Planned Communication at Programme Level - Field Study in Topola, Serbia

Sida, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, deems communication "a tool to create participation, to achieve objectives and to contribute to dialogue and good quality". But how does this policy play out in practice? To approach this question, Ulla Engberg carried out a 7-week field study within the framework of a Masters programme in Communication for Development at Malmö University in Sweden. The resulting 20-page report explores the Sida-financed Topola Rural Development Programme (TRDP), which was carried out in Topola, Serbia, in an effort to "improve the quality of life for the communities living in the municipality."

Engberg's interviews and observations revealed that TRDP did not have a communication strategy from the very beginning and that, in the eyes of the local community, the communication with and about the programme started even before the TRDP had set up office in Topola. Rumours that "the Swedes were coming with a lot of money" started when a consultant arrived in the spring of 2001 to research the basis for a rural development programme. What was said in a January 2002 press conference and live radio show seemed, in the recollection of those interviewed as part of this research, to merely exacerbate confusion about what the programme was about. "More or less from Day One, the TRDP offices were under siege from people who had come to ask for 'their' share of the money. Up to 50 people a day were queuing up outside the office.... Since the TRDP was designed to 'respond to the initiatives' of the locals, closing the doors to these visitors was never seen as an option."

Three months into the programme there were still lines of people outside the TRDP offices. As a matter of urgency, an "Information and Programme Awareness Project" was designed to try to counter some of the misunderstandings and to get on top of the communication with the community. This involved: hiring a local public relations (PR) assistant, setting up an Information Centre, drawing on regional radio stations and national media to explain the concept and the goal of the programme, delivering a TRDP leaflet to all households, placing 32 noticeboards at strategic points in the villages and around Topola, and distributing a 20-page monthly magazine. However, "it became increasingly clear that the Information Centre did not work as the Programme had hoped. The Municipality blamed the lack of skilled staff, while the TRDP saw the lack of interest from the Municipality in communicating with its citizens as the main problem."

In short, a lack of understanding of the role of communication led to a misdirected information campaign. Engberg acknowledges that there is a real challenge in explaining a concept of development, including capacity building and strengthening of democratic structures and processes, to a community that is expecting donations and credits. But "there was a lack of analysis of both the Programme's communication needs and the conditions in which this communication took place. By mistaking the need for communication with the need for PR and information, the effort to address the communication problems...was almost exclusively focused on information going one-way, from the sender to the receiver. Also, the receiver was not very well defined. It was Topola citizens in general: thus, the same message was sent to all."

The lack of analysis of the role of communication also led to other problems, which wasted programme time and resources. For example, the magazine was an ambitious product, with 20 pages full of information about not only the TRDP, but also activities in the non-governmental organisation (NGO) sector, the Municipality, and Topola in general. "But if the Programme really wanted to start or support a magazine that would fill the media void in Topola, it would have needed a much more long-term strategy and a more thought-through set-up of the editorial staff. If, however, the Programme wanted a format for getting out information that people could take home to read in peace and quiet, a more focused newsletter would probably have been a better investment of resources."

The second part of the report analyses the de facto communication between the programme and the local community. Based on the conviction that, "[w]hen creating a communication strategy, it is important to think through what you want to achieve with your communication", it looks at the programme's efforts to: improve local understanding of the development approach, increase local participation and local initiatives, foster openness (both in terms of accessibility and transparency), offer a sounding board, and ensure programme sustainability. Engberg also offers a list exploring the efficiency of the channels used to strive toward these goals. For instance, the most common way for people to hear what was going on in the programme was through neighbours or friends encountered during daily business, at the market, in the street, over a cup of coffee at home, in a café, etc. The centrality of local staff, and the strength of their communication capacity, was also found to be crucial: "Field workers were often told 'you are from here, you would not lie to us' implying that they would still be around for people to hold them personally accountable to promises made." The relative power of these types of one-on-one communication is compared to more one-way modes explored by the TRPD (presentations, workshops, media coverage, leaflets, information sent with bank statements, a website). In general, the researcher found that "the people-based channels in the first half of this list tend to allow for higher quality communication, than the mass communication channels towards the end of the list. It is the exchange of messages, of questions and answers and follow-up questions, that foster trust and encourages action. Among the channels based on one-way information, it is the targeted messages to local businesses (with their bank statements) that seem to have had most success."

The research also explored Sida's role in this communication process and its shortcomings. To start, "[t]he problems caused by the lack of a coordinated communication strategy on part of the Programme and of Sida, were unfortunately exacerbated by uncertainty in TRDP as to how to interpret Sida policy into the local context. Which projects would be ok to support and which not?" Reflection on this and other challenges leads the author to stress that "signals are sent out, and communication happens, even when it is not part of a deliberate communication exercise...It seems that the ability to always pick up the phone or to send a quick e-mail was not sufficient to maintain good communication in between the visits to Topola by the Sida programme coordinator. Therefore it is essential, at the beginning of a programme cycle, to build a strong joint understanding of the communication challenges ahead and how to solve them. One suggestion during this research was to have joint workshops around this at the start and the end (when the realities on the ground are clearer) of the inception period, where solutions to concrete examples are worked out."

The report ends with general conclusions and recommendations:

• "Early planning. Communication must be thought through already at the planning stage of a programme. It should take into account the local context in terms of expectations and experiences as well as a broad range of communication channels. With communication being a tool, the focus should be how to use it effectively.
• Two-way process. Communication should not be equated with information. It is a broader concept which...involves an exchange of messages (a dialogue)...
• Tool vs objective...[C]ommunication as a means should not be mixed up with communication as an end in itself.
• Integrated part. The communication strategy should be an integrated part of the programme, and not a reserve for 'experts', since all those working for a programme play an important role in the communication with the community.
• People-based. ..[A]ll members of staff need to fully grasp the programme and be aware of its communication aspects. They should go through an exercise-based training in how to explain the programme's aims and objectives to people with different background and level of education.
• Know your target group. The communication strategy should take into account that different groups have different communication needs, and that the communication should be adjusted to the target group...
• Start off together. The communication strategy should be complemented with joint Sida/Programme workshops at the beginning and the end of the inception period, where the communication challenges are assessed and where Sida's policy is translated into the local reality."