A complex voter education programme requires considerable planning. And once the plan has been developed, the number of different components that are necessary for success have to be aligned and realigned on a regular basis. The reason for discussing these two matters together is because of the close relationship between participation in planning and willingness to contribute fully to a programme and to align oneself and the resources at one's disposal to the direction of the programme.
It is possible to prepare a plan, and then execute it through a series of commands and contracts when those preparing it are able to plan in minute detail and have thought of all eventualities; when they have both the power and influence of position, knowledge, and money, and; when it is possible to control training and implementation activities on a macro and micro scale. Perhaps armies can do this. The majority of educators cannot.
Rather they must seek the collaboration and cooperation of others, both in making information available and in making adaptations to the programme in the light of changing local circumstances. With time at a premium, programme elements often have to be developed 'on the fly'. And when the voter education programme is spread over a wide front, and communication is not possible on a reliable and routine basis, educators have to rely on the quality of their staff and their materials to ensure that the programme continues.
Planning
Planning can be considered to have two components; the development of a strategic plan, or logical framework, and the establishment of working schedules, outlines, and other details. In a national education programme, with the importance of overall commitment and participation by a range of stakeholders and potential partners, strategic planning needs to precede operational and short-term planning. Whether educators describe this activity in strategic terms, talking of vision or mission, strategic objectives, and assessment of resources, opportunities, threats, strengths and weaknesses or in terms of a logical framework of purposes, objectives, results, tasks, indicators, and assumptions (see Preparation), it is appropriate to ensure that the broadest possible selection of people are involved in the policy areas. Detailed planning can then be delegated to specialists, rather than having a small number of people consider the policy and then expect educational partners to 'fill in the dots.'
Alignment and ownership require an understanding of and commitment to the big picture. This is best done by convening planning workshops with a range of people, including representatives of all organisations that are expected to contribute to the voter education programme. A planning workshop should be preceded by consultations with partner organisations to establish commitment. Then, by the time the group meets, the groundwork has been laid and they are ready to proceed. The workshop itself should be facilitated by those skilled in educational design. Enough time should be allotted to make sure that those attending conclude their agreements on the overall policy.
In other words, there should be agreement on:
- the context within which the voter education programme is to be conducted,
- the overall purpose of the voter education programme (which should be in an agreed form of words),
- key objectives (again, these should be written down),
- the roles of the various people present,
- commitment to future tasks,
- consideration of a planning deadline,
- the general paradigm within which the programme intends to operate.
At this point, the convening team can develop a planning document that outlines these policy issues and then enables various people to consider the operational details programme. The establishment of a set of key objectives will normally enable detailed planning to be delegated to a range of different individuals and organisations. Those individuals and organizations can then turn their attention to such details as operational budgets; training, deployment, and broadcasting schedules; printing and packaging specifications, and; production, delivery, and distribution plans to name a few. It will be necessary to appoint an individual or organisation to continue to coordinate the planning activity. This, in turn, will create the necessity for establishing what the partners may understand by coordination.
Before moving on to the issue of coordination, it bears mentioning that such workshops should not be confused with conferences, where information might be given to participants and where their participation in the voter education programme might be canvassed. Such events may be considered educational and they may even identify potential partners in the programme. But if the plan is presented in the closing session as a product of such a conference when, in fact, it has been developed only by a small appointed committee or by those organizations convening the conference, then it is not going to reduce the future need for more significant planning or consultation. Ultimately, such events have to be followed by so many additional meetings and communications, to ensure commitment and overcome misunderstanding and resistance, that they are actually much more expensive than might have been thought when the decision to get people together was originally made.
Coordination
Individuals and organisations operating within a public interest paradigm, where there is fierce and justifiable commitment to independence and autonomy; and where there may be equally fierce commitment to participation and equality, tend to be suspicious of management and control. Since it is essential that organisations do have management systems, there has been a tendency to find a range of soft words to describe these. One of these words is 'coordination'. There are too many who take on the job of coordination when they really intend to lead and control. Yet the word has a service component, and it is necessary, even in a collegial arrangement, to establish ways in which partners' activities can be aligned to one another.
For this reason, there is often suspicion of the word which prompts the regular invention of new terms and structures. Some of these may be 'convenors,' 'secretariats,' 'steering committees,' 'engine rooms,' 'task forces,' and 'service units.' The human capacity for invention is enormous. But the human capacity for seizing or assuming power seems equally enormous.
And it is this problem that needs to be addressed when considering coordination efforts rather arguing over terminology.
In order to ensure that the coordinators do that, rather than take over a programme, there should be regular meetings of the partners, an insistence on good written records and minutes of meetings, a clear understanding of accountability, a policy on who acts as spokesperson for the programme, and training of all coordinating staff. Much of the confusion comes from
ill-prepared staff unable to complete the tasks set for them by the programme.
Alignment
Once planning has been conducted in a collaborative way, and coordination of that plan has been established, it remains for the team leading the programme to consider ways in which a range of resources can be aligned in support of the objectives of the programme.
For the most part, such alignment requires regular articulation of the vision of the programme and an openness to the participation of a range of individuals and organisations whether or not their ideological or historical antecedents are politically correct. National educational programmes are attempting to ensure that a wide range of individuals and groups accept and
work towards a common goal, and that goal should be articulated and defended.
The programme team may, if the programme has a long term existence, regularly assess their achievements and the position of the programme in relation to the goals. And as a result of that, they may require changes in what they communicate to those they want to associate with and contribute to the programme. But, wherever they are in the programme, they will want to ensure that there are regular opportunities to speak to organisations and convey their vision through the press, that a newsletter or web page is established that consistently encourages people to contribute to the set goals, and that they have regular staff development and training opportunities at which they can assess the programme and re-establish commitment to it.
Such social activities build consensus and ownership if they are conducted as forums for people to listen to one another and confirm they understand and can believe in the programme and its goals. There is a danger that such alignment activities encourage blind faith. There have been occasions when programmes have become 'sacred cows' in which the social relations between partners have become more important than the programme outcomes. For this reason, independent assessment and honesty on the part of the educations or leadership team are both essential.
