Question 2: How to make the telecentre.org Foundation (TCF) more influential on behalf of telecentre movement?

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Nalwoga Sarah Mpagi on November 19, 2009 at 7:50am

Telecentre.org should build strong partnerships with national networks that strongly oversee the grassroots telecentres. And this should come up by building capacities and continuous trainings, ensuring there is connectivity in those telecentres and also helping the grassroots telecentres with modern computers that don't consume a lot of time for the users.

There should also be strong partnerships that encourage more women to come on board in the telecentre movement. With that tc.org should build partnerships with Governments, NGOs and the private sector that specifically deal in ICT for instance, mobile telephone companies, and making stronger and effective networks that emanate from the grassroots level. tc.org should use a bottom up model and a mix of top down to create a lot of influence in the telecentre movement.

Permalink Reply by Madeline B. Quiamco on November 19, 2009 at 10:07am

The influence an organization can wield depends on how it can actively contribute to the development of the sector or region. Telecentre.org can hook up with organzations addressing regional concerns. With its community-level reach, telecentre.org can efficiently communicate information and issues up and down different levels on concerns such as health, risk and disaster, education, etc.

For instance, journalism educators meeting in Manila recently found that to address their problems in upgrading faculty and getting hold of Asianized learning materials, they need a means to enable members to discuss issues, share information and educational materials on journalism, and enrich the teaching of the field in Asia. They are forming the Southeast Asia Journalism Educators' Network. Telecentre.org can work with them in curriculum development, research, and capacity building of journalism faculty in the new media.

Permalink Reply by Jimmy L. Calata on November 19, 2009 at 6:26pm

1. Initiate global action towards establishment of uniform country level awards systems.
2. Establish uniform regional-level and global-level awards systems.

http://telecentrecommunity.ning.com/forum/topics/international-awar...

Permalink Reply by Jimmy L. Calata on November 23, 2009 at 7:50pm

TCF to organize a body that will (a) conduct consultation with leaders of networks all over the world, and (b) craft the mechanics of the proposed uniform national-level, regional-level and global-level awards systems.

Permalink Reply by Jimmy L. Calata on November 19, 2009 at 10:53pm

TCF to affiliate with and be an active partner of relevant ICT4D networks and institutions.

Permalink Reply by Alain Berranger on November 20, 2009 at 4:43pm

I think Jimmy's suggestion is right on! As an elected Executive Committee Member of GKP, I can say that GKP is strongly interested in exploring such affiliations as you suggest. We have already informally and bilaterally agreed with GAID and WITFOR that we should explore... Time will tell if words will turn to action... ICT4D sector consolidation is a must today in the face of the relentless fractured knowledge situation for a few billion people and dwindling donors' interest for funding ICT4D... We must find other sustainable ways of keeping our work going! Knowledge is a public good that is abundant but expands only when it is shared! Networks like TCF, GKP, GAID, WITFOR, Development Gateway and many more would do well to collaborate rather than compete... Until we succeed we will continue to witness the haves and have-nots...

Permalink Reply by Madeline B. Quiamco on November 19, 2009 at 11:07pm

The influence an organization wields will depend on how involved it is in addressing the prime concerns of a sector or region. Telecentre.org can become influential in the Asian region by collaborating with other organizations working on major concerns such as education, risk and disaster management, and health. Its reach spans from community-wide to global; it can provide an efficient forum for discussing issues and doing collaborative interventions to address these concerns.

For instance, journalism educators that met in Manila under the auspices of UNESCO have resolved to do something about constraints to developing their journalism programs: need for faculty development opportunities and lack of learning materials with an Asian perspective. They have formed the Southeast Asia Journalism Educators' Network. Telecentre.org can collaborate with the group in learning materials development and access, research on the new media, and capacity building in ICT for journalism faculty, consequently impacting on the development of future journalists and the quality of journalism in the region.

Permalink Reply by Jimmy L. Calata on November 20, 2009 at 12:29am

TCF to organize and/or sponsor international telecentre knowledge sharing and ICT4D conferences, that will involve not only telecentre knowledge workers and support institutions, but also some other key players and stakeholders in the international ecosystem of telecentres.

Permalink Reply by Polly Gaster on November 20, 2009 at 8:37am

There seem to be two main lines of thought re increasing the influence of tc.org/TCF, roughly speaking: tightening links for joint work with governments and other national and international bodies, and working to strengthen a large and broad community-based telecentre movement and becoming more of a civil society voice of telecentres that would lobby and advocate on behalf of the communities and telecentres. These aren't necessarily incompatible, but it might be helpful to clarify a bit what we mean.

After all, increasing the influence of TCF isn't a goal in itself, only a tool for furthering its real basic vision and goals, which will define the messages it needs to communicate.

So that's my question - what does TCF want to do with its influence? Strengthen the worldwide, regional and national telecentre movement in order to... make it bigger/get benefits for it/raise funds/share knowledge/etc. Then, according to the manuals (though I'm sure Alain knows much more about this than I do) we can figure out who, how and where to influence for what and in which proportion and priority.

Referring to earlier discussion on this influence issue, I think TCF should not try to be all things to all people but should concentrate on being the leading voice of the telecentre (and other community ICTs) movement, ie a reference point for information and knowledge about telecentres, a researcher and innovator of ideas, a central point of intercontinental exchange, a lobbyist on behalf of communities round the world and their needs - and thus governments and other organisations will come to understand that it has to be involved in their reflections and strategies for national and regional development for what it can contribute. This can be international, regional or national.

But at the same time, while I'm very well aware of the sustainability challenges, I think the movement must continue to be open and flexible, like the whole tradition of the Internet itself that we fight to defend, and not get tied down into too much bureaucracy and admin and excluding "non-members" and so on. If TCF chooses to go that road then it can, but will have to accept that in that case it will no longer be able to have the same aspirations of global leader of a movement.

I do think, whatever the decisions, that it wd be desirable to open up TCF's structures and deliberations to wider sharing than we had in tc.org 1.0, and that this would be an important way of making it more influential with partners, members, governments and potential allies.

Permalink Reply by Alain Berranger on November 20, 2009 at 4:33pm

I fully agree with the relevance of Polly's probing question: "what does TCF want to do with its influence?" Her own answer: "concentrate on being the leading voice of the telecentre (and other community ICTs) movement" is a compelling one! I share her conviction that inclusiveness - open and flexible as she puts it - is a dimension of sustainability. I believe the movement should be active globally, regionally and nationally. To be the leading voice for a movement is very ambitious but necessary: in a world of fractured knowledge, leadership integrity is required. (See Boston College's Sandra Waddock's excellent paper on this subject, entitled "Leadership Integrity in a Fractured Knowledge World" in Academy of Management "Learning & Education", Vol. 6, Number 4, December 2007, p.534-557. A further question then is the following: "does TCF possess the minimum required human, financial and knowledge resources to aspire to being or becoming the leading voice of the Telecentre movement?" I'm not qualified to answer that question, but hope that the devolution from IDRC's mother ship was timely and optimal for the movement and not only for IDRC. Time will tell!

Permalink Reply by Meddie Mayanja on November 23, 2009 at 3:33pm

Alain and Polly make very interesting comments. I would like to add...

Essentially these are noble aspirations. Yes, telecentre.org Foundation can be what you describe. Does it possess the necessary human, financial and knowledge resources .... Yes, telecentre.org Foundation should have all that and more.

Because, you are the telecentre.org Foundation. Everyone involved in the telecentre for development movement/community is part of this effort. I think we can ask then,

How do we make this collective resource count - how does the Foundation facilitate the sharing of these concrete resources, capacities and influences?

Permalink Reply by Alain Berranger on November 20, 2009 at 9:55pm

I fully agree with the relevance of Polly's probing question: "what does TCF want to do with its influence?" Her own answer: "concentrate on being the leading voice of the telecentre (and other community ICTs) movement" is a compelling one! I share her conviction that inclusiveness - open and flexible as she puts it - is a dimension of sustainability. I believe the movement should be active globally, regionally and nationally. To be the leading voice for a movement is very ambitious but necessary: in a world of fractured knowledge, leadership integrity is required. (See Boston College's Sandra Waddock's excellent paper on this subject, entitled "Leadership Integrity in a Fractured Knowledge World" in Academy of Management "Learning & Education", Vol. 6, Number 4, December 2007, p.534-557. A further question then is the following: "does TCF possess the minimum required human, financial and knowledge resources to aspire to being or becoming the leading voice of the Telecentre movement?" I'm not qualified to answer that question, but hope that the devolution from IDRC's mother ship was timely and optimal for the movement and not only for IDRC. Time will tell!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 8
• Next ›
• Page