The Concepts of Hierarchy and System Levels - Book Report/Review Example

Q1 Understanding the concepts of hierarchy and system levels is key to understanding sustainable development. These are where actions of individuals are relevant to a range of levels. Systems are just sums of their parts. They may have emergent properties which sub-systems do not posses. However, by concentrating on hierarchies it is possible to understand these properties at sub-system levels. By studying systems at different levels, system practitioners can predict properties of sub-levels, which may not manifest at the overall system level. As an example, a system practitioner will not concentrate on physical environment when studying climate change. S/he will have to consider the human aspect such as the economic, social and political factors. Sustainable development is a domain activity considered complex by many. It can however be a sensible way to engage with this domain as in the domains of information systems and organizations which can be explored using systems thinking. Domain in this context refers to i) the area of activity of a person, institution, etc, ii) a sphere of thought or operations, or iii) the condition in which something is applicable. Sustainable development issues and situations are best understood by recognizing systems, boundaries, environments and their interconnections. There are three particular features of sustainable development there are: 1) Everyone is important in the domain of sustainable development. Sustainable development can affect or be affected by the actions or inactions of individuals or groups. It is a multi-stakeholder domain, which provides opportunity for managing complexity. 2. SD is a domain that makes possible multiple perspectives of stakeholders in managing complexity or making decisions using system approach. By working together, different stakeholders can formulate joint systems-of-interest, which enable them learn new ways of problem-solving and different courses of action. In broader sense, systems theories and methodologies can be used in practice using the SD domain. 3. The flexibility of SD domain makes it possible for system practitioner to think and act more systematically even it they cannot use the domain explicitly. Hence it provides opportunity for system practitioners to use learning approaches in crises situations. Q2. First-order processes are processes in which general rules apply to situations in terms of the identifiable objects and well-defined properties. When these rules are applied in a logical order, conclusions can be drawn on why certain things happen or what should be done to fix a situation. Here learning and action are based on the belief in a single reality (a real world) which can be approached and known objectively. First-order understandings have been characterized by a reliance on a high level disciplinary knowledge (more recently, multi disciplinary knowledge) and a ‘fix’ mentality- expose the breakdown and attempt to fix it. In first order R&D, a problem is clearly defined and the solution is a technologically based. In addition, the barriers to adopting the solution are placed fairly and squarely with the end-user community. A practitioner practicing in first-order ‘mode’ is minimally aware of how the context actively shape any experience and especially how the act of observation and participation determines the actual experience. The attitude to knowledge is predominately one of believing in the possibility of an ‘objective’ knowing of the world. This tradition is characterized by concerned intervention, the definition of clear goals, the naming of the problem, and the proposal of a rational solution. General Rules Understanding is value-free Objectivity Reality is objective High-level Disciplinary knowledge Subjectivity Multiple reality Relies partly on First order data Perceptions context-bound Box 1: Spray Diagram Explain First and Second Order Processes Second-order processes: It utilize data that takes as its starting point first-order data such as descriptions of physical, biological, and psychological events with specific reference to a person’s experience of gathering and working with, the said data. Thus in order to achieve second-order change it is necessary to step outside the usual frame of reference and take a meta-perspective. This perspective seeks to avoid being either subjective (particular to the individual) or objective (independent of the individual) and recognizing that the objects of our actions and perceptions are not independent of the vary actions/perceptions that we make. Second-order research and development is built on the understanding that human beings determine the world that they experience. Second-order systems practice is characterized by the experience of ‘awareness’ of being the agent in generating key distinctions (e.g., what is the situation under study (The system of interest), what is focused on and what is marginalized, what is the ‘problem’ or ‘opportunity’ and what might be an ‘improvement’) and especially, that the objects and events that we perceive are only knowable through the action of the person perceiving- the ‘observer’. Q3 The vignette “Engaging with the Commons Issues in Namibia” highlights the major theme of participation in project management. It brings out how lack of participation of intended beneficiaries of projects leads to project failure. It shows how beliefs and practices of western-based conservation organizations ruined the success of conservation project. The approach introduced based on scientific worldview was not in conformity with the beliefs, values, perspectives and worldviews of the indigenous communities, whose project aimed to use in sustaining the project and achieve the overall goal of the project: conservation of the vegetation. The approach by these organizations may perfectly produce results in theory and probably if implemented in ‘ideal’ environments in modern world, where scientific knowledge shapes the society’s cultures, belief, values and practices. The vignette provides empirical evidence that projects designed with the consideration of the realities of the project environment are more successful, all things being equal. The approach in the design of the Community Rangers produced the desired results largely because it was culturally sensitive. It created a sense of ownership needed for sustainability of project. The beneficiaries, who are major stakeholders, identify with such projects. They served as “eyes and ears of the Community Rangers”. The vignette highlights the difference between ‘involvement’ and ‘participation’ of stakeholders in project management. Involvement refers to the use of stakeholders’ expertise and support to ensure project success. This may involve building capacities of stakeholders, empowering them to take advantage of the project and creating opportunities for mutually beneficial gains. In some cases it may even involve immediate financial gains, compensations and remunerations, which makes involvement enticing. However, the major shortcoming is that the stakeholders play a passive role in the project. Those with formal education may be involved in the planning of project but they are required to be ‘objective participants’ in the process. Their expert knowledge and experience are needed but not their perspectives, which is reflective of the beliefs, values and practices of the benefiting communities and not necessarily in line with conventional wisdom. Conversely, participation of stakeholders in project requires active role of stakeholders. It requires good knowledge of project environment and sensitivity to the peculiarities of the environment. This entails involving stakeholders from the conception of the idea of the project or at the point of entry in the case of projects designed for implementation in different environments to enable domestication of project to suit local realities. In essence, participation bridges the gap between theory and practice in project management especially for global projects. It illuminates the limitations of using scientific views in project design. Fig 1 shows the influence of local (real) and global (ideal) environment of projects. Fig 1: Influence Diagram of Global Projects in Local Environment 4a Values are convictions deeply held by individuals and which guide their behaviours and decisions. At personal level, values can help individuals to determine what is good or what is right. These include integrity, honesty, diligence, humour and determination. Keeping to personal values make individuals have feeling of righteousness. Individuals living against their personal values may have stress. Beliefs are also deeply held convictions about life. They are thoughts one have about his life and purpose of life. They are highly influenced by cultures and traditions, and subject to individual or group’s perception of universally accepted truths. Beliefs include what individuals or groups think about equality and freedom. 4b Values, belief and circumstances are conceptualized and used differently. Values seem to do more with our emotional than intellectual approach to knowledge while beliefs, which are intellectual starting point, appear to do more with reasoning. Circumstances are fluid. Generally, however, our worldview is influenced by our beliefs, values and circumstances we find ourselves. Values form the basis for emotions, which obscures objectivity and intellectualism. They make individuals to think and act subjectively or display bias in their decisions or actions. Conversely, beliefs put us on the path to objective reasoning. The circumstance we find ourselves may tilt our thinking or decisions whichever way; objectivity or subjectivity. Individual’s strong beliefs and core values can be influenced by circumstances. Although, these three attributes may appear to be antithetical, they are systematically inter-connected. This inter-connectedness is manifest in how they individually or collectively mould an individual’s character or behaviour. Q5 AN INVESTIGATION OF INFLUENCE OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENT ON PROJECT OUTCOMES: CASE STUDY OF HIV/AIDS INTERVENTIONS IN NIGERIA Introduction The global commitment to enhancing the living conditions of majority of the people in the world is facing surmountable challenges. While billions of dollars are budgeted and spent every year on community-based projects aimed at improving the lives of economically disadvantaged people in the developing world, the results recorded appears to be far from being satisfactory. The reports of some projects funded using global funds suggest marginal improvements in benefitting communities. Quite a number of projects end with the termination of contracts of consultants hired to execute projects due to poor sense of ownership of projects. The local benefiting communities appear not to be carried along in the project process. Involvement of communities in these cases appears to be largely due to the immediate financial gains or opportunities that come along with project. The implementing agencies usually come with their ready-made project designs and approaches to solving local problems. Idealistic tendencies of implementing organizations appear to be limiting the domestication of project designs and approaches to suit local realities. In some cases projects are designed by ‘expert’, who are guided by theories, models and best practices recorded in different project environments. These experts are guided by conventional wisdom and scientific views in design of projects without considering the views, perspectives, beliefs and values of the benefiting local communities. Even in cases where local NGOs are involved, there role is usually limited to ideas and experiences on implementation plans. As formal organizations with western-styled structures and forms of operations these NGOs are assumed to be guided along conventional worldview. Thus their involvement does not seek to incorporate worldviews of local communities they are representing, which is necessary for maximum participation of local communities. Though projects managed in this manner may appear logically implementable and result-oriented with targets and measurable indicators embedded in project documents, the actual results recorded are usually marginal and unsustainable. Recently, the assessment of contributions of projects sponsored by international donor agencies on the drive towards achievement of the MDGs conducted by an international research group identified lack of active participation of local stakeholders in project management as one the main reasons for the marginal projects. The study revealed general insensitivity of international organizations involved in the implementation of projects in developing countries. The assessment observed that projects were generally designed and implemented without inputs of local stakeholders (local communities and implementing partner organizations) resulting in false sustainability of projects. This study seeks to go further by investigating specifically the interaction between international organizations and local stakeholders in the HIV/AIDS subsector. Objective The project aims to understand the influence (or lack of it) of local environment of project outcomes. HIV/AIDS interventions have generally faced the challenge of cultural impediments as groups reject some of the conventional methods and approaches adopted by international organizations. More specifically, the project shall: a. Identify major approaches adopted to project management in selected local communities; b. examine the nature and extent of participation of local stakeholders in project management; and c. assess the impact of participation of local stakeholder on project outcomes. Approach and Methodology This project will focus on HIV/AIDS projects implemented by selected international organizations in Nigeria in the 2010/2011 financial year. Nigeria is chosen because of the enormity of her cultural diversity. There are remarkable differences in cultures among the regions (states) and within regions (local communities). Communities will be selected using stratified sampling technique. A team of researchers comprising a key researcher and 3 research assistants will use case study research design to investigate the relationship the research variables: features of local environments and project outcome. Both quantitative and qualitative techniques will be used in data collection and analysis. The study will rely on data provided by implementing organizations as contained in their reports and information gathered through interviews and focus group discussions. Given the nature of data envisaged for the research (detailed qualitative and quantitative information), researchers will adopt analytical induction method in analyzing qualitative data and compliment results with descriptive statistics and representative tools such as chart and tables. Results This study is expected to provide descriptive information on the relationship between local environments and outcomes of HIV/AIDS projects implemented in different parts of Nigeria. The findings of this study will enhance the understanding of the problems associated with design and implementation of project funded using global funds. It will specifically outline the differential effects of project designs and approaches on project outcome. The study will assist governments, nongovernmental and multinational organizations and experts on programme management to appreciate and work with diversities in the handling of projects in non-western communities. References The project will rely on paper and electronic resources in form of: 1. Academic publications (books and Journals) 2. Current affairs publications (newspapers, magazines, newsletters, etc) 3. Project documents including Log-frames, PMPs and reports 4. Organizational profiles Read More