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

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

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

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

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

Key things to remember:

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

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

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

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

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

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

KSGhana: Feedback on Peer Assist method

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

The feedback on the method was:

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

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

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

The three experiences were as follows:

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

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

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

Key Challenges:

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

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

The feedback on the method was:

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

KSGhana: Communities of practice and how can it be useful

The purpose of this session was to introduce to the participants the concept of Community of Practice. Again, Lucie made an introductory presentation introducing the concept of community of practice. This was followed by few questions that were given to the participants for group discussion:

• Are you part of a formal/informal community? Do they work? Why do they work?
• Can FAO as an organization or you in your specific area benefit from encouraging the formation of COPs?

What can stimulate participation in and success of communities of practice?

• When a lot of participants bring their knowledge and share it with the rest of the community
• Creation of a core group that supports the COP in addition to ensuring appropriate facilitation
• When participants have a common sense of purpose
• When they are seen as source of support - getting feedback or answers to problems/questions
• When participants think they can support others with their knowledge
• When regular summaries are provided as a follow-up to discussions
• When there is appropriate language and technological support
• Bringing people together for a face-to-face interaction on occasion
• Participants are recognized and given visibility for their inputs
• Financial guarantee is available for the COP
  

In terms of the organization, the main issues with COPs were seen as:

• there is already too much demand on staff time
• lack of funding (for facilitation, face-to-face meetings, etc.)
• lack of facilitation training and support

It was also observed that FAO staff would in general benefit from participating in external COPs. They would not only bring FAO's knowledge to the community but also gain from the external perspective of participants.

COPs are vital for knowledge sharing but the organization needs to support its staff by giving them time to participate in communities. In case where FAO needs to create and lead a community, financial support also needs to be provided.

So, is secret to successful COPs - $$, facilitation and core group? In that order?

KSGhana: Network mapping and understanding its benefits to your projects

This session's purpose was to introduce social network mapping as a tool to visualize networks and support discussion on how they can be strengthened and used in support of our activities. Using paper, pens and post-it notes, participants created an informal map and then discussed it with other workshop participants to see the diagram from another’s point of view. This exercise allowed participants to get a better understanding of their diverse relationships and KS paths, to visualize the linkages that are already strong and find those that need strengthening or building. The discussion with others helped identify missing players and links. The full exercise is available from workshop wiki.

Feedback on the exercise:

• The exercise was useful as I wouldn't have taken time to do it. The analysis helps to increase efficiency in knowledge sharing.
  
• The graph also showed how one person can be center of the map. It helped me to understand that I need to develop strategies to start two-way communication.
  
• When should we expect everyone to do this? It can be used at the beginning of the project or over the course of the whole project depending on the activity. For example, for stakeholder analysis at the beginning or for creating communication plan in the beginning/during a project.
  
• This could be a good activity to be carried out by the taskforce at the beginning of a project.
  
• Project beneficiaries are often at the receiving end. This activity could be done with them to increase their input.
  
• Looking at village level - including them from the beginning to increase their participation and trust.
  

KSGhana: Icebreaker and introduction to Knowledge Sharing

This morning we started off with a tagging icebreaker. The idea was to get people to get to know each other but also in the mood for the participatory workshop. The first part of the exercise was to tag yourself with a word that describes you at work and the second was to tag yourself with a word that describes you personally.

Once the tagging was done, people were asked to move around and cluster into tags that were similar. The idea of the exercise was to also show people how "tagging" is done in social media.

Following the exercise, Lucie made a presentation on knowledge sharing and its components. Some of the elements covered were:

• Differentiating data, information and knowledge
• Clarifying the difference between a tool and a method
• Why share knowledge? (i.e. the benefits)
• KS self-assessment framework
• Knowledge sharing success factors

Following the presentation will be a small group discussion and debrief. Participants wrote up their questions and some of the questions that were asked were:

• What is the difference between knowledge management and knowledge sharing? - Knowledge Sharing is part of knowledge management which encapsulates other activities such as capture, codification, monitoring, etc. These aspects will be touched only partially as the focus will be more on the interaction or sharing.
  
• Reinventing the wheel - further explain. - Justin gave a good example of when this may happen. When he moved to RAF office, he didn't know whom to contact for specific questions. He tried to read previous back-to-office reports to find out solutions to many of his problems and as a result tried not to start from the beginning. In development, this is often the case and we should try to see what has been done before we start from the beginning.
  
• Trust - how does one create a trusting environment in communities in the field? - This was a question which resulted in some good discussion about creating trusting environment at community levels. The creation of this does not happen overnight and needs time and getting used to.
  
• What is the difference between methods and tools? - What we normally mean by methods are face-to-face interaction techniques that can be used in knowledge sharing. The tools are often technology based solutions that can be used to capture and share information.
  
• What is knowledge sharing focusing on? Tacit or codified knowledge? - In the case of this workshop and our work, we are focusing more on tacit rather than codified knowledge.
  
• What are the tools that we can use at community levels? - At community level, we would normally use face-to-face techniques due to access issues. However, there are also communities where it would be matter of figuring out what could be the best technology solutions. The BROSDI example shows how mobile phones can be effectively used for knowledge sharing.
  
• How can we monitor the usefulness of shared knowledge? Why is it difficult to measure? - Monitoring and evaluation is diffiult because it is time consuming to follow-up with people you share knowledge with. Also, sometimes you may share something with someone and that person may use that knowledge after a year. This makes keeping track of shared knowledge and its effectiveness difficult. Normally this can be done using quantitative (access statistics, document downloads, etc.) as well as qualitative methods (capturing stories of how someone's knowledge sharing helped someone else, etc.).

Knolwedge Sharing Workshop in Ghana

This week I am in Ghana (Accra) with Lucie and Justin for a KS Workshop for FAO colleagues in Regional, West Africa and Country office.

Background

Knowledge is one of the primary tools in FAO’s fight against hunger and poverty. The Director-General highlighted this when he introduced the concept of FAO as a Knowledge Organization in his reform proposals beginning in 2005. The subsequent Independent External Evaluation (IEE) devoted considerable attention to the role of information and knowledge in FAO’s current and future mission.
The IEE made a compelling case that FAO risks marginalization unless it fully exploits its comparative advantages as multidisciplinary integrator, convener and neutral forum to promote greater access to and flow of knowledge. FAO itself produces only a fraction of the knowledge required for sound stewardship in its areas of mandate; there are now many centers of excellence producing high-quality information and knowledge. FAO risks progressive irrelevance unless it asserts and develops its capacities for partnership and facilitation in support of access by and flow between all stakeholders.

Furthermore, FAO’s ability to perform effectively is also very much at stake. Knowledge sharing concepts, methods and tools can make a vital contribution to the broad goal of making FAO more efficient, innovative and relevant. A failure to take all possible steps towards this goal will accelerate the process of marginalization.

The FAO Office on Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension (OEK) will be offering a face-to-face workshop entitled "Knowledge Sharing Tools and Methods". The workshop will introduce participants to various knowledge sharing tools and methods and how they facilitate knowledge and information exchange.

Expected results
Paricipants are expected to obtain an understanding and appreciation of the role and value of Knowledge Sharing tools and methods and undergo experiences on how to apply knowledge sharing concepts, tools and methods.

Tools Covered

• Blogs: A blog (shortened from weblog) is an easy-to-publish web page consisting primarily of periodic articles or posts.
• Photo Sharing: Web based photo sharing sites are Web sites where you can upload, share and access digital photos and images from projects, events, etc.
• Video Sharing: Using video to share knowledge brings a visual aspect that can quickly convey ideas that may take much longer in text.
• Wikis: A wiki is a web site that allows users to add, remove, and otherwise edit and change content.
  

Methods Covered

• After Action Review: is a simple process used by a team to capture the lessons learned from past successes and failures, with the goal of improving future performance.
• Chat Show: is a knowledge sharing method that encourages participants to share experiences in an informal, fun environment.
• Communities of Practice: are groups of people who share a passion for something that they do, and who interact regularly to learn how to do it better.
• Icebreakers: Icebreakers are short group activities that allow the various people inside a new group to get to know each other; to become more comfortable with discussing the topic of group work; or to become more comfortable with expressing dissenting views.
• Jumpstart storytelling: is a form of storytelling technique that encourages summarization of ideas and thoughts into concise and to-the-point stories.
• Network Mapping: a tool to visualize networks and support discussion on how they can be strengthened.
• Peer Assists: brings together a group of peers to elicit feedback on a problem, project, or activity, and draw lessons from the participants' knowledge and experience.
• World Café: is a creative process for leading collaborative dialogue, sharing knowledge and creating possibilities for action in groups of all sizes.

We will be spending the next 2.5 days covering various KS tools and methods.