Up until about ten years ago the philosophy behind behavioral communications was based on the premise that certain peoples needed development assistance because they didn’t know enough to develop themselves. In essence the development community automatically assumed that they had all the answers. The population being developed should passively, and happily, accept what was being given them. The western cultural model was deemed to be the ideal, and development was gauged on the degree of westernization achieved by a developing country.

 Then the experts had a reality attack. Some rather intelligent people began to question this idea. They rationalized that the people being developed had a right to be involved in the decisions that affected their lives. Every population should and would develop differently depending on their cultural heritage, environment, and current degree of development. Development they decided, could not simply be copied from the western model, but should be a completely relative target, custom tailored, for each and every society by the people themselves.

 Then they really sent the classical development “Experts” round the bend. They proposed that the population being developed should, perhaps, be consulted as to exactly how they wanted to develop. What were that populations priorities? How did they define development? In short, what did they want from the development community and how could the development community best respond to those requests?

 Actually there had always been a contingent of non conformist communicators who tended to consult directly with the population being developed. Some would say it was the glaring success of their programs that pushed others to follow. Others will tell you that the new trend is exactly that, new, as in their idea.

 In any case Participation, Participatory approach, Community Empowerment and a whole new dictionary of buzzwords have appeared on the scene. The final result is that the people are now your bosses, they should decide what they want and what value they place on your ideas and proposals. As a friend commented recently,” How could something so sensible actually happen?” It does take a bit of getting used to; then again it makes life a whole lot easier for those of us on the ground.

 Participation is very simple in theory and very difficult in practice. They decide what, and how, their development should be. Then you advise them on how best to accomplish their  goals. Personally I think it’s a great way to do business. Then again, if you work for an agency with a lot of hidden agendas - you have a problem.

 In practice participation works’ like this.  Few people will have a better idea of what is important to a developing community than that community itself. They know what their problems are and what solutions have a chance of working. When you come along and re enforce an action that was their idea in the first place the results are more likely to reach a critical mass and become a permanent part of their lives than an idea developed by strangers or imposed by the powers that be.

 The practical side, from our point of view, is that the easiest thing to sell someone is their own idea! You never again need worry about cultural conflicts, religious conflicts, or institutional conflicts. People usually will not suggest an action that goes against their own values. The problems are in arriving at the initial consensus.

 Your new objective is to bring the widest cross section of interested parties as deeply into the process as possible. Your partners should take an active part in formulating the approach, designing the materials, implementing the program, and evaluating the results.  Before you can do anything the majority of your new found partners must agree on the objectives, content, approach, execution, and a thousand other little details.

 If it sounds like you just added teacher to your vastly overloaded job description then your catching on. Development is about learning to do things for yourself. In this case it means that the people you are trying to assist in their development must learn how to develop themselves. If they never learn how to develop themselves how are they ever going to develop? Get that, it’s important.

 The objective behind this whole exercise is to make the proposed change a self-sustaining  chain reaction driven by the people themselves. To do that you can no longer be the great guru of development with all the worlds’ development wisdom at your fingertips. You are now an advisor and teacher. Like any teacher you are going to need to let your students make their own mistakes so that they can learn from them.

 They are no longer participants in your program: You are now a participant in theirs. That is an easy thing to say, but make absolutely certain you understand what it really means.

 The people you are now working for have enough cultural, social, and political knowledge to create a program. It is their program. They can make it work with, or without your help. You are there because of your professional experience in order to make their program more effective. You, on the other hand can have a much more effective campaign because the people are behind what you are doing, they have an interest in seeing it work, they want your program succeed - after all, it is theirs. Talk about an easy sell!

 The down side comes with design and production. You will usually be dealing with complete communication novices, and they can be a serious headache. Every one wants to get into the act. Every one wants their own pet slogan, girl friends picture, or political agenda included in your materials. They will be pedantic to the 47th decimal place, and nit pick you to death with silly changes. This is where you will need to use a lot of diplomacy, educate your partners in the real world of communication, and help them stay focused on the actual objectives. A large bottle of Valium might help.

 Just a tip: Right from the very beginning educate your partners in the dangers of change. Get them to read what I’ve written about changes somewhere in here. I here by state you have my complete permission to copy that section for distribution to your partners.

 Make absolutely certain they understand the dangers of changes before you give anything to the designers or photographers for production. One way of getting their attention is to emphasize that additional changes cost additional money.

 Tip: Once you have a final draft of the text, slogans, strategy, story boards, or any other item subject to change get each and every one of your partners to sign and date a single copy for the files. That may sound drastic, but it can save you a lot of headache later. Trust me on this, I’ve been there before and still carry the scars.

 One of the most interesting aspects of participation is the wealth of “on the ground” experience it brings to a program. Most of the people you will be working with have spent their whole lives as the targets of development programs of one kind or another. Villagers can tell you some very interesting stories, some quite amusing, about programs that worked and others that didn’t work. Often they can tell you exactly why those programs succeeded or failed.

 Be smart. Use their knowledge to avoid making the same mistakes all over again. You should also impress upon your partners that this whole business of producing a campaign can actually be fun.

 Just one other point, be sure to impress on your partners that there is no such thing as the perfect campaign. It might help to read the bit in here somewhere about planning campaigns and the importance of the “Next Campaign”.

 Tip: The expression, “That’s a great idea for the next campaign” is very useful, sometimes even a lifesaver. It also avoids ego conflicts by saving face for the inventor.