Phase1 review ws-intro-2_km&julian

Knowledge Management

and Repackaging

Phase 1 Repackaging Review Workshop, Bangkok, 4th Oct. 2011By Michael Victor, Martin Van Brakel, Lalith Dassenaike, Julian Gonsalves,

Tonya Schuetz

Presentation Content

Knowledge management (KM) processes and

research and CPWF approach

Perspectives from Julian on

� CPWF Research utilization and knowledge management � CPWF Research utilization and knowledge management

� Development of the resource package, where we are

now

� Stories to tell

Why KM is important

Research and development institutions are being

challenged to demonstrate a poverty orientation

(pro-poor), show impact and ensure results are

cost-effective.cost-effective.

Research generation is not more important than

research utilization: both are equally important.

Knowledge management makes the big difference.

Approach to KM

Processes Packaging

Power: information

= power

Partnerships

Processes Packaging

We are here

5

Dr. Peter Ashton, CSIR

Networks & Partnerships: like a

value chain

Leverage networks and partnerships

Maximize opportunities within these networks to

establish relationships

ResearchResearchNext usersNext users

End users End

users

establish relationships

Looks at impact pathways, who we want to

influence, what we want to change

From research to next users

Of importance:

the simplification of science

the breaking down of scientific results into easily

understood “information bits”understood “information bits”

ensure relevance of information

Boil down the information to the “essence”: the

most important idea only needs to be shared.

Knowledge management is often a function of good

packaging or repackaging.

What does a trillion dollars look

like?

In $100 bills

Learning as we went along in the

repackaging effort

Julian F. Gonsalves, PhDJulian F. Gonsalves, PhD

Knowledge management is about

research utilization and application

Desk reviews of research outputs to

identify relevant topics and messages

Value of evidence-based Value of evidence-based

recommendations

Ideas with potential for up-scaling and

wider uptake

Research utilization can be enhanced by

proper packaging and delivery (beyond

"extension“). Research reports are difficult

to read and use.to read and use.

CPWF Phase One understood the need

for enhancing research-use (with

emphasis on uptake, up-scaling, impact

pathways, research into use, etc.).pathways, research into use, etc.).

CWPF Phase One: Classified some of the

projects as "legacy projects". Some were

identified for special attention for follow up

work.work.

Project reports were expected to report on

impacts, outcomes not just outputs.

Significant impact stories were collected. A

water and food global forum was water and food global forum was

organized in Ethiopia.

The repackaging exercise built on this rich

background. We have only done partial

justice to Phase One outputs. That’s a

reality. Phase One is a treasure trove of reality. Phase One is a treasure trove of

useful ideas.

We started with posters. Posters are

probably the most neglected mechanism

for conveying research-derived messages.

Bringing more attention to the value of Bringing more attention to the value of

posters as a user-friendly attractive

mechanism.

Outcome stories not project summaries3

not impact stories... even intermediary

outcomes, even processes and

partnerships are featured.partnerships are featured.

Source book articles: source book as key

mechanism to encourage people to further

explore available research resources.

Briefing notes: terminal reports might lend

themselves to this preparation of research

briefs.

Stories to tell

IRRI Rainfed Rice and RWC reports

Agrobio and Participatory Research

source books

ICRAF Shifting Cultivation and

Agroforestry source book

Lao Uplands Sourcebook

Lao Uplands Sourcebook

Challenge: Previously information scattered and kept locked away. Challenge was to make research results and past experiences in uplands resource management available to field workers, students available to field workers, students and others.

Proposed solution: Develop process to produce materials which could

1. provide a menu of choices for those working in the uplands

2. Bring key actors together to produce joint materials on a continual basis

Lessons learned

This sourcebook served as

example for collaboration

between research-extension-

educationeducation

Use of materials:� Excellent use from students, schools and

teachers

� Development professionals, planners

and researchers used quite extensively

� Difficult to get used by extension agents

� Used by Community radio

� Less success in deriving further materials

(serialization, etc)

Work in progress (near completion)

Editing not undertaken

Focus on the value of an idea then shift to

editing and presentation

Gaps exist and opportunities for building on Gaps exist and opportunities for building on

(within limits)

Time to get outputs out and add on other

products or adaptations (e.g. basin specific) later

on.

Prototype value of products (e.g. CAPRI work)