Beyond the Blueprint: A Multi-Stakeholder Analysis of Adaptive Management in International Development a Case Study of Christian Aid in Sierra Leone
Abstract:
The complexity of international development contexts has driven a shift towards Adaptive Management (AM), a flexible, iterative approach promising greater relevance and effectiveness than traditional blueprint planning. However, a significant gap exists between its theoretical appeal and practical implementation, particularly from a multi-stakeholder perspective. This study aimed to analyze the perceived benefits and limitations of AM within the operations of Christian Aid and its partners in Sierra Leone, capturing the distinct viewpoints of international NGO staff, local implementing partners, and community beneficiaries. A qualitative instrumental case study was conducted in Sierra Leone. Data were collected through 42 semi-structured interviews and 6 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with the three stakeholder cohorts, supplemented by document analysis. A reflexive thematic analysis was employed to analyze the data. Findings revealed a stark divergence in perceptions shaped by power and position. International staff viewed AM as a strategic imperative for relevance and donor accountability. Local partners acknowledged potential benefits but experienced it as an increased administrative burden and a reinforcement of power asymmetries, characterized by constrained agency. Community beneficiaries valued tangible responsiveness linked to interpersonal relationships but remained disconnected from formal AM systems. Four interlocking themes were identified: the duality of power and agency, structural/bureaucratic constraints, the learning vs. accountability dilemma, and questions of contextual/cultural fit. The study concludes that without addressing fundamental power imbalances, inflexible funding, and misaligned accountability, AM risks becoming a new form of technocratic control. Recommendations include negotiating genuinely flexible donor contracts, formalizing and financing local decision-space, investing in relational systems, and decoupling learning from performance accountability.References:
[1].
Andrews, M., 2013, The Limits of Institutional Reform in
Development: Changing Rules for Realistic Solutions. Cambridge University
Press, pp. 1-32.
[2].
Andrews, M., Pritchett, L., & Woolcock, M., 2017, Building
State Capability: Evidence, Analysis, Action. Oxford University Press,
pp. 1-2
[3].
Banks, N., Hulme, D., & Edwards, M., 2015, NGOs, States,
and Donors Revisited: Still Too Close for Comfort? World Development,
66, 707-718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.09.028 accessed
26/02/25
[4].
Bond, A., 2016, Making Adaptive Rigour Work: Principles
and Practices for Strengthening Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning for
Adaptive Management. ALNAP/ODI. https://www.alnap.org/help-library/making-adaptive-rigour-work-principles-and-practices-for-strengthening-mel-for
accessed 24/02/2025
[5].
Booth, D., & Unsworth, S., 2014, Politically
Smart, Locally Led Development. ODI. https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/9218.pdf accessed
15/02/25
[6].
Braun, V., & Clarke, V., 2022, Thematic Analysis: A
Practical Guide. SAGE, pp. 3-6
[7].
Conforto, E. C., & Amaral, D. C., 2016, Agile Project
Management and Stage-Gate Model - A Hybrid Framework for Technology-Based
Companies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 40,
1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2016.04.003 accessed
16/02/2025
[8].
Fanthorpe, R., 2006, On the Limits of Liberal Peace: Chiefs
and Democratic Decentralization in Post-War Sierra Leone. African
Affairs, 105(418), 27-49.
[9].
Freeman, R. E., 1984, Strategic Management: A
Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, pp. 4-8
[10]. Gaventa, J., 2006, Finding
the Spaces for Change: A Power Analysis. IDS Bulletin, 37(6), pp. 23-33.
[11]. Green, D., 2019, From the
Archives: The 'Doing Development Differently' manifesto. From Poverty
to Power Blog, Oxfam.
[12]. Hudson, D., &
Leftwich, A., 2014, From Political Economy to Political Analysis. Developmental
Leadership Program. https://www.dlprog.org/publications/research-papers/from-political-economy-to-political-analysis
accessed 15/02/25
[13]. Lukes, S., 2005, Power:
A Radical View (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 8-15
[14]. Ocwieja, S., 2018, The
Localisation of Aid and the 'Fragmentation' of Sovereignty. LSE Global South
Unit Working Paper No. 3/2018. https://www.lse.ac.uk/international-development/Assets/Documents/PDFs/Working-Papers/Global-South-Unit/2018-WP-GSU-03-Ocwieja.pdf
accessed 16/02/25
[15]. Punton, M., 2018, Exploring
the 'Fitness' of Adaptive Management. ITAD. https://www.itad.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Exploring-the-fitness-of-adaptive-management-WEB.pdf
accessed 17/02/25
[16]. Ramalingam, B., Scriven,
K., & Foley, C., 2008, Innovations in International Humanitarian
Action. ALNAP/ODI. https://www.alnap.org/help-library/innovations-in-international-humanitarian-action accessed 26/02/25
[17]. Sahlin-Andersson, K.,
& Söderholm, A. (Eds.)., 2002, Beyond Project Management: New Perspectives
on the Temporary-Permanent Dilemma. Liber Abstrakt.
[18]. Shepler, S., &
Williams, R., 2017, Sierra Leone's Ebola Outbreak and the Shadow of the Shadow State.
Journal of Modern African Studies, 55(3), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X17000105 accessed 15/02/25
[19]. Snowden, D. J., &
Boone, M. E., 2007, A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. Harvard
Business Review, 85(11), 68-76. https://hbr.org/2007/11/a-leaders-framework-for-decision-making
accessed 16/02/25
[20]. Valters, C., 2015, Theories
of Change in International Development: Communication, Learning, or Accountability? Justice
and Security Research Programme, LSE. https://www.lse.ac.uk/international-development/Assets/Documents/PDFs/Working-Papers/WP141.pdf
accessed 15/02/25
[21]. Wild, L., Booth, D., Cummings, C., Foresti, M., & Wales, J., 2020, Adapting Development: Improving Services to the Poor. ODI. https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/odi_adapting_development_report_2020_web.pdf accessed 26/02/25
