Lessons learned and recommendations

9.1 Main lessons learned

Two things stand out in what can be learned from the experience of implementing the new programs in Vietnam: (i) the tremendous value of a consistent long-lasting involvement in the development context of a country and (ii) the importance of

organizational learning in that context across a broad-based partnership based on shared vision. Both issues were stressed time and again by those with whom the evaluator spoke. NPT and NFP are both, independently and in synergy, seen as relevant—some say uniquely relevant—and effective contributors to key development goals in Vietnam that have been pursued since 1986, driven by a vision, the major outcomes of which will still take more than a decade to start materializing. Within that perspective, the way that different organizational entities have allowed themselves, and each other, to grow together, rather than do so separately, is in and of itself a marked achievement. It is a major reason for the recommendation to make organizational learning an integral dimension of key importance for the further development of the programs. The recommendations that follow reflect that concern.

9.2

Recommendations

9.2.1 Generic recommendations

Based on the investigation of relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of NFP and NPT program implementation in Vietnam, the generic recommendation is that both programs continue to operate as integrated components of a single general framework for capacity building at the post-secondary level with a focus on agreed sectoral development goals in the case of NPT, allowing NFP to supplement the NPT effort in the interest of greater flexibility in modalities of capacity building and diversity in attending to relevant development goals that do not always formally pertain to defined sectoral interests. It is furthermore recommended that the focus on quality improvement through competitive offering be maintained, allowing consortia to compete on condition only that no

predetermined fixed arrangements exist among consortium members about specific roles during implementation, leaving the decision about such matters in the hands of the lead partner. It is also recommended that the management entity for the programs (Nuffic) be encouraged and funded to increase its proactive role as a facilitator of organizational learning with a clear emphasis on enhancing the leadership role, organizational prowess, and specific management competency of the south in exploring the use of the two programs.

9.2.2 Specific recommendations

Throughout this report, a range of opportunities was identified for possible improvements regarding management, approach, sustainability and impact of the programs under scrutiny. In the interest of systematization, these opportunities are revisited below and recommendations are formulated about improvements to be pursued or consolidated. Each recommendation is preceded by a title, which is followed, in parentheses, by a reference to the major section (or sections) in the report where a more extensive analysis can be found. Recommendations have been formulated in a way that is, as much as possible, not specific for Vietnam. They are believed to be relevant across NPT countries.

(i) Concerning the division of tasks and responsibilities between Nuffic and RNE (3.3)

It is recommended that uniform principles and rules be established for making decisions regarding the division of tasks and responsibilities between Nuffic and the RNEs, creating consistency in these matters across NPT countries. Such principles and rules should take into account that competency building and institutional capacity building are transsectoral interests. They deserve attention from the RNEs whether or not (higher) education belongs to the sectoral interests of a particular RNE.

(ii) Concerning technology support to presence and organizational learning (3.3)

It is recommended that the potential of modern Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) be used more creatively to enhance the virtual presence of the program manager (Nuffic) in the local context as well as to foster organizational learning. Current ICT use is limited to email exchange and use of the Nuffic Web site to display what is on offer and as a repository for documents. This could be enhanced by

introducing any choice of technologies for participative communication and social networking among stakeholders. This would allow different actors involved (Nuffic; RNE; southern institutions; northern partners; occasional or invited contributors, such as consultants, etc.) to improve their organizational performance in synergy with each other, i.e. to learn organizationally, as learning organizations.

(iii) Concerning the processing and use of monitoring data (3.6; 6.3)

It is recommended that Nuffic, in collaboration with key stakeholders, develop a process for systematized processing, presentation and dissemination of monitoring data and findings with a view to informing the organizational learning process of the partnerships established under the NPT and NFP programs.

(iv) Concerning improved needs assessment and front-end analysis and project description in terms of measurable results (3.7; 6.3)

It is recommended that needs assessment and front-end analysis of context and boundary conditions surrounding NPT projects and NFP training interventions be given more serious attention among the various stakeholders with a view to determining in

operational language and measurable categories what organizational change, as identified by concrete products and outputs, will result from the activity and what identifiable

(v) Concerning facilitation of ongoing dialogue on important policy issues and long-term change (4.2; 4.3)

It is recommended that within countries—and, if appropriate, among groups of countries that share common concerns—processes be facilitated for ongoing dialogue on important policy issues, such as poverty reduction, gender equity, and sustainable growth. Both NPT and NFP serve important policy objectives that get appropriate attention during the design and approval process of proposed activities but that tend to be taken for granted as soon as implementation starts. Processes such as annual consultations that bring projects together, along with networking via electronic means, are important to stay focused on these issues and explore opportunities for synergy. Such ongoing dialogue at program level, i.e. over and above the project concerns, is also necessary to stay focused on long- term systemic change to which individual projects and interventions contribute.

(vi) Concerning capacity building for project design and management (4.4; 5.3)

It is recommended that project design, development and implementation be taken advantage of as opportunities for capacity development in these very areas among those involved in the south so that in the future higher quality initial outlines can be obtained. In addition, such enhanced competence in the south will contribute to higher levels of ownership of the entire process.

(vii) Concerning partially untied access to expertise in the north (4.7)

It is recommended that diversification of access by beneficiaries to expertise be

encouraged, both in the south and the north, including outside The Netherlands. Doing so would be a start to untying the program. In addition to creating enhanced diversity within the partnership, which is an advantage for the south, it will stimulate institutions in The Netherlands to explore opportunities for networking in the north and the south, which will be to their advantage against the backdrop of current developments towards

internationalization of post-secondary education. It will also enhance competition, which should be expected to lead to further quality improvement.

(viii) Concerning organizational learning (5.1; 5.3)

It is recommended that organizational learning21 be recognized as an integral aspect of the change processes to which the capacity building effort is dedicated. The focus in

organizational learning should be on the partnership as a whole, comprised of the various entities involved in project and program development and implementation (i.e., southern and northern institutions, DCO, RNE, Vietnamese government entities, Nuffic).

Organizational learning has taken place spontaneously in Vietnam, but the mechanisms to make it happen can be improved and the process can be made deliberate, rather than one forced by circumstances when things go wrong. Organizational learning will help partners to adjust to each other’s needs as a function of the local reality in ways that favor

21

‘ Organizational learning’ is to be interpreted as learning at the level of an entire organization or organizational network (as opposed to learning at the level of isolated individuals). Learning organizations are, according to Peter Senge, author of

The Fifth Discipline (1990, New York: Currency Doubleday), “organizations where people continually expand their capacity

to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning to see the whole together.” Senge describes five characteristics of the learning organization, namely systems thinking; personal mastery; mental models; building shared vision; and team learning.

flexibility over bureaucracy, given that the building of trust is a key feature of organizational learning.

(ix) Concerning the efficient use of expertise (5.3)

It is recommended that the efficient use of expertise be more carefully scrutinized— including the analysis of efficiency of such use in the progress reports—giving due attention to alternatives, such as facilitating the building of capacity through the creative and effective use of information and communication technologies to replace or

supplement expert missions. To the extent that expert missions can be argued to be necessary, planning should focus on reducing high transaction costs associated with too frequent too short missions by too many experts at the same time. In general, the models of training observed are outmoded and utterly traditional when held against the light of current developments in the fields of distance education/e-learning. See also

Recommendation xii below.

(x) Concerning mutual understanding between RNE and Netherlands institutions (5.6)

It is recommended that communication between institutes in The Netherlands, which receive NFP students, and the Fellowship Officers at Embassies and Consulates be improved so as to avoid unnecessary frustration caused by misunderstanding. It is particularly recommended in this context that Netherlands institutions report back to the Embassies and Consulates regarding their rationale for not following given advice to prioritize particular candidates.

(xi) Concerning the need for a long-term vision (6.3)

It is recommended that the policy framework for capacity building be clarified and amended to reflect the need to design, develop and implement projects and training interventions within the perspective of long-term development concerns, allowing existing activities, when appropriate, to be succeeded by subsequent action within the same long-term development perspective.

(xii) Concerning the use of technology (5.3; 6.4)

It is recommended that more serious consideration be given by training providers to the potential of current information and communication technologies to enhance the quality, efficiency and impact of the capacity building effort. In following through on this

recommendation, due attention must be paid to making the right technology choices. Such choices are contingent upon the particular context of the training and are determined by technological infrastructure and the degree to which beneficiaries of the training may be expected to be or become conversant with specific technologies.