IALU – Encuentro XIFindings and methodology

March 4th, 2015

Board Member Interviews

Board Member Interviews

• Why?

• Methodology– One-to-one interviews via Skype or personal

– 25-45 minutes

– 4 main topics• Network activities within the region / within IALU

• Strengths and advantages of these activities / of IALU

• Weaknesses and threats of these activities / of IALU

• Ideas on thematic lines / network development lines

• 8/10 Board members interviewed

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

1. Network activities within the region / within IALU

– Active at regional level

• Mexico: meetings, “Free Program Circulation Agreement”,National Teacher Forum, joint program design, CONADEL

• Europe: webpage, Identity Charter, brochures

• Philippines: pool purchasing, knowledge exchange

• Central and South America: “LS Summer Program inLeadership and Global Understanding”

• USA: collaborative MA and PhD training

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

1. Network activities within the region / within IALU

– Various global IALU initiatives

• LS Identity and leadership: Rome Summer Seminar, LeadershipSummer Program

• Research: RIILSA, Minneapolis Symposium

• Teaching: International Postgraduate Program in FinancialManagement

• Mobility: US-Mexico Business Schools

• Knowledge exchange: Cuernavaca meetings and teachertraining

• Communication: webpage

• Encuentro

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

1. Network activities within the region / within IALU

– Takeaways:

• More activity regionally than globally

• More structured at regional level

• IALU activities: autonomous, diverse, but oftenshort-lived

• Increased global awareness and knowledge

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

2. Strengths / advantages of these activities / of IALU

• Common history, values and identity

• Strong regional groups -> Truly global network

• Strong differentiators: pedagogy, outreach, education forthe poor, “common brand”

• Recognition from the Institute

• Common knowledge, friendship

• Strong interest and faith

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

3. Weaknesses / threats of these activities / of IALU

• Effectiveness: lack of clear objectives, results orachievements

• Strength: vulnerable to changes, individual schedules,personal motivation and regional interests

• Priority: important to all, a priority for few

• Coherence: find a clearer “objective / activity” alignment

• Structure: lack of memory and permanence: transient

• Funding: no clear rules to collect or access it

• Communication: a lot is done, little is told

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

3. Weaknesses / threats of these activities / of IALU

“IALU needs to exist. We need it”.

• SOLUTIONS: STRUCTURE

– Permanent base: Technical Coordinator / ExecutiveSecretary + assistant

– Less change in the Board: renewed by half every 3 years

– President elected on the basis of a Proposal

– Regional directors + regional “champions”

– Planned budget and access tools

– Clearer membership cost rules: “Get what you pay for”

--> “Stronger governance”

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

4. Ideas on thematic lines / network development lines

• SOLUTIONS: THEMATIC LINES– Research

– Student and teacher mobility

– Social innovation / voluntary networks

– Teacher training

– Leadership + LS identity

– Alumni

– Online lecture catalogues

– Business school network

Board Member InterviewsRESULTS

4. Ideas on thematic lines / network development lines

• SOLUTIONS: NETWORK DEVELOPMENT

– Communication strategy

– Common branding

– Joint global diplomacy and lobby

– Strong differentiators

– Quality accreditation

– Online platforms

Participant Surveys

Participant Surveys

• Why?• Methodology

– On-line survey– One answer per participant– 5 questions

1. Involvement in activities with IALU-affiliated institutions?2. IALU = strong or weak network?3. IALU’s strengths and advantages?4. IALU’s weaknesses and threats? How to control them?5. Suggested thematic / technical lines of work.

• 28 answers (37% of participants)

Participant SurveysRESULTS

1. Involvement in activities with IALU institutions?

– Yes: 81,5% No: 18,5%

– Activities (can be several per answer):

12% 2%

19%

21%

21%

25%

Meetings / Encuentro

Support

Joint training

Mobility

Summer schools / Leadership

Research

Participant SurveysRESULTS

2. IALU: rather strong or rather weak network?

22%

78%

Rather strong

Rather weak

Participant SurveysRESULTS

3. IALU’s strengths and advantages

• A huge potential and a lot of interest in IALU

• LS differentiators: spirit, values, heritage, pedagogy

• Global reach

• Experience

• Formal status and legal personality

• Frequent meetings -> Awareness and knowledge

• Rome sessions

• Research agenda

Participant SurveysRESULTS

4. IALU’s weaknesses and threats? How to control them?

• Structure: lack of full-time staff, and clear leadership

• More coherent governance and shared political will

• Global vision and global advocacy

• Stronger financial commitment of members

• Lack of follow-up on meetings and activities

• Knowledge of regional differences and contexts

• Collaboration between IALU and the Institute and the Mission

• “Common purpose”, “Substantive work”

Participant SurveysRESULTS

Some of your words…“ I consider IALU to have a strong potential thanks to our commonspirit and philosophy, but weak in its structure, which should allow acloser and more concrete collaboration”.

“A full-time paid position of President and Administrative Assistant isrequired to move IALU to the next level of success”.

“Perhaps the website is not well developed, perhaps there is notgood use of interactive technology, perhaps there is not aninvestment of human and other resources necessary to bolster upthe network.”

Participant SurveysRESULTS

5. Suggested thematic / technical lines of work

• Research

• Mobility (students and professors)

• Social innovation, volunteering, community work

• Teacher networks, on-line lecture catalogues

• Professional development

• Environment, human rights

• Knowledge management and exchange

Conclusions

IALU:

– has active regional hubs and important global activities,

– members are diverse, but know each other increasinglywell,

– members believe in it, and expect a lot from it,

– is still rather weak, but has a considerable global potential,

– generates many activities, but often short-lived,

– does a lot, but doesn’t capitalize or tell much about it,

– needs a permanent structure and clearer rules,

– needs clear thematic and development lines.

Our challenge

Our Challenge

How can we make IALU stronger?

How can we make IALU stronger?

• We connect it to its XXIst century identity and to current internationalizationtrends

• We articulate it with the Lasallian Education Mission

• We improve our understanding on how to build and manage networks

• We prioritize IALU’s thematic lines

• We propose the bases of a permanent structure

• We discuss network development issues

We all do it, and we do it together

Our Challenge

Methodology of Encuentro XI

Pegar infografía martes

Methodology ofEncuentro XI

NETWORK CREATION EXERCISES

1. The steps of the collaborative process

2. Themes and typologies of networks

1. Creating a holonic network

2. Basics for the creation of a network

Methodology ofEncuentro XI

THEMATIC LINES SUGGESTED (based on interviews, survey and plenaries)

1. Internationalization• Student and teacher academic mobility• Joint programs, Double degrees, Academic Summer Schools

2. Common research Agenda• IALU research agenda

Food, nutrition and health Sustainability and the environment Education and learning innovations

• Research on LS mission and differentiators• Funding (sources and tools to mobilize it)

3. Pedagogy / Education• Teacher training, research on pedagogy• Student life management

4. Social responsibility• Social work, voluntary networks, community work, outreach

5. One LS Mission and Identity• Coordination between IALU and the Lasallian Education Mission• Rome leadership training, student leadership, alumni networks

NETWORK DEVELOPMENT LINES SUGGESTED(based on interviews, survey and plenaries)

1. Communication strategy• Institutional, internal, external, website

2. Common Branding• One global brand, positioning LS differentiators

3. Joint global advocacy and lobby• One global voice• A reference on key subjects (poverty, social innovation,

education, food, environment, etc)

4. Knowledge exchange• Program circulation• Good practice platform• MOUs and agreements

Methodology ofEncuentro XI

Thank you

March 4th, 2015