Development corner4

In this session we discussed relationships and asked if systems thinking can help us understand KM4Dev

- discussing relationships and their nature. what relationships lead to deeper exchange of knowledge and how can we foster these

- social knowledge management for health - to use social media and social networks to leverage ties and relationships in networks (to improve health outcomes)

- amplifying effect through communications (diffusion of innovation)

- connecting different networks and where are the links - considering this consciously.

- in systems thinking you focus on understanding, you focus on the whole, you assume the world is dynamic and in a constant flow (pretty unpredictable)

- systems thinking is about the space in which things happen (e.g. interfaces)

- systems thinking focuses on leverage points rather than causal relationships and linear impact paths

- trusted interfaces are crucial to knowledge exchange (look at your demographics and look at where those spaces are)

- the interface might be a place where people expect like-minded people to gather

- finding existing channels where trust is already established (this is also where you can save some resources)

- those interfaces have a community already that works and trust

- working through peers is a good approach to build on existing relationships

- understating one's intentions ("we are just doing an existing thing slightly different" rather than "we do something entirely new") to not frightening people of change

- discourse as understanding the framework of discussions. Frameworks influence discussions: who participates, how long funded, etc.

- how does the set-up influence power relationships?

- the facilitator self-reflection/contemplation is crucial. What is the image they portray?

- as a facilitator and/or teacher we have to question our assumption. Listening to the slightest criticism can be useful (not brushing single comments away because there will probably be more like it but people might not trust enough to actually criticise)

- network mapping can help to understand knowledge flows and who talks to who... influencing

- who only pushes out information, who only receives (and does not have a voice?

- participatory exercises in how people perceive the knowledge system and networks illustrate where there might be bottle necks in information flows (networks can then be put into Visualiser or NetDraw)

- Instead of being a facilitator you can train the community to be their own facilitators (training in different areas: law, conversation facilitation, funding, etc.). After training the initial facilitator steps out. Not telling them which conversations to have but enabling to have the conversations on their mind themselves. After training is completed organisations step out. This is a methodology developed by WWF Colombia.

- Healthy Country Planning sounds like another methodology that goes down similar lines.

- Paying explicit attention to the difficult relationships. Which ones are the most difficult in KM? Difficult conversations are the ones where you have to convince experts to share their knowledge, to care about impact (if they don't already). Or when you have to convince people of the value of KM. Or with people that are using KM techniques to reach particular goals vs. people that just want to share knowledge. Having agendas is fine but if KM is a part of marketing, or some other goal driven environment that works different. Or the relationships where you collaborate with people that you also compete (for funding) with.

- Some methodologies are more useful for the creation of sustainable relationships that go beyond funding. Participation is one of the keys to successful relationships.

- The enabling environment is crucial in inhibiting or fostering already existing interests etc.

- Facilitators can use silence for participants to explore a space for themselves. Experimenting in safety (trusting environment).

- Asking funders for a year 0 might be a way of spending enough time on developing appropriate frameworks for sustainable relationships. The focus of our activity should move slightly towards the beginning. Phasing out facilitation should be managed and gradual (as capacities get enhanced) rather than abrupt at the end.

- Final note: we have to consider the individual (champions, innovators, entrepreneurs) and help the few people that are eager to make a change.

- A useful tool mentioned at the end was the discourse network analyser: http://www.philipleifeld.de/discourse-network-analyzer/

- And an interview that is relevant to some of those discussions at the end is this: http://www.ted.com/talks/ernesto_sirolli_want_to_help_someone_shut_up_and_listen.html