1. Effective Networking for Social Learning
The Experience of Grupo Chorlaví
Julio A. Berdegué
Presented at the Annual Meeting 2004 of Euforic, June 8-9, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands

2. Contents Grupo Chorlaví
What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Achieving the intended outcomes
Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection

3. Grupo Chorlaví Contents
What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Achieving the intended outcomes
Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection

4. Grupo Chorlavi
10,000 individuals
442 NGOs and CBO

5. Grupo Chorlavi
The objective of Grupo Chorlaví is to promote social learning to support the initiatives carried out by individuals, groups and organizations working for the transformation of Latin America rural societies
An experiential learning approach, i.e., social learning based on critical reflection about initiatives being carried out by a wide variety of catalysts of change in Latin American rural societies

6. Grupo Chorlavi Tools and platforms
Fondo Mink’a de Chorlaví - Competitive Grant Fund
Electronic conferences
InterCambios electronic newsletter
Internet-based distance training
Chorlaví electronic list
Special Cooperation Agreements
Eldis en Español

7. What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Contents
Grupo Chorlaví
What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Achieving the intended outcomes
Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection

8. Effective networking for social learning
Why social learning?
Disappointing results of old approaches
New economic, political, social and cultural contexts
New societal demands on rural societies
New objectives of rural social actors
Few of the old ways of thinking and of doing are still relevant and effective

9. Effective networking for social learning
Can be defined based on three outcomes:
A functional, vibrant, group or community of individuals and organizations
Diversity and representativeness of participants
Intensity and frequency of the interactions
Trust and reciprocity

10. Effective networking for social learning
Can be defined based on three outcomes:
The quality of the social learning process and its results and products
Who learns?
Are the questions (learning objectives) pertinent and to whom? (“Boundary partners”)
Is existing knowledge considered?
How rigorous and systematic is the experience-based critical refection process?
Are conclusions and lessons up-scalable?
Is the process well documented and communicated?
Are new capacities built or strengthened?

11. Effective networking for social learning
Can be defined based on three outcomes:
Influence
It cannot happen if the two above have not been achieved
Is dependent on how much the ‘boundary partners’ trust the knowledge generated and the group of people who generated it

12. Achieving the intended outcomes
Contents
Grupo Chorlaví
What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Achieving the intended outcomes
Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection

13. Achieving the outcomes
Effective networking for social learning is:
10% inspiration and 90% transpiration
90% of the transpiration is experimentation
A constant frame of mind: learning about social learning

14. 1. The people and the quality of the interactions
The approach to the issue of the participants and their interaction will depend on which of two types of networking is taking place:
netWORK or
NETwork

15. 1. The people and the quality of the interactions
netWORK:
Which people and which types of interactions do you need?
Is about the coordination of distributed work and co-production of knowledge, goods and services
Is about bringing together specialized skills ... and coordinate them to obtain an integrated result

16. 1. The people and the quality of the interactions
NETwork
Which people and which types of interactions do you need?
Is about mutual contributions of information to independent (not coordinated) goals, objectives, initiatives ....
Is about linking people who complement in each other in the type of knowledge they have access to, but that are related enough to be relevant to each other

17. 1. The people and the quality of the interactions
Regardless of the type of networking, ICTs cannot deliver the goods if there is not a pre-existing social nucleus
Networks which work for everyone and no one on particular, tend to be the victims of the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’

18. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Grupo Chorlaví’s experience is more of the netWORK kind, with elements of NETwork
A seven step process:
Identify and engage the ‘boundary partners’
Establish a social learning agenda
Identify critical questions and issues  learning objectives
Design ‘learning projects’ to achieve ‘learning projects’
Document the process and the results
Communicate
Build capacities

19. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Identify and engage the ‘boundary partners’
netWORKING for social learning cannot be very effective if it is a ‘common property’ process, that engages everyone and no one in particular
Who
asks the questions?
is engaged in the learning process?
who establishes the meaning of the results?
who qualifies the findings?
who is the end user and ‘beneficiary’ of the process and of its results?

20. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Establish a social learning agenda
What are the important questions that the network will answer in the medium term?
Criteria need to be defined, of two types:
What we would like to do
What we can actually do
Experts need to be engaged and consulted, to compare with the ‘state of the art’

21. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Identify critical questions and issues  learning objectives
To netWORK effectively you need to define clear objectives
Learning objectives are specific questions that, in total, allow the network to deal with the medium term social learning agenda

22. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Design ‘learning projects’ to achieve ‘learning projects’
Once learning objectives are clear, social learning processes can be treated as a project:
A theory
A learning method
Milestones
Partners with tasks and obligations
Time framework
Budget
Partnership
Governance mechanism for the partnership and the project

23. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Document the process and the results
Self-evident...
But almost never done!!!

24. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Communicate
Diffuse communication – to the broad public of individuals and groups presumably interested in the agenda, the learning objectives and the results and outputs of the learning project
Focused communication – an attempt to reach specific individuals and organizations who have it in their power to ‘do something important’

25. 2. The quality of the social learning process
Build capacities
A response to the demand for demonstrating impact of the learning process
Limited in reach, but significant ICT-based opportunities
Engage boundary partners who can have large ‘multiplier effects’, for example:
Higher education (leading MSc courses)
Managers of large development projects
Leadership of significant social movements & organizations
Coordinators and key members of important networks
Publishers of regional or national journals

26. 3. Influence
By definition, social learning organizations and processes do not have ‘impacts’ in the sense of direct and lineal cause effect relationships
For all practical purposes, it is impossible to attribute effects to a social learning process
But social learning can have great influence
A direct function of:
The quality of the people engaged in the learning process and of their interactions
The quality of the learning process and its results and products

27. Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection
Contents
Grupo Chorlaví
What we mean by effective networking for social learning?
Achieving the intended outcomes
Issues for further experimentation and critical reflection

28. Issues for further experimentation
Should we seek to have sustainable networks or should we be more concerned with effective networking resulting in outcomes which are sustainable in themselves? When one or the other or both?
How do we evaluate effective networking for social learning? What do we do with ‘accountability’ and ‘impact’? Are there technically and politically feasible alternatives?
How do we deal with issues of power in networks? For example, donors as participants in networks, N-S networks, researcher-practitioner networks, computer skilled and equipped vs unskilled and less equipped...
Capacity-building in networking

29. www.GrupoChorlavi.org and www.FondoMinkaChorlavi.org
Thank you!
and