Introduction

'The Green and Inclusive Energy' program was part of a wider initiative implemented by a consortium of Hivos, IIED, and Article 19. The program advocated a transformation towards inclusive decentralized renewable energy systems. It worked in three different levels: country-level (Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Kenya, Tanzania and Nicaragua - later replaced by Guatemala), regional (Central America), and global level. For its program management, the program used Outcome Harvesting and Theory of Change thinking . Small teams including an advocacy officer work with partners in the countries, guided by a joint theory of change. The reflection and planning meeting followed a first cycle of Outcome Harvesting (elaboration of outcome statements, substantiation, and analysis).

Step 1. Narrative interviews

To prepare for the annual reflection and planning meeting of the Green and Inclusive Energy program, narrative interviews with all advocacy officers were held on the outcomes to which they contributed. Each advocacy officer selected one or more outcome statements for the interview. An interview guide was elaborated to provide some focus for the narrative assessment facilitators.
There were two major interview topics: advocacy dynamics to unpack the relations between the outcome achieved and the influencing factors; and exploring what went into the actions in terms of, among others, decision-making and underlying assumptions. Where appropriate, attention was directed to partnership and collaboration issues.

Step 2 Narrative assessment stories

From the verified transcripts, emerging common themes were identified by the Narrative Assessment facilitators and agreed with the program manager, who in this case is the 'owner' of the annual reflection and planning meeting, and with the meeting committee. Around each theme, stories were then carved out from the transcripts, with some interviews contributing to several themes. This resulted in the editing of 11 stories of 1/2 to 1.5 page organized in four theme clusters: working with government, inclusiveness in advocacy, working with partners, and innovative advocacy approaches. Each story contained the six story elements mentioned earlier: transformation, a movement over time, actions by which this transformation happens, a specific setting, a plot (often involving crises and turning points), and a takeaway message. A theme cluster often covered stories from more than one country or level.

Step 3 The reflection workshop design

With the stories as a basis, a workshop was designed together with the meeting committee. The workshop participants consisted of staff from partners and the program with different roles and included those with whom a narrative interview was held. It was decided to organize sharing, reflection, and sense-making in four groups around the theme clusters. Theme clusters were each moderated by a facilitator, including the Narrative Assessment facilitators, to help focus on:

• Connecting the stories and bringing out commonalities;
• Sense-making of what emerges

Before the start of the workshop, participants received all outcome statements and all 11 stories, so they were aware of the achievements of the program and had an equal information base.

Step 4 The reflection workshop

Each group worked with their cluster stories around reflection questions such as:

• What resonates with your own work and thinking?
• What do these stories tell us about our strategies?

The facilitator helped the group to reach deeper levels of reflection by linking, comparing, or contrasting issues emerging from stories, and by highlighting strands or threads. In this way, the group could jointly make sense of what was revealed and capture the emerging insights.
There were two rounds of group work so each participant could discuss two theme clusters. The insights from the group work were then shared in a plenary for collective reflection on what convergence and agreements emerged across the stories and themes. The workshop participants then looked at the theory of change to locate the collective agreements on aspects such as interventions, challenges, assumptions, outcome areas.

Evaluation of the use of Narrative Assessment stories in the reflection workshop

For a reflection meeting, the Narrative Assessment stories proved to be of added value as advocates felt that the stories helped to create the right perspective: they could understand not just the end result, but also the context around it, and appreciate the challenges confronted. They felt that the unpacking of advocacy dynamics enabled them to finally explain what they are doing and show a human face to their work. They stated that these Narrative Assessment stories ‘are our own stories, not stories that we are used to telling donors’. The stories made their work more understandable to each other. Showing how advocates dealt with failure and challenges, jumped on opportunities, strategized and went through lows and highs did not only increase real and realistic learning, but also mutual empathy and the insight in their own work as part of a collective endeavor.

Those who were involved in an interview felt that this was really useful, as it forced them to take the time to reflect. The critical questions that were asked helped to generate a good process of reflection.

While one story already allowed to draw many conclusions, bringing together many stories from across the program was reported to make the reflection even more interesting and useful for learning —including from what did not work— and to stimulate new ideas. Common themes emerged from the many stories, for example about leadership, and about being flexible and adaptive as an advocate. Having the stories from across the program also created a feeling of partnership; a sense that one is not alone pushing the cart.

The reflection meeting brought many insights with implications for the program’s theory of change in the countries. The next step for the advocates and their teams will be to adjust their strategies and Theory of Change based on the insights.