The blogs on this page were written by panelists for the June 8-10 Project Design Review Workshop, with editing assistance from Keith M. Moore. The blogs are intended to introduce the issues to be discussed at the workshop. We invite you to begin your thinking and discussion on these issues a little early. You can respond to the blogs in the comments below each blog. Click on “Continue reading” to read the whole post and leave comments. We will post one or two blogs each week leading up to the workshop, so check back. We’re looking forward to the workshop and robust discussions on these important topics for agricultural education and training.

Design Review Blogs

Amon Mattee, Kandioura Noba, and Peter Koehn
Edited by Keith M. Moore

Institutional leaders are political agents whose success is due to mastery of a set of practices that stabilize the organization and their position within it. Bureaucratic processes and procedures guide behavior in predictable ways to negotiate institutional inconsistencies and conflicts. In this way, an organization secures its role in the environment. Good leadership is often indicated by the ability to follow institutional roadmaps that minimize disruption and assure continuity.

Institutional transformation is nevertheless necessary for healthy organizations. As the organizational environment changes, so too must an organization if it is to remain relevant and viable. Institutional transformation does not just happen. Considerable conscious effort is required to overcome organizational inertia. There are two sources from which transformational change may come. Some organizations may be revolutionized from within by dynamic leaders; others are pushed by external forces in their environment. In order to reinforce the process of institutional transformation of agricultural education and training (AET) organizations in developing countries, development projects have been initiated that organize and focus the forces for change.

Continue reading >

Dave Kraybill, Jim Foreman, and Daniel Yahba
Edited by Keith M. Moore

Contractual mechanisms and associated budgets provide the framework for project implementation. This is important for stability and control, but often limits options for effective project implementation. Furthermore, not everyone sees this foundation in the same light. Donors, implementers, and host institutions have differing interests and priorities. Identifying the proper balance for all parties is important for making progress toward achieving project objectives.

In order to better grasp the issues involved, we examine the following set of trade-offs. One can imagine a continuum with three dimensions of variation:

• extent of partner control and accountability;
• risk versus efficiency of project implementation; and
• adaptability versus bureaucratic procedures and controls.

Each dimension variously impacts the contributions of donors, implementers, and host institutions and the overall effectiveness of project management. Continue reading >

Michael Parr
Edited by Keith M. Moore

The Building Agribusiness Capacity in East Timor (BACET) project targeted making an immediate impact on people’s lives. The original objectives were to quickly improve the employability of youth for the recovering, newly independent economy and introduce business concepts and market-orientation to curriculum at existing agricultural high schools.   Under post-conflict conditions, immediate impact was crucial.  This required immediate investment in infrastructure at the schools and, although recognized as important, institutional change was seen as a long-term objective outside the parameters of the project, which was originally only two years in duration. Impacts on the educational system were considered a side effect and a longer-term effort.

Continue reading >