ABCD-Training-of-Trainers-Tools-July-2013

the whole process breaks down, like an electric circuit that is broken. Some people know what is
happening and others do not. Some do not even get a chance to be involved.
You can deepen the definition by comparing a process to a river. A healthy river brings life and like a
healthy process should have a stable flow – not moving too fast (as it can flood and cause destruction on
the way), and not too slowly (as it can lose energy, dry up and become stagnant water). A process
moving too quickly can cause chaos and confusion even if deliverables are met; these are hidden costs
which are not always considered. A process moving too slowly may get boring and people might lose
interest as they cannot see any benefit. Maintaining a healthy flow of energy, information and
communication is key to process facilitation work.
A well designed process can provide a container and structure for asset based community development,
yet at the same time should allow enough flexibility and adaptability to shift and change where needed.
The art is to provide structure yet be adaptive at the same time. A good process will always yield a good
outcome. It is a matter of trusting the process and allowing each step to guide the next.
Activity 2: Process Review
Introduction
With an ABCD approach, there is no ‘expert’ but rather citizens (human assets) sharing the expertise
what they have. Paradigm shifting may require a lot of input from the facilitator due to the nature of the
content designed to expose and shift paradigms. This module is much more universal and can be done in
a very participatory manner with the facilitator giving minimal input. This activity relates directly with
the group’s understanding of processes and gives an opportunity for everyone to share in more detail
the work that they have been involved in. It also sometimes reveals interesting lessons and themes
about inside – out versus outside – in processes, confirming what has been learnt about previously.
Instructions
Divide the group into smaller working groups. The way you do this will depend on the nature of the
group: it can be by organization (if there are a number of people in the room representing the same
organization); by sector (e.g. those working with women, youth, HIV/AIDS etc.); by the area they are
coming from; or randomly. Ask each person to share experiences of development processes they have
been involved in. They could be good experiences or not so good experiences; it does not matter as
there is learning to be drawn out from both. The same is true whether it was community initiated, or
one initiated by an external agency.
Once stories have briefly been shared, the group must choose one person’s experience and list the steps
in the process from start to end. What happened first, what happened next etc. The steps should just be
named but not expanded on in too much detail. For example, one can say a community meeting was
called. It is not necessary to list where it was or who was there. Give the groups about 20 minutes for
the initial discussion and another 20 minutes to map out their chosen process. Each group will then have
a chance to present their processes in plenary.
After the presentations you can ask the group to draw out the major themes and lessons in light of what
has been touched on so far. You can also reflect on what is emerging for you. For example, often
processes that failed confirm the usefulness of the Ladder of Inference (see page) as people may have