August 28, 2012

Things We Have Learned: Terms & Concepts

One of the things we are learning in our work is just how different learning terms is from learning concepts. When learning any language, the former is required to speak or write, but the latter is required to understand. We have also learned how easy it is to learn terms without actually learning concepts. This results in a dangerous situation where a person thinks they know the language, but is actually severely restricted in what they can communicate or comprehend.

To ensure good communication, we need to make sure we know what the terms we are using mean. We usually do this by defining the terms – we use other terms to describe the new term. This allows us to expand our vocabulary and thus the scope of things we can easily discuss. Unfortunately, this method makes the assumption that the terms we are using in our definition are already understood. As we have learned in Africa, this is not always the case.

In our discussion with Mozambican nationals, we discovered several terms that are not well understood. That is, the English-speaking nationals may know the terms, but the concept that the term represents is still largely unknown. For example, in our seminar, one of the areas of development we discuss is relationship-building. After the seminar, however, we discovered that some of the nationals did not grasp the concept of a relationship—which reduced the effectiveness of the session quite a bit. The important thing to understand is they know of the term “relationship,” and could use it in common conversation, but they did not possess a working concept of relationship.

We encounter a similar issue in the west—a prime example would probably be corporate jargon.[i] If you have worked in a corporate environment, you have probably encountered this situation: a boss/manager/employee/etc. will use a particular term such as “leveraging”, “diversification“, “asset management”, etc. but clearly does not understand what the term actually means. That is, they know of the term but do not understand the underlying concept. They use the term for a number of reasons: to keep from sounding ignorant, to fit into the corporate culture, or even to impress others who do not understand the concept. The problem, of course, is that when a person uses a term whose concept they do not understand, they quite literally do not know what they are talking about. This can lead to a very unfortunate situation when they are speaking to someone who does understand the concept, and therefore expects a certain set of actions from the speaker. In this case, use of such jargon results in a negative effect for the person who used it, even though they were trying to use it to help themselves.

Anyone familiar with a corporate environment is probably familiar with the illustration above, yet we often assume that this is not the case when working with other cultures. This is especially true of cultures with whom we share a common language—we forget that it is the culture that determines what terms map onto what concepts. In forgetting this important truth, it is very easy for us to make mistakes in communication; most of the time, these mistakes are relatively benign, but when you are working as an educator[ii] (which many charity and social development programs are beginning to focus on), the consequences of failing to understand the difference between terms and concepts can have dire consequences. This is exacerbated when there is also a language, not just a cultural, barrier.

The final lesson? While knowing the national language of a group you are working with is important, it is much more important to make sure you are communicating concepts, not just terminology. When communicating cross-culturally, you cannot just assume you know what you are saying—always seek confirmation that your message was received correctly. That is, assume you aren’t communicating well until demonstrated otherwise. This way is slower (and usually more frustrating), but generally results in much clearer communication.[iii]



[i] For the purposes of this article, “jargon” refers to a term used without knowledge of the concept it connects to in the context you are using it. This is a bit different from the dictionary definition of “jargon” so I wanted to clarify.
[ii] I include translators in this category
[iii] Just to give you an idea of how close to home this principle can get, consider that men and women, in most cultures, have vastly different social roles, expectations, and experiences—effectively different subcultures. In the U.S., the same can be said for many racial groups, religious groups, and even political groups. As it turns out, good communication is hard

August 6, 2012

Back From Africa

I'm back in the U.S. after my time in South Africa and Mozambique. I've already posted about
the seminar in Mozambique, but there were a few other things that have happened in the
meantime.

More Breakdowns

Our car broke down again...and yet again! Upon our return to South Africa from Mozambique, our first stop was the repair shop to pick up our newly repaired car. We then went to SARS to extend the permit to keep the car in the country for another two weeks, at which time Al planned to head back to Mozambique with Leonard. Unfortunately, during a trip to Potchefstroom the next week, the car broke down again. Moreover, it turned out to be the same problem as before - no financial worries there, as the transmission (gearbox, in South Africa) was under warranty, but it really put a dent in our plans. As a result of the breakdown, Al had to stay in South Africa longer than planned. Leonard went back by bus, while Al waited for the car to get fixed so he could drive it into Mozambique. Just before our extension deadline was about to expire, the car was repaired - only to have the transmission blow again as it was transported from the shop! It turns out something other than the transmission was broken - and since that isn't under warranty, we will have to pay for those repairs.Al is still in South Africa, and will remain there until his return to the U.S. in mid-August (his return date was moved up once we realized he wouldn't be able to make it back to Mozambique before returning, regardless of his departure date).

Contacts

We have made several contacts in South Africa, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe who are interested in our work. Unfortunately, due to the aforementioned car troubles and the accompanying time and budget impact, we don't know when we will be able to follow up. We are hoping we will be able to meet with some of the interested organizations when we...

Return to Africa

Al and Vel are currently planning to head back to Africa in December, while I am currently scheduled to head back in January. I will spend about a month in South Africa, then head up to Mozambique to help with presenter training again. I don't have a scheduled return date yet.

Cancellations

Unfortunately, we have had some disappointments beyond the car. Due to low enrollment, the seminar we had planned for OK this month was canceled. In addition, our seminar in Haiti has been postponed a year, as our hosting organization is undergoing a restructure right now. We do plan to be in Haiti next year, but I don't know when our next seminar for the U.S. will be scheduled.

Disappointed?

All this could seem pretty disappointing, but honestly, these are simply setbacks, not defeats. The time that has opened up as a result of the cancellations gives me a chance to meet with supporters and other interested organizations in the U.S. Currently, we are in the process of setting up my fall schedule, so if anyone would like me to come out and speak at your local organization/church/group of friends/multimillion-dollar IRI charity concert, please feel free to contact me (via my e-mail, through our website, or even by leaving a comment below), and I will be happy to try work out a time to visit.

Since I didn't post last month (sorry about that!), I plan for a few additional posts this month - keep an eye out!

June 24, 2012

Seminar in Review: June, 2012 – Chimoio, Mozambique


The Insight Seminar here in Chimoio is wrapping up, which gives me an opportunity to reflect on what’s happened, good and bad. This is the third seminar we have held in Mozambique and the second Portuguese seminar. It is the first seminar in which I did not act as presenter—instead, Leonard Chetechsi took on the role of presenter. I acted as assistant and coach during and after the seminars. My main rule this time was to coach Leonard on seminar presentation and debrief with him after each session. Leonard is one of our co-workers in Mozambique and was the interpreter for last year’s Portuguese seminar. When I leave, he will be responsible for organizing and leading seminars for the next year.

So how has Leonard been doing? Overall, he’s doing a fantastic job—he’s a natural presenter, and will be invaluable in helping Mozambicans understand the new concepts we are introducing. But generalities are only worth so much, so let’s get into seminar details, what they mean, and why they’re important. For ease of reading, I will break this down by point of interest (this will probably take several blog entries to completely cover):

Point One: Schedule

 We originally were planning for me to present/oversee four to five seminars while I was here. Unfortunately, due to limited funds delaying my departure and car trouble, we ended up with three and a half weeks in Mozambique instead of our original three month plan. This left us with enough time for one seminar. In keeping with our theme of “new scheduling plans”, we decided to implement an experimental seminar schedule—instead of holding the seminar for five eight-hour days, we thought we would try weeknights and weekends. This would give participants time to work during the day. This meant we had to extend the total time of the seminar to two weeks, but we thought it was a fair trade-off.

The result was mixed. While the participants were certainly able to get more work done during the week, the cultural attitude toward time meant that each session started almost an hour late—over ten days, that drops ten hours. In addition, they participants weren’t really keen on coming over the weekend, which meant we lost additional time. Between the two, our total seminar time was cut in half. On the plus side, the participants did have extra time to think through what they were learning. In addition, the participants indicated they wanted to complete the seminar as soon as Leonard gets back from traveling with Al and I back to South Africa. Overall verdict: while the five-day schedule is inconvenient for people, it seems to provide a more complete learning experience with the fewest difficulties.  Leonard wants to conduct the next seminar using the standard schedule.
 

Next Entry: Attendance and Participation

Seminar in Review: June, 2012 – Chimoio, Mozambique (2)

[note: these seminar posts are being posted in reverse order to facilitate easier viewing on the site - this is part 2 of 3]


Point Two: Attendance

Given the radical schedule changes and the fact that our Mozambican associates really have never scheduled a seminar on their own before, our attendance was pretty much what we expected. Our first night saw around six people; over the next few days, we lost a couple of people and gained about four more. By the end of the first week, we were averaging six people a night. The second week, however, saw a decrease in attendance. Whether this was due to a certain amount of miscommunication about what to expect from the seminar or participant fatigue is hard to determine—I am planning on working with Leonard to follow up with the participants to investigate the details. In any case, by the end of the second week, we were down to three people.

While discouraging, this is not unexpected. The seminars are far more complex than many Mozambicans are used to, and it is not unusual for the stress of the material to cause some to give up. 
On the other hand, the miscommunication regarding expectations has been identified and we will be able to better communicate what the seminars are about next time. In Mozambique, many nonprofit organizations have taken to offering people food or money to attend their seminars. The offer is appreciated, of course, but it creates a situation where participants attend not to learn, but to earn.[i]  While this may sound like a nice way to provide poor nationals with money and allow them to learn, all it really does is set an expectation that “classes” equal “stuff.” Thus, seminars and other training are often valued for the prizes, not the education, provided. Once we clarified that our seminar was there to give people tools in the form of information, a few of them lost interest. Others, however, were excited to learn something they actually considered useful, and saw no need to have any other incentive.

Point Three: Participation

Of utmost importance in the seminar is participation by the attendees (which is why I usually call them participants). The seminars don’t just spit out information at the participants—it is important to us that people understand the principles we’re trying to communicate, and are able to apply them to their lives. As a result, the seminar is geared toward a lot of activities to reinforce our ideas. This is especially important in Africa, where most of the participants have never encountered these concepts before.

This, thankfully, was a great success. The participants were very engaged with what we were discussing (even those who were just there because they thought they would get food were interested and participating). There was a definite level of excitement in the group, and we noted not only a steadily increasing level of engagement from the remaining participants, but also an increasing level of excitement. Some of these activities and discussion are quite difficult and complex, and the participants were definitely rising to the challenge. This was exactly what we wanted, and we are extremely happy with the results.

Next Entry: Conclusions



[i] These same organizations often later wonder why there isn’t any long-term impact from their training. Here’s a tip for anyone who is interested in teaching people: if you have to pay people to attend your training, THEY ARE NOT THERE FOR YOUR TRAINING. People do not learn by infection—simply going to a training session does not guarantee participation or retention, and paying your students to attend will only get them in the seat. If anyone out there is considering or has been paying people to attend your training/seminar/workshop, please just stop (note: this does not apply to workforce training by businesses – if you want your employees to know something they don’t you should pay them to learn it). OK, footnote rant over.

Seminar in Review: June, 2012 – Chimoio, Mozambique (3)

[note: these seminar posts are being posted in reverse order to facilitate easier viewing on the site - this is part 3 of 3]

Conclusion:


So overall, how did things go? I think I can safely say that while we are happy with the response from the participants in the seminar, the scheduling and attendance shows that we still need to work on our overall seminar structure here. This was expected, given the difference in culture between where we come from (the U.S.), where the seminar originated (South Africa), and the local culture priorities. One of the major advantages of having Leonard with us is that we can ask him why various things are happening, and he can give us a response that comes from inside the culture. In the end, it will be Leonard[i] who makes the final decisions on how to adapt the material to Mozambique .

One key thing we took away from this session is confirmation that our previous seminars were not some kind of exceptional fluke – these seminars really do have a powerful positive effect on the nationals. The concepts they introduce, while common to many westerners, are virtually unknown here. One example is our session on categories. We spend a fair amount of time explaining what categories are and why they are important. After going through the session, Leonard noted that, while the participants were having a lot of difficulty thinking of things in this new way, they were rising to the challenge, and excited about what they could do with what they have learned. For those of you with strong conceptual backgrounds, I want you to try to think of how you would see the world if you did not understand categorization—then understand this is exactly the case in many Mozambican (and, from other discussion we have had, many African) cultures. 

It isn’t that Mozambicans can’t think in terms of categories, just that no one has ever bothered to teach them about it, and it is not native to their culture. This is why we’re here—concepts like these are critical to developing large-scale economic as well as individual personal development. Mozambique is a place full of potential, and once the Mozambicans are able to see how to take advantage of that potential, we expect great things from this culture.


[i] I should mention that Leonard is acting as a kind of proxy here – we actually have several other Mozambicans we are working with who are working alongside Leonard to refine the seminar in Mozambique, but because of the unfortunate schedule changes, they were not able to be here for this seminar, so I am focusing on Leonard for this account.