The CGIAR Change Management blog is about the change management initiative designed to introduce reforms to enhance the CGIAR’s effectiveness and efficiency. This blog is intended to open a dialogue engaging all stakeholders in this process.
Live Blogging at AGM08
Sue Parrott from Green Ink, a UK-based communications consultancy, is reporting meeting sessions and interviewing participants in Maputo. We also invite anyone who would like to contribute to this blog to email their post, video or photos to s.parrott[at]greenink.co.uk or Simone Staiger-Rivas, s.staiger[at]cgiar.org
AGM08 marked a historic moment for the CGIAR. The CGIAR Members adopted the proposal for a revitalized CGIAR, ushering in a new era for our work together. After a year of intensive effort to find the best way to transform the CGIAR into a new and more effective organization, we reached agreement on the way forward. More importantly, with the agreed changes we will be able to better help the billions of people who depend on agriculture for a better future.
The change initiative has been a major collective effort and I want to thank everyone who contributed to the change initiative, especially all the stakeholders who participated in consultations throughout 2008 and made their voices heard through the change management blog and virtual forum.
The atmosphere at AGM08 was one of commitment to do something new and innovative about the challenges facing agriculture today. We will need to build on this dedication as we begin the transition to the revitalized CGIAR, as we have a lot to accomplish. We will need to make changes to our structures and changes in how we work together, continuing to build a system mindset. A transition plan will see the establishment of the Consortium of Centers and the new CGIAR Fund by the end of 2009. Together, we will deliver a more integrative, comprehensive approach to agriculture research for development.
The CGIAR’s Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative was set up five years ago to address the major challenge that successful poverty-reducing research options are often not widely applied or adopted. ILAC is already addressing many of the issues raised by the Change Management Initiative, as it is improving people’s capacity to work with a wide range of stakeholders, learn from the results of their work, and share their knowledge.
ILAC is supported by the Government of the Netherlands and the Research Into Use program of the UK’s Department for International Development. See website for more.
Project Coordinator, Jamie Watts, outlines the ILAC perspective on the change process:
Debbie Player, representing the New Zealand Agency for International Development (NZAID), believes that sorting out funding issues is pivotal to achieving greater impact. She points out that, while the specific objectives and mission of the revitalized CGIAR are clear and have been accepted by all, donors may be getting mixed messages about the future role of the Centers and that of the Consortium. On the one hand, the Centers want autonomy in funding allocation, but on the other, the future credibility of the CG system depends on ensuring the consortium promotes a joined up approach.
Another major issue, she says, is introducing a more learning-oriented culture within the organization and addressing communication issues. This includes articulating a clear message to all stakeholders – Center staff, partners and the recipients of research outputs.
Below: Debbie and colleagues engage in a roundtable discussion
New ways of working in a revitalized CGIAR call for new skills, particularly in communication and networking, says Bala Ramani, Coordinator of the Young Professional’s Platform for Agricultural Research for Development or YPARD.
YPARD is a vehicle through which young scientists in the CG system – and other stakeholders aged under 40 years, including farmers’ organizations, entrepreneurs, policymakers and donors – can voice their opinions. It operates under the umbrella of the Global Forum or GFAR.
Bala wants to see greater opportunities for professional development and more programs to support young researchers in the CG system. The capacity building pillar of the new vision for the CGIAR has potential to make provision for this. In addition, he says, the new format of the global biennial conference should allow for as many young scientists and other development professionals as possible to attend and benefit from the networking opportunities. “The future should be discussed with the future generation present.”
In the spirit of renewal, rumour has it that only participants willing to share their expertise on the dance floor will be invited to future global meetings of the CGIAR…
The Alliance and Partner Roundtable sessions on Tuesday December 2 make use of the world café concept. A world café is an innovative and simple way to host conversations about important questions. It allows people to move between groups, and for their conversations to link and build on each other, promoting cross-pollination of ideas. As a process, a world café can draw out collective insights on important questions and increase people’s capacity for effective action in pursuit of common aims.
According to theworldcafe.com, there are several common principles for hosting an effective world café:
The proposed changes in funding could create greater job security and offer better long-term career opportunities for the CGIAR’s younger scientists, says Nadia Manning-Thomas, IWMI Research scientist and Project Leader of the CG Knowledge Sharing in Research Project.
In addition, the new program-based working structures should help to break down barriers and promote greater networking. At present, collaboration can be blocked by the need to account for the time and pay for the overheads spent on inter-center initiatives, she says.
By simplifying the current complex overlay of reporting and funding relationships, the CG hopes to reverse the current trend towards restricted funding and promote longer-term funding security. This should allow the Centers and the new mega-programs to be more involved in making decisions on funding allocation.
However, Nadia believes that many of the CG’s young scientists have little knowledge or understanding of what the changes will mean to them. Although the DGs have given presentations, there is a need for consultation in smaller groups in which the younger scientists and local staff can feel more comfortable in asking questions and giving feedback.
The CGIAR is entering an exciting period of renewal, prompted by extraordinary events that have disturbing implications for the world’s poor, said Kathy Sierra, CGIAR Chair, in her opening remarks. And it is very appropriate that this revitalization, which will make us much more relevant and effective, is being launched from Mozambique, a country that is right now experiencing rapid economic development after many years of conflict.
Ren Wang, CGIAR Director, explained more about the change journey. A series of consultations and working group sessions have taken place throughout 2008, guided by the Change Steering Team. These have been synthesized into an integrated reform proposal, which sets out the building blocks that will be used to construct the new and more efficient CGIAR. In additional to providing for greater accountability, transparency, efficiency and delivery of results in high priority areas, the new CGIAR will adopt a more open and dynamic approach to partnership. This will include working closely with a renewed Global Forum (GFAR), to allow stakeholders to participate more fully in decision-making.
Victoria Henson-Apollonio, Manager of the Central Advisory Service on Intellectual Property, believes that the change process will provide an opportunity for much greater cohesion of many different facets of the CG system, among them the issue of IP.
In the past, she says, there has been too much fragmentation. For example, if a private sector organization asked the CG: ‘what are the rules on IP?’, they may have received up to 15 different answers from the different Centers. In the future, she hopes, partners will get a unified response from the Consortium.
However, there is a long way to go before this one voice can be formalized in a policy. First, the Centers – and their staff at all levels – need to go through a proactive, consultative process to make sure all understand each other. One of the first tasks is to document the IP resources we currently hold, which include scientific knowledge (which can be very country-or area-specific) as well as more tangible outputs such as new crop varieties.
