After Action Review - Share Fair Cali and learning from it

The Share Fair Cali, which took place at CIAT Campus from 25 - 27 May, 2010, was the second Share Fair I have helped to organize. (First one was in Rome, Italy)

We used our expereince from the previous event to plan this one. I was physically not present but was connected to the event through the 2 video conferencing sessions we organized, constant dialog with the organization team as well as the various social media used to share the learning.

My colleagues, Sophie, Renata and Vanda attended the event and came back with lots of positive energy. They also brought along their lessons learned from the event. Based on this as well as the participants feedback and organizing team's after action review, here are a few dos and dont's for us to take into our Addis Share Fair planning team.

What should we continue doing?

• Keep the steering committee small with each person in the team having a clear role.
• Continue to do a Knowledge Tree – many participants enjoyed putting leaves on the tree. A follow-up visit to the Tree should be also organized.
• Participants enjoyed the open space – they had a chance to organize sessions of their interest.
• The session on tools worked well because two members of the steering committee showed how the tools were used in real context (i.e. to organize the event itself). Both screens were projected on the wall so participants could see what they were doing on their laptops.
• The products which were ordered for the event, such as the conference bags, were all produced by local handicraft organizations. This worked out extremely well as it generated work and therefore income for local communities.
• The bar allowed participants to gather together between sessions to talk and network.
• Each session had clear objectives and that helped to focus the session.
• It was useful to make the thematic workshop sessions longer (2 hours and a half) and to have a content moderator (expert) in addition to the facilitator.
• The different formats used for the workshops (talk show, Samoan circle, fishbowl, world cafés, card sorting) were highly appreciated by the participants.
  

The key lessons learned were:

• Create a Steering Committee and clear responsibilities need to be fulfilled by each member of the Committee.
• There should be more interaction between the organizers and the participants prior to the Fair (which would need more resources) in order to establish a closer rapport. This would make clearer to everyone the intended substance and format of the Fair and its purpose.
• As part of training in knowledge sharing methods and tools during any one of the Share Fair, there should be an introductory session on methods and tools, what these are, how they work, and what purposes they are suitable for.
• Ensure appropriate language coverage.
• Don’t organize video session unless they are fully integrated into the agenda with facilitated discussions as a follow-up. They could also be part of a discussion session as a different presentation format.
• In case of booths, set up a limited manageable number. A game such as scavenger hunt can be organized with a prize to encourage visits to the booths and interaction with the booth owners. A guided tour or random interview of booth owners during a special session dedicated to the booths might also be another option to encourage interaction.
• In the agenda, introduce a “morning news” sessions which includes summaries/reporting back from previous sessions. This allows those who might have not been able to attend a session to know what happened as well as who to follow-up with.
• Introduce a session on “ABC of Knowledge Management” as many participants want to know more about the theory as well as clarity on terminology.
• At the end of each session, if there is no detailed reporting organized, interview (audio/video or both) one or two participants on the key lessons learned from or key issues that came out during the session.
• We don’t have a final list of participants because there was no formal registration / reception desk so it is important to register.
• Facilitator should be well versed in the methods they use. Success of the session depends on their ability to facilitate, adjust and adapt.
• Ensure at all steps (in the announcements, website, emails or guidelines sent to participants, at the plenary session of the actual event, etc.) that participants are aware of the innovative methodology and the objectives of the event (networking, sharing of lessons learned, building of partnerships, learning and training). They should be informed at all times that the event is not like a traditional conference – with series of presentations - and requires their active participation, out-of-the-box thinking and emphasizes learning and sharing.
• The video conferencing from Rome added an aspect diversity in the methods/formats used during event. However, it also slowed down the dynamics. Additionally, it would be been useful for (1) all FAO participants to be introduced and (2) if a facilitator on the FAO side also added an element of interaction instead of the FAO speakers interacting only with the facilitator at the venue.
• It is important to ensure adequate internet (wireless or internet points) support for the participants.
• World café sessions in combination with the presentations worked well. The presentations allowed the stage to be set, then the facilitator identified few streams together with the participants and then discussed them in World Café format. Ideas that came out during the world café session were then captured by one person on a flip-chart and these were then presented to the whole group.

There is no perfect recipe for organizing this type of event - there are many factors that add to its success. The lessons learned here are clearly good tips for us to take into account as we work towards planning the Addis as well as other Share Fairs.

The impact of the event is even more difficult to monitor as it depends on how the knowledge shared and the lessons learned are utilized, how the connections made will help the participants in supporting their work and how they incorporate learning before, during and after into their organizations processes!

Have you organized any Share Fair events? What has been your experience?

Share Fair Cali opens with a video-conference between Cali and Rome

The Share Fair Cali opened today with a chat show between:

• Stephen Katz, Jefe, Servicios de Gestión de Conocimiento y Biblioteca, Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación (FAO), por videoconferencia
• Ruben Echeverría, Director General, Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), por videoconferencia
• James B. French, Director, Liderazgo Técnico y Gestión del Conocimiento, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA)
• Enrica Porcari, Directora, Programa de Nuevas Tecnologías y Gestión del Conocimiento (ICT-KM) del Grupo Consultivo para la Investigación Agrícola Internacional de (CGIAR)
• Esmeralda Solarte, Agricultora, Silvia, Colombia
• John Smith, Consultor, miembro de la comunidad KM4Dev, Portland, EEUU

Stephen Katz and Ruben Echeverría participated via video conference from FAO in Rome. The session went well with very few glitches - thanks to two preparatory tests carried out yesterday and about 10 days ago. A big thanks to Elena!

This was a great example of collaboration as well as use of technology.

Key things to remember:

• The internet connection needs to support the audio/video connection. If this can't be done, an option could have been to use only audio connection.
  
• Test! Test! Test! We did two tests - one general test to see how the connection works, at what speed we need to connect, what we need to keep in mind as we are connected. The second test was with the participants of the actual event to show / familiarize them with the set up. One tip we had for participants from our side was to keep all the microphones muted so that we would not clog the line.
  
• Stay connected via other means - Simone in Cali and I in Rome were connected to each other via Skype. Originally, we had problems with the sound as we were being fed the interpretation rather than the original voice. As soon as I let Simone know, she helped correct the problem and after that it was a smooth sail.
  

KSGhana: Feedback from Fishbowl on do we need good/best practices and what FAO can do to share them

We had a very interesting Fish Bowl on the importance of collecting good/best practices. We divided the 4 chairs into red (against collecting) and blue (pro collecting). Here are some of the thoughts participants shared:

• If we were to collect good practices, we would need to do them all the time. Do we have enough time for that? Do we know who/how it is being used?
• We often collect them but do not have appropriate sharing plans. We need a blended approach to sharing our knowledge. The terminal project reports would be one approach, but these should be combined with other media (podcasts, videos, summary briefs, etc.)
  
• They are important for FAO but we need to think about the various types of audience for the good practice and prepare the appropriate package for them.
  
• Often projects have technical objectives but do not incorporate knowledge sharing as a logical next steps of the results. The project teams should consist of professional communications experts who can support the "simplification" of the technical knowledge and improve the dissemination of the knowledge. It is important to plan the use of project outputs from the beginning.
  
• Collecting good practices also allow us to get experiential knowledge, not just the technical knowledge.
• We need to show staff members the various channels available for sharing. Many technical project staff might not have the experience for using these channels but they will be informed and be able to make possible choices based on their context.
  
• Collected experience should also be translated when appropriate and made available to potential users who may not understand the original language of the report.
  

The general agreement was we need to think about communications (and knowledge sharing) from the beginning, the teams should consist of people with experience/expertise in communications, and ensure that blended (multi-modal) approaches are used when disseminating outputs. Given that this can be expensive, projects should incorporate KS and communications right from the beginning. We then can design teams with necessary competence.

Are we able to do that? What do you think? Is investing in good practices worth while?

KSGhana: Feedback on Peer Assist method

Yesterday, the last method we tried out was Peer Assist. We had two Assistees with very different problems. The first one was focused on how to ensure that staff members convey their travel plans to the clerical staff members in time while the second one was focused on identifying possible venues for acquiring funding.

The feedback on the method was:

• The method was useful because even if I didn't relate directly to the problem, I learned new things from the answers given by others and as a result both sides benefit from the discussion.
• It makes us bind together even if you don't have answer to the specific problem.
• Generational gap - asking for help comes easily for younger generation
• The asssistee was stressed at the beginning but as the answers/suggestions started to flow, the person relaxed
• Empowers younger generation.
  
• People have ideas that can assist you. They are also often willing to assist you - its just a matter of asking.
• How to go about organizing it? The informal nature helps and organizing "beer assists" could be useful
• New term for brainstorming. However, we are not in habit but should be cultivated.
• Encouraging people you don't expect to contribute useful ideas
• informal but time is money - is there value in using it?
• There is need for humility in asking and helping. There is an element of joy and belonging to the same issue and contributing in way to support the problem.

KSGhana: Chat Show - Collecting good practices/lessons learned and feedback on the method

This morning we started with a chat show hosted by Lucie. The guest speakers, Justin, Diana and Chris, were invited as panellists to share their experience.

The three experiences were as follows:

KAINET - lessons learned were captured at various intervals in the project. A person was dedicated to collecting the lessons learned. This was integrated into the project so funding was available for this person. AAR was also used to capture lessons. It allowed to identify the issues by seeing what didn't work and why. The lessons learned were shared with key stakeholders within the participating and partner institutions. This way, the future project development would have to take into account lessons learned from the previous experience.

Mainstreaming gender in agricultural projects - The experience was collected and made available through a CD. Data was collected from statisticians in African countries, FAO colleagues and a person was made in charge to create the CD. The process took 2 years. The idea for the CD came when Diana was repeating her experience to different countries. The CD is a collaboration between data producers and collectors and use of the CD will increase the quality of the data.

Aquaculture project - The project is cutting edge so they are looking towards the future. Six project partners (countries) meet regularly and steer the project. The project itself is a case-study for the other regions in Africa. The Aquaculture Networks for Africa (ANA) which uses case studies from Asia and other parts of the world. They look at the good points there and share/propose it to the African region. Staff also have opportunity to meet each other from various regional networks to share experience. This facilitates cross-fertilisation and the network is the body that collects the knowledge.

Key Challenges:

• Communication/willingness to share information/knowledge.
• Language
• Projects are seen as source of income by the participating organizations
• Information is not circulated well enough both within and between countries
• One option could be to put enough request for funding under the monitoring and evaluation phase of the project

One of the participants said, its not that we do not collect lessons learned/good practices but it is also about sharing them and making them available for future use.

The feedback on the method was:

• The method needs good preparation from both host and guests.
  
• Both the host and the guests should put on the "role" of chat show to bring the more technical out in a informal/relaxed environment
• There is limited visual information for the studio audience. There should be balance between the visual and the "chatting" part. For example, by using presentation slides in the background or short videos to introduce the topic.
  
• In a more formal setting, rehearsal would help otherwise the guests may feel bit ill prepared.
  
• And more importantly, it is important to know when this method is useful and when not.