Transboundary learning and innovation for development

From KM4Dev Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contributors

All replies in full are available in the discussion page. Contributions received with thanks from:

Jasmin Suministrado
Benedict Rimando
Serafin Talisayon
Valerie Brown
Md Santo
James Grey
Stacey Young
Juliah Goh
Pete Cranston
Catherine Brown
Nancy White
Eva Schiffer
Nadejda Loumbeva
Sarah Cummings
Paul Corney
Martina Hetzel
Yennenga Kompaoré
Ryan Rowe
Lucie Lamoureux
Charles Dhewa
Neil Pakenham-Walsh
John Smith
Andrea Bardelli Danieli
Jaap Pels
Caroliza Tulod-Peteros
Daan Boom

Related Discussions

Launch of focused converastion

Dear KM4Dev members,

We were excited to launch the focused group conversation on transboundary learning and innovation. In the last three weeks, we shared lessons and experiences of knowledge sharing beyond boundaries in financial inclusion, peace building and innovative development models. We looked forward to our dynamic and engaging exchange and learning more about your ideas, experiences and feedback. Before we started our discussion, the resource speakers shared the definition of transboundary learning and innovation.

Best regards, Nicole Afable


Transboundary Learning and Innovation

Transboundary learning covers learning processes that occurs across boundaries, whether political, ethnic, geographical, religious, corporate or administrative. Transboundary innovation is innovation that redefines or transcends such boundaries and affiliations.

Learning by individuals is well understood. Learning by organizations started to be understood and applied thanks to the works of pioneers such as Chris Argyris, Peter Senge and David Garvin. Transboundary learning and innovation is the least understood. Real world problems often cut across boundaries, yet human solutions are often conceived and implemented within boundaries. Transboundary learning and innovation that seeks to evolve more workable solutions to human, social and planetary problems has been going on in the United Nations, in regional and international development organizations and in a growing variety of networks supported and spurred by the Internet. But more has to be done to move this field forward.

We recognize the importance of bringing together experts and practitioners in this field of transboundary learning and innovation, and capture via a publication the experiences and theory building that has been happening. We are bringing this discourse through a wider audience of KM practitioners through this KM4Dev Focused Conversation. We invite you to share your own experiences so together we can gain more insights towards a better understanding of this important process.

Your resource persons:

Jasmin Suministrado

Benedict Rimando

Serafin Talisayon

October 2013



Summary

Detailed Description

This focused conversation was held from October 21 2013 to November 9 2013 on the KM4Dev Platform. It was facilitated by Nicole Afable and Jasmin Suministrado. The objectives of this focused conversation were:

  • Feature a practice/method/tool /model used in transboundary learning and innovation in a specific development sector, including success factors and challenges in its application/use;
  • Cross-fertilize lessons and experiences with others who
    • have used a similar or related practice/method/tool in transboundary learning in other areas of development and
    • operate in the same development sector but are using other methods/models for transboundary learning;
  • Explore how to improve the success of transboundary learning.



Week 1 : Peer learning and exchange

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Scenes from the Peer Learning Exchanges held in South Africa in 2012 and Bangladesh in 2013[1]


Peer learning and exchange[7] is a method that combines learning by experiencing and learning with others. It requires bringing together peers (or individuals usually from different organizations) who work on similar issues and immersing themselves in a particular environment for several days to learn about other contexts, apply tools and skills, and in some cases, solve problems together. Peer exchange is normally done in groups, but certain variations such as peer coaching allow peers to learn in pairs.


October 21

  • Launch of focused conversation on Transboundary Innovation and Learning by Nicole Afable [8]
  • Introduction to the first week’s topic: Peer learning and exchange in the area of financial inclusion at the bottom of the pyramid by Jasmin Suministrado [9]

October 22

  • Success factors and challenges of peer learning and exchanges by Jasmin Suministrado [10]

October 24

  • Make peer learning and exchange beneficial for participants from different backgrounds by Jasmin Suministrado [11]

October 25

  • Outcome and results of peer learning and exchanges by Jasmin Suministrado [12]

October 28

  • Summary of Week 1 by Nicole Afable [13]

Week 2 : Learning through Conflict Mapping

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
L-R: Punlangi River[2], Screen captures of the LRA crisis tracker[3] and MSTC tool[4]


People can learn from one another in a situation of conflict particularly with a mapping exercise. One example is the Conflict-Mapping tool for Multi-stakeholder Conflicts[14] that can be used to analyze various community conflicts that involve multiple stakeholders.


October 28

  • Introduction of Learning through Conflict Mapping by Benedict Rimando [15]

October 30

  • Tri-peoples approach by Benedict Rimando [16]
  • Network analysis and [Conversation] conflict mapping by Jasmin Suministrado [17]

October 31

  • LRA crisis tracker by Benedict Rimando [18]

November 1

  • Making sense of turbulent contexts by Benedict Rimando [19]

November 3

  • Summary of Week 2 by Nicole Afable [20]

Week 3 : Transboundary Innovation

Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Examples of transboundary innovation[5] and the SBCA diagram[6]


Transboundary innovation[21] is innovation that modifies, redefines or transcends boundaries and affiliations, whether political, cultural, corporate, sector, thematic, etc. The purpose of transboundary innovation is to solve social and planetary problems towards more sustainable peace and development. Tools like the SBCA diagram[22] can make sense of transboundary issues.


November 4

  • Introduction of topic: Transboundary Innovation by Serafin Talisayon [23]

November 6

  • Introduction of tool by Serafin Talisayon [24]

November 8

  • Case of Olecram Mining Corporation: Erasing boundary between corporation and community by Serafin Talisayon [25]

November 11

  • Summary of Week 3 by Nicole Afable [26]


Transboundary learning and innovation tools

We've also documented the tools that were featured during the focused conversation, and all three now form part of the KS Toolkit (www.kstoolkit.org) which is an online compilation of KM and KS tools and methods, supported not just by our community but also by CGIAR, FAO, UNICEF and UNDP. For more information on each tool, click on the links below.

  • Peer Learning and Exchange Toolkit by Jasmin Suministrado [27]
  • Conflict Mapping Tool for Multi-stakeholder Conflicts by Benedict Rimando [28]
  • SBCA Diagram with Stakeholder Analysis by Serafîn Talisayon [29]


Related Videos

The videos below were videos used to introduce the topics in the focused conversation.

  • Peer learning featuring the Peer Learning Group of the Microinsurance Innovation Facility[30]
  • Highlighting the LRA crisis tracker in KM4Dev Discussions featuring John Beaton and Benedict Rimando [31]
  • Transboundary Innovation featuring Serafîn Talisayon [32]
  • The SBCA Diagram featuring Serafîn Talisayon [33]


List of discussions and replies

Week 1: Peer learning and exchange in the area of financial inclusion at the bottom of the pyramid

  • Valerie Brown, Oct 21 2013, Comment on Launch [34]
  • Md Santo, Oct 21 2013, Comment on Launch - Nature Knowledge Theory [35]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 21 2013, Reply to Md Santo [36]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Oct 21 2013, Reply to Valerie [37]
  • Md Santo, Oct 22 2013, SNS Mobee Knowledge CoP [38]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 21 2013, Peer learning and exchange in the area of financial inclusion at the bottom of the pyramid [39]
  • James Grey, Oct 21 2013, Focus Plants [40]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 21 2013, Reply to James [41]
  • James Grey, Oct 21 2013, Reply to Jasmin [42]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 22 2013, Success factors and challenges [43]
  • Stacey Young, Oct 22 2013, Learning Networks Resource Center [44]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 23 2013, Question [45]
  • Pete Cranston, Oct 23 2013, Comment on USAID initiative [46]
  • Benedict Rimando, Oct 24 2013, Reply to Julian's question [47]
  • Catherine Fisher, Oct 24 2013, Explaining concepts [48]
  • Nicole Afable, Oct 24 2013, Dealing with misunderstandings [49]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 24 2013, Reply to Benedict [50]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 24 2013, Reply to Catherine - Brain factories [51]
  • Catherine Fisher, Oct 24 2013, Challenges from peer assist [52]
  • Nancy White, Oct 24 2013, Peer Exchange Processes [53]
  • Nancy White, Oct 24 2013, Visual Practices in Peer Exchanges [54]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 24 2013, Comment on Peer Exchange Processes [55]
  • Eva Schiffer, Oct 24 2013, Comment on Visual Practices in Peer Exchange [56]
  • Nancy White, Oct 24 2013, Reply to Julian [57]
  • Nadejda Loumbeva, Oct 24 2013, Comment on Brain factories [58]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 24 2013, Make peer learning and exchange beneficial for participants from different backgrounds [59]
  • Sarah Cummings, Oct 24 2013, Comment on Launch [60]
  • Paul Corney, Oct 25 2013, Sharing Peer exchange process [61]
  • Martina Hetzel, Oct 25 2013, Comment on Visual practices in peer exchanges [62]
  • James Grey, Oct 25 2013, Reply to Julian [63]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Oct 25 2013, Reply to Sarah - Outline of publication [64]
  • Sarah Cummings, Oct 25 2013, Reply to Serafin [65]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 25 2013, Outcomes and results [66]
  • Yennenga Kompaoré, Oct 25 2013, Challenges with peer exchange processes [67]
  • Ryan Rowe, Oct 25 2013, Feedback on Yennenga's insights [68]
  • Lucie Lamoureux, Oct 25 2013, Disinterested participants [69]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 25 2013, Powerpoints [70]
  • Pete Cranston, Oct 25 2013, Examples of non-visual support [71]
  • Eva Schiffer, Oct 25 2013, Creating learning experiences [72]
  • Lucie Lamoureux, Oct 25 2013, Reply to Pete [73]
  • Eva Schiffer, Oct 25 2013, Tips on doing something visual [74]
  • Charles Dhewa, Oct 25 2013, Other senses [75]
  • Pete Cranston, Oct 25 2013, Facilitation issues [76]
  • Nancy White, Oct 27 2013, Collaboration over time [77]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 27 2013, Wrapping up Week 1 [78]
  • Neil Pakenham-Walsh, Oct 27 2013, Dgroups [79]
  • Nicole Afable, Oct 28 2013, Summary of Week 1 [80]
  • John Smith, Oct 28 2013, Summarization tips [81]


Week 2: Learning through Conflict Mapping

  • Benedict Rimando, Oct 28 2013, Learning through Conflict Mapping [82]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 29 2013, Reply to summarization tips [http://wiki.km4dev.org/Talk:Transboundary_learning_and_innovation_for_development#Jasmin_Suministrado.2C_Oct_29_2013.2C_Reply_to_summarization_tips}
  • Valerie Brown, Oct 29, 2013, Comment on Summary of Week 1 [83]
  • Nicole Afable, Oct 30 2013, Divisions within a community [84]
  • Benedict Rimando, Oct 30 2013, Tri-peoples approach [85]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 30 2013, Network analysis and [Conversation] conflict mapping [86]
  • Andrea Bardelli Danieli, Oct 30 2013, SNA to understand power relationship [87]
  • Jaap Pels, Oct 30 2013, Shared guidelines and network picture [88]
  • Eva Schiffer, Oct 30 2013, SNA map conflicts [89]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Oct 30 2013, Preview of next topic [90]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 30 2013, Sarawak report [91]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Oct 30 2013, Reply to Julian [92]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Oct 30 2013, SNA to map conflict [93]
  • Martina Hetzel, Oct 30 2013, Comment on Summary of Week 1 [94]
  • Julian Goh, Oct 30 2013, Sarawak issues [95]
  • Jaap Pels, Oct 30 2013, Steps for network analysis [96]
  • John Smith, Oct 30 2013, Count of discussions [97]
  • Benedict Rimando, Oct 31 2013, LRA crisis tracker [98]
  • Benedict Rimando, Oct 31 2013, Dynamics of conflict [99]
  • Nancy White, Oct 31 2013, More on CoP facilitation [100]
  • Nicole Afable, Oct 31 2013, Interorganizational conflict [101]
  • Julian Goh, Nov 1 2013, Conflict [102]
  • Benedict Rimando, Nov 1 2013, Making Sense of Turbulent Contexts [103]
  • Neil Pakenham-Walsh, Nov 1 2013, More on CoPs [104]
  • Benedict Rimando, Nov 2 2013, Conflict and mediation [105]
  • Caroliza Tulod-Peteros, Nov 2 2013, Explaining interfaith competition in conflict [106]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 4 2013, Summary of Week 2 [107]
  • Julian Goh, Nov 4 2013, Comment on Summary of Week 2 [108]

Week 3: Transboundary Innovation

  • Serafin Talisayon, Nov 4 2013, Transboundary Innovation [109]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 5 2013, Map of Dirty Energy Money [110]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Nov 6 2013, SBCA diagram [111]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 6 2013, Sharing on SBCA diagram [112]
  • Benedict Rimando, Nov 6 2013, Sharing on SBCA diagram [113]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Nov 6 2013, Reply to Nicole and Benedict [114]
  • Daan Boom, Nov 7 2013, Transbounday knowledge exchange [115]
  • Jasmin Suministrado, Nov 7 2013, Relationships of private and public sector in innovative projects [116]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 7 2013, Reply to Daan [117]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 7 2013, Reply to Jasmin [118]
  • Martina Hetzel, Nov 7 2013, Context of uncooperative participant [119]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Nov 8 2013, Reply to Daan and Martina [120]
  • Serafin Talisayon, Nov 8 2013, Case of the Olecram Mining Company [121]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 8 2013, Reply to Serafin [122]
  • Martina Hetzel, Nov 8 2013, Reply to Serafin [123]
  • Nicole Afable, Nov 11 2013, Summary of Week 3 [124]