What's Being Done On . . . Effective Networking?
 |
Main
List of Network Profiles
Survey Results
Sample Survey
Women's Learning Partnership for Rights, Development, and Peace, Interview with Mahnaz Afkhami, President and CEO.
African Democracy Forum, Interview with Hannah Forster, Chair.
Graðansko Organizovanje Za Demokratiju (GROZD)/Citizens' Organization for Democracy, Interview with Milan Mrdja, Program Manager.
CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Interview with staff.
Global Organization of Parliamentarians Against Corruption, Interview with John Williams, Founder and Current Chair.
|
SURVEY OF WORLD MOVEMENT PARTICIPANTS
A survey on networking was conducted by the World Movement Secretariat to get a sense from participants of their own experiences. Although it was not a scientific inquiry, we sent a questionnaire to all those on our DemocracyNews list asking individuals about their experiences in, and evaluations of, the networks with which they are associated. We received responses from 45 persons in different global regions. The organizations represented are involved in a total of 107 global, 83 regional, 346 national, and 75 local networks. Thirty-two of the respondents participate in as many as 10 networks, seven in as many as 20, and four in more than 20. We believe the results of the survey will be of interest to World Movement participants and others.
On the question of how they learned about the networks in which they participate, 17 respondents answered that they did so through the Internet; 24 through colleagues or friends; 26 were formally invited to join; 22 helped launch the network themselves; and 2 joined through direct exposure to the work of the network activists.
On the primary motives for joining a network, most of our respondents said they joined networks because they wanted to share information, exchange their experiences and ideas, make professional contacts, build solidarity and support, learn about potential joint projects, or learn better working practices.
On the main advantages gained from network membership, most see the accumulation of knowledge and information as most important, followed by mobilization, credibility, exposure, joint activities, meeting people and organizations, and sharing experiences.
On the goals that might be better carried out within a network, we received a broad spectrum of answers. Many people consider the ability to impact international organizations as the main goal of a network. However, public support, capacity building, advocating changes in local policies, and information sharing were also mentioned.
On whether being part of a network might hinder efforts to achieve a goal, half of the respondents answered no. Those answering yes, however, mentioned slower decision-making processes, the fear that their own priorities will be neglected, the effects of time consuming meetings, and limited follow-up on resolutions.
On how networking helps to attract public attention to issues, most respondents answered that sharing information, addressing the media, establishing connections, increasing their own organization's profile, and having strength in numbers were of greatest help.
On how often they participate in network meetings, eight persons answered more than once a month; ten persons answered once a month; 17 answered twice a year; nine attend meetings once a year; five attend less than once a year; and one never attends.1
On a related question, 21 individuals prefer that network meetings take place as often as they do now; 18 would like to have more meetings; and three want fewer meetings. Moreover, what individuals want to achieve in such meetings are to establish connections, share experiences, exchange ideas and contact information, motivate one another to action, increase fundraising opportunities, discuss common problems, and engage in advocacy work, cultural exchanges, and the creation of a community.
Asked about their preferred means of communication within a network, the answers ranged as follows, from most preferred to least preferred: meetings, newsletters, discussion listservs, printed newsletters, Web site forums, personal phone calls in times of urgency, joint activities and working groups, teleconferences, forums, and radio & TV. The participants generally described a combination of different means of communication as the best approach.
We also asked what respondents consider to be the main advantages and disadvantages of formal and informal networks. Among the leading advantages of informal networks were flexibility, openness to subjective discussions and communication, being less demanding, being more dedicated to and focused on a certain issue, and allowing greater interaction. The disadvantages of informal networks include a lack of local implementation of network decisions, being less organized, having lower levels of commitment, difficulty sustaining movements, non-recognition by governments, and ineffective communications. The advantages of formal networks include greater reliability, more transparency, structured mechanisms of support and solidarity, and legitimacy and social standing. Disadvantages that respondents mentioned include the difficulty in organizing meetings, inefficient use of time, strict formal protocols binding members, dependence on active members, and the inability to realize one's own ideas.
On the question of what causes a network to fail, the most common response was the domination of a single individual. Other responses included passive participants; inequality among members; lack of transparency; non-democratic structure; lack of information mechanisms; ignoring input from participants; lack of clear goals and guiding principles; unwillingness of board members to step down; and lack of sustainable strategies.
Finally, we posed the question, if you could create a new network to achieve your goals, what would be the ingredients that you believe would make it successful? The answer given most often was that the network would have a broad base with inclusive and frequent communications. Other ingredients mentioned include shared responsibility for motivation and recruitment; transparency; a person in charge of working with members; shared interests; easily accessible subgroups that address specific problems; a solid financial basis; trust among all members; a good Web site; support for local groups; a working archival system; a clear mandate and definition of membership; a focused leadership; and being accepted and known by authorities on the local, regional, and international levels.
1. There are more answers to this question than people responding, because each respondent could answer with respect to more than one network.
About "What's Being Done On . . . ?"
For several months at a time, we highlight the activities of various organizations in different global regions, and links to important resources, that are focused on a particular theme or area of democracy work. Each new theme is announced via DemocracyNews, and the information from the previous installment is placed in the "What's Being Done On . . . ?" archives. We hope to receive and post information about the work you or others may be doing that is focused on these issues. Send information via e-mail to the or by fax to (202) 378-9889.
|
