Uniting Through Networks

In this 15-page article on capacity building of networks, the authors make the case for the process of networking and its importance as social capital citing the benefits of "access to information and know-how, understanding of needs and political agenda, strengthening of capabilities, pooling of resources, enlarging personal networks, partnerships, testing ground for new ideas, work division, benchmarking, etc." They name the following types of networking activities as those engaged in by civil society networks":

• The provision of services to members (e.g. information and training);
• Learning together to raise members’ level of understanding (e.g. by organising exchange visits, workshops and/or meetings);
• Advocacy to influence the public debate or policies; and
• Management of the unit to facilitate the network process."

They then share observations on and capacity building ideas from 9 networks. In response to a request from partners for more information on the status and impact of initiatives, the International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) established 9 national networks with the objectives of sharing country-specific information, knowledge, methodologies and lessons learned on ICT-enabled development; and raising awareness on ICT4D-related issues and influencing policy and development processes, by communicating relevant content to local public, private and civil society policy makers and their advisors.

The systems were formulated with building blocks so that each country would select, adapt, and combine them according to their needs. "All nine networks have established a secretarial office, and have hired staff including a (full- or part-time) remunerated coordinator in charge of the network’s day-to-day activities..", and some have added staff. Membership in the networks is both individual and organisational; some are divided by regional participation; some are financed only by IICD, while others have co-financing arrangements. The authors report that public-private partnerships have generally been difficult to forge. However, "[a]n interesting initiative in Jamaica, the Jamaica Collaborative for Universal TechnoloEducation (J-CUTE), has recently been able to draw in public, private, and not-for-profit partners within a longer-term collaborative framework.

Two network progress reviews have been conducted. Results from Bolivia highlighted a need to systematise information and communication technology for development (ICT4D) experiences, to prioritise the website and e-bulletin as products, to influence ICT public policies, to organise face-to-face meetings, and to strengthen political legitimacy. Results from Ghana's collected anecdotal evidence on network participation showed a viral spread of new ideas, tools, and working methods as well as exposure to new knowledge areas, building of new relationships, and acquisition of new materials to support daily work. IICD found that as a network and because of the newness of ICT in the country, policy support was not a priority.

The document reaches these 9 conclusions:

1. "Pay attention to involve organisations in the core of the network whose objectives align with the network objectives [In the case of IICD networks, having a clear purpose, i.e. knowledge sharing and policy participation around ICT4D issues, has proven to be a key focus.];
2. Building a strong knowledge sharing network and trust relationships comes before active policy participation as a network;
3. Thinking about sustainability issues is not limited to resource mobilisation, but includes institutional [factors, including outreach and membership issues, as well as evolving a ‘network model’ that best supports the overall network objectives and member dynamics] and political sustainability factors [building strategic alliances and leveraging those relationships for change, as well as managing the legitimacy of the network to ensure on increasing reputation in the ICT field];
4. Network sustainability is increased when respected individuals and practitioners are involved;
5. Build a strong core group, then help the core group to recruit new ideas and fresh leadership [where leadership seems to be stalled with core members, a monitoring and evaluation questionnaire may give feedback that reflects member needs and give broader representation in leadership];
6. From an early stage onwards, be clear on your support as a network capacity builder, and focus the network’s attention on sustainability issues. Help the network to think through some critical choices in terms of its identity [building in membership fees from the beginning may increase ownership an decrease external donor dependency];
7. Combining multiple roles as advisor, funder and broker is complex (but not impossible);
8. Fostering the required levels of trust for knowledge sharing takes time and is often underestimated
   [On the question of financial remuneration for knowledge sharing, the document recommends stimulating knowledge sharing ‘attitudes’ at organisational levels, and negotiating work time with organisations so that it is part of daily work, rather than an extra task performed outside of regular working hours.]
9. Capacity building does not mean building from scratch, but working with existing realities, which requires the right ‘listening’ attitude (contradictory to the expert advisor attitude that may be expected from network capacity builders)."