CHAPTER 5: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
10. Action Plan
After the project objectives have been set and consensus for action reached an action plan should be drawn up. An action plan is “a specific timetable for when each activity has to be accomplished [to] help the community have clear deadlines for effectively moving toward the solution of the problem” (Kincaid et al., 2002: 9). There may be cases where the different stakeholders involved in a project will have different concepts of time management. Dialogue and good leadership will play a vital role in ensuring that a consensus is reached on the most suitable action plan for all stakeholders.
Collective Action
During the collective action phase, project participants work together to implement the project objectives. Local communities may rely on internal or external organisations for the implementation of their objectives. Organisations such as local media, church, health centres and educational institutions may be available to help the community. During this phase participatory outcomes are evaluated against the project’s objectives. There are five
80 main steps identified by Kincaid &Figueroa (2009) to constitute the collective action phase:
i) Assignment of Responsibilities ii) Mobilization of Organizations iii) Implementation
iv) Outcomes
v) Participatory Evaluation
What is important to note about this phase is that everyone involved in the project must take responsibility and work hard towards achieving the set goals or objectives within the set timeframe. The CFPD model puts emphasis on working together as a group, from leadership to the broader community members (Kincaid &Figueroa, 2009). It is also important for all the participants to take part in the project’s evaluation process. Having discussion as a group about what worked and what did not and how they as a group can improve will no doubt reinforce a sense of collective efficacy and empowerment among participants.
External Constraints and Support
External constraints and support refers to “any factor outside the control of community members that can either inhibit or enhance dialogue and collective action” (Kincaid et al, 2002: 10). These can range from political, socio-economic to geographical factors. This simply means that “participation is contextual” (White, 1994: 16) and development projects need to be planned and implemented to fit the local context. “Context matters...
[w]ithout an understanding of context communication initiatives will fall short of their objectives” (Quarry & Ramirez, 2009: 15). In the schematic model 1 of the CFPD model there are two-way arrows from community dialogue and collective action to external constraints which according to Kincaid et al (2002: 10) imply that “over the long run community action itself can be taken to remove external constraints and to obtain external support”.
81 Outcomes
As illustrated in the schematic model 1, a community involved in dialogue and collective action is highly likely to achieve both individual and social change. “Many of the individual and social change outcomes are related and can affect one another” (Kincaid et al, 2002: 11). It is also important to note that as illustrated by the arrows from the catalyst straight to individual and social outcomes sometimes catalyst(s) can lead directly to individual and social outcomes. This dissertation does not provide a detailed discussion of all the individual and social outcomes as outlined in the CFPD model. The primary focus of the BP rock art recording project is individual outcomes such as the transference of skills and participant empowerment which is thus the primary interest of this research.
The social outcomes, though significant, will be discussed as the ‘ripples’ (or multiplier effects) of the project’s primary outcomes.
Individual outcomes as illustrated in the CFPD model include:
i) Skills improvement
ii) Ideational factors such as knowledge, beliefs, values, perceived risk, subjective norms, self-image, emotion, self-efficacy, social influence, and personal advocacy iii) Intention
iv) Behaviour
Individual outcomes entail a wide range of benefits which participants may or may not attain during a participatory project. Skills improvement may refer to improved interpersonal and intrapersonal skills.
Involvement in a dialogic conversation means that one takes into account the other person’s point of view whether you agree with it or not. Thinking and analysing rather than feeling and reacting helps participants realise that to make positive change in their lives they need to engage the problem and find solutions rather than hoping someone else might determine and enforce a resolution. This relates to Albert Bandura’s (1995) concept of self-efficacy that emphasises the importance of self-belief in attaining the
82 skills to implement positive change in one’s life. Self-efficacy refers to “a person’s belief in his or personal ability to effect change, which determines what course of action that person will choose, how long it will be sustained in the face of resistance” (Melkote &
Steeves, 2009: 133). A link between skills improvement and behaviour is thus acknowledged in the CFPD model.
Working in an environment that enables participants to analyse their situation and to think through options available to them can be empowering to individuals. Genuine participation in a project by participants implies an increased information flow between participants which can decrease the knowledge gap between participants from different cultures and disciplines, as will be discussed in Chapter Six in relation to the Biesje Poort project.
Social outcomes can include:
i.) Leadership
Leadership as a positive CFPD outcome means that the project leader(s) were able to successfully guide the project’s participants towards achieving their set objective. The CFPD model assumes that “engaging and inclusive leadership is more likely than other forms of leadership to enhance other social change outcomes, such as information equity, shared ownership of the project, and social cohesion” (Kincaid Figueroa, 2009: 1320).
ii.) Degree and Equity of Participation
Development projects must include diverse participants such as young people, women, and people from minority ethnic groups and under privileged backgrounds.
“Inclusion of these groups in the dialogue and action phases guarantees that conflicting or restrictive issues get to be known and negotiated, if not resolved, so that a legitimate shared vision can emerge for the community” (Kincaid & Figueroa, 2009: 1321).
83 The degree of participation is influenced by, and affects, other social outcomes of CFPD, such as network cohesion, trust, and collective efficacy. Kincaid and Figueroa (2009: 1321).
iii) Information Equity
One of the key positive outcomes of a participatory development project is that there should be an equal flow of information and knowledge among all participants – information equity-.
iv.) Collective Efficacy
Collective efficacy refers to a community’s shared belief that if they work together as a collective then they can achieve their goals and accomplish their desired tasks (Bandura, 1986). “It is expected that a community’s collective efficacy influences the group’s goal setting, dialogue, collective effort, and especially, its persistence when barriers arise” (Kincaid & Figueroa, 2009: 1323). There are three main dimensions of collective efficacy. First, perceived efficacy to take action as a group refers to the confidence of community members to work together as a group to solve a common problem. This dimension may be affected by contextual factors in the form of community’s past experiences, such as a history of factionalism or other conflicts in the community. Second, perceived capability of other community members refers to community members’ perceptions of other members’ talents and abilities to accomplish their work. Third, perceived efficacy to solve problems as a group refers to members’ perceived confidence to solve a specific problem or address a particular issue at the community level by working together (Kincaid & Figueroa, 2009: 1323).
v.) Sense of Ownership
In order for a development project to bring about social change among participants it is important that participants perceive themselves as owners of the project. There are at least six dimensions to shared ownership: a) importance of an issue or program to
84 participants; b) sense of responsibility for the program; c) contribution to the program; d) extent to which benefits from the project are shared; e) personal identification with the program; and f) personal accountability (Kincaid & Figueroa, 2009: 1322). Tangible resources gained from the development projects must be equally shared among all participants. Increasing access to resources, such as education, employment and income, which often are beyond the reach of certain societal groups or classes, not only changes the dynamics of social interaction but also leads to improvements in the quality of life, in general (Kincaid & Figueroa, 2009: 1322).
Conclusion
What remains constant throughout the chapter is that engaging in dialogue and actively participating in development projects as a community can lead to a positive change in a community. Although the CFPD model states that engaging in dialogue does not automatically lead to positive change nevertheless fully implementing the CFPD model is recommended for positive change in the community. It remains to be seen in a practical situation how different stakeholders’ expectations and needs are negotiated especially in cases where the catalyst is a donor from outside the community. An in-depth discussion of all these dynamics with regard to the BP rock art recording process is dealt with in Chapter Six below.
85