Why trust (not money, data, evidence, argument, credentials) is the currency of change (Rakesh Rajani, Just Systems – Alan’s notes)
Screen Shot 2024-09-16 at 5.01.11 PM
Intro
Infrastructure to make government systems more equitable, inclusive and dignity-affirming, aka Just Systems
Stories about Rakesh’s work on education in Tanzania
Supposed success, and praise and prominence
But not really effective in terms of educational outcomes, or performance of government
Adversarial approach humiliated government, made them more defensive and had a negative impact on reformers within government who were made to choose sides
Falsely and inadvertently affirmed racist/neo-colonial narratives of necessarily corrupt governments
Stories about the Open Government Partnership
High profile, rubbing shoulders with Obama
Close engagement with Tanzanian government
But, pushing for transparency when there was limited government capacity to provide good data was a mistake (22 mins)
And radically ambitious participation rhetoric challenged authority too strongly and led to push back
Research
A review of 53 studies on state capability and “systems change”
[Rakesh uses quotes, and when he talks about systems change he is primarily talking about government systems, or, perhaps, about (eco)systems where the primary actors are governments]
7 key gaps to achieving systems change
Screen Shot 2024-09-16 at 5.29.09 PM
5 missing supports
Screen Shot 2024-09-16 at 5.32.28 PM
My question/thought: i find the separation of design and implementation (28 minutes into video), and the emphasis on supporting implementation, a bit odd. Yes, implementation is key, and adaptive implementation helps, but, per Mushtaq Khan, the reason why things don’t get implemented is often because their design has not sufficiently factored in actors’ interests, behaviours and the political economy landscape.
7 key mindsets and muscles we need
Screen Shot 2024-09-16 at 5.39.37 PM
My question/thought: What does “deep work” entail and imply? Might it include understanding the drivers of behaviour in particular contexts, using that understanding to inform the design of engagement, and ensuring that engagement is supported by ongoing learning?
My question/thought: “what matters is a methodology” is key. I’ll be interested to see how the Just Systems methodology develops – what functions does it aim to cover and how, and with what process for ongoing learning and evolution, and how does this relate to understanding the drivers of behaviour in particular contexts?
At independence, there was a lot of optimism about what African countries – people and their governments – could do.
Since then, there has been a steady “othering” of governments, so that they are not (thought to be) of/by/for the people.
This has undermined the potential of governments to do good things.
Points from Q&A (was hard to hear questions)
Value of listening skills
Pay attention to the purpose of government. Government is how public purpose is achieved. And government is/includes us/the people.
Dis-like of the notion that working with the “like-minded” is the way to go. [Yep, I share that dis-like]
Great answer from Rakesh about how he has become less righteous as regards the actions of others, while staying true to his values in how own actions
Another strong answer around it not being a choice between evidence and relationships, or evidence and trust, but that sound evidence and strong trusting relationships go together
[I was also wondering what Rakesh made of the recent award of a Golden Plate to President Ruto, in Kenya, in front of FCDO and Open Government Partnership logos, for “exceptional leadership in promoting transparency, accountability and public participation.”]
