From Brussels with Love

KM4Dev cross-domain cooperation in development huddle

Tags: Knowledge Management

Cooperation across the different domains of academia, practice and policy can contribute to comprehending the complexity of development and intervening effectively. Academic knowledge, for instance, offers a broader conceptual understanding of the issues at hand. Practitioners’ knowledge and experiences can provide new insights into which concrete initiatives best contribute to or fail in development practice. However, cooperation across domains is also challenging: it is not natural or easy.

Cross-domain cooperation in development huddle

This is the report of the KM4Dev 2009 cross-domain cooperation in development huddle which took place in Brussels, Belgium on 6-8 October. It is the second in a series of workshops looking at cooperation between the domains of practice, policy and research. The convenors were Josine Stremmelaar (Hivos) and Sarah Cummings (IKM Emergent/Context, international cooperation).

From love declarations to relationships
All huddle participants are actively involved in a wide variety of cross-domain activities,
either bridging from the different domains or as intermediaries. All share the conviction that
cross-domain cooperation adds value and that it is difficult to foster structural relationships.
So, we decided to take a closer look at this landscape to better understand and foster these
relationships.

Landscape
We used a mapping exercise to get a better insight into the relationships between the different
domains. Through peer assists, we specifically discussed the role of bridgers/intermediaries.
The mapping resulted in multiple maps, which showed that:
• each of the domains were quite far apart, but have overlaps in specific fields
• the domains are not at all homogenous and the links between them may be more of less
fluid
• it is important to include the private sector as a domain
• we should not forget the power dimensions in partnerships
• there are differences between domains in terms of relevance of knowledge, incentive
system, culture
• within domains, a culture of learning and sharing is often too limited to allow for wider
learning and sharing

Findings
• A knowledge landscapes/knowledge cultures (system-wide) approach is important to
understand knowledge structures and take us outside our organisational and domainrelated
focus. To change the current system we need sectoral, organisational and
individual change.
• Leadership is important: we as knowledge managers need to exercise leadership to take
these issues forward and persuade others (including management) to take a system-wide
rather than organisational focus.
• Translators/intermediaries/activists (individuals) are needed to create spaces where
knowledge sharing across domains takes place.
• The incentives system needs to be changed. Joint efforts are needed to change the
incentive system.
• Change needs to occur at all levels: sectoral, organisational and individual. Power
pervades this debate.

Love handles: from reflection to action
We used peer assists to delve into more specific discussions.

New insights
• There is a need to experiment more in this area
• The role of industry/big business in this process. The private sector is an important
development actor – and is often encouraged by government and seen as fashionable – but
their role can be problematic. How to share knowledge without misuse? The private
sector – and we mean big business here – is particularly active in the ICT sector.
• There is a need to build more on existing knowledge. What do we already know?
Bibliographies make a contribution to this (taking stock)
• Power pervades this debate.
Ideas
- Who reviews who? Why not let academics, practitioners and policymakers review each
others’ work.
- What are the links between the system? Social network analysis could reveal this as we need
to know more BUT we know enough to take some sort of action
- Theory of change mapping might be useful
- Open knowledge business offers a new model