Undp Water Knowledge Fair 2006

H2O KNOWLEDGE FAIR

15 – 17 November 2006

DRAFTFINAL REPORT

1. Introduction

The Bratislava Regional Centre and the Arab States SURF in Beirut decided to organize a water knowledge fair using advanced technology and the global accessibility to the internet introducing and promoting a new way to organize such an event.

The idea of a web-based knowledge fair, first ever such event organized by the UNDP, opened new perspectives and possibilities but this innovative approach also has tasked the organizers with setting new standards in all aspects of planning, organizing and executing this demanding idea.

One of the main objectives was rather than having participants go to the fair to have the fair come to them: in their offices, homes or anyplace where access to the internet is available. This brought together some 600 practitioners and enabled 1,706 others to visit the web site in the three days of the fair alone.

This eliminated traveling great distances, staying in hotels, sitting in conference rooms thus eliminating the costly airfare, accommodation and conference halls costs as well as having participants allocate time for travel and participation in the three-day fair. Additionally, the organizers calculated that thanks to the virtual character of the water knowledge fair, as nobody had to travel to the fair, emission of over 1,000 tons of carbon-dioxide into the atmosphere was avoided.

The fair used cutting edge methods of knowledge management and has set the stage for long-term collaboration of water professionals around the world to exchange good practices and establish new partnerships.

The fair not only featured a number of issues but has made them available long after it has closed its virtual doors for future references. All of the features remain at the web site for the members of the water community to download at any given time: Live discussions with experts on water issues, virtual booths documenting national and sub-regional water-related activities of various countries, comparisons of water governance issues in different regions, easy-to-access information relevant to the water community such as publications or contacts of experts, and opportunities to become better acquainted with water governance and water-related problems.

1. Content exhibited at the fair

In order to provide easy access to the content exhibited at the fair the organizers divided it in three main groups that enabled easy navigation for the users of the web site: (I) by country; (ii) by topic, and (iii) live discussions.

Altogether 18 countries were featured.[1]Each country had its own page which featured country information, the water-related facts for that country, information on UNDP water-related projects in the particular country, photographs, videos and other useful information. There was a section with twelve multi-country cases (cases that involved more than 1 country) located in twenty countries (some of which did not have a separate country page). The total overall budget for the fair amounted to 66 000 USD which includes contracts, multi-media production, travel and promotional materials.

Four main topics were made available for the participants of the fair: (i) Water for life: Access to water for consumption, household use and sanitation; (ii) Water Governance: Sustainable water governance on national level; (iii) Water for livelihoods, production and community development, and (iv) Cooperation in managing water as a transboundary resource. Each of the topics pages presented short downloadable video documentaries on various water projects implemented in one of the participating countries. Also “storified” exhibits with photographs were also featured for numerous projects in participating countries.The “Water for Life” topic for example featured Experiences from the regions of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Middle East and Northern Africa.

During the fair live on-line discussion were organized for every day of the fair, each attracting experts and others to participate and exchange experiences and knowledge on a specific topic.The first day the topic was Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in the Region – planning and capacities.On the second day members of the water community discussed The Human Development Report (HDR) 2006 - From Report to Action on the Ground.New Approaches forStakeholder Management in Transboundary (and National) Water Projects were discussed on the last day of the water knowledge fair.

In addition to this content the fair also offered information about the fair itself, the organizers, a list of professionals, a list of water resources, awards and a press corner. Additionally all experts and active practitioners were encouraged to take a short survey on the fair intended to provide the organizers with valuable information on how to organize such an event in the future.

1. Lessons learnt

1. The idea and the business case (conceptualizing objectives and defining the means to reach them)

The mandate was given based on the following needs: (i) need for alternative ways of knowledge sharing, (ii) and need for opening knowledge sharing beyond UNDP. The third element of the idea is to involve the Water community and to build on a new tool created for its collaborative purposes – the Waterwiki.But a major driver for this endeavor was the (top-down) whish to do “something virtual on knowledge management”.

Elaborating on the mandate and establishing a sound business case that includes needs, objectives and desired results, was hence facing some difficulties. There was no initial understanding and long time no consensus on what the main objectives of the project should be and how it should be implemented. Struggling with the clarification of the objectives resulted in a series of complications: (i) initial lack of client-driven objectives, (ii) late start of the project implementation; (iii) lack of precision in requirements for the final product; (iv) insufficient clarity as per what the target audience is, and (v) the ensuing difficulty in developing an appropriate communication strategy.

Lesson: It’s important to develop a clear and convincing business case in the first place shortly following the project mandate and before starting any brainstorming or activities towards the content or design of a knowledge fair!

1. Sequencing and timing

A better sequencing would have provided for possible and tolerable delays. For example: Lots of time was used for brainstorming about the project idea (business case); software should have been developed first, which would have allowed a better focus on the content uploading afterwards (see also below);testing and final editing should start at least some weeks before the beginning of the fair.

The actual project implementation started late - 6 months before the event.

Time constraints were at the origin of problems with subcontractors, choice of inappropriate procurement procedure (price-based than quality-based).

Lesson: A proper sequencing of project steps with a clear time plan including tolerances for adjustments is essential for such a project – especially given the degree of novelty / innovation.

1. Definition of responsibilities

Initially the project was supposed to be managed by a short-term consultant – a fully dedicated project manager who will put together and coordinate all facets of the project, with the project support function staying in house due to UNDP specific procedures. The selected project manager was hired but withdrew unexpectedly from the project for personal reasons as of June. A decision was made to keep project coordination and management in house since this was the only possible option at this point in time. These functions were located in and assumed by Bratislava.

Lessons:

- When project management of such innovative undertakings is kept in-house, there should be at least two persons fully dedicated to the event who will ensure the project management and the project support sides.

- A task force should be established (at a later stage of the process) with clear responsibilities assigned to each individual task manager,

- it should be considered to assign (or hire esternally) one person as full-time project manager .

1. Outsourcing and procurement

The project required a number of sub-contractors. There were instances when sub-contractors were not delivering at a satisfactory level while the outcome of the project depended on the successful collaboration and quality of outsourced services. Reasons for tensions and unpredictability of the quality of outputs provided by contractors varied – from choosing inappropriate procurement procedure to insufficiently specific terms of reference.

Lessons:

- Sufficient time needs to be allocated for planning and clear definition of requirements and tasks in the TOR for sub-contractors.

- In terms of UNDP procurement procedures – Request for Proposals (RFP) is a better choice than Request for Quotations (RFQ); particularly for the creative parts (web-design/solution). The latter relies on the offered price as the only criterion for selection (lowest price winner) whereas the former requires a set of quality criteria to be elaborated prior to the launch of the bid. Consequently, applicants should prepare much longer and more sophisticated proposals as well as technical documentations (foresee enough time for that too!).

4.1 Website development

Major difficulties encountered with this particular sub-contractor in terms of timely delivery, quality and overall communication. At the same time, even though this was an innovative undertaking and therefore nobody knew exactly what product to require, requirements and suggestions should be consolidated before meetings with the sub-contractors and decisions from the meetings should be documented (for better follow-up and in case of disputes). Limited capacity of the supplier and time constraints sometimes resulted in the use of inappropriate solutions (video files presentation, collection of analytical data, etc.).

Lessons:

(i)Design of the web-platform is of utmost importance. It should be luring, interesting and surprising. Web-fairs are one-time event with limited duration. Therefore they should be very interactive, teasing while also easy to access and use (e.g. real chat, live presentations/panel discussions, video streams, possibility to see who else is in the "room", etc.).

(ii)It is desirable for the software to be reusable for other online events;

(iii)Connectivity issues are important, should be thought of and appropriately resolved before the launch of the event. Web content should be adapted to the low speed of access in many countries in order to reduce the risk of losing customers and visitors;

(iv)Server's ability to work efficiently under heavy load was not sufficient, especially for country in the Arab States region. In the future, it will be worth using the worldwide content caching facility as in use for HDR.

(v)Two-phased approach: It’s important to time the development of the site (and include this in the TOR and budget of the sub-contract of the web-developer) in such a manner as to have ample time for proper testing, and the flexibility to adjust or even re-do parts of the site BEFORE the content is uploaded/entered.

1. Responsibilitiesand information flows, reporting and monitoring

Information sharing was good. The process was very (too?) democratic and consultative where each member of the task force (independently of his/her area of expertise) was involved in the decision-making. A mailing list was created. This contributed to a stronger ownership feeling and commitment. However, this transparency and inclusion had a downside in terms of efficiency. Meetings were long and decision-making process difficult. It would probably make sense to set up meetings with a limited number of persons (task managers) who are informed but also report on their respective responsibilities. In this case, meetings should be well documented. More regular and documented updates are anyway needed to avoid repetition and to keep everyone at the same page, especially while working with remote partners (i.e. RBAS SURF).

Lessons:

- Create a mailing list and always include all members when exchanging information

- when sub-groups or bilateral communication is more adequate (to solve or decide on a sub-task), mail out regular summaries or updates to the entire mailing-list

- Document and distribute decisions, and observe & monitor deadlines for doing so

1. Collaboration between Bratislava Regional Centre (BRC) and RBAS SURF

Collaboration was successful even though at one point “endangered” by force majorcircumstances (war in Lebanon, RBAS team dislocated in different countries). Both sides were committed to work together virtually and to carry out the project as planned. However, remote collaboration makes it difficult to ensure equal participation in the decision making process of all parties. BRC ensured the overall project management and coordination which left at times RBAS Beirut without up-to-date information even though there were attempts for regular updates between Bratislava and Beirut either by phone or via e-mail.

Lessons:

- hwne more than one office (physical location) are involved, it’s probably advisable to assign overall coordination responsibility to one of them

- properly plan task and work load distribution

- exchange information in a regular and regulated manner (see also above)

1. Relationship with country offices and content management

Contact with COs worked well. However, there were significant delays in providing materials (by COs) which resulted in delayed content upload. Even though delays should be accounted for in the project plan, deadlines for content submission should be stricter. Providing information and confirming ready materials should be finalized a week before the launch. The final version of the web-page should be ready at least a week before the launch of the fair. It could make sense to include programme associates at the CO level because workload of programme officers hindered their active participation in the preparation as well as in live discussions. From technical point of view, the complexity of the upload procedure was an important disadvantage.

Lessons:

- In principle, most CO colleagues are willing to contribute to such endeavors; but most of them will need significant moral support and motivation to deliver their share. Regular reminders (also calling them up besides e-mailing) seem necessary

- It seems beneficial from a moral point of view to involve CO colleagues from the beginning, and to arrange the contributing in such a manner as for all to see the progrees of the others (“peer-pressure”)

1. Community of Practice mobilization, internal communication and media coverage.

The paradox of this water fair was a good outside participation but lack of participation from within UNDP. COs were actively participating in the preparation phase but much less actively during the fair.

Organizing any event is a demanding task that calls for a team of organizers to closely cooperate and coordinate their efforts in planning, preparing, promoting and finally executing the event. The Water Knowledge Fair being first virtual ever added more value and burden to these tasks to the organizing team. The fact that water fair organizers come from Bratislava Regional Centre and the Arab States SURF in Beirut called for a carefully planned internal and external communication strategy to be an imperative.

Key players in internal/external communication were identified and were accordingly tacked with handling specific organizational issues – web page design and its outlook, experts and practitioners that were to be invited to participate, press issues etc.

The team decided to divide the tasks regionally with Bratislava charged with Eastern European points and Beirut tasked with the Arab States issues to avoid overlaps and tighten the information flow. Once a decision on a topic was reached regionally the two bureaus would discuss the final decision i.e. the Bratislava team upon reaching a decision on how a specific Eastern European country will be presented in the “By Country,” section of the web page, or what would be the form for video documentary presenting a country, senior executives from both times would confirm the final version.

Distance being an issue all major organizational issues had to be coordinated via telephone and e-mail. Conference calls were organized on numerous occasions to fine tune the organizational issues. This has proven to be a useful and time saving tool that eliminated travel and/or one-on-one conversations.

An e-mailing list was created for the water fair organizing task force to enable all members to be up to date before and during the fair, as well as of the impact of the fair. This has proven to be a success as all obstacles in the preparation phase have been tackled as a joint effort of the team.

However, the extended number of organizers informed and asked for the opinion on issues not tightly related to their expertise sometimes prolonged reaching the final decision. This was especially notable when web page design was concerned, with individuals that should not have a say promoting their ideas on the visual outlook of a specific aspect of the page.