In the run-up to the OCHA +5 Symposium (which apparently I’m not going to), Dennis King asks:
How do we get more “Non-geeks” to use information technology and tools on a consistent basis?
This has been the central problem with most of our work over the last decade. It’s particularly obvious in the field, where staff do not have the time to learn how to use new tools. There seem to be a range of considerations if we want any of our projects to succeed:
- Embed new tools into existing processes where possible. New processes are even harder to introduce into an organisation than new technologies, so enhance existing processes first. This builds the credibility of the technology and familiarises people with it, strengthening your position within the organisation for future developments.
- Build on existing and familiar technologies (mobile phones) rather than introducing new and unfamiliar ones (standalone PDAs). If you want staff to use a tool, it will be easier for them to accept and adopt if they are comfortably with it. This is why Sahana is browser-based, for example, since most people are now comfortable using services on the web.
- Invest in preparedness by a) training key staff in tools that we want them to use, and b) getting management support for their implementation. The first one may rely on the second, since you’ll need budgets to pay for training, but as I said above – don’t ever try to introduce something new in the middle of an emergency response.
- Make them useful. This might seem really really obvious but it feels like a lot of us forget it. We might think our project is the best thing since sliced bread, but if the rest of the organisation doesn’t agree, then we may as well not bother. Let’s start by helping staff to articulate how technology can help them in their work, and then move on to designing what they really need.
- It’s not just “non-geeks” that we need to persuade. IT departments in many of our organisations are seldom enthusiastic about new ideas, since they have the tough job of making sure that the old ideas keep working. We need a) to make sure that our IT strategies have room for innovation and b) our IT staff are aware that it’s acceptable for them to innovate. This will get ideas flowing.
- The final issue is our very own digital divide question. None of the above can be accomplished if we do not build better working (and personal) relationships between tech staff and non-tech staff. In nearly every organisation I’ve worked with, the links between the IT department and the Emergencies department has been very poor (if it exists at all). This has to change, otherwise we’ll never get anywhere.
These points were off the top of my head – any other thoughts are welcome.
Related posts:
One suggestion would to use technology already in the hands of non-geeks, without forcing them to use new technologies, devices or ICT mechanisms. However sophisticated in and of themselves, ICT mechanisms that aren’t grounded in local work cultures will run soon become ossified artefacts.
I’ve written extensively on how ICT solutions for humanitarian aid need to be sensitive to, amongst other factors, the local socio-political, cultural, ethnic and religious dynamics:
http://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2006/07/03/humanitarian-aid-and-peacebuilding/
http://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2006/04/30/technology-for-humanitarian-aid-6-mantras/
and contributed to a list that a bunch of non-geeks at Strong Angel III (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_Angel) came up with:
http://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2006/08/24/strong-angel-iii-design-consideration-for-humanitarian-aid-systems/
Online Technology for Social Change: From Struggle to Strategy by dot.Organise is also compelling reading in this regard. Though US-centric, it clearly brings out the challenges of sustainable use of ICTs by “non-geeks”, irrespective of how technologically advanced the makers think their ICT solutions to be.
See http://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2006/10/17/online-technology-for-social-change-from-struggle-to-strategy/
Paul,
Sorry to hear that you won’t be attending the Symposium and be able to talk with you in person, but glad you are contributing through this blog. You have contributed a lot to the progress in humanitarian information over the last several years. Thanks for your input into the Symposium Google Groups discussion and the issues I raised and I will make sure they are incorporated into the best practices and recommendations.
Hi Paul, I’ve made a few comments supporting and discussing yours, and adding a couple more on my blog.
http://www.rediguana.co.nz/gav/2007/10/22/encouraging-non-geek-use-of-information-technology/
Having had some experience in “gettingâ€
Clearly a collection of IT proverbs is in development: how about ‘Look before you geek’ as a contribution? Too many IT projects in our sector forge ahead with only the most cursory scan of the existing landscape…
Paul is too modest to mention his excellent assessment of the use of ICTs in emergency reponse, carried out in 2005/6 for the Emergency Capacity Building Project, which deals with many of these issues in depth: (http://www.ecbproject.org/publications_4.htm)
Our more recent experience with ICTs in emergency capacity building suggests a couple of generalizations:
1. Where we have had success, it has been through a multi-disciplinary project team including both IT specialists and program people, involved from the get-go. Sometimes painful to watch: always worth it in the long run.
2. Related to this, our experience suggests that at least 50% of the budget and effort involved in an ‘IT project’ needs to be directed away from the computers and towards ‘soft’ activities such as facilitation, communication and internal marketing, if any return is to be realised on your IT investment.
Pingback: humanitarian.info » ICT4Peace in the news