'Sticky' change: What international development can learn from adaptive management

2nd December 2016

One of the most significant failings of international political assistance has been the tendency to focus too much on institutional structure and process, and not enough on culture and behaviour.

Many authors have described international assistance programmes that were so concerned with creating new institutional architecture they forgot to take the people inside the buildings with them. People repeated previous patterns of work and brought the same attitudes to their role, just in a slightly different – and possibly more ‘efficient’ – environment. Patterns of politics and power remained pretty much as they were.

In international assistance, ‘changing behaviour’ is rarely, if ever, articulated as a specific objective.

Donor agencies’ recently-discovered appetite for adaptive programming has created new levels of consensus around the need for more flexible projects that understand, and engage with, the incentives and interests that affect political and development outcomes. But there has been less progress, and perhaps less inquisitiveness, about how to use these insights to actively change behaviour. Even harder, how do we actually manage and maintain the process of institutional reform?

Part of the answer may come from the business world, where ‘adaptive management’ has been evolving as a discipline since the mid-1990s.

Adaptive management includes the type of adaptive programming that the international assistance world is increasingly familiar with – the need to think politically, value small-scale innovation and accept that managing change is a flexible, iterative and reflexive process. But it also emphasises a second dimension – behavioural adaptation to make change ‘stick’. Back in 1994, Ronald Heifetz’s Leadership Without Easy Answers argued that adaptive solutions must “engage people in facing the challenge, adjusting their values, changing perspectives, and developing new habits of behaviour”.

Yet in international assistance, ‘changing behaviour’ is rarely, if ever, articulated as a specific objective. For this reason, at Global Partners Governance (GPG) we recently published the KAPE® methodology that we use to design, deliver and measure projects that seek institutional and behavioural change.

KAPE stands for knowledge-application-practice-effect. It sets out the stages of the project, starting with the initial advice, support and guidance to our partners (knowledge). Then we work with them to use that knowledge to manage practical problems (application). However, the key to achieving and maintaining institutional change comes in the second half of the process; ensuring that those new patterns of behaviour are repeated over time (practice) and replicated across the institution to improve the performance of the institution as a whole (effect).

We have described our approach, only half-jokingly, as ‘management consultancy for politicians in difficult places’.

KAPE reflects the logic we have applied over the last decade in our work with parliaments, political parties and government ministries in some of the world’s most sensitive political environments. In Iraq, for instance, we worked closely with specific parliamentary committees to help them establish new ways of operating that led to improved oversight, policy and service delivery. The task then was to embed and spread those new practices across the parliament: we used our original progress with the committees to help the Speaker’s Office and senior staff in parliamentary directorates establish parliament-wide benchmarks for committee activity, while simultaneously helping the committees to meet those criteria.

We have described our approach in private, and only half-jokingly, as ‘management consultancy for politicians in difficult places’. It is an active form of change management based on solving practical and political problems. The approach can be characterised as a search for catalysts for wider reform by establishing ‘pockets of good practice’ and then encouraging a ‘ripple effect’ across the institution.

Perhaps more importantly, KAPE is also a way of measuring change. It captures progress towards the programme’s strategic goals  through evidence of changed behaviour and new ways of working, instead of getting caught up in the pre-ordained indicators in the logframe. Although we use a series of metrics to assess institutional effectiveness that provide a baseline, the route to improving on them depends on behavioural change, which can take many forms – but not structural change, which tends to be more prescriptive. 

That approach means that any time during the project we know exactly whether we are getting the behavioural change sought, and whether we need to adapt our support. In places like Iraq, where politics is particularly in flux, interests and incentives are constantly moving. If new ways of working are not proceeding as expected within a particular committee, it suggests a lack of traction, forces us to question previous assumptions and to try something new to achieve the same, or similar, goals. Political analysis and adaptation go hand-in-hand at every stage.

Putting adaptive programming into practice means developing frameworks that are less rigid than the logframe. The point of KAPE is to emphasise that it is perfectly possible to innovate, experiment, and respond, while still having a clear sense of strategy, purpose and progress.

But it also reflects a belief that institutional change must start with individuals rather than the institution. As John P Kotter, one of the leading authors on change management puts it,

“… change sticks only when it becomes ‘the way we do things around here’, when it seeps into the very bloodstream of the work unit or corporate body. Until new behaviours are rooted in social norms and shared values, they are always subject to degradation as soon as the pressures associated with a change effort are removed.”

It is exactly this sort of ‘sticky’ change – lasting beyond the lifetime and scope of the original project – that international assistance has always sought, but found elusive. Getting closer to that goal will mean greater attention to both dimensions of adaptive programming; flexible delivery and behaviour change.

 

Image: Chameleon (Tom Lee)

0 Comments

Leave a comment

The views expressed in Opinions posts are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of DLP, the Australian Government or DLP's partner organisations.

Documents

Author

Greg Power

Greg Power

Greg Power is the Founder and Director of Global Partners Governance, which delivers projects in many parts of the world that seek to strengthen representative politics. He is also the co-author with Tom Carothers of DFID’s forthcoming central guidance on working with parliaments and political parties. 

Find Greg on twitter: @gregpower_1 / @GPGovernance

Read more

Related items

Breaking new ground in parliamentary strengthening

The importance of tailoring parliamentary support programmes to their context. (Guest post for openDemocracy)

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal29th March 2016

Corruption? The developing world has bigger problems

More nuanced anti-corruption work should focus on results - and even put up with some corruption if things are working well. (Guest post for Prospect)

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal26th April 2016

Political analysis as the practical art of the possible

Bringing politics back into PEA - a new paper with Adrian Leftwich

Opinion by David Hudson24th July 2014

From objects of care to controllers of lives: governance, development and disability inclusion

The next step on from a rights-based approach to disability inclusion is to hand over control to those who know best - people with disabilities.

Opinion by Luke Arnold25th May 2016

Connections, contradictions and the political economy of attention

Thoughts on two sources of new and useful ideas about the deeper structures that might shape creativity.

Opinion by Chris Roche7th May 2015

Identifying rebels with a cause (and effect)

The Developmental Leadership Program will host its 2016 Annual Conference at La Trobe University in Melbourne on 8 February. Its theme is Power, politics and positive deviance.

Opinion by Chris Roche1st December 2015

Indonesia and the political settlements trap

When aspirations triggered by development and prosperity outstrip a political settlement's ability to deliver on those expectations, how easy is it to 're-settle' the settlement? 

Opinion by Graham Teskey17th July 2015

Security and justice – the mismatch between policy and practice

What hinders more politically nuanced security and justice programming?

Opinion by Shivit Bakrania21st July 2014

Medellin - more than a miracle

Bad news sells. And for news editors looking for horror stories to recycle, Colombia's second largest city used to be a reliable source.

Opinion by Cheryl Stonehouse4th March 2014

Taking the Results agenda to the next level?

In The Politics of Evidence and Results in International Development, Chris Roche and his fellow editors examine how practitioners have navigated, resisted and used the ‘results agenda’ for more transformational ends.

Opinion by Chris Roche15th July 2015

Parliamentary strengthening: the IDC report

Parliaments - and the political parties that populate them - are the institutions people trust least. Guest post for ODI's Shaping Policy for Development blog.

Opinion by Tam O'Neil9th February 2015

Oil reform in Nigeria: The ups and downs of channel-hopping programme delivery

How much do we really know about what 'thinking and working politically' can achieve – and where it might present dangers – in challenging political and sectoral contexts?

Opinion by Joanna Buckley27th July 2017

The inclusiveness test: making change work

Institutions that are inclusive of the broader population - and not just of elites - are an integral part of peaceful, prosperous and resilient states. Guest post for openDemocracy.

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal4th November 2015

Politics, risk and development: three takeaways

Reflections from last week's Australasian Aid Conference and DLP’s 2016 Annual Conference, both hosted at Australian universities. 

Opinion by Chris Roche19th February 2016

Using aid to strengthen Parliaments: fix the car, or worry about the driver?

Parliaments have always been treated as the poor cousins of democracy assistance efforts. (Guest post for From Poverty to Power)

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal24th November 2014

Inclusive political settlements: who and what gets included?

DLP hosted a day-long high level introductory workshop on political settlements in June. This post introduces a series that showcases the contributions of researchers, policymakers and practitioners.

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal13th July 2015

Politics shape services; and services shape politics

How governance and sector specialists can help each other understand the politics of service delivery

Opinion by Richard Batley19th June 2014

Bringing Political Economy Analysis in from the cold

Once seen as a 'transformative' tool to change donor thinking, does much PEA now do little to help staff think and work politically?

Opinion by Jonathan Fisher6th May 2014

Transparency and Accountability: learning through collaboration

How can the impact of transparency and accountability work be deepened? 

Opinion by Brendan Halloran10th June 2014

Development cooperation and fighting corruption: thinking differently

Corruption is an emotive word and covers a huge range of behaviours - yet anti-corruption efforts still follow a one-size-fits-all pattern.  

Opinion by Heather Marquette24th June 2015

Cancer and the links between medicine and development

DLP Senior Research Partner discusses what cancer has taught him about the links between medicine and development. Guest post for From Poverty to Power.

Opinion by Chris Roche15th April 2015

Different development: walk the talk

The argument for asset-based approaches to development programming and practice that value communities' capacity, skills and knowledge.

Opinion by Gillian Fletcher14th April 2015

Overcoming premature evaluation

Sometimes failure is the first stop on the road to success for development programming. (Guest post in From Poverty to Power)

Opinion by Chris Roche15th November 2016

How does politically informed programming shape development outcomes?

A new 'thinking and working politically' community of practice aims to develop practical guidance for development practitioners based on evidence of what works in politically smart programming.

Opinion by Mark Robinson29th January 2016

What do we do on Monday? Political settlements in theory and practice

Can donors, researchers, policymakers and practitioners all agree on what we mean when we talk about 'political settlements'?

Opinion by Edward Laws15th July 2015

Adding gender and power to the TWP agenda

Gender relations are full-blown power relationships. Yet in the development context, they are too often seen as value-neutral cultural arrangements. 

Opinion by Sally Moyle6th August 2015

Gender - the power relationship that Political Economy Analysis forgot?

While most development research is well on the way to embedding gender analysis, PEA - many donors' key analytical tool - largely ignores it.

 

Opinion by Evie Browne13th February 2014

International donors - aiding or abetting?

The importance of acknowledging the dilemmas donors may face when giving aid to developmental states.

Opinion by Niheer Dasandi10th September 2015

Don't give up on government

Can the World Bank's flagship World Development Report inspire a good governance revolution that delivers development gains?

Opinion by Dan Hymowitz3rd February 2017

From functional governance to sustainable peace: Making the space to reflect, learn and adapt

Learning how to balance the technically possible and politically feasible in volatile, conflict-affected contexts.

Opinion by Aditi Haté 22nd February 2017

Gender and power: six links and one big opportunity

Donors have recently made great efforts to understand power in partner countries. Yet they have largely ignored one of the most pervasive power relations – gender.

Opinion by Diana Koester21st May 2015

Does talking about corruption make it seem worse?

Examining the reluctance of those working in development to engage with the public on the complexity of corruption in poor countries. Guest post for The Guardian's Global Development Professionals Network.

Fragmentation of the Thinking and Working Politically agenda: Should we worry?

Many different paths, but all leading to similar destinations - and adding useful nuance to development thinking and practice.  

Opinion by Thomas Parks29th August 2016

Anti-corruption in Bolivia: fighting greed – or attitudes?

Social attitudes towards corruption may be shaped by beliefs and values, rather than facts.

Opinion by Nieves Zúñiga29th June 2015

Do anticorruption messages work? Findings so far and what they could mean for Papua New Guinea

How do anticorruption messages influence people’s views about corruption and about anticorruption efforts?

Opinion by Caryn Peiffer23rd March 2017

Innovation: transactional or transformative?

It's time to discuss how the word 'innovation' might mean different things to different audiences. 

Opinion by Chris Roche23rd March 2015

Uncounted: has the post-2015 data revolution failed already?

The Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi report tells us that how we measure affects what we do; and if our measurements are flawed, decisions may be distorted.

Opinion by Alex Cobham12th May 2015

Where do inclusive institutions come from? Lessons from Asia

Societies with more inclusive institutions are more peaceful and more resilient, and tend to be better governed - but how do they get there?

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal27th February 2017

Thinking about women and girls makes development work better for everyone

A look at what happens when gender analysis is placed more squarely at the heart of governance work. (Guest post in The Conversation)

Opinion by Orlanda Ward7th March 2017

Beyond the limits: can we Think and Work Politically to achieve the SDGs?

How international development agencies need to change to confound the sceptics. (Guest post for the OECD's Institutions and Stability blog)

Opinion by Heather Marquette4th February 2016

The curious case of Indian autocracy and what it tells us about 'thinking and working politically'

The history of India’s largely forgotten shift to autocracy and its return to democracy can tell us much about how change happens.

Opinion by Niheer Dasandi25th June 2015

Anthropology and elites: 'Studying up', politically

The parallels between - and ethical dilemmas of - anthropology's focus on context and international development's ‘thinking and working politically’ concept. 

Opinion by Paul Robert Gilbert10th March 2016

Do donors have realistic expectations of their staff when it comes to 'thinking and working politically'?

Is learning to ‘think politically’ like learning a new language? 

Opinion by Heather Marquette9th June 2014

The seeds and roots of change

Leadership that drives genuine, lasting reform is rarely - if ever - about one individual. (Guest post in Governance for Development)

 

Opinion by Heather Lyne de Ver1st December 2014

'Sticky’ change: What international development can learn from adaptive management

Promoting and sustaining individual behavioural change is as important as building flexibility into development programming.

Opinion by Greg Power2nd December 2016

What's in a name? Leadership as more than the 'big men' and 'big women' of history

A more nuanced understanding of good developmental leadership demands a shift away from the conventional focus on 'big' individuals.

Opinion by Heather Lyne de Ver11th February 2014

Reforming FIFA: what can we learn from experience with (other) corrupt autocrats?

FIFA may not be a developing nation, but international football has its own complex political economy. Guest post for From Poverty to Power.

Opinion by Paul Jackson and Heather Marquette11th June 2015

Corruption: unpacking the black box of political will

New thinking on the reasons why individuals engage in corruption - including the pragmatic calculation that, right or wrong, corruption may be the only solution to pressing difficulties. 

Opinion by Heather Marquette12th January 2015

Gender in impact evaluation: norms as well as numbers

Sex-disaggregated data tells us little about the gender-related impact of an intervention, argues DLP research fellow Gillian Fletcher, since gender is a process of judgement linked to norms about femininity or masculinity.

Opinion by Gillian Fletcher27th November 2015

Gender analysis, and thinking and working politically – bridging the gap

Guest post on Devpolicy  introducing panels at this week's Australasian Aid Conference

Opinion by Chris Roche14th February 2017

DLP political settlements workshop: reflections

A practitioner considers how the intangible nature of power can be discussed and included in a policy framework. 

Opinion by Astrid Jamar22nd July 2015

Fixing aid: we can't turn off the tap at the first sign of corruption

Much 'petty' corruption is about the poor using what little power they have to stave off destitution. (Guest post for The Conversation)

Opinion by Heather Marquette10th November 2014

What are governance advisers missing with 'Political Economy Analysis'?

DLP's contribution to a new-style field guide for development practitioners. Guest post in FP2P

Opinion by David Hudson8th October 2015

Political settlements: people and the landscapes of power

The inescapable conundrum that politics involves actual politicians is one reason why the subject of political settlements generates so much debate.

Opinion by Alan Whaites24th July 2015

The practicalities of change: Positive deviance and land reform in Vanuatu

Anna Naupa's 2016 Adrian Leftwich Memorial Lecture discussed where most transformation happens - in drafting the rules, or in putting them into action.

Opinion by Anna Naupa13th April 2016