Lessons I Learned

I loved this piece!  It is not only the part where Christopher London says “A building can’t teach.” when referencing donating school buildings that resonated with me, but his whole conclusion that product-driven development might sometimes be easier but less effective.

Sing it, Christopher!

(I wrote to his organization to get approval to re-post this here.  I’d love to read comments!)

Process-driven models of change work better

Every organization dedicated to social change believes it is providing a service in its community. Consequently, there are perhaps as many models of change as there are organizations. All these efforts can be placed loosely into two categories: “product-driven” models of change and “process-driven” models. We at Educate the Children, an Ithaca-based nonprofit that works to provide educational opportunities for women and children in Nepal, employ a process-driven model.

Now, what can be wrong with building a school? Well, nothing. But, what is a school? Is it the building? Or is it the administrators, teachers, parents, students and the relations between them all that make it a functioning educational environment? An excellent teacher can make do with the shade of a tree and a stick to draw in the dust, though a classroom with desks and a blackboard certainly can make the job easier. But a building? A building can’t teach.

There are excellent things that can come from product-driven programs, like well-stocked libraries or low-cost computers. These products can be useful, but without a social structure to support them, they easily become white elephants. The problem with product-driven models is that they are mechanical models: add Product Z and social change follows. If only life were so easy.

By contrast, a process-driven model strives to build the necessary social relations that make products useful and sustainable features of local social life. Rather than build school buildings, we work with the community and local government to plan and execute the refurbishing of existing structures. This is far more cost-effective than starting from scratch, but it also initiates a process of the community working with what they already have, instead of relying on outside agencies. This means we can use resources to train teachers, provide teaching supplies, establish kindergarten classes and provide in-kind scholarships for students who otherwise could not afford to attend school.

However, there is more to succeeding in school than better classrooms or just being able to show up. One of the most important tools for success is breakfast. Children who arrive in class with contented bellies have the energy to exert their minds and bodies and the capacity to relax and concentrate. In order to ensure that kids eat, we must work with their families. This means initiating a process of consciousness-raising through literacy and communal organization in addition to intensive follow-through on subjects as diverse as proper use and maintenance of toilets, child and pre-natal nutrition and improving the productive capacity of farmland for food security and income.

While a product-driven approach starts with a pre-determined solution, the process-driven approach starts with people, works with them to identify needs and then devises solutions. Ultimately, product-driven approaches sell solutions while process-driven approaches help make them happen. So, whatever organizations you support, ask them, “what is your model of change?” You will get many different answers. Just remember: the best models start with people, not products.

Christopher London is the executive director of Educate the Children.