Talk:Knowledge sharing amongst traditional weavers of East Nusa Tenggara: a myth or potential

From KM4Dev Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Patrick Lambe, 2010/07/15

Hi Endro - this is a wonderful story!

For the question of transferring successes from one community to another, have you come across the positive deviance methodology?


Patrick Lambe

weblog: website: book:

Have you seen our KM Method Cards or Organisation Culture Cards?

Martine Koopman, 2010/07/15

Hi Patrick,

That seems like a great method. Do you have concrete examples were this methodology was applied? I am looking at the moment at good practices to share and learn between communities both in a tradional way as in a virtual way.

Kind regards,

Martine Koopman Officer Knowledge Sharing

International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)

P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague,The Netherlands Visitors: Raamweg 5, 2596 HL The Hague Phone: 00-31-(0)70-311 73 11

Zambia: +260-974045229 Ghana: +233-245419740 Fax: 00-31-(0)70-311 73 22 Website: E-mail: Skype: martinekoopman Twitter:martinekoopman People - ICT - Development

Don Kildebeck, 2010/07/15


In looking at the website "Positive Deviance" seems like a reworking of the Appreciative Inquiry model, invented by Dr. David Cooperrider, and used since the 1970's. Do a Google search for Appreciative Inquiry and you will find a plethora of research and information available on the subject. I believe this approach will bring you the success you're looking for.

Don Kildebeck

Nancy White, 2010/07/15

I recommend this article by Keith McCandless(<> ) and Henri Lipmanowicz


It looks beyond positive deviance to methods that, in my mind, foster ownership of KM/KS and other actions by the participants ini ways that are fairly simple, and scalable.


Patrick Lambe, 2010/07/16

The positive deviance methodology does share a close affinity with appreciative inquiry in its core principles. It adds some statistical techniques for uncovering better solutions already being practised to shared problems, and it is also influenced by Everett Rogers' work on how innovations diffuse successfully across social groups. The website has a number of practical case studies, many of them in the development arena, and more recently being applied to the eradication of MRSA in hospitals.

There is a new book out on positive deviance written by Richard Pascale with the technique's developers.


Patrick Lambe

weblog: website: book:

Have you seen our KM Method Cards or Organisation Culture Cards?

Patrick Lambe, 2010/07/16

Hi Martine

Anyone interested in sharing and learning across communities should read Everett Rogers' book on "Diffusion of Innovations" which captures 50 years of research into how new knowledge spreads across social groups. Rogers started in agricultural sociology looking at how farmers did or did not pick up new technologies and practices, but this focused quickly broadened and he developed an extremely widely based and accessible framework for the conditions in which new knowledge spreads (and some of the factors inhibiting transfer).

One of the facilitating factors, for example, is observability of the innovation - innovations tend to get picked up more readily if people can see it being practised, preferably by people very much like themselves. Turns out that videos where villagers demonstrate how they prepare parboiled rice (more nutritious, more marketable) are more effective than trainers going into villagers and giving workshops, for example. The African Rice Center and other agencies are capitalising on this insight

That's to understand the factors influencing knowledge transfer.

Nancy's suggested reading (thanks Nancy!) shows off a great suite of tools and techniques that can be deployed to facilitate the transfer, depending on the challenge. There's no single simple approach to all knowledge transfer challenges, because not all challenges are alike.


Patrick Lambe

weblog: website: book:

Have you seen our KM Method Cards or Organisation Culture Cards?

Ana Maria Currea, 2010/07/16

Dear Patrick,

Thank you for sharing this useful link.

Martine, in the website you can read some case studies of how they have used the methodology in specific contexts. Mostly used for nutrition and health programmes.

However, I am interested in learning from other colleagues which other tools you are using. I work with a programme that supports community projects that protect the environment and we are also dealing with the issue of how to best communicate and transfer knowledge at the community level. In particular, at the community-to community level using face to face meetings as well as online tools to extract and transfer lessons learned and best practices for scaling up and replication. Any examples or concrete tips, tools would be greatly appreciated.

For know we are piloting the photo story approach, which consists in putting together a short video using pictures and a narration to enable communities to document and share how they have been cacrrying out their projects and share the results. We are using our staff in the ground to help put them together. You can see some of the photo stories that we have produced in our website at:

But curious to learn from others.


Ana Maria Currea Knowledge Management Facilitator GEF Small Grants Programme 304 E 45th Street, Rm. FF 904 New York, NY 10017 '212-906 6028

Nancy White, 2010/07/16

Just saw this via a retweet from Gauri:

The Knowledge Management for Development Journal (KM4D Journal) is a peer-reviewed community-based journal on knowledge management for development – for and by development practitioners, researchers and policymakers. The journal is closely related to the KM4Dev community of practice (»<>website).

Volume 7, Issue 3, to be published in September 2011, will focus on the connection between systems thinking in knowledge management for development (KM4Dev) and systems thinking in innovation management for development (IM4Dev), particularly for international development, as both of these approaches have been adapted from systems thinking in business innovation and entrepreneurship. The issue will introduce various academic and practitioner perspectives, thought pieces on strengths and weaknesses of knowledge systems and innovation systems approaches, and case studies on the possibilities and concrete applications of innovation systems thinking in knowledge and innovation management for development (KIM4Dev).

Rationale Within the KM4Dev community of practice, and in the wider field of knowledge management, the emphasis is often and logically on knowledge sharing and interactive learning, within organizations and between organizations, and at networks and systems levels. Such knowledge sharing and learning should support innovation, growth and development for the benefits of lowincome countries. Such a focus on interactive learning and social learning and innovation resonates with innovation systems thinking that has recently gained its space in international development. Many definitions of innovation systems emphasize stakeholder networks for the creation, exchange, regulation, adaptation and use of knowledge for economic, environmental and social changes, such as the one from World Bank (2006) “a network of organizations, enterprises, and individuals focused on bringing new products, new processes, and new forms of organization into economic use, together with the institutions and policies that affect the way different agents interact, share, access, exchange and use knowledge”.

A distinction of the thinking in innovation systems vis-à-vis knowledge systems is its explicit attention to institutions as formal ‘rules of the game’ and informal ‘habits and practices’, which not only govern the actual behaviour of innovation actors, but also are subject of change, seen from the perspective of Giddens (1984) ‘duality of structure’ -- “structural properties of social systems are both medium and outcome of the practices they recursively organize”. Another distinction of innovation systems approach from knowledge management approaches is that knowledge creation and exchange is just one function of innovation management, besides several others, such as fostering entrepreneurial activities, facilitating visioning and foresight processes, market formation, mobilizing resources necessary for innovation, networking and capacity development, and creation of enabling environments for learning, innovation and change. However, both approaches highlight the importance of having well-established linkages and information flows amongst different public and private actors, enabling institutional environment and incentives that enhance broad-based stakeholder collaboration, and well-developed human capital, so they appear to have a lot in common.

World Bank (2006) Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems, World Bank, Washington. Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Polity Press, Cambridge

This issue aims to provide a critical view on similarities and differences between knowledge management and innovation management, particularly in the context of international development, in order to mutually reinforce the approaches and create a better understanding of how interaction and learning between heterogeneous actors can be improved.

We welcome all contributions that touch upon issues that relate to a number of central issues in both knowledge management and innovation management: creating and fostering effective linkages, learning in hetereogeneous actor networks, the influence and overcoming of dialectical divides (having cultural-institutional background that hinder cooperation and learning), and building learning and innovation capacity. Papers can be empirically grounded in different economic and societal sectors (such as case studies), or be more conceptual, and deal with issues such as:

  • Ontological and epistemological similarities and differences between systems thinking in KM4Dev and IM4Dev.
  • The relationship between knowledge management and innovation systems performance
  • Innovation systems thinking and the extent to which knowledge and innovation can be ‘managed’ in international development practice.
  • Linkage building mechanisms to facilitate knowledge and innovation management for development (e.g., the role of boundary spanners and brokers), and their benefits and tensions as regards their functioning.
  • Dialectical divides and multi-stakeholder processes in knowledge and innovation management for development.
  • The role of formal and informal institutions on learning and innovation capacity development.
  • The relationship between knowledge management and other necessary functions of innovation management.
  • Monitoring and evaluation, particularly outcome and impact assessment, of interventions aimed at improving knowledge and innovation management, and innovation capacity development.
  • The role of tacit and explicit knowledge, informal and formal interaction in knowledge and innovation management, and innovation capacity development.

Please note that this topic list is not exhaustive, as there may be other interesting perspectives on this matter. We invite practitioners and academics to submit, in the first instance, an abstract of a full paper, case study, story and or opinion piece that you intend to write for this special issue. As this is an English language journal, we would, if possible, like potential authors to submit paper proposals and contributions in English.

About the guest editors

Laurens Klerkx is Assistant Professor at the Communication and Innovation Studies Group of Wageningen University (»<>personal page). His research takes place in the realm of agriculture and the life sciences and focuses on: demand articulation and multi-stakeholder negotiations for demand-driven research and innovation; newly emerging intermediary structures for matching demand and supply for knowledge and other resources to support innovation (innovation brokers); how such innovation brokers affect the dynamics in innovation networks and how they are perceived by ‘traditional’ knowledge intensive service providers (such as research institutes and consultants) and end-users of innovation.

Laxmi Prasad Pant is Adjunct Professor and Lecturer at the School of Environment, Enterprise and Development, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada (»<>personal page). His research focuses on human creativity and innovation to enhance renewable natural resourcebased livelihoods, such as agriculture, specifically analysing the agency of individual actors within the broader framework of innovation systems. His current research programme has been developed in three interrelated fields: a) bridging research-practice divide in renewable natural resource management, including organic and low external input agriculture; b) enhancing rural adaptation, and rural and regional competitiveness of smallholder farming through the use ICTs, such as cell phone and roadband/high speed Internet technology; and c) local adaptation to global change, such as changes in climate, environment, culture, and closing and opening of markets.

Cees Leeuwis is Professor of Communication and Innovation Studies at Wageningen University (»<>personal page) and head of the group with the same name. He regards innovations as a balanced whole of technical devices, mental models and organisational arrangements, resulting in co-ordinated action in a network of stakeholders. His research focuses on (a) the value of new interactive and cross-disciplinary approaches to bringing about coherent innovations, (b) the analysis of social learning and conflict management in networks, (c) changing dynamics and arrangements in the knowledge infrastructure due to privatisation of research and extension, and (d) the reflexive monitoring and evaluation of innovation support strategies and trajectories.

Submissions deadlines Submission deadline for the title and abstract 30 august 2010 Acceptance of paper proposal 20 September 2010 Submission of paper 30 January 2011 (»<>website) Peer-review completed 30 March 2011 Final version of paper submitted 30 April 2011 Publication date September 2011

If you would like to submit a paper, or be actively involved in this initiative in any other way, please send your abstract (minimum one paragraph – maximum one page) or your message [1] by e-mail with a copy to the lead Guest Editor Laurens Klerkx.

Click here for Full paper submission

For further information about the journal, kindly consult the journal website

Guidelines for authors are available on the journal website

Volumes 1-4 of the journal (2005-2008) are available on the journal’s archive site

We look forward to receiving your submission,

Laurens Klerkx, Laxmi Prasad Pant and Cees Leeuwis Guest Editor Team Volume 7, Issue 3, Knowledge and Innovation Management forDevelopment, Knowledge Management for Development Journal

Nancy White | Full Circle Associates | Connecting communities online | +1 206 517 4754 | GMT - 8 |skype - choconancy | Twitter NancyWhite

Chris Burman, 2010/07/17

Hi -

I know of one study where the WHO used positive deviance to look at malnutrition amongst children on some islands. I've looked for the document but cannot find it. Perhaps others know of the case study?

With kind regards


Dr C.J. Burman

The Development Facilitation and Training Institute

University of Limpopo

Tel / fax: 015 290 2826

Allison Hewlitt, 2010/07/18

Hi Martine

Not sure if this is the positive deviance example that Chris was referring to but perhaps it will be useful either way:

Best, Allison

John Smith, 2010/07/18

For an alternative to the diffusion model that starts from the center (the top of a hierarchy of some sort, too?) and spreads outward, have a look at Mizuko Ito, et al. Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out: Kids Living and Learning With New Media (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2009) 419. pp. The complete book is available here: (Turns out it's a book you kinda need to live with and ponder, so if you can buy it, I'd recommend it.)

It could be that quite privileged students at the University of California do things differently from traditional weavers. I would assume similarities and try to show the difference, however. Here's a tease on p 59:

"In conceptualizing the media and information ecologies in the lives of University of California at Berkeley freshmen, classical adoption and diffusion models (e.g., Rogers [1962; 2003]) proved inadequate. Rather than being characterized by a few individuals who diffuse knowledge to others in a somewhat linear fashion, many students' pattern of technology adoption signaled situations in which various people were at times influential in different, ever-evolving social networks. The term "techne-mentor" is used to help to describe this pattern of information and knowledge diffusion."

Techne-mentor is similar to the idea that we developed in Digital Habitats and I took a crack at connecting the two in a blog post here:


  • John David Smith ~ Voice: 503.963.8229 ~ Skype & Twitter: smithjd
  • Portland, Oregon, USA
  • "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken

place." GB Shaw

Geoff Parcell , 2010/07/19

Hi Endro

I am part of The Constellation for Life Competence. The focus is on revealing the strengths of local communities to enable them to share those strengths with others and to learn from others in turn. Initially our focus was on the response to HIV/ AIDS but we realise it applies to many life issues too. You can learn more about the process at process

There is a team of facilitators already established in Indonesia. They connect with the rest of the world via Ning, a social networking site. On this site you will also find knowledge assets under construction.

We have learned that when a community is competent to deal with AIDS, they are competent to deal with other community issues of health, economy etc. I am sure when a community identifies their strengths in weaving, then they can share and learn with other communities and find their own solutions. As a community they will become competent to deal with other issues they have. Their priorities may not be our priorities.

I hope this experience proves helpful to you,


Speranza Ndege, 2010/07/20

Dear Geoff,

I have read your email and the information is very interesting and encouraging to find communities sharing freely information even on HIV /AIDs. Here in Kenya we too are encouraging people to share with one another information relating to different needs that relate directly with communities at the grassroots. When people get competent in one area, soon they get confidence to deal with other areas that touch people's lives.

Thank you for sharing your experience with us from a practical point of view.

Kind regards,


Dr. Speranza Ndege, PhD;MSc Cbis;MA;BEd; Pgdip e-Teaching;Pgdip.Tourism;CCNA Commissioner, Broadband Commission for Digital Development


Director, Institute of Open, Distance & e-Learning (ODeL) Kenyatta University P.O Box 43844 - 00100 Nairobi Tel. (+254) (020) 8712459 Email:


Martine Koopman, 2010/07/26

Hi everyone that shared their links and experiences,

Thanks. Just back from holiday I see that there were many good contributions that I can follow up.

Kind regards,

Martine Koopman Officer Knowledge Sharing

International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)

P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague,The Netherlands Visitors: Raamweg 5, 2596 HL The Hague Phone: 00-31-(0)70-311 73 11

Zambia: +260-974045229 Ghana: +233-245419740 Fax: 00-31-(0)70-311 73 22 Website: E-mail: Skype: martinekoopman Twitter:martinekoopman People - ICT - Development

Endro Catur, 2010/08/01

Dear Colleagues,

Thank you for your responses in this topic.

I'm following up to the provincial government as the key stakeholder for this initiative: a knowledge management project for traditional weavers in East Nusa Tenggara. Your feedbacks - including tools, methods and approaches - will be useful feedbacks to this initiative. Now waiting for the government to respond - which usually takes patience.

In the mean time, I will propose the initiative to some organisations with similar interests.


Endro Catur

Tariq Zaman, 2010/08/03

Dear Endro!

Very nice sharing.

I am from your neighbor Sarawak Malaysia.

Sorry for late response from my side but i was in travelling from last one months.

1): Did you take a look on my proposal for KM4Dev Innovation Fund;

In our Centre of Excellence for Rural Informatics Universiti Malaysia Sarawak we faced the same problem with our projects in rural area of Sarawak Malaysia. We are coming with strategic maps and interventions.

You can also find in attachment one of my research paper "Formulating Strategic Directions for Indigenous Knowledge Management Systems". I presented this paper in Second conference on Semantic Technology and Knowledge Engineering 2010 (Malaysia)

2): Regarding the Replication issue I would share our experience of eBario project which is replicated in four more sites of Sabah and Sarawak this year. eBario supported the tourism potential of Bario community and now eLarapan and eLamai is replicating the same concept of ICT support for local potentials. The community leaders from Long Lamai, Larapan and Buayan visited Bario during 2nd eBario Knowledge Fair 2009 and got the idea of community based Homestay projects implemented by Bario community. I would like to share some of the links to Professor Micheal Gurstein Blogs on eLamai and eBario.

we can talk in detail if you have interest and I am enthusiastic to know some more about your work.


Attachment: Formulating_Strategic_Directions_for_Indigenous_Knowledge_ManagementSystems.pdf