Dev-Com-1.pdf

MODULE 1 The Value-Added of Development Communication The newer conceptions of development imply a different and, generally, a...

MODULE 1 The Value-Added of Development Communication The newer conceptions of development imply a different and, generally, a wider role for communication. (Everett Rogers) Preview This module introduces the theory and practice of development communication and pre- sents a brief historical survey showing why this field has become so important for develop- ment initiatives and instrumental in enhancing sustainability and better overall results. This module not only illustrates the basic features, principles, and methods of development com- munication, but it also highlights the value it adds to a development project. In a discussion of why it is so important to adopt development communication practices from the start of development initiatives, it shows why failing to do so jeopardizes projects’ success and sus- tainability. The module, a refresher for communication practitioners, also addresses the interests of decision makers and managers of development initiatives, who are among those who can benefit the most by the appropriate use of such approaches. Contents 1.1 What Communication? 1.1.1 Different Types of Communication 1.1.2 A Brief History of Development Communication 1.2 The Value-Added of Development Communication in Programs and Projects 1.2.1 Adopting Two-Way Communication from Day One 1.2.2 Development Communication for Communication Programs 1.2.3 Development Communication for Noncommunication Projects 1.3 Ten Key Issues about (Development) Communication 1.4 Understanding the Scope and Uses of Development Communication 1.4.1 Monologic Mode: One-Way Communication for Behavior Change 1.4.2 Dialogic Mode: Two-Way Communication for Engagement and Discovery 1.4.3 Misconceptions about Development Communication 1.4.4 Two-Way Communication-Based Assessment: First Step to Mutual Understanding and Strategy Design 1.5 The Operational Framework of the Development Communication Division 1.5.1 Communication-Based Assessment 1.5.2 Strategy Design 1.5.3 Implementation 1.5.4 Monitoring and Evaluation  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication 1.1 What Communication? Mass communications, interpersonal communication, and health communication are just some of the specialties that can be found under the communication curric- ula of major academic institutions in countries around the world. Also included are international communication, speech communication, intercultural communica- tion, communication education, applied communication, organizational commu- nication, and political communication. This list could be expanded even further to include journalism, media production, information and communication technolo- 1 gies, public relations, corporate communication, and development communica- tion, indicating the diversified and multifaceted nature of communication.1 Dictionaries, Web sites, and other sources confirm the richness, yet they can cause misconceptions about the term “communication.” As noted by Mattelart (1996), this is not a recent development: in 1753 Denis Diderot was already writing in the Encyclopédie, “Communication: a term with a great number of meanings.”2 Rather than being taken as a sign of weakness or confusion, however, this diversity of conceptions and applications should be considered a strength—provided that the different areas are well understood and applied professionally according to their nature and characteristics. At the outset of this discussion, a point worth clarifying is the correct use of the terms “communication” and “communications,” since the two have different con- notations. Usually the choice of a singular or plural form indicates merely a quanti- tative difference, but in this case the difference can be considered one of substance. References to “communications” typically emphasize products, such as audiovisual programs, posters, technologies, Web sites, and so forth. In this respect, it is appro- priate to talk of telecommunications or mass communications. The broader field of communication (spelled without an “s”) does not describe a single product, but a process and its related methods, techniques, and media. This is the case with devel- opment communication, as well as other fields such as research communication, intercultural communication, or political communication.3 Later in this Source- book, the significant difference between everyday communication skills and profes- sional knowledge of communication, another blurred area, will also be discussed. 1.1.1 Different Types of Communication A challenge for development communication experts is the lack of clarity, and at times the confusion, that many development managers display in their failure to differentiate among the various areas of communication, especially between this field of study and others, such as corporate communication or mass communica- tions. The practical differences are often significant and are rooted not only in the rationale, functions, and applications of the different fields, but also in the theories 3  Development Communication Sourcebook behind those applications and the methods and techniques being used. Further- more, the operational implications of the emerging paradigm in development have broadened the scope and function of communication in a way not yet fully under- stood by all those concerned. While communication specialists are usually familiar with the different branches of communication, they do not always have the in-depth knowledge to apply each one of these appropriately to different situations. A political communication con- 1 sultant who has been working for the past 20 years in a New York consulting firm would not likely be the most appropriate person to design a health campaign in a developing country. A journalist who has been working in the corporate communi- cation department of a multinational firm would hardly be the best choice for advice about a communication program for a community-driven development project. Similarly, asking a development communication specialist to write a speech for the director of an institution might be a mistake, since writing speeches is not a required task for such a specialization. Although most specialists possess a number of different skills, they usually master one of those broader areas of communication, and each of those areas requires well-defined professional knowledge, competen- cies, skills, and specific sensitivities. Table 1.1 presents the four basic types of communication frequently encoun- tered in the development context.4 Even though they are highly complementary, the types differ in scope and function, and each can play a crucial role, depending on the situation. Note that the term “conducive environment,” used to describe the main functions of development communication, indicates the broader function of two-way communication to build trust among stakeholders, assess the situation, explore options, and seek a broad consensus leading to sustainable change. Although some functions may overlap to a degree, the different types of commu- nication and the way they are used require different bodies of knowledge and applicative tools. According to the circumstances, each of the types can involve one communication approach or a combination of approaches (for example, marketing, capacity building, information dissemination, community mobilization, and so forth). Different types of communication usually require different sets of knowledge and skills. All the various types of communication, and the related skills, are equally important in general, but they are unequally relevant when applied in specific situa- tions (for example, journalism skills to facilitate community mobilization). Each type of communication listed in this table, while belonging to the same family and sharing common conceptual roots, requires its own specific set of com- petencies and knowledge, an idea not yet widely understood in the development community. Too often, a specialist is hired for a communication intervention out- side his or her area of expertise, with results that are less than satisfactory. In the world of engineering, for example, the equivalent would be the interchangeable use of different types of engineers, such as hiring an electrical engineer to build a bridge. 4  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication Table 1.1 Common Types of Communication in Development Organizations Type Purpose/Definition Main Functions Corporate Communicate the mission Use media outputs and communication and activities of the organi- products to promote the zation, mostly for external mission and values of the audiences. institution; inform selected audiences about relevant activities. Internal communication Facilitate the flow of infor- mation within an institution/ Ensure timely and effective sharing of relevant information 1 project. Sometimes this area within the staff and institution can be included in corporate units. It enhances synergies communication. and avoids duplication. Advocacy Influence change at the public Raise awareness on hot communication or policy level and promote development issues; use issues related to development. communication methods and media to influence specific audiences and support the intended change. Development Support sustainable change Establish conducive environ- communication in development operations by ments for assessing risks and engaging key stakeholders. opportunities; disseminate information; induce behavior and social change. Source: Author. In the medical world, for example, the equivalent would be to ask an orthopedist to treat ear pain. 1.1.2 A Brief History of Development Communication Awareness of the different purposes and functions of various types of communication is the first step toward a better understanding of the field of development communi- cation and an effective way to enhance necessary quality standards. Being familiar with the origin of this particular discipline and the major theoretical frameworks underpinning it can help achieve a much better understanding. The following pages present a brief overview of the field of development communication (also referred to as “communication for development,” “development support communication,” and more recently,“communication for social change.”)5 The theoretical models related to this field of work and their implications are presented in more detail in module 2. The Dominant Paradigm: Modernization An understanding of the broadening role and practices of development communi- cation is more relevant now than ever, since the old, widely criticized paradigm of 5  Development Communication Sourcebook modernization has been in part abandoned—and a new paradigm has yet to be fully embraced.6 This old paradigm, rooted in the concept of development as mod- ernization, dates back to soon after World War II and has been called the dominant paradigm because of its pervasive impact on most aspects of development. The central idea of this old paradigm was to solve development problems by “modernizing” underdeveloped countries—advising them how to be effective in following in the footsteps of richer, more developed countries. Development was 1 equated with economic growth, and communication was associated with the dis- semination of information and messages aimed at modernizing “backward” coun- tries and their people. Because of the overestimated belief that they were extremely powerful in persuading audiences to change attitudes and behaviors, mass media were at the center of communication initiatives that relied heavily on the traditional vertical one-way model: Sender-Message-Channel-Receiver (SMCR). This has been the model of reference for the diffusion perspective, which has often been adopted to induce behavior changes through media-centric approaches and campaigns. The Opposing Paradigm: Dependency In the 1960s strong opposition to the modernization paradigm led to the emergence of an alternative theoretical model rooted in a political-economic perspective: the dependency theory. The proponents of this school of thought criticized some of the core assumptions of the modernization paradigm mostly because it implicitly put the responsibility, and the blame, for the causes of underdevelopment exclusively upon the recipients, neglecting external social, historical, and economic factors. They also accused the dominant paradigm of being very Western-centric, refusing or neglecting any alternative route to development. In the field of communication the basic conception remained rooted in the linear, one-way model, even though dependency theorists emphasized the importance of the link between communication and culture. They were instrumental in putting forward the agenda for a new world information and communication order (NWICO),7 which was at the center of a long and heated debate that took place mostly in the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in the 1980s (see Mefalopulos 2003). One of the thorny issues was the demand for a more balanced and equitable exchange of communication, information, and cultural programs among rich and poor countries. Although the dependency theory had gained a signif- icant impact in the 1970s, in the 1980s it started to lose relevance gradually in tandem with the failure of the alternative economic models proposed by its proponents. The Emerging Paradigm: Participation When the promises of the modernization paradigm failed to materialize, and its methods came increasingly under fire, and the dependency theorists failed to provide 6  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication a successful alternative model, a different approach focusing on people’s participation began to emerge. This participatory model is less oriented to the political-economic dimension and more rooted in the cultural realities of development. The development focus has shifted from economic growth to include other social dimensions needed to ensure meaningful results in the long run—as indi- cated by the consensus built in the definition of the Millennium Development Goals. Sustainability and people’s participation became key elements of this new vision, as acknowledged also by the World Bank (1994: 3): “Internationally, empha- sis is being placed on the challenge of sustainable development, and participation is 1 increasingly recognized as a necessary part of sustainable development strategies.” Meaningful participation cannot occur without communication. Unfortunately, too many development programs, including community-driven ones, seem to over- look this aspect and, while paying attention to participation, do not pay similar attention to communication, intended as the professional use of dialogic methods and tools to promote change. To be truly significant and meaningful, participation needs to be based on the application of genuine two-way communication principles and practices. That is why communication is increasingly considered essential in facilitating stakeholders’ engagement in problem analysis and resolution. Similarly, there is an increasing recognition that the old, vertical, top-down model is no longer applica- ble as a “one-size-fits-all” formula. While acknowledging that the basic principles behind the Sender-Message-Channel-Receiver model can still be useful in some cases, development communication has increasingly moved toward a horizontal, “two-way” model, which favors people’s active and direct interaction through con- sultation and dialog over the traditional one-way information dissemination through mass media. Many past project and program failures can be attributed directly or indirectly to the limited involvement of the affected people in the decision-making process. The horizontal use of communication, which opens up dialog, assesses risks, iden- tifies solutions, and seeks consensus for action, came to be seen as a key to the suc- cess and sustainability of development efforts. There are a number of terms used to refer to this emerging conception (Mefalopulos 2003); some of the better known are “another development,” “empowerment,” “participation,” and “multiplicity para- digm.” This last term, introduced by Servaes (1999), places a strong emphasis on the cultural and social multiplicity of perspectives that should be equally relevant in the development context. The new paradigm is also changing the way communication is conceived and applied. It shifts the emphasis from information dissemination to situation analysis, from persuasion to participation. Rather than substituting for the old model, it is broadening its scope, maintaining the key functions of informing people and pro- moting change, yet emphasizing the importance of using communication to involve stakeholders in the development process. Among the various definitions of devel- 7  Development Communication Sourcebook opment communication, the following two provide a consistent understanding of the boundaries that define this field of study and work. The first is derived from the Development Communication Division of the World Bank (DevComm), which considers development communication as an interdisciplinary field based on empirical research that helps to build consensus while it facilitates the sharing of knowledge to achieve positive change in development initia- tives. It is not only about effective dissemination of information but also about using 1 empirical research and two-way communication among stakeholders. It is also a key management tool that helps assess sociopolitical risks and opportunities. The second definition emerged at the First World Congress of Communication for Development, held in Rome in October 2006. It is included in the document known as the Rome Consensus (see the appendix), in which the more than 900 par- ticipants of the Congress (World Bank et al. 2007: xxxiii) agreed to conceive it as a social process based on dialog using a broad range of tools and methods. It is also about seeking change at different levels, including listening, building trust, sharing knowledge and skills, building policies, debating, and learning for sustained and meaningful change. It is not public relations or corporate communication. 1.2 The Value-Added of Development Communication in Programs and Projects The history of development has included failures and disappointments, many of which have been ascribed to two major intertwined factors: lack of participation and failure to use effective communication (Agunga 1997); Anyaegbunam, Mefalopulos, and Moetsabi 1998; Fraser and Restrepo-Estrada 1998; Mefalopulos 2003). The same point is emphasized by Servaes (2003: 20), who states, “the suc- cesses and failures of most development projects are often determined by two cru- cial factors: communication and people’s involvement.” No matter what kind of project—agriculture, infrastructure, water, governance, health—it is always valuable, and often essential, to establish dialog among relevant stakeholders. Dialog is the necessary ingredient in building trust, sharing knowl- edge and ensuring mutual understanding. Even a project that apparently enjoys a wide consensus, such as the construction of a bridge, can have hidden obstacles and opposition that the development communication specialist can help uncover, address, and mitigate. A number of studies have confirmed that a top-down management approach to development is less effective than a participatory one. Bagadion and Korten (1985), Shepherd (1998), Uphoff (1985), and the World Bank (1992) are among those pro- viding data to support this perspective. Development communication supports the shift toward a more participatory approach, and its inclusion in development work 8  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication often results in the reduction of political risks, the improvement of project design and performance, increased transparency of activities, and the enhancement of people’s voices and participation (Mitchell and Gorove, in module 4, 4.6). 1.2.1 Adopting Two-Way Communication from Day One Communication interventions are often used in ongoing projects, but managers should be aware that their effectiveness is limited by factors that might have emerged since the inception, such as the perceived significance of project objectives, 1 the lack of support by stakeholders, or a number of other potential misconceptions and obstacles that might limit the impact of communication interventions. That communication assessments and strategies can still help when adopted halfway through a project should not affect the recognition that communication initiatives are most effective when applied early in the project cycle. Even though many practitioners in the new participatory development para- digm advocate the active involvement of local stakeholders from the early stages of an initiative on moral grounds and from a rights-based perspective, participatory approaches have demonstrated their crucial role also in enhancing project design and results sustainability. Hence, participation can be considered a necessary ingre- dient for successful development, both from a political perspective (good gover- nance and a rights-based approach) and from a technical perspective (long-term results and sustainability of initiatives). Successful communication interventions do not always need to rely on media to engage and inform audiences—they can also rely on more participatory and interpersonal methods, as in the case narrated by Santucci (2005) in box 1.1. Participation in a project can be conceived in a number of ways—from the most passive (for example, holding meetings to inform stakeholders) to the most active form (for example, collaboration in decision making). Frequently what is often referred to as “participation” in many cases is not, at least not in a significant way. Box 1.2 presents a typology of participation (Mefalopulos 2003) compatible with others, including one used by the World Bank that is presented in module 2. When not involved from the beginning, stakeholders tend to be more suspicious of project activities and less prone to support them. Conversely, when communica- tion is used to involve them in the definition of an initiative, their motivation and commitment grow stronger. This applies not only in the development context but also in the private sector, as confirmed in a statement by a director of a major private cor- poration:8 “It is incredibly irksome and terribly longwinded to get agreement to any action, but it does have enormous benefits—the meetings buy everybody in, and once they get behind the project they’ll do anything they can to see it through.” The involvement of stakeholders in defining development priorities has advan- tages other than just gaining their support. It gives outside experts and managers 9  Development Communication Sourcebook BOX 1.1 Getting Results through Interpersonal Communication Methods The Rural Poverty and Natural Resources Project, implemented by the Panamanian Ministry of Agriculture, was challenged to improve living con- ditions in the area of operations (556 communities) by devising microproj- 1 ects relevant to their realities. Most of the project area had poor infrastructure and high rates of illiteracy. Due to this context, to some com- plexity in the content, and to the need for capacity building, the communi- cation strategy relied mostly on interpersonal and group methods. Owing to the vast area and the size of the population involved, contracts were made with a number of local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to provide qualified staff in addition to project personnel. These contracts were very helpful in achieving the expected project results, even though the differences in logos of different NGOs and occasional gaps in coordi- nation generated some confusion among stakeholders. The project supported the creation of 75 Committees for Sustainable Development, which included 6,000 members, almost one per family. Assisted by NGO and project staff, the committees reviewed and approved 1,216 infrastructure and microprojects. In a number of other cases the committees became involved in seeking additional donors and sources of funding. Overall, the project was considered successful, and the communication strategy based on interpersonal relationships was instrumental in achieving such results, which would have been harder to achieve if adopting a media campaign approach. valuable insights into local reality and knowledge that ultimately lead to more rele- vant, effective, and sustainable project design. The next example illustrates what can happen when stakeholders’ perceptions diverge, and how major problems can arise because of these perceptions rather than because of actual facts. According to the experts from the Ministry of Land and Water, the initiative was expected to increase crop yield, thus enabling higher food security, better nutrition, and higher income for poor farmers. Unfortunately, the experts did not involve the farmers in the identification, assessment, and planning phases of the project. This lack of proper communication at the initial stages generated suspicions in the farm- ers (the so-called beneficiaries) and led to misunderstandings and negative attitudes throughout implementation of the project. The cause of these problems, and ulti- mately of the project failure, was the lack of two-way communication. The end result was the opposite of what was expected—insecurity and frustration on the side of the farmers instead of increased confidence and a better quality of life, as shown in figure 1.1 (Anyaegbunam et al. 2004). 10  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication BOX 1.2 A Typology of Participation in Development Initiatives The table below illustrates a participation ladder, starting from the lowest form, which is merely a form of token participation, to the highest form, where local stakeholders share equal weight in decision making with external stakeholders. Passive Stakeholders participate by being informed about what is 1 participation going to happen or has already happened. People’s feed- back is minimal or nonexistent, and individual participa- tion is assessed mainly through head-counting and occa- sionally through their participation in the discussion. Participation Stakeholders participate by providing feedback to ques- by consultation tions posed by outside researchers or experts. Because their input is not limited to meetings, it can be provided at different points in time. In the final analysis, however, this consultative process keeps all the decision-making power in the hands of external professionals who are under no obligation to incorporate stakeholders’ input. Functional Stakeholders take part in discussions and analysis of pre- participation determined objectives set by the project. This kind of par- ticipation, while it does not usually result in dramatic changes on “what” objectives are to be achieved, does provide valuable inputs on “how” to achieve them. Func- tional participation implies the use of horizontal commu- nication among stakeholders. Empowered Stakeholders are willing and able to be part of the participation process and participate in joint analysis, which leads to joint decision making about what should be achieved and how. While the role of outsiders is that of equal partners in the initiative, local stakeholders are equal partners with a decisive say in decisions concerning their lives. In summing up the body of evidence that has emerged since the 1980s, Rah- nema (1993: 117) concludes, “A number of major international aid organizations agreed that development projects had often floundered because people were left out. It was found that, whenever people were locally involved, and actively partici- pating in the projects, much more was achieved with much less, even in sheer finan- cial terms.” Other studies of operations in major organizations (Shepherd 1988), such as the United States Agency for International Development and the World Bank (1992), reported similar findings. 11  Development Communication Sourcebook Figure 1.1 Windows of Perception in an Agricultural Project Perception of Ministry Perception of Farmers IRRIGATION SCHEME IRRIGATION SCHEME Increased Good overall potential For some, less crop fall components available variety of Self-reliant production strategies More food Reduced and nutritious food 1 Increased available Reliance on unreliable crop Less income outside expertise production available and administration inputs Better (pump repair) Knowledge Reduced income nutrition Uncertainty of of makers Amenities Different farming technical Better systems Less requirements More education taxes/levies money Increased security from from Better Creation for farmers Better living scheme school health of new Anxiety (flexibility of standards More fees marketing and mental market-oriented employment More problems problems Fear of production) work, ending up Greater independence reduced as beggars free time Feel trapped Feel like a laughing stock BETTER LIFE– INSECURITY FOOD SECURITY Source: Anyaegbunam et al. 2004. When adopted from the very beginning of the process, such as in Poverty Reduc- tion Strategy Papers or in projects formulation, communication activities are ide- ally poised to facilitate dialog and mutual understanding among relevant stakeholders. Early incorporation of communication allows the use of all available knowledge and perspectives in a cross-cutting investigation and analysis of the sit- uation, minimizing both political and technical risks and, most important, enhanc- ing projects planning and results. With timely information in hand, project managers can refine a project’s scope and objectives with a deeper understanding of the environment in which it will be implemented. In doing so, they can avoid most common mistakes, including those that Hornik (1988) characterized as “the political explanation of failures.” Through the unveiling of political and other types of risks, and by seeking a broad consensus and mediating among various positions, development communication helps man- agers to identify the best strategy to support intended change. United Nations agencies are increasingly acknowledging the key role of two-way communication in assessing the situation, mitigating risks, and building consensus toward change. In the 10th UN Inter-Agency Round Table on Communication for Development (UNESCO 2007: 29), the various agencies proposed to embed the practice of this discipline in all “UN and international standardized program-based approaches and formats for project development.”9 12  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication To use development communication effectively, managers do not need to know the nuts and bolts of this discipline. It is sufficient to understand its scope and basic functions. The most common obstacles to the effective application of development communication are to be found in the inappropriate timing of its inclusion (typi- cally halfway through the project, once a number of preventable problems may have already emerged) and in relying on inappropriate professional expertise (that is, using a specialist with a different communication specialization other then develop- ment communication). Although it is always advisable to involve a development communication spe- 1 cialist at the earliest stage of a project, assistance can be provided also at later stages. In ongoing projects, the strategic use of communication can help mitigate problems and get a project back on track. Therefore, a two-way communication assessment can be applied in two kinds of situations: explorative, to facilitate the appropriate design of development initiatives from the start, and topical, to support the achieve- ment of the set objectives in ongoing projects (Anyaegbunam, Mefalopulos, and Moetsabi 1998). 1.2.2 Development Communication for Communication Programs The two main communication modes presented later in the module—monologic and dialogic—illustrate the expansion of the scope of communication beyond its well-known dissemination functions to include explorative and analytical cross- cutting features. This distinction is also useful in understanding how communi- cation is of great value, not only in initiatives clearly and explicitly requiring communication components (i.e., those envisioning a specific communication component to disseminate information, carry out media campaigns, or advocate for a reform), but also in those that do not appear to have a need for communica- tion (i.e., initiatives not envisioning specific communication or information activities, such as building a bridge or conducting a feasibility study about a refor- estation project). Projects that include communication components are usually related to the sup- port of predefined development objectives. In such cases, the various phases of the communication intervention (that is, research, strategy design, and so forth) remain within the boundaries set by the scope of the project and its indicated goals. The communication assessment will then be focused on identifying stakeholders’ needs, perceptions, and risks on the specific issues of interest for the project. On the basis of the assessment, a strategy will be designed to define the communication program aimed at helping to achieve the project goals. For instance, an environmental project with the objective of preserving an endangered ecosystem might need a communication component to raise people’s awareness and knowledge and encourage local people to adopt certain practices. To 13  Development Communication Sourcebook be effective, the communication strategy needs to be based on the stakeholders’ knowledge, perceptions, and practices toward the ecosystem. Such information would have been collected during the research phase. This kind of research is usu- ally referred to as communication needs assessment (CNA). It investigates exclu- sively communication-related issues—information gaps, communication needs and capacities, media environment, and so forth. This differs, or better, it has a nar- rower focus, from what in DevComm is referred to as CBA or communication- 1 based assessment (see box 1.3), which is discussed in the next session. 1.2.3 Development Communication for Noncommunication Projects Communication for a noncommunication project might seem like an oxymoron, yet this is hardly the case. It basically means that communication is used to investi- gate, explore, and assess various sectors (health, environment, infrastructure, and so forth), regardless of whether any communication component is envisioned. The dialogical and analytical features of communication are useful for any kind of assessment and for any kind of problem-solving strategy, thus helping managers of development initiatives to prevent conflicts and face unforeseen problems halfway through the project. For instance, a road-building project might not seem to need the support of communication, yet, contacting the communities involved in the project, listening to their concerns and suggestions, assessing risk and opportunities, or tapping into local knowledge can be of crucial value to the success of the project. Road construc- tion can involve the use of land with special sentimental value to local people (for example, burial grounds) and raising funds for longer-term maintenance, just to mention some issues where communication would make a difference. Any development intervention involves change of some kind, and as the man- ager of the Development Communication Division of the World Bank said, “Devel- opment is about change and change cannot occur without communication.”10 The limited understanding of communication as a way to disseminate, inform, and per- suade fails to embrace the spirit of the new development paradigm, in which com- munication is used to facilitate participation and generate knowledge. The interdisciplinary nature of development communication becomes invalu- able when conducting comprehensive assessments covering more than a sector. Even when different specialists are able to conduct in-depth assessments for each of the sectors involved (for example, environment, infrastructure, and health), it is often difficult to understand how the issues for each sector are intertwined and what the overall priorities are for different groups of stakeholders. Each specialist can give an accurate representation of his or her specific sector, but there is the need for someone putting together all the pieces in a single consistent frame to avoid the confusion or misrepresentation such as that presented in figure 1.2. In this picture 14  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication BOX 1.3 Comparing and Contrasting CNA and CBA CNAs, or communication needs assessments, are typically carried out to investigate, understand, and determine issues directly related to commu- nication, such as the media environment, infrastructure and policies, insti- tutional communication capacities, information gaps, formal and informal information flows, and networks. They can be effectively used either at the beginning of an initiative or once a project has already begun. 1 CBAs, or communication-based assessments, on the other hand, are carried out to investigate all relevant issues in any sector. Communication cross-cutting features are used to facilitate the investigation and assess- ment of key issues in one or more sectors, regardless of their relation to communication. Although a CBA can be used at different stages of the project cycle, its effectiveness is greatly enhanced if it is applied at the beginning of an initiative, since it can link the dots across sectors and com- pare and contrast different priorities. The following examples serve to clar- ify the way these two assessments can be adopted most effectively. As presented by Cabañero-Verzosa (2005), in the Uganda Nutritional and Early Childhood Development Project, a communication needs assessment was carried out to investigate communication issues and understand people’s attitudes and practices regarding nutritional patterns relevant to the project objectives. The objective was to identify which communication messages and channels could be applied effectively to induce the desired change. The CNA also included the investigation of the existing communication environment and of the institutional capacity to implement the communication strategy. In the case of the Bumbuna Hydroelectric Project in Sierra Leone (Hass et al. 2007), instead, the investigation had a broader range and a CBA was conducted to probe stakeholders’ perceptions and address negative atti- tudes and concerns, such as worry about corruption, while addressing some of the long-standing history of conflicts. Two-way communication was used to facilitate the participation of different groups of stakeholders and investigate several issues beyond the boundaries of communication. This helped the project to get back on track while providing communica- tion inputs needed at a later stage to design a proper strategy. Once again, the main difference between the two resides in the communication-cen- tric approach of the CNA, which is about communication issues, versus the use of communication as an investigative tool in the CBA, which uses communication as a two-way tool to explore all kinds of issues. 15  Development Communication Sourcebook each mouse draws the cow accurately from its own perspective, but no one is able to fit together all the various pieces in a coherent picture. In a development initiative, communication has the needed cross-cutting features to combine different per- spective into a unified frame. The adoption of two-way communication to involve stakeholders as partners in the problem-analysis and problem-solving processes of development initiatives, rather than treating them as mere receivers of information, is fundamental for mak- 1 ing changes effective and sustainable. It also prevents making costly mistakes or investing in solutions that are technically sound but of little use to communities, as the story in box 1.4 illustrates. In this context, communication becomes the best method to investigate and facilitate a “communion of values and experiences” by most stakeholders, needed to achieve sustainable results, no matter what the sector of intervention. BOX 1.4 When a Perfectly Appropriate Technical Solution Does Not Make Much Sense During a poverty reduction assessment mission in an Asian country, the team composed of various sector specialists identified a few solutions meant to improve the livelihoods of villagers in the community. Among other issues, the experts noted that women, who were doing a number of heavy chores, had to walk almost an hour to fetch water from the nearby river. If a water well was built by the village, the experts reckoned that women would save time and energy that were now required in the daily walks to the river. As a result, a technically sound proposal was done, funds were made available and the water well was quickly built. One year later a follow-up mis- sion returned to the same community. To the experts’ surprise, the newly built water well was rarely being used by the women. When they asked for the reasons, after some initial resistance from the villagers, the experts learned that the walk to the river was one of the few daily moments in which women could be together and socialize. Taking away that walk meant taking away their only moments of sharing part of their lives and having some relaxed moments away from the other hard chores they carried out individu- ally. If dialog and simple two-way communication had occurred before mak- ing the decision to build a well, this aspect would have probably emerged and a more culturally appropriate alternative would have been found. 16  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication Figure 1.2 Mice Reconstructing an Image of a Cow 1 Source: Cartoon by Stefanos N. Tsekos. Used by permission. 17  Development Communication Sourcebook 1.3 Ten Key Issues about (Development) Communication The 10 points presented in this section address some of the myths and misconcep- tions about communication, especially when related to the field of development. These misconceptions can often be the cause of misunderstandings and lead to inconsistent and ineffective use of communication concepts and practices. The first two points on this list are about communication in general, while the others refer to 1 development communication in particular. 1. “Communications” and “communication” are not the same thing. The plural form refers mainly to activities and products, including information technolo- gies, media products, and services (the Internet, satellites, broadcasts, and so forth). The singular form, on the other hand, usually refers to the process of communication, emphasizing its dialogical and analytical functions rather than its informative nature and media products. This distinction is significant at the theoretical, methodological, and operational levels. 2. There is a sharp difference between everyday communication and professional communication. Such a statement might seem obvious, but the two are fre- quently equated, either overtly or more subtly, as in, “He or she communicates well; hence, he or she is a good communicator.” A person who communicates well is not necessarily a person who can make effective and professional use of communication. Each human being is a born communicator, but not everyone can communicate strategically, using the knowledge of principles and experi- ence in practical applications. A professional (development) communication specialist understands relevant theories and practices and is capable of design- ing effective strategies that draw from the full range of communication approaches and methods to achieve intended objectives. 3. There is a significant difference between development communication and other types of communication. Both theoretically and practically, there are many dif- ferent types of applications in the communication family. In this publication, we refer to four main types of communication, which are represented signifi- cantly in the work of the World Bank: advocacy communication, corporate communication, internal communication, and development communication. Each has a different scope and requires specific knowledge and skills to be per- formed effectively. Expertise in one area of communication is not sufficient to ensure results if applied in another area. 4. The main scope and functions of development communication are not exclusively about communicating information and messages, but they also involve engaging stakeholders and assessing the situation. Communication is not only about “sell- ing ideas.” Such a conception could have been appropriate in the past, when communication was identified with mass media and the linear Sender-Mes- 18  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication sage-Channel-Receiver model, whose purpose was to inform audiences and persuade them to change. Not surprisingly, the first systematic research on the effects of communication was carried out soon after World War II, when com- munication activities were mostly associated with a controversial concept— propaganda. Currently, the scope of development communication has broadened to include an analytical aspect as well as a dialogical one—intended to open public spaces where perceptions, opinions, and knowledge of relevant stakeholders can be aired and assessed. 5. Development communication initiatives can never be successful unless proper 1 communication research is conducted before deciding on the strategy. A commu- nication professional should not design a communication campaign or strat- egy without having all the relevant data to inform his or her decision. If further research is needed to obtain relevant data, to identify gaps, or to validate the project assumptions, the communication specialist must not hesitate to make such a request to the project management. Even when a communication spe- cialist is called in the middle of a project whose objectives appear straightfor- ward and clearly defined, specific communication research should be carried out if there are gaps in the available data. Assumptions based on the experts’ knowledge should always be triangulated with other sources to ensure their overall validity. Given its interdisciplinary and cross-cutting nature, communi- cation research should ideally be carried out at the inception of any develop- ment initiative, regardless of the sector or if a communication component would be needed at a later stage. 6. To be effective in their work, development communication specialists need to have a specific and in-depth knowledge of the theory and practical applications of the discipline. In addition to being familiar with the relevant literature about the various communication theories, models, and applications, development com- munication specialists should also be educated in the basic principles and prac- tices of other interrelated disciplines, such as anthropology, marketing, sociology, ethnography, psychology, adult education, and social research. In the current development framework, it is particularly important that a specialist be acquainted with participatory research methods and techniques, monitoring and evaluation tools, and basics principles of strategy design. Additionally, a good professional should also have the right attitude toward people, being empathic and willing to listen and to facilitate dialog in order to elicit and incorporate stakeholders’ perceptions and opinions. Most of all, a professional development communication specialist needs to be consistently issue-focused, rather than institution-focused. 7. Development communication support can only be as effective as the project itself. Even the most well-designed communication strategy will fail if the overall objec- tives of the project are not properly determined, if they do not enjoy a broad con- 19  Development Communication Sourcebook sensus from stakeholders, or if the activities are not implemented in a satisfactory manner. Sometimes communication experts are called in and asked to provide solutions to problems that were not clearly investigated and defined, or to sup- port objectives that are disconnected from the political and social reality on the ground. In such cases, the ideal solution is to carry out field research or a commu- nication-based assessment to probe key issues, constraints, and feasible options. Tight deadlines and budget limitations, however, often induce managers to put 1 pressure on communication experts to produce quick fixes, trying to force them to act as short-term damage-control public relations or “spin doctors.” In such cases, the basic foundations of development communication are neglected, and the results are usually disappointing, especially over the long term. 8. Development communication is not exclusively about behavior change. The areas of intervention and the applications of development communication extend beyond the traditional notion of behavior change to include, among other things, probing socioeconomic and political factors, identifying priori- ties, assessing risks and opportunities, empowering people, strengthening institutions, and promoting social change within complex cultural and polit- ical environments. That development communication is often associated with behavior change could be ascribed to a number of factors, such as its application in health programs or its use in mass media to persuade audi- ences to adopt certain practices. These kinds of interventions are among the most visible, relying heavily on communication campaigns to change peo- ple’s behaviors and to eliminate or reduce often fatal risks (for example, AIDS). The reality of development, though, is complex and often requires broader changes than specific individual behaviors. Module 2 explains this in more detail. 9. Media and information technologies are not the backbone of development com- munication. As a matter of fact, the value-added of development communica- tion occurs before media and information and communication technologies (ICTs) are even considered. Of course, media and information technologies are part of development communication, and they are important and useful means to support development. Their application, however, comes at a later stage, and their impact is greatly affected by the communication work done in the research phase. Project managers should be wary of “one-size-fits-all” solutions that appear to solve all problems by using media products. Past experience indicates that unless such instruments are used in connection with other approaches and based on proper research, they seldom deliver the intended results. 10. Participatory approaches and participatory communication approaches are not the same thing and should not be used interchangeably, but they can be used together, as their functions are often complementary, especially during the research 20  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication phase. Even if there are some similarities between the two types of approaches, most renowned participatory approaches, such as participatory rural appraisal (PRA) or participatory action research (PAR), do not usually assess the range and level of people’s perceptions and attitudes on key issues, identify commu- nication entry points, and map out the information and communication sys- tems that can be used later to design and implement the communication strategy. Instead, these are all key activities carried out in a participatory com- munication assessment. 1 1.4 Understanding the Scope and Uses of Development Communication To fully understand the way development communication can be effectively applied in operations, it is necessary to have clearly in mind how its scope has broadened. Even the media-centric MacBride report (1980)11 indicated that the communica- tion role was not restricted to media and dissemination—that it should also be con- cerned with “involving people in the diagnosis of needs and in the design and implementation of selected activities.” To be effective in that task, and to be true to the interdisciplinary nature of communication, a specialist in this field should be familiar not only with communication do’s and don’ts but should have broad ana- lytical skills and be able to use communication methods to assess the cultural, polit- ical, and social context. A communication specialist, when called in to assist in development projects and programs, should always ask why a certain issue is occurring and what kind of communication is needed to address it effectively. Is communication mostly used to inform and promote project activities and objectives? Or is it to engage stakehold- ers in the investigation and assessment of priorities for change, thus enhancing the design of the initiative? As stated by Quarry (2008), managers and decision makers want communication, but too often it is the first kind of communication, which in this Sourcebook is referred to as monologic, and they tend to neglect the impor- tance of the other type of communication, here referred to as dialogic. The typology adopted in this Sourcebook divides development communication into two basic modes, or families of approaches: the “monologic” mode, based on the classical one-way communication model associated with diffusion, and the “dialogic” mode, based on the interactive two-way model, associated with participa- tory approaches. Being familiar with these two modes helps one to better under- stand which to apply under what circumstances. They serve different purposes, but they are not mutually exclusive and can often be used in a complementary way, as explained in module 2. 21  Development Communication Sourcebook 1.4.1 Monologic Mode: One-Way Communication for Behavior Change The monologic mode is linked to the development communication perspective known as “diffusion.” It is based on the one-way flow of information for the purpose of disseminating information and messages to induce change. Its main intentions can be divided into two different types of applications: (1) communication to inform (or simply “information,” as Latin American scholars such as Pasquali and Beltrán Salmón refer to it); and (2) communication to persuade. 1 “Communication to inform” typically involves a linear transmission of infor- mation, usually from a sender to many receivers. It is used when raising awareness or providing knowledge on certain issues is considered enough to achieve the intended goal (for example, informing a community about the activities of a proj- ect or informing the public about a reform coming into effect). In other instances, the dissemination of information is only a temporary stage to be reached in a longer process aimed at achieving behavior changes. This modality can be labeled “com- munication to persuade.” Approaches in communication for behavior change use methods and media to persuade individuals to adopt specific practices or behaviors. These approaches are frequently used in health initiatives. The Family Health International Web site (www.fhi.org) states that communication for behavior change aims to foster posi- tive behavior; promote and sustain individual, community, and societal behavior change; and maintain appropriate behavior. Its underlying assumption is that indi- vidual attitudes and behaviors can be changed voluntarily through communication and persuasion12 techniques and the related use of effective messages. Since the approaches, methods, and media used for this modality rely mostly on the one-way model, the mode of reference is monologic communication. In many cases, approaches to persuade still rely on the classic notion of one-way communication. The primary objective is for the sender to be able to persuade the receivers about the intended change. In this model the feedback is a sort of tune-up, allowing the sender to refine its persuasive message (Beltrán Salmón 2000). A com- mon approach closely associated with this communication mode is strategic commu- nication, which is often used in development initiatives to support management objectives. 1.4.2 Dialogic Mode: Two-Way Communication for Engagement and Discovery On the other hand, the dialogic mode is associated with the emerging participatory paradigm. It is based on the horizontal, two-way model of communication, creating a constructive environment where stakeholders can participate in the definition of problems and solutions. The main purposes of this model can be divided into two 22  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication broad types of applications: (1) communication to assess; and (2) communication to empower. This categorization helps one to understand the way in which the ultimate scope of the communication interventions shapes the choice of communication approaches, methods, and models of reference. Both of these types of applications take a radical turn away from the common conception of communication, since they do not involve any dissemination of information or messages. Even if these two types of communication cannot be easily positioned in a sequence because their scope is often closely intertwined, the use of dialogic communication to ensure mutual 1 understanding and explore a situation often becomes the best tool to facilitate empowerment. “Communication to assess” is used as a research and analytical tool that, thanks to its interdisciplinary and cross-cutting nature, can be used effectively to investi- gate any issue, well beyond those strictly related to the communication dimension. The power of dialogic communication is applied to engage stakeholders in explor- ing, uncovering, and assessing key issues, opportunities, and risks of both a techni- cal and political nature. As an illustration, take an initiative that at the surface does not appear in need of communication, such as building a bridge to link two areas and their communities separated by the river. A communication-based assessment prior to the project would probe the knowledge, perceptions, and positions of local stakeholders on the intended initiative. Unless probed through two-way communication, the identified technical course might neglect important aspects that could lead to problems or conflicts, for example by local fishermen who see their livelihoods endangered. This use of two-way communication engages experts and local stakeholders in the problem-analysis and problem-solving process leading to change. Active listen- ing becomes as important as talking. In a way, it could be said that dialogic commu- nication is not used to inform but to truly “communicate”—that is, to share perceptions and create new knowledge. Dialog should be understood not as a broad form of chit-chat, but as a process where “participants come together in a safe space to understand each other’s view- point in order to develop new options to address a commonly identified problem.” This assertion is put forth by Pruitt and Thomas (2007: 20) in a publication on the virtue of dialog in development, commissioned jointly by the Canadian Interna- tional Development Agency (CIDA), the International Institute for Democracy and Electorate Assistance (IDEA), Organization of American States (OAS), and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The same publication states, “In dia- log, the intention is not to advocate but to inquire; not to argue but to explore; not to convince but to discover.” The same notion is also included in the other typology of the dialogic mode, that is, “communication to empower.” When used to facilitate the active engage- 23  Development Communication Sourcebook ment of stakeholders, the dialogic feature of communication enhances the capaci- ties of all groups, especially the most marginalized ones, and addresses the issue of poverty as explained below. Dialogic communication is not only effective as a problem-solving tool, but it also builds confidence, prevent conflicts, and addresses the issue of poverty by engaging the poorest and most marginal sectors in the process concerning issues of relevance to them. Amartya Sen (1999), a Nobel Prize winner in economics, high- 1 lights how the poverty dimension goes beyond the notion of lacking sufficient income to address basic needs. Poverty is also about capabilities deprivation and social exclusion. By involving the poor in the assessment of problems and solutions, by engaging them, and not just the experts, in the decision-making process, and by making the voices of the poor heard, the dialogic mode can address and reduce one key dimension of poverty: social exclusion. The overall goal of the dialogic mode is to ensure mutual understanding and to make the best use of all possible knowledge in assessing the situation, building con- sensus, and looking for appropriate solutions. By facilitating dialog with key stake- holders, this type of communication enhances the analysis and minimizes risks. On the other hand, the primary scope of the monologic mode emerges especially when information needs to be packaged and disseminated to address specific needs and gaps. Table 1.2 provides a further clarification of the two approaches by contrasting their scope, basic functions, and main differences. Development is about change and about people. Each of the communication types presented in table 1.2 is a means to bring about change. Methods to achieve change, however, may vary according to the perspective, situation, and overall scope of the initiative. Even if past experiences indicate that the mere dissemination of information seldom achieves the intended change, properly packaged message dis- Table 1.2 Basic Features of Communication Modes Monologic Mode Dialogic Mode Compare and Communication Communication Communication Communication contrast to inform to persuade to assess to empower Main purpose To raise aware- To change To assess, To involve ness or increase attitudes and probe, and stakeholders in knowledge of behaviors of analyze the decisions over key audiences key audiences situation key issues Model of One-way model One-way model Two-way model Two-way model reference (monologic) (monologic) (dialogic) (dialogic) Preferred Predominant use Predominant Wide range of Use of dialog methods and of mass media use of media methods to to promote media investigate participation issues Source: Author. 24  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication semination may be effective in a number of cases, such as the prevention of the spread of pandemic illnesses or for explaining the benefits of a public reform. On the other hand, two-way communication is more indicated in achieving mutual understanding, building trust, and uncovering and generating knowledge, leading to better results. 1.4.3 Misconceptions about Development Communication Attitudes of development managers and decision makers toward communication 1 were studied in a survey commissioned by the Development Communication Divi- sion of the World Bank (Fraser, Restrepo-Estrada, and Mazzei 2007). The findings indicated that while many managers and decision-makers are fully aware of the importance of communication in development programs, most of them use it in a broad and at times confused way. They usually conceive communication mostly in terms of public relations, media production, information dissemination, or corpo- rate communication. The study clearly indicates the need for positioning and clari- fying the scope, body of knowledge, and practical applications of the field of development communication. Since the use of communication in development has been associated historically with information dissemination and one-way persuasion, it is not surprising that many managers and decision makers involved in development focus primarily, or even exclusively, on these aspects. This leads many of them to seek communication interventions only halfway through the project cycle, rather than as part of the pro- ject’s initial conception when it is more strategic and cost-effective. When discussing persuasion, it should be noted that in addition to the com- monly conceived one-way modality, which often carries a negative connotation, there is also a wider conception, where persuasion is used in two-way communica- tion among two or more parties who are exchanging opinions and knowledge in order to uncover and agree on the best option. Jacobson (2003), for instance, refers to the philosopher Jurgen Habermas’s concept of communicative action to address this issue at different levels of scale. He claims that persuasion can also take place in dialogic/participatory communication as “large-scale political discourse requires mass media, whereas interpersonal and small-group communication do not. Nev- ertheless, the principles of reciprocity, the equal distribution of opportunities to contribute, and the freedom to raise any proposals are common to participatory communication at both levels” (108). Distinguishing development communication from other areas of communica- tion is essential—failure to do this leads to misconceptions and wrong expectations. Its analytical focus and its embrace of a number of principles from other disci- plines, such as anthropology, sociology, adult education, and marketing, are signa- ture features. The interdisciplinary nature of development communication is 25  Development Communication Sourcebook defined by its dialogical focus, which becomes a crucial feature to explore and uncover risks and opportunities. It is important to remember that the concept of “dialog,” when used in the context of development communication, refers to more than just engaging people in a conversation or discussion. It is about the profes- sional facilitation of dialogic methods among stakeholders to explore and identify priorities and best alternatives leading to change. Another prevalent misconception in this context equates discussion with dialog. 1 When engaged in a discussion, the goal is usually to prove the superiority of one’s point of view, and at the end, winners and losers emerge. Alternatively, in a genuine dialog, nobody is trying to win. As Bohm (1996: 7) states, “Everybody wins if any- body wins. In genuine dialog there is no attempt to gain points, or to make one’s particular view prevail. Rather, whenever any mistake is discovered on the part of anybody, everybody gains.” Conceived in this way, dialog becomes instrumental in setting the groundwork for any successful development initiative. It becomes a heuristic method, striving to seek and to sustain the best possible solution or change. When all parties involved feel that their contribution is part of the solution, it is more likely that everyone will put forth their best effort to support the initiative. A further misconception surrounds the qualifications for development commu- nication work. Once the scope, range of functions, and multifaceted nature of a proj- ect are fully understood, the depth of the communication discipline needed becomes apparent. At this stage, it is difficult to support the argument that anyone who “com- municates” well can be considered a communication specialist, without specific studies or in-depth expertise on the subject (an assertion that is implicitly and tacitly accepted too often in development circles). To be applied effectively, especially in the complex development context, communication strategies and approaches require a specialist’s in-depth knowledge, at both the theoretical and applicative levels. 1.4.4 Two-Way Communication-Based Assessment: First Step to Mutual Understanding and Strategy Design The first step in a communication intervention always should be based on empiri- cal research through the use of two-way communication investigative methods. In order to assess and minimize risks, DevComm stresses on-site research as the basis of any communication intervention and consequently as the basis for the success of any development intervention. Depending on the scope of the intervention, the various communication approaches presented in the Sourcebook can be adopted to address a given situa- tion. Yet, accurate measuring of the effectiveness of specific communication approaches can vary considerably. Assessing if and how much the level of awareness and knowledge of a certain issue has increased is not a particularly difficult matter; the same applies when measuring changes in attitudes and behaviors. Evaluating 26  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication the impact of dialog, empowerment, joint analysis, and consensus, however, is a much more complex issue—one that some argue cannot be accurately measured, at least in a rigorous quantitative manner. The question of whether such “preventive functions” can be measured or accounted for is not an easy one to answer. Maybe it should be acknowledged that, given the complexity of the human dimension, not everything can be accurately measured. Or perhaps measurements can be carried out in more creative ways, such as assessing projects that have failed because of the lack of communication inter- vention at the initial stages. This would measure the costs of noncommunication,13 1 which in many cases are evident and easy to quantify. Moreover, people’s participation has gradually become a pillar of the current development conception, and a number of studies, including some by the World Bank, demonstrate the positive impact of participation in development projects. And participation cannot occur without two-way communication. There is a grow- ing international consensus considering participation not only as a means, but also as an end in itself (Sen 1999). UNDP (1993: 21) asserts that “Participation, from the human development perspective, is both a means and an end.” Nonetheless, the debate on this issue, while extremely valuable, is beyond the scope of this Source- book. For the purposes at hand, participation is treated primarily as a means, a valu- able element to meet development objectives. Communication is not only considered as a necessary ingredient for meaningful stakeholders’ participation in development initiatives, but it is often paired with the term “strategy.” An effective strategy based on two-way communcation increases a development project’s success and sustainability. Communication strategies need to be professionally designed and prepared to avoid some of the problems found most frequently in projects and programs: inadequate diagnosis, flawed or ill-conceived design, or inappropriate timing (Hornik 1988). When designing a strategy, communication professionals should be clear about the specific objectives and the communication mode required for the intervention. The temptation to jump into the design of messages or into the production of audio- visual materials without carefully assessing what is really needed or what the bench- mark is to assess the intervention should be resisted. To be effective, a communication strategy should always be based on the findings of a two-way assessment. Whenever the term “communication strategy” is used, managers’ attention almost automatically goes to the search for a solution—what do we need to do or say to achieve the intended change? The focus, instead, should be first on the search for the root of the problem, on what different stakeholder groups think, and on what elements impede the desired change. Since most of the causes are usually cre- ated by or related to people, communication is the best and perhaps the only tool to investigate them comprehensively and effectively. There are a number of methods providing guidelines to follow, usually starting from the causes of the problem to 27  Development Communication Sourcebook the outputs needed for addressing the situation successfully, the Logical Frame- work14 approach probably being the most renowned of these methods. 1.5. The Operational Framework of the Development Communication Division 1 In 1998 the World Bank established the Development Communication Division, or DevComm. Unlike in other institutions, where such entities are often positioned within operational departments, DevComm has been placed within the World Bank’s External Affairs Vice Presidency, in the company of Media and Corporate Communication. This positioning might have contributed to some of the difficul- ties in differentiating the role of development communication from the other types of Bank communication. To be sure, these other types of communication, among their various functions, include support to operations. The field of development communication, however, does not simply support operation, but is engaged in operations (dealing with operational issues of projects and programs beyond aspects regarding communicating information), and this is its main scope. DevComm’s mission is to incorporate communication into World Bank opera- tions in order to improve development results, helping to achieve set objectives and strengthen long-term sustainability. DevComm functions are not limited to the design of effective communication strategies. The value-added of its work is most evident in the initial phase of development initiatives, where communication is used as a research and analytical tool. Using its full range of resources, development communication supports operations not only through dissemination and outreach activities, but also by exploring and analyzing project issues on the ground. DevComm operations are carried out along three business lines: (1) polling and opinion research, (2) learning and capacity building, and (3) operations. The bulk of activities carried out by DevComm are aimed directly at working in projects and programs in client countries. DevComm’s services in polling and opinion research provide the basis needed to inform further research and to understand how institu- tions, reforms, or other key issues are perceived by key groups. The Learning and Capacity Building Unit provides a number of services aimed at strengthening the knowledge and skills of the participants in relevant areas and strengthening key institutional capacities. The bulk of DevComm services, however, are in operations, and they cover a wide range of communication applications, from empirical research for engaging stakeholders, exploring their perceptions, and assessing risks and opportunities, to the dissemination-of-information media cam- paigns to promote behavior change, or the use of two-way-based approaches to facilitate social change. A detailed explanation of the scope and range of activities within each business line is presented in module 4. 28  MODULE 1: The Value-Added of Development Communication Figure 1.3 DevComm Methodological Framework ME Communication- OBJECTIVES WORK PLAN INDICATORS Monitoring and Strategy based Implementation evaluation design assessment (indicators) Identify/analyze/refine: Audiences/stakeholders Select and design: Comm. approaches Carry out: Pretesting 1 Risks Messages Media production Opportunities Learning systems Training activities Needs Message dissemination Solutions Media/channels ME indicators Objectives Source: Author. ME: monitoring and evaluaton DevComm’s methodological framework is divided into four main phases. Fig- ure 1.3 illustrates the overall process/cycle of the development communication intervention, highlighting the key functions for each phase. The first phase involves research and is often referred to as communication-based assessment, or CBA. This phase provides the inputs for the strategy design, which makes up the second phase. The next phase concerns the production of the materials and implementation of the planned activities. Finally, the fourth phase is concerned with evaluation. Proper evaluation of the impact of the communication intervention requires the definition of monitoring and evaluation (ME) indicators during the initial research phase. 1.5.1 Communication-Based Assessment Communication-based assessment is a flexible and relatively rapid way to conduct an initial investigation, usually followed by more extensive research. For any com- munication intervention to be effective, it must be rooted in research. In addition to exploring the situation and the perceptions of the various stakeholders, this analy- sis also produces data for the design of subsequent communication strategy. When carrying out a CBA, DevComm specialists study the cultural, political, and social context; identify and interview opinion leaders and relevant stakeholders; assess risks (such as opposition and potential conflict); seek solutions; and, finally, define the objectives to support the intended change. 29  Development Communication Sourcebook As indicated previously, the term “communication-based” indicates that this