to take-over should be included as part of the implementation plans.

Other challenges experienced include lack of support for the initiatives at both organizational and country level as a result of RRA initiatives being seen just as other reforms either being implemented or those initiated and abandoned.  That is, the danger of RRA being perceived a fad that will soon fade away or as an additional burden. In many countries where RRA has been introduced, it is in most cases not the only reform initiative. There are likely to more many more competing reform initiatives. It is critical that RRA is not only presented as a unique and different approach it must also be seen as a complementary tool.   RRA is a tool for implementing existing plans and priorities and not a project or programme on its own.  Introducing RRA to an organization therefore calls for a deep understanding of the organization’s long and short term goals, culture and capacity.

Initial RRA in any organization should take into consideration- the size of the organization- size of staff and how many teams can be successfully managed.  Available resources that can be re-organised to take care of the incidental expenses emerging from implementation of RRA and lastly but not least the level of organization’s maturity in the application of results based methods.

Leadership at both organizational and at the formation of temporary governance structure levels are critical to successful attainment of results.  The coach needs to carefully understand the dynamics within the organization. He/she need to facilitate and not dictate the process of identifying governance structure leadership and ensure the right people are assigned to appropriate positions.  It is recommended that a coach understands the type of top leadership in an organization and how they can drive the initiatives. Supporting the governance structure through specific coaching interventions from time to time is hence crucial to attainment of success.

Launching RRI can be quite a daunting task depending on a wide range of issues ranging from the type of preparations put in place for the venue, work done in preparing the temporary governance structure for the launch, whether a coach has enough support on the day of the launch to the number of teams involved.  It is advisable that a coach spends time with the organization to ensure readiness, including invitation to team members being sent in good time. Whereas, some RRAs have evolved to a point of not conducting a formal launch, a formal launch especially for the first wave is critical for publicity, stakeholder support and involvement in setting out goals and team building.

After the launch it is critical for the coach to monitor progress at agreed intervals per the work plan. And monitor any potential challenges that might arise. Each team need to be able to document its progress and results thereof in an agreed and uniform format. To that extent, the mid-term and end-term review dates need to be closely observed and teams come together to share the results, lessons learned, challenges and how such challengers may have been overcome.  Such provide unique opportunities that are rarely found in organizations especially those in the public sector.

In general therefore, the challenges that are encountered in implementation of RRA at macro-level can be classified as to fall under – Environmental (Local conditions) or Technical. Both need to be addressed to achieve the desired results. Coaches, who generally operate at the Technical Level, need to ensure that the RRA implementation is aligned to the environment but in the process of such alignment still ensure that the Core Principles that make RRA unique in helping organizations achieve results is maintained. 

Thus even though RRA is flexible, elastic and very adaptable there is a danger of stretching this to an extent of changing the original concept or principle.  When such occurs then, ‘probably’ the new variant should cease to be referred to as ‘RRA’ and should be named appropriately and shared across.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on April 21, 2011 at 3:25am

Communicating Results

In 2009, the OECD-DAC Development Co-operation Directorate and DevCom Network commissioned a ‘study on communicating development results’.  The study spelled out among other things why results are at the heart of the effort to improve development effectiveness in changing aid systems and why communication constitutes a key link in the accountability chain.  The commissioning of this study is yet another indicator of the importance of communication in managing for development results.  Communication is also central to successful implementation and sustainability of rapid results approach.

In this two part series, I would like to highlight first the importance of communicating for results, before looking at the second more common aspect -communication of results.  Successful implementation of rapid results approach calls for open and free interaction and not ‘communicating only what is necessary’.  It is important for rapid results approach coaches to be seen as people who share information and develop a team spirit in which:

• Team members interact openly and directly: Direct and open communication with team members fosters trust, enhances flow of information and builds stronger relationships. This may be achieved through letting team members know in a timely manner about information that affects them, responding promptly to issues and giving positive and constructive feedback
• Providing access to information: Team members need to know what progress they are making in implementation and how the team is performing in general. Coaches therefore need to encourage team members to identify areas of challenge and encourage them to complete their action steps and milestones.  Effective access to information to both team members and the temporary governance structure, allows coaches to create an environment for effective interaction and high performance.
• Sharing essential information with others: The flow of information between the coach, team members and the entire organization is critical to maintaining rapid results initiative momentum.  The coach should not only provide access but also facilitate the flow of communication to all stakeholders concerning rapid results approach status and progress as well as challenges and possible solutions.
• Encouraging teams to share information: During implementation of rapid results initiatives information is likely to come from different sources. Apart from information arising from implementation of the work plan, there is need for the coach to foster an environment where team members can share ideas, constructively critique each other’s contribution and also nurture and mentor team members.  The coach should not be therefore the sole source of information and wisdom.

It should be noted therefore that robust communication flow during implementation is critical to achievement of rapid results goals and objectives.  Coaches should spend time and energy developing and maintaining clear, consistent and effective communication channels not only with team members and the governance structure, but with the entire core group of stakeholders. If the is done effectively it will generate motivation, commitment and support for the implementation of rapid results approach.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sylvestor Obong’o on June 7, 2011 at 2:44am

Communicating Development Results

This is the second segment on the two part series where the first segment focused on communicating for results and this second segment looks at communicating of results.  The need for effective and efficient communication during a program/project life cycle in a multiple stakeholder environment cannot be over emphasised.  In a context of a collaborative undertaking such as rapid results approach, with multiple stakeholders from different backgrounds and skills effective communication is even more significant for delivering the best results.  However an equally critical aspect is that once results are realised they should be communicated in a manner that is understood and appreciated especially by the primary target audience.

As with other aspects of communication, reporting of or reporting about development results, does not just happen and one cannot assume that the results are ‘out for all to see’.  Communicating results requires effective strategy and a coherent plan of action which must take into account goals and objectives, the audience and the media among other critical aspects.  The coach must take into consideration how rapid results approach fits into the organizational objectives and the information requirements of key stakeholders.  The results being communicated must therefore demonstrate their contribution towards achievement of the overall organizational objectives and at the same time highlight contribution of rapid results approach.

Communicating rapid results approach – development results should therefore reflect goals set, the commitments made by the organization at launch, progress, results achieved and their impact.  As a result communicating development results should be a core activity of every Rapid Results Approach coach and organizations implementing RRA.  Such correspondence not only opens avenue for feedback, but also helps confirm the actual results achieved and thereby bridge the gap between perception and reality on the ground.

Development results achieved from a 100-day rapid results approach cycle are ‘outputs, outcomes or impacts realised from a specific initiative. They include both hard results achieved directly and measured on the extent or level of attainment of the originally set goal and should also include changes in organizational behaviour or the environment.  Communicating RRA results should emphasize more on the ‘outcomes’ (achieved and immediate short-term effects of the initiatives) and ‘impacts’ (long-term effects produced by the initiative).

For rapid results approach the 100-day goals set at the launch is the framework for measuring and communicating achievements.  Each 100-day goal includes a concrete target and key milestones.  The ability of rapid results approach to unlock implementation barriers is what sets it apart from other methodologies and therefore draws the interest of organizations and stakeholders who are concerned about results.  Communication of results which can similarly be referred to as communication of development results should therefore target the key stakeholders mainly outside the organization and should include good and bad results, failures as well as successes.  Being honest and transparent about Rapid Results Approach outcomes just as was found about Aid communications in Norway, is most likely to stimulate debate, foster engagement, share knowledge and increase visibility for stakeholder participation in rapid results approach implementation.

• ▶ Reply