Over the past five years, the Building State Capability (BSC) program has been deeply immersed in PDIA experiments aimed at facilitating problem-driven, iterative, and adaptive work. These experiments have served as invaluable learning opportunities, offering a mix of enlightening breakthroughs, frustrating setbacks, nuanced discoveries, and clear insights. In the spirit of sharing knowledge, we will be chronicling our journey through a series of blog posts, offering a glimpse into the evolution of our approach and the lessons we’ve gleaned along the way.

Before delving into our experiences, it’s essential to provide clarity on who we are and what we aim to achieve. Let’s outline the fundamental characteristics shared by our experiments:

  1. Alignment with PDIA Principles: Our experiments adhere to the core principles of PDIA, involving local authorizers in nominating problems and assembling teams to tackle them through iterative processes with ample feedback loops.
  2. Collaboration with Government Teams: We exclusively collaborate with government teams, recognizing the pivotal role of capable states in driving sustainable development.
  3. Emphasis on Experiential Learning: We prioritize experiential learning, allowing teams to navigate real-world challenges and derive insights from both successes and failures before institutionalizing solutions.
  4. Focus on Real Problems and Results: Our focus remains on addressing real problems and achieving tangible results, rather than merely introducing predefined solutions.
  5. External Facilitation: We serve as external facilitators, guiding teams through the process and fostering a culture of learning and adaptation without directly engaging in substantive delivery work.

This set of principles has guided our experimental endeavors across diverse countries and sectors, spanning areas such as justice reform, health policy, agriculture, tourism, and more. Our engagements have adapted to varying contexts and opportunities, resulting in a spectrum of approaches and outcomes:

  • Convening Teams: In some instances, we directly convene teams, while in others, local authorizers take on this role.
  • Intensity of Interaction: Our level of engagement varies, ranging from regular and hands-on interaction to more sporadic or light-touch approaches.
  • Structural Dynamics: We employ different structural frameworks, including classroom-style settings and workplace-driven structures, tailored to the specific needs of each context.

Our experiments have been marked by diversity and adaptability, allowing us to glean invaluable insights and humbling lessons alike. While some initiatives have flourished, empowering individuals to effect transformative change, others have faced challenges right from the outset. Both outcomes have served to deepen our understanding and reinforce our commitment to this critical work.

Engaging in PDIA experimentation has been simultaneously exhilarating and demanding, underscoring its significance in the realm of development. It has sharpened our vision for the future of development and underscored the imperative of adaptive, context-specific approaches. As we embark on this journey of reflection and knowledge sharing, we hope to illuminate the path forward for fellow practitioners and enthusiasts alike. Stay tuned for our upcoming blog posts, where we’ll delve deeper into our experiences and insights.