Appendix A: Network Examples

This section outlines examples of support, coordination, and hybrid networks.

Support Networks

Network: A group of young women political party members whose goal is to share connections, experience, and encouragement with each other to run for elected office.

Theory of change: The biggest barrier to women running for office in Region X is that campaign fundraising occurs through traditionally male channels of power. This tends to intimidate women trying to create the autonomous political identity necessary to be a powerful figure within in her political party, and thus a viable candidate for national office. As a result, very few women end up running for elected office. If women party members who are active in their parties but hesitant to run for office are aware of campaign fundraising best practices in Region X; and if they are supported by a cohort of their peers, including women who have successfully run for office in Region X previously, then then they will feel less isolated and disempowered. As a result, more of these members will run for office.

• This program is designed as a network because the assumption is that trainings alone will not be enough to motivate these women party members to decide to run for office - they need the inspiration that comes from continued interaction with their peers.

• This is a support network because they are not coordinating to influence an external goal (such as changing party quotas for women). Rather, they are supporting each other to achieve their own individual goals of running for office.

Note: Most behavior change projects are intended to supplement missing capacity, opportunity, or incentive to change. This project targets capacity primarily through the training and incentive through the network. When designing your network, think of which of these necessary conditions for change your network is supporting. Remember, if your project isn’t building one of these conditions, the assumption is that it already exists.

Common support network results that build capacity:

• Network members share technical skills via advice on group communication channels

• Network members share technical skills via mentorships with less experienced members

• Networks members share technical skills joint projects with other members

Common support network results that build opportunity:

• Network members share opportunities for participation (training opportunities, calls for proposals, open positions, etc.)

Common support network results that build will:

• Network members share encouragement through success stories

• Network members build confidence through sustained engagement

There are many other activities and results a network like this could have achieved. Click here for more detailed example results chains and for more on measuring results for support networks.

Hybrid Networks

Example 1

Network: A group of entrepreneurs in a closed society whose goal is to build connections, solidarity and share practical advice for running a business among others who face similar challenges. These individuals and organizations do not wish to work on joint sectoral advocacy presently, but they want to prepare themselves for collective action in the future, if new opportunities or political openings occur.

Theory of change: The main problem for civil society and interest groups in Country X is their lack of organization due to government repression and mistrust. If a group of community entrepreneurs can build connections with others in their sector and learn from their experiences AND if they understand the benefits of joint advocacy, THEN they can build the foundation for coordinated action and will be better prepared to pursue common goals and interests together in the future.

• This program is designed as a network because the members are building connections with others in the same sector that they would not normally be able to meet.

• This is a hybrid network because there are two phases of network building, one where the goal is to build connections and political awareness, and a second where those connections can be used to act collectively in the future.

Example 2

Network: A group of accountability CSOs whose goal is to create a singular, open platform to provide organizational trainings, exchange ideas, and develop common policy positions to use in advocacy efforts to encourage citizens to vote in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

Theory of change: CSOs in country X are mostly performing at a novice level. While there are many registered CSOs, even the most advanced groups do not have long term goals or strategies. As a critical election approaches, many of these CSOs focusing on rule of law wish to work on GOTV efforts, but their current plans are vague and uncoordinated. IF a group of legally focused CSOs who have limited, individual capacity see the value in combining their efforts around election issues concerning rule of law; and IF they increase their organizational capacities and identify their strategic advantages, THEN they will operate more effectively as individual organizations as well as coordinating more effectively with other CSOs on election issues concerning legal reforms. As a result, individual CSOs will be more sustainable and voter turnout will increase.

• This is a network because the assumption is that one, individual group is not sufficient to conduct all the domestic GOTV work necessary to influence voter turnout; instead, these CSOs need the inspiration, manpower, and political gravitas that comes from working collectively under a united front.

• This is a hybrid network because it is working to improve the capacity of individual associations while also organizing to produce a coordinated GOTV campaign. The idea is that these CSOs may not coordinate on their work indefinitely, but for the purpose of a key event like an election, they have a reason to act in coordination.

Coordination Networks

Network: A group of CSOs, journalists, academics, and businesspeople whose goal is to advocate for the passage of improved anti-corruption legislation.

Theory of change: While the demand for new anti-corruption legislation is in Country X is high, the biggest barrier to its passage is that various voices for change are all advocating for disparate priorities, giving the government no clear mandate for what the new legislation should include. If a diverse coalition of anti-corruption actors (CSOs, journalists, academics, and businesspeople) develops a unified agenda and coordinates their respective activities to pressure the government to adopt a clear and specific set of policies, then the government will be more likely to pass more rigorous anti-corruption legislation.

• This program is designed as a network because the assumption is that individual advocacy alone will create a clear and actionable mandate for lawmakers to respond to. The diverse connections, skills, and perspectives of a network have the potential to create a message that is widely appealing and clearly voiced.

• While sharing skills is a useful secondary result of the network, this is a coordination network because the group’s primary goal is coordinating to influence an external goal. It is also more structured and rule-bound.

Note: Most behavior change projects are intended to supplement missing capacity, opportunity, or will to change. This project primarily targets capacity and opportunity of the government by lowering the barriers to incorporate the network’s suggestions by providing clear and actionable legislation, ready-made to sign into law. When designing your network, think of which of these necessary conditions (capacity, opportunity, will) for change your network is supporting. Remember, if your project isn’t building one of these conditions, the assumption is that it already exists. (At IRI we are sometimes guilty of assuming this about political will even when it is not the case.)

Common coordination network results that build capacity:

Remember, coordination networks are externally focused, so high-level results tend to focus on the institutions or actors that the network is trying to influence, rather than network members

• Networks share technical skills or guidance with targeted actors or institutions

Common coordination network results that build opportunity:

• Networks share opportunities for action with targeted actors or institutions

• Networks lower barriers to action for targeted actors or institutions

Common coordination network results that build will:

• Networks build community demand for change within targeted actors or institutions

• Networks organize community activities to pressure targeted actors or institutions

There are many other activities and results a network like this could have achieved. Click here for more detailed example results chains and for more on measuring results for coordination networks.