PME (3)

This third presentation on PME highlights the importance of this

type of process in attaining certain of the objectives targeted

by aid to development and humanitarian action.

Version 1 - April 2003

As with all tools, they can be used in different ways :

- somewhat mechanically when the feeling is that have been imposed;

- by incorporating them into a quality approach because the user has understood the objectives they help to attain and has the resources required for exploiting them appropriately in relation to these needs.

PME offers a range of project management tools.

Apart from satisfying Apart from satisfying management requirements, management requirements, why else is PME such a why else is PME such a fundamental process?fundamental process?

For giving account, For improving the quality of our

interventions, For learning from experience, For giving more power to our

partners.

Accountability is an increasingly important requirement in the field of aid to development and humanitarian action.

Account… to whom ? To partners, beneficiaries, funding bodies, donors …

This supposes that we know where we are at and why, and also that we know where we are headed … in other words, that we are part of a PME process.

For giving For giving account …account …

To improve the quality To improve the quality of our interventions…of our interventions…

The quality of our actions partly depends on anticipating and mobilising resources at the right time (human, partner, material…).

This quality should be measured against different criteria both in the monitoring and evaluation stages. Indeed, only by measuring in this way can we know where we are at and make choices that guarantee - as far as possible - the pre-defined quality of an intervention.

For learning from our For learning from our experience …experience …

Learning from experience and sharing the knowledge acquired supposes being able to recount the history of an intervention : present the context, detail the choices that were made, the reasons behind them, their impact …

A PME system not only makes for better project management, but is also an important part of its institutional memory.

For giving more power For giving more power to our partners.to our partners.

Collectively building a PME system should enable the parties involved to identify the information they consider to be essential to the running of the project.

Thus the project is no longer managed solely from the project manager ’s point of view, but according to pre-defined information that is collected and shared by and between the parties involved.

Formalising a PME system may enable partners to become involved in the management of the project. It remains to be seen, on a case by case basis, whether this is desirable and/or feasible.

To sum up,To sum up,The PME is not just about methods or tools … even though these tools are important.

A PME system also depends on an organisation ’s political project and ethics.

What are the organisation ’s interests? What resources does it have? What are the values it defends? What place does it reserve for the other? …

The PME may not answer these questions, but it does at least ensure that they are raised.

So, what were we saying So, what were we saying ……

A project/ a programme

A mandate Ethics

In a given country and with stakeholders who each have their own vision of the world

A planning/ monitoring/

evaluation system

stakeholders,

objectives,

approach/ tools…

of the PME system.

Tools are important, but must not get out of proportion. They can not replace real political reflection.

Or, in other words and in a bit more detail …

The [PME] system should provide mediation between the following contradictory factors * :

- being congruent with the culture of the organisation whilst at the same time being a possible catalyst for transforming this culture;

- being a means of legitimising the actions of stakeholders whilst at the same time being a means for discussing and analysing their relevance;

-developing zones of autonomous action whilst at the same time obtaining greater control of the action system;

- encouraging self-criticism and confrontation between different points of view, without creating conflicts that may prevent the system from functioning.

*extrapolation de la réflexion que développent Vincent de Gaulejac, Michel Bonetti and Jean Fraisse on evaluation(p175)

Bibliography

Vincent de Gaulejac, Michel Bonetti, Jean Fraisse, 1995, L’ingénierie sociale [Social engineering],Ed. Syros, Coll. Alternatives sociales, 214p.

END

For further information : For further information :

contact the Methodology TC Unit : pvilleval@handicap-international.orgcontact the Methodology TC Unit : pvilleval@handicap-international.org