Capdev planning and_management

The book
Capacity development, a very popular concept in recent
years, has a fairly mixed record. While successes have been
achieved, from which useful lessons can be learned, the overall
record remains a source of concern, especially in the least
developed countries. In July 2008, IIEP invited international
experts for a debate on the reasons capacity development
efforts at times fail to have a long-term impact, on ways to
overcome common constraints and on UNESCO’s role in this area and how
it may be (re)defined.
This book comments on the differences of opinion between experts but also
highlights points of agreement on capacity development strategies which
may be more successful than present approaches. The focus should shift
from the individual to the organization and action should move from simply
providing training to a more complete set of interventions. These can include
the development of organizational tools, better monitoring using incentive
systems, and stronger accountability, both within the organization and towards
civil society. Longer time frames and new evaluation schemes are needed
to measure efforts correctly. However, in order to trigger organizational
change, a certain number of prerequisites must be in place, such as internal
commitment and change-oriented leadership.
The authors
Steven J. Hite is professor of educational research theory and methodology
at Brigham Young University, USA. His expertise is exploring and applying
the full range of quantitative and qualitative research and evaluation systems
to improve the opportunities and conditions of disadvantaged individuals,
families and communities.
Anton De Grauwe is Senior Programme Specialist at IIEP and heads the
team in charge of operational activities. His research work has focused,
among other things, on organization and management of education systems.
He coordinated the programme on Rethinking capacity development.
International Institute
for Educational Planning
Rethinking capacity development
Capacity development in educational
planning and management
Learning from successes and failures
Steven J. Hite
Anton De Grauwe
ISBN:978-92-803-1340-6

Capacity development in educational planning and management

Capacity development
in educational planning and
management
A report of the IIEP-UNESCO Experts’ Meeting
Paris, France, 1-2 July 2008
Steven J. Hite and Anton De Grauwe

The views and opinions expressed in this book are those of the authors and do not
necessarily represent the views of UNESCO or IIEP. The designations employed
and the presentation of material throughout this review do not imply the expression
of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO or IIEP concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning its
frontiers or boundaries.
The publication costs of this study have been covered through a grant-in-aid
offered by UNESCO and by voluntary contributions made by several Member
States of UNESCO, the list of which will be found at the end of the volume.
Published by:
International Institute for Educational Planning
7-9 rue Eugène Delacroix, 75116 Paris, France
info@iiep.unesco.org
www.iiep.unesco.org
Cover design: IIEP
Typesetting: Linéale Production
Printed in IIEP’s printshop
ISBN: 978-92-803-1340-6
© UNESCO 2009

5
CONTENTS
List of abbreviations 7
Foreword 9
Summary 11
Résumé 13
1. Introduction 15
Back to basics: ‘déjà vu’ all over again 17
Partner organizations 19
Contextual dimensions 20
2. Concept of capacity development 23
Desired outcomes 23
Deﬁnitions and principles 24
Political will 27
3. Constraints on capacity development 29
Common constraints 29
Context-speciﬁc constraints 32
4. Capacity development strategies 37
Individual-level strategies 37
Ministry-level strategies 45
Strategy effectiveness 49
5. Role of UNESCO in capacity development in EFA 61
EFA focus 61
Unit of analysis 62
Accountability 62
Organizational issues 64
UNESCO and its partners 65
6. Conclusion 67
References 69
International Institute for Educational Planning www.iiep.unesco.org

7
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
BMZ German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and
Development
CD capacity development
DAC Development Assistance Committee (OECD)
DEO District Education Ofﬁce
DFID Department for International Development (United
Kingdom)
EFA Education for All
EMIS education management information systems
FTI Fast Track Initiative
GMR Global Monitoring Report
IIEP International Institute for Educational Planning
M&E monitoring and evaluation
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
NGO non-governmental organization
NUEPA National University of Educational Planning and
Administration (India)
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development
PDAE Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
Sida Swedish International Development Cooperation agency
SWAp sector-wide approach
TA technical assistance
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc and Cultural
Organization
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UPE universal primary education

9
FOREWORD
Capacity development is a fundamental part of the mandates of many
international organizations. Much of their work aims to strengthen
national capacities through training, technical advice, exchange of
experiences, research, and policy advice. Yet there is considerable
dissatisfaction within the international community regarding the impact
of many such interventions. The activities have usually strengthened
the skills of individuals, but have not always succeeded in improving
the effectiveness of the ministries and other organizations where those
individuals are working. These shortcomings demand investigation in
order to strengthen capacity development policies and strategies.
In this context, UNESCO received funds from the Norwegian
Ministries of Education and Foreign Affairs to focus on ‘capacity
development for achieving the Education for All goals’. The objective
was to identify appropriate strategies for UNESCO and others.
Within UNESCO, IIEP has coordinated this work. A wide range of
activities was undertaken, including detailed case studies on three
countries (Benin, Ethiopia and Vietnam), a series of thematic studies
and literature reviews, and consultations with experts. The focus has
been on educational planning and management as stronger capacities
in these areas should lead to important improvements in the education
system as a whole.
IIEP’s work has led to the identiﬁcation of some main principles:
• The type of capacity development being considered here only
works in a sustainable manner when there is national leadership
and ownership, and when international efforts match national
priorities and strategies.
• Strategies need attention at several levels: the capacities of the
individual, the effectiveness of the organization (for example the
ministry of education), the norms and practices which rule public
management as a whole, and the political, social and economic
contexts.
• Any intervention must recognize the intrinsic values of ownership
and participation. When it aims only to identify partners’

10
Foreword
weaknesses or to strengthen the positions of those already
powerful, the deepest sense of capacity development is lost.
The series Rethinking capacity development has been prepared
within this framework.
Mark Bray
Director
UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP)

11
SUMMARY
Some twenty international experts in capacity development (CD) in
education met at IIEP for two days’ debate on the reasons CD efforts at
times fail to have a long-term impact, on ways to overcome common
constraints and on UNESCO’s role in this area and how it may be (re)
defined.
The report acknowledges that some of the experts had reservations
against discussing these issues yet again. However, changes in the aid
architecture and on the development agenda have occurred. Challenges
remain and new insights may be needed. The importance of context is
often emphasized: In general, context matters more than CD modalities,
especially in decentralized education systems. Values and behaviour
need to change from within, and CD strategies need to be compatible
with social structures and belief systems.
Nevertheless, common constraints may be identified: Individual
level strategies do not move beyond training; organizational constraints
are often linked to poor leadership and legitimacy issues; too often,
successful CD strategies remain isolated, making it difficult to induce
change.
In order to overcome these constraints, several options were
discussed: Performance at the ministry level may be improved through
the use of various organizational tools and through better monitoring
using incentive systems. Accountability should be strengthened
both within the organization and towards civil society, building on
other rights-based processes such as ownership, empowerment, and
participation. Longer time frames and new evaluation schemes may be
needed in order to measure CD efforts correctly. However, in order to
trigger organizational change, a certain number of prerequisites such
as internal commitment and change-oriented leadership need to be in
place.
The experts agreed that CD efforts should give voice to those
who promote change, and addressed the need for critical mass in both
host countries and aid agencies. The report encourages a clarification
of UNESCO’s position on CD in order to let other organizations that

12
Summary
work with UNESCO position themselves accordingly. This implies
deciding on whether to focus on the supply or the demand-side of CD,
and whether to privilege intra- or extra-national efforts. A ﬁtting unit
of analysis, to be UNESCO’s focal point, needs to be deﬁned for CD
in EFA.

13
RÉSUMÉ
Une vingtaine d’experts internationaux ont débattu pendant deux jours à
l’IIPE des raisons pour lesquelles certains efforts de développement de
capacités n’ont que peu d’impact à long terme, des moyens nécessaires
afin d’éliminer les contraintes et du rôle de l’UNESCO dans ce domaine
et comment ce rôle peut être (ré)défini.
Le rapport reconnaît la réticence exprimée par quelques
experts vis-à-vis de la réouverture du débat sur le sujet. Cependant,
des changements dans l’architecture d’aide et sur l’agenda de
développement ont eu lieu. Les défis demeurent et de nouvelles idées
peuvent être nécessaires. Ces idées mettent l’accent sur l’importance du
contexte : en général, le contexte est plus important que les modalités
de développement des capacités, particulièrement dans les systèmes
éducatifs décentralisés. Valeurs et comportements doivent changer
de l’intérieur, et les stratégies de développement de capacités doivent
correspondre aux structures sociales et aux systèmes de croyance.
Néanmoins, les contraintes communes sont identifiables : les
stratégies qui ciblent les individus ne vont pas au-delà de la formation ;
les contraintes organisationnelles sont souvent liées à un leadership
faible et aux questions de légitimité ; les bonnes stratégies restent trop
souvent isolées, ce qui rend le changement difficile à provoquer.
Afin de surmonter ces difficultés, le rapport examine plusieurs
options : la performance des ministères peut s’améliorer par l’aide
de divers outils organisationnels et par un pilotage plus efficace en
utilisant des systèmes d’incitation. La responsabilisation doit être
renforcée à l’intérieur des organisations et vis-à-vis de la société civile,
se fondant sur d’autres processus qui reconnaissent l’importance de
l’appropriation, de l’autonomisation, et de la participation. Des cadres
temporels plus longs et de nouveaux systèmes d’évaluation sont peut
être nécessaires afin de mesurer correctement le développement de
capacités. Cependant, afin de déclencher un processus de changement
organisationnel, quelques pré-requis comme l’engagement interne ou
un leadership orienté vers le changement doivent être en place.

14
Résumé
Les experts sont d’accord sur le fait que les stratégies de
développement de capacités doivent donner la parole à ceux qui
souhaitent promouvoir le changement, et ils ont abordé le besoin d’une
masse critique à la fois dans les pays hôtes et dans les agences d’aide.
Le rapport encourage la clariﬁcation de la position de l’UNESCO dans
le domaine du développement de capacités et sa relation avec d’autres
organisations. Ceci implique de faire un choix entre une approche axée
sur l’offre ou la demande de développement des capacités, et sur les
efforts intra- ou extranationaux. Une unité d’analyse pertinente, le point
central naturel pour l’UNESCO, doit être déﬁnie pour le développement
des capacités dans l’EPT.

15
1. INTRODUCTION
While capacity development (CD) has become a popular concept,
focus and activity in recent years, the challenges and preoccupations
involved with CD are not new. Over time there have been changes
in the terminology, from institution building to capacity building
to capacity development, but these different terms basically refer to
similar challenges and issues. Modalities and strategies have also
undergone some change and successes have been achieved from which
useful lessons can be learned. Nevertheless, the overall record remains
a source of concern, especially in the least developed countries and
fragile states, which are most in need of stronger, internally sustainable
capacities.
Within this environment, UNESCO has assumed a mandate that
includes a strong component of CD to support countries in achieving
their Education for All (EFA) goals. Much of the work at UNESCO
aims at strengthening the capacities of its member states through various
means, such as training, policy dialogue and advice, and technical
support. Within UNESCO, as in many other agencies that play similar
roles, there is dissatisfaction with the short- and long-term impact of
many CD efforts. These efforts have often strengthened the skills of
individuals, but have not succeeded in transforming systematically the
organizations to which these individuals belong, particularly ministries
of education.
Against this background, UNESCO has received funds from the
Norwegian authorities to work on a strategy of ‘capacity development
for achieving the EFAgoals’. The final objective is to prepare a strategy
paper on CD that will guide UNESCO’s actions in this field and
hopefully become a source of inspiration for and collaboration with
other partners. The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) and
recent Global Monitoring Reports have identified the lack of planning
and management capacities as a major obstacle to achieving EFA, and
perhaps as important as the scarcity of resources. The focus of the
strategy paper will therefore be on planning and management. In its
preparation, the work undertaken by the EFA partners will be given

16
Introduction
due attention. IIEP-UNESCO is coordinating this exercise on behalf of
UNESCO.
In the course of preparations for the strategy paper, IIEP-UNESCO
determined to bring together a select group of people from different
professional backgrounds and geographical locations, all of whom have
experience and expertise in capacity development. They represented
fourdifferentprofessionalspheres:ministriesofeducation,international
agencies, training institutions (focused on educational planning and
management) and academic settings. Many of the experts have worked
in different professional spheres and in various geographical locations.
They convened at the IIEP-UNESCO in Paris from 1-2 July 2008 for
two days of open discussion on three questions:
• What are the key reasons for the relative failure of capacity
development efforts (i.e. failure to improve the effectiveness of
organizations in a sustainable manner)?
• What strategies can overcome (or in some countries, have
overcome) these constraints?
• What roles can international agencies, in particular UNESCO,
perform?
The composition and process of the experts’ panel succeeded
in bringing together people from geographically and professionally
diverse settings who were eager to share their respective viewpoints.
This diversity and willingness to share was evident throughout the
course of the meetings. Though the participants were at times split
in their viewpoints and positions, these differences did not typically
follow predictable or consistent professional or geographical patterns:
those from one professional sphere were not always uniﬁed in their
expressions, and geographical clustering was not always evident when
differences arose. Consequently, the content of the meetings presented
in this report should be considered reasonably representative of the
complex sense of clarity or uncertainty, agreement or lack of consensus
in perception, views and experience evident across the global CD
enterprise.
As illustrative statements by individuals are provided, they are
attributed to a professional area in a particular continental location
rather than to a speciﬁc participant. Each example voices a sentiment or

17
Introduction
position shared by a number of participants across spheres and locations.
A few examples of capacity development implementation successes
and failures are provided to illustrate certain main points. Successes
are directly attributed to the countries and institutions involved, while
failures are positioned with more generic characteristics. The material
in the report is not necessarily presented in the precise sequence in
which the discussions actually took place. The presentation of themes
is meant to convey logically, rather than chronologically, the main
issues and nature of the discussions.
This report is not a literal transcription of the meetings and
consequently it should be viewed as an account of the meetings as
‘moderated’ by its authors. The report is meant to convey the general
sense of the discussions. The differences in position and experience
arising during the meetings did not create intractable and signiﬁcant
disagreement – in fact, quite the opposite occurred. When differences
arose, the discourse was civil but vigorously engaged. However,
differences did emerge and remained even after full discussion, leading
to the need for a moderated account as provided in this report.
The remainder of this introductory section looks at some
transversal questions, such as the usefulness of the discussions on CD
and the context within which UNESCO operates. This is followed by
four thematic sections, in line with the programme of the meetings.
They concern the concept of CD, constraints on its success, strategies
for improvement and the role of UNESCO.
Back to basics: ‘déjà vu’ all over again
Throughout the two days of
meetings, a recurrent theme in the
discussion was whether we were
convened to discuss something ‘new’.
Some of the experts felt that the concept
of CD had already been discussed and
articulated sufﬁciently, perhaps even overly so. It was clear that the
feeling of “we have already discussed this regularly, so why are we
doing it once again?” emerged early on in the discussion and was
consistently on the minds of some of the participants.
“Are we trying to ‘untie’the
knot of this issue, or ‘tighten’
it?”
International agency worker
stationed in Europe

18
Introduction
The responses to this question, which were expressed and held
tenaciously, pursued several distinct courses. Firstly, some participants
were clearly persuaded that since CD had previously been discussed at
length by many qualified and experienced people, who had operated
globally in the full range of professional spheres, we were unlikely to
produce anything new or important. Perhaps the sense expressed that
we were dealing with ‘quite common’ issues that had proved to be at
least persistent, if not intractable, was at the root of this feeling of doubt.
This group also hinted that it was unlikely that we were going to be
able to produce anything more useful than that which had already been
achieved historically. It would also be fair to say that some experts felt
that past efforts were sufficiently informative but were not adequately
implemented, or were implemented without the right contextual factors
in place, or were attempted without sufficient time and proper evaluation
to rightly determine success or failure.
One response to the reservation about discussing these issues
again could be that the CD community, all professional areas and
locations included, simply was learning too slowly: it is perhaps not
sufficiently responsive enough to keep ahead of current or future needs.
It also could be that the CD community believes deeply in what it
attempts to accomplish, but does not hold the same level of confidence
in the evidence for or against the effectiveness of those efforts. Lastly,
it might be that the CD community is more interested in maintaining
the status quo, including the positions (and advantages) of those in the
community, than in adapting to the evolving needs of the constituent
groups targeted by our efforts.
Another sentiment expressed
over the two days was that
although there had been much work
previously in the field of CD, the
challenges had not necessarily been
solved or become less important.
Nor was CD incapable of benefiting
from new and promising insights
and approaches identified by the experts’ panel. A rather introspective
aspect of this position was consideration of what it means for the
discourse on CD strategies and effectiveness to appear repeatedly in
“Just because something is ‘old’
doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be
recycled, re-discussed, or even used.
Not all processes are linear; some
are iterative.”
stationed in Europe

19
Introduction
the literature, symposia, and agency and ministry meetings but still
remain high on the list of issues to raise. Might the very persistence
of the CD discourse imply that the issues need to be revisited and re-
contextualized?
Similar to the reluctance to re-engage in the CD discourse was
the assertion that Berg’s (1993) work had effectively ‘buried’ technical
assistance (TA) in the early 1990s. Why is it then that TA has survived?
Indeed, many believe that under the new aid architecture more TA
would be required than ever before. This provides some insight into
why obviously recurrent themes are, and probably should be, revisited:
contexts change (country, regional and global), systems change (for
example, aid architecture elements such as the Fast Track Initiative
(FTI) and the sector-wide approach (SWAp), and broad approaches
are modiﬁed (for example, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
(PDAE) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)). When
substantial contextual and systemic changes occur, ‘old’discourses and
discussion must be re-engaged, efforts must be re-contextualized, and
service trajectories must be adjusted. Some approaches and ideas from
the past may prove adequate or appropriate under conditions of change.
This needs to be discussed and proved, however – and doing so may
from time to time require enduring an individual or collective sense of
‘been there, done that’. One last notion in this regard that is important
to consider is that not all processes are linear; some are iterative.
Perhaps the discourse and processes involved in CD are iterative, and
consequently continual revisiting is required.
Partner organizations
While the participants’ task was to consider important aspects
of CD and the eventual development of a UNESCO strategy paper,
a strong sentiment voiced was that
the strategy paper should target
more than just UNESCO’s efforts.
Perhaps as important as providing
a foundation for UNESCO’s efforts
in CD is consideration of what the
paper would also mean for partner
organizations.Partnerorganizations
“Since UNESCO is the appointed
leader in EFA efforts, it needs to
create something around which its
partners can rally.”
stationed in Europe

20
Introduction
would not need to conform their own efforts and processes in line with
that of UNESCO, but they should agree with the role the paper will
define for UNESCO in global CD efforts. This would not only help
UNESCO in defining its role and function, but also provide better
clarity to enable other groups to position themselves and their efforts.
In making this happen, it is clear that UNESCO must identify
precisely the critical actors in CD, with a special focus on how
UNESCO can and should best fit into the complete constellation of
partner organizations. Since UNESCO is the appointed leader in EFA
efforts, it must create a strategy paper around which its partners can
rally.
Contextual dimensions
When discussing the concept of CD, the participants felt that
a number of critical contextual dimensions needed to be considered
– particularly as applied to UNESCO and its role in CD. These
dimensions covered institutional boundaries, supply and demand,
exogenous versus endogenous decisions and actions, and national
systems of government.
The process of developing a strategy paper for UNESCO’s
CD efforts in EFA needs to take into account various dimensions of
UNESCO’s context. But this is not as simple as it might seem. The
education sector at UNESCO has institutional boundaries internal
to the organization itself. Additionally, as part of the UN system
UNESCO has institutional boundaries that are rather contested by
other units, such as United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), but at the
same time UNESCO is very much part of the ‘one UN’ movement,
which demands that all UN bodies ‘deliver as one’. UNESCO also has
institutional boundaries influenced by non-UN-specific aid agencies and
non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Lastly, UNESCO operates
within institutional boundaries encompassing governments and units
within those governments. All of these contexts operate concurrently
and to a significant degree in an associated manner. None of them
operates independently of the others – they are part of the same larger
context. The internal and external institutional boundaries that define

21
Introduction
UNESCO’s efforts in EFA are all influential and need to be considered
when discussing the concept of CD.
Supply and demand, which emerged in a number of discussions,
present an interesting platform for ‘context’. Should the concept of CD
be contextualized in the platform of supply or demand? Should
UNESCO conceptualize and contextualize its strategy paper on CD
according to what it is best positioned to supply, or by what is most in
demand? It is perhaps too simple to respond that CD must be
conceptualized in accordance with a combination of supply and demand.
This begs the question of whether UNESCO’s policy on CD should be
constrained by its ability to supply what is demanded, or whether it
should reposition its provision potential according to the demand side.
There was disagreement on this issue,
with some holding that the contexts of
demand should always be pre-eminent,
while others contended that the issue of
what could be supplied was simply an
unavoidableconstraint(althoughchanges
in what could be supplied were possible,
but difficult and slow to achieve).
The issue of endogenous (internal) and exogenous (external) CD
efforts and actions will be discussed more extensively in later sections
on the readiness of the context, connection between the local and central,
and so on, but it must be mentioned here. Relative to the concept of
CD, the issue rests on consideration of whether a particular CD effort
has a real chance of enduring. It was generally held that real change
must draw significantly on efforts and rationales that are internal to the
context rather than from an exclusively external perspective. While it
is easily argued that donor-driven efforts fail to build upon internal pre-
existing processes, UNESCO needs to reflect on the question of how
much it differs in this regard, and whether its actions are characterized
by greater recognition of these processes.
“We must involve governments
in defining CD for their contexts.
Donors can’t adequately or
appropriately define CD for these
governments.”
stationed in Africa

23
2. CONCEPT OF CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
Discussion and debate around capacity development tend to be complex
for at least two reasons. Firstly, the concept itself is multifaceted. The
definitions that various agencies propose are a good illustration. The
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
DevelopmentAssistance Committee (DAC) (2006, p.5) defines capacity
development as “the process of strengthening the abilities or capacities
of individuals, organizations and societies to make effective and efficient
use of resources in order to achieve their own goals on a sustainable
basis”. Additionally, the FTI Capacity Development Team (2008: 6)
defines capacity development as “the ability of people, organizations
and society to manage their affairs successfully”. While such broad
definitions have the advantage of being comprehensive, they are of
limited use when governments and agencies need to identify successful
strategies to overcome specific constraints. Secondly, the success
and failure of capacity development efforts may depend as much on
the specific modalities as on the national context within which these
modalities are implemented – and national contexts differ profoundly.
Desired outcomes
Though it was not a major
themeofdiscussion,theparticipants
did mention the need for better
clarification of explicit, desired
outcomes in UNESCO’s definition
of CD. This was proposed as the
best way to provide an ‘anchor’
for UNESCO in its CD efforts. This need for explicit clarification of
outcomes was driven by the concern that progress towards achieving
the EFA goals was unfolding in a very uneven fashion. The Global
Monitoring Report (GMR), according to several participants, uncovers
this unevenness clearly and dramatically. The discussion of explicit
outcomes resulted in the proposal of only very general ones, such as
improved efficiency in delivery and improved ability to contract out TA
and other technical services. This highlights the difficulty of making
“If our concern is achieving EFA,
then we must pay attention to the fact
that the GMR uncovers that EFA is
unfolding very unevenly.”
Training institution worker stationed
in Asia

24
outcomes explicit – the frequent and broadly expressed desire for
specifics very often outstretches the ability to arrive at an acceptable
set of outcomes agreeable to all the relevant stakeholders.
However, some participants held that UNESCO’s historical
devotion to finite outcomes such as universal primary education (UPE)
(as a more easily measured issue of growth in enrolments, for example)
has led to a lack of serious discourse and attention to more substantial
rights-based issues. One response lies in recognizing CD as a valuable
process, aiming at ownership and participation as indispensable
elements of human development.
Definitions and principles
In attempting to define CD and other terms involved in CD, the
participants expressed quite different views. Some felt that existing
definitions were more than sufficient, but that UNESCO had not given
adequate attention to them.
In particular, the definition
of CD found in the OECD-DAC
(2006) document was pointed out
as salient for consideration – or
perhaps even for direct adoption
or adaptation by UNESCO. This
led to consideration of whether
definitions of CD were, or
should be, primarily conceptual
or operational. In labelling something as overly conceptual, an
organization too easily eludes accountability to that definition. Perhaps
the issue here is that UNESCO has not yet felt the need to or taken the
initiative to reflect fully on what its interpretation of CD actually is, or
should be. The present work, in the framework of which this experts’
meeting is organized, is aimed precisely at developing such a common
interpretation.
On the other hand, there was also a definite sense that UNESCO’s
definition of CD should include an analytical and evaluative framework
for action, whether an explicitly conceptual component was present or
not.
“Capacity development’is
understood as the process whereby
people, organizations and society as
a whole unleash, strengthen, create,
adapt and maintain capacity over
time.”
(OECD-DAC, 2006: 12)

25
Concept of capacity development
Some participants supported the view that definitions are not of
particular importance per se. Rather, they held that manifestations of
CD are what matters. This begs the question as to how one would ‘know
it when one sees it’ and whether reasonable and experienced people
would even agree on what they see, in lieu of well conceptualized and
operationalized definitions.
The common theme of TA emerged again in discussing definitions
of CD, with indications that distinctions between TA and policy advice
are somewhat artificial. Nonetheless, participants felt that while
discussions of TA were not necessarily detrimental to or exclusive of
CD, definitions of CD should be super-ordinate to, but inclusive of,
functions such as TA and policy advice.
There is an important, and perhaps obvious, assumption that a
UNESCO strategy paper would be adopted in order to produce some
eventual product.The panel agreed that one of the substantial challenges
in the development of the strategy paper would be agreement on the
principles and product(s). In terms of principles, a few basic approaches
were proposed for CD:
• from the perspective of the issues and systems generated by the
‘push and pull’ of supply and demand;
• from the practical approach of focusing on the requirements of
mobilizing, developing, utilizing, maintaining and retaining
capacities;
• from the perspective of examining how CD fits within the rubric
of other associated trends and processes, such as empowerment,
ownership and participation (running along the entire spectrum of
centralized to decentralized actors).
However, it was repeated several times that to start with a
focus on CD would be to start in the ‘wrong place’. The best place
to begin, according to several participants, is from the perspective of
organizational change – the principles, conditions and outcomes that
are necessary to transform the organization. This means that a strategy
paper must contemplate at least two things:
• whether the organization is in the ‘mood’ or mode to change;
• whether the ‘centre of gravity’ in the organization is on change.

26
In addition to identifying whether the organization is ready for
change, it is important to determine whether any external agency, such
as UNESCO, has the specific ability to facilitate or participate in that
change. Finally, it is important to note that, given factors of instability
and unpredictability, even if it appears that the organization is ready for
change, this is particularly difficult to achieve in any sustainable way
in fragile states.
In considering the unit of analysis
(that specific level of operation that
serves as the focus for particular
missions and programmes), there are
typically four levels of CD that are
considered: individual, organization,
institution and context. Clearly, the
‘unit of analysis’ question is central
to virtually every conceptual and practical issue when dealing with CD
efforts.
The Paris Declaration assumes a particular unit of analysis – that
of the country or nation-state. If UNESCO or any other agency or
organization accepts that focus, then the particular conceptual and
practical implications are fairly obvious. Sooner or later – and preferably
sooner – the unit of analysis must be made explicit, and all other
conceptual and practical definitions and planning efforts must be
reconciled to and consistent with that choice.
The participants were
split as to the appropriate unit
of analysis. Many felt that
the individual would be the
most likely and effective unit
of analysis for CD efforts,
although many documents and
official programmes discussed
otherwise. This is evident in
the discussions described in a
number of other sections of this
“The ‘unit of analysis question’
is central. If you accept the Paris
Declaration’s unit of analysis, and
its other assumptions, then you
can move forward.”
Ministry of education worker
stationed in Europe)
Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
(2005)
Unit of analysis = country/nation
• Strengthening partner countries’
national development strategies and
associated operational frameworks
(§I.3.i)
• Exercise leadership in developing
and implementing their national
development strategies (§II.14)
• Indicators of progress: to be measured
nationally (§III, Title).

27
Concept of capacity development
report, including, in particular, those that refer to the persistence of TA
efforts.
The other unit of analysis with broad support on the panel was the
ministry of education – or at least, at the ministry level.The main caution
inthisperspectivewasconcernedwiththedifferentrealitiesencountered
in highly centralized national governments compared to those found in
federations. With federal governments, the CD implications become
much more complex and the unit of analysis is not as highly centralized
as it would seem to be when declaring a ministry-level focus. In this
regard, unit of analysis considerations are further complicated by the
fact that not all federal systems are equally, or similarly, decentralized.
Indeed, not all federal systems are even decentralized: some may be
very centralized despite the seemingly obvious implications of their
political status as federations.
Afinalimplicationofthequestionoftheunitofanalysisrelatestothe
evaluation of CD efforts. Clearly the broader (more highly aggregated)
the unit of analysis, the more complex and difficult implementation
and effectiveness evaluation becomes. Also, the notion of ‘fit’ between
the unit of analysis and the evaluation effort is implicated. In sum, CD
efforts must be more specific and explicit about the unit of analysis of
the intended impact, and the match between evaluation efforts and unit
of analysis must be more tightly designed and implemented.
Political will
Political will, including the
role and function of that will in
CD, emerged in several sessions.
The participants agreed on a
number of critical issues in this
domain:
• Political will and the participation of civil society make a
significant, positive difference.
• The degree of ownership in a country, as manifested by political
will, strongly influences success in CD.
“Capacity development is not just a
technical act – it is also a political
act.”
in Asia

28
• Lack of capacity implies a lack of leadership (the political will) to
produce and implement change.
• Governments need to exert positive political will (good leadership)
in order to increase the likelihood of success.
In focusing on political will and leadership in the government,
however, it should not be overlooked that CD efforts must extend
beyond the ministries to fully include outside agencies such as local
government and civil society, and including unions, for instance. To
limit UNESCO’s strategy paper to a focus on governments at the
country level without including outside agencies would minimize, at
best, the eventual impact and sustainability of any CD efforts.

29
3. CONSTRAINTS ON CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
Experience and systematic studies have identified a wide range
of constraints to successful capacity development in educational
planning and management, which differs significantly between and
within countries. These constraints may relate to a lack of qualified
personnel; ineffective CD deployment and monitoring; the weakness
of communication, coordination and staff support within the ministry;
demotivating personnel management practices; the perverse effects of
the present incentive systems; disinterested leadership; the loss of faith
in the ability of ministries to work towards positive change; or various
additional factors. The purpose of the discussion on this vast theme
was not to cover all these elements in detail, but to explore how far
participants agreed with these ideas and hopefully to discover some
systematic elements that may guide the development of the strategy
paper in this domain.
Common constraints
The experts were asked to consider which aspects of the constraints
to CD were ‘common’across settings.They sought to determine whether
there are constraints to successful CD efforts that appear to be, in the
experience of the experts, encountered regardless of the geographical,
organizational or institutional setting. The following are some key
elements that were identified by the participants.
Organizational and ministry limitations
Lack of leadership was
seen as a constraint to CD
and this is common in many
settings, especially when found
in connection with corruption in
fragile states. Often manifest as
weak public sector management,
organizational and leadership
limitations are likely to lead to
“In many cases there is a lack of
willingness to change – there are simply
no rational reasons for the ministry to
change (building a school is a great
win-win, but political change is often a
lose-lose).”
Academic stationed in South America,
teamed with an international agency
worker stationed in Europe

30
a number of common systemic challenges to effective and long-lasting
CD efforts:
• high staff turnover;
• low morale;
• lack of a fit between staff skills and work assignment;
• weak vision;
• unrealistic time frames;
• political appointees who are typically not well qualified;
• resistance to meaningful change;
• lack of systematic performance evaluation;
• low correlation between real needs and training efforts.
Overall, organizational and ministry-level limitations indicate that
there is little planning for the cascading downward of skill and expertise
throughout the system. This means the impact of most CD efforts is
‘localized’ within the particular units or within the specific individuals
where the CD efforts are situated. The weak organizational structures
that result from organizational and ministry limitations commonly lead
to a lack of a system-wide desire for change and capacity to plan and
design change, ultimately creating a stagnant CD environment at all
levels of operation.
Relationship between legitimacy of government and policy change
A brief but poignant issue was raised relative to the common
challenge of a poor relationship between government and policy
change. Firstly, when government organizations such as ministries of
education manifest the challenges described in the preceding section
on organizational and ministry limitations, there is a serious question
of the legitimacy of that ministry outside of the formal structure – that
is, in the public domain.
When a government organization
lacks public legitimacy, as evidenced by
patronage systems in ministries, district
education offices (DEOs) and schools,
then the likelihood of meaningful and
effective policy change decreases
dramatically. This occurs because policy
“Political equilibrium (which
is the case in most developing
countries) works against
change.”
Academic stationed in South
America, teamed with an
international agency worker
stationed in Europe

31
Constraints on capacity development
change depends on the willingness of the public (at the appropriate
level) for support. When patronage is publicly evident, public
willingness to believe in and support change is often low. Additionally,
the typical outcome of government organizations that manifest
patronage systems is political equilibrium, meaning patronage systems
are oriented toward self-maintenance and self-perpetuation. Thus
patronage tends to work directly against change, in policy or otherwise.
Culture
Culture was seen as extremely important, evident in every setting,
and consistently a contributing factor to challenges to successful CD.Yet
the experts approached culture with a somewhat cautious tone. Perhaps
this caution is due to the fact that ‘culture’is difficult to understand and
often it becomes a convenient ‘catch-all’for those things that we do not
understand in the implementation of particular CD efforts, successful
or otherwise.
Nonetheless, culture emerged
several times during the discussions
as something that was unavoidable.
One point of discussion that produced
neither disagreement nor resolution
was the question of whether cultural
change is possible or, if possible,
should be attempted. Clearly, if culture
does or can undergo change it does
so much more slowly than structures
do. Consequently, there is a tendency in CD to focus on changing
structures rather than attempting much more difficult and sensitive
efforts involved in culture change.
Because culture implies value systems and people’s behaviour
patterns, individually and collectively, if we do attempt to change a
culture it should only be attempted as change from within the culture,
not from outside. Additionally, attempts at changing culture (not just
observable behaviours) are difficult and should be given significant
periods of time to manifest and be evaluated.
“Culture is extremely important.
But culture is more difficult to
change than structures are.
Culture implies the value systems
and behavioural patterns of
people.”
stationed in Europe

32
Social structures and belief systems
While constellations of social
structures and belief systems are
particular to a given location, their
existence and influence often limit
the effectiveness of CD efforts. It is
not that social structures and belief
systems limit CD efforts per se, but
rather that the failure of CD efforts
to adequately and appropriately assess, account for and deal with these
social structures and belief systems significantly deflects the potential
for impact.
Often, external CD interventions attempt changes that are not
compatible with the social structures and belief systems of the host
country or institution. These constraints and realities may not be
congruent with the approaches that agencies such as UNESCO have
become comfortable in applying. We cannot simply reconfigure
what ‘matters’ in the belief systems of local CD efforts, but we can
strengthen the voices of those whose views are compatible with CD
and change efforts and who are in a position to make a difference. We
must do whatever we can to increase the involvement of civil society if
that society is amenable to participation and to the direction of the CD
services that we can provide.
Context-specific constraints
Along with constraints that very often occur regardless of the
setting, the experts were asked to consider constraints to CD that have
occurred in specific contexts though not consistently across settings.
Context-specific constraints may be encountered frequently, but are not
experienced as predictably or consistently across geographical, social
and cultural settings as the more general inconsistencies. Consequently,
these types of constraints are more difficult to identify and group, and
by definition they elude classification.
“We can strengthen the voice of
parents, but we can’t reconfigure
their beliefs in what matters; that is
a powerful result of their historical
and socio-cultural context.”
stationed in Europe

33
Context matters
There is a need to differentiate between contexts; contextual
conditions are clearly more important than CD modalities. When donor
and aid agencies fail in their CD agenda, the failure is often due to a lack
of flexibility or consideration of context-specificity and to the agency’s
over-anxiousness to focus only on apparent commonalities. Even in the
presence of significant commonalities, small context-specific conditions
can debilitate an otherwise well designed CD effort.
When no obvious or clear relationship exists with the needs or
demands of the context, consequent CD efforts will ultimately be
disorganized and ineffective. For example, in fragile states the particular
reasons for fragility in a particular state (not some ubiquitous ‘fragile
state factor’) must be accounted for in the design, delivery and
evaluation of CD efforts.
While there appears to be no
‘north-south-east-west’ solution,
due to contextual matters, some
of the participants reflected on
whether we can indeed still
learn something from diverse
settings where CD efforts appear
to have worked and the lessons
learned from them can be applied
judiciously elsewhere. This inquiry remained unresolved, but was still
presented several times for consideration.
Another issue that arose was whether a ‘CD context-by-solution
matrix’ could be derived from successful experiences: that is, could a
list of successful CD solutions be considered for some designated types
of settings as potentially successful and appropriate? This gave rise
to the concern of whether a taxonomy or typology of training modes
is, in fact, realistic. It was also not clear that there was confidence in
the notion of a consistent array of contextual conditions that would
reasonably align with the hypothetical CD taxonomy/typology.
Finally, it was proposed that the impact of context-specific matters
increases as the movement towards decentralization progresses. This
“Too much training depends on
general recipes that are not context
appropriate. This is much more a
problem where decentralization is
in full swing.” International agency
worker stationed in South America,
teamed with a training institution
worker stationed in Asia

34
correlation is due to the fact that within large social and cultural
contexts there are meaningfully different sub-contexts. The variation
within those sub-contexts is great enough to warrant attention when
designing, implementing and evaluating CD efforts.
Federation issues
The issue of the impact of federal government systems on CD was
presentedindifferentsessions.Eachtime,itsintroductionanddiscussion
was brief, but there was near unanimity regarding the importance of
considering this constraint to typical CD efforts.
While the experts generally
agreed that the ministry level
of operation is the most likely
centralized arena of CD efforts,
they had to consider that in
federations there are, in effect
and sometimes in reality, many
ministries. This clearly creates
the need for more careful
and complex assessment and
planning for CD efforts, and perhaps even a re-conceptualization of
what CD is at the ministry level in federations. The relative autonomy
of ministries in federations demands a much more holistic approach
to CD – an approach that is all the more essential as ministries in
federal systems (particularly in large nation-states) operate much closer
to the decentralized units for which they set policy frameworks and
programmes.
Organization and ministry limitations
While organization and ministry limitations can manifest at the
level of ‘common constraints’, they are also seen in context-specific
ways. Three countries were discussed by panel members as examples:
one in Africa, one in South America and a third in Asia.
Two of the examples dealt with context-specific instability in
leadership. In one African country, political pressure brought about the
shuffling of eleven different ministers of education in just three years.
“Focusing on the ministry makes sense
if the state is unified. Federations, on
the other hand, are more complex and
require a different approach. Within
a federation there really is sufficient
autonomy, and a holistic approach in
that condition is essential.”
Ministry of education worker stationed
in Africa

35
Due to political turmoil, the SouthAmerican country had three ministers
of education in a period of just 18 months. This type of organization and
ministry instability, while not common, clearly creates context-specific
conditions that are not conducive to meaningful CD efforts. While
these two examples could not be considered common conditions, they
represent conditions that are not particularly rare.
The third example, from Asia, did not deal with the rotation of
the nations’ leaders of education, but dealt with specific challenges to
CD efforts related to limitations created by the rise of the influence
of NGOs. While the increasing number and effectiveness of national
and international NGOs was largely seen as positive and welcome, the
mismatch between the efforts of those NGOs and those of agencies
delivering CD programmes was not conducive to effective ministry-
level resources. This mismatch was often the result of particular
ministry incapacities to coordinate and prioritize these often disparate,
albeit valuable, CD opportunities. Although many of these constraints
are common to most if not all ministries, the consequent impacts and
issues are not the same everywhere. This real potential for dissimilarity
in the effects of apparently similar conditions means that there is always
a need for careful analysis for each ministry.
Technical issues
Many of the experts agreed that in the broad CD discourse
there is too much of a focus on technical issues rather than strategic
processes. This was not meant to minimize the need for TA; indeed,
most agreed that TA has persisted over time and will perhaps emerge as
even more important in the future, given changes in aid priorities and
systems. (This is discussed elsewhere in several sections.) Yet the ‘TA
versus strategic process’ dimension of the discussions was persistent
and strongly held. The sense was that the need for TA resulted from
context-specific conditions and did not represent a need found in most
settings.

37
4. CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
Strategies implemented to develop individual and ministry-level
capacity aim at improving at least four complementary dimensions:
• the skills and performance of individuals;
• the performance of organizations (such as ministries);
• the public administration to which individuals belong, and
which support and sustain organizations (which forms part of the
‘institutional’ level);
• the social, economic and political context within which individuals
work and within which education organizations and systems
develop.
These four dimensions are apparent in the following discussion.
However, they are not used systematically as organizing categories,
given the fact that the experts’ discussions were not constrained
exclusively by them. Speciﬁc attention is given to strategies aimed at
improving individual skills and strengthening ministries. These two
discussions are followed by a more general examination of various
factors that have an impact on the effectiveness of strategies.
Individual-level strategies
Training, in its different forms, is probably the most popular form
of CD among individual ofﬁcers. However, to some extent training is
under attack due to the argument that in many cases it has had very
limited long-term impact.The same may be true forTA, especially when
it takes the form of the ‘resident expatriate-local counterpart model’.
Such judgements, however, may be somewhat unfair because they
render training accountable for changes in areas on which its impact
is typically limited (for example, the functioning of ministries). The
experts were asked to discuss individual-level strategies in CD, focusing
on what has helped or hindered success at this level of delivery.
Discussions surrounding incentives were among the most lively
and varied of the meetings. Should incentives be considered an
individual, an organizational or an institutional strategy? The answer
to this question should have been simple, but it proved more than a

38
little problematic. Should incentives be financial only, and when
financial, should they be linked to the long-term capacity of the country
to maintain them? What about the social and institutional impact of
financial incentives? Which institution should decide what constitutes
appropriate and adequate incentives, and who should set the rates and
terms of those incentives? What does the Paris Declaration really say
about incentives? Is the Declaration realistic, and is it being, or should
it be, followed?
Financial incentives and linkage
Prior to presenting the
issues regarding financial
incentives, it is important to
statethatanumberoftheexperts
were convinced that financial
incentives are important in the
sense that a basic salary level is
necessary. They believed that
incentives are indispensable in
circumstanceswhereworkingin
education (or the public sector)
is not socially desirable and
respected and these incentives
could create change. In some
settings, the non-financial
benefits – largely social status
and prestige – appear to render
financial incentives less potent
and less likely to achieve their
intended results. While this
does not imply that in these
circumstances financial incentives are not important or effective, it
simply identifies conditions under which financial incentives might
have a less direct and measurable impact.
“We commit ourselves to taking
concrete and effective action to address
the remaining challenges, including
insufficient delegation of authority
to donors’field staff, and inadequate
attention to incentives for effective
development partnerships between
donors and partner countries. Donors
and partner countries jointly commit
to [r]eform procedures and strengthen
incentives – including for recruitment,
appraisal and training – for management
and staff to work towards harmonisation,
alignment and results. Donors commit
to [a]void activities that undermine
national institution building, such as
bypassing national budget processes or
setting high salaries for local staff.”
Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
(2005: 1-2, 6, 7)

39
Capacity development strategies
Where social and cultural esteem for education or public sector
service is low, financial incentives have the highest likelihood of
achieving positive effects. In fact, panel members clearly believed
that in conditions of low prestige it is unlikely that CD would succeed
without some type of financial incentive structure. However, several
potential problems with financial incentives need to be considered.
Firstly, the Paris Declaration was referenced several times as
either creating problems, promoting confusion, or being ‘out of touch
with reality’ (or at the very least, with common and persistent practice)
when considering financial incentives. One participant stated that “the
Paris Declaration is utterly insufficient in this respect” (referring to
financial incentives). It was apparent during the meetings that significant
clarification was necessary regarding what the Paris Declaration
should actually mean in terms of CD and financial incentives. Does the
Paris Declaration really prohibit, or at least very strongly discourage,
the provision of separate financial incentives by international agencies?
Should the Paris Declaration be accepted as the ultimate and binding
authority on the appropriateness of using such financial incentive
structures? Finally, does the international political context and reality
in which UNESCO operates even allow any latitude to consider these
questions fully?
While some felt that the Paris Declaration is clear and specific in
being generally against the use of incentives, particularly financial
incentives, others felt that there are circumstances under which the
declaration would allow such incentives. The best way to describe the
collective sense of the experts on the Paris Declaration’s position on
incentives would perhaps be to phrase a few dualisms that were not
presented in the meeting, but do convey the sense of the discourse. The
experts seemed to feel that on the topic of incentives (specifically,
financial) the Paris Declaration
is concurrently clear but
unrealistic, assertive but largely
ignored in practice, and
predictable but insufficiently
flexible to local conditions.
“I am worried about certain aspects of
the Paris Declaration. ‘Countries should
be in control’is an interesting notion, but
is it realistic?”
International agency worker stationed in
Europe

40
The second issue to be considered regarding financial incentives
concerned the short- and long-term impact and sustainability of the
financial incentive structure. On the one hand, financial incentives
could make the ministry positions even more valuable than before as
patronage instruments, thus furthering some fundamental concerns
regarding the politicized nature of hiring and promotion. Additionally,
if incentives were initially to rely substantially on the participation
of external agencies but internally never develop economically to the
point that the incentives would be sustainable independently, then
their long-term impact could be decidedly negative. A third issue to be
emphasized was that financial incentives need to be part of an overall set
of incentives, which together promote the behaviour and performance
expected from the civil servants. Financial incentives alone are seldom
enough to create motivation or to change long-ingrained practices.
Particularly in the case of financial incentives, there must be a
well established institutionalized linkage with two elements. This
is especially true in fragile states and other areas where systems of
patronage have become normalized.
Firstly, incentives ideally must be linked to performance. A clear
system of assessment, accountability and quality requirements is
needed for the incentive structure to operate. This can take the form
of ‘performance contracts’ or other clearly articulated and calibrated
instruments, but without a linkage to performance, incentives
– particularly financial incentives – simply will not achieve the desired
results.
Secondly, a transparent and binding recruitment system must be
set in place. A crucial part of that process must be well-defined job
descriptions and a system of valid public posting of vacancies. When
recruitment takes place transparently in the public domain and is based
on clear job descriptions that include valid performance evaluation,
then an incentive structure has a reasonable chance of making the
desired impact.
Non-financial incentives
Perhaps the most underutilized and underappreciated incentive
structures are those based on non-financial resources. A number of

41
non-financial incentives were mentioned by participants, including the
following:
• career development opportunities;
• public recognition for good work;
• transparency and participation in the staff evaluation process;
• better physical conditions of service (office space and equipment,
transport facilities or allowances, and so on);
• ‘credit’ towards promotion for participation in CD programmes.
Several examples of the application of non-financial incentives
were provided (some leading to elements on the prior list), though
interestingly it was easier to give examples for teachers than for
ministry staff. In Zimbabwe, trees were planted and other environmental
improvements were made to the school settings; the attractive
environment was highly motivating for the teachers. In Brazil, teachers
in government schools were not as happy as teachers in private schools,
even though the government teachers received higher salaries. The
reason for their discontent was their perception that the social and
physical environments of the government schools were inferior to
those of the private schools. Whatever the professional or geographical
setting, the experts agreed that in CD design, more focus must be
placed on non-financial incentive structures. Virtually everyone agreed
that non-financial incentives are much easier to sustain internally than
financial incentives.
Sustainability of incentives
Examples abound of incentive structures that either did not create
the result intended or were unsustainable over time. These instances
span every region of the developing world. It was clear to panel
participants that when dealing with incentive structures, the tension
between internal versus external priorities, issues and decision-priorities
is serious, even when issues raised by the Paris Declaration and other
similar instruments were set aside.
Whatever the ultimate decision regarding incentive structures,
a solid civil service environment must already exist or significant
civil service reform must precede the development and introduction
of incentive structures. Ultimately, incentive structures must be a

42
country-level issue (or in the case of a federation, an issue of the largest
reasonable sub-national unit). Incentive structures should not become
a UNESCO issue.
Incentive structures must first and foremost be compatible with
domestic issues and structures – both educational and economic. This
compatibility takes several forms. Firstly, the gap between teacher
salaries, administrator compensation, ministry packages and so on, must
remain in balance within the larger social and economic environment.
For the most part, using incentives to create an elite system that does
not ‘fit’ with the larger historical, social or cultural environment will
not achieve the long-term CD design or be internally sustainable, and
is likely to create instability in the ministry and the context in which
the ministry operates.
Finally, incentives and any donor supplements must be based
on a feasible future scenario, for example where the country will ‘be’
economically in ten years. The internal sustainability of any incentive
structure must be a realistic possibility within ten years so that donor
support is not perpetual and the structure can become a regular part of
the country’s normal mode of operation.
Match between training and assignment
A prominent theme that emerged in the discussion was that
mismatchingtheassignmentsandworktasksofindividualshasgenerally
resulted in inefficiency and ineffectiveness. While many training efforts
targeted at individuals were seen as very successful in increasing
the knowledge and capacity of trainees, a pervasive mismatching in
assignments has been a significant, if not insurmountable, challenge to
the positive impact of those individual-targeted CD programmes.
This mismatching can take many forms. The most typical is a
particular posting or long-term tasking that simply ignores what the
individual has been trained to do and is best suited to do. But career-
track assignment can also be misaligned. An individual trained to be
an education planner, for example, may very well be assigned to a
ministry other than education. While that person may have a relatively
successful career in that other ministry, the human resources loss and
potential loss to the ministry of education can be significant. Another

43
possibility is that a person
well trained and successful
in education may not prove
capable of transferring that level
of success into another ministry
setting, creating problems not
only for the individual, but for
both ministries involved (for
opposite reasons).
A critical point in post-CD
efforts is that individuals and
others in the units to which they
belong must believe that they
can perform as required by their
assignment. It is imperative
that well trained individuals
with the necessary capacities be
placed in positions where they
have the essential skills to make
a difference.
Training individuals vs. training organizations
Theexpertsoftenreferredtotheneedtostrengthentheorganizations
in which even qualified individuals operate.At times this was promoted
as an imperative more important than the need to strengthen individual
capacity. One participant expressed this sense well, when stating as
follows: “The trap I see is that we come back to what is the easiest and
which we are most comfortable with – training, or whatever relates to
capacity development, in individuals. But the problem is not individual
capacity, it exists at other levels and locations.”
Conversely, many of the experts agreed with the sentiment that
‘you can’t train organizations, you can only train people’. Their position
was that strengthening individuals is strengthening the organizations to
Mozambique: a successful match of
training and assignment
“As early as 1981, when the civil war
was still raging in the country, several
young but highly motivated central level
officers were trained at the IIEP. They
were given important assignments and
rapidly became a strong technical force
within the ministry. Without much delay
they took the initiative of organizing
capacity-building activities for planners
at the decentralized level and later
actively contributed to setting up and
running a national training programme
in education planning and administration
at the Universidade Pedagogica in
Maputo. The Mozambique experience
demonstrates the importance of a proper
match between training and assignment
in facilitating the new competencies
acquired by individual officers so that
they produce a positive impact on the
organisation as a whole.”
Europe

44
which they belong and is perhaps the only way one can really strengthen
organizations.
A resolution to these apparently opposing viewpoints was not
achieved. Yet the tension between these two perspectives must be
explored and eventually solved.Without the targeting potential provided
by a resolution, it is difficult to conceive of a way forward in CD that
could produce predictable, replicable and sustainable positive results
for CD in organizations or with individuals. Possible solutions to this
condition are explored briefly in the sub-section on Organizational
change in the section on ministry-level strategies.
Extra- and intra-national efforts
An important point of
consideration in the success
of individual CD is the point
of origin in the initiation,
design and implementation of
a CD effort. While most efforts
appear to be driven largely by
extra-national agencies, some
do originate from within the
nation itself. Intra-national
origination, as well as centrality
in linkage to design and implementation, appears to have a significant
positive influence on the ultimate success and sustainability of CD
efforts and programmes.
A significant factor in the success of intra- versus extra-
national efforts appears to be the level of specificity in the design and
implementation of the different programmes. Extra-national efforts are
clearlymore‘recipe-based’and‘formulaic’thanthoseoriginatingwithin
the nation-state. The more formulaic and technocratic approaches of
extra-national CD programmes have been shown to provide important
skills-based information, but not to have serious or long-term impact on
ways of operating or behaving. In these cases, the individuals trained
can understand the information perfectly, but that typically does not
“National institutions with a clear
mandate and support from their
government are where the most effective
individual capacity development can
take place. These sorts of institutions are
more stable, they are ‘inside’the country,
and the government prefers to rely on
them.”
Europe

45
lead to a change in operation and behaviour, which requires more than
mere information transfer.
It seems evident that, at equal levels of capacity, intra-national
efforts and institutions are in principle better placed than extra-national
agency programming in identifying, designing and implementing
CD efforts. Extra-national efforts should be focused on supporting
these programmes rather than competing with them or working in an
uncoordinated fashion in parallel to them.
Ministry-level strategies
Focusing on organizations such as ministries of education and
their regional and district offices demands work in at least three core
areas: (1) the development or clarification of organizational tools
such as detailed organizational charts, mission statements or job
descriptions; (2) demands for accountability from within or outside the
ministry, including by civil society; and (3) supportive staff monitoring
linked to motivating incentive systems. Changes in human resources
management, however, may also be necessary, and the control of
ministerial decision-makers in this domain is at times limited when
ministry staff belongs to the civil service.
The experts’ discussion was prefaced by the introduction and
review of several questions, including the following:
• When ministries function ineffectively and few incentives are
available to officers, what capacity development strategies have
been successful?
• Who can demand accountability from the ministry?
• How can international agencies have an impact on the functioning
of ministries? What actions should they promote in this regard and
what actions should they avoid?
• When ministries are ineffective, should other partners – coming,
for instance, from civil society – be given priority?
While the discussions were not limited to direct response to these
specific questions, they were informed by them.

46
Organizational change
The need to change
organizations, and not just
individuals, was part of a
recurrent and prominent theme
in the discussions. While the
experts mostly agreed that
cooperative CD efforts between
aid agencies and ministries had
for the most part succeeded
in strengthening individuals
(independent of consideration
of their subsequent use), the organizations to which they belong had
not realized equal success.
The question, therefore, becomes how to help (or ‘get’, as it was
often phrased) ministries to change. There is a subtle but important
distinction between the implications of the terms help and get when
discussing attempts at organizational change. With the term help, CD
efforts would be seen as cooperative enterprises between mutually
interested organizations – the power and the working relationship
would tend to be more horizontal. With the term get, CD efforts would
tend more towards vertical relationships, with the extra-national partner
being the super-ordinate participant and the host organization being in
a sub-ordinate position.
The likelihood of organizational change depends at least on the
following:
• The host government must take the lead (or have at the very least
an equal partner role) in the design, implementation and evaluation
of any CD effort.
• The culture of management in the host government must receive
serious attention before CD activities are designed and delivered.
• ‘One-size-fits-all’ or ‘recipe’ approaches must seriously be
challenged and, if implemented, must contain sufficient flexibility
to fit the specific needs of and conditions in the host country.
“The question becomes how to get
ministries to change. At the top level,
planning is the way to get ministries
to change. The minister must choose a
small group and they must develop the
plan. With the plan in place the whole
ministry must be mobilized – but this is
where the process usually gets ‘stuck’.”
Europe

47
• Individuals must be included as members of teams with
sufficient mass to be able to increase the likelihood of substantial
organizational impact.
As with many other critical issues, significant and sustainable
organizational change is particularly difficult to achieve in fragile
states or in nations experiencing substantial instability. Yet even in
difficult circumstances, important organizational change can be made
if everyone involved is willing to operate with realistic targets and time
frames that are suitable and sensitive to the prevailing conditions.
Ministries’relationships with other organizations
Any CD effort at the
ministry level must account
for the influence, efforts and
relationships between the
ministry and other relevant
organizations. Some of those
influential organizations
originate and operate from
within the nation, while others
are extra-national.
At the root of this may
be the extent to which the
agency attempting to deliver
CD services is considered
legitimate by the host nation.
Closely related is the real or
perceived legitimacy of the
ministry within its own country
or with the involved agency. Of
course, this issue of legitimacy
could be extended to extreme
points, such as a refusal to
participate in CD activities due
to a claim of low or no legitimacy by the agency or host country against
the other. Nonetheless, legitimacy within and between the ministry and
Zimbabwe, Sweden and London:
collaboration via Sida
“In 1983, Zimbabwe started
collaborating with Gothenburg and
Linköping Universities in Sweden and
the Institute of Education of London
University to enable technical subject
teachers to receive degree-level
studies in subjects such as woodwork,
metalwork, agriculture, home economics
and technical drawing. This was funded
by Sida. These degree-level courses
were incorporated successfully into the
University of Zimbabwe (even though
most Zimbabwean academics believed
academic degrees should include classics
but not practical subjects!) Through this
collaboration, we were able to upgrade
and update our technical education
programmes, which had previously been
below standard.”
in Africa

48
other active partner organizations does have a major influence on the
likelihood of CD efforts making a significant or lasting impact.
An interesting point that was raised and agreed to by a number of
experts was that the relationship between ministries and teacher training
institutions is not as good or productive as it needs to be. In many places,
this relationship has deteriorated in recent years. This would appear to
be a critical area for CD efforts and programmes in coming years. The
question of why resistance to change towards better inter-institutional
relationships – which seems so self-evidently necessary and appears
to be so easily within reach – remains entrenched, is significant.
Participants considered whether better and more productive working
relationships require (on both sides) new institutions, new people, or
just new approaches.
At least part of the challenge appears to be rooted in concern over
losing control and autonomy. Whether it is institutionalized or rests in
the decision-making power of small groups or individuals, the move to
better working relationships seems to be hindered by concern that
mutually beneficial change and cooperation are likely to be too costly
in terms of control. The costs of change simply do not appear to be
sufficiently offset by the potential benefits. There are examples of great
success in this area, however.
Several national institutions have
been able to produce capable
education planners who are well
and properly placed within relevant
and influential government units.
These institutions generally have a
significant level of autonomy in
personnel and finance management.
Issues of scale
Even conceding the context of discussion at the ministry level,
the issue of scale emerges. When a CD initiative is not dealing with
federations (which brings issues of scale into play, as noted elsewhere),
a focus on the ministry of education makes the most sense only when
the nation-state is reasonably unified or stable. Non-federated fragile
“In at least half of Latin American
countries the ministries aren’t that
bad. The bottleneck is the teacher
training institutions. They aren’t
teaching their students how to
teach.”
Academic stationed in South
America

49
states, for example, may require that CD efforts focus on sub-national
regions or on highly localised units rather than on the ministry.
Another point of consideration relating to scale is whether a
‘ministry-level focus’ indeed requires CD efforts at the ministry itself.
Alternatively, are ‘ministry-level’activities in reality taking place at the
level of the sub-ministry organizational unit that is specifically tasked
with some significant aspect of designing, planning, implementing and/
or evaluating the education function(s) of interest?
A last issue of scale to be
considered, and one that has an
impact on all prior issues, is the
size of the nation-state involved.
Certainly, any CD effort taking
place in China or India would have
to be approached in a very different
fashion, due to issues of scale, than
efforts in Togo or Samoa.
Issues of scale emphasize the point that ‘one-size-fits-all’ and
‘recipe’ approaches must be reconsidered, if at all attempted, with
the implication for agencies such as UNESCO to consider their own
‘issue of scale’. It is important to ask whether a reasonably large and
historically-laden agency like UNESCO can provide CD services that
are sufficiently adaptable and malleable to widely varying conditions
that are heavily textured by their own issues and politics of scale.
Strategy effectiveness
Not all strategies are ‘created equal’, nor are they all equally
effective or ineffective across settings and conditions. Yet there may
be some strategies that appear to have led consistently to positive and
sustainable outcomes and thus may provide a reasonable expectation of
success in the future, perhaps in other settings. On the other hand, some
strategies may consistently have been ineffective, and the conditions
and reasons for these relative failures should also be explored. Perhaps
further examination will show that no strategies per se succeed or fail,
but rather that strategies nested within varying sets of opportunities,
“Working with a small island
state is very different to working
with a large country like China.
In CD, we don’t differentiate
sufficiently between large and small
– we assume a ‘one-size-fits-all’
approach.”
in Asia

50
constraints and circumstances may have higher or lower chances of
contributing to effective and sustainable CD efforts.
Environment of change
The discussions consistently interpreted CD as a process of change
and therefore paid much attention to the conditions necessary for, and
indeed requisite to, change. This emerged as one of the most significant
issuesinthetwodaysofdiscussions,generatingperhapsthelargestshare
of agreement among participants. In brief, the assertion was made that
the readiness of the country, ministry, unit and individuals for change
is the determining factor in success, above all other considerations in
CD efforts. The ability of those involved in CD, both internally and
externally, to understand correctly and diagnose the conditions of
readiness for change is the skill most required. To emphasize this point,
the metaphor of ‘pregnancy’ was used throughout the discussion.
CD is about relationships and micro- and macro-level social
change. It is about the process of actors coming together or not coming
together. CD simply cannot be accomplished independent of the
context. The change environment or the readiness of the environment
for change cannot be ignored. Interest in, commitment to and readiness
for change must exist on the part of the ‘receiving unit’ – this is the
critical condition.
Pregnancy of the host environment for change is often linked
directly to leadership. Good leadership typically means that an
environment of change has been created, nurtured and maintained. The
disposition for change is often a central quality of a good leader, and
the conditions for change will have been created by such a leader.
Culture
While it is clear that
culture alone cannot explain
success or failure in CD, it must
be conceded that it certainly
makes a significant difference.
But what is meant by culture?
Can culture change and/or be changed? Must culture be taken as an
“Culture applies more appropriately
to a specific place, and not so well to a
generic borderless condition.”
Europe

51
unavoidable, inflexible condition? Differences of opinion were strong
on these points.
The literature on the nature and malleability of culture is immense.
One group of experts felt that the literature that declares culture to be
fixed and not amenable to change is simply incorrect. But this assertion
could not be taken at face value. There is research and literature to
support the notion that culture can and does change. Furthermore,
culture change can be influenced from within and outside of the culture
itself. This would be an important consideration in designing, delivering
and evaluating CD efforts.
While cultural issues and norms
should always be considered
and respected, there are
occasions when efforts
associated with CD can and
should be made to influence
change. Indeed, a CD effort
may even target culture change
itself as the object of the
programme. The notion of team
or team building, as it has
functioned in specific national
settings, was used to illustrate
the challenges encountered
when the host culture does not
necessarily support a required
behaviour, and as an example
of how cultural norms that are
not initially conducive to such
behaviour can be changed to be
more supportive.
However,theremaybeasignificantdifferencebetweenthemeaning
and malleability of culture as expressed in a workplace or management
environment,incontrasttocultureasexpressedinthelargercivilsociety.
In the sense of culture in the workplace or management environment,
the likelihood of change is increased by the fact that workplace settings
are by their very nature a ‘composite’culture focused on individual and
Benin: cultural change through
appropriate incentives
“The experience of one district education
office (DEO) clarifies this issue. The
DEO made an agreement with an
NGO: The NGO provides the DEO with
technical and financial support, and
in exchange the DEO makes sure that
its files are well kept, that it organizes
regular training courses for principals,
and that it allows its staff to participate
in professional development. It asks
the NGO for advice, which is well
appreciated. It reports back every year
to the NGO, which makes continued
financing conditional upon progress
made. This has allowed for a relationship
of mutual trust to develop and for the
DEO to function more effectively.”
Europe

52
cooperative tasks and functions. A workplace environment typically
brings together individuals from different – sometimes divergent –
ethnic, regional, linguistic and other cultural backgrounds. The various
combinations of workers’ different backgrounds creates a condition in
which the staff are brought together to pursue specific functions and
tasks that often anticipate actions and decisions that supersede prior
background commitments. Whether this actually happens or not is not
the issue here. The fact of the combination and the united intention of a
cooperative work enterprise create a condition with greater possibility
of change than normally exists when a single cultural dimension
predominates.
When culture is applied
in the second meaning, then
change may still be possible,
and is perhaps desirable and
necessary for success and
sustainability. Clearly, the
impetus for and efforts targeted
at changing the larger cultural
contextcomemostappropriately
and effectively from within –
not from and according to the
norms and expectations of an
external culture or agency.
Critical mass
An important issue
influencing the efficiency of
CD efforts is critical mass. In
terms of CD efforts, critical
mass expresses itself in two
ways: (1) the critical mass
necessary in host nations to
build sustainable capacity, and
(2) the critical mass necessary
Cambodia:
conditions ready for change
“As soon as Cambodia began to emerge
from decades of war and destruction
in 1991, the Ministry of Education
with the support of UNICEF and Sida
started investing in building capacity
for planning. Year after year, one or two
officers were sent to the IIEP for training
and were posted in responsible positions
within the Planning Department. At
the same time the Department got
properly equipped and was provided
with up-to-date information technology.
Today the country has one of the best
education management information
systems (EMIS) in the region and the
Planning Department plays a key role
in coordinating and monitoring the
education sector development process on
a SWAp basis. The example shows that
successful CD is a long-term undertaking
which involves not only a strategic
vision, but also some risk taking, serious
commitment on behalf of the government
and persistent support from donors.”
Europe

53
foraidagenciestobeeffectiveintheireffortstoprovideCDprogrammes
and services.
The number necessary to qualify as sufficient critical mass varies
between host nation contexts. Sufficient critical mass is influenced by
factors such as the size of the ministry or nation, the stability of the
host nation and institution, the skill levels of involved personnel, and
the complexity of targeted capacity outcomes. It is evident that even in
the smallest nations or ministries with good stability, skill levels and
modest outcome goals, one or two capable individuals simply would
not be sufficient critical mass either to make a meaningful difference
or to sustain that difference over time. Among the suggestions given
for increasing the critical mass in host nations were using distance
education and technology, and encouraging increased support from
universities in the region. It is interesting to note that in considering
university participation it was believed that ‘younger’ universities
would be more likely to participate effectively in developing critical
mass in CD programmes. Older universities, it seems, are considered
too conservative and self-contained, and thus likely to display a level of
disinterest in adapting to and participating in CD efforts.
In terms of critical mass and aid agencies, the issues are a bit more
subtle. It was mentioned several times during the experts’meetings that
an important aspect of critical mass is the number of qualified personnel
in field offices. It should be noted that the claim for critical mass in this
regard does not refer simply to the number of field offices or the number
of people in those offices. Rather, the reference is to the number of
qualified people in the field
offices, as well as the attitude
within the organization for
posting to those locations. It is
clear that the experts believed
that any agency involved in CD
efforts needs to have enough
qualifiedandproperlymotivated
people in the field in order to
succeed.
“There isn’t enough critical mass in the
field. UNESCO’s best people should be
in the field. UNICEF people are fighting
to go to the field – in UNESCO there isn’t
much fighting going on to move into the
field!”
in Europe

54
Time frame
Often, CD efforts
struggle under the avoidable
constraints of unrealistic time
frames. This is not to imply
that either short- or long-term
efforts are always the problem.
More often, the problem is a
significant mismatch between
the prevailing needs and the
readiness of the host country, institution(s) and/or actors and the time
frames attempted. The source of inappropriate time frames is not
always external agencies and actors. In many instances internal forces,
for practical or political reasons, request or demand time frames that
are ill-suited to the CD needs and realities.
Most contexts and needs require more time to assess, plan, deliver
and evaluate than is typically anticipated; there is often a significant
amount of time between an action and any measurable result. The
typically anticipated time frame of one to four years from intervention
to results is simply too short in most aspects of CD. Preferences for
10- to 20-year time frames were evident in the discussions. Clearly,
these longer time frames present a number of practical and functional
challenges and create perhaps as many challenges as they intend to
solve – albeit different ones. It is not clear that the exchange of
challenges from short-term to long-term efforts would net a necessarily
satisfactory result. However, concern and perhaps frustration with the
currently more common short-term efforts has generated a sense that
perhaps the challenges associated with long-term efforts would be a
welcome change at least.
It was pointed out that in Rwanda, “the fact that DFID made a
ten-year commitment was critically important to the success of the
CD effort”. On the other hand, it was agreed that in fragile states it
is desirable first to have short time frames of one to two years before
longer-term goals are feasible.
“My general experience is that the time
it takes to go through the discussion,
negotiation and agreement process is
much longer than we allocate. It takes a
long time to do it right, and we are not
patient enough.”
Europe

55
While it does not represent a unified collection, the following brief
list of issues that emerged regarding the time frame may be instructive
for some of the basic issues that were discussed:
• We must be patient and allow sufficient time to see the results.
• Change involves the long term, even when particular successes
might emerge in the short term.
• We should be better at distinguishing between short-term and
long-term TA.
• A realistic assessment of the circumstances of the host setting
should drive the delivery of either short- or long-term TA, rather
than the availability of funding, the priorities of the funding
agency, or the preferences of the aid agency.
In either short- or long-term cases the dimensions of a specific
CD programme – in terms of the approach, needs, monitoring and
evaluation, funding, and so on – will differ considerably depending on
the element of time frame.
Accountability
Astrongthemethatemergedinseveralarenaswastheaccountability
necessary for success to be a realistic expectation. Accountability was
expressed in several ways: conditional funding for meeting performance
goals, the presence of real conditionalities, checks and balances in the
responsibility mechanism, clear expectations and evaluation systems,
and linkage in performance contracts.
Accountability must be
balanced by providing requisite
competencies and establishing a
reciprocal system of free-flowing
critical information. Implementing
accountability systems without
increasing skills and capabilities is not only problematic, but certain to
lead to any number of negative outcomes, risking a high probability of
failure.Arelated critical factor is the formalization of clear expectations,
the establishment of criteria for performance and deliverables, and
agreement on schedules and dates. Without these formal arrangements
there will be a predictable breakdown in any accountability system.
“We ask for more accountability of
developing countries than is asked of
developed countries.”
stationed in Europe

56
While accountability is typically related to the performance of
individuals in specific sub-ministry units, the concept of accountability
should actually be construed much more broadly. A balanced system
of accountability needs to consider and strongly link to, in whatever
degree is reasonable, four groups:
• policy-makers at the national level;
• technicians (professional-level personnel);
• implementers;
• civil society:
– beneficiaries and users;
– political parties (including the ability to monitor);
– trade unions.
Accountability systems can easily be destabilized by unclear ‘line’
and ‘authority’ mechanisms. The issue of governance can arise in
designing and implementing accountability systems, and this can prove
to be problematic. It is often
not clear that there is a distinct
or singular chain of
responsibilities between
decentralized units and actors
and more centralized
authorities. There is also a
potential for inequities in
organizational structures
between regions and districts
within the same nation. Clear
structures of responsibility and
accountability must be in place prior to implementation, and potential
conflicts and overlaps in lines of authority must be resolved.
Evaluation
Issues of evaluation were the only ones that emerged in all of the
sessions during the two days of meetings, and they generated some of
the most diverse questions and discussions. Have CD efforts failed,
or have our evaluation systems failed to investigate them adequately
or appropriately? Where CD efforts have not achieved the magnitude
“This leads to the issue of governance:
to whom are the decentralized units
responsible? Are they responsible to
the central government or the local
government? There is a risk that a lack
of clarity in the chain of responsibilities
between decentralized units and the
centre will lead to inequities between
regions and districts.”
Europe

57
of results anticipated, have evaluation attempts been sufficiently
patient to allow those efforts to mature? Have evaluation efforts been
sufficient but appear inconsistent simply because sometimes CD works
and sometimes it doesn’t? These and other questions were expressed
or implied during the course of discussions regarding the relevance,
effectiveness and sensitivity of CD evaluation efforts. Regardless of
the positions that the experts assumed, it was clear that evaluation
efforts are critical to CD efforts and that evaluation must improve in a
number of ways.
It was proposed that the Guidelines for capacity development in
the education sector within the Education For All Fast Track Initiative
framework document provides an evaluative framework on which
future efforts could draw (FTI Capacity Development Team, 2008). It
may be true that the FTI Capacity Development Team document and
other relevant documents of this sort, such as the OECD-DAC document
(2006), can provide some
general indications for
evaluative ‘frameworks’.
However, they provide few
specific evaluation modalities
or technical details to truly
guide the design of future CD
evaluation systems.As a general
framework, these two
documents and others merit
serious consideration and
inclusion in future CD
evaluation efforts.
One set of challenges
emerging from the discussions
related to whether the real
changes assessed in CD
were based in behavioural
observations and criteria, as
currently dominate evaluation
systems. Certainly, there are
Set up monitoring and
evaluation modalities for
capacity development efforts
While designing a strategy, it is key
to define how these structured efforts
towards capacity development in the
education sector will be monitored
and evaluated (M&E). M&E of CD
should be considered part of a planning
cycle, interlinking priority setting,
strategy selection, resource allocation
and budgeting, and implementation.
M&E closes this cycle by delivering
information on whether intended
outcomes of CD interventions were met,
why they were not achieved and whether
chosen CD interventions turned out to
be relevant in achieving education sector
targets.
(FTI Capacity Development Team,
2008: 29)

58
significant changes that are not amenable to traditional evaluation
approaches and assumptions. However, this does not mean that there are
not (or should not be) significant impacts and changes that are amenable
to traditional evaluation approaches and assumptions. Consequently,
while the argument of outcomes not measurable by present evaluation
techniques is valid and thus meaningful to contemplate and pursue, this
argument does not answer the question of why outcomes that should
and do conform to those techniques are often not manifest.
It may be, as one expert put it, that “we do not have enough
patience”. It is likely that the outcomes we want most from our CD
efforts are not yet manifest because we have miscalculated the
‘incubation period’ required.
Additionally, evaluation systems
must be sufficiently flexible to be
applied to the nature of the service,
context and intended outcomes. Each
of these conditions exerts a powerful
influence on the appropriate type and
timing of evaluation. These factors imply a reasonable resistance to
standardized evaluation systems, approaches, timelines and
expectations.
Another possible explanation is that our evaluation systems are
adequate and we exercise sufficient patience, but because we failed to
conduct thorough and accurate assessments of the needs and readiness
of the change environment and conditions prior to proceeding, the
desired results simply did not
occur. Evaluation efforts,
which most typically proceed
during or after the fact, also
need to include a priori
attempts to assess the readiness
and adequacy of conditions in
the host environment. These
pre-design and pre-delivery
assessments must be regularized and must be given adequate weight in
determining whether or how to proceed.
For CD to work communities,
schools and parents must demand
it, and support it – otherwise efforts
can be too easily reversed.
Ministry of education worker
stationed in Africa
“Needs assessment prior to CD is too
weak and superficial; consequently,
linkage is poor between what is really
needed and the generic solutions
applied.”
South America, teamed with a training
institution worker stationed in Asia

59
Connection between local and central
Successful and sustainable CD efforts must include the full
range of impacted organizations, groups and individuals. CD cannot
be limited to an investment in ministries or the staff of ministries. It
should be seen as unavoidable to include the full range of actors, from
the most highly centralized to the most localized units of impact and
participation.
The inclusion of groups and individuals at the local level is
particularly important in democracies. Full range inclusion is a
fundamental assumption of a democratic society, and the impact and
sustainability of CD efforts will be severely restricted without it.
While there is an assumed ‘natural’ tension between central and
local needs and action, that tension must be confronted and resolved
to ensure the best possible results. While some of the experts felt that
change must always come from local action and effort, and that support
from centralized units must be locally controlled, this position clearly
has limited validity in certain cases and conditions. Consequently,
while many CD efforts may begin from an assumption of the priority
of local inﬂuence and control, the best CD solutions and programmes
will not always operate from this perspective.
There is reasonable concern that operating from an exclusively
localperspectivewillnotproduceeffortsthatarefullyrobust.Thecentral
and local perspectives of operation equally involve risks, limitations
and possibilities in CD efforts. The nearly universal assumptions about
‘grass-roots’ and ‘bottom-up’ efforts and priorities often defeat CD
efforts before they begin. This issue is cultural rather than technical.
Where cultural assumptions of hierarchy dominate, and operational
solutions and CD efforts must function within that milieu, grass-roots
and bottom-up mechanisms simply might not be appropriate. Cultures
can be so different that CD efforts and solutions must be highly adaptive
and sensitive. This makes the connections between local and central
actors more complex than might typically be apparent.
NGOs play an interesting role on the central-local dominance
continuum. Local needs are clearly the primary domain of operation for
NGOs, and for the most part they do very well in that niche. There can

60
often be a mismatch or overlapping of efforts, however, between NGOs
functioning at the local level and traditional CD efforts that operate on
the ‘line’functions typically associated with centralized actors. Careful
collaboration of efforts must take place to avoid inefficiency and costly
conflicts between potentially complementary efforts.
External vs. internal issues
Similar to issues regarding the full inclusion of central and local
actors, there is a significant need to consider the relationships and needs
of external and internal actors. Often expressed as tension between
external efforts and internal action, the issues involved persist, and they
resist easy resolution.
Intheexperts’discussions
it was not always external
agency personnel who were
asserting the priority of
exogenous perspectives and
efforts, and nor was it always
locally-situated experts who
were asserting the priority of
local control. Often, internal actors, wrapped in the realities of their host
country, look to external agents and organizations to take the lead in
identifying the most important CD needs and designing and delivering
services. External actors, meanwhile, often champion the priority of
local actors. Rather than engaging in a discourse of ‘hierarchy’, where a
clear and universal determination is made of whether external or internal
actors should have priority, efforts should focus on determining which
perspectives should guide a specific CD effort and in what particular
proportion of external/internal ‘mixture’. Often, the mixture of external
and local may change in the course of the CD effort, depending on
the nature of the host environment and the institutional and capacity
‘target’ of the CD programme. Also, internal and external actors have
to agree on the goals and approaches used.
“Who should decide that an external
agency should provide CD services – the
country or the agency? The ‘optimum’CD
service level should be determined by the
host country, not the external agency.”
Africa

61
5. ROLE OF UNESCO IN CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT IN EFA
UNESCO and other international development and funding agencies
play an important role in supporting and financing many CD activities.
BecauseUNESCOhasafairlycentralizedstructureandisnotafinancing
agency, it needs to develop partnerships. Its focus should probably not
be on the implementation of programmes and projects, but on more
upstream areas where technical expertise is of more importance than
implementation capacity. Such areas could include policy advice, needs
assessment or institutional analysis, which needs more emphasis from
the international community. All of this should be better focused and
refined in terms of UNESCO’s mandate and role as the global leader
in EFA. How UNESCO determines to fulfil its future role as the global
leader in CD efforts in EFA may very well define its relevance and
impact as an organization and global leader.
EFA focus
Since UNESCO is the appointed leader in EFA, and the primary
function of the experts’ panel was to provide an input towards the
creation of a UNESCO strategy paper on “capacity development for
achieving EFA goals” (De Grauwe, 2008: 1), the group pushed for an
‘EFA focus’ in the discussions. There is clearly a need to contextualize
UNESCO’s efforts and policy obligations in EFA – especially because
of the tendency to focus on less comprehensive CD subjects,
opportunities or services.
Any effort on the part of UNESCO to cross institutional boundaries
without full contextualization in EFA will lead only to non-sustainable
results. This is an issue of UNESCO’s competitive advantage, which
rests on EFA. UNESCO is,
above all, about ideas. Ideas
cannot be contextualized in the
abstract. EFA is the focal point
on which UNESCO needs to
base its priorities and assess its
competitive and comparative
advantages, as well as the
“The situation at the school level is
actually much less depressing than at the
ministry level – but that is largely due to
the actions of NGOs.”
Europe

62
area in which its ideas can and should find their most concrete future
possibilities.
Unit of analysis
It is self-evident that UNESCO must make clear and operational
the ‘unit of analysis’ it intends to use for future CD efforts in EFA.
Historically, the focus has primarily been nation-states – ministries
of education in particular. Perhaps the country or nation-state unit
of analysis in the Paris Declaration and the OECD-DAC document
should guide UNESCO’s selection. Whatever choice is made, the unit
of analysis should be the starting point. The typically weak linkage
between ministries and schools means that clear targeting of one or the
other as the unit of analysis is critical, since it is difficult to assume that
operating at either the school or ministry level will consistently have
an impact on the other.
Establishing a clear unit of analysis as the starting point improves
targeting, scale and the scope of intended services and operations,
evaluation techniques, and timing – among other functions critical for
effective implementation and sustainability. Care should be taken to
avoid being drawn into efforts at too many levels at once. It is best to
determine the highest ‘leverage’ opportunity for UNESCO and move
confidently in that direction. Considering that the UN system has
stewardship over only 2 per cent of the aid monies in the world, and
UNESCO’s budget is only a fraction of that amount, highly focused
efforts based in a realistic and contained unit of analysis framework are
the only rational option for the future.
Accountability
While the experts felt that accountability includes important
implications for UNESCO, various groups construed the role very
differently. Positions on this ranged across the full spectrum, from
asserting that UNESCO must hold governments directly accountable,
to the belief that UNESCO can’t be involved in holding countries
accountable.
Those who took the position that UNESCO must or should hold
governments accountable made it clear that the implied systems of

63
Role of UNESCO in capacity development in EFA
accountability should include not just centralized government units,
but also communities and other sub-national government units as well.
However, they did not present or even approach any mechanisms by
whichUNESCOcouldholdgovernmentsandotherentitiesaccountable.
Given donor and aid funding systems, global political roles and
UNESCO’s traditional position (and its likely future position), it seems
very unlikely that a function as an ‘agent of accountability’ will ever
materialize.
Conversely, some of the experts presented strong arguments
asserting that UNESCO simply could not become involved in holding
governments accountable, especially via direct strategies. This position
included the sense that even the use of ‘conditionalities’ in CD efforts
is not appropriate for UNESCO. Accountability, conditionalities,
incentives and so on should remain the purview of the host government
and of internal agencies and funding units. The assertion was credibly
made that UNESCO-centred systems of accountability are simply
inappropriate.
The ‘middle ground’
appeared to be the belief that
UNESCO does indeed have
a role in accountability, but
that role should be moderated
through alliances and
moderated efforts with NGOs,
indigenous institutions such
as universities and training
units, as well as international
aid agencies. In this scenario,
UNESCO has somewhat of
a ‘brokering’ role. Again, no
speciﬁc mechanisms or approaches were proposed, but the general idea
was presented as the most likely role for UNESCO in the domain of
accountability.
“For ministries to become more
accountable, civil society must ﬁrst be
reinforced. Government structures (that
is, ministries of education) can’t be made
to be more accountable until their civil
society is such that this can be done.
The role of UNESCO is to see how civil
societies can be reinforced by NGOs
and knowledge-based institutions like
universities, and so on.”
Europe

64
Organizational issues
It was clear that the
participants were not interested
in ‘judging’ UNESCO,
but rather in exploring and
offering suggestions to help
create the most relevant
and useful strategy paper
possible. Questions about the
possibility or legitimacy of
exploring organizational issues
relating to UNESCO were raised a number of times. The approach
to such questions seemed rather cautious, indicating a concern that
organizational issues might be somewhat delicate at UNESCO. One
participant reflected on whether UNESCO was prepared to evaluate
and challenge its own definitions and processes. A delimitation was
made to not consider UNESCO’s internal organizational and capacity
issues, but rather to focus on the relationships between UNESCO and
other organizations.
Organizations and governments obviously seek UNESCO’s
involvement – but why is this? Some may do so in the belief that
UNESCO remains neutral. Perhaps the ‘brand name’ of UNESCO is
attractive to potential partners seeking an organizational relationship.
In any case, UNESCO must become more proactive in seeking out
organizational partners and must broaden its search beyond the
ministry level to include NGOs, sub-national government units and aid
agencies.
Although UNESCO’s internal organizational and capacity issues
were not a focus of this group, a few ideas in these areas circulated
and emerged in different discussions. The most prominent of these was
the issue of UNESCO’s field offices and patterns of deployment. First,
clearly the sentiment was universal that UNESCO’s main value is its
people, not its financial support. Consequently, the experts felt that the
best (most competent) people should be in the field. There was a sense
that the quality of the field offices had deteriorated over time, and that
UNESCO needs to find ways to reverse this trend.
“The OECD paper definition required
a major shift in thinking, away from
historical successes, discourses and
commitments. The gap is enormous
between the practice of CD and the
OECD paper definition.”
Europe

65
Role of UNESCO in capacity development in EFA
UNESCO and its partners
While the goal of the experts’
meeting was to help provide a basis for
UNESCO’s strategy paper, it was also
necessary to consider what other
organizations are, can and should be doing in CD and EFA. This broad
approach provides a more realistic landscape of the context in which
UNESCO’s paper must be positioned, as well as a more comprehensive
picture of UNESCO’s role and function in that context.
An important issue to
resolve is how UNESCO
relates to and interacts with its
partners. The experts observe
that UNESCO often interacts
quite differently with partners
such as member states, NGOs
and aid agencies than it does
with other international groups
such as UNICEF and the World
Bank. To some degree this may be inevitable, or even preferable, given
UNESCO’s particular commission and organizational position. On
the other hand, UNESCO may simply have fallen into institutional
patterns that are not necessarily essential, preferable or productive. It is
important to consider how to deﬁne not only who UNESCO’s partners
are, but how UNESCO should interact with them in a functionally
productive way.
Along with identifying UNESCO’s potential partners, the group
realized that it is imperative to determine from whence the ‘push’ for
this strategy paper is coming. Does the impetus come from one of
UNESCO’s partners or a group of partners, or does it result from a
larger set of reforms and change forces that have created the necessity
for UNESCO to reposition or redeﬁne its perspective and functional
imperatives on this issue? This determination makes a substantial
difference in how to proceed, how to target the strategy paper and how
to bring together partners in a united effort.
“You can’t do CD in a ‘silo’!”
Academic stationed in Europe
“UNESCO needs to acknowledge the
role and ability of other agencies, make
partnership commitments over the long
term, avoid establishing redundant
systems, establish strong networking
relationships, and increase its own
diversity.”
Africa

67
6. CONCLUSION
A meeting of experts with the combined experience of more than
500 years can be expected to be a forum for rich discussion and some
areas of disagreement. Such disagreement results not only from the
experts’ different positions and their own more or less successful
experiences in CD, but also from the complexity which characterizes
CD and the impact of the contexts within which CD efforts are
implemented. It may be more instructive in this conclusion to move
beyond these disagreements to highlight the points on which the experts
agreed.
CD only succeeds when individuals and organizations are ready
for change. Precisely because CD is linked intimately to individual
incentives and organizational cultures, its implementation will
unavoidably imply profound change and will therefore encounter
resistance. If those who resist change outweigh by far those who
promote it, CD programmes may remain superﬁcial and generate no
sustainable impact. Without internal commitment, external efforts
make little sense.
Readiness for change depends on the type of leadership at the
national level as well as within organizations. External incentives or
conditionalities cannot replace national leadership and direction; at
most, such factors may help create them. The implication is, therefore,
that CD programmes may need to include speciﬁc interventions to
identify prospective leaders and support leadership that is oriented
towards change and development.
A more general implication is that successful CD programmes
cannot be limited to a few one-off training courses, but may have to
be comprehensive and multifaceted, focusing on building individuals’
skills, organizational transformation and institutional reform. Training
is undoubtedly a part of CD programmes, but training alone does
not change bureaucratic practices. CD is intrinsically a complex and
challenging endeavour, but without capacity, sustainable development
is not possible.

69
REFERENCES
Berg, E. 1993. Rethinking technical cooperation: reforms for capacity
building in Africa. New York: United Nations Development
Programme.
De Grauwe, A. 2008. Capacity development in educational planning
and management for achieving EFA – learning from successes
and failures. Background document for Experts’ Meeting, Paris,
France, 1-2 July 2008. Paris: IIEP-UNESCO.
FTI Capacity Development Team. 2008. Guidelines for capacity
development in the education sector within the Education ForAll-Fast
Track Initiative Framework. German Federal Ministry for Economic
Cooperation and Development (BMZ).
OECD-DAC. 2006. The challenge of capacity development: working
towards good practice. Paris: OECD.
Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. 2005. Retrieved 10 September
2008 from:
http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/238766/H&A%20
Menu%20rev%202%20English.pdf.

IIEP publications and documents
More than 1,200 titles on all aspects of educational planning have
been published by the International Institute for Educational Planning.
A comprehensive catalogue is available in the following subject
categories:
Educational planning and global issues
General studies – global/developmental issues
Administration and management of education
Decentralization – participation – distance education
– school mapping – teachers
Economics of education
Costs and ﬁnancing – employment – international cooperation
Quality of education
Evaluation – innovation – supervision
Different levels of formal education
Primary to higher education
Alternative strategies for education
Lifelong education – non-formal education – disadvantaged
groups – gender education
Copies of the Catalogue may be obtained on request from:
IIEP, Publications and Communications Unit
info@iiep.unesco.org
Titles of new publications and abstracts may be consulted online:
www.iiep.unesco.org

The International Institute for Educational Planning
The International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP) is an international centre for advanced
training and research in the field of educational planning. It was established by UNESCO in 1963
and is financed by UNESCO and by voluntary contributions from Member States. In recent years
the following Member States have provided voluntary contributions to the Institute: Australia,
Denmark, India, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.
The Institute’s aim is to contribute to the development of education throughout the world,
by expanding both knowledge and the supply of competent professionals in the field of educational
planning. In this endeavour the Institute cooperates with training and research organizations
in Member States. The IIEP Governing Board, which approves the Institute’s programme and
budget, consists of a maximum of eight elected members and four members designated by the
United Nations Organization and certain of its specialized agencies and institutes.
Chairperson:
Raymond E. Wanner (USA)
Senior Adviser on UNESCO issues, United Nations Foundation, Washington DC, USA.
Designated Members:
Christine Evans-Klock
Director, ILO Skills and Employability Department, Geneva, Switzerland.
Carlos Lopes
Assistant Secretary-General and Executive Director,
United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), United Nations,
New-York, USA.
Jamil Salmi
Education Sector Manager, the World Bank Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Diéry Seck
Director, African Institute for Economic Development and Planning, Dakar, Senegal.
Elected Members:
Aziza Bennani (Morocco)
Ambassador and Permanent Delegate of Morocco to UNESCO.
Nina Yefimovna Borevskaya (Russia)
Chief Researcher and Project Head, Institute of Far Eastern Studies, Moscow.
Birger Fredriksen (Norway)
Consultant on Education Development for the World Bank.
Ricardo Henriques (Brazil)
Special Adviser of the President, National Economic and Social Development Bank.
Takyiwaa Manuh (Ghana)
Director, Institute of African Studies, University of Ghana.
Philippe Méhaut (France)
LEST-CNRS, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Xinsheng Zhang (China)
Vice-Minister of Education, China.
Inquiries about the Institute should be addressed to:
The Office of the Director, International Institute for Educational Planning,
7-9 rue Eugène Delacroix, 75116 Paris, France

Capdev planning and_management

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Capdev planning and_management (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Capdev planning and_management