Research to Action

The Global Guide to Research Impact

Navigation

  • Home

  • How To ▾

    This list of how to’s provides an essential guide for a number of key communication and engagement activities that will help make your research travel.

    • Building Capacity
    • Policy Briefs
    • Research Impact
    • Theory of Change
    • Uptake Strategy
  • Topics ▾

    • Eye on 2022
    • Impact Practitioners ▸
      • Impact Practitioners
    • Knowing your audience ▸
      • Building a strategy
      • Engaging policy audiences ▸
        • EBPDN
        • Targeting policy actors
        • Targeting practitioners
      • Stakeholder mapping
      • Strategic communication ▸
        • Building a brand
        • Engaging the public
      • Working with the media
    • Making your research accessible ▸
      • Framing challenges
      • Knowledge translation
      • Learning in context
      • Open access
      • Presenting your research
      • Using digital tools ▸
        • Using multi media
        • Using online tools/ICTs
        • Using social media
      • Using intermediaries
    • Monitoring and evaluation ▸
      • Applying M&E methods
      • Evidence into policy
      • Measuring success
    • Uncategorized
  • Dialogue Spaces ▾

    • GDN: Doing Research
    • Manchester Policy Week 2015
    • TTI Exchange 2015
    • Strengthening Institutions to Improve Public Expenditure Accountability (GDN PEM Project)
    • DFID/AusAid Research Communication and Uptake Workshop
    • 3ie Policy Influence and Monitoring (PIM) project
    • Policy Engagement and Communications (PEC) Programme
  • Reading Lists

  • Impact Practitioners

    • Impact Practitioners overview
    • Capacity Building
    • Communication and Engagement
    • Frameworks
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • Monitoring and Evaluation
    • Policy Impact
    • Strategy
    • Theoretical
    • Utilisation

Social Media

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Vimeo

Featured

Practitioner Insights: People-centred theories of change

By Ben French 05/07/2018

The link between the team, its success, and how it understands and interacts with its objective, the theory of change, is critical to a programme being adaptive and impactful. This post considers how teams are formed and how the developing a theory of change can be used to build a collective vision that aligns individual and collective objectives. This process takes time; often far more time than programmes are given or take. We need to recognise this challenge and place far more emphasis on team formation.

Why does this matter?

The term ‘theory of change’ is interpreted in many ways, but it’s useful to think of it as a statement of intention: where we want to get to. Determining this answer should lead to a plan of action, and a successful project uses this to deliver the most appropriate outcome – accepting that it is likely that the theory and the plan will evolve and change over time. They respond to emerging problems and challenges.

Such agility in projects is rare, and almost always associated with a strong and dynamic team. It’s almost a truism in development to say that a team is important: we all know it is. But this knowledge can get lost amidst the analysis of a problem, the search for objectives, the unravelling of complexities, and so forth. We mustn’t lose sight of the fact that it is people who deliver a project.

How a team is formed, built, and led matters, and it is hard to do well. Using the framework of Tuckman’s stages of group development – forming, storming, norming, performing – is a useful way to explore the role of a programme’s theory of change in gaining and maintaining a successful and productive team dynamic.

Forming

A theory of change is not a diktat distributed impersonally, without regard for a team’s input. Rather, it should be based on a narrative that encapsulates a shared vision, bringing together and aligning the objectives of everyone involved into one coherent theory. If team members feel that their objectives for the project are reflected in the overall narrative, and combined with the funders’ objectives, it helps to increase buy-in and alignment. It is the role of somebody in a position of leadership to ensure that her or his team are behind a collective vision. Not only does this fairly represent the views and objectives of the team members and other stakeholders (such as funders and partners), it is more likely to lead to the successful, impactful implementation of large and complex development programmes.

Early team formation is about understanding the broad outlines of the problems and challenges faced by the programme. This means distilling these challenges down into a clear direction and developing a collective sense of purpose around these areas of focus. In short, it is about distilling complexity. Looking across the programmes I work on, where there are failures or challenges it is often because we have rushed the forming stage. Without this solid foundation, we do not have a clear enough guiding purpose through all the complexity.

Lesson 1: Focus on forming a team around a clear, simple theory of change that reflects the united vision, and becomes more complex as the team’s understanding grows.

Storming

At the second stage, where a team is beginning to learn about each other and the project, trust is paramount. Inevitably mistakes will be made. The environment will change. New information will come to light. When this happens, teams with trust and openness, that are challenging each other and that understand each other, have the greatest chance of responding positively to this new information. Through this process, the theory of change will evolve. It will remain the fulcrum for the programme, directing the efforts of the programme and pushing the team together. The challenge here is not to assume trust, but to find ways to build it – which is much easier if the theory of change is constructed to take account of team member’s objectives and thereby reflects the values and vision of the team. It goes without saying that these need to be brought into a coherent narrative with the objectives of all the other stakeholders, such those of funders and partners.

Lesson 2: Build trust. Build ownership. This takes time; the theory of change, a project’s objective, needs to matter to the team, and it needs to develop collectively. During this period, it should start to form into a clearer vision, direction, and focus. But more importantly, everyone in the team must be able to see their contribution in it.

Norming

In the move from leveraging the team together into ‘business as usual’, the theory of change becomes the core of the programme. As the team ‘norms’ its behaviours, the theory of change becomes part of the way of working. It becomes the pivot around which the programme flexes and adapts to changes in its environment. During this stage the team will require reminding and support to maintain its focus and direction aligned to the theory of change, but the trust and debate exists within the team.

Performing

As the team starts to perform, to deliver project outputs and objectives, constant reminders of the theory of change and the programme’s direction are not required. The theory of change becomes the narrative of the programme, enabling the programme to evolve as required but also providing consistency to guide its broader work.

Lesson 3: Continually adapt the level of engagement from management and leadership. The ‘norming’ and ‘performing’ still require support and management but to a declining extent as the narrative and approach become clearer to the team. This has been set out clearly by Stephen Akroyd, in his article Practitioner Insights: Making change happen, which talks about OPM’s work on the Sub-National Governance programme in Pakistan.

Finally, repeat

The process does not stop once a team is seeing results; it is constantly being reviewed and re-evaluated as new team members join, additional information emerges, and the team develops.

It’s not technical. It’s human.

This blog was originally published in the OPM blog series Practitioner Insights, and is based upon a presentation made at an Asia Foundation conference on Adaptive Programming and Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning. I am grateful to the Asia Foundation for organising the conference and inviting me to present.  I am also grateful for the numerous discussions from my colleagues across OPM, in particular Nils Riemenschneider, who have helped me understand this set of questions more fully.

 

Related posts

EBPDN: Refreshing recommended resources - 31/10/2019
Building momentum to advance citizen evidence in policymaking - 03/09/2019
Bringing researchers and knowledge brokers together for greater impact - 29/05/2019

Get 'New Post' e-alerts and follow R2A

> > > > >

Contribute to R2A:
We welcome blogposts, news about jobs, events or funding, and recommendations for great resources about development communications and research uptake.

Topics: development, evidence-informed policy making, OPM, strategic planning, Team building, theory of change

Ben French

Ben French leads OPM's Public Sector Governance team. Ben works on public policy implementation, strategic communications, and organisational development. Working across sectors, his focus is on public administration reform, public financial management, and centre of government reforms. Ben consistently works with governments to develop innovative solutions to public policy challenges. Having represented the British Mission in Pakistan, Ben has experience both within the UK Government and working with governments in fragile and conflict-affected environments. Ben’s expertise in government reforms saw him advising the Minister of Finance and the Economic Advisor to the President in South Sudan during the transition to independence in 2011, as well as providing advice on public sector reform to the Budget Secretary in Myanmar. Ben has also worked on issues of public policy, governance and institutional development with governments in Uganda, Myanmar, South Sudan, and Pakistan. Ben holds an MSc from the London School of Economics in Development Management, and a BA in Economics from Dalhousie University in Canada.

Contribute Write a blog post, post a job or event, recommend a resource

Partner with Us Are you an institution looking to increase your impact?

Tweets by @Research2Action

Most Recent Posts

  • Designing research uptake strategy: four areas to consider
  • Join the AEN Podcast Party!
  • Senior Associate – Communications and Engagement: Healthy Brains Global Initiative – Deadline 2nd June
  • Evaluating impact from research
  • Powered by Evidence podcast by GEI

This Week's Most Read

  • What do we mean by ‘impact’?
  • How to write actionable policy recommendations
  • 12ft Ladder: Making research accessible
  • Policymaker, policy maker, or policy-maker?
  • Gap analysis for literature reviews and advancing useful knowledge
  • Outcome Mapping: A Basic Introduction
  • Stakeholder Engagement a Tool to Measure Public Policy
  •  How to develop input, activity, output, outcome and impact indicators 
  • Evaluating impact from research
  • Synthetic literature reviews: An introduction

About Us

Research To Action (R2A) is a learning platform for anyone interested in maximising the impact of research and capturing evidence of impact.

The site publishes practical resources on a range of topics including research uptake, communications, policy influence and monitoring and evaluation. It captures the experiences of practitioners and researchers working on these topics and facilitates conversations between this global community through a range of social media platforms.

R2A is produced by a small editorial team, led by CommsConsult. We welcome suggestions for and contributions to the site.

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Cookies
  • Contribute

Subscribe to our newsletter!

Our contributors

  • Paula Fray
  • Shubha Jayaram
  • Sue Martin
  • Maria Balarin
  • James Harvey
  • Emily Hayter
  • Susan Koshy
  • Ronald Munatsi
  • Ajoy Datta

Browse all authors

Friends and partners

  • AuthorAid
  • Global Development Network (GDN)
  • INASP
  • Institute of Development Studies (IDS)
  • International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie)
  • ODI RAPID
  • On Think Tanks
  • Politics & Ideas
  • Research for Development (R4D)
  • Research Impact

Copyright © 2023 Research to Action. All rights reserved. Log in