Building State Capability | Blog

IPP Program Journey: A Bridge to Sustainable Development begins with Purpose

Guest blog written by Lorena Fabrega

This is a blog series written by the alumni of the Implementing Public Policy Executive Education Program at the Harvard Kennedy School. Participants successfully completed this 7-month blended learning course in December 2019. These are their learning journey stories.

After 25-years-experience in the private sector, steering the course of a professional career towards public service is challenging. Implementing Public Policy came to me at such a moment, when I knew I cared and was willing to take risks.

Knowing I had the ability to make a difference was enough to seek serving my country to achieve sustainable development goals. However, nothing had prepared me foray into the public arena, and the Executive Program at Harvard’s School of Government seemed the perfect starting point. Searching for purpose, guidance and legitimacy, I luckily joined the 2019 IPP cohort.

Being a lobbyist for sustainable development policies had been my dream job since the beginning. But building a team, when I was in between jobs, and pursuing a specific policy proved to be my biggest challenge: I did not find it. It chose me in the unlikeliest of moments: the pandemic.

To focus on the problem, not the solution

Less than a year before the pandemic (B.P.), in May 2019 professor Matt Andrews asked us to define Public Policy Implementation; our first assignment into the course, I was reluctant to focus the definition on the problem, and so I declared that it was the design and execution of a response to further the public’s best interest.

It took at least two days into the on-campus part of the program for me to accept the value of focusing on what, for many years, most managers ask their teams not to do: you may not present me with problems unless you come with at least two possible solutions! I even gave them “the face” when they came up to me with an issue, and they quickly turned back on their steps to figure out a possible answer to complicated and even complex problems on their own. I asked that they jump into possible solutions, without examining the problem in depth…without deconstructing it.

The basic switch on focus, to examine the problem and not the solution, is the biggest and most impactful of the theory behind Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA). Constructing the problem, which is to make it visible to those that matter, or those that it should matter to, is easier when you have mapped out why the different authorizers care or should care about it in order to secure resources: abilities, authorization and acceptance. This triple A combo sums up the capabilities on board, or the lack thereof, to achieve successful policies.

But the easiest thing, almost instinctive, is to jump towards a solution or solutions for problems we have not deconstructed, an exercise needed to understand actions or responses that will be tried out. When deconstructing a problem, we understand the impact of such a problem, its ramifications, and why it needs our intervention.

Solutions create new problems

Halfway through the on-campus part of the program, reading that complex problems are not solved but managed, and that our policies create new problems made me stop. I mean full stop. I breathed deeply and wondered if it was all worth it… maybe I should stick to the private sector. Policies are ongoing, never finished, evolving continually and indefinitely.

IPP Program Journey: The Origins, Gospel, Path and Light at the End of the Tunnel

Guest blog written by Luis Paredes

When I decided to apply for the Program, I was not sure I would get accepted! With all the complicated crises around the globe, I thought my country’s problems were not that hard to solve or -even- that important. Happily, I was totally mistaken. Once I arrived in Boston and interacted with each of the amazing group of participants, I realized I was in the right place. I could not believe that we shared almost the same problems no matter where we live!

The gospel …

As for my expectations about the course, well I thought it would be a very theoretical, book-oriented program with some interaction spaces and lots of academic work to do!

Of course, I was not totally mistaken! At HKS we had lots of readings, study sessions, and classes with world-class faculty. But it was not entirely theoretical, boring or book oriented. We really learned by listening and participating through the debates and experiences of our professors…

Of course, we had some fun too! I really enjoyed the on-campus experience.

One of the key learnings from this course is that your work is never really done. PDIA is based on iterations, permanently trying to understand the problem in a better way to find comprehensive solutions for our citizens. These iterations are at the core of the whole process because they help to identify and manage the problem.

IPP Program Journey: Poor Tax Collection in Nigeria

Guest blog written by Fuad Kayode Laguda

I must disclose that coming for this course was a product of careful decision-making and determination. It is not easy combining my job schedules with the academic tasks. The course structure, coupled with the quality of the administrators, lecturers and fellow colleagues, actually surpasses my expectations. It exposed me to improved patience, persistence, importance of building, having a team, diverse way of solving problems and formulating policy. This course has allowed me to understand and showcase the Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA) to my authorisers and other decision makers.

The key learnings were too numerous to explain in details. However, I will not forget the “Fishbone” as well as the sequential techniques of problem solving. IPP has enriched my proficiency in critical thinking and programmatic application of various approaches to identifying and solving complex problems through strong network for consultation and collaboration as well as partnership for actions with different national or corporate decision makers.

However, IPP has made me more confident, courageous in handling data and emphasis on the importance of mobilising and working with a team(s) to implement the data.

This course has taught me to appreciate little successes and that every effort taken to solve challenges are not a waste. It builds me for connecting with authority and building legitimacy around my actions. It has allowed me look for opportunity in the problems I proposed to solve.

The IPP networking system is highly remarkable to the extent that implementation of the instructions, ideas and policy innovations passed in the classes (on-site and off-site) becomes successfully feasible. PDIA is a remarkable learning for me because it opens my eyes to gaining the confidence of authorisers through the cultivation of informal engagement with them. PDIA taught me to manage constructively every shortfall and celebrate every slight achievement.

IPP Program Journey: A Professional Watershed in a Land of Climate Change

Guest blog written by David Sperling

I was optimistic: I knew the course would be useful and would help me understand better, at least in theory, how one might best go about implementing a public policy decision. Little did I realize what a profound impact the course was going to have on my professional work. I never imagined that something like PDIA existed, much less that it would be applicable in a highly practical way to my own policy challenge, working as I was, and am, with agricultural pastoralists in the dry region of Turkana County in northern Kenya. The progressive practical application of new ideas and concepts throughout the course was invaluably useful. What I have learned far exceeded my expectations.

My key learning moments during the course came about because of its: 1) comprehensive deep analysis of the dynamic context of public policy challenges; and 2) the accompanying creation of “implementation capability”. The definitional ideas/concepts especially useful to me were:

– the core idea of deconstructing the “meta-problem” into its multiple dimensions and then pursuing a “problem-driven sequencing” solution;

– the ideas of “state capability”, “premature load bearing” and “isomorphic mimicry”;

– the distinction between “project completion and success” and “policy impact success”;

– the fact that there is an “authorizing environment”, not just authorizers, and that authorization needs to be maintained; it’s not self-sustaining or self-perpetuating;

– the difference between “functional success” and “legitimacy success”;

– the concept of “capability taxonomy” and the “organizational capability” needed to implement public policy;

– the “triple-A” factors of authority, acceptance and ability that characterize “change space”.

Other key learning moments came about because of the specific questions like: “What did you manage to do in these last few weeks? What questions do you have moving ahead? How have you managed up? What did you learn as you did this work? List the new people you have met and engaged with in the last three weeks”. These questions needed action-answers. No waffling! The Assignments were most helpful. They required me to be hard-nosed and specific in assessing progress and planning for the future, and more accountable to myself, constantly asking real-life and real-work questions about past progress, present initiatives and future planned action. I wasn’t used to asking myself such questions. The course has helped better define, and raise the standard of, my self-accountability.

IPP Program Journey: Public Policy is Not only about Ticking the Checkboxes

Guest blog written by Oluwole Pratt

In terms of the quality and content of learning, I received what I was expecting from a world class faculty. What I didn’t expect was the level of support I received throughout my policy implementation journey, which is phenomenal.

I obtained a better perspective into the two main dimensions of public policy success (functionality and legitimacy) and that it is equally important to keep the two in view when implementing any public policy intervention. I also learned that obtaining and maintaining authorization in implementing public policy is key to success. Maintaining authorization is an iterative process that can only be reinforced through continual and effective communication with our authorizers. And finally, I learned that implementing public policy requires a lot of grit and determination to succeed; we would need to learn how to self-motivate while keeping our team members equally motivated. Overall, there is not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution to public policy problems, and that we must adapt our solutions to the local context in which we implement public policy and adapt our strategy to the changing policy environment.

I made progress by achieving some degree of functionality success, i.e. submitting my deliverables against agreed timelines. Most importantly, I discovered that authorization is not a constant and one should continually be checking the status of one’s authorization and recalibrate if one is to achieve legitimacy success.

As a consultant, I operate under a slightly different mindset; I have a contractual obligation to fulfill, which is largely within the functionality dimension of success. That notwithstanding, I have come to the realization that public policy is not just about ticking the checkboxes of my deliverables, it impacts the lives and destinies of real people. My overriding motivation is and therefore will continue to be, to make a sustainable impact in my public policy interventions rather being a mere ‘flash in the pan’.

IPP Program Journey: Adapt, Learn and Win

Guest blog written by Kanoo Hana

After the last few months listening, observing and learning we finally come to the end of this very interesting programme. I feel that we are still engaged with all our classmates and faculty, deconstructing and reconstructing all our concepts.

The programme lasted seven months with participants meeting in-person for only a week, but engaging via calls and online for weeks. I have taken a few executive educational programmes at Harvard Kennedy School and this programme was everything that I expected. The programme on campus was structured very well. This in my opinion is important so that participants can actually start learning and taking in information to develop the skills needed.

The key leanings from this programme included the following,

Understanding that there are constant issues and problems that need to be dealt with
That there are scenarios that need the use of various tools and skills that can be developed
We need to continuously grow authority
We need to continuously work on our legitimacy and ensure functionality
Develop a learning culture at work
Take small cumulative steps
Maintain authorization
Maintain your teams, focus and navigate
Stay motivated

So, I feel that I learnt a lot about a process that is continuous and needs to be constantly worked on.

IPP Program Journey: Public Policy Problems are both Inevitable and Approachable

Guest blog written by Doran Moreland

I was extremely excited to begin the course, mainly because I was looking forward to the opportunity to approach my problem in new ways. I was also looking for new tools to help measure my progress and present my problem to others to gain outside buy-in. The course certainly provided each of these. However, I was most blown away by the incredibly diverse and deeply inspiring individuals in my IPP cohort. The value of their stories- small and big victories and set-backs, and the passion with which they approach their work is immeasurable. After going through the course, I now know that public policy problems are both inevitable and approachable. Before IPP, I was attempting to know the solutions to any problem presented. Today, I no longer aspire to achieve a state of all-knowingness, because it does not exist. Instead, I now have the confidence to state what I don’t know with practical ideas on getting started, with opportunities for continual learning to address the challenge at hand.

The sections on Psychological safety Comfort level speaking up, asking for help, admitting mistakes (Edmondson, 1999) and Felt Accountability Extent feel accountable, responsible (Abelson et al., 1999) led by Prof. Monica Higgins were particularly helpful for me. Both helped me to understand the multidimensional aspects of leadership. I’ve learned that leaders do not simply find and promote talented individuals. They must create and maintain an environment where individuals can thrive. Additionally, I took many key points from the section on fragmented and dysfunctional bureaucracy, led by Prof. Matt Andrews. This section helped me gain perspective about the environment in which I work, and to ask myself why information flows and decisions are made the way that they do. The internal challenge I’ve faced during this introspection is the need to balance the practical concessions needed to advance my work within my current environment, which often conflict with my desire to try to change the environment altogether.

My level of access was very high coming into the program. But I found that my access increased as I progressed in addressing my progress. I attribute two main factors to this development: 1) the clarity with which I’ve been able to explain the core problem, as well as the nuances around the problem. This increased clarity has come over time as I’ve continued PDIA and speaking with new stakeholders. 2) My association with Harvard Kennedy School has enhanced my credibility with my internal authorizers. Going through this process I have gained more practical expectations around working with problems. I’m no longer looking to hit home runs every time; I’m now happy with consistent doubles and triples.

IPP Program Journey: Feeling Excited, then Misplaced, then Overwhelmed, then Inspired!

Guest blog written by Anna Doherty

Rolling up on day one at the Kennedy School, alongside a global cohort of policymakers, I felt excited and then immediately overcome with imposter syndrome. As it turned out, my fellow students were establishing peace ministries, tackling the inter-generational impacts of racial segregation, advocating for better healthcare and medicine, and developing unprecedented national legislation! There were members of parliaments, heads of public service departments, there was even a banker with a Rolex. I was just from a State Government in Australia – what could I possibly contribute?

It wasn’t until our first coffee break that I realized that many of the class were feeling the same way. And despite our uncertainty, we soon found we weren’t just there to listen to public policy experts and return home with a head full of theories but no road-map for applying them. We were there to work through and commit to our challenges, and this meant bringing them into the classroom to be dissected, to plan our approach, subject our plan to the scrutiny of others, and then build a better one.

There was barely any time to let the realization of hard-work set in before we were asked to confront the complexity of this task via the Ishikawa fish-bone – everyone’s favorite tool for understanding just how vast and intractable our chosen policy challenges were, and then empowering us with entry points to make a start. My chosen challenge was “how to encourage policymakers to adopt empirical evidence”, and the fishbone helped me understand how many structural issues there were inhibiting progress.

Lesson 1. Find those already committed to the problem – they are your allies

Despite mapping this vast problem alone, I soon realized I was not the first, only, nor last person to tackle this policy challenge. We were taught the importance of investing time in finding people who were already making progress, and were encouraged to look for “positive deviance” that is, ideas already being acted on in your specific context. On returning home, I found an existing network of public servants from across several Government Departments, who were already mapping, consolidating and measuring academic-government partnerships across the Sector.

RISE Launches Interactive Data Visualisations Estimating Long-Term Learning Losses from COVID-19 School Closures

Guest blog written by Carmen Belafi

COVID-19 will exacerbate the learning crisis. Causing schools to close around the world, the pandemic disrupted education as we know it. But the COVID-19 shock to education systems will likely cause severe and long-term learning losses that are far bigger than the ‘mere’ time schools were closed. Learning losses can continue to accumulate after children return to school.

It is important to estimate long-term learning losses

Research following the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan shows how the long-run effects of school closures can compound over time. When schools closed for 14 weeks following the disaster in Pakistan, learning losses were far more severe. Four years after the earthquake, children were 1.5 years behind their unaffected peers, far more than the 14 weeks of school they originally missed. Learning losses can far exceed the actual school closure time if no mitigating action is taken, multiplying an initial short-term learning loss into significant long-term losses.

The same will be true for COVID-19. Modelling the impact of school closures on children in Grade 3, Michelle Kaffenberger shows how an initial three-month school closure could build up to more than a year’s worth of learning by Grade 10 if no mitigating action is taken. This is because many students had already fallen behind before the pandemic caused schools to close, as curriculum and instruction were too ambitious to have all children keep up. And even school closures themselves will likely exacerbate inequalities—not only because solutions for remote learning vary a lot in quality and effectiveness, but also because students from lower socio-economic backgrounds do not have the same household support and access to remote learning options (especially those that require electricity or internet). Hence, differences in learning based on household characteristics are likely to widen during school closure times.

But the outcomes do not have to be so grim. Combining short-term remediation with long-term reorientation of instruction and curriculum to better align with children’s learning levels not only has the potential to fully mitigate learning losses, but to improve learning outcomes beyond what was to be expected under the ‘business as usual’, counterfactual scenario where the world never experienced COVID-19.

Leveraging Technology to Improve Forecasting and Monitoring of Local Government Budgets

Guest blog written by Ruth Huette

Public budget uncertainty is a defining characteristic of the COVID-19 pandemic

Last week, governments of France and Germany announced that their countries would enter yet another phase of lockdown as new cases of COVID-19 were on a steep rise again. As Europe is grappling with a second COVID wave, other governments around the world are expected to make similar announcements soon.

Although long expected by epidemiologists, the announcement took many smaller and medium sized companies by surprise. To help ease the impact on businesses forced to close during the lockdown, Germany’s finance minister, Olaf Scholz, promised that the government would compensate small firms with up to 75% of their revenue for the same time last year, thereby tearing yet another hole into already diminished public budgets. Not only in Germany but around the world have local governments taken a massive doublet hit in their budgets since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, as tax revenues went down and social spending and economic support increased. Until a vaccine will be developed and widely distributed, this uncertainty on future public budgets will persist.

Data analytics can improve local government budgeting processes

To prepare for future phases of budget uncertainty local governments should take advantage of technology and replace manual processes and basic tools with specialized analytics systems. This will help them enhance prediction accuracy, improve data exchange between different government units, facilitate budget-related decision making through visualization and increase citizen participation in budgeting.

Enhancing the accuracy of forecasts

Already in normal times, local budgeting requires bringing together many moving parts – during a global pandemic even more so. In a time of unprecedented uncertainty, both short- and long-term local financial management has become ever more complex. Public health and safety predictions, complex economic scenarios, and accompanying public social spending forecasts are new sources of information, among others, that must now be incorporated into robust budget planning analyses. With increased complexity, manual manipulation of spreadsheets is even more prone to errors and can be difficult to replicate. Advanced data analytics tools offer the potential to improve government’s ability to extract value from various sources and large volumes of data.

Breaking up siloed data and coordinating systems

Data silos in budgeting can be the result of limited insights which the various institutions that help inform the budget planning process gain from their traditional Excel spreadsheets and ERP reports. During crisis times, even more and potentially unusual data sources from various sources need to be taken into account – including for example forecasts of future COVID-19 cases, of required government measures to curb the spread and of the measures’ expected impact on small businesses. This further complicates data transmission and analysis and increases the risk of loss of relevant information.