International collaboration for research impact

Descriptive transcript

Dr Soytavanh Mienmany: In the past, I joined the evaluation of several projects and mainly I was the data collector. Before joining this evaluation, I didn't understand project design at all. I only knew the part that I contributed, that's it. But this time I was thinking that I don't want to be just a data collector. Is this okay? I want to learn how to analyse data and parts of the report, and communicate the research after the report is done.

Dr Somphasith Douangsavanh: In terms of a collaborative research process, I would say this went really well as we met regularly to plan things together. We made it super-clear by allocating a specific task for each team member, and made sure we hit the targets.

Bethany Davies: Both the Lao government and ACIAR were really interested in understanding what worked effectively in that relationship between science and policy. So they were really interested in understanding how to improve the way that they use science in the management of key sectors in their development planning. And ACIAR really wanted to know how we can most effectively work in partner systems to support them to do that. So in that way, there was really an equal investment in conducting the evaluation. To reflect that, we also wanted to make sure that the evaluation team was led both from Australia and from Lao. So I think the team did a really excellent job of building a collegial relationship with the team in Lao, and making sure that they felt empowered and enabled to engage as equal partners in the evaluation. That was possible because they were on board from the very beginning of the design stages.

Jessie Meaney-Davis: So it was really helpful in the beginning that Soy and Somphasith were really clear about what their expectations were of the evaluation, what they wanted to learn, and what they wanted to contribute. So we were really deliberate about the way we planned all of the processes, and really allowed enough space for everyone to say what they did want to contribute to, what they didn't feel so comfortable contributing to, and where they really wanted to take the lead on something, so that everyone had that open space to decide how they wanted to contribute. Knowing the framework is very important to understanding what is going to be in the report, and how to analyse that. And the main important part, this project allowed a local lead. It is very comfortable for me that it's a journey of learning and sharing. So I would feel like the leader in the team was not on the top all the time, knowing everything, but was open to discussion, valuing my contribution and my skill, my capacity.

Dr Keren Winterford: We work in a way which always prioritises inclusion and the unique contribution of national consultants. So we always work as equals, and we always involve our national consultants in all parts of evaluation or research activity. It's really about us co-producing the work together, and we're all one team. We seek to ensure that each individual has the best opportunities through an evaluation for their own professional and personal learning and growth. So that it's a positive experience, both for themselves but also for our clients or our partners who we're working with, and delivering really good learning outcomes, such that they can use that information and evidence to improve development programming in the future. This is one of my best experiences of working as a foreign team and Lao team, and sharing my knowledge about the Lao context, where some international development teams may not know about that. We learn a lot and we can improve from this evaluation. Thank you.