In October 2007, the Institute of International Education (IIE) received an Organizational Effectiveness subprogram grant that was different from traditional grants given out by the subprogram. The grantee “organization” was a network of reproductive health leaders in the five countries where IIE had been implementing their Leadership Development for Mobilizing Reproductive Health Program (LDM) since 2000.
The vision of the LDM program includes fostering collective action to improve reproductive health options. But just how to foster collective action was one of the challenges.
IIE engaged consultant Eugene Eric Kim to help leadership fellows strengthen their networks and integrate social media technologies into their communication and planning processes. By the time the project began, fellows in each of the five countries had already established networks of various sizes—small thematic groups, regional in-country networks, and larger national networks of reproductive health leaders—some which were more effective than others.
Cheryl Francisconi, IIE Program Director said of the early stages of their work: “We were focused more on encouraging action plans between fellows or groups of fellows. We noticed that fellows began to feel guilty when they weren’t able to carry out action plans in addition to their already demanding work. We learned that a better approach was to encourage network members to use the network to ensure that their existing work would be amplified.”
A year after project completion, LDM reported a much greater understanding of the strengths and potential uses for its network. The original assumption that networks should engage as many members as possible was debunked—the network worked best when individuals and sub-networks connected to get work done. Meeting for the sake of meeting was not necessary.
Members also learned that network diversity required respecting sub-network differences—approaches of Islamic scholars in northern Nigeria might be very different from those of non-Islamic scholars in India. Access to technology also varied by countries, and technology needed to be deployed carefully so that it did not increase divides across the network.
Another core learning for members was to “leave a trail,” documenting activities as well as lessons learned. The network created a public, interactive Wiki to share the work of the program not just across the network, but with the broader field of reproductive health leadership. Finally, LDM learned that communication with the donor did not have to be the sacred privilege of the project “manager.” In fact, the final report for the Packard Foundation grant was co-created on the Wiki by network members.
Already, the LDM network has generated positive results. Reproductive health leaders across five countries are now enhancing advocacy and direct services with input from each other via the Wiki, Facebook, YouTube, and text messaging. Donors and partners around the world have access to information, including leadership program models and research results. Previously, the network often required the sometimes cumbersome participation of a majority of members—now results are achieved more quickly by individuals, sub-networks, or the full network, as is appropriate. A previously centralized database of leadership fellows was converted to an open-source database to track fellows’ contact information and core competencies. Finally, participants report increased openness and transparency across the LDM network.