Designing Knowledge Partnerships Better

Organization, People, Knowledge, and Technology for Learning

OLIVIER SERRAT Principal Knowledge Management Specialist

Knowledge Management CenterRegional and Sustainable Development DepartmentAsian Development Bank

1Organization, People, Knowledge, and Technology for Learning

Strategy 2020 identifies Knowledge Solutions and Partnerships as two of five drivers of change.

Knowledge Management in ADB moves ADB to improve its organizational culture, management systems, business processes and information technology solutions, communities of practice, and learning and development mechanisms.

Enhancing Knowledge Management under Strategy 2020: Action Plan (2009-2011) delivers knowledge solutions and knowledge services from four strategic thrusts.

ADB INITIATIVES ON KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS


ENHANCING KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT UNDER STRATEGY

2020: PLAN OF ACTION (2009-2011)


STRENGTHENING EXTERNAL

KNOWLEDGE PARTNERSHIPS

KEY ACTIONS

1. Develop criteria for the selection of knowledge partnerships including non-regional institutions.2. Ascertain that expected outputs and outcomes are aligned to ADB and DMC priorities.3. Ensure that knowledge partnerships are considered when ADB enters into agreements

such as letters of intent and memorandums of understanding with other institutions.4. Make sure that knowledge partnership agreements spell out the need to conduct proactive

dissemination activities in ADB and DMCs.

Some Challenges • The purpose and selection of knowledge partnerships need clarity.• Monitoring and evaluation systems are insufficient.• Performance vis-à-vis work plans is poor.



Knowledge Partnerships • Are associations and networks of individuals or organizations that share a purpose or goal. • Comprise of members who contribute knowledge, experience, resources, and connections, and participate in two-way communications.• Thrive when there is a strategic, structural, and cultural fit, and when members embrace a collaborative process, behave as a coherent entity, and engage in joint decision making and action.


KNOWLEDGE PARTNERSHIPS AND

ORGANIZATIONS

FUNDAMENTALS OF KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

SOME COMMON ATTRIBUTES • Groups of individuals or organizations...• With a shared, understood, and consistent purpose or goal...• Who voluntarily contribute knowledge, experience, resources, and connections toward joint decision making and action and share learning to achieve the shared purpose or goal…• Who rely on the partnership to reach the shared purpose or goal

WHY KNOWLEDGE PARTNERSHIPS ARE NOT ORGANIZATIONS• A knowledge partnership has a less formal structure than an organization and is more fluid.• Participation is largely voluntary and as needed, not full-time.• Participants have a high degree of freedom to make choices.• The nature of decision making is distributive.


RELATIONSHIPS IN KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

What Flows Through Knowledge Partnerships • Knowledge• Experience• Resources• Connections

What Makes Knowledge Partnerships Work • Trust• Reciprocity• Diversity• Complementarity


FUNCTIONS OF KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

FILTERING Organizing and managing information that is worth paying attention to.

AMPLIFYING Taking new, little-known, or little-understood ideas, giving them weight, and making them more widely understood.

INVESTING AND PROVIDING Offering a means to give members the resources they need to carry out their main activities.

CONVENING Bringing together different, distinct people or groups of people.

COMMUNITY-BUILDING Promoting and sustaining the values and standards of individuals or organizations.

LEARNING AND FACILITATING Helping members carry out their activities more efficiently and effectively.

Time and again, a subtle rationale behind strategic alliances is obscured by their explicit strategic motives. That rationale is the intent to learn—especially knowledge that is tacit,

collective, and imbedded: and it is probably failure in this arena that explains shortcomings.


BENEFITS FROM KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

• Increased access to knowledge, experience, resources, and connections• Shared learning• Shared good practices• Fostered creativity and innovation• Increased business process efficiencies• Increased visibility of concerns and issues• Strengthened capacity to advocate and influence policy• More effective responses to complex realities and scaled-up impact• Reduced isolation and increased credibility• Mitigated risks

What Knowledge Partnerships Ought to Be Good at • Efficient search for data, information, and knowledge• Rapid dissemination• Efficient small-world reach to collect and connect with others and resources• Building adaptive and flexible capacity• Resilience to shock or change

A fool can learn from his own experience, the wise learn

from the experience of others. - Democritus


COMMON FORMS OF KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

Net

wo

rkin

g

Par

tner

ship

Info

rmal

P

artn

ersh

ip

Par

tner

ship

w

ith

som

e “F

orm

al”

Ele

men

ts

Inst

itut

iona

l P

artn

ersh

ip

Inte

r-O

rgan

izat

iona

l P

artn

ersh

ip

Attributes Web of relationships, or loose ties of information transfer and reciprocity, fuelled by trust

Self-governing and self-regulating

Members articulate ways to leverage some arrangements

Highly dependent on informal leadership to achieve purpose or goal

Partnership with a common name and collective identity

Guiding principles and norms for decision-making and emerging or well-established governance structures

Small secretariat facilitates functioning of the partnership and is primarily accountable to partnership members

Legally recognized entities with institutional legitimacy; can attract large project funding from the state, private sector donors

Structures and systems to manage and account for complex funded projects and to rapidly disseminate information and promote creativity and innovation

Contractual relationships, agreements, and accountabilities, where funded projects and delivering on results are the main drivers of the partnership



PARTNERSHIPS

Net

wo

rkin

g

Par

tner

ship

Info

rmal

P

artn

ersh

ip

Par

tner

ship

w

ith

som

e “F

orm

al”

Ele

men

ts

Inst

itut

iona

l P

artn

ersh

ip

Inte

r-O

rgan

izat

iona

l P

artn

ersh

ip

Typical Benefits

Connections and relationships

Access to knowledge, experience, resources, and connections

Space in which to share information, develop good practices, and mobilize as a partnership for change

Collective identity, combined with internal and external legitimacy

Capability to synthesize learning, to do research, to move things forward between meetings, to mobilize the partnership for joint action and to manage relationships

Capacity to scale up and to take on complex, internally and externally funded projects, as a partnership with greater impact

Capacity to address complex local, national, regional, global, institutional or policy issues or integrated service delivery requiring collaboration among different stakeholder groups



PARTNERSHIPS

Net

wo

rkin

g

Par

tner

ship

Info

rmal

P

artn

ersh

ip

Par

tner

ship

w

ith

som

e “F

orm

al”

Ele

men

ts

Inst

itut

iona

l P

artn

ersh

ip

Inte

r-O

rgan

izat

iona

l P

artn

ersh

ip

Typical Limits and Challenges

Benefits accrue mostly to individual members, with limited impact on the partner organizations

Limited internal and external legitimacy

Risk of dissention around the purpose or goal

Due to limits on available resources and the challenges of organizational complexity, there are risks that the secretariat can begin to substitute for the partnership or does not have the capacity to meet the expectations of the partnership’s members

The secretariat can become driven by funding imperatives and contracts

Competition for access to resources can arise in the partnership and lead to loss of trust and reduced willingness to share information

Formalizing can reduce the flow of information and limit creativity and innovation

Fostering and preservingtrust, joint ownership,and collaboration

Possible competition orconflict over who holds power and accessesresources can lead to disengagementof actors, or loss of capabilitiesand legitimacy


COMPLEXITY IN KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

Aligns individuals or organizations to develop a collective value proposition

and common identity

Individuals come to share a set of ideas, language, and

standards

Connects individuals or organizations to allow

easy flow of and access to knowledge, experience,

resources, and connections

Fosters joint decision making and action for

agreed upon, specialized outcomes by aligned

individuals or organizations

• Mobilization• Advocacy• Learning and sharing• Delivering knowledge products and services• etc.

On Organicity• Initiation and start-up• Status quo or growth• Renewal or decline• Long-term sustainability

CONNECTIVITY Information

LEVEL OF COMPLEXITY INCREASES

PRODUCTION Initiative

ALIGNMENT Identity


DESIGNING A KNOWLEDGE PARTNERSHIP

1. What kind of partnership do you wish to build?2. What is the value proposition that will attract participants?3. What is the (initial) membership?4. How will the partnership be governed?5. What will the partnership’s structure be?6. What are the partnership’s operating principles?7. Who will build the partnership?

Partnerships are self-regulating systems: if they have no value proposition

individuals or organizations will exit them.

If more than two of the above statements hold, the collaborative task requires special arrangements.

How Complicated is the Collaborative Task?

• The task is not likely to be accomplished using only the skills in the organization.• The task must be addressed by a new arrangement designed specifically for the purpose or goal.• The task requires collective inputs from specialized individuals.• The task requires collective inputs from more than 10 individuals.• The members of the collaborative arrangement are in more than two geographical locations.• The success of the task depends on understanding the preferences or needs of individuals outside the organization.• The task must be accomplished under time pressure.• The outcome of the task will be influenced by uncertain, emerging events.



1. What Kind of Partnership? • Choose carefully and wisely. Are you wiling to be partners and is your partner? Is this an important and valuable partner?

• Partnerships should be designed to serve the partnership’s function.

• Take time to clarify what the purpose or goal of the partnership is. • Differentiate between the partnership design and partnership

launch phases.

2. What is the Partnership’s Value Proposition? • Sharing knowledge • Building trust

• Sharing experience • Building reciprocity • Sharing resources • Building diversity • Sharing connections • Building complementarity

3. What is the Partnership’s Membership? • Partnerships can be open or closed.

• Membership should be aligned to the purpose or goal and required capacities.

• There can be different categories of members, e.g., core group, inner circle, outer circle.

4. How Will the Partnership be Governed?

Who decides?• Core group• All members• Other arrangements

How are decisions reached?• By consensus• By democratic vote• By action (emergence)• By outsiders

What is decided?• Purpose or goal• Values and beliefs• Membership criteria• Member responsibilities• Plans and strategies• Outputs• Distribution of resources



5. What Will the Partnership’s Structure Be?

6. What Are the Partnership’s Operating Principles? • Make the partnership do the work and minimize “delegation” opportunities.

• Let connections flow to value. • Let variation create (unplanned) opportunities. • Keep plans and strategies flexible. • Encourage strategic learning from emergent strengths,

weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

7. Who Will Build the Partnership?

Sample Roles for Partnership Builders

Organizer Establishes the partnership’s purpose or goal and its value proposition, links the first nodes, and attracts initial resources.

Funder Provides initial resources.

Weaver Increases links among nodes and connects to new nodes.

Coordinator Helps establish the partnership’s shared value proposition, negotiates action plans for production, and coordinates production.

Coach Advises organizers, funders, weavers, and coordinators.


DESIGN CHECKLIST Purpose or Goal What is the value proposition?What will the partnership produce?What values and principles will guide it?

Membership Who will the members be?What are the membership criteria?Will there be different classes of members?What will be the obligations and benefits of members?

Governance What decisions will need to be made?Who will make decisions?How will decisions be made?

Structure What will the structure look like?What will the development path look like?

Measures What is success? What are its specifics?How will the partners know when success is achieved?How will success be rewarded?

Formation Who will build the partnership?Will an outside facilitator be used to facilitate alignment and production plans?Who will operate the partnership?

Production What hypotheses will you test?How will you design joint undertakings?How will you evaluate results?What will give you confidence to scale them up?

Communications Are open communications and information a visible indicator of the level of trust?Is the power of technology harnessed in support?

Resources What resources will fuel the partnership?What contributions will members make?What are all the possible sources of funding?Who will manage the cash?

Evaluation What factors do you want to assess?Who will do the evaluation?How will you design evaluation at the front end?


GROUND RULES IN SETTING UP


MANAGING KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

• Describe clearly the purpose or goal.• Clarify the roles and responsibilities of each party.• Develop mechanisms to resolve potential conflicts of interests or partner disputes.• Generate means to share information with other stakeholders.• Agree on principles of consultation: – Engaging diverse stakeholders – Instituting reliable operating structure and process management – Practicing transparency – Using effective communication channels – Fostering focus on interests, not positions or personalities – Allowing for independent verification – Being responsible to all concerned – Making use of existing networks – Incorporating capacity building – Allowing for process adjustments

Partnership Management Tasks • Weaving connections within the partnership and between the partnership and associated players.• Facilitating alignment that leads to production agreements.• Coordinating the actual work of production and partnership development.• Operating the partnership and handling management issues.• Monitoring and evaluating partnership development and performance.

Planning must, eventually, degenerate into work.

ASSIGNING RESPONSIBILITIES• Work plans lie at the core of a partnership’s value proposition.• In the voluntary, collaborative structure of a partnership, responsibilities still need to be made very clear.• It helps to have an “outsider” negotiate and structure the partnership’s relationships.

MANAGEMENT ISSUES THAT REQUIRE ATTENTION• Balancing between the needs of the “parts” and those of the “whole.”• Balancing autonomy with collective control, and stability with change.• Ensuring effective communications. “Policing” the partnership


SUCCESS CRITERIA FOR KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

INFORMAL LEADERSHIP • Coordinators are active and committed, give space to others, act as leaders of the cause the partnerships stands for, make connections, facilitate relationships, and make good use of resources.• The partnership relies on a core group of coordinators with complementary skills and usually includes a governing committee, secretariat, and working groups.

ALIGNMENT AND IDENTITY • The partnership connects individuals across functions, locations, and organizations and creates a third space for learning, creativity, innovation, and development of joint practice.• In the partnership, legitimacy is earned, not declared.• The partnership fosters the emergence of collective identity among members.

TECHNICAL EXPERTISE AND RESOURCES • Cooperation increases when the roles of individuals members are sharply defined.• The partnership is able to tap the technical expertise and professionalism of members and connect them to the higher purpose or goal that motivates them.• The partnership offers possibilities for individuals to use their knowledge outside of their organizations to create new knowledge and spark energy for change that, potentially, can be used by others.• The partnership is looked to and recognized by key stakeholders (e.g., policy makers) as a place to visit or consult for deep expertise.• Resources come in various forms: in-kind; grants; member funding; etc. “Sweat” equity is the key to most successful partnerships.


COORDINATION • Coordinators are both task- and relationship-oriented.• Coordinators focus first on serving partnership members. They earn and maintain the commitment of members by ensuring that the partnership responds to explicit (not constructed) needs.• Coordinators create a gift culture by coaching and mentoring. They encourage activity and interaction among members of the partnership and build networks to foster a sense of community.• Coordinators provide technical advice and scan the environment for opportunities to advance the partnership’s purpose or goal and benefit its members.

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS • The partnership has significant capability to use information and communications technology to facilitate rapid and broad-based interaction among members.• The partnership strengthens and supplements online communications with face-to-face interactions.

ADAPTIVE CAPACITY • Coordinators have strong analytical and adaptive capabilities and effectively anticipate and respond to changing circumstances.• The partnership invests in information and communications technology, relies on information exchanges to gather intelligence from a range of sources, and establishes spaces for processing and sharing data, information, and knowledge.• The partnership reinvents its working forms as needed.

SUCCESS CRITERIA FOR KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS


MAKING KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS WORK BETTER

EVALUATING KNOWLEDGE

PARTNERSHIPS

From To

Defining the right business arrangements

Developing the right working relationship

Creating ends metrics Creating means metricsEliminating differences Embracing differences

Establishing formal management systems and structures

Enabling collaborative behavior

Managing the external relationship with partners

Managing one’s internal stakeholders

The DAC Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance The OECD-Development Assistance Committee sets five criteria for evaluating development programs and projects:1. Relevance2. Efficiency3. Effectiveness4. Sustainability5. Impact

The OECD-DAC criteria should be considered when evaluating knowledge

partnerships but also during their design and for monitoring purposes.



PARTNERSHIPS

RELEVANCE Relates to whether or not the purpose or goal of the partnership is suited to the priorities and policies of the partners and those that the partners wish to influence, and is aligned with broader development priorities.

1. Does the partnership have a clear, shared purpose or goal that meets defined needs?2. Will the partnership help each organization to achieve more than it could on its own?3. Will the partnership help each partner to define its own areas of influence more clearly?

EFFICIENCYMeasures the qualitative and quantitative outputs in relation to the inputs. Attention should be given to alternative approaches to achieve the same outputs, and the extent to which the partnerships made optimal use of all available resources.

1. Have you explored different delivery options, including whether a partnership is the best approach?2. Are the necessary resources available, properly allocated, and well-matched for planned activities?3. Is there scope for adjustment of processes, activities, and resources during the lifespan of the partnership?4. Is there clarity on management of the assets (funds, intellectual property, and brand) of the partnership?

EFFECTIVENESSRefers to the extent to which the knowledge partnerships attains its purpose or goal.

1. Does the partnership have a clear outcome identified?2. Are there processes, infrastructure, and resources with sufficient flexibility in place for • Quality exchange of knowledge and experience? • Regular communication and meetings? • Communicating beyond the partnership?3. Have you mutually agreed upon a framework for monitoring work over time?



PARTNERSHIPS

SUSTAINABILITYGauges the likelihood that the achievements of the partnership and the partnership itself can be sustained, that last concern resting on four dimensions: • Relevance – whether the purpose or goal of the partnership is still relevant • Relationships – whether the partners are still active • Resources – whether resources are still available • Time – whether continuation of the partnership is necessary

1. How can the outcome of the partnership work be sustained?2. Should the partnership itself be sustained and, if so, how?3. Do you know what motivates the partners to want to continue to participate?4. Are there mechanisms in place to jointly reflect, learn, and adapt over an extended life span of the partnership?

IMPACTRefers to the positive and negative changes produced by the partnership activities, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. The impact should be examined at two levels: • The contribution that the partnership as a whole makes to the attainment of development priorities; and • The improvement of each partner’s institutional capacity to have impact.

1. How will you ascertain whether the outcome led to impact?2. How will you ascertain whether people outside of the partnership are aware of the knowledge generated and use it?3. How will you ascertain whether the partners’ capacities increased as a result of the partnership?4. Does the partnership have flexibility for the unexpected to emerge?


QUALITIES CHECKLIST

FOR EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS

FURTHER READING

1. The partnership has a solid base of joint commitment and understanding.2. There is a clear and appropriately detailed plan for achieving the purpose or goal of the partnership.3. Each partner clearly benefits from the partnerships.4. Sufficient and appropriate resources are committed from all partners for achieving the purpose or goal of the partnerships.5. The partnership has an appropriate level of formality.6. The partnership has good leadership.7. The partnership has clear and effective lines of accountability.8. Partners communicate in a productive and supportive way.9. There is trust in the function of the partnership.10. Accurate and appropriate indicators are used to evaluate and improve the success and progress of the partnership.

•ADB.2008.Building Communities of Practice. Available: http://www.adb.org/documents/information/ knowledge-solutions/building-communities-practice.pdf• ADB. 2009. Building Networks of Practice. Available: http://www.adb.org/documents/information/ knowledge-solutions/building-networks-of-practice.pdf • ADB. 2008. Creating and Running Partnerships. Available: http://www.adb.org/documents/information/ knowledge-solutions/creating-running-partnerships.pdf• ADB. 2009. Enhancing Knowledge Management Strategies. Available: http://www.adb.org/documents/information/knowledge- solutions/enhancing-knowledge-management-strategies.pdf• ADB. 2009. Learning in Strategic Alliances. Available: http://www.adb.org/documents/information/ knowledge-solutions/learning-in-strategic-alliances.pdf• ADB. 2009. Strengthening Communities of Practice in ADB. Available: http://www.adb.org/documents/reports/consultant/ strengthening-communities-of-practice.pdf• ADB. 2011. Guidelines for Knowledge Partnerships. Manila. Available: http://beta.adb.org/publications/guidelines-knowledge- partnerships

ADB’s vision is an Asia and Pacific region free of poverty. Its mission is to help its developing member countries reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of their people. Despite the region’s many successes, it remains home to two-thirds of the world’s poor: 1.8 billion people who live on less than $2 a day, with 903 million struggling on less than $1.25 a day. ADB is committed to reducing poverty through inclusive economic growth, environmentally sustainable growth, and regional integration.

Based in Manila, ADB is owned by 67 members, including 48 from the region. Its main instruments for helping its developing member countries are policy dialogue, loans, equity investments, guarantees, grants, and technical assistance.

For more information, contact Knowledge Management Center Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 632 6710 Fax +63 2 632 5264 [email protected] www.adb.org/knowledge-management/

ABOUT THE ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

March 2012© 2012 by Asian Development Bank. All rights reserved.

Knowledge Primers serve as quick introductions to knowledge management and learning applications in development work.

In an attractive package, they are suitable for interactive presentations and self-learning for action. They are offered as resources

to ADB staff. They may also appeal to the development community and people having interest in knowledge and learning.

Designing Knowledge Partnerships Better

Documents

Transcript of Designing Knowledge Partnerships Better