The Drum Beat 354: CI Network Survey - Initial Insights

***

This issue of The Drum Beat looks at a selection of the results of The CI Network Survey conducted in March and April of 2006, outlining some brief insights. Through your participation in this survey, we have gathered considerable opinions and facts from a large cross-section of the media development and development communication communities. There was a tremendous response, with a significant portion of the network taking the time to answer most of the 55 questions we posed. Your responses will be key elements in The CI achieving its long-term goal of responding to your interests and needs and engaging and involving your analysis and perspectives for improved development action. We so appreciate your time and effort in completing the survey.

A more formal report on the results will be forthcoming. Additional analysis of these results is also planned in the near future. We hope that these brief insights are helpful to you, and are also perhaps supportive of and of value to your work, and that you continue to let us know if and how we can better support your work.

***

A. Who completed the network survey?

• 2,334 people
• from 153 different countries
• 47 countries had 10 or more respondents
• 1,620 [70% approx] respondents reside in the [so-called] developing world or The South.
• 714 respondents [30% approx] reside in OECD countries.
• The numbers and percentage for nationality rather than residence is very similar.

Some "country of residence" examples for survey respondents include: Bangladesh [18 respondents]; Bolivia [44]; Brazil [32]; Canada [89]; Dominican Republic [11]; India [104]; Kenya [60]; Malawi [21]; Moldova [2]; Mozambique [13]; The Philippines [28]; Thailand [14]; Uganda [31]; Viet Nam [10].

B. With what kinds of organisations were the respondents affiliated?

The respondents come from a very extensive range of organisations. There were a number of respondents from large international agencies such as UNICEF [38] and Oxfam [7]. There were a range of people from a cross-section of government departments - e.g. Ministries of External Relations, Education, Health, Communication, Scientific Research and Innovation and Departments of Agriculture, Health and Mental Hygiene, and Population Welfare. But there also appear to have been a large number of respondents working at the local level, such as in an Indian primary school improvement campaign, a number of non-profit "support organisations" and "welfare associations", centres, magazines and radio stations, and a hospital.

C. What does the information you provided about your work tell us about the media development and development communication field?

We asked people to state their job position. From a communication perspective this write-in list is long and varied: just a few examples do not reflect this range as there were over 2,000 stated positions in total. Some examples include Development Communication Specialist; Director of Marketing Communications; Reader in Communication Technology; Communications Assistant; Fundraising & Communications Director; Professor and Chair, Department of Journalism; Senior Reporter; Voices of Youth Media Manager; Director, Public Information; Director, ICT Programs; Editor-in-Chief; radio journalist; Programme Communication Adviser; Coordinator of International Television Festival; Adviser - ICT in development cooperation; Consultant Behaviour and Social Change; Programme Officer - Media.

D. Is there any evidence from the network survey of The CI making a significant contribution to mainstreaming media development and development communication with policymakers, funders and significant technical experts in other international development disciplines?

From our initial look at the people completing the network survey there appears to be good evidence that the answer to this question is: yes. There are 48 Executive Directors and 70 Presidents among the respondents, though these positions could of course be situated within media/communication organisations. But there are also clearly a very significant number of respondents who are neither in media nor are they communicators and yet have substantive policy and funding roles. As the meaning of these titles can differ markedly, it is not possible to do tallies; however, some examples highlight their roles and potential influence: Country Director [international non-governmental organisation (NGO)]; Country Representative [United Nations (UN) agency]; Executive Editor [major national newspaper]; Director of Evaluation [bilateral]; Senior Technical Advisor and Director of Social Science [bilateral]; Director, Maternal Health [large international NGO]; Africa Area Education Advisor [major international financial institution]; Chairman [board of an international NGO]; Director - Planning and Programming [UN agency]; Manager, Collaborative Programs and Research [international NGO] and many others.

E. How does the fact that The CI is a virtual process, reliant on new technologies, affect the reach and potential supportive impact of The CI process?

Examples of two responses from the network survey provide some insights (recognising that you did need to be online to complete the survey!).

Question (Q) 4 in the survey asked people to indicate the city/town/state/province in which they are located. This was a write-in question. As expected, large cities feature prominently - for example: Johannesburg, South Africa; Lima, Peru; Kampala, Uganda; Geneva, Switzerland; Nairobi, Kenya; Washington DC, United States; Maputo, Mozambique; and New Delhi, India. But what also stood out were the large number of non-capital, perhaps smaller cities from which people in often local NGOs responded - towns and cities such as: Acajutla, El Salvador; Ambato, Ecuador; Asaba, Nigeria; Bhubaneswar, India; Bikaner, India; Bogor, Java; Chipata, Zambia; Cluj-Napoca, Romania; Damak, India; Kubwa, Nigeria; Maharagama, Sri Lanka; Makurdi, Nigeria; Minna, Nigeria; Quelimane, Mozambique; Saynatsalo, Finland; Tafea, Vanuatu; Takoradi, Ghana; Tabubil, Papua New Guinea; Vadodara, India; and Växjö, Sweden. There are many more.

This significant engagement of "the local" is backed up by the response to Q8. When asked "What best describes your profession?" 20% said "local/national non-governmental organisation (NGO)/civil society organisation (CSO)".

***

The World Congress on Communication for Development (WCCD)

Co-organised by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), The World Bank and The Communication Initiative, the WCCD will take place in Rome, Italy on October 25-27 2006.

Click here for details.

***

F. Is connectivity a significant issue for The CI network?

Question 50 and Q52-54 sought to shine some light on connectivity issues. 415 people from sub-Saharan Africa completed the network survey. From those 415 responses it seems clear that there remain substantive connection challenges. Though 75% of this group connect from work [it was possible to select more than one option - 21% of the 415 connect from an internet cafe; 20% from home; 8% from an educational institution] just over 46% do so from a dial up 56k modem or less [30% Reliable Cable/ADSL; 24% unknown] and 46% use hardware more than 2 years old [42% less than 2 years; 12% do not know]. These findings may affect the plans for the technical design and platform of The CI processes, since we feel that it is important to not exclude individuals and organisations through the use of high end processes that take large bandwidth and require very recent hardware.

G. How does the media development and development communication network community use The CI process?

Prior to this survey, we measured usage through the statistics related to page views, page reviews/ratings, review comments, etc. But we have never had a good, non-anecdotal overview of why people use The CI process. Q13 provided an insight into this question. 55% of respondents use The CI to find resources for their work [it was possible to select more than one option - 39% also use The CI to conduct research for programmatic/strategic purposes; 33% to find training courses]. But what is perhaps most striking is the even spread of use. With the specialised exception of "find advanced academic degree opportunities" [14%] all other categories were above 25% [respondents could provide more than one answer] including "conduct research for academic purposes"; "conduct research for material for other electronic publications or online resources"; "support my teaching curricula"; "find people who are doing similar work (networking)"; "find new jobs"; "find events"; and "find funding opportunities (awards, grants, scholarships)".

H. How are The Communication Initiative features rated?

Q16 asked people to "...rate The Communication Initiative website(s) features (including The CI, La Iniciativa de Comunicación and Soul Beat Africa websites)". In relation to the content of those sites, for 5 possible ratings [Excellent, Very Good, Good, Mediocre, Poor], 81% rated the quality of the content as "Excellent" or "Very Good". Variety of content was rated "Excellent" or "Very Good" by 72% of respondents; 66% chose those ratings to describe their perspective on the amount of content as well. Respondents were less enthusiastic about the interactive processes and framework of The CI, with 46% rating the interactive features as "Excellent" or "Very Good" and 45% rating them as "Good". Similarly, the highest rating for the navigation was "Good" [42%] with a further 48% rating it as "Very Good" or "Excellent". Similar patterns show for usability [Excellent - 19%; Very Good - 37%; Good - 35%] and look and feel [Excellent - 15%; Very Good - 32%; Good - 38%].

This insight into The CI's work was reinforced by Q20 where people were asked why they subscribe to The Drum Beat/Son de Tambora/The Soul Beat electronic magazine: 82% selected the option "it publishes information relevant to my work/interests". Further amplification of this perspective comes from Q21 where the most popular selection in relation to why people read The Drum Beat/Son de Tambora/The Soul Beat was to "find resources for my work" [59.4%]. But, again, all the possible selections were checked by over 25% of the survey respondents - for example: "Conduct research for programmatic/strategic purposes" [40.4%]; "Find people who are doing similar work (networking)" [31.8%]; "Find training courses" [37.1%]; and, "Find events" [36.4%].

***

Please participate in our PULSE POLL

Listening to parents is the most important thing communities can do to better support early child development.

Do you agree or disagree?

[For context, please see The Drum Beat #350]

***

I. Is the principle of local identification of relevant knowledge working?

A vital principle for The CI process is that the individual members of the network decide which knowledge, contacts, ideas and support are of most value to them within their own contexts, that is, that the information and interaction they find here are relevant to the issues that they are addressing.

Q22 asked people to identify how often they "click on the links associated with the abstracts within The Drum Beat/Son de Tambora/The Soul Beat to read the more detailed information". Though 6% of respondents said "every issue" and 28% said "frequently", the more encouraging response was that 47% said "sometimes, whenever something interests me". The response to Q23 provides a further indication of this selectivity according to context and issue. In response to the statement "I forward issues or portions of issues of The Drum Beat/Son de Tambora/the Soul Beat to my colleagues/staff to use" 6% said "often", 11% said "periodically", and 45% said "occasionally - one to five times per month". It appears that it is the user, then, who is selecting relevant knowledge according to his or her needs and requirements.

J. Is The CI process providing a platform for the peer-to-peer networking, review and relationship building that is a key part of The CI strategy?

Two questions provided insight:

Q30 asked people to respond to this statement: "After reading summaries on The CI websites or within the e-magazines, I have corresponded via email, telephone, fax, or post with the contacts listed." Though 34.4% respondents said "never", 43.1% responded "often" [2.8%], "periodically" [6.7%], and "occasionally" [33.6%] and once [11.7%]. Interestingly, 10.8% said they were unaware they could contact people directly.

Q31 asked people to respond to this statement: "As a result of using The CI websites, I have developed valuable new relationships" and then went on to state various options. As would be expected with the "high bar" level set by this statement - namely "valuable new relationships" - the largest response [63%] was for this option: "I have not developed any new relationships as a result of using The CI websites". But the other 5 options [it was possible to check more than one option] indicated that significant numbers of people have developed valuable new work relationships [in their opinion and judgment] through The CI platform: 19% with "peers internationally"; 11% "with staff in my organisation"; 12% "with peers in my country/region"; and, 7% "with colleagues from my organisation in my country/region".

K. Is The CI sharing too much or too little knowledge?

Anecdotally, we sometimes receive comments saying that maybe The CI is sharing too much knowledge. We felt this was an important issue on which to seek feedback and insight.

In Qs 27-29, we asked people to choose a response to this statement - "I would like to hear from The Communication Initiative...More; Less; Just the Same" - for all 3 processes: Global, La Iniciativa de Comunicación and Soul Beat. The response was very similar for all three processes. Taking La Iniciativa de Comunicación as an example, in response to "I would like to hear from La Iniciativa de Comunicación", 31% said "more"; 11% said "less" and 57% said "just the same". The percentages are similar for the The Communication Initiative and Soul Beat Africa processes. If you were to extrapolate the portion of the network that responded to the survey relative to this question, it appears that we are not sharing too much knowledge for the majority of our network. In fact, we might want to consider sharing more in some cases.

***

Thank you, again, to those of you who completed our Network survey. We have obviously learned a great deal about you and what you are seeking in us. It is extremely useful for us to have such an in-depth perspective from a sample of this size. The information you provided will help us to improve our efforts in support of the excellent communication work you are achieving all over the world.

- The Communication Initiative, La Iniciativa de Comunicación, and Soul Beat Africa teams.

***

The Drum Beat seeks to cover the full range of communication for development activities. Inclusion of an item does not imply endorsement or support by The Partners.


Please send material for The Drum Beat to the Editor - Deborah Heimann dheimann@comminit.com


To reproduce any portion of The Drum Beat, see our policy.


To subscribe, click here.