Download Theories of Change in social justice initiatives

Theories of Change in social justice
initiatives.
To what extent are social justice initiatives
in South Africa guided by coherent theories
of how they make an impact and how can
such theories be made more likely to
succeed?
October 2012
Paper Commissioned by the Raith Foundation and written by SPII
Table of Contents
Interview Process ............................................................................................................... 7
Overview of Theories of Change .................................................................................... 8
South African Social Justice Organisations and Theories of Change ............. 14
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 28
Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 31
Introduction
Social justice organisations have played a dominant role in the liberation of South
Africa and the development of a new and democratic post-Apartheid in the
transition since 1994. Paper One in this series of critical essays addresses the
question of how the social justice sector self-defines itself within the broader
family of civil society.
Spurred on in part by the concern about the ever-decreasing financial support for
civil society organisations in general, as well as by growing concerns about the low
pace of transformation within South Africa and the attendant impact on social
cohesion, equality and apparent regard for the rule of law and the effectiveness of
constitutional rights by the many millions of people marginalized by the
mainstream economy and social and political institutions within South Africa, it is
pertinent and germane to explore the extent to which social justice organisations,
as key potential actors to catalyze inclusive and transformative change within
South Africa, can be said to be conscious of their theory of change, and guided by a
reflective praxis that marries theory with action.
In this paper, we highlight some of the diverse understandings with which the
concept of a theory of change is viewed, where after we set out the discussions
captured in the interviews held with leaders of social justice organisations in South
Africa towards an understanding of the topic of this paper.
What emerges from this paper are a number of key reflections about the practice
of social justice organisations post Apartheid.
An overwhelming impression that emerges is that social justice organisations to a
large extent are still struggling to define the most effective and most appropriate
modes of interaction with power, and in particular, the state, and also the mass
populace, representing another locum of power for change.
Pre-1994, progressive civil society, including under the umbrella of the United
Democratic Front, located its power base in the mass organization of ordinary
people whose lives and realities, choices and aspirations, were directly affected by
the unjust laws of Apartheid. Much of the work of the internal opposition to
Apartheid consisted in the organization and mobilization of civil society from a
very localized grass roots presence through street organisations, youth structures,
faith based structures, women’s movements etc., to sectoral bodies such as the
National Education Crisis Committee, structures that represented support for
people affected by the detentions and direct impact of the militarized state, as well
as progressive professional affiliations, such as NADEL (the National Association of
Democratic Lawyers). Grass roots needs were advocated through a wide network
of advice offices, usually staffed by volunteers, which provided both legal advice,
but also looked to advancing development issues and furthermore in many
instances provided infrastructure for some of the emerging civic structures that
often took on a far broader role of providing a state substitution to people whom
the state refused to provide for, or, in the latter days, decided not to subject
themselves to the parlous delivery that the Apartheid state offered, packaged as it
often was with insidious conditions of submission to what was seen as an
illegitimate state. Front line delivery organisations, such as advice offices, often
had support from more professional bodies, whether in the legal profession, or
health care profession, for instance, and so civil society structures offered a role as
intermediary to advance peoples’ needs and claims. Structures, whether internal
in South Africa, or externally based, had a growing consciousness that the objective
of their work was in fact to overthrow the state as the first step towards building a
new, democratic, non-racial, non-sexist and equal South Africa that provided for a
liberated and united people.
And so we see, interestingly, a re-formulation of this multi- class assistance with
the emergence of organisations like ProBono.Org that also seek to provide for
access by poor people to services of professional lawyers, through facilitating the
application of the profession’s self-regulated rule of voluntary pro-bono service of
members of the profession.
Trade unions and faith based- structures played a significant role as the fulcrum
for other organisations, and also as larger bodies who sought to grow and mentor
new activists and train people to undertake struggle, aspiring to do so in
democratic and transparent ways, subject to the prevailing conditions at the time.
Post –Apartheid however, with the spread of ‘normalization’ of some of the more
oppressive conditions, many structures of civil society began to have to seek news
ways of operating and new realities and roles for themselves. As the same time,
international support become more formalized and organisations, more
‘professionalized’ in the sense of introducing salaried positions, having to produce
strategic plans and following flows of proposal writing, undertaking activities and
producing reports.
Supporting organisations in the early nineties provided very directed support to
structures
around
the
practice
of
developing
and
strengthening
the
institutionalization of these structures. Handbooks were produced and workshops
held to transfer the new skills required. A very real challenge at this time however,
was the loss to the sector of many of the experienced leaders who were called to
begin to rebuild the state through government, and also, business positions. The
support organisations that sought to teach and replace these skills were keenly
aware of this, but at the same time, the widespread nature of the exodus of this
leadership in effect, proved irreplaceable.
As the years progress, and as we move deeper into this so-called normalization of
society, we also see the movement into the sector of younger people who have not
had the same political training whether at school or at tertiary institutions, or
through community-based affiliations, as before.
The tools for strategic
engagement that provided in a sense the bedrock for earlier action, are no longer
guaranteed, and, through the interviews, we see that this is something that people
have not factored in to their organisational development and training.
What the overriding objectives of civil society are or should be, eighteen years into
democracy, and the strategies and tactics for the realization of these objectives,
emerges as an underlying question through the interviews undertaken for this
paper. Critically, at the same time organizations identified the real need for more
reflective practice, to enable organisations to answer this question and to reflect
on more effective modes of working. What emerges is that few organisations have
in fact defined clearly a theory of change for their practice, although keenly aware
of the need for one.
Activities are easier to implement than reflective thinking, especially when
organizations are funded to do, and deliver, rather than to reflect. This is the way
that many respondents portrayed the current state of strategic engagement within
the sector. One has however to probe whether it is more than merely a lack of
time and resources that prevents the strategic reflection, and to ask whether the
initial question, namely that of the function of civil society in a democratic but
highly divided society, is and should be.
Emergent thus in this paper are the sense of the need for strategic reflection that is
informed by the aims of the organization and its own ability to effect change in its
sphere of influence, but also the sense that there has been a loss of intellectual
investment in the sector. This was ascribed to a variety of forces, but in particular,
the sense of the promotion of equality in a narrowly applied way that questioned
an intellectual theorizing of work in favour of a more widely accessible, collective
process of thinking and planning, and secondly, that due to a pressure to advance a
culture of equality in civil society, both internally but also due to donors,
prescribed salary structures within organisations began to operate as a barrier to
the retention of highly skilled and experienced actors who were constantly being
headhunted by both government and business, for positions that carried far higher
remuneration. As one respondent said, not only are the salaries much lower in
civil society, but you are also expected to deliver in advance an additional
commitment, voluntarily, to keep the work of the organization going in the face of
ever-decreasing resources. Leaders feel sucked dry, and often left high and dry.
Finally, the growing anomie within the sector was identified, with respondents
expressing a desire for effective and mutually supportive social networking within
other organisations within the sector, and yet a certain wariness accompanied this
desire with people’s recent experiences dwelling on situations in which
networking was sometimes seen as an excuse for no-one in particular taking full
responsibility for the actual doing of the work, and also situations in which donors
promoted the concept of a network where in fact it was not an appropriate vehicle
in the circumstances.
This paper, in short, is intended as providing an indicative overview of how
leaders in the sector view the current state of strategic planning and evaluation.
The nation is currently seeing a growth in protest as a form of communication
between ordinary people and power – both state power and the power of capital.
Many of these protests have been met with an increase in state violence through
police action, and hardened responses by capital as evidenced in threats of widespread retrenchments.
How does civil society, and especially, social justice organisations, act to address
structural change? What are the modes for facilitation and intermediation that are
required and where should the human and financial resources come from to drive
this?
These are the conversations that we hope to see emerging from these papers.
Interview Process
The interviews were conducted either telephonically or face to face between
August and October 2012. In unpacking the above question, the interviews
sought to probe the following sub-questions:

Are social justice organisations guided by any theory of change (or any similar
notion of the relationship between the work that is done and its intended
consequences)?

If so, how well do those theories of change reflect in their actual operations? (I.e.
do they plan/think in advance about how their activities will deliver the
consequences they are wanting to achieve - in the short, medium and/or longterm?)

What are the direct and indirect consequences of work done?

How do organisations think about whether they are making a positive difference?

Do they monitor and document their performance in terms of their achievement
with regard to any theory of change?

How do organisations think through future programmes and priorities? Do they
see the need to link this to theories of change? If so, are there any barriers to the
development of such plans?

What are the most important characteristics/components required for increasing
the value of social networks?
Framing the reflections from the interviews, the paper begins with a theoretical
overview of the applied notion of a ‘theory of change’ as presented in works of two
documents produced by Comic Relief1, and a report jointly commissioned by
Hivos, the Democratic Dialogue and the UNDP2, where after the inputs from the
interviews are set out.
1
Theory of Change Review. A report commissioned by Comic relief. James, C. September 2011.
Downloaded from http://mande.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012-Comic-Relief-Theory-ofChange-Review-FINAL.pdf on 15 October 2012.
2
Theory of Change. A thinking and action approach to navigate in the complexity of social change
processes. Eguren, I. R. May 2011.
This paper is one of three critical essays commissioned by the Raith Foundation
from Studies in Poverty and Inequality Institute towards the development of
broader engagement about the role of social justice organisations as catalysts or
agents of change and transformation in South Africa in 20123. The papers should
be viewed as a baseline for understanding future developments and trajectories,
and represent an indicative rather than an exhaustive study and scope of opinions
within the social justice sector.
Overview of Theories of Change
According to Eguren4, a theory of change (TOC) is a process by which the
assumptions that inform our view of how we can effect social change are made
explicit. He identifies both the visioning aspect of the process, as well as the ability
of the process to be used to create a tool for the monitoring and evaluation of the
implementation of the activities and strategies chosen to effect such change. It is,
accordingly, the ‘change logic’ and the reflective learning process of the
implementation of that logic that, together, constitutes a comprehensive TOC
necessary to address the multi-layered reality of the ‘holographic’ nature of our
interdependence.5
The following six-point definition of a theory of change is taken directly from the
work of Eguren.

A conscious and creative visualization exercise that enables us to focus
our energy on specific future realities which are not only desirable, but also
possible and probable

A set of assumptions and abstract projections regarding how we believe
reality could unfold in the immediate future, based on i) a realistic analysis
3
The other two papers address the following questions respectively: Understanding the Social Justice
Sector. What is the social justice sector? What does it do well, what does it cost, what value has it added to
transformation in South Africa and how does it interact with other forces for change? and Shifts and Drifts
in South Africa’s social justice transformation agenda. To what extent did South Africa aim to and succeed
in following a policy path and an implementation strategy likely to lead to social transformation as
articulated in the Constitution?
4
Theory of Change. A thinking and action approach to navigate in the complexity of social change
processes. Eguren, I. R. May 2011, 2.
5
Ibid, 3.
od the current context, ii) a self- assessment about our capabilities of
process facilitation, and iii) a critical and explicit review of our
assumptions.

A thinking- action approach that helps us to identify milestones and
conditions that have to occur on the path towards the change that we want
to contribute to happen.

A multi-stakeholder and collaborative experiential learning exercise
that encourages the development of the flexible logic needed to
analyze complex social change processes.

A semi-structured change map that links our strategic actions to certain
process results that we want to contribute to happen in our immediate
environment.

A process tool that helps us to monitor consciously and critically our
individual and also collective way of thinking and acting6.
The Raith Foundation articulates their theory of change as follows:
The Foundation’s vision of success is a just and fair society in which (a) people are
aware of and able to exercise their rights and responsibilities and (b)
organisations, the state, private sector and civil society are held accountable for
their actions.
According to the Theory of Change Review commissioned by Comic Relief, there
are a variety of ways in which people use the concept of a TOC. James identifies
twelve in the Review, namely:
6

Programme theory/ logic/ approach

A causal pathway/ chain/ model/ map

Interventions theory/ framework/ logic

A clear and testable hypothesis

A blueprint for evaluation
Theory of Change. A thinking and action approach to navigate in the complexity of social change
processes. Eguren, I. R. May 2011, 4.

A direction of travel

A road map for change

Pathways mapping

A process of open enquiry and dialogue

A logic model

Back to basics

A sense of direction7
James then proceeds to define two broader approaches to the use of the concept of
a theory of change, namely an approach that seeks to identify how an interventions
brings change, and using this analysis, then uses the logic to develop a clear path
between cause and effect, and those that seek to identify more broadly how change
happens, and thereafter applies this analysis to develop an understanding of how
and where a particular intervention can fit into that broader understanding8.
7
8
Theory of Change Review. A report commissioned by Comic Relief. James, C. September 2011. 6.
Ibid, 7.
Participating Organisations and their Objectives and Models of
Change9
1. Alliance for Children’s Entitlement to Social Security (ACESS) believes in
society that takes care of its vulnerable members and ensures its children do not
suffer from hunger, abuse, cold, illness or hardship. Children should be able to
survive and develop their full potential.
Acess’s objectives are to make children’s rights to comprehensive social security a
lived reality by:

Advocating for, and facilitating, coordinated models of service delivery;

Advocating for improved policies, laws and service delivery;

Monitoring and evaluating the implementation of laws, policies and service
delivery;

Identifying and pioneering collective responses to emerging challenges and
opportunities in the area of comprehensive social security.
2. Afesis Corplan
Is guided by the understanding that development is a political process, and we
work to place the needs of the poor and marginalized on the development agenda.
We do this by offering the following services:

Technical support on land issues and physical development projects

Capacity building and training in institutional development, local
governance and various technical fields

Research relating to settlement development and local government

Information dissemination on key development issues
3. Black Sash aims to ‘enable all. To recognize their human rights, particularly
their social and economic rights’ and to ‘work towards a South Africa in which the
9
These descriptions of the aims and missions of the participating organisations were taken from their
websites.
government is accountable to all its people and attends to their basic needs, and
members of society (individuals and the private sector) also take responsibility for
reducing inequality and extreme poverty’.
4. Corruption Watch ‘intends to ensure that the custodians of public resources
act responsibly to advance the interests of the public. By shining a light on
corruption and those who act corruptly, we promote transparency and protect the
beneficiaries of public goods and services. Corruption weakens institutions,
criminalizes individuals and undermines social solidarity. Corruption Watch will
provide tools of support for a more engaged and active civil society in South Africa.
Each act of corruption that is prevented by our citizens underpins and fortifies civil
society and thereby enhances democracy, the rule of law and the establishment of
a more caring and just society.’
5. Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI)
Their mission is to ‘fight for freedom of expression and eliminate inequalities in
accessing and disseminating information and knowledge in South Africa and
beyond’.
6. Section 27 was established as a public interest law center that seeks to
influence, develop and use the law to protect, promote and advance human rights.’
It ‘works to ensure that the conduct of the public and the private sectors accord
with the Constitution and the obligations it imposes on their day-to-day conduct’.
7. The South African Civil Society Information Service
SACSIS ‘seeks to influence media reporting and consequently public policy
discourse to promote the idea of the entitlement of the poor, to a higher standard
of living and better quality of life’.
8. ProBono.Org aims to ensure the creation of free legal representation for all
who need it. It ‘promotes, protects and realizes the rights established in the
Constitution by improving access to justice to poor, vulnerable and marginalized
South Africans…through the volunteerism of private lawyers’.
Their aim is
informed by the words of former Chief Justice, Sandile Ngcobo, namely ‘legal
representation will ensure that the constitutional promise of access to justice is
available to all’.
South African Social Justice Organisations and Theories of Change
In this section we reflect the responses to the questions posed in the interviews,
without identifying the particular respondents. This was done in an effort to
encourage participants to feel safe to reflect their truths without any possible
come back to them in terms of donor responses to this paper. This in itself speaks
quite strongly to the perceptions of the power relationship between funded and
donor ‘partners’ in the sector.
The sections below respond to the sub-questions set out above, and reflect a
collation of the responses, with text boxes and italicized extracts containing
illustrative quotations from various of the interviews.
Are social justice organisations guided by any theory of change, or a similar
notion of the relationship between the work that is done and its intended
consequences?
‘No, I do not think that the sector really operates around any concrete theory of
change, and this is one of our challenges. There might exist de facto theories of
change, but I do not think that these have been properly explored or articulated. I
think that the question should rather go back to how can an active citizenry
actively bring about and sustain change through the use of law.
There is a poverty of thought about our work and change, with people doing the
same old shit. Instead, if people could proceed with four or five big campaigns, the
selection of the campaigns and the work driven by a principled pragmatism, such
as the choices by the TAC, seeking profound redistribution, and as a result of this
and how it has worked, I do think trying to quantify the impact will show that it has
been profound.’
There were a variety of responses to this question that demonstrated, as set out in
section one above, the different modes in which the concept of a theory of change
is understood. On the one hand, the concept was understood to refer to any
system of strategic planning, and, as one respondent said, every organization
would have to have some strategic plan to satisfy their donors and their boards.
‘It varies. It seems that the theory of theory of change is just the new log frame!’
‘A theory of change is a very useful tool to provide clarity to external organisations
about what we do. We found ours through the Raith Foundations’ processes,
whereas previously we structured our work around a very elaborate and not as
useful log frame (which was more about planning, not change).’
A theory of change was understood by one respondent to refer to the strategies
employed by an organization, as opposed to their tactics, and strategies were
understood to be aligned to an organization’s vision and mission and objectives.
One respondent said that she thought all organisations did operate with a theory
of change, but an unarticulated one, the driving force that had always informed the
work and priorities of an organization, which does not accord with Eguren’s view
that a theory of change by its very nature requires the articulation of the
assumptions upon which an organization builds its work.
‘Transformation in South Africa requires economic and social transformation so
that all people in South Africa can lead quality and prosperous lives, but achieving
this vision requires sacrifice from those that have – we need to build an alliance
between the middle classes and the poor. Currently, the middle class acts as a
buffer between the elite and the poor, but the upwardly mobile are not on board,
that is why we are trying to have an influence on their thinking.’
Two of the respondents felt that South African based social justice organisations
did not root their work firmly enough in sufficiently articulated theories of change,
and both respondents felt that the paucity of reflection and the ‘failure of making
explicit the implicit’ often led to situations in which people just continued to repeat
the same activities as before, because these were known and safe.
As one
respondent said: ‘You know what works, and the risk of innovation can be very
scary’. Both of these respondents identified a sector –wide failure to reflect, which
they referred to as a ‘poverty of thought’, and a ‘lack of intellectual reflection’,
which they attributed to as having lead to a degree to stultifying of the optimal
catalytic potential or capacity of the sector. This failure to reflect was attributed
variously to a lack of intellectual capacity, not knowing how to do so (weak process
orientation), and also a lack of financial resources to allow the time and space for
reflection.
Another respondent agreed, suggesting that we are better at
undertaking activities than reflection. As a result of this, the respondent said that
the process that lead to the development of an organizational – specific TOR
needed to be adopted in a very deliberate process, and organisations had to really
dedicate sufficient internal resources to guarantee ongoing monitoring and
evaluating of work and the external context against the developed TOR.
‘Generally, organisations do not pay enough attention to context – organisations
are too busy to find the space to reflect, which we all need to be able to really know
the context and the environment.
‘Ownership of outrage is critical!’
Two of the respondents indicated that their organisations had in fact recently
chosen to undergo a process to develop and adopt a specific theory of change,
which they both characterized as being distinct from a strategic plan.
‘A theory of change is a very useful tool to provide clarity to external organisations
about what we do. We found ours through the Raith Foundation’s processes,
whereas previously we structured our work around a very elaborate and not as
useful log frame (which was more about planning, not change).’
The main difference that these organisations provided between the two concepts
was that while the latter focused on measurable activities and outcomes, the
former was an attempt to marry theory and practice (praxis). These organisations
identified how critical they had found, for instance, the need to regularly reflect not
only on their work, but also on the external, frequently shifting, environment, and
one of the two respondents added that for them the external context extended far
more broadly than the national borders of South Africa.
‘But it differs for other organisations, their use of Theories of Change (TOC) s, and
an overemphasis on TOCs can lose organisations due to our inability at large to
articulate them, we are not very analytical, rather we tend to be activity driven,
and for us that is where the value of our Monitoring and Evaluation system comes
in. We have really had to refine and define our M and E system, so that we can
really use it to evaluate our work and our value for working for change.’
How do organisations use theories of change in the planning between their
intended outcomes and their choices of activity in the short, medium and
long term?
As has already been mentioned, the self-reflection in the interviews suggested that
social justice organisations do not draw sufficiently on a coherent theory of change
when undertaking planning or prioritization of choices of programmes and
projects in the short, medium or long term.
‘Well, this depends on how SJOs locate their niche within the broader spectrum of
the sector and if they are able to see their niche as contributing to a greater
catalytic potential within broader issues. You need to be able to see your work as it
fits in to the issues such as likely political scenarios in the future, the broader
impact of prolonged economic crisis etc. Your work needs to be located against
such as background.’
The most popular reasons given for this were a lack of dedicated time and
resources to provide for the necessary reflectiveness required to ground such
prioritization in theory, and a lack of resources to undertake such dedicated
processes, and secondly, a narrow or blinkered vision that fails to take sufficient
cognizance of the external environment and how that should impact on the link
between objectives and activities as shaped by a specific theory of change.
‘In terms of applied theories of change – I think that other organisations have lost
their way on a self-perpetuating manner. We need to do some reflective thinking,
but we have lost our good thinkers, and there is no new generation of activists.‘
Linked in to the previous question, one respondent said that ‘asking where the
change lies (is) where resistance creeps in, and acknowledging that there might be
alternative ways to get to your ultimate objective’. Another respondent suggested
that the sector has in the main lost their reflective and strategic thinkers, and failed
to grow a new generation of activists who are able to meet this challenge. The
potential dissonance between activities and environment was however not limited
to people located within the sector. One respondent, who works closely with
members of the legal profession, indicated how important it was to him to
constantly locate the work of the lawyers within a consciousness of the broader
movement for social justice, so the blinkered perspective, or inability to move
beyond one’s safety realm operates on a variety of levels.
The failure to draw on a more reflective foundation was linked to the reluctance
previously expressed to risk innovation, and so was the threat of competition from
other civil society organisations for funding, with the sense expressed that funders
are also risk averse, and so to motivate for trying new ways of doing things,
without being able to locate this departure in a clear theory of change, would in all
probability lead to funding being withdrawn and redirected to more conventional
activities and organisations, leading to the necessity to give up on unfunded work
or identified new areas of work.
‘There is not enough space or time or security for reflection so we give up.’
At the same time, clear reference to donors was made – where donors demand and
provide resources to undertake such reflective thinking (‘we used to call it action
learning’ said one respondent), this is usually gratefully received and drawn on,
and the richness that accompanies these processes is duly acknowledged.
‘But there is an awareness of the need to reflect.
Some donors have been really good at providing the support to enable us to
implement the outcomes of the reflections, like Raith and the Mott Foundation.
They come and work alongside you and with you and provide the space for you to
internalize and own the process because they are interested in eh work of the
organization as a whole and not just the project that they fund. They do it in a
supportive, rather than a punitive manner.
The response to this section must be read in conjunction with the section above.
In general, the practice of reflective learning, whether around an internal strategic
plan or based on a more layered theory of change, is not widely followed, although
all respondents acknowledged the critical importance of such processes for
improving and sharpening practice and effectiveness of the outcomes of such
practice.
Activity is the enemy of thought, but activities pay for your salaries and those
of your staff.
What are the critical characteristics of work undertaken by the sector?
Critical aspects of work undertaken by the sector included change at both an
individual level, through agency, and on a broader, societal change that seeks to
bring about structural changes.
Reference was made to many of the
jurisprudentially vital judgments coming out of the Constitutional Court, but so too
was the subsequent work, that work which was not as ‘sexy’, that is necessary to
embed and spread the impact of the catalysts brought by such a judgment. Work
thus is located both at changing the lived reality of people facing the impact of
poverty, inequality and marginalization, but also the underlying structural barriers
to inclusion that need to be dismantled to increase the reach and impact of this
work.
The four main aspects of work undertaken could be broadly summarized as
mobilization and organization of communities (including rights education), policy
and legislative engagement (including litigation), and changing both the discourse
of power and engagement, and the consciousness of the potential and need for an
active citizenship that promotes and demands and contributes to the realization of
rights beyond waiting for a political party through the state to deliver these.
How do organisations in the sector claim victories around attaining change
for themselves, and what might make this more efficient, if anything?
Crucial to the responses to this question was an overwhelming sense that
organisations are not able to claim victories or changes because of a lack of
appropriately developed indicators. Activities, or ‘concrete victories’ like court
cases, can be monitored, but the evaluation of impact or change requires different
indicators that also require a far longer time period for a correct evaluation to be
possible. The galvanizing impact of a catalytic intervention such as a judgment is a
lot more difficult to evaluate than the judgment itself.
‘Well, how do organisations value success? There can be tangible successes, such as
the achievements by the Social Justice Coalition around policing in Khayelitsha, but
we also have to ask what are the longer-term victories. We do not have time to
fight township by township; we need to identify the national catalyst. Short term
victories are important, if you improve somebody’s life that is good, but you cannot
get a broader mobilisation/ galvanization around that one victory.’
It is interesting that only one organization mentioned how they integrate feedback
from their members and the recipients of their training within their evaluation
system, which none of the other respondents mentioned.
Part of the failure to adopt such indicators was attributed to the absence of any
such indicators previously, but again, in the lack of time for the reflective learning
required to advance towards the development and implementation of such change
indicators.
‘Organisations are not effective because they have lost their way; there are no clear
indicators that people use. Also now, donors are undertaking their own projects,
because donors know where they want to go.’
The distinction between quantitative indicators (such as the number of reported
incidents attended to, the number of people attending a workshop) and qualitative
indicators for change and impact was identified as being central to the sector’s
current struggle to measure change.
The danger was identified of organisations losing their way in the absence of the
development of indicators located in robust theories of change, reducing the
impact of organisations and having the impact to undermine the efficacy and value
with which the social justice sector is held within society.
‘A theory of change should relate to strategy, and not to tactic. We know for
instance that we were wrong if people stopped listening to us. We need to have
feedback through our engagement with the public. This shows that we are still
effective.’
Finally, one respondent identified that they saw many organisations judging their
own efficacy not by the outcomes or impact of their work, but by whether or not
they continued to receive funding, or, in fact, were able to broaden their support
base.
Does the sector document sufficiently their victories and monitor their
performance, and does this reflection feed back into the theory of change of
organisations?
There are two main thrusts to the answering of this question. Those organisations
whose work lends itself to quantitative monitoring and evaluation to a large
degree had all developed systems that sought to allow for the statistical analysis of
their reported activities.
Another organization again indicated the importance of their link with their
membership in monitoring their performance, and indicated that trying to find a
balance between the subjective impressions and objective evaluation of impact
and success was always quite difficult, and that after a while they had realized that
they should not try to force this, but allow the system to emerge in a more organic
fashion.
There was however a very clear sense that there is a crucial lack of documenting of
the work undertaken and the victories won by the sector. The overwhelming
sense was that of a lack of the skills and training required to capture and record,
with sufficient elegance and substance, the work, the reflections and the learnings
of activities and campaigns built up over time, which had very negative effects for
newer activists and organisations operating in different spaces and spheres of a
collective knowledge, which led to each struggle having to be renegotiated from
the beginning each time. A lack of a central repository for the reflections and
learnings was also identified as being a critical absence.
‘The sector does not do enough documenting either internally, or externally to the
sector. I do not think that there is enough understanding of our campaigns to
enable outsiders to come in and document for us, no understanding of the social
forces, the political, people need to be understand that better to be able to
document it, need to understand the subterranean forces and the impact of shifts
there within.’
There is a real problem with the lack of documentation, look at the textbook story,
if we lose these stories, we forget what we did and how we did it, even we who are
active in the doing, because we are constantly moving on to the next thing, and so
our work can be neither recognized nor replicated, inspiring people to take hold of
the potential power that they have, demonstrated through other examples,
inspiring people to success in their own campaigns.
One of the questions raised in the answering of this question was – how do you
make development work and small victories around poverty sexy, able to compete
with headline grabbing articles and sensationalist scandal? “How do you celebrate,
and with whom?” asked this respondent.
In general, communication with people outside of the sector is not a strength, with
many messages being delivered to the converted. One new organization that
works with both the public and private sectors said that they saw communication
and documentation as being so critical that they employed three full time
communication people, active both within the media, but also at different
platforms including at community fora. This respondent said that the old notion of
a media strategy being sufficient if it included a website, an electronic newsletter
and an irregular op-ed in the print media was dangerously wrong, in the age of
social media and networking. Another respondent reflected that due to the pace of
activity, once one issue draws to a resolution, we are already moving on to the next
thing and “so our work can be neither recognized nor replicated, inspiring people to
take hold of the potential power that they have, demonstrated through other
examples, inspiring people to success in their own campaigns”.
‘Our internal Monitoring and Evaluation has been more organic rather than
planned and sequenced.
Our direction is supported by grass roots up – our
membership is very strong in the areas that e focus on in our work and finding our
what is required. One has to be flexible in this regard within a formalized structure
– it is a necessary balance to find.’
The packaging, the skills and expertise, the human resources and the capital
resources for strategic documentation, dissemination and sharing and distribution
all accordingly require urgent remedy for us to be able to replicate learnings and
so expand the beneficial reach of the victories of the sector, multiplying its reach
and effect and having an impact beyond the usual suspects, converted and fellow
travellers.
None of the respondents mentioned having access to any international platforms
for sharing learnings and victories.
How do social justice organisations decide on priorities and how do these
link back to a living engagement with a theory of change?
One of the respondents was clear that their choices and the shape and trajectory of
their strategic plan are deeply and firmly rooted in their theory of change and a
constant evaluation of the changing external context.
Amongst the various respondents however, there was a large variety of responses,
ranging from a resigned sense that we just continue to do what we have always
done, to a very applied reliance on statistical evidence to suggest new trend
analysis and prioritization through a apparently quite scientific approach that did
conform with their stated theory of change.
Another respondent, whose organization is also firmly located in their theory of
change, it was important not to become too constrained by restrictive practice, but
to allow for the accidental occurrence to identify new and critical areas of work as
long as it was located within an analysis of the organization’s capacity for change
and influence, and also within a thorough analysis or scoping of the external
environment to verify the initial interest or assessment of need.
Interestingly, one organization that works alongside very localized organisations
emphasized the growth of their awareness of the need to have an analysis of the
broader macro social, political and economic dynamics happening in the subregion, on the continent and also globally, including being aware of the impact that
global events might have on the immediate, medium and long term resources
available to donors as they anticipated developing, expanding or closing down
areas of prioritization of their work. Against this tapestry however, they were
clear that the priorities had to speak to the immediate needs as a grass roots level,
but the choices and the assessments made vocal through their theory of change
had to take this broader analysis into account.
The value of social networks, and critical components for building strong
and effective networks.
There was a very ambiguous position held amongst respondents about social
networks.
Many expressed a concern that social networking appeared
increasingly to be made up of occupying spaces that were not based on a very clear
alignment of interest or unified objective. Social networks, it was expressed,
should form around sectorally specific issues that were contained, with a clear
objective in mind.
Concern was raised about the danger of being affiliated with loose body over
which few had any control that had the potential to undermine the integrity of its
members through the undemocratic adoption of some position, in other words,
about the potential lack of accountability that exists within some fora.
‘Social networks can be very helpful in enabling people to come together and learn
and amplify our voice through collective lobbying. The negative consequence by
association must however always be kept in mind.’
Again, there was resigned reference to the fact that successful networks, in
addition to having a clear objective and delineation of scope of work, had to be
coordinated by an effective and specifically resourced coordinator or secretariat
responsible for the day to day nurturing and support for the work of the members.
It was felt that donors often appeared to promote networks amongst their
grantees as a way to cut down on core costs for institutional support, and that this
in fact weakened both the networks and the participating organisations that were
left with a sense of having been sold short.
Concern was raised that few of the members of a diverse range of networks, after
the meetings had ended and the workshop held, actually delivered concretely on
their undertaken obligations that boiled down to hard work.
Social networking has to be around a specific issue and outcome or else you can
spend your time going to every event, so we need to select carefully what we do and
what/ where the learnings can take place to enable us to move forward. They have
to be spaces where hard work happens. It is about understanding the individuals in
the networks, not the organisational members per se.
Integrity and the
understanding that work has to be actionable at the end of the day.
Despite this, the potential of good social networks was acknowledged.
This
included the ability to amplify a position through a larger membership, the ability
to enrich a position through a diversity of views and experiences, the potential to
build multi-class alliances that lead to greater social solidarity. In addition, a
number of respondents raised a desire to have more spaces for learning to happen
and exchanges to occur, especially around issues pertaining to the running of
organisations and campaigns, which indicated a sense of growing isolation
between and amongst organisations and activists in the sector.
‘Well, this goes back to what I have said about the social justice charter, there is
definite value in that.
We need to have the vision, and also a time frame and the steps identified that will
get us to that vision that will enable us to reach that vision.
My personal theory of change is that when 1 million citizens understand their
rights and the obligations of government, and they are able to organise, and we
could raise the resources – it is not about money or poverty, but about democracy,
and the lack thereof. Stealing money at a municipal level is about a lack of access
to information, not about the money per se, and people not knowing what their
rights are and how to enforce them. Campaign, get the public broadcaster to
broadcast better to empower people.’
Conclusion
From the above initial survey, a number of critical issues emerge with regard to
the extent to which social justice organisations consider their work to be informed
by coherent and clear theories of change.
Overall, while almost all organisations claimed to be highly aware of the positive
potential impact of developing a theory of change for their work, and further
processes for strategic direction and reflection that was based on a theory of
change, few, in reality, said that they had done so.
The most overwhelming sense that came through the interviews was that people
felt they did not have sufficient time, space or expertise to undertake such a
process. For people who are stepped in undertaking activities, and in being
adjudicated and supported on the basis of an evaluation of such activities, to move
into a mode of operation very clearly and robustly dedicated to internal processes
appeared almost a luxury.
The chasing- of – the – tail syndrome was very
apparent. People said that they would be able to undertake their work and
achieve their objectives in a far more efficient and significant manner should their
tactics be informed by a very clear logic, but at the same time, because they felt the
need to be continuously undertaking the activities of their programmes, there was
just not enough space to do so. In a way, the impression was created that the
allocation of time and resources to undertake such a programme was almost
viewed as a waste of funder’s money – hence, when funders specifically allocated
resources to a few respondent to undertake the work, this was gratefully seized as
it to an extent legitimized the allocation of resources to this process.
Emanating from the above, people also lamented the lack of reflection about work,
and about the environment in which work is undertaken. The impression was
created that serious reflection has been replaced largely to a potentially quite
mechanical adherence to a monitoring and evaluation because that is what was
demanded by donors, rather than as a result of any commitment to adjust
programmes to external shifts, and this can be appreciated given that often
organisations adopt two to three year programmes with very clear activities and
outputs that form legal contracts for delivery with donors. On the other hand, as
one respondent honestly admitted, to act on critical feedback, even internally
generated evaluations, could pose a threat to people more comfortable in doing
‘business as usual’, and then wondering why the same approach failed to generate
new and innovative outputs.
The absence of appropriate indicators by which to monitor the more qualitative
nature of work undertaken by the sector was also apparent. Those respondents
who were able to develop and implement quantitative measures did so clearly
quite successfully, while others floundered to be able to understand what to
measure and how, which would detract from their ability to assess and evaluate
the achievement of their objectives beyond the undertaking of their activities. A
couple of the respondents muttered about ‘log frames’, and the sense was that the
era in which donors drive the need to use log frames for planning and evaluation
was perhaps done in to overly mechanical a process, at the cost of destroying a
more organic and traditional approach by which progress and change was
measured.
Given an increasing need to make the case for local support for social justice
organisations, donors should consider committing secure funding and resources –
including process experts – to take organisations through this process of
developing a theory of change, and also appropriate indicators on which to build a
useful monitoring and evaluation system, with training about how to use it as well
as the assistance in the development and design of the system.
There is a clear dissonance between the logic of a theory of change (namely,
effecting clear and sustainable change), and a defensive retreat into activities. If a
fundamental, defining characteristic of social justice organisations that
distinguishes them from more charity- oriented or state- substitution
organisations is that the sector seeks to achieve structural change, then to retreat
into a delivery- or doing- mode clearly represents a drift from the logic and
objectives of the sector.
Bibliography

Eguren, I.R. Theory of Change. A thinking and action approach to navigate
in the complexity of social change processes.
Guatemala, May 2011.
Commissioned by Hivos, Democratic Dialogue and the UNDP.

James, C. Theory of Change Review. A report commissioned by Comic
relief. September 2011. Downloaded from http://mande.co.uk/blog/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/2012-Comic-Relief-Theory-of-ChangeReview-FINAL.pdf on 15 October 2012.