Monday, 27 February 2023
Thursday, 4 August 2022
Tuesday, 7 June 2022
Some thoughts on research, data analysis and evidence based decision making
Data in evidence-based decision-making is often used to measure performance, structure incentives, and allocate resources while informing public courses of action. Setting up an anti-corruption agency (i.e., allocation of resources and course of action) with the hope of deterring high-end corruption (structure incentives) because corruption is too rampant (performance) is one such example. Determining the course of action and allocation of resources is often political. On the other hand, the process of measuring performance, while political, is often hierarchical as the data is generated by international agencies, bureaus of statistics, and researchers. Even when the research process is done in consultation with community members, the ultimate interpretation and presentation of the analysis are often from the researchers’ cultural nuances, definitions, biases, or vested interests.
Bribery, for example, is the primary consideration when designing the bribery index and, in turn, is a primary determinant of the corruption rankings among countries in the world. In cultural contexts where it is informally acceptable to give money or gifts for a public service rendered, as a way of expressing gratitude, bribery as a measure of corruption becomes very problematic. It means that, as long as corruption is measured using the bribery index, some countries will never exonerate themselves from being the most corrupt countries in the world because their way of life integrates “transfer of value in the context of an official action.”
Selecting an indicator or a set of indicators to measure performance also means that many factors that perhaps make more sense to a community or tell the whole story as experienced by community members are also left out. Corruption seen through the prism of bribery or another definition like nepotistic appointments to public positions may not be a significant or a relevant measure of corruption in a communal culture like the Somalis in my country who select leaders based on clans. However, personal experiences of denial of essential services like access to health facilities or misuse of resources that cause harm to community members while unfairly enriching others may be a more relevant, tangible, and relatable definition of corruption to them. Therefore, in measuring corruption, the latter indicators should matter more than the former indicators to validate these lived experiences and contexts, whether I agree with them or not from a research point of view.
It is therefore important to remind ourselves that data is never neutral. Data can create illusions of rationality, yet beneath it, mask underlying fundamental differences of interpretation, purpose, and power among the various stakeholders situated on both sides of the spectrum, such as researchers (with an academic outlook) and communities (with lived experiences). Scarcity of resources is at the root cause of relying on other people’s data, hence depending on their interpretation of what is or is not important. This means that the real experts – those with lived experiences and whose perspectives should matter most in giving meaning to the data or indicators to measures performance are often ignored.
As a researcher, I must be committed to presenting the community’s outlook with honesty and respect. Taking human-centered approaches to data and research that: truly regards multiple community definitions and perspective; that seeks to have a collaborative as opposed to an extractive data relationships; that considers lived experiences as equally important as academic perspectives; that is empathetic to community welfare above researcher interests, and; that promotes social trust and community realities, must be embedded within research and data analysis if it is to lead to mutually benefiting and just evidence-based decision-making processes.
Wednesday, 30 March 2022
Wednesday, 16 February 2022
Wednesday, 26 January 2022
Wednesday, 31 March 2021
Freedom in foresight – the reason why children make the best futurists!
I am in the business of futuring, and I am glad that in my part of the world, it is catching on and with a lot of excitement. One of the greatest difficulties I have encountered as I facilitate these processes is what it entails for people or organizations to fully utilize the available intelligence - especially the non-mainstream, seemingly obscure gut feeling or ostensibly disparate information – to effectively increase insights.
The inability to do so is orchestrated by the fact that all human beings have a particular worldview they use to filter things, including information. The tendency is to reject whatever is not congruent with those filters. These relatively narrow mental constructs are based on past and the conventional lenses they use to view the world. However, one other crucial reason is that they come to these processes with self-serving biases that incline them to gather and process information to advance their perceived self-interest or support their pre-existing views. To be politically correct, they seldom voice all their standpoints, cynicisms, fears, or assumptions, without which the process short-circuits the creation of robust futures that enable strategic decision making.
To guard against these blind spots, it is imperative to consider:
- Joining these processes from a place of complete honesty, awareness, reflection, and the openness to learn just like children view the world with wide-open eyes and a sense of wonder and curiosity
- More honest analyses of the data we collect, including the emerging weak signals we often dismiss to re-conceptualize our ideas and get multiple views, just like children are open to having more than 'the right answer' to a question
- The effective use of human intelligence tacked away in gut feelings just like children bluntly say what they think, however illogical
- Inviting those people we rarely interact with, the ones who are not like us – the authentic dissenters or devils advocates - with the intention to value those outside views just like children are un-inhibited and open to playing with everyone
- Highly abstracting sensitive situations and role-playing them to literary 'put oneself in another's shoes' and increasing empathy while creating a much more open interaction, just as children often experiment with anything in their context to imagine different fantasies, aka possibilities!
Friday, 20 November 2020
Mentorship matters
I will never forget how terrified I was when I was about to graduate from campus. I wondered what it was that I could offer the world and get paid, never mind that I had picked out my undergrad course on a picky ponky basis because there was no career guidance. The fright of having to face the uncertainty of my future without help was so bad that I had to get treated for ulcers.
After graduation, I was fortunate to get a three-month internship position in one of Kenya's leading thinktanks, and where I eventually got to work for the next eleven years. The whole office had insanely intelligent people. Half the time, I wondered what they were going on about, primarily because they dealt with a subject that was entirely out of my depth - Economics. I had also come from a seriously flawed education system – one where I could ace it in class but one that rendered me dysfunctional when I stepped out to apply that knowledge in the workplace. I was inadequate in many ways, but my work environment provided the space to grow. The tonnes of literature I had to read through, the debates I listened to, the many places I visited, the people I interacted with, but most importantly, my colleagues who graciously handheld me out of my 'not knowing' without judgment – all gave me an opportunity to learn, unlearn and re-learn. Because of that, which was extended to me, I am a firm believer in providing that space for others.
As fate would have it, I came into contact with what would eventually become my life's calling – foresight. The organization had just completed a project on Kenya's possible futures in the coming decade, and I was in charge of the countrywide dissemination process in 300+ workshops. Traversing the country and facilitating community dialogues helped me understand my history and get in touch with my heritage. It also knocked out a lot of assumptions I had previously made during my sheltered school life. I got to experience the strategic power of foresight firsthand when three of the four extrapolations panned out in seven years - even if the project's intention was not to predict the future. The fact that we had an opportunity to proactively design policy decisions beforehand was revolutionary. From this experience, foresight became that thing that had to be transmitted to others – especially in a continent that needs to get its act together on many levels, operates largely from two-dimensional time perspectives, and has the fewest number of futurists.
Through LongView Futures Foundation, we are now running Africa foresight Lab, which fosters foresight literacy among young Africans. The 10-week action learning training program is offered three times a year. It is designed to accommodate a maximum of 30 young people from 30 countries, learning for three hours every week for three months to understand the basics of futures thinking. This first cohort is very special because we have designed foresight projects together in the past. They came on board to deepen their knowledge on the subject and help test the tools and methodologies, and ensure that they are fit for purpose in the African context. The team comprises 17 individuals from 12 countries – who are now on week 7 of learning. They are in the process of designing futures perspectives on the areas that are of most concern to them. We hope to share the outcome of that process at a later stage. We hope that they will use the knowledge gathered to transform their spheres of influence because collectively, we will influence Africa's futures one cohort at a time.
Dr. Katindi Sivi
Friday, 13 November 2020
Time for organizations to hit the reset button: Using scenarios to stress test your strategic plans
A lot of organizations have been trying to pick up from where they left off before the COVID-19 lockdown. This means most of them want to continue with business as usual with the hope that the effects of COVID-19 are a passing cloud and that somehow, things will get better. Most do not fully acknowledge that something has fundamentally shifted. Whatever is going on has lasting future implications on how organizations are structured, how they deliver goods and services, as well as their relationships with their employees, customers, and other organizations or sectors in general. The reason why it is vital to revisit your strategic plan is that it is based on certain assumptions about the future, and these assumptions need to be reconsidered with the hindsight of the new realities.
The banking and the insurance sectors have been forerunners in coming up with a process of creating buffers that prevent their systems from collapsing if there are extreme shocks that adversely affect their operations like financial crushes. Through robust risk analyses, they can plan for uncertainties brought about by complex conditions. From the point of view of long-term resilience and sustainability, organizations also need to guard against the adversities of unforeseen circumstances in the future. Stress testing is deployed by futurists to explore the impacts organizations would face or the stresses the systems in the organizations would go through if certain scenarios were to occur. The idea is to test the fortitude of the strategic plan and, if necessary, to develop organizational work plans or amend the strategic plan so that it becomes more robust and/or flexible to future uncertainties and more inclusive of the emerging concerns.
In a stress testing process, we choose relevant and viable sets of scenarios and conduct a SWOT analysis of the strategic plan's performance in each scenario. This process brings out how various components of the plan (like the strategic goals or program strategies) would perform under various circumstances or eventualities while surfacing the trends with the highest future impact on the organization. These issues are then mapped out in what we call a heat map – which is a color-coded matrix that indicates the performance of the different components of the plan against the various stress factors identified in each scenario. The color code also shows the impact of the stress on the organization or on the organizational system. Abysmal performance means a very high impact of the stress and that the particular components of the plan are not viable or feasible in the future hence a red color code; marginal performance means the medium impact of the stress and that the components of the plan are somehow viable or feasible, but they need strategic enhancement hence an orange color code; while good performance means that there is no negative impact of the stress and that the components of the plan are feasible or viable hence a green color code. Apart from the color-coding aspect in the heat map, the reason why an impact and the performance of the plan's component warrants a particular color code should be indicated as it helps surface the assumptions made and enhances participants' clarity on the issues.
At the analysis stage, organizational members have an opportunity to zoom in on the problem areas with the highest potential impact on the organization and identify strategic interventions that would help them to be more prepared and agile in their responses. The heat map also shows certain patterns e.g., strengths in the program side of things and weaknesses in the institutional side of things – and such patterns clearly show the areas that need more work. Ultimately, a stress test should generate both internal interventions that strengthen the institutions' response to external eventualities but also it can help identify external strategies such as lobbying for certain laws or collaborating with certain partners to proactively work towards creating futures that help avert the scenarios that would cause the highest levels of impact on their organizations.
LongView Consult was privileged in October 2020 to work with a global organization - Publish What You Pay - on such a project, and this is what the client said about the process.
"You have taken us on our first journey of futures thinking at PWYP, and I hope this is the beginning of a new approach in our work. I also wanted to say that I have received really good feedback….."
Elisa Peter, Executive director
Publish What You Pay
Dr. Katindi Sivi
Afri-Futurist, founder and Lead consultant @ LongView Consult
Tuesday, 11 August 2020
How foresight can help persistent public policy failures
I was invited last week to speak about effective inclusion – a subject that many have worked on for long with mixed results - and I felt it is essential to write a short article on why futures is imperative in fostering participation and inclusion in the public policymaking process. Policymaking is the mechanism through which the government identifies a public problem and puts a framework to address it. It is assumed that once the policy is implemented, the quality of life of the citizen will improve – mainly through laws and regulations that facilitate addressing the issue or through funding towards the achievement of the goals intended by the policy. Traditional policymaking is linear and includes identifying the problem & framing it, policy formulation, policy adoption, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. The process, in my view, is counterproductive at many levels, hence the need to infuse futures thinking. This is why.
At the identification of the problem & framing stage, the challenges are often identified from incidences that have occurred. There is usually little analysis of the root causes of the problems or their function within the whole system. Interestingly is also the fact that policy development is made to address the current problem in the future, but seldom is there any thinking that goes into how the issue will evolve in the future. The lack of analysis at this systemic and futures level makes people have single-sided definitions of the problem instead of the holistic view in which issues could be looked at – making it essential to ask, whose definition is adopted when a policy is crafted? On many occasions, the official policy then ends up being biased and mainstreaming stereotypes that keep policymakers locked inside obsolete assumptions that continue to surface long after the policy is done.
The policy formulation stage entails designing an approach to solving the problem. While lobbyists might be successful in getting progressive suggestions to politicians, the threat of political interpretation and the vicious fight by conservative forces to maintain the status quo gets in the way of what should be objectively done about the issue or how to address changing circumstances. It is also important to note that politicians are trying to resolve a problem they may not personally experience while living in their ivory towers – so in essence, they are not the wearers of the shoe. That is why policy proposals are sometimes so abstract and thus impractical. At the adoption level, it is usually the same politicians, with many vested interests and selfish ends, deciding the legitimacy of the policy. It is a no brainer that the public good is most times sacrificed for short-term expediency. There are incidences where good policies make it to the implementation stage, but the bureaucratic nature of government institutions makes execution slow or obstructed by lack of funds, misappropriation of resources, ethnicization, elite & other captures, among many other challenges. Monitoring and evaluation to check if the policy was successful in resolving the issue is rarely done. Even when we manage to tick the boxes, it is the executor of the service that checks themselves, which makes it hard to be objective.
So how might foresight help?
Policy challenges are much more complex and must be treated as such. Comprehensive research (without political manipulation of data) into the state of affairs, which considers past and present systemic evolutions, can establish the facts impartially. Honest multi-stakeholder views with very diverse groups (not those stage-managed political gimmicks) to ensure honest feedback on the issue, correct biases, and to understand intersectional impacts are crucial to foster empathy, inclusion, buy-in, collaboration, as well as to generate trust. Both the quantitative and qualitative data are necessary to complement each other and, in a sense, complete the analysis loop.
Due to the volatile, uncertain, rapidly changing, and ambiguous context within which the policy issues to be addressed occur, it is imperative to understand the possible future evolutions. This is where a combination of futures methods like trends analysis, scenarios building, horizon scanning, etc. all play a part in simulating long term probable outcomes. This kind of analysis helps design strategic responses and anticipate behavioral incentives and tradeoffs required for successful intervention and creating the necessary changes. Policymakers even get the advantage of genuinely co-creating solutions with the affected populations and in realistic ways – which demolishes the traditional top-down approach to policymaking and appreciates the context-based location of those impacted by the issue.
Based on the two previous processes, policy adoption and legitimization is therefore predicated on the basis of genuinely making the most strategic decision in terms of cost-benefit analysis, public good, and authentic change or results. The collaborative nature of the process can enable the loosening of self-preserving tendencies among institutions because of the trust created with stakeholders. The government can be free to create an enabling environment where other actors step in to take their space. They can efficiently work together because of the elaborate process that fosters the creation of policy ownership and still keep each other accountable because of very clearly stipulated expectations. It is also possible to collect feedback to the most granular levels and from multiple angles because of the multiplicity of actors enabled to participate in the policy implementation process.
Of course, issues of time to do such a laborious process, the political will or mandate, as well as the culture clash between politicians, bureaucrats, and organizations or ordinary citizens, are often cited as reasons why this process is impossible. However, the benefits far outweigh the constant tragedy of the effects of bad policies, and an ineffective policymaking process.
Wednesday, 22 July 2020
Why we should consume forecasts with caution
Thursday, 9 July 2020
Building a shock-resistant planet in a world of such great difference
Monday, 15 June 2020
Resist the status quo bias
Saturday, 6 June 2020
How COVID-19 has destroyed the false narratives we tell ourselves
Friday, 22 May 2020
Thriving in Turbulence...How do we handle disruption?
My youngling (she is three) keeps saying, “when conona vinus ends, we shall do ….”. Like her, we say it loud or deep-down wish that we could miraculously snap out of whatever this is and get on with life as we knew it. It is hard to come to terms with the fact that there is a breaking of the norm because human nature dislikes change and the disruption of known patterns and routines we effectively control. However, whether we like it or not, life will never be the same again. The question is, how do we cope with the uncertainty of not knowing the full impact of COVID – 19 on our personal lives or in the future? How do we adjust to significant, life-altering changes we have no control over?
Dr. Katindi Sivi
Saturday, 30 November 2013
Set me free: The story of Ajem
Friday, 29 November 2013
Kenya: So Rich Yet So Poor, Is Turkana Selling Its Due?
see: http://allafrica.com/stories/201311290270.html
Imagine a place that is linked to the origin of humankind; is one of the world's leading archaeological sites and is now a World Heritage Site; has preserved wildlife fossils, which include the giant tortoise and the 20-foot long crocodile; is home to one of the smallest tribes on earth who still wear goat or fish skins and accessorize with fish bones or fish teeth; has the world's largest permanent desert lake which is also the world's largest alkaline lake; has an island with scenic crater lakes each harbouring its own kind of animal species like flamingos, crocodiles and tilapia; has sand dunes that measure over 40 feet high that are surrounded by palm trees; has a forest;is rich in wild life; has commercially viable oil deposits and a lot of water. Well, what do you think about this place? I think it is too good to be true. I think it should be one of the world's biggest attractions.
Unfortunately it is not. The people from this place, when compared to a Kenyan of average status (which is not that great), are two times poorer; fifteen times less likely to get a formal job; thirteen times less likely to earn more than seven thousand two hundred shillings (Ksh 7,200) per month; four times less likely to learn how to read and write; seventeen times less likely to have a primary education; sixty three times less likely to have a secondary education or above; three times less likely to have access to clean water; sixty three times less likely to have access to sanitary facilities; eighty two times less likely to live in a house with a cemented floor or a mabati roof; three hundred and thirty six times less likely to live in a house with stone/brick walls; thirty four times less likely to cook with cooking gas (LPG), bio fuels or electricity; and no chance on using electricity.
These are a lot of 'less likelies' for such a rich place but regrettably, these are the contradictions a person born in Kotaruk/Lobei in Loima Constituency, Turkana County, has to live with.
While on one hand the opportunities and resources in this county can be a blessing and thus the county has the potential to make incomparable sums of money to kick-start economic growth, eradicate poverty, raise literacy levels, improve health indicators, ensure food security, access to clean water and sanitation, create jobs to increase household incomes and purchasing power, enable the transfer of technology, improve infrastructure and encourage the flourishing of other related industries; on the other hand, these resources could be a curse.











