In your work, when do you get to know if your intervention or field implementation is successful or not? Is it after implementation is over or is it when implementation is ongoing?
I co-created the Responsive Feedback approach out of a deep dissatisfaction with traditional intervention designs, where you have to wait until the end of an intervention to learn if you have been successful or not.
We cannot wait. Lives are at stake. Resources are at stake.
This is why I’d like to tell you the story of how Responsive Feedback was created in the first place.
The “heart and soul” of Responsive Feedback is about continuous learning so we can better improve the lives of people and communities we serve. Hear me explain.
If we keep learning, we keep improving.
Responsive feedback is an integrated framework that incorporates elements of feedback, continuous learning and engagement, premised on using foresight and learning to iterate programs for better results.
Responsive Feedback has five key elements:
- Requires diverse stakeholders to work together;
- Interrogates a program’s Theory of Change and makes assumptions explicit;
- Prioritizes information gaps where a program would benefit from data and course-correction;
- Seeks evidence to fill information gaps, using learning questions;
- Advocates Pause & Reflect sessions to evolve a program based on evidence.
I have also invited Emeka to share with you what he thinks is the most valuable part of responsive feedback. You may be surprised to hear what he has to say.
Think about how you are currently doing your daily work. Do you already use some form of Responsive Feedback without actually calling it so? I would love to hear about your experience in the comments below.
- If your work already has some form of continuous learning and improvement, tell us how you do it and what difference (if any) it has made.
- If you do not think you have used any form of Responsive Feedback, share with us what barriers are preventing you from doing so.