CRP MAIZE Workplan 2017
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•541 visualizações
CRP Maize Phase II Methodological approach for CD strategies
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (19)
Semelhante a CRP MAIZE Workplan 2017
Semelhante a CRP MAIZE Workplan 2017 (20)
Mais de CIMMYT
Mais de CIMMYT (20)
Último
Último (20)
CRP MAIZE Workplan 2017
- 1. CRP Maize Phase II Methodological approach for CD strategies 2017 Work-Plan Development Workshop Capacity Development Strategy and Innovation - Joachim Stahl, 17.01.2017
- 2. What we have in the full proposal CRP logic: flagships – impact pathways – CoA CD Paragraph for each flagship CRP overall capacity development strategy with indicators (along the CGIAR CD framework) CGIAR CD framework and indicators
- 3. What is missing? Wide range of ideas about capacity development (training, transfer of technology, innovative platforms etc.) No shared understanding No link between different CD levels: individual, organizational, societal CD CRP Maize not aligned with theory of change and impact pathways No strategic framework
- 4. What we want to achieve CD under MAIZE more effective, i.e. demand-driven and more impact and efficient in terms of approaches, methods and tools systematic CD interventions on CRP flagship and project level
- 5. How? Methodological approach – Key pillar 1. Framework: Impact pathway and theory of change Question: Which capacities have to be developed to make these changes happen? The strategic option is defined through impact pathways /theory of change on FP level The CD strategy defines the specific CD activities within this framework
- 6. Methodological approach – key pillar Question: Which capacities have to be developed on the individual, organizational + societal level? 2. Different levels of capacity development
- 7. 1. CGIAR capacity development (ind., org., soc.) FP 1 Methodological approach – key pillar 2. NARS capacity development (ind., org., soc.) 3. Non-Research system capacity development (ind., org., soc.) Question: Which capacities have to be developed on the ind., org., soc. level in system 1, 2, 3 3. CapDev for different systems
- 8. Capacity Development Levels and Systems The levels of CD Actors Activities NARS capacity development CGIAR capacity development Individuals Competence building Organizations Organizational development Society Development of cooperation Partnerships Society Development of enabling Frameworks Individuals and communities of learning Professional development: training, coaching, knowledge- sharing. Improving personal performance and competence Organizations and units of organizations Change management regarding: strengthening strategy, monitoring and learning, the management system (rules, structures, processes) Institutions (organizations), networks Relationships and cooperation systems: establishment, development/steering of cooperation and networks, to raise performance in the policy field Institutions (organizations) involved in negotiating rules of the frame- works concerned Policy advice: incentives for agreements, agenda analyses, round tables and other forms of participation in the negotiation of rules, interests, basic rights, policies and their implementation visiting scientists, (non-) degree students. Trainings, field days, conferences etc. Knowledge sharing, develop training materials, training on tools (i.e. NA) National agricultural education and training (AET) systems: curriculum development, improved learning resources Organizational incentives for capdev and training on CGIAR and center level. Standard procedures, quality standards, M&E, reporting Partnerships, platforms, networks, multi- stakeholder dialogue. CGIAR and CRP coope- ration and knowledge sharing in all contents of individual training, private sector partnerships, innovation platforms Quality control in seed production; national standards and regulations for the release of new varieties; policies related to seed production Development of standardization in CGIAR system with regards to capdev and training, i.e. frameworks, regulations, quality standards etc.
- 9. Overall objective: coherent and systematic capacity development interventions on CRP level. Capacity Development LEVELS and Capacity Development SYSTEMS Individual Organizational Societal: cooperation Societal: frameworks Non-research capdev X% NARS capdev X% CGIAR capdev X % X% CD LEVELCD SYSTEM Matrix
- 10. CRP Assumptions, Risks Interventions, outputs Clusters of activities (CoA) CapDev activities What has to be done on different CD SYSTEMS in order to achieve R&D outcomes? Non research system capdev NARS capdev CD activities on individual, organizational and societal level CGIAR capdev Needs assessment; Gap analysis; Knowledge sharing with other centers; recollection of good practices; development of materials R&S outcomes Impact pathway Theory of change Flagships Capacities on • Individual LEVEL • Organizational LEVEL • Societal LEVEL 1 2 3
- 11. Additionally - Work on standard processes, procedures and criteria for CD interventions - Offer training, learning materials, facilitate networks for CRP staff and NARS - Recollect what works and what doesn’t Summary Overall objective: coherent and systematic capacity development interventions of CRP. 4. Work with CRP projects (current and new) on CD strategies, monitoring and evaluation of quality and impact What? Work on CD strategie(s) aligned with impact pathways/ ToC How? 1. Define and establish working groups (per FP) and work on flagship and CoA level (approach) 2. CD activities/indicators (reframe what already has been developed) 3. Align with CapDev framework and indicators
- 12. www.MAIZE.org Thank you for your interest! CRP Maize Phase II Methodological approach for CD strategies: http://inside.cimmyt.org/CapacityDevelopmentInnovation/CapDev/SitePages/Presentations.aspx
Notas do Editor
- (Although my work assignment is “capacity development Strategy and Innovation”) I will not come up with a capdev Strategy for CRP maize. But I will come up with a proposal how to work on and develop a Capacity Development Strategy for CRP Maize. I will propose a methodological approach and highlight the key pillars of this approach.
- CGIAR framework – level of guidance is zero, no strategic concept – so we have to come up with it! We have levels of capdev as organizational development and institutional strengthening We have activities of capdev as develop future research leaders or develop CRPs & centers partnering capacities We have tools and approaches as learning materials and approaches, gender sensitive approaches, needs assessment (Maize - CRP overall capacity development strategy with indicators (along the CGIAR CD framework) – full proposal, annexes
- Current/Initial situation IITA/CIMMYT scientists and their partners have a wide range of ideas about capacity development, such as training, transfer of technology and knowledge, as a medium for scaling out research results and validated models, as a cross cutting issue like gender, as innovative platforms for knowledge sharing and stakeholder interaction etc. but without a clear idea how these elements are interlinked. Often a wide range of CD activities is listed on CRP flagship level and projects but they are not presented within a strategic framework. A shared understanding of all the different aspects of CD is needed, as well as a clear, systematic link between the individual, organizational and societal level, which will support having greater specific impacts over time. In MAIZE and WHEAT capacity development strategies were developed but they need to be refined; they are not yet well aligned with the CRPs theory of change and the impact pathways. In terms of implementation, both CRPs need to design and use a systematic approach to design CD interventions in areas of concern.
- A strategic CD framework and a shared understanding of the different aspects of CD as well as a clear, systematic link between the individual, organizational and societal level supports having greater specific impact over time. Objectives: What we want to achieve? coherence and common understanding of capacity development between IITA/CIMMYT scientists and their partners capacity development under MAIZE and WHEAT is more effective (i.e. more demand-driven, increase chances of impact) and efficient (in terms of approaches, methods and tools). CIMMYT has a capacity development strategy systematic capacity development interventions on CRP flagships and together with relevant actors (e.g. NARS) on national and project level addressing the capacity development needs within the identified critical areas.
- CRP wide capacity development approach; Definition: Capacity development supports a process, which strengthen the ability of people, organizations and societies to manage their own sustainable development processes and adapt to changing circumstances. Principles: Ownership, Learning, Sustainability, Cooperation To identify capacity development with training contains „simply an implicit assumption that strengthening the competencies of individuals will enhance the capabilities and capacity of organizations, which in turn will contribute to the emergence of capacity of the system.” (tap, conceptual background, p. XVii) CIMMYT is doing a lot more in capacity development than training, but often it is not understood as capdev. 1. Put things together and give them a conceptual frame (e.g. innovative platforms, stakeholder dialogue, partnerships) instead of a long list of spread wide CD activities in CRP and projects 2. Makes gaps visible (systematic link between the different levels of CD) 3. Reframe what is done already in some extent and sometimes perhaps more intuitively
- While designing CD strategies take into account the different systems of CD: research capdev on CGIAR, research capdev on NARS, non-research capdev and analyze the needs for capdev. 1. CGIAR capacity development CapDev of CRPs not only for boundary partners, but as well for CGIAR itself. Focus: capacities of CRP staff, organizational capacities of CGIAR centers, capacities of centers to cooperate with each other and partners Research system (NARS) capacity development research system (NARS) capacity is a key concern for the CRPs. Focus: capacities of NARS staff, NARS organizations, NARS organizations to cooperate with each other and partners, NARS policy framework 3. Non-research system capacity development in impact pathways non-research capacity addressed: extension, policy, private sector… Focus : capacities of cooperation partner’s staff, organizational capacities of partner organizations, capacities to cooperate with each other Question: are the capacities of these actors adequate to play their role within the cooperation system in order to provide technologies (hardware: seeds varieties, ploughs, water management technology etc.), skills and extension (software) adapted to farmers needs and demands?
- National agricultural education and training (AET) systems: universities, technical colleges and other organizations involved in higher education in developing countries; working on curriculum development, improved learning resources (information, tools, methods), improved government. Individual + institutional: human capacity development (skills, knowledge) through training and physical capacity building through infrastructure (asset, facility, tools, equipment, lab)
- How strategic CRP approach comes together with short term duration/orientation of projects? Project based funding of an organization has always the downside of a fragmentation of efforts and short-term duration of interventions. Projects generally end before their outputs reach ultimate beneficiaries and do not include evaluation of impacts especially on capacity development, which usually needs more time and may happen after the project completion. (Wheat Annexes, p. 12) The CRP structure in contrast includes the posibility to think more strategically and impact oriented: CRP structure demands a strategic CD approach. So we have the top down CRP approach and the bottom up approach from project portfolio level. But to make that work it needs that a regular exchange between both approaches should take place. Experiences from the project portfolio level lead to the review of the impact pathways and the contribution of the projects to the impact pathways leads to a more strategic orientation of the projects. But that needs first an established structure of exchange between both levels, and secondly to a clear mapping or allocation of the projects to the impact pathways of the CRP flagships.