retolaza_2014_process_oriented_facilitation_toc

This paper explores the relationship between complexity thinking, group process facilitation, and the use of Theory of Change (ToC) from an action-learning perspective. For the purpose of this paper, Theory of Change is understood as a transformative action thinking non-linear approach applied to complex social change processes.
It relates key concepts of complexity theory with group process facilitation, analyses the relationship between change and conflict transformation, proposes innovative ways of learning embedded in multi-stakeholder contexts, looks at how we understand and relate to the future, and then suggests certain premises and metaskills we should always consider when facilitating theory of change and complex group processes.

This paper explores the relationship between complexity thinking, group process facilitation, and the use of Theory of Change. It suggests certain premises and metaskills we should always consider when facilitating ToC and complex group processes.

Process Oriented Theory of Change Facilitation: Surfing the Wave of Complexity

This World Bank blog builds on Craig Valter&#8217;s paper on &#8220;Theories of Change: time for a radical approach to learning in development&#8221;. Suvojit Chattopadhyay describes the paper as Valters&#8217; advocacy for ‘modest radicalism’ in the use of Theories of Change (ToC) as an approach to improving reflection and learning in the development sector:
&#8220;In this paper, Craig reflects on the role of the ToC in the context of the ‘results agenda’ and suggests four principles that could help development organisations develop knowledge and improve practice: Focus on processes; Prioritise learning; Be locally-led; and ‘Think compass, not map’.&#8221;
In this post/blog, Chattopadhyay shares additional thoughts on the use of ToCs and how they might be improved. He starts with two problems in the way we do things:
<ul>
<li>In development, failures are hard to detect: Often, organisations that fail find ways to mask failure – by either refusing to acknowledge failure, finding external factors, or moving on to a different desk officer/donor/location. So within the aid industry, we have a peculiar situation where it is real hard to fail – or at least, it is hard to know when a project has failed.</li>
<li>It’s harder still to ensure that projects that fail face significant consequences of failure: Organisations that implemented the failed projects should be required to make significant changes to key aspects of design or management.</li>
</ul>
<div class="related-items"></div>

Building on "Theories of Change: time for a radical approach to learning in development", this World Bank blog post shares additional thoughts on the use of ToCs and how they might be improved.

If using ‘Theories of Change’ cannot transform the way you operate, why bother?

levy_institutionalization_web_exercise

This document introduces and elaborates on the notion of the &#8216;web&#8217; of institutionalisation by Levy (1996) as part of the internal assessment by Hivos of the institutionalisation of Theory of Change thinking. It zooms in on the core elements, presented by Levy as the citizen&#8217;s, policy, organizational and delivery sphere, and lists guiding questions for each sphere, specifically formulated for Hivos&#8217; internal assessment.
Related is <a href="https://changeroo.com/toc-academy/posts/institutionalising-gender-equality">this</a> post, which elaborates further on the institutionalisation dimensions identified by Levy.
<div class="related-content"></div>

This document applies the institutionalisation elements identified by Levy (1996), as part of the internal assessment by development organisation Hivos of the institutionalisation of Theory of Change thinking in their organisation.

Source URL

Attachments levy_institutionalization_web_exercise.doc