Dissemination and Implementation
Once policies have been forged it is essential to ensure these are
disseminated and implemented. Many academic research projects often risk
compromising their efficacy because of fundamental flaws in their dissemination
and implementation. Once a project has been underwritten a diagram for its
sequential implementation ought to be mapped out in the original proposal.
Dissemination and implementation are not two distinct features. A
policy paper may be disseminated but not implemented only if implementation is
resisted or dissemination is not efficiently delivered. Dissemination is simply
availing useful information about the proposed project to identified parties
through reliable ‘communication conveyors’ and should ideally make
implementation a natural corollary if these conditions are satisfactorily met.
A ‘targeted approach’ is essential to any successful dissemination
policy. It is crucial to base dissemination and implementation on ‘research
intelligence’ that identifies specific ‘deliverables’ and relevant ‘user
communities’. These can be broached through selective mediums and targeted
marketing. This information should be collated in the original proposal and
should include a business plan for its perusal.
Implementation ought to be based when possible on ‘consensus-building’
that creates a demand for the implementation based on relevance. ‘User
communities’ can be ascertained from ‘data based driven information’, like ‘metadata
registries’ or ‘web-based’ demand assessments or any other empirical raw
material warehouse that be mined. These are the essential features of any
successful proposal and subsequent dissemination or implementation policy.
All projects should incorporate a clearly defined ‘protocol’ that ensures
dissemination and implementation can be technically measured. Such a protocol
could be facilitated by ensuring the features related to dissemination and
implementation marketing are coherently defined in the original project’s
feasibility proposal. ‘End-user relevancy’ of any project determines demand
measurements facilitating a ‘targeted approach’.
In any knowledge-based research milieu it is crucial to ‘harmonize’
research protocols. These should be designed to ensure dissemination and
implementation can be assured prior to project approval. One important feature
of any project ought to be specifically designed ‘tracking-templates’ already defined
in the original project design that can progressively track dissemination and
implementation.
These tracking-templates ought to be aligned to project finance
whereby funding could be availed incrementally in relation to dissemination and
implementation tracking projections criteria being met. Project management of
concrete implementation could be tracked in relation to previously determined ‘user-relevance’
and ‘end-user feedback’.
This can be achieved by conjoining ‘foresight’ and ‘hind casting’
measurements within the ‘tracking-template’ funding matrix. Finance would be
exchanged in trounces against piecemeal delivery of tangible implementation indicators,
adhering to specific time-frames.
Should a project anticipate stakeholder ‘resistance’ to
implementation of the policy being delivered, these tracking-templates could where
possible incorporate an end-user ‘compliance requisite’ that could be
determined through foresight. Compliance could be assured through ‘incentive-induced’
implementation ‘responsibility sharing’ whereby previously identified end-users
would be burdened with compliance through compliance mechanisms specifically
designed to be in-built in the implementation policy that exclude or neutralize
resistance. These implementation procedures would use foresight to determine
anticipatory and sentient feedback resistance.
Compliance could be achieved by making implementation a necessary
condition for contingent or collateral benefits or even service-provisions the
end-user may demand from ancillary fonts the policy-maker may control as a jurisdiction
regulator. These measurements could be identified and gauged in the original
project research intelligence submissions and thus incorporated in the
tracking-template design. (e.g. VAT collection.)
Such a scenario of resistance would be envisaged when policy implementation
is resisted because of burdens that seemingly outweigh benefits to the end-user
or a lack of utility value in the deliverable. Policy dissemination in the case
of resistance would basically see a shift from disseminating and later implementing
the policy, to merely first disseminating the compliance requisites against communicating
sanctions and benefits that ensure implementation in the immediate future.
Where the policy promoter can only champion policy against
resistance without recourse to incentives or sanctions, implementation and
dissemination require further elaboration and an inversion of resource
deployment. Here the project requires consistent prior dissemination based on
knowledge gleaned from stockholders that includes content-calibration targeting
the utilitarian values of the proposed deliverables, professional status of
users and their facilitators, technical apparatus potential, production
environment, competitive skills, market requisites, memory institutions, and
the cultural configuration of the end users simultaneously, while promoting the
long-term benefits of the proposed policy implementation. Here the targeted dissemination
approach could rely on inter-comparative assessments and gradual marketing to encapsulate
resistance and recruit consent. Such a strategy would have to be included in
the original research proposal.
Should such a policy proposal predict stake-holder resistance to the
extent of making the prospects of immediate implementation appear futile, the
only justification of pursuing the project would be assumed to be the benefits
of protracted ‘dissemination’ towards some deferred implementation based on the
necessity or benefits of the project gradually becoming apparent. In such a
scenario one would not expect the funding to be determined by implementation
measurements, rather, the focus ought to be directed at accentuating the policy
relevancy through systematic marketing and long-term dissemination, postponing
implementation to a more expedient future.
This resonates the need to have project designs scientifically
rationalized and harmonized to ensure feasibility is predicated against
realistic appraisals of implementation forecasts as an axiomatic underpinning
of all policy design. Foresight tracking of dissemination and implementation is
an essential premise of any project feasibility calculus.
No comments:
Post a Comment