Stag

ed C

apac

ity B

uild

ing

Mod

el

A Staged Approachto Assess, Plan and

Monitor Capacity Building

4 May, 2006

Staged Capacity Building Model

Table of Contents

1. Purpose of the staged capacity building model.......................................................3

2. Description of the staged capacity building model..................................................3

3. Implementing the staged capacity building model...................................................4

4. Further use of the model.........................................................................................8

5. Updating the model.................................................................................................9

Annex A: Staged capacity building model.................................................................10

Tool 1: Capacity Building Planning Example.............................................................11

Annex C Tool 2: Progress Report Template.............................................................12

Tool 2: Progress Report Example.............................................................................12

Annex D Tool 3: Capacity building strategies............................................................13

Capacity building definition The process of developing competencies and capabilities in individuals, groups, organisations, sectors or countries which will lead to sustained and self-generating performance improvement.

AusAID (2004) Capacity Development Principles and Practices

1. Purpose of the staged capacity building modelThe staged capacity building model is a methodology for planning and monitoring capacity building. It is a systematic approach to assess the capacity of work groups and individuals, identify needs, develop strategies to build capacity and assess the results. It provides a practical tool for use by advisers and counterpart staff working together, thus incorporating best practice philosophies and approaches on effective capacity building. It is designed for use during implementation of donor funded activities.

The model has been developed from a process used in AusAID’s Ministry of Planning and Finance Project in East Timor, where advisers and counterparts were seeking a tool to track their progress in capacity building. This model is still a ‘work in progress’ and AusAID welcomes feedback and suggested enhancements.

This document outlines the model and a number of tools to help implement it, as follows:

The Staged Capacity Building Model

A model that describes four capacity building stages, from highly dependent on advisers (Dependent) through to full capability (Independent). See Annex A.

Tool 1: Capacity building plan A plan that documents the functions of a work group, current and targeted levels of capacity and capacity building strategies. See Annex B for a template and a worked example.

Tool 2: Progress report A table that shows the work group’s progress in capacity building over a period of time. See Annex C for a template and a worked example.

Tool 3: Capacity building strategies

A checklist of capacity building strategies, methodologies, tools and techniques to help advisers and counterparts identify options. See Annex D.

2. Description of the staged capacity building modelThe model is, very simply, a structure to use when assessing the capacity of a work group or team. It recognises that capacity building is a process in which the role of the adviser(s) will change over time as counterpart staff develop competencies to do the work, systems and processes are improved, and other causes of lack of capacity are addressed.

In effect, the model can be used to assist advisers and the counterpart staff with whom they work to: Assess and agree current capacity of the work group Jointly plan approaches and activities to build capacity Monitor the results.

As with any model, it does not provide ‘the answers’ – hard thinking, analysis, discussion, judgments innovation, problem-solving, and teamwork are still required. But it can provide a

document.doc 3

systematic means of analysing and quantifying changes in capacity, which is a major challenge for people involved in capacity building activities. Importantly, it can also provide the basis for advisers and counterparts – the managers and staff in the group with whom the adviser is working – to jointly discuss and assess what is happening, and to jointly plan the strategies to build capacity of the work group. It is thus a method for promoting a sense of ownership of the activities, a key principle in capacity building.1

The model requires the work group and adviser to work together, through one or a series of short workshops or meetings, to identify the main work functions of the group and decide the current stage (or level) of capacity for each function. In order to keep the model simple, four stages are proposed which reflect the degree of reliance on and involvement of the adviser, and the degree of ‘ownership’2 or responsibility by counterparts. The four stages are:

Dependent Guided Assisted Independent

The adviser controls the particular work function and may do most of the work, takes the decisions or is highly influential in the decision-making process. This is typically the case when an adviser is appointed to an in-line position, or where capacity for particular functions is very low.

The adviser still has a high level of control, but counterparts can undertake the straightforward elements of the function under supervision or guidance. Staff may not be fully aware of the full function – they ‘may not know what they don’t know’ – and may not be aware of the need to follow through and take responsibility for ensuring the process or function is fully completed.

Counterparts are now taking prime responsibility for the function, can handle most of the complex aspects and know when they need to ask for assistance. The adviser’s role is more one of support, with occasional reminders and prompts to follow through, and occasional higher levels of support for new situations or for infrequent events (such as preparing an annual budget).

Counterparts are now fully competent to do the whole function. They may still use an external adviser for highly technical work that occurs only once a year or on an ad hoc basis. This is similar to bringing in external consultants as needed, a common practice in developed countries if it is more cost-effective to ‘buy in’ the capacity rather than develop it in-house.

The ‘labels’ for the four stages are suggestions only, and the group may wish to use different labels, perhaps ones in the local language. Annex A provides a fuller description of each stage, covering different aspects of a function such as planning, quality control and follow through.

3. Implementing the staged capacity building modelThe following process is a guide only, and should be adapted according to local circumstances. It is a process to use with the work group or team, although it can also be used with individual counterparts.

Implementation will depend on the stage of the aid-funded activity: For new activities, the model could be implemented from the start, to identify the

capacity building needs of the target group and to agree the capacity building strategies.

1 International research on capacity building identifies ownership of aid-funded activities by the recipient agency as the over-riding principle for success. See AusAID (2004) Capacity Development Principles and Practices, p.4. It is a well-established principle also in change management – people are more likely to accept change done by them than change done to them.2 The test used in East Timor when the model was first developed was ‘on whose computer did the work reside – the adviser’s or the counterpart’s?’

document.doc 4

For existing activities where advisers and work groups are already using capacity building plans and strategies the model can provide a means of assessing the completeness of those plans and tracking progress over the remaining life of the activity.

Step 1: Preparation and planningThe first step involves a meeting with the adviser and key counterpart staff3 to ensure a common understanding of the model and agree how it is to be used. They should review the model and decide whether it will be used only for the work group or also for individuals. They should also decide on the frequency of reviews, which might be anywhere between 3 and 12 months depending on the nature of the work.

The group should agree on a process, involving the adviser and the full work group, to tailor the model and implement it. This might be done at a full-day workshop, or at a series of short workshop sessions over two or three weeks. Steps 2 to 6 below should be done jointly at the workshop(s).

Before the first workshop session, the adviser and counterparts should gather any existing documents that list functions, tasks and work responsibilities. These may include job descriptions, organisational structures, training needs analysis materials, legislation, corporate/strategic plan, existing capacity building plans etc. If the work group or activity is operating within a competency framework, the competencies would be a useful basis.

Outputs: An agreed approach to developing a local Staged Capacity Building Model; a workshop format agreed; existing relevant reports and materials collected.

Step 2: Agree definitions of capacity building stagesIt is important that the adviser and counterparts understand the stages and what each means. They should review the definitions used in the model (Annex A) and adjust them to meet local needs. The group should agree whether to use pluses and minuses when assessing capacity. For example, an assessment of Guided + would mean that the work group generally fits into the ‘guided’ stage but there are several areas where it is Assisted.

Process: Groups of 2 or 3 to discuss the definitions, suggest changes, report back to wider group

Output: A staged capacity building model tailored to local conditions

Step 3: Identify and document functions of the work group The list of functions of the workgroup should be developed, drawing on existing documents identified in Step 1. The list could be developed by the full group at the workshop, or in advance by a smaller team for review and amendment by the larger group.

It can be difficult to determine just what is a ‘function’. The function should be seen as a unit of work, for example a process, or a step in a wider process, or a collection of tasks or an output. The challenge for the group is to find a balance between identifying distinct units of work where capacity can be assessed in a meaningful way, yet not having so many units that the process becomes too detailed and time-consuming. Rather than spend too long debating, for example, whether something is a task or a function, the group should aim to develop an initial list, and review it in the light of experience.

3 In this process, it is assumed that there is only one adviser and a relatively large work group, so that initial planning would be done by the senior counterpart(s) working with the adviser.

document.doc 5

Process: Brainstorm a list of functions; refer to existing documents; use post-it notes to track a process done by the work group recording one task per post-it.

Output: A (draft) agreed list of functions of the work group recorded on a Capacity Building Plan (Tool 1 – see Annex B).

Step 4: Assess current stage of capacity for each functionFor each function, the group should assess the current stage of capacity using the definitions in the localised version of the staged capacity building model. The assessment should be of the sustainable capacity of the whole work group. So if one or two individuals can perform at a higher level than the rest of the group, the assessment will depend on whether the group can rely on these one or two individuals.

In some cultures people will be reluctant to make a negative assessment, either at the individual or work group level, or both. It may be helpful to remind people that the main purpose of the assessment, at this step, is to help people think about what needs to be done to build capacity. So it should focus on opportunities for capacity building rather than assessment of past performance. Encouraging people to identify the different reasons for building capacity could help to overcome the reluctance to make an assessment. Some reasons include: There are no relevant policies, systems or procedures New processes or systems are being introduced The systems and processes being used are not appropriate (for example, they are out of

date or unnecessarily complicated) People have the capacity, but lack the resources, to perform the task People have the theory but don’t know how to apply it People do not have the knowledge and skills, but are keen to learn Some ‘do not know what they don’t know’ Some people may not be motivated or have inappropriate attitudes to their work The organisation culture does not encourage learning or taking initiatives or seeking to

make improvements.

If there is a difference in the assessments made by the adviser and counterparts, then the reasons for the difference should be identified and strategies to handle them implemented. Some suggestions are given in the following table.

Reasons for different assessments Strategies to handle the differences

There are differing interpretations of the stages

Review the understanding of stages definitionsConduct a more detailed analysis of the work and functions to ensure all parties are clear about what should be happening, in terms of capacity, and what is actually happening

The adviser does not have a good enough understanding of what counterparts actually do

Counterparts to provide examples to demonstrate capacity in certain areas

The defined function is too broad and covers a mix of stages

Break down the ‘too broad’ function into two (or more) functions that can be more easily assessed

document.doc 6

Reasons for different assessments Strategies to handle the differences

Counterparts do not understand the full scope of the work.

Adviser to provide examples to demonstrate the fuller scope of the work

If there continues to be differences in assessments, the group (adviser and counterpart) needs to make a judgment on the importance of the difference. Don’t spend time trying to resolve it if it is not a major function or task. Keep in mind that the absolute assessments are less important than being able to see progress and developing strategies for building the capacity. As a last resort, agree to disagree, in which case use the counterparts’ assessment as the public document.

Process: Small groups of 2 or 3 to assess current capacity, using the definitions in the model, then large group discussion to get overall agreement

Output: Agreed assessments of current capacity against each function / task documented in the capacity building plan

Step 5: Set target levels of capacitySetting short to medium term capacity targets may be difficult initially, particularly if the work group has little experience in setting targets. This step could be introduced once the basic process (outlined in the first four steps) has been used for a number of months and people are more comfortable with the process.

If it is agreed to set targets, the timescale should be consistent with the review schedule agreed in Step 1. The work group themselves should set the target levels in consultation with advisers. The adviser should encourage the group to set targets that will stretch them but not be too daunting. It is acceptable to focus on building capacity in just a few areas over the next period, rather than setting a higher level for every function. It should also be acceptable to revise the targets during the period if needed. The group might want to build in some incentives for achieving the targets – so long as this does not distort behaviour.

Process: Large group discussion Output: Agreed targets documented in the capacity building plan (Tool 1 – Annex B)

Step 6: Identifying strategies to build capacity For existing (as opposed to new) activities, this step is optional as there is no need to duplicate existing work plans or strategies. Nevertheless the step can provide a check that such work plans are targeted at real capacity building needs and priorities, and to incorporate other strategies that the group might identify.

The process of identifying strategies should be done in as consultative a way as possible, to promote ownership and commitment. It is important to ensure that counterparts do not just focus on training (off-job, overseas etc), or that they develop a ‘wish list’. A list of capacity building options is provided in Tool 3 (Annex D), which could be used as a starting point to prompt broader thinking. Discussions about the budget available to support capacity building activities could help the group to focus on priorities.

Process: Small groups to identify possible strategies for building capacity in each function. (Use Tool 3, Annex D). Large group to review, agree strategies, responsibilities and timeframe.

Output: Agreement on the strategies to be used to build capacity, responsibility for taking the lead and the timeframe documented on the capacity building plan

document.doc 7

Step 7: Reviewing capacity building progress and redeveloping the planProgress should be reviewed according to the schedule agreed in Step 1. The review process involves reassessing the current level of capacity of the group or individual using the definitions in the staged capacity building model. It should also involve reviewing progress on the implementation of the capacity building strategies outlined in the report. The review can also be done at a workshop.

The review step is an opportunity to recognise, acknowledge and celebrate achievements, no matter how small, and to award incentives if they have been used. If progress has not been made as expected, it is important to understand the reasons and incorporate the lessons into the next cycle, but without it being a ‘witch hunt’.

If needed, the work group and adviser should redevelop both the functions list and/or the capacity building strategies (this is best done at the time of the review). The planning will need to take into account any changes in functions, any new functions that the group (or individual) has taken on, the review process and lessons learned from the process to date.

Outputs: Progress Report (Tool 2 – Annex C) updated to include new assessments; revised capacity building plan that includes a revised function list and revised capacity building strategies.

4. Further use of the modelThe model uses functions (or tasks) as the basic starting point as this is usually the easiest way to understand capacity building. It also means that capacity building efforts are practical and focused on the real work being done.

However, in some cases, a simple analysis by function or task might not be enough to provide the basis for assessing current capacity or developing capacity building strategies. This is particularly the case if there are systemic problems, for example a lack of understanding of the need for quality control. If counterparts are competent at doing the work, but are not so good at following through or checking its quality and effectiveness, it might be appropriate to include quality control as a separate function.

More generally, such ‘cross-functional’ aspects or dimensions include: Planning Setting quality standards Checking the accuracy or quality of the work against the standards Problem-solving and making decisions in relation to non-standard circumstances Following through to ensure that decisions are implemented Reviewing the processes used and making improvements.

5. Updating the modelThis Staged Capacity Building Model is a ‘living document’. Please feel free to use it and modify it to suit your needs. If you have some ideas for improvements, or if you have any questions about the model, please contact Patricia Lyon, Principal Adviser Capacity Development, AusAID, patricia.lyon@ausaid.gov.au, or +61 2 9006 3340.

document.doc 8

Annex A: Staged capacity building model

Dependent Guided Assisted IndependentLevel of adviser support

High Medium Low Occasional or nonePrimary ownership of work by adviser Primary ownership of work by counterparts

Planning Planning for day to day work is done by adviser, often within the context of a wider strategic plan

Planning is done by adviser, in consultation with counterparts

Adviser assists counterparts to plan their work

Planning for day to day work is done by counterparts, within the context of a wider strategic plan

Doing the work Adviser does all the complex tasks. Counterparts carry out straightforward tasks, usually under close supervision

Counterparts carry out straightforward tasks with limited guidance. Complex tasks require direction from advisers.Counterparts are not always aware of the scope of a task and may not realise when they need to ask for help

Counterparts can do most of the tasks without assistance.Counterparts know when to ask for help, but only need to do so occasionally

All tasks are done by counterpartsNo input is requested from adviser

Quality control The adviser controls the quality of work by checking all outputs

The adviser checks most work to ensure quality

Counterparts take responsibility for work quality with sample checking by adviser

Counterparts take full responsibility for work quality. No checking is done by the adviser

Responsibility for outcomes and results

The adviser is responsible for achieving the outcomes, and will do whatever is necessary to achieve them

The adviser works with counterparts to help them understand their responsibility for achieving outcomes

Counterparts understand they are responsible for achieving outcomes but may sometimes need to be prompted

Counterparts are responsible for achieving the outcomes, and will do whatever is necessary to achieve them

In summary … The adviser makes things happen The adviser works with counterparts to make things happen

Counterparts make things happen with the occasional prompt from the adviser

Counterparts make things happen

document.doc 9

Annex B Tool 1: Capacity Building Planning Template

Function / work task Current level of capacity

Target level of capacity in next

x monthsStrategies to build capacity By when Person

responsible

Tool 1: Capacity Building Planning Example

Function / work task Current level of capacity

Target level of capacity in next

x monthsStrategies to build capacity By when Person

responsible1: Register new taxpayers Assisted Assisted + Focus on improving quality of work through weekly review meetings. Maintain

current capacity level through refresher coaching.2: Develop and implement strategies to find taxpayers and encourage them to pay Guided Assisted

Identify small group of staff to take the lead on the task and arrange for them to attend short course on influencing and negotiation skills. Support the group to develop their work programUse short-term consultant to develop community education program. Hold monthly meetings of whole work team to review progress and make further suggestions (Learning circle)

3: Interpret the tax laws governing taxpayers to determine tax liabilities Dependent Dependent +

Identify local tax expert (government or private sector) to provide ad hoc advice as neededIdentify appropriate off-job training course for at least 3 staff, and provide follow-up on-job coaching (aim to meet over lunch every Friday)

4: Respond to requests for information and provide information (for taxpayers and government) Guided Assisted

Each team member to seek customer feedback from 5-10 customers (customer survey) Establish small team to collate results, then review and improve the current processes for dealing with enquiries, including setting up a help desk

5: Collect revenue from taxpayers (withholding tax, income tax, wages tax and VAT)

Assisted Assisted +

Implement visible monitoring process, using data from finance IT system on revenue collected to produce graphs showing trends; coach individual staff member to update graphs monthly (encourage staff to take responsibility for increasing revenue collection)Explore alternate means of collecting taxes, eg through local councilsReview taxpayer education program and strengthen if necessary (may become a separate function)

6: Maintain an Excel spreadsheet on taxpayers, tax paid and tax debits for the 4 types of taxes

Independent Independent (maintained)

Ensure independent level is sustainable by identifying and training back-up staff. Encourage retention of current staff through incentives

document.doc 10

Annex C Tool 2: Progress Report Template

Function / work task Starting level of capacity (date)

Level of capacity after 6 months (date)

Level of capacity after 12 months (date)

Level of capacity after 18 months (date)

Level of capacity after 24 months (date)

Tool 2: Progress Report Example

Function / work task Starting level of capacity (date)

Level of capacity after 6 months (date)

Level of capacity after 12 months (date)

Level of capacity after 18 months (date)

Level of capacity after 24 months (date)

1: Register new taxpayers Assisted Assisted + Assisted + Assisted + Independent2: Develop and implement strategies to find taxpayers and encourage them pay

Guided Guided Assisted Assisted + Assisted +

3: Interpret the tax laws governing taxpayers to determine tax liabilities Dependent Dependent Guided Guided + Assisted

4: Respond to requests for information and provide information (for taxpayers and government)

Guided Assisted Assisted + Independent Independent

5: Collect revenue from taxpayers (withholding tax, income tax, wages tax and VAT)

Assisted Assisted + Assisted Assisted + Assisted +

6: Maintain an Excel spreadsheet on taxpayers, tax paid and tax debits for the 4 types of taxes

Independent Independent Assisted + Independent Independent

document.doc 11

Annex D Tool 3: Capacity building strategiesIndividual work specific learning processes

- structured on the job training (usually teaching people to do a set task)- coaching (helping people to solve their own problems through asking effective

questions)- mentoring (helping people work through their own career issues; providing guidance

and support in career progression)- training others- leadership/modelling appropriate behaviours- work shadowing - learning journals

Work group learning processes- team learning through facilitated problem solving- learning circles- project work- job placements/job rotation- study tours- process reviews- work group reviews- organisational reviews- critical incident learning – either review from a mistake or review after a major event

(eg annual budget process)- customer surveys and follow-up action- organisational climate / culture surveys and follow-up action- team building- team retreats- development of ‘model’ responses eg. Checklists for regular tasks, standard responses

to common enquiries, examples of common documents ..- conduct of pilots to test new ideas

Training and Education- tertiary studies (including via scholarships)- off job training (in house courses, external courses) - guided reading- self learning through manuals- distance learning

Technical assistance- short and long term technical assistance

document.doc 12