Sometimes committed young professionals who want to gain experience in the public and policy realm may become an additional contribution to the network by volunteering for certain activities. According to Creech and Willard (2001) one of the key components of sustainable development is a conscious consideration of the needs of future gene- rations. Young people will ultimately bear the re- sponsibility for implementing the policies and pro- grams necessary for sustainable development. It is essential that we begin to incorporate their skills, knowledge and ideas into current strategies, as well as develop their capacity to become leaders in the years ahead.
We learned that networks benefit from the inclusion of young professionals
in three ways:
1. supporting, strengthening and ensuring the continuity of the research;
2. strengthening internal network processes and interactions; and
3. strengthening the use of communications technologies within the network.
The GCAP case study (see page 33) also provides some useful insights on the scope of funding needed to launch a global campaign and innovative ways to find additional re- sources from, for example, world-known celebrities.
7. How do we adapt and adjust?
Due to the dynamic and changing nature of both the network and the policy processes, there is a need to think about specific mechanisms that will allow members to ad- just activities and strategy as they learn throughout the in- fluence process.
To this purpose, the selected coordinating structure should be able to inform members constantly about new opportunities or threats, or unexpected events that might arise during the process that would require the revision of some aspects of the planned operations. This ensures that
the coordination structure is guaranteeing synergy among members, helping towards making the right decisions at the right time, and overseeing that the network is consistent throughout its diverse interventions at the different levels and with various stakeholders.
In fact, the two-way communications flow with differ- ent actors implies that messages and communications tools will evolve as feedback is obtained through these relation- ships. Thus, the coordinating group should make sure that it sets aside time and space on an ongoing basis to evaluate the implementation of the policy influence plan.
In addition, adaptation may be needed if a policy deci- sion is made earlier than expected. The network might de- cide to reallocate resources to monitor the implementation of this policy –even if the final decision did not incorpo- rate its proposals. Monitoring a policy becomes a source for generating evidence for further influence regarding evalua- tion and modifications to the original policy.
In order to streamline adaptation that might require too many small adjustments, it would be useful if members first agree on the room for manoeuvre allowed to each subgroup or working team to decide certain changes on their own. This would mean that certain type of changes would be the re- sponsibility of each group while other changes (e.g. budget
asPects to be
consIDereD DecIsIons
funding strategy • How much global, regional and national fundraising needs to be done • Roles of Secretariat or coordinating group and of members
• If a fundraising team should be created types of support • Project-tied vs core or discretionary funds
• Whether attract sponsors or support for specific activities or look for larger support for general network activities • In-kind contributions: which type of these would be most valuable (supplies, free advertising space, celebrity endorsement, travel, ICTs, etc.)
sources of funding • Whether support from governmental sources and/or private companies are to be accepted • How diversified should they be
• Whether to develop a policy about how to decide if a source of funding is acceptable to the network accountability • Who will be in charge of receiving the funds and presenting financial reports to supporters
• How to ensure that the rest of the members can easily access to information regarding how resources are spent • How to communicate to the general public about sources and amounts of funding, and how these are used
Related challenges: Coordinating and gluing members/ Achieving good internal governance/ Ensuring capacity to follow up/ Communicating effectively within strategic relationships
reallocation, change of some main message at a country or regional level, delay in the production of a policy document, etc.) should be decided in collective way (consultation with other affected subgroups, or with the coordinating structure).
Internal communications could help develop the capacity to follow up on advances to achieve the intended policy goal. ‘ The technology that facilitates this communications plays a pivotal role: email groups are great for communication but not always the best way to collaborate virtually and a portal or a dedicated collaborative technology can sometimes prove to be more effective for the later’ (UNDP 2006)
A formalised follow up mechanism could also help members keep updated about each other’s progress, and maximize the benefits of working at the global, sub-the- matic and regional levels. ‘For example, after each lobby activity, after a mobilization, in response to changes in the context, etc [adjustments may be necessary]. (…) It is im- portant to evaluate each activity within the plan in terms of achievement and outcomes, by always trying to identify the concrete causes or factors that contribute to the success or failure, and by proposing changes that enhance practice and strengthen the initiative for policy influence. The next table can become a useful tool for this task:
4
activity expected results obtained results reasons or factors that contributed needed adjustments
considerations
McKinley and Baltazar (2005)
8. When and how will we evaluate
our work?
Meagre concrete results are frequently pointed out as one of the networks’ main weaknesses. As mentioned in Chapter 2 (page 22) transnational activity can mean uneven and variegated impact. In consequence, several policymak- ers feel that the networks´ potential contribution to their work is diffuse and unclear.
This is not only a problem regarding external stakeholders, Members may have diverse and even confronting views about
the role and need for evaluation of impact. While some mem- bers privilege the process of working together (by promoting participation, consultation and inclusion of traditionally ex- cluded voices and groups), others emphasize outcomes (guar- anteeing direct, concrete and quick results) as the priority.
Leadership should take these potential conflicting views into account to decide which mechanisms will allow the network to discuss about what has been and has not been achieved, and why. In this sense, evaluation of the policy influence plan could focus at two levels: 1) its contribution to the network and each of its members; and 2) the achieve- ment of the intended policy goal/s. Additionally, the net- work could also include in its evaluation the achievement of secondary objectives (see page 71) such establishing new alliances, gaining experience in interacting with the State, engaging new social groups in the debate, etc.
Related challenges: Measuring impact/ Empowering a healthy leadership
Finally, networks may also face difficulties regarding evaluation due to the lack of resources that a complete evaluation process may require. In this sense, evaluation reports required by the donors can become valuable inputs of systematized information. These reports can be on large grants provided by one or more donors, and/or on specific projects carried out individually by members but related to the network’s influence plan.