AfterActionReview

From ipm2016 ilriwikis

Please IPM2016 committee team, leave your comments here

Strengths

  • Logistics went very well
  • Good, chilled coordination by Julie, great to work with you on this!
  • The committee team had a right balance across the teams (except perhaps not enough admin staff) and kept a very playful and positive attitude
  • Karaoke night was a hit (I think)
  • The balance between presentations and
  • Time management was indeed nearly impeccable - the presenters mostly followed instructions very well
  • I liked the smaller presentations - they got to the essence and still covered some important science details while still being 'accessible' for most audiences
  • Randomisation really works and is sthg to use again
  • Having an 'IPM manager' for each session was really helpful
  • The BecA skit was great
  • Facilitation of the all the sessions was smooth.

Weaknesses/improvables

  • Event design had several flaws:

The program sessions followed the same format and that became really routine, repetitive, tedious Using the same 4 questions was really repetitive One of these questions in particular (the ToC one) was nearly impossible to answer following a presentation of at best 3' on the ToC of the program

  • Quality of screen display - find better/higher resolution
  • Improve audio
  • We could have defined even earlier what role the IPM manager, program leader and facilitator played, including clear guidelines for each role
  • Hardly any recognition was given to CKM despite all the work they did - so either involve them more centrally or let them play a lesser (and less demanding) role - but in any case recognise their contribution
  • I found the dinner night nice but a bit dull - should we think of some minor entertainment next time around?
  • I'm not sure the newbies' cocktail really helped people meet the newbies (I - Ewen - was involved in the committee meeting so they didn't feel the pressure to comply with my instructions ha ha ha)
  • 3 nights of socialising is perhaps a bit too much
  • Brown bag lunches, beyond the first day flaw, some people went hungry, because portions were small. Maybe we should have made a take-away buffet?
  • Some people left the IPM because there was no internet and they had urgent matter to solve. Maybe we should just make internet available

Specific recommendations for the next IPM team

  • Report back on this IPM?
  • Think carefully about how to keep audience engaged and present for whole event
  • Involve young scientists - more junior staff during program presentation (but this would only happen with more time for preparation)
  • Involve NRS staff much more centrally
  • Involve services - get service teams to work with the science teams together perhaps?
  • Have regions play a much more central role
  • As decision-makers (e.g. ILRI management or IPM coordination team) give some instructions to the different session leaders about what topics you may want to cover and what you want to achieve and for the rest trust that they will come up with a good design/process flow. Crucially: identify and work with your facilitator(s) early on to help design the overall architecture of the IPM, not after these design decisions have been made ;)
  • Involve facilitators again
  • Plan some 'email/work' breaks or make the IPM shorter? This include make internet available.
  • Depending on the objectives, run parallel sessions so you allow people to go more in-depth on certain topics
  • Involve chart writers but really use them as the memory of the group, not as a demonstration feature that perhaps didn't really add so much (or wasn't used so much - no one made any comments about this except Chris)
  • Ensure one or two IPM2016 folks can advise on the process here and there to ensure continuity and learning from lessons
  • What would be even greater would be to have an IPM log book where we have the entire set of issues to sort out and organise described so the next team can more easily pick up the job
  • Close registration earlier, so that not everything has to be planned in the last minute.

Follow up points from IPM

  • Develop survey monkey survey
  • Gather feedback from IMC about the IPM 2016
  • Get Jimmy to clarify where/when the next IPM is - would be good to have an annual event though perhaps shorter and every second or third year a longer event.

For the record, here is the summary of observations and recommendations made by staff at the IPM. Find the full list of these here.

Observations:

  • Excellent opportunity to meet the rich diversity of people at ILRI
  • Good representation of almost all programs, services, regions
  • Excellent to hear about the new programs of ILRI generally
  • Good opportunities for interaction, engagement and discussing the future of ILRI
  • More science than in the past IPMs
  • Some of the design (questions, program sessions) brought tedious moments
  • The programs and all people are wishing to integrate and collaborate - though this is (too?) ambitious
  • Generally excellent organization and logistics
  • Except for the lunch (brown bag lunches, no good option for fasting were not appreciated)
  • Excellent time management
  • Good facilitation

Recommendations:

  • Walk the talk!
  • Get to know more about the ToC
  • Develop a resource mobilisation strategy and strengthen the business development unit
  • Present action plans derived from the feedback from this IPM
  • Involve young scientists more
  • Pay a lot more attention to regions (staff them more, have more activities there etc.)
  • Involve NRSs a lot more next time around
  • Engage admin services even more
  • Have more frequent IPMs (every 3 years not enough) and perhaps organise program-wide IPM-type events
  • Next time, report on progress
  • Keep on focusing on integration