The BELO Program

From microLINKS Wiki

Comments and observations are welcome and encouraged. However, please do not make changes to the definitions as they may change readers' understanding of BELO partners' learning and sharing experiences. Thank you.

Purpose

Realizing the importance of learning across the breadth of the MSE development and microfinance industries, the Microenterprise Development office of USAID supported activities to build the capacity of participating agencies to become ‘learning organizations.’ In early 2006 MD selected four international development organizations (CARE-USA, the World Council of Credit Unions (WOCCU), Practical Action, and Freedom From Hunger) from a large pool of applicants for funding to assist them in Building more Effective Learning Organizations (BELO). With these awards, MD intended to increase these organizations’ knowledge sharing and learning (KS&L) capabilities and to support horizontal-learning opportunities amongst partners. For the long term, the MD office was interested to see how these organizations would more effectively integrate internal and external lessons learned into idea generation and improved programs. During the grant period, representatives from these four organizations held quarterly conference calls to share their experiences and brainstorm for ideas to address actual challenges faced in their processes to become more effective learning organizations. The lessons learned and recommendations offered in here are the result of the partners’ individual and collective learning.

Distinguishing between the various components of knowledge management and learning is an important step in effectively using knowledge for learning. Widely recognized as the ‘Knowledge Hierarchy’, the ‘Information Hierarchy’ and the ‘Knowledge Pyramid’ and first developed by Russell Ackoff and Milan Zeleny , the DIKW framework is a simple way to understand and think about the progression of data to wisdom. Data is the raw input, the facts and numbers. With analysis and an understanding of context, data becomes information. According to Heres , this information only becomes knowledge when “combined with skills, attitudes and experience”— information therefore does not become knowledge until used. Being able to discern when, why and how to use this knowledge is wisdom and is dependent upon reflection. It is also what contributes to better future decision making.

Knowledge Management and Learning: A Few Useful Terms and Concepts

Distinguishing between the various components of knowledge management and learning is an important step in effectively using knowledge for learning. Widely recognized as the ‘Knowledge Hierarchy’, the ‘Information Hierarchy’ and the ‘Knowledge Pyramid’ and first developed by Russell Ackoff and Milan Zeleny^[1], the DIKW framework is a simple way to understand and think about the progression of data to wisdom. Data is the raw input, the facts and numbers. With analysis and an understanding of context, data becomes information. According to Heres^[2], this information only becomes knowledge when “combined with skills, attitudes and experience”— information therefore does not become knowledge until used. Being able to discern when, why and how to use this knowledge is wisdom and is dependent upon reflection. It is also what contributes to better future decision making.

Knowledge and Knowledge Management

Knowledge exists in different types; the following definitions are taken from Britton^[3]:

• Explicit knowledge is clearly articulated and accessible to anyone who reads, hears or looks at it (e.g. a training guide on using a software package or the conclusions of a policy briefing paper);

• Tacit (or implicit) knowledge is unconscious and intuitive; it allows experts to make decisions without referring to rules or principles (e.g. knowing how to perform medical operations, knowing how to network at a conference).

A ‘first generation’ approach to knowledge management would be that which understands the value of raw data, recognizes its contribution to institutional memory and prioritizes its compilation and storage. Many organizations have taken this first and necessary step into learning; however, some of these organizations are frustrated at the lack of results because they have not yet taken the next step—using the information as a dynamic component of program design and decision making.

Learning and Learning Organizations

Learning can be understood as the process that transforms information into knowledge and involves developing an ability to do something. For a development organization learning leads to observable improvements in its own development practice or its ability to influence others.^[4]

Though there is no concrete definition of a learning organization, it is recognized that learning organizations value continuous learning, believe it is most effective when shared, and see every day experiences as opportunities to learn and incorporate knowledge. Learning organizations tend to share the following characteristics:

• They provide continuous learning opportunities.

• They use learning to reach their goals.

• They link individual performance with organizational performance.

• They foster inquiry and dialog, making it safe for people to share openly and take risks.

• They embrace creative tension as a source of energy and renewal.

• They are continuously aware of and interact with their environment.^[5]

While many organizations value collective and individual learning, this is insufficient to create a ‘learning organization’ if that organization does not connect those learning opportunities to the organization’s planning, policy and strategy formation. By connecting knowledge agents through integrated learning opportunities, rather than by skills and task, the learning organization closes communication gaps, thereby increasing dialog and enabling a reiterative analysis of programs, processes and policies.

According to Britton,^[6] learning organizations are structured so as to facilitate learning and enable it at five levels while recognizing and allowing for overlap: individual learning; learning in teams or work groups, either permanent or temporary; cross-functional learning; operational organization-level learning; strategic organizational learning. Effective learning organizations also recognize the horizontal-learning benefits derived from partnering and knowledge sharing across development agencies. Further, these organizations practice adaptive management – continuously seeking new input, observing outcomes and adjusting program and policy frameworks, always responding to emerging industry trends and prompting institutional change. Learning and using knowledge is embedded in the learning organization’s culture.

As the BELO partners explored the literature and reflected on their own experiences in knowledge sharing and learning (KS&L) they have come to understand Knowledge Management (KM) as the management of learning, knowledge and information within an organization so as to make it accessible and applicable to further organizational or programmatic goals.

Approaches to Learning

Experiental Learning

Learning organizations achieve outcomes of increased understanding and action (change) through an iterative process that alternates actions, such as program design and implementation, with periods of critical reflection, such as monitoring and evaluation, as well as integration of new ideas from a variety of sources. When practice, based on careful analysis, is then re-assessed to contribute to ongoing learning, a cycle is completed.

An effective learning cycle includes program design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and sharing and gathering of new information or inputs. These components, linked by strategic ongoing analysis and learning, enable organizations to refine and strengthen their learning while gleaning new understandings and lessons to apply to future program development. This approach to learning and growth is particularly well-suited to integrating lessons learned, documenting local best practices from a variety of perspectives, and aligning organizations to build on previous successes. The traditional knowledge cycle expands, becoming a “knowledge spiral,” with each cycle pushing the bounds of technical knowledge and expertise further and helping organizations keep pace with the rapid evolution of new trends in micro- and small-enterprise development and/or microfinance (see diagram).

Kolb’s four stage ‘Experiential Learning Cycle’ model as illustrated in Praxis Paper 3^[7]

Single, Double, and Triple Loop Learning in Aid Agencies

In order to experience transformational change, organizations need to practice what is called triple-loop learning. Single-loop learning deals with explicit practices, policies and norms and fosters incremental improvements but without developing or exploring the basis for these improvements; learning at this level addresses the ‘how’ of doing, but very seldom goes any deeper to explore or even ask ‘why’. Double-loop learning encourages the ‘why’ question as to underlying beliefs that shape practices, policies and norms and can frequently result in their being changed. According to Ramalingam,^[8] triple-loop is organizational self-examination in the highest form and is the challenging of organization’s entire rationale, principles and operating assumptions; here, the entire organization’s practices, structure and very culture may be changed.

In most aid agencies single-loop learning happens at individual and group levels. However, evidence suggests that this is usually in an informal and ad hoc manner. In Ramalingam’s research on knowledge and learning practices in the development sector, all the organizations studied saw value in informal learning, specifically in small acts of informal knowledge sharing and daily reflection. But there was no clear sense that such activities were actively supported by, or even related to, organizational learning strategies, even though they were generally regarded as key.

Programmatic Versus Organizational Knowledge Management and Learning

Implementing a knowledge sharing and learning strategy can be an organization-wide initiative to improve the effectiveness of the NGO, but can also focus on a specific program or initiative within the larger organization. Both approaches are quite different in terms of initial needs assessment, strategy development and implementation, which will be exemplified by the different case studies.

Within the BELO project, Practical Action and CARE focused their efforts on improving learning at the programmatic level (the Markets and Livelihoods Program within Practical Action, and Village Savings and Loan Programming within the Economic Development Unit of CARE), whereas Freedom From Hunger chose to support its organization-wide path towards improving KS&L as a new strategic initiative, which was underway prior to the commencement of the BELO project. WOCCU focused its BELO efforts on hiring a knowledge management coordinator for the project duration, whose scope of work was to develop a set of program modules, capturing existing knowledge for various program components in one place and providing these in a manner that would enhance future program design. After a review of program materials that covered four years and multiple projects in countries, the WOCCU KM coordinator focused on one module topic: credit union building in conflict and fragile environments. In conjunction, the coordinator engaged discussion with staff from all levels within the headquarter office to discuss WOCCU’s knowledge management and learning trends and needs. She also led a knowledge audit, which has triggered awareness by senior management on the importance of further improving knowledge and learning. Further details of these two approaches and how they were applied by the four BELO participants are available in appendix A.

An effective learning organization needs to emphasize knowledge management and sharing, but it also needs to engage in additional analysis and judgment to translate knowledge into new insights and action. Therefore, the implications of this type of learning for an organization are related not just to improving knowledge management systems and processes (which can be accomplished relatively easily), but also to developing new tools for dialogue and holistic analysis, as well as promoting attitudes and skills for working collaboratively.^[9]

---

Notes

1. ↑ Ackoff, Russell L. (1989). "From Data to Wisdom". Journal of Applied Systems Analysis 16: 3–9; Zeleny, Milan (1987). "Management Support Systems: Towards Integrated Knowledge Management". Human Systems Management 7 (1): 59–70.
2. ↑ Heres, Ibid
3. ↑ Britton, Bruce (2002). Learning for Change: Principles and practices of learning organizations, Swedish Mission Council.
4. ↑ Ibid.
5. ↑ Kerka, Sandra, (1995). The learning organization: myths and realities Eric Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education; Center on Education and Training for Employment.
6. ↑ Britton, ibid.
7. ↑ Britton, Bruce (2005). Organizational Learning in NGOs: Creating the Motive, Means and Opportunity, Praxis Paper No. 3, INTRAC.
8. ↑ Ramalingam, Ben. Organisational learning for aid, and learning aid organizations. Retrieved September 27, 2008, from http://www.capacity.org/en/journal/feature/organisational_learning_for_aid_and_learning_aid_organisations
9. ↑ Pasteur, K. (2004). Learning for Development: A literature review. Lessons for Change in Policy and Organizations No 6. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.

Return to Outline