Adaptive Management: Thoughts about USAID's Evolving Program Cycle

Leading complexity thought leader Ben Ramalingam, author of Aid on the Edge of Chaos (2013), spoke to the Society for International Development’s Knowledge Management Work Group in July on adaptive management, focusing on when it works and when it doesn’t. 

Ramalingam highlighted the differences between adaptive and traditional management and the importance of balancing the two -- explaining that traditional management is characterized as  “standardization and control”, and adaptive management as “capacities and processes.” Adaptive management recognizes that change is emergent and contextual. 

Development professionals usually work in complex environments. Traditionally, we have responded to this complexity through directive and order. Ramalingam advocates for moving toward a more human-centered approach where the focus is on the beneficiaries’ needs rather than the organizational form. Adaptive management puts more trust on those who are closer to the problem and in a better position to understand and resolve it. To do this, we need to develop the capacity to better anticipate beneficiaries’ emerging needs. 

One way to improve how we anticipate these “end user” needs, according to Ramalingam, is to forge new networks and partnerships to achieve goals in a highly collaborative fashion. The absence of coordination and collaboration leads to duplication of efforts. He gave an example where the Government of Uganda banned international mobile health technology projects until they coordinated with one another. A rational approach to development had resulted in irrational implementation on the ground. This expert-driven, highly engineered, technology push and top-down approach resulted in limited local capacity. The government asked donors to stop work on mobile health projects to give them time and space to coordinate with one another.

In another example of designing solutions with the end user in mind is the Somali farmers who needed a way to keep track of their goats. They started by painting their phone numbers on the goats’ ears, but it turned out that thieves would just remove the ears. In response, farmers adapted by painting their numbers to the sides of the goats. Then the goats became a marketing channel for the farmers’ agricultural services in addition to a tracking system. Painting the sides of goats evolved beyond a system of identification to one of marketing -- a bottom up innovation to sustain income, foster livelihoods, and build social capital and trust. The key takeaway from this example is how the beneficiaries themselves led the process of positive change and adaptation specific to their context. They designed their own approach based on their own needs and resources.  

The Uganda mobile health and Somali goat examples show us that adaptive and traditional management are not an either/or proposition, but for why an organization should be flexible and still maintain elements of control. The traditional side isn’t going away and the adaptable side isn’t always enough. Innovation isn't just about creativity, but also about rigor. You need both to make change happen. 

The Way Forward

Ramalingam concluded his presentation with advice for how development organizations can move forward, chiefly by finding the positive deviants--people who are doing things in remarkable and new ways despite facing the same constraints as everyone else. “Find them through networks, support them through evidence, and enable them through leadership.”

He noted that development organizations in some cases do balance control and adaptation, but this balance is not distributed equally. The way forward looks like new ideas and innovations, workarounds, push backs, rule breaking, and new voices, Ramalingam said. We don’t need to “reject the machine,” but find new ways of intelligently resolving the tension between the machine and the entrepreneur. Rich social networks that encourage new ideas can help resolve this tension without negating the need for systems to support new approaches in a predictable and repeatable fashion. Ramalingam also suggested finding ways to ensure that the tensions don’t become dysfunctional and are tapped as a source of productivity, value, and impact. 

USAID has been experimenting with this approach to see where deviations are already happening while drawing out their lessons. Stay tuned for updates on these efforts!

“Success comes from striking a balance between tradition and innovation.”